Welcome to the Q&A Forum

Many thanks, Donna. I'm seeing things completely different to you. Screwfix does use both variations on-page (METAs and content). They also rank #1 for both variations. Strange! I am searching from the UK, but the ranking Screwfix pages should be the same regardless. Lee

Hello, I have also been in a similar situation. What I did was to disallow the urls with parameters using the robots.txt and place (in only the pages with parameters) the following two html tags: This will expressly indicate to google not to index these pages. I still have some errors but I guess they will disappear in a few months. Regards

Google wants us to believe they are presenting results based on intent and not keywords. In adwords google doesn´t even let us target singulars and plurals directly anymore and keyword search data is presented equal for both. In practice i see however that a lot is still based on keywords, your example is one of them. I think both have a similiar, if not same intent, so creating seperate pages doesn´t make sense in my opinion, we usually try to use these variations in the page content as some pages are able to rank for both.

Many thanks Gianluca, think I was looking at it too technically yesterday.. got blind to it! Think I've sorted it now! Really appreciate the help, Lee.

That's great, many thanks Emanuele. Glad to hear that our suggeston of a 'folder' strategy is the best way forward, but as you say there are pros and cons for each solution. In my opinion, hosting a website 'locally' (i.e. German host for a .de site, US host for .us site) is better from a rankings perspective. I feel that this is not as important as it once was, but it still helps. Would you agree? Thanks again, much appreciated. Lee

Thanks, Tawny. I'll email them now

Nope, still not working! Quite a pain to be honest.

Many thanks for this, Andy.. appreciated. The site is; http://bit.ly/1PqGTbS I look forward to your response, Lee.

Many thanks for the feedback, Miriam. hope all's well. You make a lot of sense.. my train of thought though is that if you do have varied unique, optimised descriptions you have more chance of a number of different directory profiles ranking in Google for related searches, therefore increasing your 'third-party' search visibility. Wouldn't Google only rank one of your directory profiles if the content (description) is duplicated? Thanks again, Lee.

That's the answer I was hoping for, thanks Tom!

Thanks Lee.  

Thanks for this Jane, good to know that we're doing it right.. am still a little unsure why the metrics are identical but as you say it's better to be safe than sorry

Thanks Rand.. have just re-read this response and I totally agree with the SEO tactics you have mentioned.. but in my opinion you are assuming that the client has an endless budget for SEO. Unfortunately this isn’t the case for a lot of ‘smaller’ clients, they have limited budgets in comparison to their nationwide ‘bigger’ competitors.. Creating videos isn’t cheap, hosting events isn’t cheap etc.. Google favours big brands who have the resources to make them happy.. it’s a lose lose situation for smaller companies.. how can they compete?

If you're saying that each ebook landing page lives on your root domain then that's definitely better. I thought as you were using Unbounce for the landing pages that they would be on a subdomain.

Thanks Martin, not 301'd the pages before so it's still a mystery why this has happened! They're not new pages, been around for years without this problem! We're aware of the underscore issue, this is how we found the URL's when we took over SEO, as the pages are ranking well I feel it best to leave as is. Thanks again, Lee

Sounds good Tom.

Many thanks Pete, will see what we can do and take action. Appreciate the advice

Many thanks Ryan, that explains a lot!