Welcome to the Q&A Forum
Browse the forum for helpful insights and fresh discussions about all things SEO.
Can you clarify what you mean by "forward their website traffic"?
The idea behind a 301 or 302 forward is to send visitors to the same content in a different location. If the content is altered, then you run afoul of Google rules. This could be seen as cloaking or doorway pages.
Further details can be found here: http://www.google.com/support/webmasters/bin/answer.py?answer=66355
The site I have seen the most for WP templates is: http://themeforest.net/
I have no personal experience with the site so I cannot comment further. There are plenty of sites which offer designs if you are unhappy with that site. They seem expensive to me, but they have a ton of designs and several look exceptionally nice.
There are many forms of affiliate websites. Can you offer a bit more detail?
Is there even any point in doing on-site optimization?
Is SEO important? Does the site have original content? If the answer to both questions is yes, then I would say on-site optimization should be done.
All things being equal, your SEO would not be be affected at all purely because of a host change. Let me clarify the "all things being equal" part:
will your new server offer the same performance as the old server? As Cody suggests, if the new server offers better overall performance that would be good, and if it is worse that would be bad.
will there be any downtime during the change? Ideally your should be able to make the move with zero downtime. Any downtime would obviously not be good.
is your new server physically located in a significantly different location? If your current server is located in England, it can offer better local results for visitors located in England. If you then move your server to the US, your local SERP can be affected.
there are many server settings which can impact SEO and performance. These can easily be taken for granted. If you use any form of shared hosting, you should try to thoroughly understand your current settings and ensure you are aware of your new host's settings. Webmasters are often surprised to learn about changes after they have moved.
Will opening in a New Window pass all link juice?
YES
There is not any direct SEO reason related to link juice why you should or should not present the page in a new window.
Your only consideration would be user preference.
If you plan to use the target="_blank" approach, I would suggest the target="_new" option as being preferred. Ann wrote a nice article on the topic:
http://www.searchenginejournal.com/when-not-to-use-target_blank-link-attribute/19924/
For an individual who does not have a website and is a casual blogger, then using an established domain offers the advantage of a stronger domain authority. In any other case, I prefer using your primary domain.
You want to control your traffic. There are a few nightmare stories where the blog host, such as blogger, closed the URL of a user. In each case the user lost years of value they built up. This reason alone would lead me to always using my primary domain.
Additionally, a key reason for providing a blog is to generate site traffic. If you offer high quality content in your blog, then you want visitors linking to your site, and not wordpress.
Now it is my turn to agree with EGOL.
I would add one idea. In general I prefer not to share content but it can offer value to periodically share a selected article and gain backlinks to your site.
I am in agreement with you Christoph.
I do not see any value in adding a "content" directory. From a user stand point, it is not helpful.
The only reason to have a /content directory is if there is a need for it on the server. Sometimes there is shared hosting involved or other considerations that I am not aware of, so I prefer not to criticize others for their choices without knowing all the facts that their decision was based upon.
I would recommend reading the below article. It is from 2008, but still very relevant to your decision on CMS selection.
http://www.seomoz.org/blog/choosing-the-right-cms-platform-for-your-website-from-an-seo-perspective
Will doing this transformation affect our rankings if Redirects are correct ?
Anytime you add a redirect, a small amount (1-10%) of link value is lost. However, if the change means an improved site for your visitors, then your new design benefits should outweigh this effect.
Any recommedations for a Easy CMS that is very SEO Friendly?
WordPress is very popular and SEO friendly. A lot depends on how you want to present the content and your reasons for moving to a CMS.
A topical article you can look at: http://www.seo.com/blog/lord-of-the-seo-friendly-cms/
Will Switching To a CMS System Help Rankings
It can, but the switch itself isn't what makes a difference.
Will your new CMS present your existing content in a better manner?
Do you have buried articles that a new CMS might position better making them easier to find?
Do you have SEO issues which the CMS is set up to resolve?
There are too many factors involved to offer a definitive answer.
Yes and No.
YES - If you have a high quality article with good content, and you are submitting it to a quality site, then absolutely it is still worth it to do.
NO - If you are talking about the content farming practice where generic low quality articles are created that are 400 words with the key words thrown in periodically, and these articles are sent to article farm sites, then no.
You asked about this site before. What specifically would you like to know?
I notice you made some improvements since your last inquiry. The non-working navigation tab has been removed, among other changes. That is a good move.
Your RSS feed link is partly hidden. It moves and reveals more of itself on hover, but still remains party hidden. There is nothing directly wrong with it, but it would get more value if you simply displayed it fully so visitors would recognize it.
The page still overuses the phrase "Filme Online Gratis" repeating it 8 times directly, which doesn't include numerous phrase variations such as "Filme Gratis" and "Filme Online".
You offer links for "Filme online" and "filme online" with the only anchor difference being the capitalized first letter. These links go to different sites. Will your users understand the difference between the anchor text?
your page title and description seem fine. You can remove the meta keywords tag if you wish.
As a fast review the page seems ok. You can improve it a bit by focusing on your over-use of phrases and try to step back and look at your header, footer and sidebar words from a visitor's point of view.
Would it be better to create sub-domains for those translations (same content, different language) or sub-folders?
You can safely use either method. For the most part it is solely a matter of your preference. Neither choice has a SEO benefit nor disadvantage when compared to the other.
If it was my site, I would choose to go with the subdomain approach as a means of separating the content. The site structure would be identical other then the prefix. It would be easiest to manage in my opinion.
But who am I? How about listening to Matt Cutt's opinion 
http://www.mattcutts.com/blog/subdomains-and-subdirectories/
There are many great pages written on this topic. An older but relevant article from Matt Cutts: http://www.mattcutts.com/blog/seo-advice-discussing-302-redirects/
In short, a 302 would only ever be used if the move was temporary. You are correct in that they do not pass a link's value. I would only use a 302 to resolve a temporary problem.
A 301 passes 90%+ of the link's value, but there is some loss. That is why you would prefer not to use it, especially if the move was temporary. Using multiple 301s in a chain can be especially bad for this reason.
First thing I was wondering about, was the use of a redirect to a new site using an additional directory /content/... Why would anyone do this?
There are some very good reasons. It sounds like they originally had the site located in the root directory of their web server, and did a re-organization of their file structure. Their site is now contained in the content directory. Perhaps they set up a new CMS which required this change.
The most logical structure would be www.domainA.com/products/.., and not www.domainA.com/content/products, right?
It depends on your perspective. For example, if you have a WordPress blog site or other CMS paired with forum software, then the wordpress site is often set up at the root domain. The forum software would be in a directory such as /forums or perhaps /content. If it was my site then the products would be located off the root directory as you suggest, but others could certainly offer it within the /content directory.
what are the actual implications when redirecting from domainA.com to domainA.com/content?
It depends. A well established site will often have a lot of link value for their home page. That value would be lost with the 302. There is nothing specifically detrimental per se. It is more of missed opportunities.
Magento is correct.
200 is the normal response given for a web page. It is the equivalent of you dialing a phone number and the other person answering.
301 is the normal method to redirect a user to a different page. It is the equivalent of call forwarding. Basically you are saying "hey, I know which resource you are looking for, it has moved, let me take you to it."
The first thing I notice is you do have two different pages
http://www.britishhardwoods.co.uk/oak-skirtings-architraves.php
http://www.britishhardwoods.co.uk/oak-skirtings-architraves.php/
The page with the "/" on the end is actually a different physical page. Both pages have the identical content presented differently. At a glance I would guess the page with the "/" ending is for users who view your site from a cell phone or with older browsers. Either way you need to canonicalize these pages. Right now those pages will show up as duplicate content to Google.
As to your initial post, both versions of the page do contain a proper meta description. Their length is good at around 110 characters.
I would check these pages in the crawl report for other issues. Perhaps it is getting confused. The canonical piece is a big concern which should be addressed immediately.
Good luck.
The site you mentioned appears to be a very well designed, high quality site. What I see to make that determination is:
The domain was purchased in 1999. The domain is paid through 2020.
The DA is 54. Their parent company is http://www.micrositez.net. The parent company has offices located in several major locations world wide. The parent company's home page has an impressive DA of 83.
The company advertises as providing SEO services.
They are registered with their local version of a better business bureau, have been in business since 2004 and advertise a million dollar insurance policy for clients
The advertise "Strictly White Hat SEO. No black hat tactics guaranteed.
Their Google results are impressive. They offer a large list of clients who rank in the top 5 for the key words in their industry. I checked one and it seemed quite legitimate.
They offer every impression of a solid company. Past the public appearance, I do have some concerns.
They repeatedly offer testimonial quotes from "Top SEOs".
They build links by submitting your site to 1000 free directories with their first package, up to 8000 directories with their last package. They do offer reasonable time frames ranging from 3 months to 1 yr.
The offer paid directory links. Paid links of course is completely black hat, but directories provide a service. Yahoo directory, for example, is a perfectly legitimate paid link.
Basically it appears they use what I refer to as a "zerg" method. It can be quite effective. They acquire literally thousands of low quality links. Surely many of the links will get cut off from Google, but many will get through. I would suggest this as "grey hat". It is not against Google's terms, but I would expect a future adjustment from Google specific to this method.
how do I go about getting links on Chinese sites with .gov urls.
If you don't speak Chinese, you would most likely need to hire a company like theirs that specializes or understands how the process works in China.
All things being equal, a domain hosted in a local country should rank higher in a Google search from that country.
Your first consideration would be determining where your customer base is located. Specifically, the customers who are most likely to reach you through a search engine.
TLD, Hosting location and site language are the three considerations which come to mind for a site. The only other factor to consider would be any local customs or culture differences.
I agree with Steve. One site is definitely the approach I would recommend. A few thoughts:
The time, cost and efficiency of building and maintaining a single site is far better then trying to maintain dozens of sites. You will gain all the advantages of consolidation.
.com addresses are very well accepted throughout the world. You can definitely rank at the top in local searches and compete with country-specific domains. If you wish to have a country specific domain, you can keep it and re-direct users to your .com. It's not what I would advise, but it would address the concern you shared about uses feeling less comfortable.
You can also use geographical re-direction. A user from England can automatically be directed to your English page, while a user from Spain can be directed to your Spanish page. This could be a consideration.
Your 2004 URL definitely gives you an advantage compared to newer URLs.
I could go on but, you have every advantage by moving to one domain. The only reason to take any other approach is your perception that a local URL is perceived as preferable over a .com. You might find for many people, the opposite is true. I have a lot of contact with Greek users and many of them will prefer doing business with a .com over a domain from their own country.
Can you offer an example of a page with the problem? I have a couple ideas.
Please copy/paste the URL from the crawl report instead of typing it.
I am viewing my Crawl Diagnostics Report.
My report is filled with data which really shouldn't be there. For example I have a page:
http://www.terapvp.com/forums/Ghost/
This is a main forum page. It contains a list of many threads. The list can be sorted on many values. The page is canonicalized, and has been since it was created.
My crawl report shows this page listed 15 times.
http://www.terapvp.com/forums/Ghost/?direction=asc
http://www.terapvp.com/forums/Ghost/?direction=desc
http://www.terapvp.com/forums/Ghost/?order=post_date
and so forth. Each of those pages uses the same canonicalization reference shared above.
I have three questions:
Why is this data appearing in my crawl report? These pages are properly canonicalized.
If these pages are supposed to appear in the report for some reason, how can I remove them? My desire is to focus on any pages which may have an issue which needs to be addressed.
This site has about 50 forum pages and when you add an extra 15 pages per forum, it becomes a lot harder to locate actionable data. To make matters worse, these forum indexes often have many pages. So if I have a "Corvette" forum there that is 10 pages long, then there will be 150 extra pages just for that particular forum in my crawl report.