Welcome to the Q&A Forum

Hi there If you have a search console profile for that .net URL, you could use the Change of Address tool to let crawlers know the site has moved. I would also check this migration guide to see if there are any loose ends that may still be indexing those pages. Sometimes you can have internal links or sitemap issues that may still contain old URLs. Lastly, there is the remove outdated content from Google tool, but I would make sure that your new URL / domain are appearing for all searches that you need it to be, and that the .net address isn't. Hope this helps! Good luck!

Well I'm glad to hear you've had a traffic increase at least! We're seeing different things at Majestic. I'm seeing 124 different domains with deleted links. Examples include: <colgroup><col width="470"></colgroup> | http://blog.sellingpower[dot]com/ | | http://www.honeywellaidc[dot]com/en-US/partners/Pages/find-a-partner.aspx | | http://www.sellingpower.typepad[dot]com/ | | http://www.dcvelocity[dot]com/whitepapers/ | | http://spectrumsuppliermarketplace[dot]com/Listing/Index/Printing__Surface_Treatment/Bar_Coding/3497/681 | | http://www.thomasnet[dot]com/products/barcode-labels-42422006-1.html | | http://www.business[dot]com/technology/electronics/ | | http://www.supplychain247[dot]com/company/supply_chain_services | | http://fc.webmasterpro.de/stat.php?name=hotelab&source=referer | I agree the purchasingandsupplysourcingguide link is active. I see that as well. "A_nd I run my report against the same competitors every month but theirs actually increased_."  Sorry, here I don't know what report you're referencing. Are you saying you run Moz reports each month that tells you the number of links you and your competitors have? I thought Moz used Open Site Explorer data for that - the same data we're talking about so can't speak to that. Lastly, yes - none of the tools are 100% accurate. They're all based on sampling and projections. Yes, I agree Moz estimates tend to be lower than other sources of link data.  I really think the reason you're seeing such a huge variation in link counts is because of the small number of sources you have for incoming links and the relatively small sample size Moz uses to make it's projections. I agree 80% is huge, but from what I can see in Majestic, you've lost 60% (124 of 198) of your link sources recently so that would explain it, at least partially. That's the best I can come up with Ken.

I totally agree but the issue is we have sections of our site we now can't control title tag and descriptions for because we use that anchor jump menu all over the place.  That was what I was trying to get to the bottom of.  I did find a jquery solution for it that we may try.  Thanks everyone!

SearchMetrics would be a good place to start - you won't get individual keyword historic performance but it will show your website's overall SEO visibility over time. Particularly useful for tying in with Google algorithmic updates. George

DMCA is free, yes.

Thanks.  We made sure a 301 redirect is in place but the error is still there.  It's been days now.  I'm not sure what else to do.

Thank you!!!  I really enjoyed your session.  Opened up a whole new way of thinking for me!  Can't wait to dig into the SEER blog.

They had switched the title months back but once I shortened the pixel width it righted itself.  Thanks for the answers it is much appreciated!

In the light of this article (http://searchengineland.com/google-can-now-execute-ajax-javascript-for-indexing-99518), I can say that Google can crawl the content in Javascript (few of it, if not all). Hope this helps!!

It definitely shouldn't be harmful but is most likely unnecessary. This is the code to verify your website in Google Webmaster Tools. It looks like it's verified for two different accounts. You should only need to verify on one and then you can add users from the dashboard inside webmaster tools, instead of having multiple verification codes.

Hi Sika, Your redirects from the .net to the .com site are 302 (temporary) and not 301 (permanent) and is likely the reason your .net urls are staying in the serps. If you get those switched over to 301 then with a little patience all your .net urls should be replaced by the correct .com ones. You can check what kind of redirects you have with various online tools like this one: http://www.redirect-checker.org/

Ah, I see what you mean Alan and I'm inclined to agree. With the JS you mentioned, there's no risk of a user (or crawler) being taken away from the page itself, so no link would be passed and "diluted", as it were.  Thanks for posting this!

Hey David thanks for your response.  We are not using wordpress or joomla.  We use currently IIS, ASP.net and MVC.  This will be going on a software company website.

Hi, You're able to track a maximum of 250 keywords in your Moz Pro account. What you could do is add the 181 keywords to a project and then add your competitors to the project so you can see their progress against yours. I'm not sure if that's what you're looking for but that's the best you could do on such a basis in your Moz account. Otherwise I would look into other tools.

Given you "can't say" how the old numbers were derived, you might try plugging your key phrases into Google trends to see if there's been an obvious diminishing of search volume over the past few years. That might help you figure out whether there's been less searches or whether your "old" numbers are from exact match searches or something else.

This is what I came say. Have the html document, then the link to the pdf download. That way the html document can rank and also the PDF can too. I think some people over look the fact that the page a pdf is downloaded from can rank AS WELL as the pdf itself.

I've definitely found that Google seems to take more liberties giving you the title tag of your choosing when your title tag is too long. I also like the pixel width guidelines over the character recommendations. Your title tag is currently 589 pixels wide, vs the recommended 466 maximum. Fun tool to test it out with: http://www.webshoptimizer.com/page-title-pixel-meter/ Of course, you could change it and create a nice short title tag, and Google may still choose to show something else.

Google has stopped passing the search query in UTM Codes. It's a new development that you can read about here.

Well we had to leave the urchin code as we cannot figure out how to get the new UTMZ cookie into our code.  We did however put back the new UA that we need so results did start to appear again. Thanks for all the help.  If anyone has info on the UTMZ cookie please let me know.

These are kind of some big questions with a lot of possible answers. So I'll go with the most general response. Top 40 Results: That can be a terribly unrealistic goal, or one that's tough. If these are branded queries (e.g. Product/Service Your Brand), it will be tough even for an established brand. Someone else always sneaks in there, somehow. Given that you've been tasked with doing that for hundreds of keywords, it sounds closer to the terribly unrealistic side of the spectrum. Competition With Yourself: It can be good and it can be bad. It really depends on the pages. Some pages can be better than others, given their purpose. So if you want someone to call and for some reason there isn't a phone number, they won't find what they need and you've lost the sale. If someone has many options from only one source, they may choose not to click at all for some reason. Better KPIs: A good KPI is something that's achievable and in line with real business goals. Good KPIs keep the lights on. Higher rankings don't always guarantee business goals will be met. Honestly, there's some real garbage pages out there that rank well for certain queries. You can virtually guarantee they aren't worth the cost of hosting. Perhaps you want more service calls? Maybe you want to increase your email database? These are things that you have to establish with decision makers/stake holders within the business. A good set of performance indicators pay the bills. Rankings for the sake of rankings often deviate from that purpose. Hopefully this was helpful. Edit: I forgot to touch on the .net to .com migration. There are a lot of variables there as well. I really don't know how well the migration was handled. If it was handled well, you might see some cached results from the .net version, but eventually everything will swing over to the .com. If the migration wasn't handled well... you have a whole set of other problems.