Welcome to the Q&A Forum

Hi h2o2, maybe the phrasing wasnt clear but I think you misunderstood: "For bigger sites especially I really wouldnt advise not using breadcrumbs."

Tried all of them. Did not isolate the effectiveness of each directory however did lead to a positive result overall.

You have to be very careful about this, as Keri suggested. Google can crawl some JS, especially basic stuff, and if they detect a clear intent to present different content to crawlers and people, you can get into trouble fast. I would say, though, that pop-overs are pretty common these days. These are usually just a CSS-styled box that appears, with an ad, survey, etc., often the first time you visit a site. Even some reputable survey engines used them. Now, I still think you should absolutely test this for usability issues, but if the pop-over is just an overlay that appears the first time a user visits, the SEO consequences should be minimal.

I would do it like this: AdGroup - Keyword Keywords AdGroup Location Keyword Location Keywords Location You really just need to make sure that if you do it this way, you turn off the "Keyword Variance" in the Campaign Settings or it will F up your data. Don't forget to NOT use broad match and only use modified broad match. And always always use Phrase & Exact matches for every keyword type!

I read somewhere that the meta keywords did matter for some search engines still like Yahoo but not for Google. Not sure where I read it...maybe I am mistaken though.

How come?

Thanks Ryan - 1. I thought as much with Bing but wanted to see other people thoughts - I will hunt around for the submit in webmaster tools. It begs the obvious question what's better quality (bing being selective) or quantity (google analysing it all and deciding for its self).... To be debated at length! lol 2 & 3. W3C no errors and no css errors either..... I think it is the way we put the pages together using modules and laying them out via css - we employ our own coder. I don't really want to broadcast clients sites on forums etc.... But I am looking to improve to ensure we are doing things right - if something is not right we need to do it again and get it right. I don't want to get a rep for bad quality and bad work.

For quick checks I use on iPad SEO RANKING by Leon Huang. I have tested many and that one is the most accurate. In Poland we have many sites with very good tools but they do not have English UI

think about it, you pass PR to me and i'll pass PR to you. At the same time we'll tell Google we are in cahoots together.:( The easiest way to explain it is that Google is that linking to other sites on your site might make Google think that you are selling links and could get you penalized, so as an SEO you have a rule to never link out to other sites unless they are trusted domains like Facebook, Twitter or G+ pages. And in those cases you are linking to your social media profile pages for the user and not for helping other sites rank better which is against Google's TOS. There is information directly on Google's Webmaster Guidelines that you can provide to them. Sometimes people prefer to hear it directly from the horses mouth.

It's trying to example why fake profiles/spam are bad.... they just see the numbers of followers going up and think it makes the account look better....

There is a chrome extension called "scrape similar" that is useful for doing small batches of stuff like this. However it does have a couple of limitations in that you have to view each page & google will not show you all pages of a large domain. However it is quite easy and effective for sites with under 1000 pages. https://chrome.google.com/webstore/detail/mbigbapnjcgaffohmbkdlecaccepngjd The process can be sped up using other tools.  I use tool that is designed for black hat forum/comment spamming to do SERP scrapes like that.  Even if I did such spamming (I don't), I don't actually think this is a very good tool to do it with. However it is rather good at scraping results from google. However, again you are limited to how many results Google/Bing choose to show you. If you need a bigger list then log files might be the way to do.  You can get a list of all crawled URLs for any particular agent (including the likes of googlebot) from your server logs.  Some hosts limit the size of these, so it might be worth checking before you start.  However the data does get collected.  The downside here of course is that you need access to the logs. Of course crawled is not the same as indexed. Once you have that list you might need a further step to see which is indexed. Possibly cross-referencing it against google analytics landing pages or querying the google cache for that page (SEOtools for Excel from Biels Bosma is good for this). Similarly, if you have a definitive list of the URLs on site you could start with that list and query which are cached. Harder than it seems isn't it? Hopefully one of those methods will put you on the right track.

When you say data is showing up - what kind of data? Referring data? Or actual pageviews?

Keri, the problem with this analogy is that it reinforces the concept of a fallback or safety net. Who wouldn't feel better going off to college knowing that if by some chance it didn't work out, you'd still have Mom & Dad keeping your nice warm bed and comfy room waiting for you. That's exactly the unfortunate attitude FreshFire is up against - the site owners think it's more valuable to keep that fallback in place than to fully commit to the new site. Which is why I suggested that maybe there's more to the issue than just "not getting it". Paul

We will see what sort of list is produced!

Cool thanks for this - I tried searching the SEOMoz site but could not find these. I will see how things go.