I would caution against having the same content on two sites/servers - Google penalises duplicate content.
The warning about frames is absolutely correct.
The best way to combine the flow of traffic/inbound links is to use Mod Rewrite - sorry, that moves us into the "bit technical" realm. In essence, when a request is made to the server for a particular page/site, the request is rewritten on the fly and the alternative page delivered. This intervention is not seen by the user - even when the "user" is a Google bot.
You could also use a 301 permanent redirect from one site to the other
Both methods retain the inbound links and Google PageRank.
This is because kettlenet.co.uk is just a single frame framing your annakettle.co.uk site. There is no site there, no content there, and search engines can see this.
The best course of action depends on what your final goal is. kettlenet.co.uk is a well established domain (nearly 5 years old), with a PageRank of 3. This makes it a good starting base for any site - search engines will automatically favour it over younger domains.
OTOH annakettle.co.uk is only 1 year old, and has no PageRank.
If your aim is to get traffic from your site, this is what I'd do:
Put your current site under kettlenet.co.uk, without a frame redirect.
Use this as your main site for now.
If you want to eventually use annakettle.co.uk as your main domain, build a second site (just one page will do), with some good keyword-rich content. Promote this site in its own right, and link from it to your main site (and also link back).
(I'm not an SEO expert by any means, but some of my clients are, so I pickup the odd snippet or 2. My site has a rating of 4, which I'm told is quite good apparently!)
It was Google's killer feature when launched. Google were able to get an idea of a page's significance by counting the links to that page - the more links, the better the page must be; otherwise people wouldn't have linked to it. That was the simple idea that put Google ahead of the rest.
The next layer of sophistication looked at the PageRank (PR) of the linking pages - a high PR page must itself be important so a link from one of those must be worth more than a link from a lowly ranked page. So it wasn't just link quantity that mattered - it was the link quality as well. And that's where it all went wrong...
Link farms/exchanges/sales started up with significant monthly fees for a link from a PR7 page - and PR is only one of more than a hundred elements used by Google to establish the page's Search Engine Results Position (SERP) for any given search term.
Whilst Google is very secretive about its algo, it seems pretty clear that PR has been significantly downgraded as a factor in establishing a SERP. We have pages that have a SERP of top place out of 2 million and yet they only have PR of 3/10.
Longevity is a factor that seems to have grown in importance so I'd suggest that you stick with the URL that Google has known about longest - though there may be other factors in your choice of URL that over-ride this.
Well thanks for your effort but I really don't understand it all :-)
It's much easier for me to keep the same url and it has lots of benefits, people from years ago use it and new people can find it easily just by googling what they want. Mind you, what they want is usually an uncommon item ...
HomeOwnersHub website is not affiliated with any of the manufacturers or service providers discussed here.
All logos and trade names are the property of their respective owners.