Welcome to the Q&A Forum

Hey Caroline, I am also seeing that some of the data is missing on the keywords that I track in my account,a s well. So it looks like you found a bug here. I am going to create an email ticket in our support desk so I can have our engineers investigate the issue. You will see an email from me shortly and I will follow up with you there as soon as I have an update from them. I apologize for the inconvenience this has caused. Chiaryn

Well as I understand it if I have these keywords added through a campaign then they will not consume the quantity of available keywords through the rank tracker. Every one of the keywords is in a campaign (to my knowledge). The usefulness of the keyword rank tracker is that it's able to export the results for use on a spreadsheet we utilize.

Thanks, it's finally working today

Wow, that was like an hour of digging--trying  to track down the linkscape crawler.  I think I've got it now.

I don't really think it's possible to calculate. A multiplier for one keyword will be different to another. I don't the nk there is an average figure that anyone could calculate with any degree. Peter

Hi Allie, If you are not used HubSpot in a while I agree with you it was clunky. HubSpot 3 though is the only tool I know if that will allow you to monitor all the big networks including LinkedIn. Tell you when somebody comes from your site from any of them. Allow you to track all of your engagements rather it's over HubSpots e-mail or any social network. They are coming out with HubSpot 4 in January and I think it might be the best social tool out there here are some good competitors though. Check out tracker as well as Adobe anything listed below should do all the networks know that I AWE.SM lets you track your posts on LinkedIn and lets you to post to LinkedIn there are 3 levels of that software and I use it to post a link and quite often you can also create your own category for instance if you wanted to use the least expensive version use static and name it static linkedin when you look at the analytics you'll see where it was shared to as the URL is present in the monitoring. Please have a look at please options as well. https://en.mention.net/ http://www.brandwatch.com/ http://www.adobe.com/solutions/social-marketing.html http://simplymeasured.com/tour/ http://www.socialreport.com/about-social-report.html http://smallbiztrends.com/2013/09/social-media-analytics-tools.html http://www.razorsocial.com/social-media-analytics-tools/ A look a hubspot http://www.hubspot.com/products/social-inbox if you check out http://totally.awe.sm/ in there http://support.awe.sm/ or the links here linkedin in each https://so.awe.sm/bookmarklets http://support.awe.sm/customer/portal/articles/1101457 http://support.awe.sm/customer/portal/articles/1136589-overview I hope this is of more help sincerely, Thomas

Anytime! Cheers

Thanks Matt, that explains it.

Hi Lana, Hmm ... did you migrate from Pro to Moz Analytics? As reported on Moz Health, our engineers are fixing an issue where some former Pro users aren't receiving emails. Details are at http://health.moz.com. If this does NOT apply to you, please triple-check your email settings. If they are properly set, please email the Help Team so they can dig into your account. Either way, please let me know what happens. I want to make sure we get you fixed up! Again, thanks for your patience. You are awesome. Christy

Sorry, I don't think we're clear (judging by other responses) on what you're trying to check. Are you looking for some core stats on those 800 domains, or do you have a list of keywords for each domain that you want to check rankings for? If it's a list of keywords, how many total (ballpark) keywords are you talking about?

Send an email to help@moz.com and that creates a ticket. Thanks!

now is ok, I can use it succesfuly, thanks for your response Abe.

http://moz.com/learn/seo/redirection can help. You're specifically looking for the "Redirecting Canonical Hostnames" section. Briefly, google considers the following as different pages, even if they are the same. example.com www.example.com Other fun things that can also happen are having all of these pages have the same content, but you can use the following URLs to get to that one piece of content: example.com example.com/ example.com/index.html www.example.com www.example.com/ www.example.com/index.html Hope that helps!

If you are using rel canonical, you're doing it right. The real question is why that second link exists.  Somewhere on your site you are linking to that snap-picture-poster-frames subdirectory.  I would spend some time figuring out why that is the link and not the direct canonical link.  Then fix it.  It's unnecessarily confusing and points to some poor site architecture.  Removing it will both eliminate the dupe problem and also just leave you with a cleaner link structure.  Being in two categories shouldn't mean you need two different URLs for the same product...

Thanks heaps Dan, really appreciate it! Made most of the fixes you've prescribed and will do the others. Content is unique on each page, however thin and lacking substantive value... certainly requires some more work. The Onpage Grader also eventually seems to have caught up and no longer displays non-problems as problems as it did initially. Looks like I just needed to give it some time upon making a remedy. A few quick questions if I could trouble you to answer them. You've been extremely helpful already though and gone well above your call of duty so don't worry if you're too busy. What do you think is the best way to approach a location-based campaign that targets different localities? Is it a good idea to create a different location page for each location targeted? You've suggested to make the title tag - Dental Care in Cairnlea - Family Dental Care. However, how detrimental would that be for targeted keywords like "Orthodontist Cairnlea" or "Fillings Cairnlea" if it were to be targeted on that page? Is Google smart enough to know that Dental care covers the wide array of dental services like fillings braces, orthodontist etc. and so a broad descriptive title tag is most effective? Specific targeted keywords like "Orthodonist Cairnlea" are then considered highly related or a subset and therefore, are not extensively affected, so long as the keyword (eg Orthodonist Cairnlea) is appropriately prevalent in body content? Do you think the Moz Onpage Grader places too much value on keywords appearing a number of times in body content, when some thought leaders claim that Google is moving away from this as a key metric? Just answer if you have the time. Thanks abundantly.

Hi Ruben, The title tags are not in images. Here is the source code: <htmllang="en" class="no-js"><metacharset="utf-8"><metaname='svg-x-verification' content="59db65b1c4a5977e69948d222f59793dc8222000"><metahttp-equiv="x-ua-compatible" content="IE=edge,chrome=1"><title>FirstCry Coupons November 2013 | FirstCry Promo Code - Couponspy</title><metaname="description" content="FirstCry Coupons November 2013 Save instantly with a FirstCry Promo Code 100% Free No Sign up Save up to 50% at firstcry.com with CouponSpy!"><meta< p=""></meta<></metaname="description"></metahttp-equiv="x-ua-compatible"></metaname='svg-x-verification'></metacharset="utf-8"></htmllang="en"> Thanks!

Hi, There is an explanation of the metrics in the Open Site Explorer here: http://moz.com/help/guides/research-tools/open-site-explorer The "number of domains linking to domain" is the total number of other domains that have at least one link to the site. You said, " I'm analyzing our competitors link profile and noticed some numbers as high as 2369232? Yes, 2,369,232 is a high number, but is that number linking domains or some other metric like linking pages? If it is linking domains then you could only expect those sort of numbers for a very large and significant site. If it isn't a site like that then that number must be an error in the report. Peter

hi This does not seem correct to me i will check out the link you have provided, but not sure how these pages can be considered duplicate when all three pages have the exact same url defined within the canonical meta Regards Paul

We are so sorry that you didn't get the deserved investigation with this issue. Please write in to help@moz.com and we will re-visit this issue quickly with you. The data should certainly not be as far off as you are seeing.

You are right the numbers are only an estimates but I disagree with you that they are "Worthless", is always good to have an idea of your competitors traffic.  You can see what is the potential of market x or y looking by looking at big players estimate traffic.