Keywords with locations
-
I've seen quite a few threads that orbit around my questions, but none in the last year, so I'll ask it
I'm seeing some strange results when testing various keywords with and without locations included. For a foundation repair company in Indiana, we've optimized for all the big cities, since the company services the whole state. Here's a sample of weird stuff:
Test 1: If I set my location (all other Google 'helps' turned off) to Indianapolis and search
'foundation repair' result is #3
'foundation repair indianapolis' result is #20
'indiana foundation repair' result is #18
Test 2: Location set to the small town the company is based in (Rossville, IN)
'foundation repair' result is #1
'foundation repair rossville' result is #3 behind other companies located in Rossville, GA, and Rossville, PA!!
I suppose I was under the impression that the ip location data Google gathers would weigh more heavily than how place names are optimized as part of keywords (or just that the physical location would supplant the place name typed into the search if it happened to be the same). But according to these tests, it seems that inferred location is by far a secondary factor.
I can deduce that we're more optimized than our competitors for 'foundation repair', but less optimized for keywords with place names in them (we feel like we'd be verging on stuffing if we did more).
Am I missing something here? Has anyone else seen this sort of thing?
-
This makes sense, and is a good way of framing it. Thanks very much.
Your answer here made me see that my two tests (Indianapolis and Rossville) actually showed somewhat different algorithm principles.
I understand that with the increase of mobile and thus 'conversational' voice searches, the inclusion of a place name is less and less common. Thus with the 'Rossville' example, since 'Rossville' is ambiguous and was not differentiated from other Rossvilles I can see how others might creep in.
Even so, I would think Google would be programmed to first see that my location is set in Rossville, IN, and thus conclude that Rossville, IN must be the one I'm referring to. If every search was done on mobile, then I can maybe understand seeing Rossville, PA, and Rossville, GA in the SERPs. But even then, not in position 1 and 2 before Rossville, IN, where I am located...
So, when I specified a very unambiguous place name (Indianapolis), while my location is set to that same unambiguous place (Indianapolis, IN), would Google's algos look outside of Indianapolis, like it did with Rossville? It turns out the inverse process is happening here (I think). I went back to look at the results for 'foundation repair indianapolis' and found that the listings were extra-localized, starting with businesses that have an indianapolis address, and moving concentrically outward from there.
But again, we rank highly when location is set to Indianapolis, IN, and simply search 'foundation repair'. Apparently in this case, when a search string does not specify disambiguated place-names, Google produces items related to {foundation repair} in the general vicinity of {indianapolis}, based on the inferred location data, instead of the other approach which yields limited results within the city. This is surprising to me (though beneficial to us).
I'm probably constructing too detailed of a process here based on just a couple small tests. I'd love any other input. And sorry for the novel!! I'm trying to work all this out. It's an interesting discussion though. I hope it's helpful to someone in the forums.
-
Good Morning!
Ah, I think I see what you were explaining now. So, this is how I find it most helpful to think of this.
If I am located in Topeka, Kansas (or have my location set there) and I search for 'hotels', Google assumes that I am looking for a hotel near me.
But, if I am located in Topeka, Kansas (or have my location set there) and I search for 'hotels Dallas, TX' I'm making it very clear to Google that I am looking for lodgings elsewhere.
In other words, if I don't tell Google to be specific to some region other than my own, Google assumes I want the results nearest me. But if I am specific that I want results from somewhere else by including that location in my query, Google shows me the local results for that location.
-
Thanks for responding Miriam! I really appreciate it.
I suppose my conclusions may not have been expressed well, or made some jumps. First, yes, I was actually really surprised by how strong the inferred location data influenced the results when no place name was typed in the search bar!
It's the second part that surprised me though; that when a location is specified in the search, that the typed location name seems to supersede Google's gathered ip location data. I didn't expect it to work this way -- especially not to the degree of bringing up #1 and #2 listings from totally different regions of the country! Does this make sense or am I still missing something?! Haha
-
Hi Joshua!
I'm a little puzzled by the conclusion your are drawing. Don't your tests prove that inferred location is actually the stronger force here, if your client is ranking highest for non-geo-term searches with your location set to a city rather than including a city in the search phrase? From the result set you've shared, that's how I would read it, but it may be that I am the one who is missing something:)
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
-
Question about partial duplicate content on location landing pages of multilocation business
Hi everyone, I am a psychologist in private practice in Colorado and I recently went from one location to 2 locations. I'm currently updating my website to better accommodate the second location. I also plan continued expansion in the future, so there will be more and more locations as time goes on. As a result, I am making my websites current homepage non-location specific and creating location landing pages as I have seen written about in many places. My question is: I know that location landing pages should have unique content, and I have plenty of this, but how much content is it also okay to have be duplicate across the location landing pages and the homepage? For instance, here is the current draft of the new homepage (these are not live yet):Â http://www.effectivetherapysolutions.com/dev/ And here are the drafts of the location landing pages:Â http://www.effectivetherapysolutions.com/dev/denver-office http://www.effectivetherapysolutions.com/dev/colorado-springs-office And for reference, here is the current homepage that is actually live for my single Denver location:Â http://www.effectivetherapysolutions.com/ As you can see, the location landing pages have the following sections of unique content: Therapist picture at the top testimonial quotes (the one on the homepage is the only thing I have I framed in this block from crawl so that it appears as unique content on the Denver page) therapist bios GMB listing driving directions and hours and I also haven't added these yet, but we will also have unique client success stories and appropriately tagged images of the offices So that's plenty of unique content on the pages, but I also have the following sections of content that are identical or nearly identical to what I have on the homepage: Intro paragraph blue and green "adult" and child/teen" boxes under the intro paragraph "our treatment really works" section "types of anxiety we treat" section Is that okay or is that too much duplicate content? The reason I have it that way is that my website has been very successful for years at converting site visitors into paying clients, and I don't want to lose aspects of the page that I know work when people land on it. And now that I am optimizing the location landing pages to be where people end up instead of the homepage, I want them to still see all of that content that I know is effective at conversion. If people on here do think it is too much, one possible solution is to turn parts of it into pictures or put them into I-frames on the location pages so Google doesn't crawl those parts of the location pages, but leave them normal on the homepage so it still gets crawled on there. I've seen a lot written about not having duplicate content on location landing pages for this type of website, but everything I've read seems to refer to entire pages being copied with just the location names changed, which is not what I'm doing, hence my question. Thanks everyone!
Local Website Optimization | | gremmy90 -
Is it deceptive to attempt to rank for a city you're located just outside of?
I live in Greenville, SC (who has a large "Greater Greenville" reach). I work for an agency with many clients who are located just outside of the city in smaller towns, sometimes technically in counties other than Greenville. Often, they provide services in the city of Greenville and aim to grow business there, so we'll use "Greenville, SC" throughout site copy, in titles, and in meta descriptions. Are there any negative implications to this? Any chance search engines think these clients are being deceptive? And is it possible these clients are hurting their ranking in their actual location by trying to appear to be a Greenville-based company? Thank you for any thoughts!
Local Website Optimization | | engeniusbrent1 -
Duplicate Content - Local SEO - 250 Locations
Hey everyone, I'm currently working with a client that has 250 locations across the United States. Each location has its own website and each website has the same 10 service pages. All with identical content (the same 500-750 words) with the exception of unique meta-data and NAP which has each respective location's name, city, state, etc. I'm unsure how duplicate content works at the local level. I understand that there is no penalty for duplicate content, rather, any negative side-effects are because search engines don't know which page to serve, if there are duplicates. So here's my question: If someone searches for my client's services in Miami, and my client only as one location in that city, does duplicate content matter? Because that location isn't competing against any of my client's other locations locally, so search engines shouldn't be confused by which page to serve, correct? Of course, in other cities, like Phoenix, where they have 5 locations, then I'm sure the duplicate content is negatively affecting all 5 locations. I really appreciate any insight! Thank you,
Local Website Optimization | | SEOJedi510 -
Moving to a new Location: SEO Website
I'm moving to a different state and want to keep my business and clients in both locations.  Is it better to build two separate sites, one for Ohio locations and create a new site for Tennessee content? (www.ohiosite.com & www.tennesseesite.com) Or is it best to keep one site, and install a second wordpress site in a separate folder like ( www.site.com  + www.site.com/tennessee )
Local Website Optimization | | morg454540 -
How to approach SEO for a national umbrella site that has multiple chapters in different locations that are different URLS
We are currently working with a client who has one national site - let's call it CompanyName.net, and multiple, independent chapter sites listed under different URLs that are structured, for example, as CompanyNamechicago.org, and sometimes specific to neighborhoods, as in CompanyNamechicago.org/lakeview.org. The national site is .net, while all others are .orgs. These are not subdomains or subfolders, as far as we can tell. You can use a search function on the .net site to find a location near you and click to that specific local site. They are looking for help optimizing and increasing traffic to certain landing pages on the .net site...but similar landing pages also exist on a local level, which appear to be competing with the national site. (Example: there is a landing page on the national .net umbrella site for a "dog safety" campaign they are doing, but also that campaign has led to a landing page created independently on the local CompanyNameChicago.org website, which seems to get higher ranking due to a user looking for this info while located in Chicago. We are wondering if our hands are tied here since they appear to be competing for traffic with all their localized sites, or if there are best practices to handle a situation like this. Thanks!
Local Website Optimization | | timfrick0 -
Location Pages and Duplicate Content and Doorway Pages, Oh My!
Google has this page on location pages. It's very useful but it doesn't say anything about handling the duplicate content a location page might have. Seeing as the loctions may have very similar services. Lets say they have example.com/location/boston, example.com/location/chicago, or maybe boston.example.com or chicago.example.com etc. They are landing pages for each location, housing that locations contact information as well as serving as a landing page for that location. Showing the same services/products as every other location. This information may also live on the main domains homepage or services page as well. My initial reaction agrees with this article: http://moz.com/blog/local-landing-pages-guide - but I'm really asking what does Google expect? Does this location pages guide from Google tell us we don't really have to make sure each of those location pages are unique? Sometimes creating "unique" location pages feels like you're creating **doorway pages - **"Multiple pages on your site with similar content designed to rank for specific queries like city or state names". In a nutshell, Google's Guidelines seem to have a conflict on this topic: Location Pages: "Have each location's or branch's information accessible on separate webpages"
Local Website Optimization | | eyeflow
Doorway Pages: "Multiple pages on your site with similar content designed to rank for specific queries like city or state names"
Duplicate Content: "If you have many pages that are similar, consider expanding each page or consolidating the pages into one." Now you could avoid making it a doorway page or a duplicate content page if you just put the location information on a page. Each page would then have a unique address, phone number, email, contact name, etc. But then the page would technically be in violation of this page: Thin Pages:Â "One of the most important steps in improving your site's ranking in Google search results is to ensure that it contains plenty of rich information that includes relevant keywords, used appropriately, that indicate the subject matter of your content." ...starting to feel like I'm in a Google Guidelines Paradox! Do you think this guide from Google means that duplicate content on these pages is acceptable as long as you use that markup? Or do you have another opinion?0 -
URL Keyword stuffing. service-city.com/product-service-city/ vs. service-city.com/product/
For example: tailoring-london.com/suits-tailoring-london/ or tailoring-london.com/suits/ The main keyword being targeted here is "suit tailoring london". The home page's main keyword is "tailoring london". Would love to hear your opinions. Many thanks 🙂
Local Website Optimization | | LondonAli0 -
Local SEO + Best Practice for locations
Hi All, Based on a hypothetical scenario, lets say you are a plumber. You live and operate within Chelsea in London. You have established a Google places profile and incorporated schema data to tell Google your fixed place location. In addition you operate in several nearby towns with no fixed location presence. i.e Brentford, Bromley, Catford, Cheswick and Tottenham. I create a feature rich page on 'How to find a quality plumber'. Within the page I incorporate the following description: blah blah, as a quality plumber serving the community of Chelsea, we also offer our services to nearby towns of Brentford, Bromley, Catford, Cheswick and Tottenham. I create hyperlinks for the towns (Brentford, Bromley, Catford, Cheswick and Tottenham) that allow the user see in details a full list of services, operation hours, etc. Naturally all towns will have there own unique content (no duplication). Question
Local Website Optimization | | Mark_Ch
Is the above scenario the correct way to provide local seo or is this approach considered spammy to Google? Thanks Mark0