Welcome to the Q&A Forum

Actually in this case the domain ranks highly but doesn't have many (if any) quality links. So is it likely that we will loose the rankings if we place a 301 redirect on the site?

What would you guys recommend for the homepage?

Thanks Adam. I started to use breadcrumbs a few months ago but I guess It was too late.. The website is jeuxcasino.com, it provides free casino games. The main category page is for instance : http://www.jeuxcasino.com/machine-a-sous/ for the "machine a sous" games. But when I google the word "machine a sous", I have individual game pages or articles like this http://www.jeuxcasino.com/machine-a-sous/news/348-le-travail-technicien-machine-sous...

I would switch the OpenCart URLs to something more static/search friendly first.

Thanks a lot! I will definitely try that.

If you can use server side programming to change the homepage, this would be better for your users and optimization.  Just be sure to expose enough content on each for Google to spider and index properly. Yes, 301 redirect the old night home page. In fact, redirect all homepage requests to just http://www.domain.com/ The canonical link can be removed if on the domain root.

Like what James said, I wouldn't de-index them.  Perhaps consider putting a call to action to get those visitors to micro-convert to an email list or put some sort of offer on them?  Just a few ideas...

I agree with Scott and Takeshi, also give credit to people linking to you is a good way to enhance their value and so the one they're passin to you. Maybe you can consider a dynamic footer with a slideshow of the mentions you receive in external sites, like you see in movie trailers. This will give you a testimonial like added value mentioning your backlinker without even having to link back to them.

I wouldn't say "equal". But I do believe each site would provide additional opportunity. 3 articles per week per site isn't a bad frequency to be posting. Also, as it is now you have the chance to interlink one site to another if there is a related topic. Handling all those 301's if you were to combine all the sites into one would be quite the ordeal.

I am starting to do back linking for them in the next week or so. I am not having the issue with all of the pages though. It's weird. They are in Arizona. If you type in "Scottsdale roofing" they are coming up #1 on Google  (for me). If you type in "Sun City Roofing", they are on the 3rd page. I don't understand how there can be such drastic differences in results when none of the pages have external links yet and they are all configured and optimized the same. And MOST of the smaller cities are ranking high as well. Scottsdale would most definitely be a higher competition city than Sun City. The company is Jim Brown and Sons Roofing. I am kind of learning by trial and error and made the mistake of not varying my keywords so I am correcting that in both the content and title tags/ descriptions. I am not sure if what I did, by creating separate pages for residential roofing and commercial roofing is hurting me or not. I know it is good to combine keyterms / content when possible but because residential roofing and commercial are completely different, I wanted to target people specifically searching for commercial roofers. I almost feel like Google doesn't know which page to pull and it's hurting me. Is that possible? I've run many tests through SEOmoz and nothing is setting off red flags, no duplicate content etc... I'm just finding there is a huge variance in results. I need to rank much higher for Phoenix... Roof repair phoenix was one of the most searched phrases, and even after developing a page specifically targeted to that, It's not showing up within the first 5 pages. Yet, if I were to do it for one of the smaller cities, it would be number one. Again, none of these subpages have external links as of yet.

Brad - It's been sometime, still haven't solved the issue, as the 3rd Party is basically refusing to create the 301 Redirects.  With that being said - is there anything else you can think of that might help.

Interesting, I like this. I see how this could be beneficial because the content would be similar just changes gears a bit. I'm interested in if this would be better for my overall domain authority or having just one link on each site (home page more likely then not) in the footer with different anchor text and title tags to our home page.

But rel=canonical is offered only for search engines to learn whether the page is a duplicate or an original. Maybe there's someone else that could tell their experience about this topic?

Thanks Tom, I like the idea of anchoring links down to specific OE number sections using the H2 headings, my concern is what content would these sections contain? You mention a brief description and history. The problem is there's nothing different about the product so the description/history would be exactly the same as the main product number. These number are literally alternative numbers for EXACTLY the same product. Client did have option 1 set up and working when I came onboard and they did rank well for these OE numbers which brought in visitors/business. These pages had nothing more than a H1 Heading and one line of text on these pages containing OE number. I advised client to 301 these into main product page which also listed these OE number as alternate numbers. In the short term I suspect this move will lose them visitors, until we build strength into main product page and in the long term protect their domain from a Panda penalty for thin content. Would you agree?

Index is the current number of pages in the Google Index, EC is total number of pages crawled (cumulative) over a given period. Indexed will never be 100% of ever crawled for any site which has had pages removed, moved or url changed - this includes if you tell robots.txt to not index a folder once indexed (these go to ever crawled). Hope that makes sense

Thank you again, Scott!

Everyone says don't dilute the PR, but what is the approximate numbers? As for now we have an e-commerce site, with many products. We want our page to be easy slide (as on Facebook scroll down), and it would put like 5000+ links on one page, would this dilute?

Im not positive, but ill always default to what is best (or less clicks) for the user and visible to google. This may help you make the embed responsive. I tested this and I still can't really interact with it successfully on my phone. http://niklausgerber.com/blog/responsive-google-or-bing-maps/ Here is what I know. The embedded map is very useful to me on a desktop. A link to google maps is more useful to me on mobile. Although it is not the elegant solution we would prefer, I believe it'd be optimal to deliver the embedded version to desktop users and the best responsive, useful-to-a-user version to mobile.