Welcome to the Q&A Forum

Hi Eric

It sounds like Google will only affect websites only on Google's mobile listings. So rankings on the desktop version of Google should be unaffected. They are doing this purely from a user experience perspective and are devaluing sites that aren't mobile ready for users on a mobile device,.

Hi Nevil

Google does support cross domain canonical tags as they announced here: here http://googlewebmastercentral.blogspot.co.uk/2009/12/handling-legitimate-cross-domain.htm

However I am not sure this is the best strategy for you. When you use a canonical tag you are basically telling Google not to index that page but the one in the canonical tag instead. If Google listens to this it means your job pages will not be indexed in Google.

The better strategy for this would be similar to Indeed's where you take a snippet of the job, add your own unique content to the page and then have the call to action button link to the original job itself. This should give that page the best chance to rank.

Indeed is a tough example to use. They are pretty much number 1 for every job related term with a site that is extremely thin. I believe Google has listed this site similar to Wikipedia where it is a credible source for jobs and they give it additional weight. How fair Google is being here has been a long debate of mine

I hope this helps

Hi Miriam

The other aspect of this that got me thinking when I saw the update was around multiple sites for the same business. I have seen this in several niches where the same business has 2 or 3 different websites ranking on page 1 for their main term. Each of these sites has unique content etc however they are all linked via the same address. I have been waiting for Google to resolve this issue as it is technically a doorway page unique just more sophisticated. It wouldn't be hard for them to devalue a site if they see it ranking well and it is the same business as another site ranking.

I wonder if they will deal with this issue in this update.

Hi, I would say the best way to answer this is to look at a general news site such as the BBC here in the UK. They have a huge domain the covers hundreds of topics. There is no way this site will have an overall relevance on the domain yet the links it provides will still provide a huge benefit. With this in mind, in your situation I wouldn't worry to much about the relevance of the domain. It is more around the relevance of the topic of the content itself.

In your case, I am assuming that the link you are referring to will be the author bio link at the bottom of the page. In this case I wouldn't concern yourself too much on the strength of this link. Ultimately it will be fairly low as in context links tend to get the most benefit if we are talking pure SEO here. By all means I think you should continue writing on the blog as it is in your field of expertise but make sure you are doing it to build your own personal brand and not  just for the sake of the link.

Hi there,

We may be able to help - we're www.datify.co.uk, a UK based agency.

Be great to chat more on this.

Thanks,

Hi Edmond,

We'd love to chat to you about this - be great to maybe jump on a Skype call?

Hey David,

There's no one way, we'd always recommend a healthy marketing mix - if you try multiple channels and measure them all from end to end you'll be able to assess results and see which traffic source is the best for you.

Normally, with a new site we start with a mixture of paid (paid search & paid social), as well as social community building.  The reason we do this is twofold.  First, social can drive good traffic that will keep coming back - so this would be from interacting with influencers and posting content on Twitter, and the same on Facebook (with a little audience growth or content reach boosting through ads).  With Facebook we also recommending trying some ads that link straight to your website, as the targeting is so good and the CPC's are low to start driving some traffic.

We recommend doing a bit of paid search before you knuckle down into an organic strategy because it allows you to see how your keywords perform in terms of any conversions on site, so you can see fully where to focus.  It also allows you to dictate where you want your traffic to land and for which keywords straight away, so that you can start to measure your sites performance - we wrote about it here a little more if this helps > http://datify.co.uk/role-ppc-organic-strategy/

After this it depends what's important to you - we find remarketing to people who have visited our site across the google display network to be really powerful with bringing people back, and of course organic will have a massive part to play over the longer term in driving you consistent traffic without cost attached!

In the short term too - content curation sites like inbound.org are great to post your content to.

Hope this helps give some ideas!

Hi Shawn,

In theory it's possible, but it's pretty difficult and can take an awful lot of optimisation.  As well as who else is bidding, Google take into account your quality score.  You'll need to optimise your quality score a lot by having very relevant keywords, ads, and landing pages and segment everything down into a lot of ad groups to have any chance.  Then you'll need to achieve a high CTR, have low competition and constantly optimise everything (taking out low performing keywords, adjusting ad copy etc).

It can be a long road, but in theory you can get there - by following the above though you will in theory continually drive your costs down, so whilst you may never get to $0.01 you may get closer than you are now!

Hope that helps

Most cases like these are catered for on an adhoc basis, usually done by a dev team that will migrate the entire database into the new site.

There could well be a market for a porting tool that provides a checklist type system for a large scale site migration. I have seen site migrations go wrong. A lot of revenue can be lost through the plummet of organic traffic from a failed migration.

Just to confirm what my findings discovered, it showed that Wikipedia does (or at least did then) actually provide value from an SEO sense. The external links are indeed nofollow however Google could be wavering the nofollow status of those links because of the fact it is "Wikipedia".

Hi Miriam

The other aspect of this that got me thinking when I saw the update was around multiple sites for the same business. I have seen this in several niches where the same business has 2 or 3 different websites ranking on page 1 for their main term. Each of these sites has unique content etc however they are all linked via the same address. I have been waiting for Google to resolve this issue as it is technically a doorway page unique just more sophisticated. It wouldn't be hard for them to devalue a site if they see it ranking well and it is the same business as another site ranking.

I wonder if they will deal with this issue in this update.

I have had a very quick look at your link profile and it seems there are 2 major issues.

1. You anchor text profile is over optimised for commercial terms, this looks unnatural to Google and is usually what algorithmic updates such as Google Penguin look for to reduce a sites rankings.

2. A lot of your links seem to be forum profiles, this is an old and quite spammy way of building links to a site. These types of links used to work to gain rankings but with recent advancements and updates in Google these can actually harm your site.

I would recommend to look at all the links pointing to your site, look closely at what links are unnatural and attempt to get them removed. As well as this I would recommend submitting these unnatural links to the Google Disavow Tool in your Webmaster Tools account.

Hi Eric

It sounds like Google will only affect websites only on Google's mobile listings. So rankings on the desktop version of Google should be unaffected. They are doing this purely from a user experience perspective and are devaluing sites that aren't mobile ready for users on a mobile device,.

From the research I have done I would say they are worth it. The external links in Wikipedia are nofollow however I have seen reason to believe that Google still counts links from Wikipedia. This test is a few years old now so it may have changed but this is what I found.

I built a new site on a new domain for a client that was a local restaurant. Once the site was live it gathered a couple of links all very small in terms of pagerank value. The site sat at PR0 for over a year.

Some time after that the site was listed on the villages Wikipedia page as an external link (of course no followed). The wikipedia page itself was a PR3. After the next PR toolbar update my clients site received a PR2 update.

From that I knew fully well that there was no other links pointing to the site that would have affected this. Since that day I have always assumed that Google pushed value to sites linked from Wikipedia followed or no followed. But as I say, this test is about 4-5 years years old now.

Hope this helps.

Hi Nevil

Google does support cross domain canonical tags as they announced here: here http://googlewebmastercentral.blogspot.co.uk/2009/12/handling-legitimate-cross-domain.htm

However I am not sure this is the best strategy for you. When you use a canonical tag you are basically telling Google not to index that page but the one in the canonical tag instead. If Google listens to this it means your job pages will not be indexed in Google.

The better strategy for this would be similar to Indeed's where you take a snippet of the job, add your own unique content to the page and then have the call to action button link to the original job itself. This should give that page the best chance to rank.

Indeed is a tough example to use. They are pretty much number 1 for every job related term with a site that is extremely thin. I believe Google has listed this site similar to Wikipedia where it is a credible source for jobs and they give it additional weight. How fair Google is being here has been a long debate of mine

I hope this helps

AS Alberto says you are pretty much correct in your implementation however I just want to check a couple of things.

If you are looking to get authorship set up you do not really need to set up rel=publisher so lets leave that part for a moment. If you want the homepage to have authorship simply put rel=author on the homepage linking to the correct Google Plus account. I assume you have done this part.

The next part is to go to the Google Plus account and make sure that on your profile you have added your eCommerce site in the "Contribute to" section. This creates the link and will start the authorship markup and it should appear in SERPs.

If you want to double check that authorship is working correctly then use the Google Structured Data testing tool here and enter your sites URL. This will let you know.

Hope this helps.

Hi Alex

Looking at your link profile the anchor texts of your links look over optimised. I would almost certainly say these are causing issues with your site and could be a reason why your site isn't ranking for those key terms.

Before looking at investing time and money into changing the architecture of the site. I would look into analysing all links pointing to your site and see if you can get some of the unnatural links removed. Then give Google time to notice the change.

I hope this helps.

Adam

HI Jean-Francois

I would try to keep you sitemap as clean as possible. But could you export all the data into a CSV and clean up the pages using a formula. If you got a full list of your URLs in column A in Excel. Then used the following formula

=LEFT(A1,Find("ref=",A1)-1)

Put this formula into cell B1 and drag the formula down all the rows. This should strip out all of the parameters you do not want. Then simply remove the duplicates and you have your list of URLs to create a clean sitemap.

Let me know if this helps.

Hi, I would say the best way to answer this is to look at a general news site such as the BBC here in the UK. They have a huge domain the covers hundreds of topics. There is no way this site will have an overall relevance on the domain yet the links it provides will still provide a huge benefit. With this in mind, in your situation I wouldn't worry to much about the relevance of the domain. It is more around the relevance of the topic of the content itself.

In your case, I am assuming that the link you are referring to will be the author bio link at the bottom of the page. In this case I wouldn't concern yourself too much on the strength of this link. Ultimately it will be fairly low as in context links tend to get the most benefit if we are talking pure SEO here. By all means I think you should continue writing on the blog as it is in your field of expertise but make sure you are doing it to build your own personal brand and not  just for the sake of the link.

Hi Shawn,

In theory it's possible, but it's pretty difficult and can take an awful lot of optimisation.  As well as who else is bidding, Google take into account your quality score.  You'll need to optimise your quality score a lot by having very relevant keywords, ads, and landing pages and segment everything down into a lot of ad groups to have any chance.  Then you'll need to achieve a high CTR, have low competition and constantly optimise everything (taking out low performing keywords, adjusting ad copy etc).

It can be a long road, but in theory you can get there - by following the above though you will in theory continually drive your costs down, so whilst you may never get to $0.01 you may get closer than you are now!

Hope that helps