Welcome to the Q&A Forum

It's a good suggestion - mostly it's just a resource limit on our side (retrieving lots of rankings for lots of customers from lots of engines is challenging). We'll certainly look into it, though.

Hi Sebastian - unfortunately, I'm not sure there's much help I can give you on your question (I'll explain why below), but I did want to pop in to say that I'm worried about the goals you're attempting to achieve and how they conflict with what Google and its users are seeking from websites.

The build + flip model of creating an exact match domain (which have been trending down in Google's results and no longer provide much benefit) along with the concept of hosting many sites and simply publishing articles without regard for the quality or the broader mission or the end-user's goals and experience in mind is dangerous. Years ago, those types of systems worked and today, they can still work ocassionally and temporarily, but given the amount of effort required, I'm certain you could find other ways to accomplish far greater financial returns and give the web something truly excellent - something Google wants to rank and people want to visit, rather than a gallery of article-heavy built-to-flip sites.

The last point I'll add is that the links you might find to sites like these are not going to be high-quality, editorially given endorsements from trusted sources. They're far more likely to be the kind of links that get you into trouble. And, generally speaking, the Moz Q+A community doesn't focus on those and may not have great recommendations for how to acquire them.

That said, we welcome all kinds, and I wish you luck whatever you choose.

Story's still pretty much the same - I'd be MORE worried than before if you're doing either in a way that could be perceived as intentionally manipulative and more for engines than users, but I wouldn't sweat doing either if it's user-focused, high value and editorial.

We've seen no changes and experienced no less accurate results since Google's privacy change. I strongly suspect there's no impact from that cross-service tracking back to SERPs/link/crawl/etc. types of data, though over time, greater personalization is certainly a likely outcome and will make the "canonical" rankings gathered in a rank report less and less perfect (though probably still a reasonable benchmark for a while).

Totally agree. We're looking at making it more integrated with OSE very soon. Thanks Gavo!

Hey Z - totally fair question. A lot of folks use the membership for the free trial to simply do a site audit or get some data, then leave, but we often get those folks back (especially if they continue to do serious SEO work for their own sites or those of clients).

The most used features are (relatively in order):

• http://www.seomoz.org/users/pro - the PRO campaigns that track crawl, rankings, on-page and competitor link profiles (and we add new features here every 2-4 weeks)
• http://www.opensiteexplorer.org/ - which provides access to in-depth link research
• http://www.seomoz.org/seo-toolbar - Firefox and Chrome toolbar for watching metrics and quickly getting key SEO data as you surf the web
• http://pro.seomoz.org/tools/keyword-difficulty - for comparing the competition for various keyword phrases
• http://www.seomoz.org/blog/the-best-kept-secret-in-the-seomoz-toolset - inside the KW difficulty tool and also available from inside the campaign app; a way to determine why/how another site is ranking ahead of yours
• http://www.seomoz.org/webinars - IMO, some of the best content on SEO in webinar/slideshow format
• http://www.seomoz.org/labs - a bunch of tools that aren't fully supported but can often provide interesting data and highlight some things we're trying before they go "live"
• http://www.seomoz.org/toolbox/pagerank - one of my personal favorites that lets you see PR back in time,  often helpful for spotting penalties/manipulation
• And, obviously, this Q+A section (note: this is not the least used feature, I just put it at the end. I think in usage numbers it would fit right near the webinars)

Hope that helps!

In order to truly test this at scale, you'd need a very large number of sites and a huge swath of testable, organic linking sites - probably not feasible.

However, I can tell you that IMO, it doesn't matter much. If the links are organic and editorial, Google probably doesn't care whether they point to deep pages or the homepage. Some sites get a lot of press, which means they get links to their homepage. Other sites have lots of links to their content, which means they get deep links. I honestly doubt Google cares much which it is - what matters more is the quality and editorial nature of the linking sources.

Hi Joony - sorry for our delay! I believe that you can use ip detection to re-route Chinese IPs to the page you want. Just be aware that Google's crawling from Mountain View (even for their Chinese indices), so you'll need to provide links back and forth for manual/crawler navigation, too.

It shouldn't affect your SEO, and the plugin is a fine way to do it. You can also do it manually (lots of examples of how on places like StackOverflow, e.g. http://stackoverflow.com/questions/2316307/how-to-detect-a-users-language-through-their-ip-address which is a good thread and has numerous points of advice).

Best of luck!

Hey Rusty - welcome to Moz! Totally understand that based on your income/focus, an ongoing monthly subscription might not be in the cards forever. That said, I figured I'd link to some resources that might be helpful on learning to use the software to help:

• http://www.seomoz.org/dp/welcome-webinars
• http://www.seomoz.org/webinars/using-open-site-explorer-to-uncover-new-marketing-opportunities
• http://www.seomoz.org/blog/30-seo-problems-the-tools-to-solve-them-part-1-of-2
• http://www.johnfdoherty.com/minimum-viable-keyword-research/
• http://ppcblog.com/seomoz-pro-tools-review/
• http://www.quora.com/Any-reviews-of-SEOmoz

Cheers!

Hi Kev - yeah, totally agree that we need to make that more clear. We'll get to work on that asap.

And yes - Potential takes into account whatever metrics it can; when those are absent (like volume), it uses a low volume bucket (I think 0-10) so as not to overstate. Often when we don't have volume, it's either a very new keyword or a very uncommon one.

And yeah - we don't cover the UK yet, but hope to in the future.

Hey guys - the ranking collections are indeed weekly. They may not match exactly what you see depending on personalization, geography, IP address, browser, and any/everything else Google uses to personalize, customize or test results, however, they are always current.

We don't ever do anything like say a ranking is updated without actually going and grabbing the SERP where it exists.

That said, we're unlikely to ever get to daily rankings updates. It's just not feasible with so many customers (16,500+ subscribers today tracking millions of keywords weekly). There are a few other services that, I believe, do provide daily rankings. AuthorityLabs can do this, though it may be price-dependent.

If rankings is the only reason you're using Moz and the Q+A, Pro content, webinars, tool collections, crawl data, opensiteexplorer, etc al. isn't needed, then you might want to consider one of these others. We'll be sad to lose you, but definitely want the best for marketers.

Hi Scott - it depends. You can use Google Search Console's preferred version (https://support.google.com/webmasters/answer/44231?hl=en) to help them choose between www vs. non, but if there are other parameters or versions of the page, you really want a canonical tag or 301.

Given the limitations it sounds like GoDaddy is giving you around this stuff, I'd probably suggest moving to a different CMS/host. Better safe than sorry later.

Permission is different than an API, IMO. Does Google have "permission" to crawl all of the world's websites and serve advertising alongside the results? No. But it's also not illegal or explicitly against those sites' terms (and they can opt out by keeping info behind a registration wall or robots.txt).

Everyone who collects rankings data - us, Raven, AuthorityLabs, Searchmetrics, Conductor, Covario, etc, etc. - does so in the same fashion. There's no special deals or APIs with search engines (Google, Bing, Yandex, Baidu - any of 'em). Anyone showing rankings data is transparent about this simply be virtue of having it.

Sadly, I do agree that nothing we do here will ever be 100% reliable - it's a tough problem, but we believe it's one worth fighting for. This information deserves to be in the hands of marketers, and we're willing to work hard on their behalf to get it (just like our competitors and colleagues in the space do).

In terms of the bet - I'll be happy to just take the losing side now and donate to Movember Will send $99 when I'm back online later today!

In terms of "The degree to which my use account usage has been affected is an irrelevance.  A chunk of the $99 you receive every month from me includes the use of tools that are reliant on ranking data to function. By not issuing automatic refunds to all pro users you are simply charging money for a service that was not available."We're more than happy to issue you a full refund, but you and I disagree on the issue of automatically refunding users who didn't use the tools or for whom the service didn't break. I'm happy to chat about that more offline - you can feel free to email me at rand@seomoz.org

Personally, I think the community as a whole is even smarter than those folks individually But glad you like that feature so much Sha!

Hi Anders - totally not your fault; it's ours. We have volume data that's US-centric currently, and don't have data for Norway (or other countries) yet. We're working first on UK, Canada, and Australia, and then will try to get other countries' search volume data, too.

Apologies for that - in the meantime, my suggestion is to use AdWords KW Planner data for volume and select the specific country.

We've been loving a few things:

• http://www.gooddata.com/
• http://www.tableausoftware.com/ - Will Critchlow wrote a post using some of their cool stuff here - http://www.seomoz.org/blog/data-visualization-techniques
• http://www.geckoboard.com/

Not sure if any/all of these will work for you, but they are definitely worth a look.

We're also planning on getting more advanced/polished data visualization into the Moz web app and tools, but our priority has been data quality, scalability, uptime, speed and features, so it may be a little while before we get it where we want it

Umit - I just wanted to chime in and note that Ryan's correct on the guidelines and focus of the community here at Moz.

Your question is OK, but it does push on the boundaries of our community. While we'd love to have you as a member and you've clearly got some great ideas and experience to share, we don't generally support or try to provide advice/help to those attempting to manipulate search engines with black/gray hat tactics.

The math doesn't work out here either, because each page is only assigned an extremely tiny amount of PR initially, and the damping factor will make it such that you're only passing some lesser quantity to the linked page. That, combined with the fact that PageRank's iterations end after a certain number of runs (at one point, I think it was ~10 iterations), and you'll see that looping PR like you've shown doesn't work out.

Wow - that's very impressive work; congratulations! I think getting more technical depth is a great goal, but I wouldn't let it overwhelm the equally important practice of creativity in content, branding, UX, design, etc. The "softer" practices and metrics that touch on inbound marketing / SEO are a huge part of how you win authority, links, brand reputation, trust, etc. and those all lead to both better rankings and more customers.

Glad you're sticking around here, too

Hi Christian - can you send over some examples of Difficulty scores that were 40+ and are now <5. That seems very fishy and we can look into it.

In general, the new tool should be vastly more accurate and useful than the old one. Volume data in the old KW Difficulty tool comes from Grepwords, which we'll be using for non-US volume in the new tool as well, hopefully very soon, so you should see that fixed before the old KW Difficulty disappears.