Welcome to the Q&A Forum

Google knows the difference and that is why they wouldn't give it the same value.

They are looking for other websites to link to your site on their own. No organic link is going to have tracking variables appended to it, meaning that the backlink was "self-generated". As such, your link value is discounted (especially press release links).

(The site does have some adult content!)

That's probably it. Site got flagged as adult and won't rank for dating terms any more. Your homepage title alone is very adult oriented.

Working for me right now. Try restarting your browser, logging in via seomoz.org and trying again.

You need to set up rel="alternative" hreflang="x" tags to let google know that you have two sites, with very similar content, that target different countries.

Prob won't do much for SEO but will improve UX. Only way this would help is if other sites decide to link to your glossary and bring in more authority.

I've had clients who had nice glossary pages but they didn't improve traffic much (low inbound links and low keyword traffic).

You should go the 51A / 51B route. Here is a similar question/response from Miriam that covers everything you need.

Produce more content that contains the keywords you want to show up. That list is purely a word count and does not represent the relevance of the website's keywords, although I would assume there is a correlation.

Option 2 all the way.

If you want to rank a local page, check out all the ranking factors compiled by David Mihm. Here is a post by Mike Blumenthal on your exact question. Basically, its a waste of time to build links to your G+ places page.

G looks at reviews from a number of different website when determining rankings (at least I know this is true for local so I assume it would work for global sites as well).

If this freeindex site is large and credible, G would probably look at that and factor it into their rankings.

Not sure about the effect on adwords costs but it should improve conversion rate and conversions.

Check out the "How much is my site worth?" sites - They usually give you a widget to embed once you "evaluate" your site worth.

Sucks, don't it? Google isn't perfect and there are still many flaws that let sites like this rise to the top.

I've seen this happen many times (especially in the more competitive industries). This is the difference between black hat and white hat seo.

White hat route: keep providing good material, get higher quality backlinks and eventually you'll overtake him (and the results will be more permanent).

Fast & Risky Route: Looks like he just did a big social bookmarking blast to the sites. You can find these services around the web and order them for yourself (get a link report first and see if the sites match up). You'll be on even ground but the downside is the risk of going under next update.

Best of luck,
Oleg

Embedding links into widgets (especially keyword rich, hidden links) is considered a link scheme by Google. TripAdvisor will not be penalized (at least algorithmically) because they have a very strong link profile. A small site may be hit with penguin for these actions.

Manually, G may or may not decide to penalize them. Personally, I don't think its a bad thing. They are providing a service and show a link that would allow someone to get more info in case their JS is off (as you mentioned).

If you were to make a widget, I would link back with your brand name. It can be an excellent way to build links as long as you do it right.

Cheers,
Oleg

Hmmm, are you positive its sending a 301 response code and not just redirecting? I've seen that be an issue before.

Also make sure you are testing the redirects with and without the trailing slash.

I would update the sitemap with the new urls and if possible, block the old url structure via robots.txt

rel=publisher makes information about your business pop up in the right hand side of the serps when you search for the brand name (map, business info, reviews, related searches). This is where you would display your business entity, not yourself.

rel=author is what causes the icon to appear to the left of the result and must be an actual person.

You should be linking to your business page from the website and asking people to follow your places page. Your author profile is supposed to be more personal and used to connect your work from around the web (think guest blog posts).

Check out this great explanation by Ann Smarty on the difference between the two.

Not sure - that was private browsing in Chrome.

One thing I recommend doing is creating and verifying a Google places page for your company with "date me now" as the brand name. This would help G associate that text with your domain and show sitelinks more often,

I see sitelinks

1. If you use IIS, urls are parsed case insensitively (i.e. page.aspx = Page.aspx). Unfortunately, crawlers treat them as separate pages and would say they are duplicate pages. Be sure to set up canonicals for the proper url structure.

2. No, it would be handled through IIS and the web.config file

3. Check. site:url.com and see if your pages appear

Cheers,
Oleg

If you followed their instructions for pagination with rel="next" and rel="previous" then you should be fine. A canonical tag should only be used if there are even more variables (i.e. sort by, category filters, etc)

Yes, especially if the pages are identical. I would leave the new url (/internet-daily-special/itemA.html) and set a canonical to the page that is permanent (/subcategory/itemA.html). That way users and magento will be able to navigate to the daily specials section easily and crawlers would know that the permanent home for itemA is inside the subcategory.

Cheers,
Oleg

Could this be a bug in SEOMoz's crawler or is it because IIS is not case sensitive and maybe Apache is??

This is most likely the case. Most websites would treat those URLs as separate pages and think crawlers would too. You should set up canonicals so that only 1 version of the URL is indexed (whichever way you link to the page most often)

In addition, you should choose whether you want a www. or non-www url and 301 to your preferred version (I would keep the www as it looks like you have more links to it).