Welcome to the Q&A Forum

Here are some resources and ideas:

http://moz.com/community/q/content-marketing-for-e-commerce-sites

http://www.getelastic.com/beyond-blogging-13-content-marketing-opportunities-for-ecommerce/

http://www.practicalecommerce.com/articles/4066-14-New-Ecommerce-Books-for-Summer-2013

also their blog should be a great resources: http://www.practicalecommerce.com/

Hope this helps

can you expound a bit why wistia vs youtube (being the #2 search engine?)

Just updated with some more info and thoughts

Hi Megan

Generally longer (authoritative as they are known) articles perform better.

However there are cases where article can be broken down into multiple sections here is one example:

http://moz.com/community/q/one-long-article-or-3-smaller-articles-broken-down-into-logical-steps?sort=newest

In response to having more pageviews:  If page views had any or significant optimization power, people would create programs to visit or manipulate the increase in pageviews. However on one long article it is easier to get authority combinted social shares, links, etc. Some big news sites do break up the articles with a similar method to your example. I have not found out why they do that whether for SEO purposes or some other usability or other methods.

Another thing to consider broken up articles might not play nice with RSS feeds

Let me know if this helps

Some discussions that can help:

http://www.quora.com/Do-CDNs-have-positive-or-negative-SEO-impact

http://www.sitepoint.com/forums/showthread.php?864524-Does-Using-CloudFlare-Have-Any-Impact-on-SEO

Summary: CDNs actually help with SEO because they lower your page load times, decreasing bounce time, increasing SERPs, and increasing conversions.

Hope this helps

security wise it seems both of you guys have stellar options. for me the issue is performance, caching for dynamic sites, CDN performance, and in this case TTFB response.  I was not sure with your response do you have faster TTFB to CF?

Thanks

Hi Igal,

Do you work for incapsula, you are mentioned as a Mod on the blog?

I have heard great things about incapsula from others, but in terms of TTFB is it better than cloudflare? If so, how so?

Also any other ways that it excels Cloudflare? any ways its inferior to Cloudflare in your opinion?

Thanks I am really looking for more info, as I had great results with Cloudflares features and offering, wondering if I should give Incapsula a run

Thanks

Great question EGOL,

One I have given a good thought after a Google Reader death. G Reader being such a popular tool that I would have never thought would die, had it not been the Google's farewell message.

For me feedburner is also in that same category of a very popular tool that carries a big chunk of necessity in it.

Having said that I am not switching (yet) for the following reasons, and conditions that need to be met:

1. Official message from Google, I am hoping and for experience hoping to hear some time to export find an alternative.
2. Until then I am happy with feedburner, it works well.
3. I am hoping/assuming just like in Google Reader case, with Google's official announcement, much better alternatives will arise to jump on. For example when Google Reader first made the announcement Feedly was good but it was no where near previous Google Reader I did switch over and try Feedly (better safe then sorry) but was still using Google Reader because Feedly did not work like Google Reader, then after a while came inoreader.com and it was in response to Google Reader's shut down and it was love at first sight.
4. I dont really see need to switch and waste time and resources if it works. I am hoping and assuming there will be easy method to export all the subscribers/feeds/etc when and if Google shutdowns.

Also for others interested in making the switch now, here are some great alternatives, and a great article:

http://www.kevinmuldoon.com/feedburner-alternatives/

I have noticed the same thing it takes a while for your profile to display the points even when you hover over the image and more points are displaying. But rest assured within a day or so the system propagates and adjusts on all the areas to match. If you have no activity and the points after few days doesnt show up let us know

So part of this is a new website branding, and this organization is trying to attract younger crowd and I am not sure of the studies but they might prefer .com as .org seems like an older tradition. But just guesses here

Irving,

Yea that is what I was thinking, seems obvious, but the org wanted to build a new image and try to appear more modern, by having the main domain be .com. How much benefit is that 7 years for the site, practically any ideas?

Its a non profit organization. With name.org acquired in 2006.  name.com will be acquired soon. In SEO terms it would make sense for me just to get .com and redirect to the original .org but from the standpoint of 7 year history of name.org is it worth keeping or its irrelevant or not that important or really important. I am in the process of rebuilding the site other than the initial domain home links to other pages do not matter at the moment.  Thanks Mozzies

Hi David,

This post should help: http://moz.com/community/q/too-many-on-page-links-20

and this

http://moz.com/community/q/too-many-on-page-links-31

Let me know if that clears out few things

Yea this makes sense as others have said that Cloudflare is trying to say that TTFB is not the most important metric, and so they published this study, as it aids their business model.

I would do just that listen to Google dev vs Cloudflare. Also the way I think about it even if their studies are true, where for the overall benefit TTFB would have to increase if you are using some compression, you still need to work and decrease your TTFB either way, that is just intuition. I apologize if I made it seem that TTFB is to be ignored, because Cloudflare state's that quite boldly,

Again some things that affect TTFB:

1. Move your website to a faster/better server (If an option)
2. Use a CDN or something similar to reduce the load on the server (repeated requests to a server will increase the TTFB)
3. Reduce the time the server spends processing the request for information (sent above) and more here: http://stackoverflow.com/questions/10938682/how-to-reduce-server-wait-time

1. Not critical but helps and gets a message across much better visually.

2. Speaking of visually and what to tag, this infographic gives you a general start of what to tag: http://moz.com/blog/a-visual-guide-to-rich-snippets

3. Rel=author is one type out of many ways to add rich snippets described in schema.org.  Used to show in SERPs the author of the article.

Hope this helps

Great reminder Ricky, if you are getting paid, then disclose and no-follow. Thanks Ricky

Databases?  Optimize any database queries that are slow This should help: http://www.techfounder.net/2011/03/25/database-profiling-and-optimizing-your-database-the-generic-version/

Now before you pass anything over to the IT this issue is a heated one in some cases where you have people saying that TTFB is not might not be the key metric to go after, here is more food for thought:

http://blog.cloudflare.com/ttfb-time-to-first-byte-considered-meaningles

"At CloudFlare we make extensive use of nginx and while investigating TTFB came across a significant difference in TTFB from nginx when compression is or is not used. Gzip compression of web pages greatly reduces the time it takes a web page to download, but the compression itself has a cost. That cost causes TTFB to be greater even though the complete download is quicker."

I've seen this personally happen to me, and my guess it is something on Google's side as they are trying to fiddle around with what information best to display from your site to SERPs. I'd love to hear others experience with this as well.

Hi Dana,

Yes TTFB is something you can control with the type of server you use. And where that server is in relation to your visitors. You cannot control the browsers they use, but hear are some thoughts on possible optimizations:

Server side: http://createdevelop.blog.com/2010/10/12/how-to-reduce-time-to-first-byte/

Location (plus other suggestions): http://msdn.microsoft.com/en-us/magazine/dd188562.aspx

Hi Oomdo

For local seo, your citations aka your NAP in youtube description goes a long way because in local seo world it works as a link

If you need more info Dana DiTomaso did a great post on earlier this year: http://moz.com/blog/you-asked-i-answered-qa-from-you-probably-think-this-citation-source-is-about-you-dont-you

**3. Couldn't citations on sites such as YouTube and Flickr be flagged as spam?**Only if you're being spammy in your citation building. If the photo or video could contain a relevant address, I don't see an issue. For example, if the photo or video was taken at your business, then you're just saying (with a full NAP) where the photo or video was taken! I can't see how that would be considered spam - it's relevant information for the visitor.

I agree with Dana that somethings will look spammy but your NAP in cases like a youtube video should not.

Hope this helps