luni, 28 noiembrie 2011

Mish's Global Economic Trend Analysis

Mish's Global Economic Trend Analysis

Ron Paul on a Return to the Gold Standard (When and How); The Dangerous Competing Idea for the IMF to Create the Standard for International Money

Posted: 28 Nov 2011 11:28 PM PST

In the following interview video on Fox News, Ron Paul explains his plan for monetary freedom and a return to a gold standard. Paul also addresses a dangerous competing idea for the IMF take over control of setting international monetary standards. Finally, Paul explains how he has been temporarily stymied on his plan for a full and complete Fed audit.



URL if Video does not play: Ron Paul's Plan for Monetary Freedom

Introduction and questions by Judge Andrew Napolitano, senior judicial analyst for Fox News.

Transcript

Judge Napolitano:
Here is a man who has single-handedly educated the nation to the evils of worthless money and to the dangers of a central bank with a printing press, and who continues to believe that fighting for economic liberties is just as important as fighting for civil liberties.

Who else but Texas Republican Congressman and Republican presidential hopeful, Ron Paul.

Congressman Paul, always a pleasure. Welcome to this special edition of "Freedom Watch" on money.

Ron Paul:
Thank you very much.

Judge Napolitano: 
 What would happen in a Ron Paul presidency if we were to return to a gold standard. How soon could this happen and how would it happen?

Ron Paul:
I wish we could do this overnight and we could do a few things like repealing the executive order of Nixon but that in and of itself wouldn't be enough.

We know what to do. We did it once after the Civil War. We went from a paper standard back to a gold standard, and the event was not that dramatic. Today the big problem is both the conservatives and the liberals have a big appetite for big government for different reasons. Therefore they need the Fed to tide them over and monetize the debt.

So if you do not get rid of that appetite, it's going to be more difficult. But the transition is not that difficult. You have to get your house in order, you have to balance the budget, you have to not run up  debt, and you have to promise to not print any more money.

That's what they did after the Civil War and it was accepted and we went right back to the gold standard.

I would like to have a transition period. Just legalize gold money, and allow us to use gold and silver as legal tender. And we can work our way back.

Judge Napolitano:
I have to agree with you, but I would even go a step further and say, if gold and silver became currency, that would drive paper money out. Who would want the paper money when you have real gold and real silver out there?

Ron Paul:
If there was a fixed exchange rate, sure, we would never pay our bills off with gold. We would pay it off with paper because it drives the good money out of circulation. But if you want a checking account and you want to deal with gold, you put your money in, you could buy and sell in gold and save in gold, so it would be parallel rather than having a fixed exchange rate between the two.

If you tried to fix the exchange rate it would not work.

Judge Napolitano:
Is this a Pipe Dream or might you and I at some time in the near future, actually be able to show up at the gold window, the one Nixon closed in 1971, and receive from that person the equivalent fair market value of actual gold or actual silver? Might that happen?

Ron Paul:
Well it might, but you would have to be completely on the gold standard. But that's not on the near horizon.

What we want to do is legalize the use of gold and silver as the constitution dictates rather then punishing the people who try to do that.

But yes, it will come about. I am quite convinced the system we have here will not be maintained and that's what these last four years are all about, and that's what the turmoil in Europe is all about.

So the question is: Are we going to move towards constitutional form of money or are we going to go another step further into international money? Instead of having an international gold standard based on the market, will we go towards a UN, IMF standard, where they are going to control with the use of force, another fiat standard?

That's what many people are working for. I consider that a very, very dangerous move.

Judge Napolitano:
The last time you proposed the Federal Reserve should be audited, you had more than half of the House of Representative agree with the proposal, and it passed overwhelmingly. Even some of your polar opposites ideologically were agreeing with you. Where does it stand in this Congress, this time around? Are we going to get a real serious, true audit of the Federal Reserve because everybody (liberals, conservatives, Democrats, Republicans, Libertarians, progressives) have had enough.

Ron Paul:
I wish I could tell you we are better off now since we [Republicans] are in charge of the House, but unfortunately we are not moving. Sometimes these things are done in a partisan manner.

Where these bills to audit the Fed used to come through the domestic monetary policy subcommittee, of which I am the chairman, has no longer directed to that committee, it has been sent over to Government Oversight. So I have been hamstring to a degree, on actually pushing that type of legislation. That means their heart is not in it, and that means we need a lot more work from the people to put pressure on members of Congress.

That's why we did get so far last time, because we mobilized the people and they were telling their member of Congress, you better support the position of auditing the Fed, but right now there is a lot more talk about the "super-committee" and how they are going to mess around with the budget under pretense they are going to cut. That is dominating the news.

Judge Napolitano:
When you and I first met, which was a long time ago, you may have been the only member of Congress talking about auditing the Fed. But am I hearing you say, congressman Paul, that their might actually be more resistance from Republicans, particularly the Republican leadership in the House of Representatives, than anybody else to this vital piece of legislation, to reveal secrets that everybody has a right to know?

Ron Paul: 
I don't have concrete evidence. I haven't had a statement, but I do know that I could have had more jurisdiction than I have now. I've had it in the past, and committees have always had it in the past, but its gone in a different direction this time. I think that when push comes to shove, there are people at the leadership of both Republicans and Democratic parties have too much at stake to mess around with the Federal Reserve unless there's a political gamesmanship play in there and they can gain some politics out of it.

END Transcript

Please also consider ...


If you want change, and polls suggest you do, there is precisely one candidate who will give you the change this country desperately needs. That person is Ron Paul.


Mike "Mish" Shedlock
http://globaleconomicanalysis.blogspot.com
Click Here To Scroll Thru My Recent Post List
Mike "Mish" Shedlock is a registered investment advisor representative for SitkaPacific Capital Management. Sitka Pacific is an asset management firm whose goal is strong performance and low volatility, regardless of market direction. Visit http://www.sitkapacific.com/account_management.html to learn more about wealth management and capital preservation strategies of Sitka Pacific.

Some Failed Institutions Always Foreclose; The Reason: FDIC Sponsored Fraud; Who Benefits: George Soros, Michael Dell; John Paulson; Boycott Dell

Posted: 28 Nov 2011 07:09 PM PST

A couple of readers asked me to comment on the Sun Sentinel article Are loss-share lenders gouging us?
November 27, 2011

In the wake of the recent real-estate meltdown, the borrower of a nonperforming loan called his lender with promising news: "I have a buyer looking to make an all-cash offer for my Florida property. Will you meet with us tomorrow?" The lender's answer: "No."

Disturbingly, this implausible response is not uncharacteristic of lenders who exploit FDIC loss-share agreements by seeking to foreclose on nonperforming loans, even when prudent business judgment calls for short sale or loan modification solutions. By perverting the terms and spirit of loss-share agreements, these lenders are reaping windfalls while prolonging the foreclosure crisis, depressing real-estate values and sticking taxpayers with the bill.
FDIC Sponsored Fraud

Rather than comment directly, I asked Patrick Pulatie at LFI Analytics to chime in. Pulatie writes ....
I wrote an article about IndyMac and the Shared Loss Agreement (SLA) two years ago, before I quit working with most homeowners. Essentially, here is what is going on.

Shared Loss Agreements were executed by the FDIC with the banks that took over failed institutions. Some had the terms that the author describes. Others did not have the same terms, and were much more restrictive. The author is referring to the Shared Loss Agreements similar to OneWest Bank/IndyMac, which I wrote about.

The SLA for OneWest Bank worked in the following manner:

• It only applied to the Portfolio Loans being purchased. It did not apply to servicing rights. 1st Mortgage Loans were purchased for 70% of the original balance. Second Mortgage Loans were purchased at a much lower rate, at 55% or lower at times. I shall only mention First's from here on out, but Seconds apply as well.

IndyMac had a large portfolio of Neg Am loans, so the 70% purchase price of individual loans might be "lower" if the loan had accrued a Neg Am balance above the original loan amount. If there were a large number of 30 year fully amortized loans, then there might be a greater than 70% purchase price. There is no way to break down the proportion of each.

• The first 20% of losses on the "Total Portfolio" purchase would be absorbed by OneWest Bank. There would be no reimbursement on those losses.

• The next 10% of losses, up to 30%, are reimbursed at 80%. So to begin to make claims, the 20% level must be reached.

• From 30% on, the reimbursement rate is 95%. But the 30% loss level must be reached before the 95% can be claimed.

• The total purchase of Portfolio loans was approximately $12.5 billion, so a 20% loss would be $2.5 billion before claims could begin.

• If every single loan (first mortgage) had defaulted on the first day of purchase, and after reimbursement, the agreement, every $.70 spent would have resulted in $.778 being returned. Not bad! But that is not all.

Most of the loans were not in default. Therefore, interest would continue to be earned until the loan refinanced, or defaulted, so they were making a profit, and as their filings have shown, they made very good profits on these loans.
As you can see, it is always in the best interests of OneWest Bank to foreclose on defaulted properties. The sooner that the 20% loss is reached, then the quicker that they can make claims for reimbursement.

Has OneWest Bank reached the 20% threshold? That has not been announced. However, it has been 2.75 years since the Shared Loss Agreement went into effect in March 09. One would think that the 20% level has been reached.

In Feb 2010, a person I know claimed to have seen the paperwork on one loan showing that reimbursement had occurred on that loan. I did not see the paperwork, but since this person did the Good Bank/Bad Bank scenario for the FDIC in the early 90's, I have to accept that he knew what he was looking at.
Who Benefits: George Soros, Michael Dell, John Paulson

Pulatie referred to an article he wrote on December 1, 2009: Anatomy of a Government-Abetted Fraud: Why Indymac/OneWest Always Forecloses
OneWest Bank and its Sweetheart Deal

OneWest Bank was created on Mar 19, 2009 from the assets of Indymac Bank. It was created solely for the purpose of absorbing Indymac Bank. The principle owners of OneWest Bank include Michael Dell and George Soros. (George was a major supporter of Barack Obama and is also notorious for knocking the UK out of the Euro Exchange Rate Mechanism in 1992 by shorting the Pound).

When OneWest took over Indymac, the FDIC and OneWest executed a "Shared-Loss Agreement" covering the sale. This Agreement covered the terms of what the FDIC would reimburse OneWest for any losses from foreclosure on a property. It is at this point that the details get very confusing, so I shall try to simplify the terms. Some of the major details are:

  • OneWest would purchase all first mortgages at 70% of the current balance
  • OneWest would purchase Line of Equity Loans at 58% of the current balance.
  • In the event of foreclosure, the FDIC would cover from 80%-95% of losses, using the original loan amount, and not the current balance.

How does this translate to the "Real World"? Let us take a hypothetical situation. A homeowner has just lost his home in default. OneWest sells the property. Here are the details of the transaction:

  • The original loan amount was $500,000. Missed payments and other foreclosure costs bring the amount up to $550,000. At 70%, OneWest bought the loan for $385,000
  • The home is located in Stockton, CA, so its current value is likely about $185,000 and OneWest sells the home for that amount. Total loss for OneWest is $200,000. But this is not how FDIC determines the loss.
  • 'FDIC takes the $500,000 and subtracts the $185,000 Purchase Price. Total loss according to the FDIC is $315,000. If the FDIC is covering "ONLY" 80% of the loss, then the FDIC would reimburse OneWest to the tune of $252,000.
  • Add the $252,000 to the Purchase Price of $185,000, and you have One West recovering $437,000 for an "investment" of $385,000. Therefore, OneWest makes $52,000 in additional income above the actual Purchase Price loan amount after the FDIC reimbursement.

At this point, it becomes readily apparent why OneWest Bank has no intention of conducting loan modifications. Any modification means that OneWest would lose out on all this additional profit.
Meet IndyMac's New Owners

Flashback March 20, 2009: IndyMac Bank's new name: OneWest Bank
The sale of IndyMac Federal Bank was concluded Thursday, and the new owners wasted no time in ditching its tainted name. Starting today, IndyMac is OneWest Bank.

The Pasadena bank's new owners, organized under OneWest Bank Group, bought the bank's $20.7 billion in loans and other assets for $16 billion. That includes $9 billion in financing from the Federal Deposit Insurance Corp. and the Federal Home Loan Bank.

The ownership group is led by Steven Mnuchin of Dune Capital Management in New York. The bank's investors include J. Christopher Flowers, who has specialized in distressed bank purchases, and hedge fund operators George Soros and John Paulson.
Check out the last line and primary lie in the above article:

The management team has been working with the FDIC on a loan modification program to attempt to keep people in their homes.

OneWest bank profit: $1.6 billion

On February 20, 2010, the Los Angeles Times reported OneWest bank profit: $1.6 billion
The billionaires' club of private financiers who took over the remains of IndyMac Bank from the Federal Deposit Insurance Corp. turned a profit of $1.57 billion last year on the failed mortgage lender -- more than they invested less than a year ago.

Yet under the sale agreement, the federal deposit insurance fund still could lose nearly $11 billion on bad loans that the Pasadena institution made before it was sold last March and renamed OneWest Bank.

In taking over IndyMac's assets, the investor group, led by Steven Mnuchin of Dune Capital Management, put up $1.55 billion to revitalize the bank. Other investors included hedge-fund operators George Soros and John Paulson, bank buyout expert J. Christopher Flowers and computer mogul Michael S. Dell.

OneWest's financial results were filed with regulators Friday. Regulators and the investors declined to comment on the profit.
As much as $11 billion is set to go straight into the hands of the desperately needy: George Soros, John Paulson, Michael Dell, and Christopher Flowers. The regulators and the investors parasites declined to comment.

Boycott Dell

If you are thinking about buying a new computer, and you are considering Dell, you may wish to reconsider.

Mike "Mish" Shedlock
http://globaleconomicanalysis.blogspot.com
Click Here To Scroll Thru My Recent Post List
Mike "Mish" Shedlock is a registered investment advisor representative for SitkaPacific Capital Management. Sitka Pacific is an asset management firm whose goal is strong performance and low volatility, regardless of market direction. Visit http://www.sitkapacific.com/account_management.html to learn more about wealth management and capital preservation strategies of Sitka Pacific.

Wild Ride in 2-Year Italian Bonds; What's Changed? Nothing! Expect More Nonsensical Rumors

Posted: 28 Nov 2011 10:33 AM PST

It's difficult to catch the early news from Europe and the US open as well, unless one never sleeps. Here we are in the midst of another flatline gap-up rally.

Here is an intraday chart of the S&P 500.

S&P 500 3-Minute Chart



As with the last gap-up on rumors now dead, I confidently predict this nearly-3% gap will fill sooner, rather than later.

Let's take another look at the bond market.

Italy 10-Year Government Bonds



Italy 2-Year Government Bonds



Spain 10-Year Government Bonds



Spain 2-Year Government Bonds



The yield on 10-Year Italian bonds barely budged. In contrast there was wild action in 2-year bonds, opening up at 8.11% then finishing 100 basis points down from the high and 56 basis points lower than Friday's close. This intraday move is probably another 6-Sigma event.

2-year bonds for Spain showed similar action, but the swings were not as dramatic.

Nonetheless, in spite of these swings, the yield on both 10- and 2-year Italian bonds is over 7%, and Spanish bonds are sick as well.

As I said at 2:52 AM in Equity Futures Ripping, Bond Market Still on Deathbed; Germany Allegedly Mulls Five-Nation "Elite Bonds" ....
If there was any reason to believe "elite bonds" would help Italy, or the IMF would help Italy, then 2- and 10-year yields would not be above 7%, and the 2-year yield certainly would not have soared to a new high above 8%.

Equity markets are responding to something the bond market does not see, most likely pure nonsense.
Expect More Nonsensical Rumors

Don't worry, when the equity gaps fill, there will be still more nonsensical rumors to excite the stock market.

Mike "Mish" Shedlock
http://globaleconomicanalysis.blogspot.com
Click Here To Scroll Thru My Recent Post List
Mike "Mish" Shedlock is a registered investment advisor representative for SitkaPacific Capital Management. Sitka Pacific is an asset management firm whose goal is strong performance and low volatility, regardless of market direction. Visit http://www.sitkapacific.com/account_management.html to learn more about wealth management and capital preservation strategies of Sitka Pacific.

Equity Futures Ripping, Bond Market Still on Deathbed; Germany Allegedly Mulls Five-Nation "Elite Bonds"

Posted: 28 Nov 2011 12:52 AM PST

Equity futures are ripping tonight primarily on a pair of rumors regarding Italy. The first rumor is the IMF would buy Italian debt, now denied but the equity markets could care less.

No sooner than one ridiculous rumor goes up in flames than does another ridiculous rumor spring up in its place.

Germany Allegedly Mulls Five-Nation "Elite Bonds"

Reuters reports Germany mulls "elite bonds" with 5 nations
The German government is considering the possibility of issuing joint bonds with five fellow triple A euro zone countries that are being referred to as "elite bonds" or "AAA bonds," newspaper Die Welt reported on Monday.
Chancellor Angela Merkel and her center-right government have repeated ruled out collectivizing debt and the introduction of common euro zone bonds.

The conservative daily cited "high European Union diplomats" involved in fighting the sovereign debt crisis saying the Berlin government was nevertheless considering issuing bonds jointly with France, Finland, Netherlands, Luxembourg and Austria.

The joint bonds could be used not only to finance borrowing for those six countries but also could be used to raise funds under strict conditions for countries such as Italy and Spain, the newspaper reported.

The goal would be to stabilize the situation in the AAA countries as well as "building a credible firewall to calm the financial markets," Die Welt said. The interest rate for the bonds should be somewhere between 2 and 2.5 percent -- or only slightly above the level for German government bonds.

The newspaper said the euro zone countries without AAA ratings should not be included initially.
Far be it from me to rule out complete stupidity from any politician at any level, but this story does not remotely smack of the truth.

I have no doubt some low or mid-level German bureaucrat might concoct such an idea but it makes no sense that Angela Merkel would go along with it.

Notice the report cited "high European Union diplomats", not Merkel and not even German officials.

Even if Merkel was willing to go along with this nonsense, the German Supreme Court wouldn't.

Dead on Arrival

This idea is dead on arrival no matter what the equity market thinks.

Check out the action in bonds.

Italy 10-Year Government Bonds



Italy 2-Year Government Bonds



Spain 10-Year Government Bonds



Spain 2-Year Government Bonds



Italian debt yields are modestly lower but only after the two-year bond yield soared to a new high of 8.12%. Spain yields are essentially flat.

If there was any reason to believe "elite bonds" would help Italy, or the IMF would help Italy, then 2- and 10-year yields would not be above 7%, and the 2-year yield certainly would not have soared to a new high above 8%.

Anything can happen in the next few hours I suppose, but equity markets are responding to something the bond market does not see, most likely pure nonsense.

Mike "Mish" Shedlock
http://globaleconomicanalysis.blogspot.com
Click Here To Scroll Thru My Recent Post List
Mike "Mish" Shedlock is a registered investment advisor representative for SitkaPacific Capital Management. Sitka Pacific is an asset management firm whose goal is strong performance and low volatility, regardless of market direction. Visit http://www.sitkapacific.com/account_management.html to learn more about wealth management and capital preservation strategies of Sitka Pacific.
Publicat de 1 la 23:32 0 comentarii

Damn Cool Pics

Damn Cool Pics

"Sexiest Man Alive" Then and Now

Posted: 28 Nov 2011 05:20 PM PST

With the recent release of People Magazines "Sexiest Man Alive issue we have gone back to some of the previous winners to see how their physiques and faces have held up over time. While time is not kind to any man, some of these stars did not help the process with their face-lifts, ugly haircuts and extra few pounds.

Brendan Fraser


Axl Rose


Bruce Jenner


James Spader


John Travolta


Mel Gibson


Mickey Rourke


Nic Cage


Nick Nolte


Russell Crowe


Tom Cruise


Val Kilmer


Vince Vaughn

Cyber Monday in the Workplace [infographic]

Posted: 28 Nov 2011 05:00 PM PST



Cyber Monday, for those of you who haven't yet heard of it, is only the BIGGEST day in online shopping of the year. The Monday following Black Friday is a day where many of you will be glued to your computer screens, credit card in hand, making holiday purchases.

Cyber Monday is a relatively new thing having begun in 2004, however it's youth has not stopped it from growing in popularity. In 2010 the average transaction was $195 up from the 2008 average of $130. Last year's Cyber Monday also saw a record amount of total money spent the total coming in at $1.03 billion. If you want to save the money, but were too lazy to get up this past Friday you may want to check out some Cyber Monday deals.


Source: cheapsally
Publicat de 1 la 19:36 0 comentarii

What Every SEO Should Know About IIS

What Every SEO Should Know About IIS

What Every SEO Should Know About IIS

Posted: 27 Nov 2011 01:47 PM PST

Posted by Dave Sottimano

IIS Server through the eyes of an SEO

Disclaimer: This post is long and technical, but has been lovingly paraphrased for the benefit of non-technical SEOs to get involved and step out of their comfort zone. Recently, I’ve had to deal with sites running on IIS and rather than just prescribing universal SEO fixes, I decided to get my hands really, really dirty. This is what I’ve learned…

In this post: (Use the navigation links, trust me!)

  1. Brief explanation of what IIS is
  2. Why SEOs should care about IIS
  3. How to get a free, super powerful crawler – You need Windows 7
  4. IIS "out of the box SEO faults" you need to know about
  5. The Chaining 301 disease and a way to fix it
  6. Interview / SEO Resource guide for IIS 7+ - with Mark Ridley
  7. Possible sexual attraction to Microsoft products
 

Internet Information Services (IIS) is the second most popular web server in the world to Apache. IIS’s first big gig was in 1995 and still continues to power a massive portion of the internet today. Read more about Microsoft's history on the web

 
  • You’ll likely have a client sooner or later that uses IIS
  • There are some common SEO faults with IIS that you need to know
  • Fixing those default "faults" can significantly improve the site's SEO
  • You need to understand how this beast works before you say “301” or “clean URL”
  • I will show you how to get a free kickass crawler – You need Windows 7 on your machine
  • If you can speak IIS, those super smart developers will instantly warm up to you
  • IIS popularity is growing (see image below)

IIS trends

IIS isn’t going anywhere, in fact it’s growing. Whether you appreciate Microsoft products or not, there are many that do and there’s no doubt that you’ll likely have to consult a client running IIS.

 

Requirements: Windows 7 (automatically comes with IIS 7.5)Sorry Mac! – muhahaha
How: IIS server & SEO toolkit on your Windows 7 machine
Why: It’s frickin incredible – It will make your SEO life much much easier.
Difficulty: Easy
Estimated Completion time: 5-7 minutes

 

Why it's so cool!

Watch this video, and tell me you DON'T need this beast :)

  • Reports on content, SEO and other violations. Tells you how to fix it in plain english
  • You can add your own custom violations
  • Fully functional database of what's going on with your site
  • Tons and tons of custom reporting, including mapping navigation paths
  • Find orphaned pages from Sitemap
  • And much much more. You expected that right :)

 

We can get you up and running in 10 minutes (minimum requirements): follow these instructions– this is EASY.

First, install IIS Server

  1. Start > Settings > Control Panel
  2. Programs & Features
  3. Click on "Turn Windows Features on/off"
  4. Find the Internet Information Services folder, expand it
  5. Expand the Web Management tools folder
  6. Make sure IIS Management Console is checked, click OK

Next, the IIS toolkit - Post here with screenshots

  1. Download the IIS Web Platform Installer, and install it
  2. Click on Start, search for "Web platform installer", open it up
  3. Once in the web platform, type in "SEO" in the search bar - top right
  4. It should be the last item in the list "Search Engine Optimisation Toolkit", click add, then install
  5. Click on start, type in: inetmgr
  6. Look for the Icon that says "Search Engine Optimisation Toolkit", and double click
  7. You're done! You now have an insane, free crawler on your machine :)

Now you need to:

  1. Crawl a site!
  2. Understand the analysis!
  3. Enjoy, you'll love it :)

Read Microsoft's official instructions for the IIS SEO toolkit

 

Read more about this here. Example of a default document: www.example.com/index.html www.example.com - will return the same content, different URLs

  • Case insensitive
    • IIS by default will serve the same content regardless of casing Example: www.example.com/BLOG and www.example.com/blog are the same content, different URLs
  • Works with www and non www (site canonicalization)
    • By default, like most servers you'll get the same content from www.example.com and example.com

Why it’s a problem: You get a hard earned inbound link to the wrong URL and it doesn’t give you full credit – “but it’s the same page!” No, it’s not, and no, Google doesn’t magically fix this even though they try.

But hey! No one is going to link to your site like this! Right? cc Matt Cutts 2006

  • www.example.com/
  • example.com/
  • www.example.com/index.html
  • example.com/INDEX.html

Yes, yes they do. Not on purpose, but they do.

This is a very real problem for older, larger sites that hadn’t canonicalized their domain, or bothered with consistent URL structure in the past. Fast forward to 2011 and we SEOs start nitpicking for every bit of link juice and we notice that we’re missing out on all of these external links because we’re not redirecting these inbound links to the right pages. We need to write some permanent redirect rules to catch these.

Simple, right? When someone links to our real page www.example.com/blog/ like this: example.com/Blog

We just do a 301 redirect back to www.example.com/blog/ ! Happy days right? Please continue…

 

It’s best to explain this by example. Open up this page from Cheapflights.co.uk.

Notice the capital L (london)? What happens when we request http://www.cheapflights.co.uk/flights/london/?

 

Brilliant! Even if someone incorrectly links to the lowercase version, we get a 301 redirect to the correct page http://www.cheapflights.co.uk/flights/London/

Here’s where I get crazy. Let’s say I decide to link to http://cheapflights.co.uk/flights/london

I want you to notice a couple of things here:

  1. No www
  2. London is london
  3. Monitor the http requests, try HTTPFOX for FireFox

 

Whoa! Two 301 redirects! We know one 301 loses link juice, but 2?The point here is that Google is far less likely to pass on PageRank with each chained redirect, you should always aim for no more than one 301 redirect.

This is referred to as chaining 301 redirects (My example is specific to IIS)

Why is this happening?

When you are creating redirect rules, the server usually obeys each condition depending on what it finds. As a good SEO, you should always canonicalise the domain – as a smart SEO you’ll probably want to stop any uppercasing goofs too, maybe even trailing slashes while you’re at it!

 

My obsession – I noticed this all over the web and I was obsessed with finding the “catch all” redirect rule that would only redirect once, to the right URL.

I failed, until I got some very clever friends involved. Meet Daniel Furze, developer at Reed.co.uk.

A way to fix the chain for common SEO issues

I'm nicknaming this the "Furze Method" :) This method has been tried and tested, so we know it works. You should add this rule base in web.config for a .net app. Learn more here.

We're using IIS 7 and the url rewrite 2.0 module here which allows us to run regex rules against different parts of the url and then either Redirect or Rewrite them. The ability to rewrite is what I'm using to make sure we keep 301 chaining to a minimum. It allows us to run several rules against the url, cleaning it up in stages before doing one final Redirect. The trick to this is that when a rewrite rule matches and it does it's job it adds a _ to the path of the url. The final rules look for any path beginning with _ and will then strip this out and redirect. Let's have a look at the rules and then break them down in to sections.

Section 1

<rule name="WhiteList - resources" stopProcessing="true">

<match url="^resources/" />

<conditions logicalGrouping="MatchAll" trackAllCaptures="false" />

<action type="None" />

</rule>

The first rule is very important here as there is no need to be cleaning up resource requests (remember all requests pass through here including image, css and js files with an integrated pipe).

Section 2

<rule name="SEO - remove default.aspx" stopProcessing="false">

<match url="(.*?)/?default\.aspx$" />

<conditions logicalGrouping="MatchAll" trackAllCaptures="false">

<add input="{HTTP_METHOD}" pattern="GET" />

</conditions>

<action type="Rewrite" url="_{R:1}" />

</rule>

<rule name="SEO - Remove trailing slash" stopProcessing="false">

<match url="(.+)/$" />

<conditions logicalGrouping="MatchAll" trackAllCaptures="false">

<add input="{HTTP_METHOD}" pattern="GET" />

<add input="{REQUEST_FILENAME}" matchType="IsDirectory" negate="true" />

<add input="{REQUEST_FILENAME}" matchType="IsFile" negate="true" />

</conditions>

<action type="Rewrite" url="_{R:1}" />

</rule>

<rule name="SEO - ToLower" stopProcessing="false">

<match url="(.*)" ignoreCase="false" />

<conditions logicalGrouping="MatchAll" trackAllCaptures="false">

<add input="{HTTP_METHOD}" pattern="GET" />

<add input="{R:1}" pattern="[A-Z]" ignoreCase="false" />

</conditions>

<action type="Rewrite" url="_{ToLower:{R:1}}" />

</rule>

The 2nd section of 3 rules will tidy up different parts of the url

  1. remove default.aspx, since we are using .net we want to clean up any stray default.aspx from the path (less important with a greenfield mvc app), you can change this rule for any other document types that you like including index.html.
  2. clean up trailing slashes from the path of the url ie www.yoursite.com/news/ becomes www.yoursite.com/news
  3. lowercase the whole path part of the url, the querystring isn't touched as these are often case sensitive so www.yoursite.com/News becomes www.yoursite.com/news

Section 3

<rule name="SEO - http canonical redirect" stopProcessing="true">

<match url="^(_*)(.*)" />

<conditions logicalGrouping="MatchAll" trackAllCaptures="false">

<add input="{HTTP_HOST}" pattern="^www\.yoursite\.org$" negate="true" />

<add input="{HTTP_METHOD}" pattern="GET" />

<add input="{SERVER_PORT}" pattern="80" />

</conditions>

<action type="Redirect" url="http://www.yoursite.org/{R:2}" />

</rule>

<rule name="SEO - https canonical redirect" stopProcessing="true">

<match url="^(_*)(.*)" />

<conditions logicalGrouping="MatchAll" trackAllCaptures="false">

<add input="{HTTP_HOST}" pattern="^www\.yoursite\.org$" negate="true" />

<add input="{HTTP_METHOD}" pattern="GET" />

<add input="{SERVER_PORT}" pattern="443" />

</conditions>

<action type="Redirect" url="https://www.yoursite.org/{R:2}" />

</rule>

<rule name="SEO - non-canonical redirect" stopProcessing="true">

<match url="^(_+)(.*)" />

<conditions logicalGrouping="MatchAll" trackAllCaptures="false">

<add input="{HTTP_METHOD}" pattern="GET" />

</conditions>

<action type="Redirect" url="{R:2}" />

</rule>

The 3rd part is a little more tricky, this is the part that does the actual Redirect but it is also responsible for one last tidy-up as well. The first 2 rules will fix missing www and then redirect while also respecting the port the requested url was using ie http://yoursite.com becomes http://www.yoursite.com and the same for https. The reason these 2 rules are separate is that I haven't figured out how to add www without also specifying either http or https. The 3rd rule will do a redirect if any of the SEO Rewrite rules caught but the url already had www in it. You can see that these last 3 rules pay attention to _ which might be in the path from the previous rewrite rules.

One final gotcha is to make sure you don't actually have any geniune urls that begin with _ , if you do then you can substitute this for another special character but you will have to make sure it all still works. And also to pay attention to which ones have stopProcessing="true" on them, typically a Redirect will stop and a SEO rewrite will carry on. If you are wanting to put in any other rules for say redirecting email links or migrating old pages to new pages then I would recommend putting them in between any Whitelist rules you have and the SEO rules at the bottom.

The final result is a very mangled url like:

http://yoursite/NeWs/default.aspx?id=123 will redirect to http://www.yoursite/news?id=123 with only one 301.

You can see how it works live here..please disregard the domain name!http://a4uexpobavarianbeerandsausageonstand50.org/ArTIcle/

You'll notice that our non www, uppercase and trailing slash version 301's to http://www.a4uexpobavarianbeerandsausageonstand50.org/article with one 301! Cool!

 

Mark Ridley is the Head of Development & an IIS expert at Reed and a personal friend of mine that I called for help. Oh feel free to bug him on Twitter, just say I told you to :)

I need to 301 redirect page A to page B, how can we do this?

Dave: This is fairly easy, we won't reinvent the wheel - please see detail instructions here. Updated: Another great resource (full tutorial) has been discovered thanks to Alan in the comments

We are migrating a site and we know which pages to redirect to, can you send us the rewrite map template so we can fill it out? (Basically explain that the Devs could send a rewrite map template and then just apply rules)

Dave: Yes, it is possible. Get a developer to send you a template, use this resource here.

How will ASP, .net, PHP react to our redirect rules? Are there any common pitfalls?

IIS URL Rewrite rules will execute before any rewrites or redirects that your application insists upon. There are some very technical reasons for this. Essentially, the web server thinks it's more important than your code, which is probably correct. The only pitfalls to watch out for, exactly as with Apache, is that you're making sensible rules on the web server. It is a little bit too easy to make infinite redirect loops, or at least very long chains of redirects that won't make you popular with search engines

Is there anything Apache can do that IIS can't?

There's WAY better community support for Apache, and a much wider adoption. That doesn't mean that IIS has poor support, just that the number of articles telling you about Apache is going to outnumber IIS by orders of magnitude, partially why this article is important. Other than that - yes, some Apache modules make Apache do things that IIS can't, but there aren't many things that will trouble the 80% of 'normal' users.

Do you prefer IIS or Apache? Why?

I refuse to get involved in a religious argument! Both are very capable web servers (number 1 and 2 in the market according to Netcraft), and often the decision to use one or the other is not based on the capability of the web server itself. Microsoft houses will use IIS and Free/Open Source or *nix houses will use Apache (or nginx). It doesn't hurt anyone to understand both, especially as your client will have made the decision to use one or the other, and probably won't want to change. It's enough to know that both are sensible choices depending on your reasons.

How can I speed up page load time with IIS?

IIS, like Apache's mod_gzip, allows you to turn on gzip compression of both static and dynamic content. It's a very simple change that will make a massive difference to your page download speed, and your bandwidth costs! This was added in IIS7 and was a long overdue feature. All modern browsers support content compression, and there is almost no downside to enabling it.

A more technical, and complex solution is also available in addition to content compression, which is output caching (http://learn.iis.net/page.aspx/710/configure-iis-7-output-caching/). This is probably something best left to the developers and server administrators to argue over, as whilst it can have benefits they are less obvious and harder to achieve than compression.

Can you easily give me log files? What information can I get? What software do you recommend to parse the logs?

Of course! IIS logs just the same way Apache does - writing log files into a folder. You can use exactly the same format as Apache, or several other popular web log formats, which are simple configuration options in IIS. Log parsing is often now less common with the massive improvements in online services, such as Google Analytics, Webtrends or Omniture. With Google Analytics being free, you're in a position to do away with pesky logs and let your marketeers do the analysis without worrying about the underlying technology. The free 'Live' view which is currently in Beta in GA is also amazing, and will sell itself to execs and marketing folk, as they can see who is on your site right at the moment. If you want a little more detail from your own logs for a reasonable price, I've often used Sawmill to great effect. AWStats is also popular with the more technical FOS community.

Can you explain (basic) how you set up a dev server and then deploy to live? (what are common issues)?

This is enormously variable based on your server architecture, your connections and your technical decisions. On a Microsoft stack, Microsoft provide tools such as Web Farm Framework and Web Deploy which can be a great help and offer a lot of heavy lifting. Some people with simpler sites are happy with FTP or WebDAV deployments. We use our own cocktail of Powershell scripts and Robocopy to manage our servers and keep them up to date, but we won't test you on that afterwards.

How can you define a custom 404 page easily?

IIS has standard support for all the common (and any custom) error pages. The easiest route is to create an HTML page with your 404 content and save it to a folder on your live servers. In the IIS configuration, you then simply locate this page and IIS will do the rest. With more complex ASP.NET MVC sites, you may want to handle your own 404s, bug again that's best left to the developers.

Can you explain how to make friendly (SEO) urls in IIS? What is the process?

Exactly the same way as with any other web server! Name your content well. Avoid special characters, use lower case filenames, be consistent with naming, use slugs where possible to make URLs that search engines will appreciate. If you're writing an application which pulls content from a database, make the URLs as meaningful as possible and avoid varied query strings. All of this is second nature for good SEOs. ASP.NET (or any other flavour) MVC helps even more as the URL routing allows the developers more control of exactly what the URL will look like, rather than having to rely only on filenames. If you use a content management system, make sure that you know how to configure correctly - most popular CMS products have this boiled in these days.

What do you mean by rewriting as opposed to redirecting?

In simple terms, imagine you have two files - a.htm and b.htm.

If you are using rewriting, someone will look at a.htm in a browser (and the address bar will still show http://site.com/a.htm), but you will actually see the content of b.htm.

If you are using the more common redirect method, when someone asks for a.htm with their browser, they will be sent to b.htm in the server. The address bar will now show http://www.site.com/b.htm For SEO purposes, this means that a spider won't be able to tell the difference between a.htm and b.htm if you're rewriting. If you're redirecting, you can give powerful instructions to the spider, such as a 301 response, asserting that the value of the b.htm should now be carried to a.htm. In most cases, you probably only need to worry about using redirects, as these are widely used and understood. Rewriting is often an edge case, or something used by developers for their own nefarious purposes.

Give me a good reason why I should use IIS 7 over previous versions?

IIS7 - now actually IIS7.5 in Windows 2008 R2 - was a huge improvement over IIS6. Native support for gzip compression, the newly integrated ASP.NET pipeline and performance and security improvements should be enough. If not, Windows 2008 is a far nicer Operating System to use than 2003 (now it's been patched a few times), and migrating will make your life a much more pleasant place to be. Do watch out for slow file copying though, a relic of it's Windows Vista brethren.

A few more helpful links

 

Feel free to follow me on Twitter @dsottimano, don't forget to randomly hug a developer - even if they say they don't like it :)


Do you like this post? Yes No

Publicat de 1 la 09:18 0 comentarii
Abonați-vă la: Postări (Atom)