Welcome to the Q&A Forum

Yes, of course. You can book a second, twenty minute session (though I'm sure you can have longer if needed) using the book a session email link you received previously. I've used this twice, before and Steve was really keen to help.

Hi,

PM sent. If you contact Moz, you can schedule a free walkthrough of the Moz tools, having given them an outline of what your are looking for from the site. This would be a good opportunity to go over issues like this. They have a UK based representative, Steve Dunn, who is really helpful.

I'd recommend contacting Moz via the blue chat icon for details.

Could you PM me a link to your site so I can try a few things, please?

Thanks, EGOL, that's most kind.

(Does anyone know where the blushes emoticon is, on here?)

These articles may give you some insights:

CTR by Industry (a useful consideration) https://www.searchenginejournal.com/highest-lowest-average-ctrs-google-adwords-industry/159351/?

A quick overview: http://www.wordstream.com/blog/ws/2013/02/22/click-through-rate-by-ad-position

A more in-depth article: https://searchenginewatch.com/sew/study/2345638/ppc-click-through-rate-by-position-does-rank-matter-data

and:

http://www.smartinsights.com/search-engine-optimisation-seo/seo-analytics/comparison-of-google-clickthrough-rates-by-position/

I hope they help.

Here's Moz's explanation of 'No data': "No data means we have not yet collected volume for the keyword" and the expanded answer from their FAQs (https://moz.com/help/guides/keyword-explorer

What does it mean when a keyword has “No Data” for its volume?

“No data” indicates that we’ve not yet collected search volume information on this keyword. It may have very high or very low volume (more likely the latter than the former, but with many exceptions, especially recently trending keywords or very obscure ones). Over time, we attempt to gather volume data for keywords on which we’ve reported “No Data” so you may see us update these as we gather it (approximately monthly).

As a rule, I usually assume low volume - the fact that these keywords are often "longer-tail" ('large black leather handbags uk', for example) will often confirm that.

There are other keyword research tools you can use to cross-reference, such as SEMRush and http://keywordtool.io but, like most of the best tools, these are paid-for solutions.

And, of course, there's Google's own keyword planner: https://adwords.google.com/ko/KeywordPlanner/ This is free, but requires you sign up for a free Google Adwords account (you don't need to create an Adwords campaign).

Don't forget that if you're not sure, you can always contact Moz for help: https://moz.com/help/contact

I hope that helps.

The site is indexing okay. A Google search using " site:http://customerconnect-services.com " will give you a rough approximation of what has been indexed for this site (Google Search console will provide more accurate data, however).

But Indexing isn't your issue. In short, this site isn't ready and, I'm afraid to say, it doesn't really deserve to rank well. (That doesn't mean it can't rank well, but it needs work - lots and lots of work.)

Looking through the currently indexed pages, you will see that a few Lorem Ipsum (pages with dummy content) have been indexed (these now 404 - http://customerconnect-services.com/?p=12982 for example), this is our first indication that the site is/was recently under development.

Further, there are other signals that this site isn't yet compete: http://customerconnect-services.com/our-offerings/ - the second slider on this vaguely titled page shows a slider "CONDO Makes selling and buying easier...." This is in no way relevant and is likely a remnant from using a template site with pre-populated demo content.

While we are on this page, let's look at the Navigation label and URL - 'Our Offerings' /our-offerings - offerings of what to whom? This could not be vaguer! These elements need to be used to tell visitors explicitly what it is you do. 'App Development' /app-development or similar would much better. As it stands, the visitor is expected to click it to find out what the page might be - assuming that they're sufficiently motivated to do so. Take a look at Steve Krug's 'Don't Make Me Think' then buy every client a copy. (http://www.uxbooth.com/articles/10-usability-lessons-from-steve-krugs-dont-make-me-think/)

Look at those who are ranking well for this phrase and compare your client's page against it Here's an example (These are number one in the UK for the term 'mobile app development':

https://www.mobilesmith.com/app-development/ - not an exact match for the service your client offers (though I'm still not sure what that is) but it's close enough to demonstrate the gap between where you/your client is and where they want to be. On-page grader gives your client's 'our offerings' page a generous C for 'mobile app development' from a user's perspective, it's a F.

Then, below the slider we get:

GET FEATURED ON GOOGLE AND APPLE STORE. ENHANCE CUSTOMER ENGAGEMENT USING ANDROID AND IOS APPS

Stop. What does that actually mean? This is just vague filler - it means nothing. and you're still not telling me what you do!

The list goes on (and on), I'm afraid. And while I'm being brutally honest, the domain name is AWFUL - it is as vague as the rest of the content, it also entirely unmemorable; not the end of the world if your content and user experience is up to scratch but it isn't. (Granted, as the SEO for this client, this is likely to be out of your remit.)

I don't think I would be helping you if I were to be delicate about this, so forgive me: The site looks like a template site with some content hastily thrown into it. In essence, your client has a LOT of work to do before they can expect to see results.

The technical SEO aspects/mechanics of the site (that you reference in your question) are a secondary concern. Content and UX are your primary concern - without getting those right, you're never going to succeed. Google is better than it's ever been at sniffing out weak content, so don't expect to circumvent this with a few keywords in your content and a handful of backlinks.

Good SEO is hard enough when you're working with a well-designed and well-established site; with a half-done website, that has been (or appears to have been) hastily assembled, it's impossible.

Start (and finish) with the user in mind, give the user what they want (Google is not your user), answer their questions, deliver your message clearly and make it easy for them to engage with you and then build upon that.

I'm sorry to be so blunt, but no-one wins until these issues are tackled head-on.

As an aside, I'd run a Fetch as Google from Google Search Console to speed up re-indexing. (https://searchenginewatch.com/sew/how-to/2326164/index-your-content-faster-with-the-fetch-as-google-tool)

Good luck!

You will continue to have both http and https variants active in Google Search Console (you should also add the non www variants and set www as your preferred version).

You do not set anything up within GSC to direct HTTP to HTTPS (to tell Google that you are changing protocols), this is all done via redirects as Logan suggests. Here's a great page which should help clarify this for you:

http://webmasters.stackexchange.com/questions/68435/moving-from-http-to-https-google-search-console

From what I understand, you're already decided to split your traffic between HTTP and HTTPS. If this is correct, I would urge you to reconsider and redirect all traffic toward HTTPS versions as there are more issues to consider other than duplicate content, particularly as you are an e-commerce store. The latest (and future) versions of Chrome and Firefox will more clearly highlight unsecured connections. This is from Google's security blog: (https://security.googleblog.com/2016/09/moving-towards-more-secure-web.html?m=1)

"In following releases, we will continue to extend HTTP warnings, for example, by labelling HTTP pages as “not secure” in Incognito mode, where users may have higher expectations of privacy. Eventually, we plan to label all HTTP pages as non-secure, and change the HTTP security indicator to the red triangle that we use for broken HTTPS."

Chrome is the world's most popular browser, used by over 50% of all internet users. If your site is displaying a red triangle with the words 'Not Secure' next to it on ANY page on your site is going to turn visitors away. If over half you your visitors are receiving such a message the consequences will not be good.

Google are pushing users toward HTTPS (https://moz.com/blog/https-tops-30-how-google-is-winning-the-long-war) so I would suggest that it's a mis-step to swim against the tide.

There are also other minor benefits to serving all of your pages via HTTPS; it's a minor ranking signal and better support for browser compression, among others.

Here's another article that covers the recent changes.

https://www.searchenginejournal.com/google-is-requiring-https-for-secure-data-in-chrome/183756/

However you proceed, I hope this goes smoothly for you.

Good luck.

You need to bear in mind that this the figures given are a guideline only. If your pages have been constructed with the user in mind (rather than just the search engines) and the keywords present are there because they add clarity then I'd be reluctant to start stripping them out solely in an attempt to tick a box.

That said, if you have gone a bit overboard with your references to a specific keyword/phrase then it would be sensible to rework the copy to include synonyms (different words that mean the same, or very similar, thing). Current best practice is to build content around a theme, rather than a single keyword, position your core keyword prominently (but not excessively) within the page and use related phrases around it to establish your theme. This practice will pay dividends with the rise or Google's RankBrain (https://moz.com/blog/rankbrain-unleashed).

Before you rush off and rework your copy, we should first look at improving the situation your facing now, and the above can be  something to consider when you are next producing content.

Can you share a breakdown of the keyword distribution with us?

Better still, share the page and we'll gladly give you some feedback.

Here's an example of mine (from a product page - the product ranks top 5 with almost no inbound links (it's a new site) in a moderately competitive niche. Moz grades this page as a A.

We found this keyword used 26 times.

Title 1, URL 1, Meta Description 1, H1 1, Body 10, IMG ALT 12

The alt tags are around one per product image - this could be trimmed back a little and we could stand to drop one of two from the body but, in truth, the page reads naturally, and isn't stuffed with keywords unnaturally. (some of the instances of the body in the copy are on labels, sub-section headings and brochures etc).I always recommend reading the page out loud as a may of gauging if it is over-filled with repetitive keywords - reading it to someone else helps (insist on honest feedback). If they start grimacing every time you use the keyword you may want to adjust the copy. In your case, if your page copy contains exactly the necessary amount of keywords (and your still keen to reduce your count) start stripping them from the Alt tags of less prominent images. If you're using WordPress (you might want to try Yoast's SEO plugin as it will assist you with monitoring this for you. However, keep in mind the Moz tool, Yoast's SEO plugin etc. are only guidelines. Don't let them get in the way of you producing great content. Create content for your potential customers, if, when you've done that, the copy also ticks these boxes then so much the better.If you haven't read this already, I'd suggest you take a look at this: https://moz.com/blog/visual-guide-to-keyword-targeting-onpage-optimizationGood luck.

Julie is absolutely on the money; A lack of comments on blog posts will not harm your ranking (though a lack of traffic and engagement might). Getting your content shared and linked-to is where you should focus your attention; build great content and engage within your niche/community and you'll reap the rewards. Opening your comments up to the world will see you bombarded by comment spam. If your content is engaging enough that genuine visitors feel compelled to comment then the odds are it's the kind of content they would share. If you feel you are denying them a voice by preventing access to comments, perhaps you should consider a forum?

Good luck.

Nope.

Using Google+ as intended may deliver positive results for your site, though.

This is a nice article: https://moz.com/blog/google-plus-tips-seo

If the inbound links are truly irrelevant to your company then a 410 redirect (Content deleted) is the best approach, as you're telling the search engines that you removed those pages on purpose and they should be de-indexed. A 410 should see this de-indexing happen pretty quickly (quicker than a 404, which will linger as there's a change the content was only temporarily unavailable and could return). This practice won't affect your credibility - it's simply good practice. There's no sense in redirecting them to the Wayback version of your site, either, as you simply don't offer that service any more, so the visitor is still none the wiser when they arrive there. An alternative, I suppose - if you'd like to point out that you no longer offer that service, would be to 301 redirect the remaining links to a page on your site informing visitors that you no longer carry out service X, perhaps offering a list of alternative service X providers?

My preference would be the 410 as that is best practice as 301 redirects to irrelevant pages have little or no value.

I hope that helps.

Good luck.

Well spotted. I've booked my eyes in for a polish, first thing in the morning. Well, that or someone's spiked my Gin with some tonic water.

Hi Mike,

The Moz toolbar is reading that canonical link correctly, so I wouldn't be overly concerned. An update of the Mozscape API will take place at around the 28th of this month. (https://moz.com/products/api/updates) you are likely to see different results then.

EDIT: The formatting of the canonical was, indeed, askew - I need an eye test. (In my defence, it was late and Gin.)

You have other on-site issues to deal with, including hundreds of broken links, other duplicate content issues and and broken HTTPS version of your home page (https://creativedigital.co.nz/artprints/)  - You should be looking to move from HTTP to HTTPS as soon as you are able, as Google are really pushing for this - Certbot and LetsEncrypt would work on your setup.

If you'd like, PM me your email address and I'll send you over a Site Audit - free and gratis (I created it to investigate this for you, so you may as well benefit from it).

I hope that helps.

Not at all. "LG actually has a very large and well respected home appliances business" is returning http://www.yourappliancerepairla.com/lg-repair-los-angeles.php in both Google.co.uk and Google.com. If you're not seeing it, try carrying out the search in a Private/Incognito browser window.

I hope that helps.

Yes, they're not great. As you know, backlinks like this simply have zero value; you wouldn't even want them if they were free so, they're certainly not worth investing in (with either time or money). As it stands, none of those examples are particularly toxic, nor do they appear to number in the thousands, so they'll simply end up getting ignored by Google. Thankfully, you do have a decent spread of high-quality inbound links. [Link removed by moderator.] That said, they want to put a stop to the "spammy link-building, before the balance shifts.

They've got a great-looking website. If all of the" effort"* invested in building these links was invested in building just one piece of great, link-worthy content then they'd be considerably better-off.

They need to realise that when it comes to link-building, quantity is no substitute for quality. You're absolutely right to take a stand against this, let's hope they heed your advice.

*granted, they don't represent a great deal of effort

Why restrict yourself to a .com domain? There are plenty of other TLDs (Top Level Domains) available and these will all be treated exactly the same as the .com (at least in terms of how Google treats it).

MoonCreate.Co is available. .Co is a TLD, as you can see here, http://data.iana.org/TLD/tlds-alpha-by-domain.txt

(Just check this won't cause any legal/branding implications.)

There will be others, such as mooncreate.clothing, mooncreate.net (both available).

A few years ago, this types of domains were considered "vanity" domains, but not so much now.

It's a shame you're not in the UK as MoonCreate.Co.Uk is available.

Whichever way you go with this, I'd steer you away from MoonCreateBrand.Com as it doesn't give any clues as to what you do; nor is it memorable or dynamic.

Good luck in your quest.

So you want to deliver PPC traffic to a unique landing page within Wordpress?

Would it not be simpler to create a unique landing page for this purpose, set it to noindex (so it doesn't get picked up in SERPS) and not link to it internally (so users via other sources don't see it)? Then just add that URL to your Adwords/PPC campaign. This should create a doorway to a landing page on your site that is only reachable via PPC. Your PPC visitor would still be able to travel away from that page, using the nav elements - unless you configure the landing page so that it has nothing other than a contact form - or learn more button, for example.

Adding plugins unnecessarily will just clog up your WP site.

I hope that helps.

Hi, I use Moz's Campaign's Report and SEMRush for Site Audits. SEMRush's Site Audit is very user-friendly and generates a very useful report. I tend to use that more for technical audits. I'd definitely give that a go. You can get a free trial easily enough. Sign up and they offer you a week's trial fairly quickly.