Welcome to the Q&A Forum

The problem with frames is that Google has problems crawling them. Read what Google says. Dynamically created pages can work just fine. However, not all CMSs are created equal, so make sure to research whatever one you're thinking about and make sure that its pages are crawlable, conform to web standards, and SEO best practices. Good luck!

No problem.  We used SEO Transporter and moved everything to All-in-One SEO...... that did the trick!  Thanks Erica!

Online Football Boot Store, Buying Football Boots, something of that nature that would imply buying. I like using keywords that don't necessarily have the product in them, but target the lifestyle of the shopper. Good luck on your Quest! Justin Smith

Yep, so the only way to conserve is to cut back on the navigation from what I've gotten so far.

The Keyword Difficulty Tool doesn't tell you if you have a canonical URL problem.  The metrics used in that report highlight inbound links and are separated into two categories: Root Domain Linking Root Domain - this is the total number of unique root domains links to your entire website regardless if it's the home page, contact, about, testimonials, etc. Page Linking Root Domains - this is the total number of unique root domains linking to that specific page ONLY and in your case, the home page.

Paste snippets of the new content in Google's search box with " " in between and see if you get any matching content?

Hey Alan, ! ! ! ! 300 broken Links ????? I'm not seing any of that.  The most I've seen are 2 URLS.  What are you using the detect broken links? Thanks for your help

Thanks for all of the help! It's not that there's anything wrong with our on page links, and we have used analytics as a helpful resource. I'm just trying to learn best practice for all of the little things. Any other advice for homepage redesign is greatly appreciated!

That area is a warning area, but not an error area. It's saying "hey, double check to make sure you really do want to exclude these pages." If the pages are things like your admin directory, you certainly do want them excluded from being indexed.

Also, if you could provide your websites link, we could run our on page analysis to better provide you some valid feedback. ; )

We can't access you personal campaigns. No need to "fix " Canonicals, they are a good thing.  Basicly if you have dupe pages the dupe pages all link back to the original article so google knows which article is the original. Basicly the blue parts of the report are notes,  yellow is warning (may or may not be a bad thing),  Red is critical (bad)

We went the simplest route, while the Mobile browsing community is still gaining momentum. However, that time is upon us. I would check the Google Analytic and see who's and what devices are visiting your site right now, and decide how sophisticated this area of the site should be. Hope this is helpful, goodluck

You're welcome, glad to be able to help

Thanks Craig, appreciate your help.

No, would be the short answer. Every domain builds its own value in the SERP's. So registering that domain will involve lots of work to get it ranking. If you do want to go for a exact match domain, I'd go for red-wagon.com in stead of wagonred.com. That way link building becomes more easy and red wagon and wagon red are two different things. Using the new domain to help you rank on your main site will be a losing battle in the end. You can't pass a lot of link juice to your main site from your new domain. It's only 1 IP, 1 link (or only a few will count towards your rankings). So if you really want to rank for that keyword, build a niche site on the new domain.

I agree with EGOL -- great way to stand out. That said, bad video can  be detrimental. Using videos from the manufacturer will largely depend on how good they are. I've seen some horrible product videos that probably hurt a product page. Why not create your own? Some good posts here: http://www.seomoz.org/q/search?utf8=✓&query=video+seo&x=0&y=0

Keep in mind that "quality" is a difficult term at best, and even if you could pin down a definition of quality, Google still has to translate that (imperfectly) into code. There are a lot of factors that go into determining the value of a link. Rand had a good post on the subject here: http://www.seomoz.org/blog/10-illustrations-on-search-engines-valuation-of-links Many of these aren't even quality issues, per se. For example, if you have a blog comment on a high PR page, but you're 1 of 300 comments, that links isn't going to count much. You could argue that's a quality issue, but it's also just simple math - the PR of that page just got split 300+ ways. Even if every single comment was relevant and topically appropriate, it wouldn't count much. There's also TrustRank (we simulate it with mozTrust), the recent Panda factors, and other quality variables - they all tackle a different piece of the puzzle. Then, you've got user factors, like bounce rate, that are probably starting to come into play. So, I don't think you can just look at it as Quality vs. PR - there's a lot more in play. Edit: Sorry, I was reading this as "link quality", not the quality of the site itself. There's no either/or - both content factors (including on-page factors like good Title tags) and link factors matter, along with social factors these days. The best approach is going to tackle all fronts.

Thank you Alan. I shall go with your advice. All the best.