Does Tier linking that's currently effective and soon may be penalized and discovered later by the big G?

The cost of SEO depends a great deal on three things: 1) The specific services being offered (SEO, social media, content strategy, etc.) 2) The degree in which those services will be implemented (how many hours per month) 3) the skill and experience level of the SEOs involved. $800/month is a pretty small investment if you consider all the layers to making a web marketing campaign successful. My company will usually not touch any fully-managed web marketing campaign for less than $1500/month and that's at the low end of the aggressiveness meter even for a pretty basic site. A larger ecommerce site might start around $5K and go up from there. Overall, you want to look for value and results. You'll want to know how long the SEO has been in business and when looking at proposals you need to understand the amount of time the company will be investing in the campaign. You also want to spell out your goals and establish the expectations on how/when those goals will be achieved. When the SEO and client don't have the same expectations, that can lead to issues later on. But if you know what the goals are you can both be on the same page from the start.

Hi, Your site is a Q&A so I presume that every time someone create a new Question it will generate a unique URL for that. Indepentend if you have or not an answer you want Google to crawl and index your site as quick as possible to start to analyzing the new page and bring traffic to it. The best way to expedite this "re-crawling" is to use a ping service that you can trigger after your user answer the question. PS: If you site is updated frequently you shouldn't have a problem with crawling, because Google usually identify this type of website really quick. Drop me a call is free for this week. Best,

TL;DR -> Yes you will risk it if you don't perform a proper audit and migration from the original platform. Any type of architecture changes can 100% ruin your SEO if you are not migrating content and topics correctly. Many people assume this is limited to URI structure but underestimate the power of Topical hierarchy and the content, internal linking and URI structure which play a crucial role into any migration effort. If you have any questions about the migration process, give me a shout. Decent free migration checklist: https://searchengineland.com/site-migration-seo-checklist-dont-lose-traffic-286880

Neither domain name option is a very good idea. I'll explain why in a second, but first I'll answer your actual question. Although there might arguably be some slight advantage in having an exact-match domain of the form Name.TLD as opposed to a domain with additional keywords alongside the name, that advantage is probably negligible. Google algorithm updates, as I understand them, withhold that exact-match-domain advantage until a website has many other reinforcing signals of authority. (Their goal has been to downgrade spammy, low-quality websites.) Whichever domain version you might choose, Google will find the brand name CUJO mentioned all over your actual website and in the referring links. Those signals will be plenty for search engines to pick up on and hence plenty for SEO, and I'd expect them to overshadow the tiny difference between the 2 domains. Your choice shouldn't be based on SEO. Stop trying to please search engines, and start paying attention to your actual human audience. Really, your decision ought to be made based on the memorability and first impression of the domains. Is the extra keyword in .COM better than a name without that extra keyword in .IO? For humans, that is. Either way, you'll run into competition from CUJO.com. And that's a potential problem. Another problem would be pronunciation ambiguity. Spanish and English speakers will see the name very differently, based on that "J". Spelling isn't altogether clear either – Koojo, Kujo, Coojo, Cujo? The main problem I see, however, is that Cujo is a murderous dog in a Stephen King novel. Since most searches for Cujo will aim at that meaning, your site will be perceived by Google as usually irrelevant in comparison with searchers' intentions. And that doesn't help SEO.

Google's official stance is that they are "roughly equivalent" and recommends to do what is technically simpler to implement (source: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_MswMYk05tk). With that said, I'd recommend a directory over a subdomain. Doing this consolidates signals to a single domain, which should then theoretically build more authority for all pages off of that single domain. This consolidation of authority results in rank increases, which have been documented here: http://moz.com/community/q/moz-s-official-stance-on-subdomain-vs-subfolder-does-it-need-updating. A subdomain would split signals from the blog and the rest of the root domain content. So while Google "says" they're roughly equivalent, SEOs have seen tangible evidence that sticking to a single domain can be beneficial. If you're able to go with www.iconery.com/editorial/, I'd choose that. Hope this helps!