Welcome to the Q&A Forum

Personally I would use your first "Maker of Blue Widgets..." title. It does a couple things in my opinion. First, since your brand is not very strong but possibly the widget is well known, the release is more likely to get picked up by media (though sadly awards press releases seldom do in my experience). Second, assuming you are buying the upgraded "SEO" package, it themes the press release more about the widgets than your brand. As long as you use good link text as well, this will make the links to your site more about the widgets than the brand. Of course if you are looking for brand recognition then go the other way.

Our agency is working with an outside developer that has designed a beautiful site. The possible problem is that they used Cufon to change a large amount of the text on the page to an image of the text in a nicer font. On some pages all of the text is replaced and on others its about 20%. The text that is replaced is identical to what is shown to the user.

I realize that Google has stated that sIFR (similar to Cufon) is okay, in a limited way years ago, but I am stil a little leery of the large amount of image replacement that is happening. I am also worried about user experience, should flash not be enabled or it is slower to load.  So I have a couple questions.

1. Would this amount of image replacment raise a flag to Google, especially since it is the heading tags and large chunks of the body content both?

2. I know about 2% of the site's users do not have javascript enabled. Do you have an idea of what percentage of people have issues, like slow connection speeds or slow computers, using javascript even if it is enabled?

Thanks for your response. Does it seem probable that this issue caused the 60% drop in SERP performance? The only other variable near the same time was changing hosting providers. We have moved to this provider for other clients, and never saw this kind of change, but that was usually at the beginning of the SEO campaign, not in the middle.

We discovered a broken link and issue with a dynamically generated sitemap that resulted in 9,000+ pages of duplicate content (namely there was not actual 404 page, but content for a 404 page that populated on the broken page).

We've corrected that issue so the 404 page is working correctly now and there aren't any more broken links on the site. However, we just reviewed our Google crawl report, and saw that now there are 9,000+ 404 links in the Google index.

We discovered the initial error when our SERP performance dropped 60% in a month.

Now that we've corrected all the duplicate content pages, will vast number of 404 pages negatively impact SERP results? If so, do you recommend doing 301 redirects to the page it should have gone to, and do you know of any automated tools performing the 301's (it's a standard HTML site, no CMS involved).

Thanks for your help!