Welcome to the Q&A Forum

Not an SEO expert myself, but wouldn't suggest that. The backlinks you can purchase probably won't be of good quality, with little to no effect on your search rankings. In fact, they might actually have a negative impact if Google blacklists these websites you are getting paid links from. It appear you've exhausted many options trying to rank ahead of your competitor, but I think there are still a couple of opportunities you can consider: 1. Aim for "position zero" on SERP by optimizing for Featured Snippets 2. Optimize for image or voice search, rather than purely focusing on text results Hope this helps a little!

Thank you so much for this. One of the SEO companies who did this is part of a well known SEO franchise, so all what I would say is, don't use that franchise. I found out today, that the franchise in question that a lot of the people who are part of the franchise don't know much about SEO. They seem to take on the work and then they send it to someone else to do for a lot less, making what I have been told a 500% mark up on profit. Hopefully I can now start getting my traffic back to normal and start building up my site and getting the articles out there.

For this reason you can contact to yelp that tell them people make fake feedback for your list.  Also you can see there report review option.  It will also work for remove fake review.

That's pretty much what I figured. Dang!

Hi there, Have the domain migration issues now resolved themselves? Hopefully it was only temporary! Nick

If I understand correctly you have 10 different pages each one with different content. The canonicals should all point to the corresponding URL's. If you have **https://format /office/location-1 ** the canonical should be and so on for the other 9 pages. Hope this helps.

Thanks for your reply Today I redirect most of these links to the right post, but it was such a borning task. https://guilaneman.ir/

The potential harm is that, even though canonical tags stop duplicate content from being a problem - they don't do much to consolidate backlink authority hitting each web-page. If you have two pages which both have links pointing to them (with "/" and without "/") then only 301s will properly 'merge' those URLs (assuming that their content is near identical) in terms of backlink authority. For this reason, a real architectural solution is always better than using canonical tags. Canonical tags are really a fall-back measure, if you have poor on-site architecture which you fundamentally cannot change. The end goal, though, is not to need them.

This all comes down to the fact that, technically 302 has always been 'found', but there was no status code for a temporary redirect so Google advised people to use 302 (as no one really ever used it for its intended purpose) Now you have 307. To this day, you can still use 302 or 307 (we're still in the transition period, where both still function identically) A 301 will gradually transfer SEO authority from one page to another, over a few weeks / months - so that the old URL stops ranking and the new URL 'has a chance' of ranking in its place. If the new URL has highly dissimilar content (in machine-terms) then the 301 fails to transfer a portion of the authority and some is 'deleted' (vented into cyberspace) A 302 retains the ranking benefit on the old page and nothing is transferred to the new page (period). Over time (a month or six) the 302 will decay. Slowly the authority (which has been kept on the old URL) will begin to 'die off' and you end up (in an extreme situation) with no authority left anywhere from that particular URL (it's just gone). 307s function the same way As such, using a 302 or 307 is the correct measure, but remember - Google will be watching to check that the redirect really is temporary. If your whole company forgets about restoring the content to the original URL (for a significant period of time) then don't expect that there will be anything left when you come back In an ideal world, you'd turn it all around inside of one month if you wanted some good juice left when you lifted the 302 / 307

I agree with this response. If the content is mostly under your own control (the main content is yours, maybe with some scattering of UGC 'comments' from parents) then go subdirectory If in the future you create an area where you have way less control over what is posted (like a forum, which is 99% UGC) then go subdomain

Could someone help me with that ? Effect digital to answer your question, I am talking about both. Are related topics things appearing in related search queries on google front end ? and are they also what is in Moz back end ? By the way in the back end Moz doesn't call it related topics anymore, they call it content suggestions. What I am really trying to understand is are those suggestions just words to include or is topics to talk about in depth. Imagine I do a "bike tour in Alsace"(France) and Moz in its content suggestions tells me Alsace wine and cycling holidays.. what do I need to do with that  ? become the new wikipedia and develop in a paragraph about Alsace wine and talk about the different alsace wine, the grapes etc... or just include the word Alsace wine in my content with other words about the Alsace region that Moz recommends such as Colmar or Vosges so that  google understand that I am talking about a bike tour in Alsace ? Thank you,

Thank you for your detailed answer.

Hi, We have the same question and we noticed that ahrefs is blocked.  Would you mind looking at our site to see if you see any issues>. www.caffeinemarketing.co.uk  thanks

Hi Corsolutions! I agree with what our community members are saying here: it's tough to rank in the local packs without a physical location. Because of this, your strategy for visibility in these other service cities can include: Content -Links to that content -Social outreach -PPC -Offline Marketing Your goal here will be organic, social, paid and real-world visibility, instead of local SERP visibility, because it's typically out of reach unless you are in a market with very low competition.