Welcome to the Q&A Forum

Sure thing!  If you have more questions, don't hesitate to ask.  I think this is the right way to go... at least try this first and see how it goes before duplicating campaigns.

Cyrus mentioned this in his whiteboard friday here: http://www.seomoz.org/blog/title-tags-is-70-characters-the-best-practice-whiteboard-friday

Second is write for users. Here at SEOmoz our title tag is the same as the title of our post on our blog because we think it is important to meet users' expectations. When they see a title tag in the SERP and they click through to your page, you want them to feel like they've arrived where they thought they were going to arrive. So, it doesn't always have to match the title of your post, but something similar, something to make them comfortable, and something to talk to the users.

Google just announced some tags to help support pagination better.  They say if you have a view all option that doesn't take too long to load, searchers generally prefer that, so you can rel=canonical to that page.  However, if you don't have a view all page, then you can put these nifty rel="next" and rel="prev" tags in to let Google know your page has pagination, and where the next and previous pages are.

It sounds like you don't want to go the view all route, so you should read the second post below and you can implement the rel="next" and rel="prev" tags.

(from the view all post below) However, if you strongly desire your view-all page not to appear in search results: 1) make sure the component pages in the series don’t include rel=”canonical” to the view-all page, and 2) mark the view-all page as “noindex” using any of the standard methods.

View all: http://googlewebmastercentral.blo...

next/prev: http://googlewebmastercentral.blo...

Yup!  It'll all be in iTunes Connect, which is the site in which your developers will be uploading your app to Apple.  There are different access levels... I don't recall what they are, but I believe there is a marketing one that should give you access to Sales and Trends report.

I'm not 100% sure what you mean when you say you can't integrate the codes.  One tool that would make it easier to include these scripts is Google Tag Manager.  With that, you include one script on all your pages, and use that script to deploy Google Analytics, Adwords scripts, and any other tracking pixels you may use.

One thing you could try is to put the following meta tag on the page, and once Google re-indexes the page, remove it immediately.  This tag will take down the instant preview, but also takes out your meta description on SERPs, so you'll want to remove it as soon as Google re-indexes the page. Once you remove it, Google will (hopefully) create a new snapshot of your page?  I have no idea if when Google re-indexes the page if they'll go create a new snapshot, or dig up the old one to display, but it seems like there should be a fair chance they'll take a new one?

Again, I've never tried this, so I'm only endorsing it as a possible idea, it is not a tried and tested solution.

[http://www.google.com/support/webmasters/bin/answer.py?answer=35304](http://www.google.com/support/webmasters/bin/answer.py?answer=35304)

Google can read PDFs, and returns them in search results, but some users might prefer to view an HTML version.  Also, it looks like images in PDFs are not indexed, according to the 2nd post below.

Regarding duplicate content, Google says (2nd post below):

Q: Is it considered duplicate content if I have a copy of my pages in both HTML and PDF?
A: Whenever possible, we recommend serving a single copy of your content. If this isn’t possible, make sure you indicate your preferred version by, for example, including the preferred URL in your Sitemap or by specifying the canonical version in the HTML or in the HTTP headers of the PDF resource. For more tips, read our Help Center article about canonicalization.

These will be of interest to you:

http://www.google.com/support/forum/p/Webmasters/thread?tid=4472512a5515686b&hl=en&fid=4472512a5515686b00047d6de91c24fa&hltp=2

http://googlewebmastercentral.blogspot.com/2011/09/pdfs-in-google-search-results.html

That's the one thing Appfigures is still missing.  When I asked their support about that, they said they're working on it.  Appcodes does a reasonable job at tracking that, and if you ever want to quickly see the keywords an app is using, you can use Sensortower for that.  I don't subscribe to either of those sites ongoing.

Yes, users could see any number of your Facebook ads from any of your campaigns that they match the targeting for. Facebook doesn't currently offer any frequency capping as far as I know.

Eventually, but that's the code Google recommends to return when your site is having downtime, so I would expect them to be more lenient towards not removing things right away.  I wouldn't expect it to be as efficient as returning a 404 or a 410.

The best way to get content de-indexed is to return a page with a meta noindex tag on it, if you're really keen on getting it removed immediately.

What you've got there looks good to me!  The iframe method is what you want to do for the widget.  I'd be wary of trying to load additional Javascript on other people's web pages.  The physical link ends up on their page, so it should count.

Note that by putting the link on their page, all their CSS is going to get applied to it, so the

and <a>tags might not look the same from site to site, but it should be consistent with the style of the page they place it on.  If you want the text and link to stand out a bit, you could add your own styling to the text (specifying color, size, font-family, hover, etc).</a>

<a></a>

<a>And if you'll allow me to nitpick, I'd say "is provided", and put a period between the</a> and

.

Hey Antonio!

It looks like all the elements on each page are in the source when the page loads... so I'm not sure where AJAX is being used.  There's a lot of JavaScript/CSS effects, but I don't see anything where JavaScript is loading something after the initial page load.

Without going into an insane amount of detail, if you have the budget, I'd try a little bit of everything.  For you, I would suggest:

1. Retargeting: Display ads to people who have been to your site, but didn't convert.
2. Placement targeting: Use Google ad planner, or just surf the web to find sites that are relevant to your demographic and show ads.
3. Interest category targeting: I'd use this if there are relevant categories for you to target.  If they're too broad, cross it with some topic or keyword targeting.
4. Keyword targeting is the oldest, and doesn't work as well as it used to for us.  You could use this to explore and find new placements, then add them to your placement targeting campaign.
5. Topic targeting is bad on its own in my experience.
6. Demographics is great, but will reduce volume a lot.  If it's already a weight loss site you're putting your ad on, there's probably no need to apply it here.  A lot of people reside in the "Unknown" categories for Gender and Age.
7. If you're an existing Adwords customer and have reps, you can get into their search companion marketing beta.  We've been seeing great results from this.  For example, when someone searches for "weight loss", and clicks through to a page with Google ads, you can now target them on the display network.

Remember that you can apply remarketing lists and demographics to search as well as display!  And also be wary of mobile if that's not great for you.  Now with enhanced campaigns, you're automatically opted into mobile...

I've had different experiences than Dana, I've had by far the most success with Adwords, little success with Facebook, and no success with StumbleUpon.  Twitter is also another viable option, and they have their own set of targeting options (and you have to run a Twitter account already).  LinkedIn doesn't sound right for this.  YouTube could be good too, although the CPCs there tend to be pretty high.

I would think Facebook should be good for you... you can target to women of a certain age who like other weight loss products.

That's not really necessary unless there URLs or directories you're disallowing after the allow in your robots.txt. Allow is a directive supported by major search engines, but search engines assume they're allowed to crawl everything they find unless you disallow it specifically in your robots.txt.

The following is universally accepted by bots and essentially means the same thing as what I think you're trying to say, allowing bots to crawl everything:

User-agent: *
Disallow:

There's a sample use of the Allow directive on the wikipedia robots.txt page here.

There's no problem with cross subdomain canonical links.  Your plan of using setting canonicals for duplicate pages until the pages differ sounds fine to me.

If you're internationalizing across different locations but the same language (like, English), Google recently released some new markup to display the title and description of the canonical page, but the URL of the localized version.  You can read more about it here: http://googlewebmastercentral.blogspot.com/2011/12/new-markup-for-multilingual-content.html.

Matt Cutts said at one point that page speed effects less than 1% of searches.  You can read more here: http://www.mattcutts.com/blog/site-speed/.

So, I wouldn't expect it to help much.  But think about how much happier your users will be!  That's where the real gains are. Over time, it might help you a bit in the SERPs because people should bounce less frequently as a function of how fast your pages load.

There's a list of supported banner sizes (see here), and you can pick any or all of them.  You can also run text ads on the display network too.  The most competitive banner sizes are 728x90, 300x250, 336x280, and 160x600.  These will get you the most volume, but generally are the most expensive.  The rest are less competitive, but lower trafficked.  Personally, I've found ROI all over the place with different sizes of banners in different campaigns.  It's very hard to know what is going to work based on ad size.

If you have Google Webmaster Tools set up, go to Site configuration > Settings, and you can set a custom crawl rate for you site.  That will change it site-wide, so if you have other pages that change frequently, that might not be so great for you.

Another thing you could try is generate a sitemap, and set a change frequency of never (or yearly) for all of the pages you don't expect to change.  That also might slow down Google's crawl rate of those pages.

Disallowing in your robots.txt keeps the bots from indexing your pages going forward, but Google may keep returning them in search results.  This post has great explanations about ways to remove pages from indices: http://www.seomoz.org/blog/robot-access-indexation-restriction-techniques-avoiding-conflicts

The surefire way to get them out of the index is to remove the disallow from your robots.txt, and add a meta noindex tags on all the pages you want removed.  Once they're reindexed by Google, they'll no longer appear in SERPs.

If they're all served under the same URL, the search bots aren't going to be able to differentiate between the different versions of the pages.  Googlebot primarily indexes from the US, so it's only going to see the English version of the site.  You can't even set up a sitemap or something with the different pages since they're under the same URLs.

The better way to do this is to have distinct URLs for each as you suggested.  You can let Google know these pages are i18n versions of each other using the rel alternate hreflang markup, described here.  With this, you can either set meta tags on each page, telling Google about all of the alternate pages, or describe them in your sitemap.  Google then can swap out the versions of the pages in Google search results to give the user the correct page for their language.