Welcome to the Q&A Forum

directory links are still a very much required part of the deal for major directories to say the least. Sure, a lot of them do not pass any link juice or Google may discount a lot of those links in its ranking factors, but you just want to be present where people actually check and where data aggregators grab their source data from.There has to be a reason why Moz local still is as service that charges people for exactly these "directory" listings...

I would look at the bottom line, which one do you sell more? Which one makes more profit on average per months worth of sales? Whichever one that is, use the old category URL for it and 301 redirect to the new URL for the more profitable URL. Then for a temporary period, keep a banner or a little link or something like that on the new URL that clearly directs users who are looking for the less profittable product's new URL to the right location.

That's the best I can think of. I had done this on a car rental company where they lost some of their cars and had to take down the URLs but we instead 301 redirected to the next closest choice and made some changes to "feature" the other related cars as well.

Ever heard of a custom branded url shortener? That is one idea I can think of for tracking some of this information in a reliable and less costly way, with some limitations. You can also always setup url paramters for it too, but that is more pain and money down the drain.

What I think you really need is the data provided here: https://www.facebook.com/help/336143376466063/

You could technically use tools that can present API data much better than the sources themselves can show in their reporting and using that you can generate a much more user friendly report. one example is sprout social.

ok yeah, apparently it STILL is not possible to delete questions. Come on Moz, that needs to be a feature!

Ranking depends on a lot of factors. Run a test with Google PageSpeed and see what it tells you, it will be actionable. All of that affects ranking to varying degrees. DA is just one of the factors and high 30s is not necessarily considered a very good or high DA from what I know, it goes up to 100.

Also, there are other factors for rankings such as personalization, demand/market changes in keywords from a few years ago to now in some markets (example: SEO ninja.... SEO Guru.... growth hacker)

And how is he checking on his ranking that he knows is bad? Rankings that moz provides? Google console? his own attempts to search for it?

One last thing, what is their backlink profile like anyway? Those may have been nerfed by Google in their value, but they still count to a degree. There is competition too, he may have found new and aggressive competition... one market like this is photo booth rental market. 3 years ago it was a new market relatively speaking, now it is saturated heavily and there are just too many hands. This will certainly impact ranks.

Nima jan, just try it man it costs literally nothing to setup a branded shortener at bit.ly (well it costs you some kind of short format domain, this can be expensive if going for some of those 2 letter TLDs)

Once you try it and do a test, you will see what level of analytics bit.ly shows in free mode. They also have an enterprise mode with expanded analytics and some other bells and whistles, but I never tried it before.

I almost exclusively use a branded short domain for all my social media posts, not just stuff that goes to my own web properties, meaning if I am tweeting something about someone else's blog post, it will still go through my branded short domain, this is so I have basic clicks numbers on the actual link and for free information, I cannot complain about it.

Please keep in mind that likes and views are better tracked with social management suites. I like sproutsocial, but there are other ones and more capable ones out there too. That information comes from Facebook, so if it is something that Facebook does not provide (either directly or through API), nobody can provide.

You can get a free trial from sproutsocial and check it out, it is neato.

Think of traffic and end conversions you get from both... think of demand you get from these, and see if it is worth attempting to maximize the traffic by improving the Bing side first.

If it is, start learning about differences between Bing and Google. Bing still uses keywords, that is meta keywords while google has long not used them for ranking. < this is last I knew and I have been away from this game for a little while.

Chances are, the traffic from Bing and Yahoo is not worth the cost and risks in attempting to get improved ranking there, for most small business at least. But this can vary significantly for niches and localities.

Generally this is a bad idea. Single page sites  face more issues for ranking properly for the right keywords than separate pages topically speaking. Jordan is right to say you could see a drop in ranking and ?I add perhaps traffic as well.

direct traffic can be from bookmarks and such, as well as it could depend on proper implementation of ads and retargetting too.

That does seem a bit odd of a coincidence though, I have never dealt with such a switch scenario like that and to that degree, I have only seen more negligible or at least less worrisome amount of such changes in the past which we ended up not spending time to find out what was the underlying sitch with it as it corrected itself as a trend after a short period of time.

So you are talking about the full image (text included in it) linking as a single link to the final property, right?

alt="Apartamento para Alugar em Campinas Residencial Vila Bella" title="Apartamento para Alugar em Campinas Residencial Vila Bella">

the bold part is your anchor text. It would not be "improved" by separating the 1 link to 3 (1 for image, 1 for text, 1 for photo, image and photo are not one and the same btw?). It would be improved if you made sure your keywords used above make sense and are actually what people search for in the order listed or part of them.

I would keep it the way it is, the other way would not really improve it, although it would give you more control and options over it and it would also give the originating page more TEXT content, instead of a bunch of picture. Google cannot READ pictures. It does read titles for them and alt text for them, but they are NOT replacement for TEXT CONTENT.

You would still want to try and get rid of them if you can. The point is not to watch out for Google punishment, but think of your user and the spam they are dealing with. Follow that mindset and Google will become only a secondary reason.

Something like that can be done, but you must exercise care to not get slapped for duplicate content penalties. There can only be one place for that content in the eyes of your users and google, meaning the funny proxy server should never itself be visible to public. But if you do this right, you can have the content rendered on your desired page on your site which should get captured by Google properly as well.

But if you really want to be sure, test it, setup a test page like this without all the fancy dev work. and have google crawl your site and see what it reports back after it picks up that page.

I think you will be ok if you do your research and do not miss your rel canonicals or other countermeasures for duplicate content.

However it gets rendered on your /page, make sure google console can show/see the same content there.

Sometimes, you just gotta try.