Welcome to the Q&A Forum

All i'd add to the comments so far is to ensure you have a video sitemap as well

To back up what Kyle says, yes there has be be relevance.  The primary driver should always be does it add value and offer something that the visitor is looking for, rather than trying to shoehorn spuriously connected content onto a site.  If it's not related in a positive way it will look manufactured, and probably be on a lower quality site.  As soon as that happens you move across to join the penalty crew and take your chances.

Yes Martijn is spot on.

The format is language-country not language_country.

http://moz.com/learn/seo/hreflang-tag

"Other SEO's have never had a problem with this arrangement, but this SEO claimed what they do is secret and for no one else to see."

Run a mile!!!

yes, if the date of the cache is prior.  So I would suggest disabling javascript in the browser reload the page and see if the expected text is displayed.  If not that's what Google misses.

...and yes Google should show all the text in the cache version (text only) if the cached version is subsequent to your amendment.

This sounds like your redirects are not right.  If you redirect from one URL to another you should have a 301 (or if temp a 302) header response.A soft 404 is where you redirect to the 404 page but you get a page found 200 header response (or any other response that is not 404).

What I would suggest is to remove any redirect from the removed URL/page and ensure you have the appropriate line in your .htaccess file for loading the correct 404 page when a URL cannot be found:

ErrorDocument 404 /whatever-you-name-your-404-file.htm

Attributes and their corresponding values can be in any order within a tag.

Having a self referring canonical tag also helps eliminate duplication issues if the site produces query strings appended to the URL. There is no ambiguity as to which is the "real" URL.

I would refine your social strategy so that you don't post the same to all platforms.  For example, someone may link up on LinkedIn, Twitter and Facebook and they are likely to get cheesed off with repetition all over, it can be spammy.  Also, I think there needs to be some trial and error - the LinkedIn audience will quite possibly respond to content that won't work effectively on Google+, and so on.  Just a thought.

You can add negative keywords to your campaign.  If you are aware of the names to remove add them straight in, otherwise it might have to be a bit of research and monitoring the keywords used to trigger the ads to work out what to add as negative keywords.

Sean gives some good points.

What I would also suggest is look for not just fancy keyword sales stuff, but what are they going to do with you under the hood, what's currently wrong with any of the on-page elements, how are they going to fix those, what impact are those changes likely to have on organic ranking.

Having a list of keywords and saying here are some keywords, here are the monthly search volumes, if you get to top 3 for x,y and z you will be getting 'this' amount of traffic is not enough.  There is so much more, what strategy do they have for content development and more importantly how do they approach link development - what is their overall philosophy in these areas.  Can they show you any evidence of overall growth of sites.

Easy to be seduced by keywords, but far more difficult to start over or come back from an algorithmic or manual penalty.

I'm not sure I understand the question?  It seems you are asking if there is any link value in Google search results.  If that is the case then the answer is no.  Links to a Google results page could only possibly benefit Google.

For sure you don't want the company name at the front of the title tag.  The title should ideally start with the main keyword for that page. Google truncates at around 65 characters so if the keyword is long just stick with that.  The title and meta should all be about being interesting and relevant to the visitor.  In many cases unless it is a well know brand having the company name in the title can waste space.

The goal tracking will only work with new events and not retrospectively.  If you trigger your event you will probably find it working.  The % figure when you verify the goal is just an indication of what would show up if already up and running.

A negative exact match should not exclude your search term.  For example:

**-[online payment] **will allow online payment gateway to show.

Check this post by Google and look at the chart of possible combinations - http://adwords.blogspot.co.uk/2007/11/adwords-optimization-tips-more-on.html

...and check the last reply in this http://moz.com/community/q/how-to-determine-which-pages-are-not-indexed.  I have not tried but it looks promising.

A reputable business will have a trading address on their site, therefore the actual trading address and listings will differ.  In this case every aspect of NAP will differ.

If you want to get rid of the html files you could try the following in your htaccess file.  The rule looks for anything (.*), until it gets to the .html then rewrites the first part dropping the .html

RewriteEngine On
RewriteRule ^(.*)+.html$ $1 [R=301,L]

No matter the source a paid for is a paid for and must not be "followed" so link equity could pass through.

If you cannot append the no-follow attribute to those links then something like this is your answer - https://yoast.com/cloak-affiliate-links/

I would give them a call.  A ticket is then raised and they are usually very helpful.

no - chicfamilytravels.com/ is do follow.

Please refer to - http://googlewebmastercentral.blogspot.co.uk/2013/02/a-reminder-about-selling-links.html