Welcome to the Q&A Forum

As I see you are using the Google Translate API, so in that case, keep in mind the on-page for every single language

Good one Paul - is there an article on this you can point me at? Thanks

Ricky, Amp on WordPress is real easy. Just install this plugin that is being developed by automatic themselves. https://wordpress.org/plugins/amp/. You can also use the page frog plugin here https://wordpress.org/plugins/pagefrog/  This will also help you set up instant articles and give you a visual preview of what your amp and instant articles pages will look like. Let me know if you need more help Thanks, Don

I feel that the search volume shown in MOZ is generally low compared to other sources. I feel it is more accurate with search terms that have a lot of volume, but in search terms that are under 1000 searches a month, I start to have a lot of problems with the data. Many times there is no search volume data at all for lower volume keywords which get just a few hundred searches per month or less. Problems with the volume data effect almost everything else in Moz so I hope MOZ sees this and tries very hard to correct these issues.

Hey Ricky, Just to answer the straightforward questions - yes - profile links vs expert source reference are weighted differently. Though there are tons of other factors in play like the anchor text (does it show as repetitive generic spam or organic linking), the reputation of publication, and whether they made it a rel=nofollow link could hurt the reputation of the publication causing it to be less than a profile link. Profile links can help with the exact brand name but not as much for the general search terms you're going for. Local business SEO is tougher to be sure - make sure to check out the Moz local tool: moz.com/local   and be sure to register with Google Business to manage how you show up. Big picture! Do all of these small actions matter, especially when you can't see the ROI on day 1 =  yes.  SEO is the ongoing act of optimization - not a one and done action. Keep in mind that you are also crushing it for awareness and reputation when you land those press hits and thought leadership placements, regardless of the SEO value. Doing the little things the right way will add up over time. Here is a solid backup of link building as a strategy: https://moz.com/blog/state-of-links Hope that helps!

Hey Muzzmoz, This is a little outside of my area of knowledge, but I asked around our team and got a recommendation of Open SEO Stats as a tool, which links to the Whois information for whatever you're looking up, surfacing domain age. I hope this recommendation helps

Hi Ricky, If you look at Restaurant item on Schema.org you'll see that they have a property for menu. Restaurant Property Info --> https://schema.org/Restaurant They suggest either wrapping the entire menu with the itemprop="menu" tag or linking to it. Below is an example of a linked menu. Fondue for Fun and Fantasy Fantastic and fun for all your cheesy occasions. Open: Daily from 11:30am till 11pm Phone: 555-0100-3333 View our menu.

Does it work? Yeah, probably. For now. Should it work? Probably not. I obviously haven't seen the sites, but if they're hosted on the same hosting account with the same IP address, then it wouldn't surprise me if this was eventually hit. And if it was reported, it definitely would not pass a manual review by the Google spam team IMO. As others have said, it's super risky. Just a few weeks ago I didn't let someone join my platform to provide local SEO services specifically because they are doing this sort of thing as their main link acquisition tactic for their clients, and while it works right now it's definitely very grey hat and will stop working at some point. I've spoken with people who used to operate Personal Blog Networks like this, and they always get hit eventually. I'd also hate to be the SEO brought in to clean this sort of thing up and get the clients that this company loses ranking again. Lots of small businesses sound like they'll be harmed because of this, unfortunately. Hope that helps! John

You are most welcome! Best of luck!

Hi Ricky, Got it. On that page I've linked to, Google gives instructions for what to do if an Editorial Summary is wrong. Please, check that out.

There's pretty much no-one at Google who would know every element of the ranking system, so it seems unlikely a third party would successfully replicate it all beyond what is already available via the common SEO tools. If they really had managed to completely replicate everything to the point it worked perfectly, why wouldn't they just set up their own websites to rank highly and make money without having to do client work? They may well have built their own internal SEO tool, which could do something similar to the Moz On Page Grader, for example. But considering how important external SEO factors remain to be, and the fact they'd have a much more limited data set than Moz or other tools, it seems like it would be a bit pointless unless they planned to pivot to selling their own SEO tool. So either the client ends up being saddled with a company using a tool with very little data. Or they end up being saddled with a company aiming to ditch clients and sell an SEO tool instead in the future...

Are you referring to having a page like this -- http://www.selectequipment.net/brands/Cutler-Hammer and simply adding a facet/filter for product type? The individual product pages Should be optimized for Brand+Product+Model. The faceted navigation within the site alludes to the fact that you can "drill down" onto a specific brand, but clicking the link takes to the general brand page vs. a page filtered for that brand...  or allowing you to filter product type when viewing by brand.. In this case, I would create the navigable heirarchy within the site to view all of the brands and filter by product type within the brand pages, essentially creating all of these "combos" you are talking about.  Further, I would create limits so pages with fewer than say 5 unique items (you determine appropriate #) are noindex,follow.   Lastly, I would make sure all product pages are also optimized to include the brand, product type, and part number as part of the optimization goals for each product page. Hope this helps! Cheers, Jake Bohall

Thanks Kane & everyone else..much appreciated. Think we got it to work!

Hi Ricky, Rand did a great Whiteboard Friday on 'How to Optimize for Competitors' Branded Keywords' in February this year that I think you'll find helpful Both options you suggested could be successful. I think it really comes down to two things: How much your client is willing to spend. If they want their company site openly targeting competitor terms. If they have no issue with openly targeting competitor brand names, I'd say do it on the current site. This will also be the cheaper option. If they want it to appear as an anonymous product comparison, obviously, you will have to build a separate site - which will require more budget. You don't need to worry about a Google penalty with either of these options. Cheers, David

Awesome, thank you!

Hi Ricky! If the client is determined to keep both sites, here is the only way to be 99% safe doing so: Only 1 site can list NAP. The other must not list NAP. You do not want any part of NAP shared between 2 sites. Do not build citations for the NAP-less site. Remove them where they exist. Zero shared content between the 2 sites. Define a totally different purpose for the existence of the second site. If site A is about the business, site B could be about something else, like maybe a community information portal about health care or something. Do not interlink between the 2 sites. If it's necessary to have a phone number of some kind on site B, it must be unique and must be answered with a different brand name than that for site A The above should remove concerns about loss of authority, citation inconsistency and duplicate content. Quite a bit of trouble, though, and may not be worth it unless the client can think of a really good, different purpose for the site B, other than promoting his business on it.

I think your interpretation is a bit tightly wound - in this case, you're not paying for the link, you're paying for a membership into the Chamber of Commerce. That you get a link is a bi-product, and it is not 'what you pay for', there's much more to the CoC than web links. I'm sure you're correctly quoting something from somewhere, and I'm not going to bother to do the research to debate in quote format about it.  I'm just letting you know, in all my experience in SEO client sites, that purchasing a membership in the Better Business Bureau, the Chamber of Commerce or a long list of other legitimate local business directories, that these links seem to have a very positive affect on SERPs. But maybe I'm just getting lucky. In the end, there's no need for confusion. Experiment and see what happens. That's what makes SEO so fun!

Hey Ricky! I would say this boils down to how well that directory ranks for your client's core search terms. $50 is quite a bit to ask for a listing, you know, but if there is some reason being ranked on this directory in this town would help your client earn rankings they can't get on their own, it might be worth it. So, do some searches to discover how authoritative the directory is.

It should do Ricky - let me know how it goes!