Welcome to the Q&A Forum

The correct answer is Quit geo-targeting in GSC Implement hreflang annotations. Their same implementation will avoid the risk of Google considering the "duplicate" versions as duplicate DON'T CANONICALIZE ALL THE VERSION TO ONE YOU CONSIDER CANONICAL. Doing that will screw all the hreflang implementation and the other countries will always see the canonical Url (for instance the US one in the UK). Instead, work on canonicalization but version by version as if they were (and actually they are) different websites. This means self-canonicalization and/or canonicalization toward another url in case, you know, of parameters et al Try the most you can to localize the different versions of English you're using. This will improve the localization signals for Google (and will  be appreciated by your users). However, if you cannot afford to do that, you're still safe because of the hreflang. Remember that the href of the hreflang annotations must always present a canonical Url. So, if you implement the hreflang in a canonicalized Url, its href will need to present the canonical url of the canonicalized page the hreflang is being implemented. If you don't do this, you will see "no-return" error in Search Console, and Google won't consider your hreflang implementation and, yes, it will start considering your versions duplicated content.

Hi Charles, You can use either of them. Google doesn't make any difference between single and double quotes. Thanks

The correct way to get .co.uk to rank the in UK and .com to rank elsewhere is to use Hreflang tags, but only if content on the two sites is different. If it's the same content i.e., it has not been localized to UK, then you are better off using only 1 website. Google often ignores Hreflang markup when it encounters duplicate content. So you have 2 options: Retire 1 of the websites because it's useless to have duplicate content. Use Hreflang and make sure that content is NOT duplicate but localized for at least 1 of the sites.

Hey there Charles, Sam from Moz's Help Team here! To be completely transparent, the Spam Scores you see in Open Site Explorer are from data collected last year. That means some of the issues listed there might no longer apply to you, or they might have been fixed as you've worked on your site. If you know you've taken care of the issues, then you shouldn't need to worry about the spam flags any longer. We actually don't include any 301s when we crawl a site to assign spam score.  The score you see now for the 301 would be from an old crawl that will eventually disappear from the index. Additionally, just because our tool has assigned a site a specific spam score does not mean it is impacting the site in any way. These are merely suggestions of sites to check out. If you haven't determined yourself that they are spammy links, then there is no action or further concern required on your part.

+1 to Mike and using "Fetch and Render". I would add using the inspect element in Chrome, along with looking at the cache like you did - you should be good to go if these all point to JavaScript being executed properly by Google. Hope this helps!