Welcome to the Q&A Forum

True, that page is higher quality. If you're not set on that being the reason, then I suggest restructuring the 'People' content to be as simple as possible. Remove any unnecessary nesting, get the microdata as short, simple, and flat as possible. Then, give it some more time and see if that makes the SERP update. If so, then you know you have some kind of code structuring issue.

Are you only looking to have the person's job title available via snippet? I hope you're not looking to have the person's photo show up in the SERPs, I believe that is still a discontinued feature.

The People icrodata you've implemented appears to be correct. You could try going with microformats instead of microdata and see if that helps, https://support.google.com/webmasters/answer/146897\. Google's example used microformats, so maybe they favor that schema.

However, I'm more inclined that they've deemed the page quality too low and not doing much to update the SERP. I would try adding content to the agent's page, maybe highlight content pieces they are proud off, skills they possess, previous travels they have put together, locations they specialize in, testimonials from customers of the agent, and anything creative you can think of - then see if that helps it get updated in the SERPs.

"Google Shopping doesn't allow the promotion of services."

Reference: https://support.google.com/merchants/answer/2770285?hl=en

Hi Anthony,

It's great to see you updating your business' local information. Consistency is very important in local search.

I suggest editing the old profile to have the same, consistent information as your current profile. Then, find the old local listing on Google Maps and click 'Suggest an edit.' There you can submit feedback to let Google know the old listing should be removed in place of the new listing and information.

I don't think canonicalization would be inappropriate here. Each page is different, but each page of a forum topic is supporting the OPs' main post on the first page. You can canonical the subsequent pages and pass the authority to the main page so it ranks highest.

If someone uses a specific search term that another person used on page 4 of the topic, that page will still show in Google's SERPs and direct the user to the deeper page, rather than the main page. So, we're not applying a canonical tag because of duplicate content issues, but to support the forum topic's parent theme.

I suggest adding rel/next logic to your site's theme and let Google rank the subsequent pages accordingly. Once proper canonical and rel/next tags are implemented, I wouldn't worry about duplicate meta information.

What SEO plugin are you using? If Yoast, there should be settings you can apply to differentiate subsequent pages' titles.

However, your blog should have canonical and/or rel/next settings added to properly inform Google (and other SEs) that the page being viewed is page 2..3..4..5..ect. Then, the SEs understand that this is a continuation of the original page and factor on-page SEO into the ranking accordingly (i.e. do not count the duplicate titles against you).

I do think you would be working against yourself, given the scenario you've outlined. You may find more success if you include zip code content into the landing page of each city you've created. I.e. We service the following zip codes - and provide a table of zip codes your business area services.

You'll want to make sure that each location your business has/services, also has its related local information in the local directories (Google business, Moz Local, ect). Also, be sure to include a proper, consistent NAP (name, address, phone number) on your websites.

Get creative with your content to satisfy all related keyword terms. For example, if you know people will search 'plumbers near me' then you may want to include a headline and content section about Plumbers near Dallas, Texas and talk about all the plumbing related services you provide near the Dallas city (Dallas and plumbing are only used for examples).

I suggest focusing less on Keyword Density (the amount of time that you use a keyword on a given page) and more on creating value-added content around your keyword - including synonyms and closely related keywords.

Do not worry about overuse of the word in your image file names. However, your image file names should represent what the image is. I.e. Sussex catering team, Sussex catering chef Joe Schmoe

Overusing a single keyword, or group of closely related keywords, could be viewed as keyword spamming. I would worry less about this in your image file names and worry more if the same keyword is used throughout your page copy. If you're reading your content and finding that you're using the word Sussex in ever sentence, that's going to be too much.

Create copy that is easy to read, quick to understand, and focused on your keyword terms.

If your company plans on having the acquired domains redirect to your primary domain, then 301 redirects would be the proper method to use.

You'd set those up in the acquired domains' .htaccess file.

It looks like you have canonical URL meta information in place. However, there is no 301 redirect from the non-ww version to the www version.

For instances such as this, you want users to resolve to a single URL, which I believe you want the www version of the URL. You should implement a 301 redirect from the non-www to the www URL.

Also, in your Google Webmaster Tools, make sure to configure the setting that tells Google what your preferred domain/home page is.

This should help clear up any duplicate content issues for this case.

You should choose a single URL and 301 all other versions to that single chosen URL. If you keep them the current way, they are seen as duplicate content.

Make sure to configure your Google Webmaster Tools for the single domain, as well as, adjusting your Google Analytics to read the home page properly.

The next most popular WP SEO plugin would be All in One SEO (AIO)

Yes, the host you use for your website can have an effect on your SEO.

Bryan mentioned some aspects of website hosting that would impact SEO:

• Uptime/Downtime - if your website is offline often, GWT will pick up those errors
• Load performance - A slow host will impact your page load speed and that could lead to undesirable SEO impact
• Location - This could impact load speeds, same as above. Try and have your website content delivered through a CDN to mitigate this issue
• Shared environments / IPs - If your website is hosted in a shared environment, the activities of other websites using that same environment could impact your rankings.

The last point is particularly important, you don't want to be dragged down by a low quality network of websites and their suspicious activity simply because your site is hosted in the same environment.

As much as copy that is needed to add quality information to your readers and clearly communicate your value proposition.

The industry has moved away from 'a minimum of 300 words is needed' to focus on the quality of content provided to the readers. Branding also influences a home page - some brands prefer a clean, minimal interface and already have the traction (word of mouth, referrals) needed to keep themselves sustained.

I recommend adding enough content to your home page that clearly explains why someone would want to use your product and the benefits they will receive from using the product. If I can get that from your home page, then it is a successful user experience.

Of course, keep that content targeted to your main topic / terms, but don't think that optimizing only the major on-page components will keep you high in the rankings.

Is this a legit approach?

No, not really. Google has never confirmed the use of CTR as a ranking signal for their search rankings. And, services such as these point to the fact that if Google did use CTR as a heavy ranking signal, it could easily be manipulated. That's what this service is proposing they are doing, manipulating the search results.

Now, does CTR actually impact search rankings? It's only speculation at this time and does seem like a logical factor to influence ranking. Google wants to show the most relevant results to the user; the results that answer the users search query the quickest and most complete. However, I don't think it could ever be a heavy impact ranking factor because it can be so easily manipulated.

A single URL for both desktop versions and mobile versions is the recommended best-practice from Google (https://developers.google.com/webmasters/mobile-sites/mobile-seo/overview/select-config?hl=en). So, I believe your client should first understand this if going the non-responsive option.

If responsive is still ruled out, then I suggest creating a m.domain.com subdomain for the main domain. You'll want to make sure you integrate the correct canonical tags, so Google understands that the main domain is the authority and unique content. Including rel="alternate" tags that point to the mobile versions is also recommended.

I agree that you should have consistency. I'd suggest going with Page Title - it's the industry standard.

Also, browser title limits what you're actually speaking to since the Page Title is more than just the Browser Title.

Have you considered using a tool like Screaming Frog SEO Spider?

It can crawl your site and it will list the inbound links to pages all neatly in a tab (exportable to Excel).

Google has dropped the 100 links per page rule;

http://searchengineland.com/googles-matt-cutts-we-dropped-the-100-links-per-page-guideline-but-we-may-take-action-if-it-is-too-spammy-178197

However, you only want to show links that are useful to the user. Look at your data and create an intuitive, easy to use navigation system and intra-linking architecture.

If the sub department has authority that you'd like to retain, 301 the department to its closest parent.

From a usability stance, this makes sense. If a visitor came to your site for that content and finds it no longer there, it is better to redirect them to the closest related content rather than showing them a simple error page and not guiding them to a better area of the site.