Welcome to the Q&A Forum

The tag should work fine with the partial URL. If you are still concerned about the warning, try adding the base href tag within the of your page. It would be as follows: <base href="http://www.aircycle.com/"> This tag explicitly specifies the base URL to which all partial URLs are built upon for a given page. Try adding this tag to just the one page, then running the report again to see if that resolves the issue. If it does, then you know what change the tool is requesting. To be clear, the canonical tag you are using should be fine for search engines assuming there is no other issue. This may be a specific issue with the tool. Since testing the base href tag, and the full URL are relatively quick and easy to do, my suggestion is to spend 10 minutes performing these tests to see the results. If the tests work, then you can contact the SEOmoz help desk and report your findings as an issue with the tool. It could be a bug or limitation with the tool.

I may be wrong, but I believe the competitive analysis link report is based on the Linkscape index. Every month or so they reindex the web. Sometimes they don't visit all the same pages that they visited the previous month, so they might miss out on some links one month that they found the previous month. This "sampling" of the web is identical to what Google has to do, although their sample is much larger and is indexed more often. This is why your rankings too can dance around in Google. The same is true for Domain Authority. A good metric that we often use is what we call Competitor Comparison Rank. Basically, choose 5 or 10 competitors and track them along your site. Each month, find the average of their domain authorities and the average number of backlinks. Then, subtract your backlinks and authority from their backlinks and authority. Is the gap growing larger or smaller? Are you falling behind or pushing ahead? This is a safer way of doing it because if SEOMoz just crawls fewer pages in one month than they did the previous, it would appear that you lost links, when in reality they just spidered fewer of them. Your competitors would appear to have lost links as well. It is all about comparison. After all, it is a competition.

It's safe to include rel="canonical" on all canonical versions of your site and will not cause any problems. I have done this and tested many times. If you run a template based website such as WordPress it would be much easier if all pages referred to their own canonical version (even if it be itself).

Yes it is thank you.

This is definitely not the best technique to quickly see competition heat as it could be easily misleading. Why? The # of results with certain keyword phrases in title does matter as it does show the # of competitors but what it doesn't show is the authority of those competitors and if they are active as of now, and its anybody's guess what could happen when you go into a fight and without knowing your opponent. Say, you are optimizing for entertainment/celebrity related keywords, you can do quick 'intitle' search and get quickly scared as it may seem as there is a lot of competition looking at the # of results.. however, if you dig a bit deeper its easy to see that majority of pages are low authority pages and are easy to beat as they do not do heavy optimizing (since entertainment traffic doesn't convert well...which means less $ for optimizing).  So my 2 cents...dig a bit deeper, check the top results in first 2 pages at least and look at their authority. Its worth spending a few hours to  know your enemy before you go against them.. rather than spending months in optimizing later and realizing your enemies are much stronger, more active, aggressive and have deeper pockets.

But should I choose terms that we rank for in the top 50 results to try to move us up, or choose terms that we're not even in the top 50 yet? (Or a little of both) And our competitors do have high DA/PA Scores and MozTrust Ranks, but I think it'd still be smart to target some of their KW phrases I noticed they rank for and my company shows up after them, correct?