Best approach for a client with another site for the same company
-
I have a client who has an old website and company A handles the SEO campaign for this site.
My client wanted us to create a new website with unique content for the same company aiming to double his chances of ranking on the 1st of SERP's and eventually dominating it.
So we created the new site for him and handled it's SEO campaign. So far we are ranking decently on the search engines but we feel like we could do better. The site we are optimizing for him uses the same company, tracking number and a virtual address in the same city.
Do you think Google has a problem with this set up?
We have listed the new site in the citation directories but I'm worried that we are sending google mixed signals. The company has two listing on each directories, one for the old site and another for the new site.
Another thing, Google+ Local for the new site is created and verified but is not showing up in local pack.
What is the best way to approach this mess?
We are looking into ranking for both local & organic results. -
Hi Adam,
Good thinking. Hope it works out well. Situations like these can be layers deep and murky - tough to sort out. Wishing you the best!
-
Thank you Miriam.
You are right, I would need to have a heart to heart talk with my client to sort out these issue.
-
First, if the tracking number that you use for the citations vary from the number listed on the new website, the old website, and/or the old citations this is a problem. Trust me, I am currently handling a client who wanted to rank locally for a city that they did not have a business location at. Without consulting us, they set up an ad for that city with a tracking number BUT it was still associated with the same business name and address. I don’t know if you are aware but these different directories scrape information from each other and as a result new listings are created with inconsistent business information. It's not pretty and not only is this confusing to a potential client looking for your business but you have significantly decreased your chances at appearing in Google’s 7-pack.
Here are a few resources that I refer back to but I would start with Google Places Guidelines---
http://getlisted.org/resources/why-citations-are-important.aspx
http://www.davidmihm.com/local-search-ranking-factors.shtml
- Pay attention to questions 5 & 7
http://www.seomoz.org/blog/40-important-local-search-questions-answered
- This is a follow up to a mozinar that is totally worth watching too.
Hope this helps!
-
Hi Adam,
We need to pedal back here to this:
"The site we are optimizing for him uses the same company, tracking number and a virtual address in the same city. "
and this:
"We have listed the new site in the citation directories...Another thing, Google+ Local for the new site is created and verified but is not showing up in local pack."
You have some root issues going on here. Both virtual offices and call tracking numbers for Local businesses are taboo in Google's local products. For legitimate participation in Google+ Local, your client needs to have:
-
Face-to-face transactions with customers either at the place of business (like a restaurant) or at the customers' locations (like a plumber).
-
A unique, physical street address (not a virtual office, P.O. box or shared address)
-
A unique local area code phone number (not a toll free, call tracking or shared number).
If the client cannot meet all 3 of the above criteria, then he is not suitable for inclusion in Google's local products, and he is not appropriate for a local citation building campaign.
So, this is actually the issue that needs to be sorted out first. Whether your client's failure to show up in the local results is due to a penalty stemming from Google considering the listing to be spam or stems from other issues is sort of moot, here, because the business model you are describing does not sound truly local to me.
For further reading, I recommend that both you and the client study Google's Places Quality Guidelines:
http://support.google.com/places/bin/answer.py?hl=en&answer=107528
You will see precisely why the business model you are describing is problematic in the above guidelines.
Regarding the call tracking phone number element, read:
http://searchengineland.com/for-local-seo-lack-of-call-tracking-solution-spawns-cloaking-70198
Read that post and all of the links in it, as well, for full information on the history of issues surrounding call tracking numbers in the world of Local SEO.
My feeling is that a wrong estimation of this client's opportunities may have been made here and that Local SEO is being pursued in vain until he can meet those requirements. Having 2 websites now in existence for the client is only going to compound the issues. I never recommend double sites for local business owners, but where there is some reason why they feel they MUST have more than one website, I advise them to make sure that their NAP (name-address-phone) is only published on one of the websites. Everything hangs on NAP in Local and if you're telling Google that both www.johntheplumber.com and www.sandiegoplumber.com are located at 123 First St. San Diego, CA., this will confuse Google and potentially lead to duplicated listings and ranking drops. Total clarity and consistency of data are vital to any Local SEO campaign, but in this case, your first step is going to be to assess the client's actual business model and then determine whether they have a legitimate place in the local index or need to pursue purely organic SEO due to a lack of the elements essential to local inclusion.
Hope this helps!
-
-
Hi Amber,
We use the same address but different location which is a virtual address then a local tracking number for the citations.
Do you think Google could tell if it's a virtual address or not and if they could, is it going to have a negative effect in our rankings?
Also, what I meant by "local pack" is the local map listings that shows up together with the organic search.
As per Google maps, I searched my client's company name and we aren't showing up in there either.
-
Our company also have two websites, we launch the second website for different reasons than your client, We sell power tools and power tool parts in the second website we want focus more in parts.
The phone number and address it's the same in both sites. We also have many products that are available in both sites.
When we decided to launch the second website we thought that having the same address and phone number could be a problem for our rank. Now 4 months later I don't think it cause any problem. The first website that we had for years still ranking well and improving the rank, our new website is also doing well and progressing fast.
We tried to avoid duplicate content so the product descriptions, about us page, and blog entries are different for each website. Also we didn't include the new site in the local directories.
In my humble opinion as long you have different content in each website the phone number and address wont be a problem.
-
Hi Adam,
When you say you have listed the new site in the citation directories are you using the same business name, address and phone number? What is the difference in the business information on these listings?
From my understanding, if these citations have mixed information for the same business you have set yourself up for duplicate listings. Google uses the information from these sources to validate the business name, address, phone number and business details. If Google is seeing two different listings for the same company on these citation sources how will it know which one to trust enough to show in it's local/map results?
In the end I think your ranking power is going to be (or is being) divided greatly for Local.
Also, when you say the G+Local listing that you created for the new site is not showing up in the local pack- what are you considering the "local pack" or are you saying that the listing is not even appearing when you search for it in Maps?
Best,
Amber
-
Hi Adam,
This is my first time hearing about this approach. In my opinion, it seems like your client is trying to game the search engine by creating 2 sites and hoping one of them will rank better. I believe search engines will not like it since your client is trying to game the system. I don't think search engines will favor anyone gaming the system.
Why don't your client spend the time and money creating and ranking the new site on the old site?
They can use those time and money to build more quality links and producing more contents then they will definitely rank higher instead of start a new website and doing everything from scratch.
my 2 cents. Hope this helps.
Got a burning SEO question?
Subscribe to Moz Pro to gain full access to Q&A, answer questions, and ask your own.
Browse Questions
Explore more categories
-
Moz Tools
Chat with the community about the Moz tools.
-
SEO Tactics
Discuss the SEO process with fellow marketers
-
Community
Discuss industry events, jobs, and news!
-
Digital Marketing
Chat about tactics outside of SEO
-
Research & Trends
Dive into research and trends in the search industry.
-
Support
Connect on product support and feature requests.
Related Questions
-
Site Migration Question
Hi Guys, I am preparing for a pretty standard site migration. Small business website moving to a new domain, new branding and new cms. Pretty much a perfect storm. Right now the new website is being designed and will need another month, however the client is pretty antsy to get her new brand out over the web. We cannot change the current site, which has the old branding. She wants to start passing out business cards and hang banners with the new domain and brand. However, I don't want to be messing with any redirects and potentially screw up a clean migration from the old site to the new. To be specific, she wants to redirect the new domain to the current domain and then when the new site, flip the redirect. However, I'm a little apprehensive with that because a site migration from the current to the new is already so intricate, I don't want to leave any possibility of error. I'm trying to figure out the best solution, these are 2 options I am thinking of: DO NOT market new domain. Reprint all Marketing material and wait until new domain is up and then start marketing it. (At cost to client) Create a one pager on new domain saying the site is being built & have a No Follow link to the current site. No redirects added. Just the no follow link. I'd like option 2 so that the client could start passing out material, but my number one concern is messing with any part of the migration. We are about to submit a sitemap index to Google Search Console for the current site, so we are just starting the site migration. What do you guys think?
Intermediate & Advanced SEO | | Khoo0 -
If I put a piece of content on an external site can I syndicate to my site later using a rel=canonical link?
Could someone help me with a 'what if ' scenario please? What happens if I publish a piece of content on an external website, but then later decide to also put this content on my website. I want my website to rank first for this content, even though the original location for the content was the external website. Would it be okay for me to put a rel=canonical tag on the external website's content pointing to the copy on my website? Or would this be seen as manipulative?
Intermediate & Advanced SEO | | RG_SEO1 -
Shoemaker with ugly shoes : Agency site performing badly, what's our best bet?
Hi everyone,
Intermediate & Advanced SEO | | AxialDev
We're a web agency and our site www.axialdev.com is not performing well. We have very little traffic from relevant keywords. Local competitors with worse On-page Grader scores and very few backlinks outrank us. For example, we're 17th for the keyword "agence web sherbrooke" in Google.ca in French. Background info: In the past, we included 3 keywords-rich in the footer of every site we made (hundreds of sites by now). We're working to remove those links on poor sites and to use a single nofollow link on our best sites. Since this is on-going and we know we won't be able to remove everything, our link profile sucks (OSE). We have a lot of sites on our C-Block, some of poor quality. We've never received a manual penalty. Still, we've disavowed links as a precaution after running Link D-Tox. We receive a lot of trafic via our blog where we used to post technical articles about Drupal, Node js, plugins, etc. These visits don't drive business. Only a third of our organic visits come from Canada. What are our options? Change domain and delete the current one? Disallow the blog except for a few good articles, hoping it helps Google understand what we really do. Keep donating to Adwords? Any help greatly appreciated!
Thanks!2 -
Consolidate Local sites to one larger site
I am a partner in a real estate company that operates in 10 different markets across the country. Each of these markets has it's own individual domain. My question is should we consolidate each of these markets into one domain that services all markets? What would we possibly gain or lose from an organic traffic standpoint? In some of our more established markets (Indianapolis, Las Vegas, Tampa, Orlando and Charlotte) our organic traffic accounts for 50-60% of our total traffic. In some of our newer markets (Denver, Phoenix, San Diego) it accounts for less than 15%. We do operate under two different brand names. EasyStreet Realty and Highgarden Real Estate. EasyStreet has been around since 2000 with most of our Highgarden sites only up for 6-24 months. Another question is we are considering converting all EasyStreet divisions to Highgarden. I am a little reluctant to do so, since most of our organic traffic is coming from our EasyStreet sites. Thoughts? You can find links to all our sites at www.easystreetrealty.com or www.highgarden.com Thank you in advance for your insight.
Intermediate & Advanced SEO | | EasyStreet0 -
Traffic down after site migration
Hi! I've been working on a campaign for http://www.alwayshobbies.com/, which has seen a 35% in drop in traffic since changing ecommerce platforms. It's now been two months, but there is no sign of recovery. We are in the middle of cleaning up the link profile as part of a resubmission request, but that has been ongoing since before the migration. A lot of redirects were needed after 10k 404s appeared in Webmaster Tools after the new launch, but these have been reduced to around 500. We've been pretty thorough here, but I thought it would be worth checking in case there's something we've missed.
Intermediate & Advanced SEO | | neooptic0 -
New site now links disappearing in Open Site Explorer and GWT
We launched a new site at the beginning of December 2012 and carefully 301'd all URLs from the old site to the new (custom CMS on old site wordpress on new). Our rankings have slipped quite badly but the most worrying thing is that we used to have about 1200 backlinks according to GWT/OSE before the new site launched and now we're down to about 30. Can anyone help shed some light on this please? The site is www.littleoneslondon.co.uk A few things that might help: 1. We were getting a lot of links through our job feeds (it's a nanny recruitment site) on indeed and trovitt, for some reason no new ones from these have appeared in site explorer and all the old jobs are gone completely. 2. We had 1000s of not found errors in google webmaster tools and once these were redirected and marked as fixed this is when the links disappeared. 3. We are getting quite a few 504 errors on the site due to an old proxy redirect (/blog was hosted on a different server on the old site and has not been removed yet), this will be fixed tomorrow but could this be a factor? 4. The developer seems to have redirected all the links through wordpress directly some how (I don't see any redirect plugins but there are lots of pages called 'redirect'). There are no references in the htaccess file for any redirects other than from the /blog folder that the wordpress instance sits in. Sorry for the long post, I hope I've given any details you'd need and I really appreciate any help anyone can give. Thanks, Karl
Intermediate & Advanced SEO | | Bdig0 -
Strange situation - Started over with a new site. WMT showing the links that previously pointed to old site.
I have a client whose site was severely affected by Penguin. A former SEO company had built thousands of horrible anchor texted links on bookmark pages, forums, cheap articles, etc. We decided to start over with a new site rather than try to recover this one. Here is what we did: -We noindexed the old site and blocked search engines via robots.txt -Used the Google URL removal tool to tell it to remove the entire old site from the index -Once the site was completely gone from the index we launched the new site. The new site had the same content as the old other than the home page. We changed most of the info on the home page because it was duplicated in many directory listings. (It's a good site...the content is not overoptimized, but the links pointing to it were bad.) -removed all of the pages from the old site and put up an index page saying essentially, "We've moved" with a nofollowed link to the new site. We've slowly been getting new, good links to the new site. According to ahrefs and majestic SEO we have a handful of new links. OSE has not picked up any as of yet. But, if we go into WMT there are thousands of links pointing to the new site. WMT has picked up the new links and it looks like it has all of the old ones that used to point at the old site despite the fact that there is no redirect. There are no redirects from any pages of the old to the new at all. The new site has a similar name. If the old one was examplekeyword.com, the new one is examplekeywordcity.com. There are redirects from the other TLD's of the same to his (i.e. examplekeywordcity.org, examplekeywordcity.info), etc. but no other redirects exist. The chances that a site previously existed on any of these TLD's is almost none as it is a unique brand name. Can anyone tell me why Google is seeing the links that previously pointed to the old site as now pointing to the new? ADDED: Before I hit the send button I found something interesting. In this article from dejan SEO where someone stole Rand Fishkin's content and ranked for it, they have the following line: "When there are two identical documents on the web, Google will pick the one with higher PageRank and use it in results. It will also forward any links from any perceived ’duplicate’ towards the selected ‘main’ document." This may be what is happening here. And just to complicate things further, it looks like when I set up the new site in GA, the site owner took the GA tracking code and put it on the old page. (The noindexed one that is set up with a nofollowed link to the new one.) I can't see how this could affect things but we're removing it. Confused yet? I'd love to hear your thoughts.
Intermediate & Advanced SEO | | MarieHaynes0 -
Reliable outsource site
Hi which is the most quality site to outsource my backlinks? freelancer.com odesk.com any other? From elance I am very disappointed. Thanks
Intermediate & Advanced SEO | | nyanainc0