Welcome to the Q&A Forum

As well as parameters mentioned you may possibly have heaps of duplicating categories, tags etc.  What I would also do is start searching Google with something like site:www.example.com/directory/ or possibly site:www.example.com/category/directory/directory/ so you are tightly narrowing down the results, switch to 100 results per page and manually look for clues.

Hi Stephen. Google try their best to serve up relevant results to everyone (or at least that's the assumption we make. Whether it's true or not is, I'm sure, something people could debate for hours) and have a very complex algorithm for doing that. The algo' changes that make up Penguin and Panda may have had the effect of pushing other sites above yours because they are more authoratative in other areas than <a rel="nofollow" target="_blank">thomassmithfasteners.com</a>. I would definitely back up your disavow requests with the information you suggest; I'm not sure how much of a difference they make but if they do then they're great to have and if they don't then at least you're keeping a record of your activity. Here's Google's instructions, which do contain comments on when attempts were made to contact site owners. Good luck! Ben P.S. I've just found this ebook at Hubspot. If a file storage company can produce good enough content to be featured on Hubspot then Thomas Smith Fastenings should definitely be able to create something!

Branding and visibility issues aside, from a pure link standpoint those links don't count (or shouldn't per Google).  Google wants affiliate links to be nofollow since they're advertorial (Matt Cutts on the matter - <a>http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1SmlsfSqmOw</a>).  Cutts also says affiliate links should be disclosed adequately.  Now on the other hand, you're right that these links are benefiting a company that has these relationships set up.  I'm sure they're getting visibility, traffic, and ultimately sales.

Hi, No direct experience but from a technical point of view the authority passed through the 301 would not be lost as such, just not of any use in ranking the new page since it is noindex. Once you allow it to be indexed it will start to appear in the search results and any extra push given by the 301 should be as expected. That being said, it might be an idea to noindex, follow the pages in question so any authority added can flow through your no indexed pages to your indexed pages. In that respect it is the nofollow rather than the noindex which is causing authority from the 301 to be wasted/lost.

Many thanks guys

Thank you HealthLotteryMan. Thank you Gordon. The drop is from past 2-3 months. I have been doing the SEO activity from past two years. Regularly I do blog commenting, directories, social book marking, classifieds. But from past two months I stopped submitting in blogs as am unable to find new blogs related to my website. Instead I submitted in more number of directories. So I have seen the fall of keywords rankings after I have stopped the blogs. I tried press releases too but did not find much difference.

I agree, it doesn't make any sense. I would redirect everything instead to a subfolder: example.domain.com -> domain.com/example example.domain.com/page-1 -> domain.com/example/page-1

That coming from you is just enough for the day I don't know who you are or what you do, but reading your responses I never, and I mean NEVER have something to add. It's like reading from wikipedia... lol

Thanks guys. This is the answer I was hoping for.

I've been seeing a fairly long time for Google to catch up with 301s and pass along the link juice....a couple of months.  Consensus is that something around 90-95% of the link juice passes through a 301.  There's some talk about 301s not passing link juice forever, although I haven't heard any evidence of exactly how long that might be, but seems like it would be in the 1-2 year range at least.  Just my opinion & recollection of a whole bunch of other people's opinions though :-).

Presuming your client is planning on launching in the US using largely the same content, perhaps with minor regional amendments, then this would be an ideal situation to use hreflang. There is plenty out there on correct use and implementation of this. You could start be reading this article. Hope this helps.

When we moved our site over to full HTTPS we noticed that GWMT needed to re-authenticate for the HTTPS domain, and actually shows different information from the HTTPS profile compared to the HTTP profile. The Analytics proporty won't change, but your sitemap will need an update for provide the HTTPS links compared to the HTTP ones. Google will quickly pick-up the protocol change and as long as you set-up correct redirects from HTTP to HTTPS you won't be dropping traffic that much. In the long run you'll see your site returning to it's old self again, depending on how good the rest of your optimization is. Do keep in mind that if you're mixing content (retrieving external content from HTTP sources) some browsers start throwing warnings to users; if you're embedding HTTP content in an HTTPS site, browsers like Chrome don't load the HTTP at all unless the user clicks the option for mixed content at the end of the address bar. Hope this helps!

It can take Google a long long long time to remove old pages from its index. I'd highly recommend manually submitting the relevant URLs via Google Webmaster Tools' URL removal tool and do them a bit at a time. We have done this quite successfully. Otherwise, I think you're doing the right things. Hope that helps!

Same happens to me with smartphones i have a lots of 500 errors on smartphones that doenst appear on web, and i see good connection. I am starting getting doughts that smartphones on webmaster works correctly.

I disagree, actually: one thing I have learned from my friends outside of our online or development world is that most people see URLs as a vaguely incomprehensible string that they copy exactly. There is a tendency to add "www" if there isn't one to the beginning of a URL, but generally visitors are just going to copy and paste whatever is in their address bar when sharing. So, I would just make sure that any "www"s are 301 redirected to their non "www" version of the URL. Good luck!

It could even be as simple as greater competition among sites that are relevant to the same search queries your pages are relevant to.  Be sure to examine the top sites showing in the results for your target search queries and see what's working for them.

If you remove the redirection, you remove the link juice from any links to site B that was flowing to site A.  Having a link or two from B to A won't likely provide near the link juice of the redirects (I see 10 domains linking to site B today). Still, we're only talking about the link juice from 10 domains, so it's not a huge deal.

Hey Olivier, You could detect the user agent and hide the button. The difference isn't substantial enough to be called cloaking. Or you could make the button not actually a button tag, but another tag with that traps clicks with a JS event. I'm not sure Google's headless browser is smart enough to automate that. I would try this first and if it doesn't work switch to the user agent detection idea. Let us know how it goes! -Mike

Hey There Bradley's answer is great. I just want to add, you really should only worry about the suggestions here - http://developers.google.com/speed/pagespeed/insights/ - in regards to Google and speed / UX factors that would affect ranking. You should also check for mobile errors in Webmaster Tools.

Any other suggestions/help on this? In my last post, I explained a little more in depth what the specific issue was. Please advice, thank you in advance.