Welcome to the Q&A Forum

ok, if you say so... Thanks for the help.

From Screaming Frog you have redirected correctly the www version to the non www version. (Which is what you stated above you wanted). By selecting the non www version in GWMT, you are just reinforcing that it is done in a way that works for you. There is no damage to the www not showing. Go to the nav bar and type in drumbeatmarketing.net and enter; you will see it resolve to www.drumbeatmarketing.net.  So, any non www page is not going to show unless we have something wrong. All is good. Yours is just the opposite as that is what you wanted. No matter what anyone says, it is irrelevant which you choose to use (with the obvious exception where the site has not had a preferred domain and now has two values for PA and you are trying to merge them). Good question, glad to help, Robert

Thanks for looking into this IrvCo, I am using clicky.com

What phrase did you drop on? You seem to have a very small link profile, and much of that is nofollow - I'm not seeing a lot of potential for high rankings here, honestly. It seems like the site is just starting out.

Advertisements can definitely reduce the quality of your website in Google's eyes, however, if your site as a whole is informative, 100+ pages and optimized as you described, I might take a quick look at over optimization of link anchor text or the site for competitive keywords. Definitely check WMT for any warnings from G as well and, be aware, that the Hummingbird algorithm just rolled out. Also, are the affiliate links set to rel=no follow?

Hey Jeffrey, So in general I wouldn't lose too much sleep over GWT 404 errors.  No matter how many I've fixed, a few pop up that I have no idea how Google landed on them.  The ones I'd worry about most are the ones that have links pointing to them, internal or external.  GWT should give you the referring page so check those out and fix them. If there are a few that keep cropping up just 301 redirect them to another page. You should take a look at the sitemap and if there are /feed/ URLs in there, remove them and resubmit. Hope that helps, Jacob

Thanks to all of you for your answers and with the clarity of your responses which make total sense. Blogging on the blog it is. Much appreciated. Peter

In most cases, Google does seem to "de-index" the non-canonical URL, if they process they tag. I put in quotes just because, technically, the page is still in Google's index - as soon as it's not showing up at all (including with "site:"), though, I essentially consider that to be de-indexed. If we can't see it, it might as well not be there. If 301-ing isn't an option, I'd double-check a few things: (1) Is the non-canonical page ranking for anything (including very long-tail terms)? (2) Are there any internal links to the non-canonical URL? These can send a strongly mixed signal. (3) Are there any other mixed signals that might be throwing off the canonical? Examples include canonicals on other pages that contradict this one, 301s/302s that override the canonical, etc.

Thanks a lot guys. I've been trying the tips and tricks you guys provided and that's why I didn't close the question. Hope you guys don't mind answering few more new questions regarding the same issue. 1. When I take a SEO project onbard for a client, how should I go with writing blog content for him. Do you guys usually write content for them or you get the client to write them for you because they know the business best? For an example if the client is a Car Importer, he knows about importing cars and why people should import cars better than the SEO gurus?  2. Similar to question one, when it comes to answering questions on forums and advertising the clients business, do you guys usually do it for the client or you get the client to do it to support the SEO campaign? Sorry if these are stupid questions, but I literally have no idea how that works Thanks a lot guys in advance Jazz

Thank you both Lesley & Jim! This tool is exactly what we needed! Fingers crossed now we have resolved the issues we had with all that duplicate content. How long has the parameter tool been available?? I never even knew it existed!

I'm not aware of an outstanding issue with downloading CSVs. Could you go to http://moz.com/help/contact and open a ticket so we can investigate? Thanks, and so sorry for the troubles!

** isn't there a place for marketing through the name and building trust through creating an online brand promoted through social media etc, which in turn builds trust with search engines?** Sure, there is a place for building.  If you going to brand build then spend that effort on a brand that is absolutely clear and unmistakable. If you market your biz as "Unlock My" then lots of people are going to go to UnlockMy.com. The harder you work to build your brand the more the person who owns that domain will get your traffic. So, I think that unlock.my has two strikes against it.

I have a few clients with 90+ DA scores and suggest the following stay on your radar: 1. (At lest in our case) these clients have large dev teams which can lead to unintended SEO issues when changes or roll outs are not properly coordinated. Basically don't let the client break their own site or rankings. This is not meant to be cynical, its just a reality when you work with a larger team. 2. Typical link building is not a main priority, these sites often build links on their own. Focus on high quality links, and ensuring that the anchor text used is properly balanced. 3. Researching conversions and keywords for new opportunities is important. 4. Improving conversion rates of the pages can often increase value quickly on these high traffic sites. 5. Look for keywords where the client has some ranking traction due to the authority but where they are not on the first page. These can often be easy and highly valuable traffic wins.

Thanks for your help with this. In the end we decided to go down the nofollow route after consulting the developer with your suggestions. Stu

It's really hard to speak in generalities. If the site had <100 back-links, and some of those links were questionable or they were all targeted to a couple of phrases, then yes, a Penguin update could cause you trouble. The other option is that Google gave you some leeway out the gate and then re-evaluated your link profile and found it to be weak. Given that you ranked back in May, though, that seems unlikely (usually, that would happen in the first 30-60 days, in my experience). A couple of things to check: (1) Has anything about your indexed site change (such as duplicates of these pages)? (2) Were there any technical or design changes to the site? (3) Have you engaged in any recent link-building that could be questionable? (4) Are you ranking for exact-match versions of the keywords (in quote)? The more you can isolate the problem, the better. Penalty diagnosis is tricky.