Welcome to the Q&A Forum

I'm not really clear on why you would want a query using either variation of this to be the same. If the page is ranking differently for each of those queries, I don't think there is anything you can do to make sure they both achieve the same ranking. Where the page ranks based on a search query is down to Google and will be affected by all sorts of metrics including where that query is entered and who entered it etc. My advice would be to concentrate on ranking for the term that is most commonly used of the two of them and optimise for that. Inevitably, you will see the page ranking for the other spelling and that is good if you do, but you cannot really control where it ranks. Peter

Hi Andrew - I've found in extensive paid / organic keyword optimization synchronization, that well-written supporting content tends to take care of the long tail pretty effectively, so for synching paid/non-paid optimization, I use the following approach: In selecting specific paid keywords to target for improved SEO, trying to optimize for too many keywords can end up diluting your overall organic results, depending partly on site structure and site focus.  I generally look at the top-ten best performing keywords for each ad group over time - which should correspond to fairly granular / specific categories, subcategories or landing pages of a website.  Then, based upon user behavior, conversions, and average CPC, I generally most specifically optimize for the top five, then include more depending upon overall search interest, etc.  Solid SEO and high-quality, relevant supporting content for your most expensive paid keywords, should not only help support your organic results, but it should also help to keep your CPC costs down as much as possible by contributing to solid landing page Quality Scores (since QS is a factor affecting CPC). The optimal end result is to have your website show up above the fold on search results pages for both paid and organic searches for key terms.  This is relatively easy to do for more obscure terms / long tail terms, but can be pretty challenging for extremely competitive terms / when competing with older, more established sites. This is why I'll devote more time to optimizing for the keywords / key phrases which more difficult to rank well for. So, bottom line, I work to keep SEM costs in check and keep a site in front of customer / reader eyeballs by optimizing for the most popular, most expensive, best performing keywords / key phrases.  If 90% of traffic comes from <10% of keywords, and I can have a site rank well w/ minimal effort for the other 90% of key words / key phrases capturing traffic, then I'm going to spend the most effort on the 10% or less that bring the most traffic.  (And yes, I realize this goes against quite a bit of "optimize for the long tail" discussion - but I do a lot of SEO+SEM in synch, and targeting the long tail can become counterproductive to down right detrimental in paid search.  I find that good content will nail the long tail consistently - so it takes care of itself.)

Its just my opinion but directories cant really harm you because a competitiors could just submiut you in them if so. I usually use the SEOMoz tool bar and only submit to directories that have a decent authority. Just don't use any mass submitter tools for this, or well research them if you intend too.

If you have the resources, ideally you want to be running them as independent microsites that eventually redirect through to your main site (ie when the user decides he wants to buy whatever your selling)

100 ARTICLE SUBMISSIONS [APPROVED ARTICLES] -> 1 article submitted to 100 article directories What is the "quality" and "relevance" of the directory to your article's subject. Are the articles unique versions or the same article submitted to 100 directories? If unique article versions added to topically relevant higher quality directories, with optimized back link, then good. 50 PRESS RELEASE SUBMISSIONS [APPROVED & SCREENSHOTS]-> 1 PR writing & submissions to top 50 PR distribution sites each Eh, depends on price and quality of press release. Is it newsworthy? There are plenty of services in which you can do it yourself. I would say it primarily depends on whether your press release is news worthy or just an ad. 150 PRIVATE BLOGS SUBMISSION [APPROVED ARTICLES] -> 1 article submitted to 150 private blogs submission This is likely to be garbage. Same rules as article directories above. 100 WEBSITE DIRECTORY SUBMISSION -> 1 url (home page) submitted to 100 top free web directories Likely worthless. But depends on directories. Are they truly the "top"? Perhaps more impt. if they allow full business citations. Are they geographically relevant? Topically relevant? 50 SOCIAL BOOKMARKING [CONFIRMED LINKS] -> 1 url of site submitted to top 50 social bookmarking websites Most likely garbage, imho. 40 PROFILE BACK-LINKS [CONFIRMED LINKS] -> 1-3 url's of site submitted and create 40 profile websites What sites? 50 SEARCH ENGINES -> submission to all the major search engines Garbage. 20 NEWS WEBSITES -> Ping all links from reports to news websites Really depends. Likely garbage. Hoped this helped.