Welcome to the Q&A Forum

I agree, though I suspect I might have a looser interpretation of if it's relevant or useful. In general terms, if they're fairly solid charities, then the links can be decent. I'd add to this that if the business is geographically focused, then there's benefit and relevance in building links and goodwill (online and off) by partnering with local charities. We've had a lot of success with this, especially in more closely-knit areas.

Is this caboose that you propose adding to these pages relevant? If yes, then add it to the main body of the page.  Why attach it down there where nobody will see it? If no, then why are you slapping it to the bottom of the page.  Delete it.  If it is valuable content then publish on its own page.

Hi Bob, You often run into this situation with eCommerce sites - they want to add information to each product but they don't quite know where to put it. The short answer is yes - but only if it's content that actually helps the visitor. If you can increase the value of these pages by adding unique content by all means do so. On the other hand, if the content is truly valuable, you may consider placing it on it's own page where it might attract more attention. The thing you want to avoid is adding content just for the sake of adding content. If it's not going to increase visitor engagement then it's probably not worth doing - but I've never seen a case where adding high quality, engaging content actually hurt. Go for it!

If you disavowed 80% of your links, and many of them were being counted by Google prior to the penalty, then you should expect your rankings to drop substantially, even after the penalty is removed....because you simply have a fraction of the links you had before.  Granted, the ones you disavowed were most likely very weak links, which is good. But moving forwards, what you've got to do is build new, strong, non-spammy links. And expect this to take some time, too.  From when you add a new link, it takes Google a while to discover that, then recalculate the PR that flows to your site from that link.  At one point, that link juice recalculation seemed to me to be taking about a month; I suspect it's a little faster now.  As well, I'm seeing indications with several clients' sites that there's an artificial delay of 3 to 6 months when major changes happen on a site...then, with no further changes made to the site, the rankings and traffic will inch up over a couple of months. So my advice:  be patient; you need to rebuild the links you've lost (with better quality sources, of course).  And if you can create interesting, shareable content, leverage Facebook, G+ etc. to get your site visitors to help you build some of those links (and get real traffic from the shares) in the social sites.

I won't be so sure that those expired domains are what's helping them rank.  As their competitor, I'd more likely snicker at them behind their back for spending the money on buying and hosting those domains with the thought that it's helping their main site in the search results.  Here's an old Danny Sullivan article on the topic

Its sucks, but they will get caught out eventually (as Christina says it happening already). Its a temping trick to try and copy, but they have such a head start it would be hard to beat them at there own game.  Best concentrate on white hat backlinks, then when the reckoning comes, you will have the head start on them

I think it's less about submitting them to, as you put it, the vast amount of info graphic directories, and more about having something that will resonate with your audience. If it's something you believe has good information, and will bring in business, then produce it and publicise it, but I'd hesitate to mass submit to every infographic directory you can find.  Pick the x most well known, or most relevant to your industry. If the information is good, and well presented you should gain real links from real people, which is significantly more useful than any number of directory submissions!

You wont waste any link juice it will come back to you, these are internal links with links back to the home page, linking to these pages and back to the home page will increase the PR on the home page Please read this page http://thatsit.com.au/seo/tutorials/a-simple-explanation-of-pagerank the have a play on this calculator http://www.webworkshop.net/pagerank_calculator.php

Hi Bob, Why not start simple and leverage the questions your clients are already asking you? There must be lots of common issues they face during a printing process. We seem to talk at least 3-4 times with the printers while we are getting anything printed. This could be spun out initially as a faq type page, but I would think that some of those questions would naturally lead to posts that could expand on more details, the theory behind practices etc. Just a thought!

I agree with Lynn. In fact, you may have already boosted the authority of your site by ditching those 1000 links--without even adding any more links. My thoughts on second list that they're not all the same value. Designwebkits doesn't look bad to me but the others, not a whole lot more valuable than the first, other than 1000 links from sites like these might be less likely to get you penalized.  I say that not necessarily because of the PR of those sites (because even low PR sites can be very good links and/or grow into  very good links) but because they just have an air of the type of generic sites that really don't have a brand, personality, real reason for existing other than to help some other site rank better in some way. Links from sites like those aren't ones that you can hold up in front of a group of your peers and announce proudly that your site has--and if you can't do that, their value to you is dubious. That's my take on them without running a OSE report on any of them.

Would you buy a bunch of spammy links and point them at your own site just so you could disavow them and try to fool your competitors?  Not likely because it's hard to fool anyone who's knowledgeable about links about the quality of the links they're looking at when they actually visit the linking site/page and a strong competitor isn't going to chance a penalty on a technique such as that.

Alan, you nailed it right on the head. what 50% meant is Google is changing and as Google changes it is picking up on what is a good link in what is a bad link unfortunately links that is deemed those old links As bad. So in my eyes you just went through a terrible penalty it seems. However you view the links that got you in trouble as helping you I don't agree with you. It was just a matter of time before Google found out. I would take that 50% and turnaround as hurting you because let's look at the facts that's exactly what it did. Where I'm getting at is do you really want to go through another round with Google they will not be as forgiving the 2nd time most of the time from what I have seen if people actually try to scam them again and they are caught they're delisted permanently. Am not trying to scare you I'm trying to tell you what I've actually seen happen to people. Why not focus on real company stuff and content until your least out of the hole with Google before you start comparing yourself with the competition. Believe me if they are doing this it's only a matter of time. Google sending out thousands of these things a day there are manual penalty that means a person has to view it. And the amount of websites is so vast that of course people will get away with it for while but times are changing and I would get with the side that is doing the right thing and stay with it. I hope I have been of help, Tom

It's a long term process, keep working and the results will come. Just remember how painful this was and use that to strengthen the resolve of using good SEO practices so you don't have to go through this again!

There is no such thing as a full clean up You try your best and prove to Google that you have tried your best by keeping detailed notes that you show them when you do a reconsideration request S

Well, do you really want to hide your contact page? If someone's looking to contact you, don't you want your contact page to rank? If you noindex, follow links to your contact page, you won't retain the link juice flowing out from that link. You'll just lose it entirely. Google understands that your conversion page will often be the most linked-to page on your site. It's fine to do that, and it shouldn't throw off the perceived structure at all. Hope this helps!

Even though it's the same color, the link stands out from the text because it has a different weight. I think it's more important that that links stand out, which this one does, but generally that means a different color.

We don't usually cut any content from the videos, no - except in a few instances where speakers have requested that certain things are left out or the session is not released altogether. There are also sessions at the conferences that aren't filmed though -  such as live site clinics, round-table discussions with the speakers and some impromptu Q&A. If you have the opportunity, I would definitely recommend coming along to the event  rather than just buying the videos - though if that's not feasible, the videos are a pretty good compromise between cost and getting the knowledge.

Nor would it help local search.  This could be a major factor in deciding where to purchase heavy printed materials.

Try to do a funny banner post with a collection of creative/mistakes on billboards or banners or a pr stunt making the biggest banner ever and get into guiness book of records.