Welcome to the Q&A Forum

Great, You see me now. Let me email you the issue I have been facing at help@moz.com . Best, Teginder

I think that depends upon how you see the "lifetime value of a customer" or the "profit margin on a single sale".    JTV will follow you around for months....  HarborFreight will follow you for days.... If you have a single product that you are selling at a discount price you might not want to remarket very much at all.

Hi my friend, if you look at the cache of the URL you gave: http://www.thinkdigit.com/top-products/Laptops-and-PCs/top-10-laptops-124.php  ::::  Click Me You are actually looking at the source code of the following page: http://www.thinkdigit.com/top-products/Ultrabooks/top-10-ultrabooks-153.php To confirm this, look at the meta data in the source, it says Ultrabooks. Now comes the issue where the rel=canonical implementation is incorrect on both the pages as they both point to themselves. Check out the source code of both the pages. Their rel=canonical attributes point to themselves. So as per my original explanation, Google is showing the cache of /top-10-ultrabooks-153.php for top-10-laptops-124.php which is the actual issue at hand. So when you look at the source code of cached page, you are actually looking at the source code of /top-10-ultrabooks-153.php page. Best, Devanur Rafi

100% agree with Alan here  as the purpose of rel=canonical implementation is to hint Google about the non-preferred pages (the duplicate or near duplicate pages of their original versions or the preferred ones) and not to index them. Best, Devanur Rafi

My pleasure, Steve.

I can tell you I don't use SEO hosting. I like to stay off Google's radar completely and SEO hosting companies are sitting ducks IMO.

Thank you Patrick The answer definitely help me understand and look at it differently. Greatly appreciate your response.

Good response Patrick. I would agree with him. You can target multiple niches on one site however take due care with your on site efforts / taxonomy structure and get ready to add loads of good relevant content.

For "Los Angeles Criminal Defense Attorney" you are attacking with your homepage.  The most powerful page on your site. For "Los Angeles DUI Lawyer" you are attacking with a weak internal page that is poorly optimized. You have another DUI page that is not very good... http://www.aerlawgroup.com/dui-and-driving-offenses.html ========================================== Your title tag on the DUI page is contaminated with other practice areas.  Focus it on DUI.  This is your current.... <title></span><span>Los Angeles DUI Lawyer - Los Angeles Criminal Defense Attorney | Criminal Lawyer</span><span class="webkit-html-tag"></title> Make your title tag a pure attack on DUI <title></span><span>Los Angeles DUI Lawyer</span><span class="webkit-html-tag"></title> =============================== You have a canonical problem.   Your homepage resolves on... two URLs. http://www.aerlawgroup.com/index.html http://www.aerlawgroup.com/ As a result, your power is cut.   You need .htaccess to 301 redirect the index.html version to root.  Also you have many internal links that point at http://www.aerlawgroup.com/index.html These should be pointing to http://www.aerlawgroup.com/ ================================ You have two pages going after DUI http://www.aerlawgroup.com/dui-and-driving-offenses.html http://www.aerlawgroup.com/dui.html If this was my site I would consolidate and attack with one (dui.html).  Then change all internal links to point at that page. ================================ I would also improve the attack on local search.  I'll let someone else  make suggestions there.

Hi there! You've received some good responses. Did any of them answer your question. Please let us know, and welcome to Q&A! Christy

Thank you Gregory

Sam, my friend...please never think along those lines like how and why someone doing spam or blackhat tactics and still be able to rank high in search engines. Even if someone from Google guarantees me in written that there won't be anything happening to my site  if I go the blackhat way, I will still stay away from those as I am here to stay forever and I never ever think of doing anything that the search engines frown upon. Please don't bother about those who do blackhat and still get away with it. Thinking along those lines itself is incorrect. Let them do and they will repent one fine day. Today, there are thousands if not lakhs of sites that do not follow the guidelines of search engines and are still ranking high. Just because they are doing good despite their shady tactics, we should not follow them or even bother or worry about them. Its obvious that they are not doing the right thing and we just have to laugh when we see them. They won't last long. Here is the deal, if you want to be here forever, then stay clean.Only quality content and quality links can secure you a lasting high rank in Google. However, you can report those spammy websites here: https://www.google.com/webmasters/tools/spamreportform?hl=en and here: https://www.google.com/webmasters/tools/spamreport You need to login to your Google webmaster tools account to be able to access the URLs above. So don't worry my friend. I know how does it feel when you see worthless sites ranking high in search engines. We are here to play a fair game and not to manipulate the search results to rank high in search engines and please do not even think about those who try to out-smart the search engines and their algorithms. Wish you all the very best. Regards, Devanur Rafi

There was a big local shake-up around 10/25 - were you potentially ranking in local markets for some of these phrases (they don't seem like local queries, but just thought I'd ask)? I'd have to agree with Marie that the timing suggest this wasn't Penguin, but Google hasn't been very forthcoming on Penguin data refreshes. Your link profile looks pretty clean to me, and your site isn't really large enough to have large-scale content issues. Those services pages look a little keyword-targeted and border on thin, but if you're talking about a handful of them, I doubt it's enough to cause you serious problems. If you rolled out hundreds of them that were all just variations on the same core keyword phrases, that would be different. On the other hand, if those pages specifically target the terms that dropped, it's hard to ignore that fact. Did you do any targeted link-building to those pages. I'm seeing one weird thing - OSE is showing a ton of recent links from Scoop.it - across a large number of pages - but when I check the source site, I'm not seeing any links. It's possible you got a temporary boost from some links that got removed, but that's really hard to track.

Howdy, Different pages will rank differently for different things. Links are a big part of it, but Google uses over 200 different signals in varying degrees, so it's often hard to pinpoint the exact cause of why one page ranks higher than the other. In this case, I'd choose to run a "full report" in the Keyword Difficulty Tool. As a PRO member you have a certain amount of credits to run a number of reports. Each report takes a few hours, and the system will email you when it is ready. The "Full Report" goes way beyond links and also looks at on-page elments, social metrics and anchor text for the top 10 results of the SERP. When setting up the report, you can also add your own URL if it is not already on of the top 10. Taking a broad look at many more signals aggregated in this way can often give you a better idea about why your competitor is ranking, and often leads to ideas about what you can do to catch up or improve. Hope this helps! Best of luck with your SEO!

Thank you very much Matijn again:-) Meanwhile I used a bit of code I found somewhere, which also have the nowfollow tags as I also added 2 more social icons. I hope the code is good:-) [image: Facebook.png] [image: youtube.png] [image: Twitter.png] [image: skype.png] [image: Linkedin.png] [image: pinterest-icon.png]

Yes, agreed - will ask for nofollows on backlinks as not doing this for SEO benefit anyway.

I agree with Sean - I've never heard of an official limit to image filenames in terms of length alone. Since the file name is almost always part of the image URL, you could be running the risk of too-long URLs but that's a relatively minor problem. I would make extra sure that your file names don't appear keyword-stuffed, though - so watch out for things like repeating keywords or having all variations of a keyword. There's a big difference between widgets-extralarge-round-blue-widgetmaker.jpg and blue-widgets-best-blue-widgets-blue-widgets-online-free-shipping, if that makes sense. Other than that you should be fine.