|
it's done quite often (look at the bottom of this page for a _link_ to Google Home, which has less to do with newsgroups than one _frame_ site _link_ing to another) so it's not always a bad sign or signal, where people get in trouble is when they have a list of 15 sites in the footer that they own from car insurance to cat collars all unrelated except in the one binding fact that the owner is trying to get _link_s. What I would consider is consolidating them however, it's tough enough to get one brand and site ranking now adays, perhaps the two combined would be more powerful than the two seperate. If the other one has it's own value and _link_s consolidating them together may make the whole be greater than the sum of their parts. To me as a consumer how the _frame_ is personalized be it with a laser or by somebody with a paint brush is much less important than the fact that the _frame_ is personalized. If you walked into walmart looking for personalized _frame_s (I realize they don't have them) you'd see the painted ones on the same shelf as the laser engraved ones, they wouldn't seperate them into different aisles much less different stores. If both sites are going after the same people, those looking for personalized _frame_s, then I'd combine them rather than inter_link_ them, it could help increase conversions as well, which is far more important than what Google thinks. But this is all being said without looking at your other site, so take it with a grain of salt. That being said, if you do combine them that would be tricky process that I'd plan ahead for. Move the content from one site to the other in small stages at first, get those pages indexed, then 301 redirect from the old to the new. If that works well, move another section. On Apr 29, 1:33 pm, 1st_frame_ wrote: Another great idea, thank you. I'll make the change. If I may ask... We had a _link_ at the bottom of the page (since removed) to one of our websites that offers personalized _frame_s but not laser engraved _frame_s like we offer on 1st_frame_. The reason we created the other site was to avoide consumer confusion on 1st_frame_.com. In your opinion, is it a bad idea to include an image and/or _link_ to other personalized _frame_s on a different site? Again, many thanks for your input. Dean On Apr 29, 2:25 pm, JLH wrote: I think it looks better, much easier to read and navigate. You could add the phrase back into the header for the column, _frame_ Layout Ideas , as that would be good form, here's a list of Personalized Picture _frame_ Ideas followed by a list of picture _frame_ ideas. On Apr 29, 1:15 pm, 1st_frame_ wrote: JLH: I only counted 299. - All kidding aside... I removed every picture _frame_ and photo _frame_ string from the navigation bar. (Except one or two only because it better describes the product.) Even if that was not what got us into trouble with Google, the site now looks roughly 99.99% better. Thanks for the heads-up JLH. Regardless of rank, the look is significantly more user friendly. Dean On Apr 29, 1:36 pm, JLH wrote: My first impression is that the _link_ bar on the left looks like spam with the terms picture _frame_s and photo _frame_s repeated 300 times. That surely isn't for your users but rather for search engines, you wouldn't see ebay with a their list of categories with online auctions tacked onto the end. On Apr 29, 9:43 am, 1st_frame_ wrote: I am writing in regards to our website, 1st_frame_.com. As of Monday, we no longer appear in Google's search results for our single most important keyword phrase. The keyword phrase is personalized picture _frame_s. And that is all we do at 1st_frame_.com. Until Monday, we have always ranked 1st, 2nd or 3rd for the last eleven years. If we have done something that has violated Google's Terms of Service, we apologize and will correct the problem immediately. Any guidance anyone could offer would be greatly appreciated. Thank you everyone for your time and consideration.www.1st_frame_.com-Hidequotedtext- - Show quoted text
|