Welcome to the Q&A Forum

Is there a report I can run on SEOmoz that shows me the page titles for all pages on my website, along with the link to each page?

Had you targeted your inbound links from a fairly narrow resource list?

Even if they are authorative links, I've read a lot of posts to this being a theory that peoples rankings have dropped since the 40 implementations from Google

Just a quick tip.

I wouldn't blindly post product links all over your social media platforms just for the sake of 'trying to affect your ranking' as more than likely it will come off quite spammy.

I would probably focus on more creative strategies of getting people to either share or +1 your posts and pages through unique content, competitions etc.

I imagine in the long run it would have much more positive implications for your main page's ranking.

Do you get followers that are worth engaging with from this?

I just signed my personal account up and straight away got 10 spam like accounts following me

I don't really have an answer but just wanted to give you a thumbs up for the Ron Burgundy reference

Doug could I ask you a question?

I've noticed that in the last few months people have attributed their decrease in the rankings to 'being penalised for bad links'.

It is the case that they were previously gaining benefits from those links and that with the recent changes these links go back to 0 influence, reducing their rankings to what they previously were, as opposed to the links having a negative impact on their sites?

You say you have a feeling eMail with links to this homepage could be contributing.

If you have a recent campaign the emails themselves could have been misleading and lead to a decent CTR but then once people hit the page they weren't impressed.

Also have you noticed a high increase in referral traffic from any sources recently? Same principle could apply there.

What keywords are the homepage ranking for? Again people could be entering through certain phrases and then not seeing the results they were expecting

Yeah

I understand that we don't want too many links in a very short period of time as it could lead to being penalised by Google, but at the same time we do need to build a spreadsheet (as you suggested) with directories to contact going forward, and that's one of my current tasks at the moment. I'm figuring since this is being done manually as an on-going process in conjunction with all the other work (so I'm not dedicating that much of my time) then i'm not going to have any infractions w.r.t mass submissions.

Yeah, I was just wondering how to determine which the best directories are whether it was a combination of PA and DA or whether when the PA's are low it isn't worth my time submiting to that directory even if their domain authority is high.

Yeah, we have all our initial content, have optimised each page for the targeted keywords & have made sure everything is how it should be for when we launch the site. Obviously this is an on-going process but we have our initial benchmark for going live.

Hi there,

We're very shortly launching a new website so as part of our link strategy we will be linking to directories found with the Link Acquisition Assistant for various keyword searches.

I was wondering at what point is it not worthwhile submitting to these directories with regards PA and DA?

For example if a directory has a domain authority of 69 but the page authority for the keyword in question is only 1, would it be a waste of time?

Cheers

What's the difference in external links between you and your competitor?

I've seen examples that If you bold title posts like this it can appear in the personalized results for targeted keywords.

The most influential factors for appearing within the G+ Internal search are:

Personal Profiles - Keywords in Bio, Employment, Education; Account verification; Number of times you appear in other peoples circles

Brand Profiles - The number of times you appear in other peoples circles; brand verification & whether you have a the main keyword in the brand page name (although if this isn't consistent with your official website it jeopordises the brand verification with the rel=publisher coding)

I think this year it's v.v.v.v important to be active in G+ too once you have the icons set up as Robert suggested.

On G+ there's data that shows how the amount of circles you are in has much more of an effect on G's algo than the engagement from people with you in their circles (+1s on posts) etc (Sort of the opposite to FB/TW)

Hi,

I'm currently writing the meta data for the launch of a new ecommerce site for our company & the way the site is set out means that each product has it's own landing page.

The issue with this is that we have a lot of products that either do the same thing or are only a very slight variation of another product.

This is causing a bit of a problem writing the page titles because as you can imagine in order to keep it relevant I'm having to pretty much copy other page titles.

For example

Product A 3/4 Length | Keywords | Company

Product A Full Length | Keywords | Company

Also as you can imagine it's a bit of an issue for the on-page text due to the only variation being the length (in this example) with only a slight bit of changed content to accomodate.

I was wondering if anyone had come across similar problems to this and if so how did they resolve the issue? I don't really want to be penalised by Google for multiple duplicate content/metadata across the site.

Should I just target the keyword for one of these products and then target a still relevant keyword, but one that has next to no searches for the other, similar product do you reckon?

Cheers

I think you can still get a wide range of links whilst keeping it relevant.

Here's a theoretical example for the topic of back pain -

A backlink from a .edu or .gov site will have high authority. Some SEO's have targeted just getting links from these types of sites just because they have a high PR (Not neccesarily .edu or .gov, but I'll use these for the sake of this example)

With the panda update it's been suggested this isn't going to be enough anymore (other people's suggestions, I have no data to support this).

As a result you may need a variety, but still relevant set of links.

For example

A backlink from a blog talking about casey stoners back injury from a high authority racing blog could be relevant

A backlink from a blog from a worried mother who's son is at university with back problems.

A backlink from a walking society website on content relating improper footwear to back pain

etc etc

From reading around the impression I get is that the update is removing some link weight from higher PR sites in order to reward sites with a diverse range of backlinks (to try and catch out those with tools getting links from a concentrated source or paying higher PR sites for links).

I think as long as you have regular, quality content and concentrate on getting links from a wide range of website types (that are relevant) then you should be fine.

The impression I got was the following

Natural backlink - One you have received in an article, blog post etc about you're quality content that you haven't had to ask for.

Quality backlink - One from a page with high authority that provides a good amount of 'link juice' - Doesn't have to be from a page with a high PR, but people usually use that as a signal that the site has high authority.

Although I could be wrong.

Personally I will begin by following any accounts I feel may be influential or interested in the field I am marketing. Out of 'Twitter courtesy' you will see roughly 20-40% of these follw you back. If there are any particular accounts I want to follow me I will mention one of their previous tweets before following them. That tends to work to an extent.

Once I have a following, with the companies actual Tweets I tend to Tweet articles, videos, pictures etc that are relevant to their interests e.g. An article on 'Podiatry vs Chiropody' with each of the terms hashtagged.I'll only hashtag certain words I think are relevant to the tweet.

Rather than RT other tweets I mentioned the person and put the Tweet via @whoeveritmaybe.

Also I find it important to add some sort of opinion to the informational tweets. It gives the account an element of humanization rather than just looking like a bot pushing out articles.

Also important to respond to any mentions no matter how negative/random they may seem at the time.

This is quite an over simplisation (and there are a lot more things I do) of what occurs but I think you get the jist of what I'm getting at

P.S - I wouldn't use hundreds of hashtags - I think even though you'll appear in more #searches# it will reduce the chance of followers engaging and any click throughs on content you're pushing

Ok .. cheers for the responses and clearing that up

Just a quick question.

We received an email from a website looking to exchange links with our blog. Their site seems relevant enough for our readers to benefit from the link being there, so everything seems fine from that point.

They began the message with Dear ******blog, then continued with their message of wanting to exchange links.

The email then signed off with

promo@*****.com

I was just wondering whether it's likely this was a manual email, or whether conducted via an automated service

Cheers