OT: Google link?

OT: Google link?



Ok now I'm gonna have to have a drink.....

Just took out the robots.txt edit till I get this figured out.

Where should we 301 redirect all the old pages???
Simply to the SFNT ?
Or maybe to a special static page that explains that was an old page
and suggest the hit the Search page or the Storefront and provide them
the links ??

What would we all do without this group...

Thanks,
-Barrett
http://handmade-paper.us
Hosted by Hostasaurus.com (MM v4.20 OUI)
ShipWorks by Interapptive.com




On Tuesday, May 17, 2005, at 06:15 PM, Kelly XR wrote:

> Why don't you also do a rewrite rule to directly anything from /home/
> to your new storefront?
> That would update any bots (ones that respect 301s anyway) like
> googlebot. And means that links listed that way won't just be thrown
> away by the search engine... they'll be updated to the new location.
>
> RewriteRule ^/home/$ http://yourdomain/ [NC,R=301,L]
>
> Maybe even send them to your sitemap! If it's a spider... that would
> help it index your new pages.
> RewriteRule ^/home/$ http://yourdomain/sitemap.html [NC,R=301,L]
>
> FYI
> NC means no case (upper lower case of the url doesn't matter)
> R=301 means permanently redirect this link to the new one I'm giving
> you.
> L means stop right here... quit htaccess... don't do anything else.
> If you need more stuff done to the url you just rewrote.. then leave
> off the L
>
> I think it's a good idea to head off trouble. But can I suggest you
> rewrite those urls instead of banning them via the robots file.
> You've got the urls in the serch engine... just to notify the bot to
> dump them ... not allow them... seems like wasting gold being handed
> to you.
> Instead 'correct' those sek results and permanently redirect them to
> the ones you want listed in teh search engine.
> That way also anyone who has those old links to you (that get followed
> by the spiders) will still be of value for inbound links (and will
> help the spiders update their search engines at the same time).
>
> I feel that just blocking those older urls... is like cutting off your
> nose in spite of your face... we fight for rankings and work so hard
> to get them..
> any inbound link to our sites is a treasure... a potentential revenue
> source... use them to improve your rankings instead. Tell the bots
> what they should have instead.
>
> rewrite rules can be really confusing and a pain in the butt to figure
> out... but they really are our friends in situations like this.

>
> Kelly
>
>
> Barrett wrote:
>
>> Ok folks after digesting this thread best I can and applying to our
>> situation
>> the first step I've taken to head off trouble (omg I hope I'm not
>> breaking the if it works don't fix it rule !!!)
>>
>> Added to the robots.txt
>>
>> User-agent: googlebot
>> Disallow: /home/
>>
>> this directory was to our old sek based site
>>
>> I did a queery at google and that showed 6,000 plus from that old
>> site and I was thinking oh gosh this is scary, but then
>> queried for url string to indicate the real site now with SFL
>> directory styles
>> that returned 24,600 results
>>
>> For probably a couple years now we had not linked from the dynamic
>> site to /home/ in any manner
>> The old /home/ was only there to not give a 404 to people hitting
>> links still indexed with the engines and most of those pages were
>> hacked up and had a great big proceed to the new site link on them.
>>
>> Our site map only includes SFL links.
>> Afaik all cats and prods for the site are all SFL directory style.
>> .htaccess at the root has the SFL rewrite strings
>> domain root pulls index.mvc and loads the SFNT with all prods and
>> cats as SFL
>>
>> How does this sound so far ?
>>
>> Thanks,
>> -Barrett
>> http://handmade-paper.us
>> Hosted by Hostasaurus.com (MM v4.20 OUI)
>> ShipWorks by Interapptive.com
>>
>>
>> On Tuesday, May 17, 2005, at 10:10 AM, Julie Thompson wrote:
>>
>>> Jason, I know you mentioned you were unsure if blocking the
>>> /Merchant2/ folder (or in my case, the /miva/ folder) would or
>>> wouldn't effect SFL's, but do you know where I (and I am sure many
>>> others reading this thread) can find out for sure? I don't want to
>>> open a $99.00 support ticket for this with MIVA ;-) And nor do I
>>> willy-nilly want to block the /miva/ folder only to find that all my
>>> SFL were blocked too.
>>>
>>> What I am wondering is if all the links in my store are just like
>>> this one:
>>>
>>> <A HREF ="http://www.ultimate-weight-products.com/page/UN/PROD/AN/AB-001">http://www.ultimate-weight-products.com/page/UN/PROD/AN/AB-001</A>
>>>
>>> Would blocking the /miva/ folder block the dynamic ones, like this
>>> one below, but not the SFL above (even though technically the SFL
>>> above is located in the /miva/ folder)?
>>>
>>> <A HREF ="http://www.ultimate-weight-products.com/miva/ ">http://www.ultimate-weight-products.com/miva/ </A>
>>> merchant.mvc?Screen=PROD&Product_Code=AB-001
>>>
>>> Julie <---- who is waiting for plane ticket prices to come down to
>>> confirm attending the Dallas Conference.... PHX to D/FW is $400!
>>>
>>> Jason Henderson wrote:
>>>
>>>> Same thing. There will be what "appears" to be two different pages
>>>> with the
>>>> exact same content. Banning /Merchant2/ directory "should" not
>>>> affect
>>>> rewritten urls via .htaccess such as SFL but don't quote me on that.
>>>> Jason
>>>>
>>>>> I tried to follow the entire thread and didn't see this asked. If
>>>>> so, I
>>>>> apologize. What happens if your site has both SFL and normal
>>>>> links to the
>>>>> same page? Will this cause issues?
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> Paul
>>>>
>>>
>>
>>
>
>

OT: Google link?



Hi Linda,

To diagnose what is going on with your PPC campaigns by proxy without
really analyzing and comparing your stats is virtually impossible.
Unfortunately only you can compare your store's referral stats with your
Adwords stats and try and glean some sort of pattern that has changed
from when your PPC campaigns were working. That would be a good place
to start.

Adwords and organic listings in Google are completely separate.
Rankings in one are not contingent on another. You may have just been
outbidded. Or as Barrett mentioned, your Adwords competitors may be
bidding lower but their CTR % are higher. Revise your ads and see if
this improves your CTR. The idea is to write a compelling ad, that not
only entices visitors to click your ad, but to stay and purchase what
you are advertising. Plus, refining your keywords, purging keywords
that do not convert, and ensuring that when they click through to your
site you are bringing them to a page that is relevant to your ad. Some
advertisers even create pages solely for their Adwords campaigns,
offering the PPC visitor something that entices them to convert them to
customers.

Lastly, your experience is exactly why I use QwkTracker. I never have
to 'guess' on how my advertising campaign(s) are doing. I can, at a
click of a button, compare my click throughs in my store with the
Adwords/Overture stats and make sure the hits match. The $350ish that
QwkTracker costs was one of the best investments I have ever made in my
store. I have been able to refine my PPC campaigns to the point where I
spend less money to bring more customers. Because I can see which
keywords, ads, landing pages, etc. work and which don't. QwkTracker
probably paid for itself in the first month of usage :-)

I hope this helps.

Julie

Linda Katz wrote:
> Thanks Barret but that's not it at all. It's been working fine for 2 years
> and hasn't run out of money. It's showing as active (not dropped) but with
> no activity- where as up to now it always hit my limit. It just DISAPPEARED
> for ALL keywords. The diagnostic tool shows nothing disallowed and nothing
> wrong.
>
> It's probably a coincidence- but having it dropped at the same time as my
> storemap links suddenly disppeared made me think something screwy might have
> happened to other users too... I hope it is just a server glitch. I wrote to
> Google- they didn't respond yet. It's awfully scary though...
>
>
>>Speaking on your Paid Adwords -
>>Your ads performance are naturally related to how much you bid for
>>position, BUT also if your ad is not as popular on click thru as one
>>that may not be bidding as much as yourself, they will show up higher
>>on the page. I would take a real hard look at what you are targeting
>>and what key words or phrases you are using to trigger the ad. Afaik
>>know - not a fact - only heard through the grapevine, if you are too
>>haphazard about keywords for your ad and you do get high click thru's
>>but the shopper doesn't find what they want and then click back right
>>away; somehow google figures this out and sees the result as not
>>relevant in that it was quickly determined to be a waste of time...hope
>>that makes some sense.
>>One real basic example that some overlook with the adwords - say you
>>were Acme Widgets and have an ad for Super Gold Plated Widgets and on
>>click the ad runs them to your storefront, big mistake - you should
>>instead land them on the Gold Plated Widgets page.
>>________________________________________________ ________________________
>>__
>>What type of links did your store map have ?
>>Should have had SFL directory style along with your whole store.
>
>
> I set them to directory style (not the one with "session appended")
> yesterday when Jason told everyone to. But they look the same as before- and
> so does the storemap once regenerated. I do not know what else can be done-
> there's only 3 configurable choices. ???
>
> I plan to match my html pages (non Merchant static doorway and info pages)
> with the same style links- but with so many posts showing so many formats, I
> still am not sure how they should look. Can you send a good example?
>
> And I'm still not sure if all the other dozens of mods we have need to be
> checked - to see if the links they create will match-- or if SFL takes care
> of the entire store??
>
>>The main moral with dynamic SFL or static html links and pages is to
>>use one or the other and stick with it.
>>If you have a site that is getting hammered by the spiders and traffic
>>to where it is a problem; using the static pages is the key for server
>>performance and in that case you block the spider from /Merchant2/
>>directory via the robots.txt file to prevent the illusion to the spider
>>of duplicate content and plowing thru and calling dynamic pages.
>
>
> I understood that- and thanks for taking the time to be so clear- but I see
> little choice. I need the doorway pages because I have to constantly change
> my site and I need the html pages for flexibility I can't get in Miva-
> probably even if I had serious proficiency with tokens, which I totally
> don't.
>
> Using just dynamic links is not a viable choice. I can see from what has
> happened now- where all I have are the dynamic links- that they are too far
> removed from index to get decent rankings. I was on page 1 or 2 with
> storemap pages- now I am buried.
>
>>________________________________________________ ________________________
>>____
>>
>>Being that the root of this new dilemma is related to duplicate content
>>and server performance or load - my gut tells me that the static html
>>solution has merit, but then that flys in the face of the whole reason
>>sites are built with database driven backends and create pages on call
>>in the first place. Now because a spider is going to load a server or
>>because someone can get so much traffic that the dynamic generated site
>>and server can't handle it we have to revert back to static page
>>management....??? This being such great solution; then why hasn't all
>>the great engineers at Miva built the new templated mouse trap to
>>conveniently and accurately produce and manage a site run in html ???
>>That would seem to me logical if the move to static pages for high load
>>site is totally sound. What then are the big players like umm Compusa,
>>HomeDepot, BestBuy, Lowes, Costco, Ciruitcity and so on running ??? I'm
>>sure it ain't static sites - oh yes don't even start with me about
>>zillion dollar budgets - just want to understand the mechanics....
>>I did hear that ebay runs separate and mirrored servers for each
>>individual category browsed so as soon as you hit a category you go to
>>that server and even if it choked you'd never know because it's twin
>>picks up the ball... Wowser (my neighbor works for a big time company
>>involved with that stuff and he said Miva ????..sorry come again...)
>
>
> That's why I said I'm thinking of giving up on Miva- though once invested it
> is awfully hard to throw all that effort away. I'm too small to ever worry
> about server overload from the spiders (and I also have Hostasaurus)- but
> Miva dynamic links are basically worthless. None of the other merchant carts
> seem to have these issues. Tiny foreign stores with no content are now
> filling up Googles top rankings for my keywords and I don't exist. Thank
> goodness for repeat customers... and though I never thought I'd say it- for
> Overture.
>
> Linda Katz
> www.israeliproducts.com
>
>>Thanks,
>>-Barrett
>>http://handmade-paper.us
>>Hosted by Hostasaurus.com (MM v4.20 OUI)
>>ShipWorks by Interapptive.com

OT: Google link?



linda wrote:
>
> 3. A site map seems very important ( I have a lame one on site now,
> that I did freebie on the net, but it only did static pages) .. so could
> I use Swap Link from Bill Weiland, for the site map... but since I
> already have Static Catalog Generator, do they duplicate stuff, or
> cancel each other or what?
>
> So which is it by popular opinion (a.), (b.) or (c.) I am leaning
> towards (c.), but is that overkill? and is there one module out there
> that will do all that?

It appears that google's new philosophy is that overkill will kill your
site. Apparently they do not want two different urls with the same
content. So if you use static pages, you might want to limit them to a
bit different content and pointers to your merchant.mvc product pages OR
use them instead of the merchant.mvc pages. With the speed of MM5, no
need to take time to generate static pages to improve performance. But
since this is the MM4 list, I won't continue on that subject.

As example of static pages, you could have a catalog of categories or
alphabetized links all pointing to the merchant.mvc product pages. You
could have a briefer format using sitelink (sitemap) page(s) to have a
link to each category and product. The key is that those links should
be the SAME as the links you see in your merchant.mvc. So a static page
link like
<A HREF ="http://www.emporiumplus.com/go/wcw/PROD/1AAG/1AA00001">http://www.emporiumplus.com/go/wcw/PROD/1AAG/1AA00001</A>
needs to be the same that the merchant.mvc is using. The .htaccess
re-write can accomplish this along with a module in your merchant.mvc
That said, it is not clear to me how google is going to handle two
different urls going to the same product page when the product is in
multiple categories. The url is going to be different for each instance
of that product depending on the category code.

--
Bill Weiland A2Z Emporium Plus <A HREF ="http://www.emporiumplus.com/store.mvc ">http://www.emporiumplus.com/store.mvc </A>
Modules for eCommerce. Mail Mgr, Coupon, PayPal, Froogle/Yahoo feeds
Rate This, Gift/Wish List, Wait List Mgr, EZ Batch, Shipping & more
Online Documentation <A HREF ="http://www.emporiumplus.com/docs">http://www.emporiumplus.com/docs</A>
Question <A HREF ="http://www.emporiumplus.com/mivamodule_wcw.mvc?Screen=SPTS ">http://www.emporiumplus.com/mivamodu...vc?Screen=SPTS </A>
|

OT: Google link?



Hi, I'm using miva on a domain hosted on Interland. The problem is that I
need to implement the CVV code for credit card processing. Now I don't see
that option and the Interland support team asked me to vrite to a miva
techincian to know if it is possible to implement it.

So the question is: can I buy a module that implements CVV and install it o=
n
the interland miva server?

Thanks, to all.

--=20
Gianluca Romito
Go Online WEB Limited
Via Roma, 52
37060 Castel d'Azzano (VR)
ITALY

Web go-online.it
email [email protected]=20

Need some relax, beauty and well-being products? Look at
www.beautywell-being.com

OT: Plane Fares to Dallas for MIVA Conference (was: Re: OT: Google link?)



IF you want to know for sure what pages are the merchant ones you can
use this search on google...
allinurl: mydomain.com merchant.mvc
Don't put in the www. part of your url just the domainname.com part.
You can do this for any links you want to find even name value pairs... like
allinurl: mydomain.com screen=

Kelly


linda wrote:

> Trying to follow all this stuff and I think I understand the issue. I
> have done some investigating on my site...
>
> I googled a generic costume phrase "plus size gypsy costume" to see
> which and where my static catalog page occured.
> It had picked up the static catalog page and then the static product
> page that was linked from the catalog page. (did others and they all
> landed at 33 and 34 respectively in Google, not sure what that means?)
>
> Google - 33rd item listing out of 59,400 or so listings. (not terrific
> but should get better as I get more incoming links)
> Netscape - same place as Google
> Yahoo - 2nd item out of an unknown amount of listings
> MSN - 15th out of unknown total
>
> I am fairly certain that Google has picked up the product pages from
> the miva merchant (since it does say they have 500 plus pages from my
> site, and I only offer 35 products), but they are so far back that
> going through 28 pages on Google did not produce one miva product
> listing for any of the generic items I had on my static catalog. I
> doubt that anyone is going to cruise through anything more than maybe
> 10 pages to find what they want..
>
> So it is obvious for me, that the static catalog page is the way to
> go, but you don't want duplicates or you get penalized...
> Here are my questions...
>
> Instead of having the static catalog listing point to a seperate
> static product page, I have changed it to point to the actual miva
> product page. Since they are picking up the catalog page first
> anyway, then linking it directly into the Miva product page should
> work, right? And since I have deleted the static product pages, do I
> need to do an htaccess redirect for those pages I deleted just in case?
>
> Thanks for all the tremendous help the "techies" and other users
> contribute to this list...
>

OT: Plane Fares to Dallas for MIVA Conference (was: Re: OT: Google link?)



Consistent syntax of your urls.
In the case of SFL using the directory style type like.
http://domain.com//page/store_code/CTGY/cat_code
Barrett

On Wednesday, May 18, 2005, at 02:25 PM, linda wrote:

>
>
> Barrett wrote:
>
>> Main thing to get out of all the excitement is:
>>
>> Stick with directing the SE's to static or dynamic pages not both.
>> Use robots.txt to control this.
>
> Ok...
>
>> Your site map at one jump off your index or SFNT page should use the
>> same link style method as the rest of your site.
>> .htaccess rewrites are how to control the link style.
>> We just happen to use SFL directory style that evolved out of the
>> issue where the SE's including google could not or would not spider
>> dynamic urls in the past. Also they are more human friendly for send
>> links in email for example.
>
> Dumb question number gazillion....what do you mean by "link style
> method"? :)
>
> And thank you for the reply.
>
> --
> Linda T
> www.corsetsandcostumes.com
>
>

OT: Plane Fares to Dallas for MIVA Conference (was: Re:



Yeah, I'm a real line stopper, my 10 pound laptop gets it's own bin, then
the camera and cell phone in another bin, shoes, sweater, laptop bag,
purse in another bin but don't blame me if you are late...I get there two
hours ahead just for the security checks.

Leslie <---who will be heading through LaGuardia this week

> Oh and don't forget they are sure to check the pilots out and make them
> take their blazers off and are sure to not let them put that coat over
> top of that laptop and when they are being extra careful are sure to
> not let that cell phone in there with the friggin laptop.........I
> better quit this
> Bedtime.
>
> Barrett
> On Tuesday, May 17, 2005, at 11:40 PM, Chuck Lasker - DoublePlus wrote:
>
>> And people don't differentiate between taxes and regular ticket price.
>> So,
>> effectively the government is pulling 25% of the perceived ticket
>> price for
>> "security." It's straight out of airline funds. It's no wonder the
>> airlines
>> are going bankrupt one by one. But boy don't we all feel so much safer
>> on
>> the plane knowing they scanned our shoes, kept our fingernail clippers
>> and
>> they kept old 60s singers from landing in the US? Worth every penny.
>>
>> Chuck
>>