Welcome to the Q&A Forum

Using the tool I have this.. Ive submitted the following to GWT but have errors saying it's an invalid URL.. <url><loc>www.thefurnituremarket.co.uk</loc></url>video:thumbnail_lochttp://www.thefurnituremarket.co.uk/videos/home.jpg</video:thumbnail_loc>video:titleAbout The Furniture Market</video:title>video:descriptionA video all about The Furniture Market a Multi Award Winning Company, based in Kelsall, Cheshire, UK.</video:description>video:content_loc"http://player.vimeo.com/external/56085518.hd.mp4?s=4d34a69f32af0d61e3c19212bdd67a81</video:content_loc>video:duration92</video:duration>video:publication_date2012-12-21</video:publication_date>video:family_friendlyyes</video:family_friendly>video:tagFurniture</video:tag>video:tagFurniture</video:tag>video:tagFurniture</video:tag><video:uploader info="http://www.thefurnituremarket.co.uk/">The Furniture Market</video:uploader>video:liveno</video:live> I tried with http: had the same error message I am using the new vimeo iframe embed code. any ideas? I read your forum thread but couldn't see any answers.

I wrote a post about this last year, but the logic is in line with what Irving said - it's really a question of dilution: http://www.seomoz.org/blog/how-many-links-is-too-many I would say, as someone who used to do a lot of usability work - don't assume more choices is better for users. I'm amazed how often people don't even see mega-menus or click on roughly none of them. I'd strongly recommend user testing and probably firing up something like CrazyEgg to click map. You may be surprised at how many links people never see or use. I think flat architecture has its merits, but putting all of the choices up front is rarely the boon for visitors that people expect it to be.

I made a demo store a few months ago and it seemed to have the right levels of functionality that I needed. I will take a closer look again soon.

You could use an html counter instead. Countdown Timer Seems pretty easy to configure, should be faster than yours, and its free.

Hey Alex, Hit the "oak furniture" analogy on the head there. I could go through our core pages disabling the canalizing link. So the Oak furniture didn't work on the oak page because the user is already there. The CMS is reliable and a little FUGLY I can't get a nice font to work and align how I want so resorted to images. How much of an edge do you think we are missing because of this issue? can you quantify it?Essentially this is not going to boost usability massively, just sculpt link juice hopefully.

Automation of this has been problomatic because of the way our CMS paginates URL's, It was sending xml generators crazy. looks like I am still going to have to have some involvement with this on an ongoing basis. Thanks for mentioning BING..

I'm going to set this as an "Ongoing Discussion", as I'm not sure there's one right answer and it's interesting to see a mix of experiences. I'd lean toward the end of the content for a blog post, if only because many people don't want to endorse until they've read or at least scanned the material. If you put it in a fixed position, like the right column, and they scroll past it (if that column doesn't move), they might forget to go back.

PPC and organic ranking does NOT go together. Read as little or as much into that as you want.

I'm at the same point with an ecommerce. I targeted a select amount of keywords too hard at the start. Now I'm looking at the past years ecommerce conversion keywords and fine tuning all my product pages to better rank them.

Hmm, now this is why I don't put too much effort into measuring the numbers of incoming links. The ones that are counted in some places, aren't counted in others, and the numbers skew the value as people think in terms of quantity rather than quality... then there's the fact that they jump up and down like Madonna's pants anyway. I tried a whole bunch of different ways before concluding we don't yet seem to be of an age where we can track them, at least not to any level of reliability or significance for taking actions on them.

I'm guessing they must have some pretty authorative links to over-rule the fact that their link profile is like that.

This is an interesting article Theo.. I guess what you are saying and they way I am interpreting it is that domain authority and trust are more important. Which I agree with. However I would still think there is some milage in this.

It would be great if you kept this thread going

Hey Robert, I was wondering what your experiences where with the changing meta descriptions? My team was looking to do something similar with one of our sites and we are worried about changing meta descriptions and whether that would affect us negatively. Thanks

Hi Robert, I'm following up on older, unanswered questions. Can you tell us what you ended up doing with the site, and how much pain you went through, and any lessons learned? I'm interested to here what decision you made here. Thanks!

Hi Robert, Basically when you load your website, all the content that shows without scrolling down is called "Above the fold", Hence the term Below the fold, means all the content that will appear when you scroll down to see the rest of your site. take a look at this article (http://andrewhansen.name/affiliate-marketing/google-checkmates-me-but-reveals-internal-secrets/) it shows that Google have the ability to know what is above or below the fold and can calculate the ratio of content / Ads. And Concerning Ehow, Josh Hannah (Former Owner of Ehow) gave his 2 cents of why EHow didn't get hit with the Panda Update. (http://www.quora.com/Why-doesnt-Google-push-down-low-quality-results-from-sites-such-as-eHow-the-same-way-it-pushes-up-results-from-Wikipedia/answer/Josh-Hannah)