Welcome to the Q&A Forum

Thanks for reply. I did not have a chance to got to MozCon. What topics were most popular? I haven't used Press Releases in my SEO that is why I am kind of questioning that method.

That makes sense. Thanks a bunch.

If publisher who you are an affiliate of allows for any custom variable to also be sent with the visitor you can include this and hopefully query it in your reporting from the partner.  This is the case for CJ, Amazon, and eBay but often times private affiliate programs have limited tracking.

It's great news that you are getting 75 to 80 posts per week with a lot of it being very well written. Will this hurt your site if the posts link back to a site where a verbatim copy exists?  In my opinion you have three risks.... 1) linking to websites that are being heavily manipulated - a bad neighborhood.... .... 2) seeing your copy of the post filtered from the search engines because of duplicate content... and ..... 3) seeing your site or a client site be punished by panda for content farming. Here is what I would do...  1) Encourage all of your clients to post high quality original content.  Preach a strong sermon to them about the value. Limit the number of links within your site that lead to low quality content or content that is heavily syndicated. Develop a "library" on your site of very high quality, original, non-syndicated content and strongly encourage your clients to submit items for consideration.  Be strict with the rules.  However, any article accepted would be featured on your homepage, linked to from one of several highly visible category pages on your site that are featured in your persistent navigation.  Turn your content resource into a highly promoted asset.  Create a situation where clients will highly desire the premium attention.

Not to my knowledge. Google analytics seems to keep this as a search referral. You can find traffic from maps, but that is specific to maps.google.com Webmaster tools certainly tracks it as a search placement.

Sure I think this page on title tags sums it up pretty well. Note the suggested format: primary keyword - secondary keyword | brand So the suggestion "Life Coach - Boise, ID | Bob Weikel & Associates" fits this model. Keyword 1->Life Coach Keyword 2->Boise, ID Brand->Bob Weikel & Associates This format keeps it under the recommended 70 characters, fits in the two primary keywords and brand, keeps it user friendly in the SERPs and displays concise relevancy to the contents of the page. The thing is, if you have a page that's well written and valuable to the user for each topic/service you provide, its easy to create title tags that fits this model eloquently. This doesn't mean you can't target more than one keyphrase to a page - there can be other ones in the body of the content of course - synonyms and variations etc.  But pick one version that works best in the title -Dan

tried using both options for imgur for picture....they dont work...here is subject URL http://www.golffellowship.org/paakoridge.html

Well it looks like you are hosting them yourself so that's good, have you created and submitted a video sitemap XML to Google yet?

I'm sorry, I actually meant to say domain authority.

Checking the URl's in google they do indeed seem to be tracking URL's, which must pass info back into their alogrithm.

any answer here Jacob?

Although it isn't the best - Yahoo Site Explorer is pretty "fresh" and should show them pretty quickly.

Hey Joe, I noticed the same thing (large drop in indexed number/percentage of pages) a few days ago and thought that was related to a ranking drop I have experienced.  All I did was resubmit all (tag, category, posts) sitemaps via GWT and the next day Google had almost 100% of my submitted URLs back in the index.  However, that didn't fix my apparent Google penalty issue so I'm still searching for a solution: http://www.seomoz.org/q/help-with-diagnosing-google-penalty Oh, this was with a wordpress site utilizing Yoast's WP SEO plugin to create XML sitemaps.

Thanks for the explanation!

Thanks for the detailed response. I checked Open Site Explorer and looks like we should be using the www. Also, I believe that we have some print ads that use www -- good thinking!