Welcome to the Q&A Forum

Thanks Christy!

I was able to reach the provider and they were very helpful.  It looks like everything was setup properly and I am seeing a large increase in pages indexed.  I appreciate the response and validation!

I recently started to explore automated options for sitemap generation because the frequency of updates to my site and the scale at which they are needed.  So I am experimenting with pro-sitemaps.com.  Everything seems to be working well, but Google and Bing are not acknowledging that the sitemap is from my domain on WMTs.  It always says, "0" sitemaps submitted, or asks me to submit a sitemap.

To see how it works, I registered the pro-sitemaps.com domain on Bing and I was able to validate it, so the the pro-sitemaps domain appears within the same dashboard as my site.  I also updated robots.txt to identify that the my site's sitemap is on pro-sitemaps.com
Example:  sitemap: http://aXXXXX.hostedsitemaps.com/XXXXXXX/sitemap.xml.gz

For Google, there was an automated way to register, which I did.  Prositemaps confirms that both Google and Bing are verified and they are both pinged when a new sitemap is created, however, WMTs does not acknowledge that there is a sitemap for my site specifically.

Is there a way to have Google and Bing report the sitemap submission on my specific domain while hosting the sitemap on a different domain?  At the very least, I would like to confirm that Google and Bing are handling the sitemap as if it were on my domain rather than another domain.  It appears to be working well, but without the data coming directly into WMTs for my site, I don't want to jump to conclusions.

H1 is a tag search engines use to help identify what your page is about. Using "overview" for all H1 would imply that your site is about "overview." (Ok, I'm dumbing it down a little bit, but I'm doing it to make a point.)

The more specific an H1 tag can be to the content of a page, the better. It's easier for search engines to understand your page and it's a better user experience (how valuable is "overview" all over the place?).

If there's that many redirects, I'd agree something is off - which is a bigger concern.

Oh, good question! I've noticed more and more people being (professional) transparent about their desire for links and giving more specific - polite - suggestions for where to link or what content may be good for it.

You mention your reports - when you send them out, do you include ways to link? Are there embedded links? If so, do they work consistently (random question, I know - I've run into issues where the hyperlink doesn't work so it's wasted). 
What about adding a section, like: For additional information and resources, please share these links: widgets: URL; exec info: URL, etc.

I think a big part of it is approach. (I'm sure you know better than to point out that a site is linking to a competitor and complain to the site/author about that.) A follow-up message, like: great post, glad to see the report is of value, here's some additional resources that could be valuable to your audience (link, link) if you'd be interested in updating your post.

I've noticed more people approaching me with specifics like that, and they do better than those who are just trolling (literally will email me just asking for any links from my site to their content). Not that I think you'd troll - like I said, it's about approach.

I also agree with Ade - it's not about a boost so much as it is about a better user experience and clarification to the search engines of where to focus.

I feel like there could be conflicting answers on this one Social sharing has been such a popular thing to push for, more I think conceptually than for reality. Very few pages within a site do well with sharing - it's just usually not the type of info users want to share (no matter what marketers want to believe or what industry experts want to tell us).

The proof is in the numbers - so start there. Are people sharing your content? If they aren't, then what have you lost by removing it? (And I realize you kinda answered this question for yourself.) I'm of the belief that it works best on pages where there's content worth sharing - news, white papers, contests, etc. - if your system allows for specifics like that. And if the change with the social sharing overall will improve the user experience (like with load time), then is that a better trade off?

Since websites can have such different CRMs/platforms/coding, there's many things (I think ) that can play into performance or issues. Like, you resubmitted that trade show page and it may have jumped because Google hadn't crawled it in a long time, vs. because the social sharing changes. Just a possibility.

I agree with Mike. Keep what you had, since it's part of the online brand at this point. And redirects are harmless, assuming they are done correctly and people can find your site (without the feeling like they are dealing with something spammy).

I am not the best person to ask for reviewing code. I suggest waiting for someone else who does more coding for this type I assistance.

Unfortunately, it could be a deeper coding issue than I can diagnose and walk you through right now. While I like the concept of rich snippets, I have found that (depending on your CMS and programmer capabilities) it can be complicated to execute and maintain. For example, some of mine went away because of a technical issue that caused us to revert to some old content (only we forgot about that).

Well, there's certainly a balance between what % of keyword searches you can expect to capture. Lower volume words like offer less traffic but if targeted they should have better CTR - right? We know this. Using Moz tools to quickly check your site, you have good links and optimization, so there's two other things to explore: the keyword isn't as viable as you think it may be and possible technical issues with your site that impact the end user.

What does your Webmaster (or other analytics tool) show you? is that term driving traffic and/or what other keywords are sending people to your page? What's your bounce rate? If it's high and tied to your keywords, then perhaps it's not the fit you think it is.  Have you considered going for a higher volume term, like 'hosted voip' and then 'business hosted voip' on a different page?

As for technical issues, that's a whole other slew of things that I am sure other Mozers can speak to in better authority than myself. From a quick look, again, you seem pretty solid here. You did a nice job getting a lot of things right - including rankings. So I'd look at other keywords to expand opportunities.

Oh, good question! I've noticed more and more people being (professional) transparent about their desire for links and giving more specific - polite - suggestions for where to link or what content may be good for it.

You mention your reports - when you send them out, do you include ways to link? Are there embedded links? If so, do they work consistently (random question, I know - I've run into issues where the hyperlink doesn't work so it's wasted). 
What about adding a section, like: For additional information and resources, please share these links: widgets: URL; exec info: URL, etc.

I think a big part of it is approach. (I'm sure you know better than to point out that a site is linking to a competitor and complain to the site/author about that.) A follow-up message, like: great post, glad to see the report is of value, here's some additional resources that could be valuable to your audience (link, link) if you'd be interested in updating your post.

I've noticed more people approaching me with specifics like that, and they do better than those who are just trolling (literally will email me just asking for any links from my site to their content). Not that I think you'd troll - like I said, it's about approach.

'No follow' isn't the same as a 'no index' code. No follow just tells the search engine it "should not influence the link target's ranking in the search engine's index."  'No index' is where you tell the crawler to not index the pages, then you can remove that if you at some future point want them indexed.

So, in theory, what you did wouldn't  have anything to do with how many pages are indexed on your site anyway.

Mike, it's a tough situation. It's so important that you are informed about your site and holding an agency (or any partner) accountable is critical. It's tougher once the relationship is over and it is a big deal if you find out you got hosed. It's unfortunate that this wasn't caught earlier.

At the very least, they should be able to give you some sort of overview. I spent most of my career on the agency side and you paid for their services and asking for information on your account isn't out of line, IMHO.

If you can get the data, great, however you know enough to not let it stop you. I mean, if you can hold them accountable, OK, but that won't change your predicament, right?

It sounds like there's plenty of black hat stuff you need to clean up and are smart enough to know to make it a priority before it really hits your site negatively.

And you know for next time -if there is a next time - who not to go to or what to make sure no outside partner does

Good luck!

I've had mine take several days and Moz has told me that's not unexpected (even if it hasn't happened to you before).

If it goes longer than let's say today, contact their help desk. It's possible something got stuck (it's happened to me) and they have a great help team who will get you taken care of. They are very responsible and approachable.

You know, I've seen all kinds of data that says ranking #1 means you get 33% of the clicks, or up to 80%. (I take it all with a grain of salt.) Matter is: if (this is according to my AdWords; I just looked) "business hosted VOIP" gets 58 clicks per month (yes, I swear that is the number they gave me when I selected "exact" and "local monthly" but I also really like to look at what the smallest opportunity would be), then 1/3 of 58 isn't many. Even 80% of that isn't many and matches back to the numbers you are talking about.

(590 comes up for "broad" in AdWords which isn't anything I use, mostly, again, because I like to look at what the smallest size could be so I know what I could be getting myself into.)

As for lower ranking pages having more traffic, that can vary as well. You'll hear people say searchers go for the top 5, but if a page ranks #6 for a word that has 11,500 searches a month, there's more opportunity for traffic than a #1 ranking for a KW that gets 58, you know?

Ideally, a bounce rate of 30% is where you want to be - you aren't that far off from there, but if 50% is the average, I'd look into additional keyword opportunities. For as much stats and science is behind SEO, there's just as much art to it

A few things could be at play: they have their on page content optimized properly (keywords are in the page title and used OK in the proper technical sections on the page). The domain is older than the other sites ranking after it (2007 vs 2009, etc.). And, the keywords aren't highly competitive.

All this means is that you just have to do a bit more than them to possibly surpass. Ex: they only have 2 links - get 10+ for you. Add solid content, update it often enough, etc. and you should be able to surpass. Again, it's not that their site is great - there's just a few things in their favor for right now.

Ah, the fun of semantics! It's amazing what a difference it can make, though, when trying to convey messages to a non-SEO or Web group.

I traditionally use "on site" and "on page" SEO for the "internal" items you have. That's partly driven by the fact we have some people working on  internal search on our site so people get confused with those projects if I use the term "internal."

I do use the term "external" or "site SEO" for the projects you list as "external." I try to differentiate what' specific to a page and what's specific to the overall site to help people understand there's different layers. And to help educate that because you optimize one page doesn't mean you've done SEO

I also like to educate on "technical" SEO so my team understands it's not just about keywords, but site performance and other things that can mean developer and IT resources. I learned fast that there was a perception that if you just put the keywords in the right place, revenue would come.

As for more social related information, I use buckets for social sharing but also make sure I hammer home the need for "in bound" marketing. There's a difference between those as you need the content to drive in bound but you use social to help give it visibility. And I think it's a more comprehensive element of marketing.

I would argue though that visibility isn't segregated by how you mentioned in. The technical build as well as the keywords selected can both play into visibility. You may not have any 500/404 problems, but if you picked keywords only a small audience cares about, you also limit your visibility.

For me, part of my terminology is dictated by our own internal jargon and how to map back to it so more people "get" it...while I talk about complicated things out of their wheelhouse that can end up confusing them anyway!

The best source for topical information is your customers, trade groups and general trends. First , are you noticing an uptick in a certain service or are you getting the same question over and over? These would mean people want to know about that topic.

Next, look at seasonality - March is home improvement time so what can people do to kick off their lawn care? Summer: if it's extra dry, what considerations should people think through to manage their lawn care? Or, if it's overly wet, what might they need to know? Fall: what should people do to prep their yard for winter? (Depending if you are in an area with more traditional four seasons.)

From industry trade shows - are there certain plants or trees that are a hot trend and being pushed? Is there a fear of any type of bug or insect infestation people need to counter?

What about best practices or care tips? "Tips from the pros." Your industry has plenty of information there - it's just a matter of you looking at it from a different perspective.

Google Trends is one way to see what people are searching for, and same with the Adwords keyword tool to gauge what type of searches people are conducting - not to mention any analytic data you see that drives traffic.

Think less like a business person and more like a reporter - address the topical relevance (timeliness - there's a reason why tax articles are more popular starting in January because it's when people start preparing, not in September), the problems (what problems do customers have and how can I solve them?) and the share. (Who, what, where, why, how?)

Exciting opportunity - good for you! I, personally, do an audit. I don't usually spend hours and hours on it,  but I look at both content and technical to get an idea of what I'd be getting myself into. It's also a chance to bring up things that the client may not even realize.

So, then you look smart. Better, though, you showed you pay attention to them and their needs. Don't overlook the power of asking questions: What might their content be missing you'd suggest? What changes might you make on what they have now? Why did they layout their site the way they did?

I'd also do a Screaming Frog or Xenu crawl to check the health of the site and see if there's a lot of broken links or missing page titles, content, etc. Also, maybe do a page load test, too, which is really easy and there's a ton of sites that do those. Check backlinks (SEOMoz tool) to get at least an idea of how spammy or legit those are.