Welcome to the Q&A Forum

I would need to see this to give you any real feedback on it John but general rule of thumb is if Google looked at these links, would they see and understand the reasoning for the links to be there? Andy

Hard to say without looking at everything in more detail Steven. Could be clutching at straws all day, but happy to have a chat in more detail if you want to get in touch. I still suspect a penalty has happened that has knocked the .ie site off the radar. Andy

Try Asana, damn cool and does the job equally well if not better than basecamp. And its FREE

I agree with Andy here. Too many 404's can hurt your site. EVEN Google says that in GWT. I wouldn't do any 404s. I would 301 or robot.txt folders. You may want to robots.txt some folders. Sometimes you can get a plugin and fix things quickly.

If you have lots of duplicate pages, you can get hit by Panda, which tends to be a site-wide penalty. However, I would look for ways to correct this rather than just ignore the pages as Google tells everyone not to duplicate content. Andy

The best I can think of would be to link to the anchors from the page the "level" above. In other words, on a category page (or equivalent), display links to the page plus its named anchors (actually, much like Google's sitelinks). It's impossible to weigh up the relative weight of links from within the page to links from elsewhere on the site without inside knowledge, but I would prefer this to hidden links.

No worries Kyu! Just a funny thing about the internet Sounds like you are doing some great digging today and are being smart about it. I hope it resolves your issues. Thanks for being thoughtful.

I think you should be fine, and Owen's comment below is excellent advice too. Following his suggestions may help prevent future problems too.

I have a competitor that has 30+ site with EMDs. He uses the domain name to target the specific town he wants to market in.  Let's say you buy Newyorkcityseo.com, you can then also use New York  City SEO in the title, description, & keywords. Also any links with anchor text will be branded New York City SEO. This still works really well for ranking high with Google, but it looks bad with to customers. Personally i would never go this route, but it does work. Like I said I have competitors that have been doing it for years, maybe one day they will fall.

If you are saying you have 75k links from your domains cross linking then I would agree. Product websites have been under attack for awhile now.Tough one.

Definitely an interesting situation. You are trying to prevent a duplicate content issue across domains by using both noindex and a canonical tag. Typically it is used for similar pages within the same domain. Google does say, " Can rel="canonical" be used to suggest a canonical URL on a completely different domain? There are situations where it's not easily possible to set up redirects. This could be the case when you need to migrate to a new domain name using a web server that cannot create server-side redirects. In this case, you can use the rel="canonical" link element to specify the exact URL of the domain preferred for indexing. While the rel="canonical" link element is seen as a hint and not an absolute directive, we do try to follow it where possible." http://support.google.com/webmasters/bin/answer.py?hl=en&answer=139394 As such, with Google you would probably be ok just using the canonical. Bing however does not follow the tag so you could face issues with them. The link juice question is very good. I would hesitate to say that Google would fully take the directive of the canonical on a page it has been told to not index or follow. There is a chance they could hit that directive and then ignore the canonical.

Ignoring everything else (elephants included), from a users point of view, if someone is in the US and sees content on a UK domain, they are less likely to click on it. I would go down the route of a .com and then find content to make it worthwhile. You also don't need to wonder where best to point GWT - UK or US. From a positioning point in the SERPs, remember that a .com is generic whilst a .co.uk is UK-centric. Even if it was a part of a .co.uk, I don't know how well it would rank in the US. There are so many factors to take into consideration. Andy

Hi Kristopher, ultimately Bing/Yahoo have the same end goal as Google - to give the searcher the highest quality search results so that they continue to use that service. However the methods they use to evaluate the quality of results and achieve this goal do differ. Of course search engine algorithms are something of a "black box", but here are two common beliefs about the differences between Bing/Yahoo and Google: Bing probably use SERP CTR and SERP bounce as a ranking factor. It's therefore really important to evaluate meta descriptions and page titles as well as quality of landing pages. http://www.stonetemple.com/search-algorithms-and-bing-webmaster-tools-with-duane-forrester/ Bing probably puts more focus on social than Google. http://techcrunch.com/2012/10/21/beyond-their-10-blue-links-googles-and-bings-search-strategies-take-different-paths/ Aside from this, major ranking factors on both Google and Bing include inbound links, on-page optimisation, website structure and quality. Good luck!

You're welcome.  I hope it all works out as you expect.

Hi Kristi, Thanks for reaching out with your questions. I'm assuming you meant to write www.abc.com since eg.www.abc.com isn't a website. I ran a report for that and it did have a redirect: Oh Hey! It looks like that URL redirects to abc.go.com/. Would you like to see data for <a class="clickable redirects">that URL instead</a>? The only time you see a message like that is if the URL you enter redirects to a different page. If there's no redirect it will just display the information you requested. As for Google, if there's a redirect on a page, it can definitely impact a sites rankings as a 301 will pass link juice to the target URL. That's generally intentional though. I hope that helps. Cheers, Joel.