Franchise Content Spinning
-
Hey Guys, Thanks for taking the time out to read my question, I appreciate it.
I know Google doesn't treat all duplicate content the same, but what about this scenario.
We have a garage door company franchise that services Seattle, San Diego, & Salt Lake City. It is the same brand, but each area has a different website, catering to their own county.
Say I write & post a blog about "how to maintain your garage door" to the Seattle site. This is certainly useful for the other locations as well. So would I get penalized for posting the same article to San Diego & Salt Lake City without massively changing the content to avoid duplication? Or should I dedicate the extra time to revamp the content and avoid duplication?
Does Google care about this type of duplication?
Thanks in advance!!
-
I agree with Miriam. Make the franchisee write the content for the site. Make unique, substantive, website content part of the franchise agreement.
-
Excellent discussion going on here and thanks, David Brooks, for popping in to add more context to this.
This seems to be distilling down to a question of the amount of control the brand desires. If the company determines that the multi-site approach is one it's essential to retain, then my best advice here would be to hand the keys over to the 6 franchise owners to each of their websites and task them with creating their own content that in no way duplicates corporate content or the content of any other site in the franchise. This is the only authentic approach to this that I can see because:
-
If the various sites genuinely represent totally separate entities, then the owner of a location should be made 100% responsible for his own marketing and SEO, apart from adhering to corporate guidelines. In this scenario, you relinquish corporate control and hope for the best.
-
If the various sites do not genuinely represent totally separate entities and are, in fact, being controlled by the corporate body behind the scenes, then the corporate body needs to come up with the funding to employ its own content development department capable of marketing all of the sites appropriately, without recourse to spinning or other such ideas. If this is the case, then the franchise owners' feelings or wishes don't really enter the picture, because total control is being maintained by the corporate body.
I continue to believe that a single site approach would be preferable in most cases, but, barring the possibility of that, the above two options represent paths that could be taken.
-
-
It's a very common approach for franchises to take. As a matter of fact, we recently stopped work for a franchisee client because the franchisor decided to do exactly this and consolidate.
In terms of how to approach the topic with them, there are so many reasons why this is a great idea for everyone involved so taking the educational route can make a very clear business case as to why they should.
The biggest complication is that if the individual sites are locked into contracts with their respective SEO providers. Since it would take a little time there would be no issue with running a landing page on your main site and their satellite site simultaneously for that time with an understanding that they take their site down at a certain point.
-
This thought process is heading down a path I recommend against, so my initial response still stands. What you're talking about doing here is essentially just SERP manipulation rather than providing a good website that ranks because it deserves to.
Your idea will probably work if done correctly, the trouble is that doing it correctly takes as much (if not more) effort than quality tactics that are above board.
The biggest issue I see is that to have each of these sites and content pieces ranking of their own accord, you need search engines to see them as different entities. To rank for your own branded terms in their respective locations, you also need search engines to understand that each of these sites is your brand. Basically, you need to show that the sites are both different and the same brand simultaneously.
Making them appear separate will take the same black hat stuff as running a PBN these days - host them on different servers, have the registration info either obscured or different on each site, don't inter-link between them etc. Your aim is to make them all appear to be different sites, owned and run by different people.
As for having the content unique enough to actually appear unique, having the same person write multiple versions of the same article isn't going to go very well unless they're well trained in doing this stuff. The writer is going to use similar sentence structures and phrasing no matter how much effort they put into it and this combined with the same branding and identical topic are probably more than enough flags to highlight what you're doing.
If you want it to work, do as much as you can to make them look completely different, including different writers. Just plan it out beforehand and consider the time investment here and whether or not that time could be used more effectively.
-
When I see the words "spinning" and "rewriting", shortcuts and duplicate content immediately come to mind.
Google is very familiar with spinning and rewriting and can filter these duplicates from the SERPs. If you have any doubts about each piece of content being unique and substantive then they might not be different enough to please Google.
-
I work with the guy who asked the original question. The issue is more nuanced then originally framed, but did represent one line of our thinking. In practice we have been writing a blog post and then rewriting them as best we can from the perspective of another writer. Our thinking is, within a large franchise a certain % of these will employ content marketing, and a certain % will logically come up with the same blog topics. The answers given to these topics will largely be the same e.g., "How much longer does synthetic oil last compared to conventional oil?" The answer will be the same, the writing will be different.
Assuming we do a good job on the rewrites, does anyone see why this wouldn't work? Can someone suggest a good way to test whether this is working i.e., Google respects these rewrites and gives them a chance to rank?
Thanks.
-
Thank you for your response and your perspective. The 1 site approach does seem like a good idea. However, the problem with making 1 site for our scenario, is that we are dealing with about 6 different franchise owners over about 12 different websites. All having a different SEO engagement with our company. It would be hard to convince all the owners it's in their own best interest to consolidate with each other.
-
Hey Dwayne!
Thanks for starting a good discussion. I agree with Chris here, in that the scenario you're describing is the main reason why most Local SEOs would urge you to go with a single site with landing pages for each company location on it, as opposed to a multi-site approach. You can look at it like this:
-
With a single site approach, everything you do on that site (publishing content, earning links, earning testimonials, accruing age, etc.) goes to benefit all of of your locations at once. Your brand gets maximum 'juice' out of everything you do and grows in strength over time.
-
With a multi-site approach, you are responsible for creating unique content for X number of sites instead of just one. Unless you've got the funding/creativity to keep up a steady stream of unique, helpful content on all of the sites, you will end up in a conundrum like this one, wondering if you should spin the same piece across multiple sites (not a good idea) because you just don't have the time to be writing 3, 6, 9, 12 different unique and awesome blog posts every week or even every month. Imagine writing just one really awesome piece that builds your brand and supports all of your locations. So much easier and appealing, right?
So, the above is kind of the long answer. The short answer is, no, it's not a good strategy to spin content. If you can't write something unique for each website, better to leave it alone. If you feel it's imperative to keep 3 websites instead of consolidating into one, you might try a relay approach in which you focus on Site 1 in February, Site 2 in March, site 3 in April and then back to site 1 in in May, etc. Not ideal, but might make it possible for you to focus on creating something really strong for 1 of the 3 sites, and then move onto the next one.
Good discussion!
-
-
You get what you earn. If you write the content, you will earn better visibility.
-
In theory, putting this same post on each of the sites won't be a problem, it just won't be of any real benefit to more than 1 site. I say in theory because Google is smart enough to understand what's going on here.
In practice, I'd still steer clear of it all together. A better way to structure it is a single site with sub-pages for each location for this very reason (and some others). Changing this structure now probably isn't an option, so my suggestions would be to either:
1) Come up with different topics for each site so no 2 blogs are the same; or
**2) **Get multiple writers involved and have them each write their own version of this topic so they really are unique. If they can't see what the other is writing, they have no choice but to offer technically unique content.
For us, "technically unique" still isn't enough and I definitely don't recommend it but it is an option.
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): http://www.effectivetherapysolutions.com/dev/ And here are the drafts of the location landing pages: 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: 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 -
Need sitemap opinion on large franchise network with thousands of subdomains
Working on a large franchise network with thousands of subdomains. There is the primary corporate domain which basically directs traffic to store locators and then to individual locations. The stores sell essentially the same products with some variations on pricing so lots of pages with the same product descriptions. Different content All the subdomains have their location information address info in the header, footer and geo meta tags on every page. Page titles customized with franchise store id numbers. Duplicate content Product description blocks. Franchisee domains will likely have the ability to add their own content in the future but as of right now most of the content short of the blocks on the pages are duplicated. Likely limitations -- Adding City to page titles will likely be problematic as there could be multiple franchises in the same city. Ideally it would be nice if users could search for the store or product and have centers return that are closest to them. We can turn on sitemaps on all the subdomains and try to submit them to the search engines. Looking for insight regarding submitting all these sites or just focusing on the main domain that has a lot less content on it.
Local Website Optimization | | jozwikjp0 -
No Index, No Follow Short *but relevant) content?
One of the sections of our blog is "Community Involvement." In this section, we post pictures of the event, what it was for, and what we did to help. We want our clients, and potential clients, to see that we do give back to our local community. However, thee are all very short posts (maybe a few hundred words). I'm worried this might look like spam, or at the very least, thin content to google, so should I no index no follow the posts or just leave them as is? Thanks, Ruben
Local Website Optimization | | KempRugeLawGroup0 -
Blogs/content marketing or slower salesfunnel on webshop?
Hi all, Im considering about building contents en blogs on a webshop, because a visitor will get see a lot of information about blogs, etc. The salefunnel will be chaotic, purchasing will be slower on a webshop. The webshop has more then 5000 products. Focus on gamers. For example Ikea or mahuranna shop, they have builded a website near their webshops. To get more traffic ofcourse, but its to hard to do both of them. Your focus will get lost and they way of communication on website/shop will be changing. Your brand and strategic will also change a lot, thats why im considering to find the right way. Who can give me an advice?
Local Website Optimization | | Dreamgame20160 -
How to Handle Franchise Duplicate Content
My agency handles digital marketing for about 80 Window World stores, each with separate sites. For the most part, the content across all of these sites is the exact same, though we have slowly but surely been working through getting new, unique content up on some of the top pages over the past year. These pages include resource pages and specific product pages. I'm trying to figure out the best temporary solution as we go through this process. Previously, we have tried to keep the pages we knew were duplicates from indexing, but some pages have still managed to slip through the cracks during redesigns. Would canonicals be the route to go? (do keep in mind that there isn't necessarily one "original version," so there isn't a clear answer as to which page/site all the duplicated pages should point to) Should we just continue to use robots.txt/noindex for all duplicate pages for now? Any other recommendations? Thanks in advance!
Local Website Optimization | | TriMarkDigital0 -
Massive duplicate content should it all be rewritten?
Ok I am asking this question to hopefully confirm my conclusion. I am auditing a domain who's owner is frustrated that they are coming in #2 for their regionally tagged search result and think its their Marketer/SEOs fault. After briefly auditing their site, the marketing company they have doing their work has really done a great job. There are little things that I have suggested they could do better but nothing substantial. They are doing good SEO for the most part. Their competitor site is ugly, has a terrible user experience, looks very unprofessional, and has some technical SEO issues from what I have seen so far. Yet it is beating them every time on the serps. I have not compared backlinks yet. I will in the next day or so. I was halted when I found, what seems to me to be, the culprit. I was looking for duplicate content internally, and they are doing fine there, then my search turned externally...... I copied and pasted a large chunk of one page into Google and got an exact match return.....rutro shaggy. I then found that there is another site from a company across the country that has identical content for possibly as much as half of their entire domain. Something like 50-75 pages of exact copy. I thought at first they must have taken it from the site I was auditing. I was shocked to find out that the company I am auditing actually has an agreement to use the content from this other site. The marketing company has asked the owners to allow them to rewrite the content but the owners have declined because "they like the content." So they don't even have authority on the content for approximately 1/2 of their site. Also this content is one of three main topics directed to from home page. My point to them here is that I don't think you can optimize this domain enough to overcome the fact that you have a massive portion of your site that is not original. I just don't think perfect optimization of duplicate content beats mediocre optimization of original content. I now have to convince the owners they are wrong, never an easy task. Am I right or am I over estimating the value of original content? Any thoughts? Thanks in advance!
Local Website Optimization | | RossM0 -
Does Google play fair? Is 'relevant content' and 'usability' enough?
It seems there are 2 opposing views, and as a newbie this is very confusing. One view is that as long as your site pages have relevant content and are easy for the user, Google will rank you fairly. The other view is that Google has 'rules' you must follow and even if the site is relevant and user-friendly if you don't play by the rules your site may never rank well. Which is closer to the truth? No one wants to have a great website that won't rank because Google wasn't sophisticated enough to see that they weren't being unfair. Here's an example to illustrate one related concern I have: I've read that Google doesn't like duplicated content. But, here are 2 cases in which is it more 'relevant' and 'usable' to the user to have duplicate content: Say a website helps you find restaurants in a city. Restaurants may be listed by city region, and by type of restaurant. The home page may have links to 30 city regions. It may also have links for 20 types of restaurants. The user has a choice. Say the user chooses a region. The resulting new page may still be relevant and usable by listing ALL 30 regions because the user may want to choose a different region. Altenatively say the user chooses a restaurant type for the whole city. The resulting page may still be relevant and usable by giving the user the ability to choose another type OR another city region. IOW there may be a 'mega-menu' at the top of the page which duplicates on every page in the site, but is very helpful. Instead of requiring the user to go back to the home page to click a new region or a new type the user can do it on any page. That's duplicate content in the form of a mega menu, but is very relevant and usable. YET, my sense is that Google MAY penalize the site even though arguably it is the most relevant and usable approach for someone that may or may not have a specific region or restaurant type in mind.. Thoughts?
Local Website Optimization | | couponguy0 -
Website and eshop with the same product descrition is duplicate content
Hi there! I'm building a website that is divided in a "marketing" and "shop" sections. The 2 sites are being authored by two companies (my company is doing the marketing one). The marketing site has all the company products while the shop will sell just some of those. I'm facing the problem of duplicated content and want to ask you guys if it will be a problem/mistake to use the same product description (and similar url) for the same product in both sites, and the right way to do it (without rewriting product descriptions). the main site will be : www.companyname.com
Local Website Optimization | | svitol
the shop will be: shop.companyname.com thanks
Francesco0