Welcome to the Q&A Forum

In other words they/you don't care about traffic, so what's the point of having a website?

I totally agree with Ray.

Theoretically having the keyword to the leftmost position is better. But I prefer shorter.

If you have time and patience you can test it, use one structure for a group of urls, and the other for another group of urls and try to spot a possible influence.

I am not sure I fully understand, but when you publish a new website you must secure all old urls have a match in the new website, otherwise is bad, very bad.

The second problem is that since you publish something somewhere it get indexed and once it's indexed if it disappear is bad.

The good news is to generate 10k redirect is not a big issue.

The basic principle is urls should never disappear, they should always exist, maybe redirect, but never disappear.

What platform are you using? For WP yoast plugin is doing a good job at generating the sitemap.

In general, once you have all the information about each chunk (url, dates, images info, etc...)  to generate the sitemap including all the bells and whistles is quite simple in any language and any platform, I wouldn't pay a dime for any software generating it.

Facebook shares/likes, Google +1, Tweet counts, etc... All will stay the same, all social signals do follow 301 properly... As long as you keep the same (old) url in the social plugins. If you trade the old url with the new one you will have split count.

As for google algo, it's not open source yet, so no one knows what it is doing with these social signs exactly. Since google is pretty good at managing redirects my guess is they know what it means for social signs too.

In addition to what Robert just said. If you add a 301 now to format url properly, and later add a second 301 to move to HTTPS, you will add redirect to redirect losing that little bit of page juice twice.

Thanks for the answer. I hate Majestic UI too.

Mat, why you prefer majestic over ahrefs? In which ways you found majestic more powerful?

You can use url rewriting to fix urls, no need of coding, just web.config http://stackoverflow.com/questions/14274370/url-rewriting-in-asp-net-4-0

In my experience the power of proper url, with the right keywords in the right place, is so great I wouldn't wait a second before to fix them.

Again based on my experience I never noticed a decrease in ranking due to 301.

I recently moved three websites from http to https and I didn't notice any decrease in ranking I could associate with the redirect.

Of course since we daily work on improving ranking is hard to distinguish a small decrease due to 301 from the general improvement.

I think showing information about the product, making clear the product can no longer be purchased and encouraging the visitor to buy alternatives is the right thing to do.

404 is out of question, it means you are removing it from SERP, why do that? You want to have as much pages in SERP as possible.

Think about those visitors, they got on that page looking specifically for that product. If you redirect/301 them to something else, you do not serve them the information they were looking for, and you may redirect them to content they are not interested into.

The only case where I would do a 301 is if the discontinued product page has tons of backlink and a terrific page authority, in other words an incredible amount of page juice to transfer.

Checking the example you linked, that page has PA 1 and zero backlinks, so there's no advantage in doing a 301.

One final notice, I am not an expert of music supply but I think you can do a much much better job at suggesting alternatives, if I look at that page I can't see any alternative product, I would suggest alternatives prominently on top of the page with a short reference+link where you state the product is no longer available, or something like that.

Checked with ahrefs.com, ordering by ahrefs url importance (and skipping no-follow).

If you take the few ones coming from websites which are not forums or directories, like http://mobiteli.geek.hr/novosti/neo-mx4-je-prva-kopija-meizu-mx4/ you will see the content/copy is thin and the page authority is extremely low.

In addition to what have already been said, the backlinks you have are of very poor quality, most of them are no-follow and almost all of them seems to come from forum or directories.

Thanks Ray, I didn't know about this.

If I could have only one I would go for semrush.com

In addition to what have already been said, I would consider adding rich snippets such as schema.org/author

http://moz.com/blog/a-visual-guide-to-rich-snippets

There's nothing asp.net specific when it comes to SEO. SEO best practices applies to any framework.

Ad Placement for instance, is not influenced by server side technology of your website.

And specifically about Google Shopping vs AsWords text ads, I would not judge them by CTR but by CR (Conversion Rate) and CPA; in my experience Google Shopping has a much higher CR, which make sense, because the visitor is closer to make a buy, but in terms of volume AdWords is 10x.

Given you are after page juice only, as far as I know after the third link from a certain domain, no matter it's DA, the incremental page juice transferred is negligible. Only exception in my experience is when 1) the additional links are deep-links, 2) content targeting heterogeneous keywords and 3) you work on to get exceptional PA for that linking page.

Hi Ray, with reference to "Any content that is hidden behind tabs is now known to be discounted for rankings." what's your source? I remember videos of Matt Cutts repeating Google knows today web is made of rich applications and as far as your app is keeping the white hat on you won't get penalized for this.

By the way, I buy my certificates here: https://www.namecheap.com/

In my opinion from a visitor perspective, to move in and out of ssl during a visit is bad; they would notice something is changing and average visitor wouldn't understand. So I would go for a 100% https. If you google about it you will find a lot of testimonial saying moving everything from http to https didn't have much impact in terms of performance. In my opinion the bad name of https is all coming from ages ago when protocols and hardware were not very good at managing it.