Welcome to the Q&A Forum

Although I wasn't able to find a concrete answer for you, It seems the general consensus is that moving ViewState to the bottom of the page can ensure a larger portion of your relevant content gets indexed, as well as improve the user experience by slightly improving page load time. Here we're some of the more helpful discussions I found : Moving ViewState to Improve ASP.NET SEO Moving ViewState for Better SEO ASP.NET HttpModule for Moving ViewState to Bottom I have never heard of any of these guys and cannot vouch for their knowledge.  Sorry I could not be of more help, best of luck!

One step at a time = long term success.  I wish you the best with it Jordan.

This is my opinion and is not backed up by any concrete evidence. Given the choice, I would opt for the cross-domain rel canonical.  Matt Cuts has said that google prioritizes the original page in search results (link references rel canonical within domain, not cross-domain) and based on todays whiteboard friday and this video from matt cuts, I think rel canonical is the way things are moving, particularly for content syndication. Edit: It also just occurred to me that there is no reason you can't ask for both.  Rel canonical is helpful to GoogleBot determining who the original content creator is but offers absolutely nothing for the user.  It takes little more than the flick of a pen to require your syndication partners to include both rel canonical and a link back. Edit #2 : Regarding your question about the difference between the Google Source Attribution tag vs. Cross-Domain rel canonical : Update 2/11/11: We've had a lot of interest in these meta tags, particularly in how the syndication-source tag relates to rel=canonical. After evaluating this feedback, we’ve updated our system to use rel=canonical instead of syndication-source, if both are specified. If you know the full URL, rel=canonical is preferred, and you need not specify syndication-source. If you know a partial URL, or just the domain name, continue using syndication-source. We've also had people ask "why metatag instead of linktag"? We actually support both forms for the tag, and you can use either. However, we believe the linktag form is more in line with the spirit of the standard, and encourage new users to implement the linktag form rather than the metatag form we originally proposed. Source

Google will do what Google will do. Just as results change when the query deserves freshness (think how search results for osama bin laden changed dramatically within two hours) so do some results deserve local emphasis, in google's mind at least. If the places results show up after the top three, then getting into those top three is the same as any other top three. If the places results are showing up before any others, there's nothing you can do to get yours ahead of the places results, that's just where google puts it. some searches even spread the places results out. A search for payday loans brings up A from the map as #1, then no places results again until #4. The key is SEO is SEO, so always have good, unique content and get good links and you will move up as high as you can.

I went ahead and added the links to the sitemap, however when google crawled the links I receieve this message. When we tested a sample of URLs from your Sitemap, we found that some URLs redirect to other locations. We recommend that your Sitemap contain URLs that point to the final destination (the redirect target) instead of redirecting to another URL. However I do not understand how adding the redirected links to the sitemap will remove the old links.

thanks

As there tends to be a risk for clients due to the fact that we can't ever guarantee anything, what we do is tell the client that they're not under any contract tying them to us so if we don't deliver they can cancel at any time. That minimises the risk a bit for them. Also, if you're thinking in just terms of rankings with them for the moment you can say that if you don't get x number of keywords (whichever keywords you decide between you are optimal) to page x by date x, and then page y by date y, etc... then they stop payments until you do.

Why do you prefer the All In One SEO plugin over the others?

I would keep them on the same URLs and explain the dupe content risk to client.  Then client can decide to upgrade them himself, have you source new content or allow them to run "as is". I know of a lot of sites that have pages like this that are working well and make nice money.

I have my blog set up so that I can easily get traffic data and revenue on categories, recent posts, and permalink pages. All decisions on what to index, what to promote and where to place my effort are based upon that data.

Thank you Daniel & Steve for your comments. This is pretty much the line we have taken on this, always nice to get back up on something that is new to us. Great answers and greatly appreciated Best Regards Sean

No, that's not correct. Think about the way link juice flows as well. Remember that it is the professionals who say neither of these practices are good. If you want a good strong SEO position, you need to avoid these practices.

I assume you have used some kind of rewrite on the server to change URLS to / rather than .aspx. This could be utilising some kind of redirect to move traffic from .aspx to /. Firstly, I'd check how the URLs are rewritten (if they are), Unfortuntaley my knowledge of windows server configs is limited, however in Linux I'd be checking my HT Access file and the redirect/rewrite rules. Once you have ascertained how the redirect us happening and solve the issue, then i'd implement the correct 301 redirects. I'd like to ask why you opted for name-of-page/ rather than name-of-page.aspx?

Brilliant suggestion - I shall do just that!

There is absolutely no reason why you can't turn it all around again To a degree, one of my customers also took a hit and with the changes we have made, they are starting to see rankings working their way back up again. Remember to stick closely to the Google Webmaster guidelines and you will be fine - just don't try anything that could be seen as dodgy in any way and keep hitting that content hard. Regards, Andy