Welcome to the Q&A Forum

I'm leaning toward quality over quantity. Looking at those individual pages, they don't seem to be offering much in the way of unique content.

I have to make this decision within the week. I guess I can't ask people to advise me when I have no data to give them.

Well, this has brought to my attention that somehow the CMS has neglected adding the analytics code to those pages, probably because they're in a sub folder, so this is a bigger shot in the dark than I thought.

We have a gallery here with our main categories of patches. https://www.stadriemblems.com/gallery/

If you click on one, say Fire Patches, you'll be taken to a page of just fire patches. https://www.stadriemblems.com/fire-patches/

But here's the kicker: If you notice of the fire patch page, there are also sub-categories to that. So if you click on say, Fire Rescue, you get taken one level deeper. https://www.stadriemblems.com/fire-patches/fire-rescue-patches/

I'm redoing this entire site (a project over five years overdue), and I'm wondering if it's really worth it to keep these three-level deep sub pages. I originally created them with long tail SEO in mind, making us be the only ones who come up when people search for very specific patches. But it's a big undertaking to redo all of them, and are they really adding any value?

Still the same for me. The expanded text ads are converting at half the rate of the regular.

I think it would be nice to get a consensus from more people.

The day expanded text ads came out last week, I immediately jumped on it and created them for all my campaigns. I still left some of the old ads running in each ad group so that I could compare.

Looking at the conversion data from the last week, the conversion rates are between 2-7x lower on the expanded text ads, and as a result, the cost per conversion is 2-5x higher as well. Basically, they're performing horribly. The click-through rate is mildly higher, but who cares if they're not converting?

I know it's only a week's worth of data, but it seems the difference is enough to be statistically significant. I'm wording what everyone else's experience has been.

Yeah, expanded text ads are out. I jumped on those the very same day.

Anyway, good to see I'm not the only one with the problem and that Wordstream probably jumped the gun.

Yesterday Wordstream announced that AdWords rolled out device-level bid adjustments for tablet for everyone, but when I go into my campaign settings, it's the way it's always been, with no ability to adjust for tablet. I'm wondering if anyone else is experiencing this, or is there perhaps some kind of setting I have to turn on?

http://www.wordstream.com/blog/ws/2016/07/26/device-level-bid-adjustments

I am so excited about this change, seeing as our cost-per-conversion on tablets is always twice what it is on desktop, and not having control over it was maddening.

"If there is one different word in each description, that is presumably enough to stop them being seen as duplicates?"

Yes, if there's only one character different, they won't be seen as duplicates, at least by machines/bots.

"Also, I was intrigued that you said "Google doesn't officially use meta descriptions" - is there some doubt over this? I thought they'd confirmed it themselves?"

It's just that Google doesn't reveal exactly what they use in their algorithm to determine ranking, so its up to us to figure it out as best we can with observation and experimentation. Sometimes they will confirm or deny using a specific factor, but it's still up to the individual to choose to take that at face value or not.

"I think the choice I have to make is, is it better to have 100% unique descriptions that are too short (keyword only, as at present), or much less unique ones that are 130+ characters. I guess the latter wins."

Probably the latter, but in the case of meta descriptions, I would make that decision based to what is best for the user/customer rather than what we'd speculate Google would want.

Having duplicate meta keywords will trigger red flags in the Moz tools and other site quality tools, but only because it's a potential user quality issue. Google doesn't officially use meta descriptions as a ranking factor, so as long as the meta descriptions are appropriate and as best as they can be for what's on the specific page, it doesn't matter how different they are from each other page-to-page. Just keep in mind that this is what shows up in the SERPS, so make them interesting enough to make a user want to click your page over the ones surrounding it.

I have used conversion optimizer a few times, and each time, it basically destroyed everything. Enhanced CPC sometimes makes things MINIMALLY better. I think conversion optimizer would work better if I had ads that were long-running, but I tend to be constantly pausing things and changing things.

Enhanced campaigns have been out over a year now (I think). Has Google seen the error of its ways yet and separated computers from tablets? My cost per conversion is five times higher on tablets than computers, and I can't find a way to separate them!

Ah, actually going into the ad group was the key. Thank you!

Hmm, when I do that it tries to adjust it for the whole campaign.

I've been thinking lately about employing re-marketing in AdWords, and have been doing some research on it. My findings keep pointing to the fact that you can't target only people who visited your site but didn't convert. I keep thinking this cannot be true because it's simply too ludicrous to be. Why else would you want to use re-marketing? Can someone please either confirm or deny this?

Thanks

In one of my AdWords campaigns, I've noticed that certain ad groups consistently convert twice as badly on mobile devices as other ad groups do. Is there a way to adjust mobile bidding only for certain ad groups, or can you only control this campaign-wide?

Wow, that was ridiculous! Thanks.

I have a single campaign and this is what I want.

Mon, Tues, Thurs, Fri to have a budget of $270 per day
Wed to have a budget of $324 per day
Sat, Sun to have a budget of $432 per day

Currently, the only way I can see to do this is to have three separate campaigns, which is very disagreeable. Please tell me there's something I'm overlooking.

Thanks

Gosh, it's so many, but I think the common thread is Google returning shopping results when I'm looking for informative sites, and returning informative sites when I'm looking to buy.

You wouldn't believe the nightmare I went through last night trying to find a site about how to color my hair at home with Redken. I still haven't found anything except for a crappy result from eHow.

I perform Google searches every single day, sometimes several times in a day. These searches have nothing to do with being a marketer--they're simply as a consumer, researcher, person who needs a question answered, or in other words: a typical person.

For about the past month or so, I have been unsuccessful at finding what I'm looking for on the first try EVERY SINGLE TIME. Yes, I mean it--every single time. I'm left either going all the way to the third page, clicking dozens of results and retuning to the SERPs, or having to start over with a differently worded query.

This is far too often to be a coincidence. Has this been happening to anymore else? I know there was a recent significant algorithm update, right? I always look at algorithm updates through the eyes of an SEO, but I'm currently looking at it through the eyes for an average searcher, and I'm frustrated! It's been like trying to find something on Bing!

I don't think I ever realized that forwarding also can return a 301. That's really good to know. Thanks.

Glad I could help. I would just run it through one or two more versions of that tool just for peace of mind. You can just google "spider view tool" and try out a couple others.

It definitely depends on how you're doing it. Without seeing it, I can't say for sure, but usually this method only hides things from the user, not the search engines. I'd recommend running your page through a service that shows you what the spiders see.

Try: http://www.iwebtool.com/spider_view

If you see your text in the results, you're probably safe.

One of the sites I designed, customwovenlabels.com, uses this with javascript. If you go there and look at the copy on the homepage, you will see a link that says, "read more." Google sees all the text and doesn't distinguish the difference between what's initially seen vs. hidden.

So if you discover that your method isn't ideal, there are always other alternatives.

Why don't you try domain forwarding? That may be your only option as there is growing evidence that Google passes links from 302 redirects as well. You can find the domain forwarding option in the control panel where the domain name is hosted. Instead of doing a redirect, the change will take place with the DNS.

Here's some info: http://support.godaddy.com/help/article/422/forwarding-or-masking-your-domain-name

Make sure you choose forwarding without masking.

"My current strategy is to target the top 3 all on one page."
Definitely have one page for all those keywords. "Managed IT Services" and "IT Managed Services" are the same thing. Even "Managed IT Support" could be considered the same thing. Google's algorithm is smart enough to decipher synonyms.
Resource: http://helpmyseo.com/seo-tips/296-language-synonyms-and-the-google-algorithm-and-how-it-affects-your-seo.html

"The problem then is the title tag: Managed IT Services | IT Managed Services | Managed IT Support"
Definitely do NOT do this. Google will see it as keyword spam/stuffing and it will hurt you, not help you. I'd recommend making the title tag "Your Company Name | One of those keyword phrases" (assuming your company name doesn't already have those phrases in the name)
Resource: http://www.pagetraffic.com/guide/keyword-repetition.php

"I could build pages for all 3, but how would I incorporate them into the website since they are all synonyms. . . How would handle separate pages with synonymous content?"
The way to handle pages with to avoid them like the plague.
Resource: http://moz.com/blog/duplicate-content-in-a-post-panda-world

Nice! You just taught me something.

Good point. I was assuming she already had goals set up.

Go to Conversion > Goals > Overview, and then click on Source/Medium.

I've included a screenshot that should be helpful.

http://i.imgur.com/ghEDLTW.jpg

I've noticed it happening with the site s you mentioned and then some. I started a discussion about it awhile back. http://moz.com/community/q/interesting-serp-trend-i-m-observing

We've been outranked by ebay, amazon, wikipedia, and etsy.

Without seeing anything, if you're positive Penguin was what you were hit by and you have a dodgy link profile, then the link profile is almost definitely the cause. Removing links and disavowing what can't be removed is the way to go. Feel free to PM me the link if you want.

The latest Whiteboard Friday should answer all of your questions.

http://www.seomoz.org/blog/how-do-i-find-a-good-seo

I will leave you with one piece of advice. My number one rule for finding an SEO company is this: You find the good guys; the bad guys find you. In other words, do NOT respond to those solicitations from India. Go out and do some research.

Here's a really good post to check out as well: http://www.seomoz.org/blog/how-many-seo-consultants-actually-know-what-theyre-talking-about

That's an excellent idea, actually. It could be like having your own custom shortened URL. I wouldn't overuse it though; that could confuse people.

Oh, sorry. You said the shorter one was easier to remember and apparently that's the part of your response that stuck out in my mind. So we only half disagree.

I think the long one is easier to remember BECAUSE it tells people what it;s about.

Personally I would go with the long one as well. Although for the opposite reason as littlesthbo. I think the longer one is easier to remember because it has meaning and isn't just letters and numbers someone has to remember.

I may be misunderstanding you, but I think the keywords "widgets extra large" or even "widgets white extra large" would be triggered with modified broad, not phrase match.

My favorite is modified broad match and my least favorite is regular broad match. Modified broad allows for the most variety in searches without returning results that are irrelevant the way regular board match does.

Our main keyword is "embroidered patches" so here is an example

[embroidered patches] - returns only "embroidered patches"
"embroidered patches" - could return "embroidered patches for uniforms"
+embroidered +patches - could return "patches embroidered onto hats"
embroidered patches - could return nicotine patches (useless)

The bottom line is that broad match will get you the most traffic, but a large amount will be irrelevant.
Exact match won't get you as much traffic, but most of it will be high quality.
I personally think modified broad and phrase are the best balance.

We have someone with a shady link profile ranking above us too. Don't worry; as was already said, it's only a matter of time before they're gone. Just keep working on your long-term #RCS strategies, and they will pay off in the long run--probably sooner rather than later.

Keep in mind, though, that certain web hosts place limits of the amount you can have. if you're genuinely concerned, I'd check with your host.

There is always a slight risk. The biggest risk lies in the possibility of Google choosing to crawl the site while it's being propagated or during the inevitable down time. This could cause some pages to have different IP addresses--from your new host and old host.

As far as how Google chooses to judge the fact that your IP changed three times in a one month period, I don't know what it thinks of that, but I know if definitely takes note.

All that being said, the odds are good that you'll be perfectly fine.

I asked almost the same question about a year ago, and unfortunately, you are right; that is the solution.

http://www.seomoz.org/q/so-confused-about-google

Here's the worst part. I made a a few posts on the old page asking them to +1 the new page. Want to know how many did? ZERO. A year later, I only have twenty-something followers.

But anyway, this is the good advice I received:

This is a Profile, so actually in violation of Google+ Terms since it is a Brand/Business.

Turn this into the "Company Spokesperson" example Head of PR, Executive or you as the Head of Marketing (or whatever your title is).

THEN

As this NOT NEWLY CREATED PAGE, but just modified to be a "Person" page.... Create a Google+ Business Page

(Make sure you are signed in as this account and)

Go to

http://www.google.com/+/business/...

And follow the on page instructions to create a "Business Page"

How long ago did you do all this? Everything you did if correct; however, it can take Google a couple months to straighten everything out.

You can always remove the bad URLs from Google's index via Webmaster Tools.

My company dabbled in this for years, and after the matter, my conclusion is this: you will have to hire more people to maintain all these other entities, and if you're able to handle the load with the staff you currently have, you probably weren't running very efficiently to begin with (overstaffed).

My short answer would be to redirect the exact match domains to your current site. You don't want to try to do SEO on multiple sites; you want to focus your effort on building your brand/image, and increasing authority of your main site.

Also, in regard to exact match domains, I'd strongly suggesting taking a look at this SEOmoz blog post: http://www.seomoz.org/blog/are-exact-match-domains-in-decline

No, I've not received a notification. Thanks, Sean.

Tom,
Thanks for your advice. It seems logical, and now I think I remember reading that somewhere. it kinda sucks, though, because now all I can do is watch my rankings steadily decline and be powerless to stop it. I guess I need to hope I earn enough good links to drown the rest of those out.

I agree with donford. I've never heard of duplicate images being flagged as duplicate content. What is more, almost everyone sets up their galleries in this manner, so you really don't have anything to worry about.

After Penguin, our site: www.stadriemblems.com jumped up to #1 for the keyword "embroidered patches." Now, months later, it's at the top pf page two. I'm pretty sure this is because we do have a few shady links (I didn't do it!) that perhaps Penguin didn't catch the first time around, but now Google is either discounting them or counting them against us.

My question is, since I'm pretty sure those links are the reason we are gradually declining, should I submit them to Google as disavowed, even though technically, we're not penalized . . . yet?

I have done everything possible to get them removed, and it's not happening.