Welcome to the Q&A Forum

Morris, As strong component of a linking strategy, the heyday of press releases has come and gone but press releases are still valuable.  They're valuable in the sense that they've always been valuable--as a means to reach a targeted audience with a creative message about a topic that will be of interest to them. Press releases are an active engagement tactic, in that you research what publishers you want to target, you craft a message that is going to catch their attention, you send it via a channel you expect them to be listening on, and then you expect to engage and develop relationships with your target publishers.  Unfortunately, many people today think of the press release as sort of a passive tool--you write something that fits into the template you pay your money then you hit submit and you wait for all the links to come in. Don't think of press releases as a way to get links, think of them as tools in building new relationships.

Hi Morris, I am not seeing any issues, either. Please confirm whether or not this has been resolved, thanks! Christy

** using 20-30 unique informative words per product, would you consider this substantive, informative and of great interest to visitor?** In my opinion, 20 to 30 words is insignificant.  I try to have a few hundreds words for a product description.

That's a good point Federico, I didn't think to ask if they only wanted to nofollow external links.

yes it was put up on may 21 2013 as a paid link and i check in Webmaster Tools' Manual Actions No manual webspam actions found.

I checked your homepage you have 680 links found on http://www.printe-z.com/I used this it's always worked very well http://www.feedthebot.com/tools/linkcount/result.php?url=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.printe-z.com%2FYou need a web Dev try the guy I listed he knows his stuffThis is the tool with out your URL for you to testhttp://www.feedthebot.com/tools/linkcount/

It is likely not available to you at this time.  It is only being offered to a limited number of verified accounts still.

Morris, I did some Googling and found quite a number of people who were using an app or CMS called Presta (something) that had an image sitemap generator.  This makes me think that a little issue in the sitemap could cause this problem. Compare your image sitemap to mine and see if you can see anything different, missing tags, etc.: http://www.visualitineraries.com/imagesitemap.xml

You should try to avoid soft 404s since they are confusing for users as well as for search engines. A good solution is to use custom 404 pages, that way you can return the correct code to the bots and provide some useful content for your users. Also, you should try to redirect some of those 404s to pages with related content in your website, check for the ones that carry the most link juice, traffic, etc. Read on: Soft 404 errors Farewell to soft 404s Creating useful 404 pages Customizing your 404 page HTTP Status Codes Best Practices

There should be no problem hosting CSS & Javascript on a CDN. It will help the site load faster, and Google shouldn't be crawling those files anyway. Not sure what you are asking about Google Translator.

Dustin, I think it's pretty rude to shill your own companies in a reply without making people aware that you are promoting your own businesses. For anyone reading this, it would be a good idea to do your due diligence into any company mentioned, particularly if the recommendation comes from an employee of the same group. Matt

First thing I would say, Morris, is that, in my opinion, if it's an ecommerce site that you depend on for income, it absolutely should NOT be on shared hosting. It needs to be on at least a VPS (Virtual Private Server) so that you can ensure your site won't be negatively affected by other sites sharing/abusing server resources. All you need is one outage or slowdown due to shared hosting problems to cost you far more than the increased cost of a VPS. Not to mention a VPS can be tuned much more specifically for your particular website's needs. It can also easily add resources (CPU and memory) as needed when your site gets busier, or during peak traffic season. That said, your current server definitely has a problem. Its time-to-first-byte is almost 5 seconds. It should be in the range of about .5 to 1 second. Since your overall load time is abut 8 seconds, it means your server is wasting over 60% of its time waiting to process the page. As far as recommendations for a host, I've been using Site5 for some time now and have been very pleased. They offer fully-managed VPS for around $55-$80 per month (depending on your site's resource needs) including excellent off-site backups. There are other good VPS providers out there, I just have personal experience with Site5. Note that you will want a fully-managed VPS unless you are already experienced in server administration, which most of us aren't Happy to help if you have further questions. Paul P.S. The configuration of the site can have an major impact on the speed, regardless of hosting. Yours seems pretty well configured, but there are still some tweaks available that would speed it up some more.