How important is AMP?
-
I have a client site with 200+ landing pages. We implemented AMP and many of the pages lost a lot of key elements including, sidebars, Calls to Action and footers. Our developer claims that we need to customize each of the 200+ pages for AMP to show those things (don't 100% believe him).
So the questions are:
a. How important is AMP? if we dump AMP will that hurt us? The site is already mobile friendly and clean, loads fast.
b.Does it sound fishy that he says each page needs to be cusotomized to show sidebar, footer content, CTAs? -
dk7,
My experience with amp is that it is not necessary for SEO unless you are writing time sensitive news articles or articles based on current events. These are the real amp pages that google is displaying right now. I have not seen amp product pages or service pages from small businesses show up in the SERPS. Amp will remove all programming from the page so it will mostly be text based. Sidebars and other page elements are not usually displayed with AMP pages. The purpose of AMP is to increase the user experience on mobile devices. So these pages have basic text and some images.
-
Sidebars etc shouldn't be on AMP pages, as they are designed to present the user with the content on their mobile device. They are usually on a separate page, for example, url.com/page/amp, and shouldn't impact the desktop version of the website with regards to different content, sidebars etc.
AMP isn't currently a huge focus for many websites which are mobile friendly as AMP pages will not be shown preference in SERPs over mobile friendly ones simply for using AMP. If you have the option to add it then, of course, go ahead and do so. But if you are confident that you are mobile friendly and load quickly then I wouldn't panic too much over it.
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
-
Only fraction of the AMP pages are indexed
Back in June, we had seen a sharp drop in traffic on our website. We initially assumed that it was due to the Core Update that was rolled out in early June. We had switched from http to https in May, but thought that should have helped rather than cause a problem. Until early June the traffic was trending upwards. While investigating the issue, I noticed that only a fraction (25%) of the AMP pages have been indexed. The pages don't seem to be getting indexed even though they are valid. Accordingly to Google Analytics too, the percentage of AMP traffic has dropped from 67-70% to 40-45%. I wonder if it is due to the indexing issue. In terms of implementation it seems fine. We are pointing canonical to the AMP page from the desktop version and to the desktop version from the AMP page. Any tips on how to fix the AMP indexing issue. Should I be concerned that only a fraction of the AMP pages are indexed. I really hope you can help in resolving this issue.
Technical SEO | | Gautam1 -
Desktop & Mobile XML Sitemap Submitted But Only Desktop Sitemap Indexed On Google Search Console
Hi! The Problem We have submitted to GSC a sitemap index. Within that index there are 4 XML Sitemaps. Including one for the desktop site and one for the mobile site. The desktop sitemap has 3300 URLs, of which Google has indexed (according to GSC) 3,000 (approx). The mobile sitemap has 1,000 URLs of which Google has indexed 74 of them. The pages are crawlable, the site structure is logical. And performing a Landing Page URL search (showing only Google/Organic source/medium) on Google Analytics I can see that hundreds of those mobile URLs are being landed on. A search on mobile for a longtail keyword from a (randomly selected) page shows a result in the SERPs for the mobile page that judging by GSC has not been indexed. Could this be because we have recently added rel=alternate tags on our desktop pages (and of course corresponding canonical ones on mobile). Would Google then 'not index' rel=alternate page versions? Thanks for any input on this one. PmHmG
Technical SEO | | AlisonMills0 -
ALT tags - How important are they?
I realise ALT tags are important from an accessibility perspective but in terms of organic search, do they carry much value? I have a big site and it doesn't look like ALT tags have been added generally, it would be a massive job to fix and I'm just trying to weigh up what to concentrate on first. Does anybody have any real life experience?
Technical SEO | | seoman100 -
Hi Mozers, is the AMP project is supposed to be an SEO factor on mobile platforms? Also, can it be used on ecommerce sites such as Magento or Shopify as well? Thanks!
It stands to reason that Google will favor early adopters of Accelerated Mobile Pages, but it seems heavily geared toward news publishers so far. What about regular Wordpress sites, or ecommerce sites like Shopify, should AMP be pursued on that type of CMS?
Technical SEO | | CalamityJane771 -
Crawl Attempt Errors & Homepage Not Ranking
Hi all, I have scanned the community forum thoroughly to find a solution to this issue and noticed some detailed and informed responses, but I am not sure which apply to the issue we are currently having. We are receiving a lot of 803 Crawl Attempt Errors on a weekly basis for our site www.mangofurniture.co.uk and also our homepage isn't ranking and I can't help but think that the two are linked. We have some rankings for the internal pages and have a couple of other sites that use the same template as www.mangofurniture.co.uk that are doing well with no crawl attempt errors and strong homepage rankings. There are a lot of great resources out there on the Moz forum and elsewhere but I am little unsure what applies to our problem or whether to two are linked at all. We have tried rewriting the homepage and developing the internal linking system but to no success as yet. Also, because the site is fairly new so the link profile is quite small at present. Any advice regarding this would be greatly appreciated. Many thanks in advance.
Technical SEO | | FurnitureGeek0 -
Why an audit is so important?
Hi Mozzers, I was wondering what are the greatest benefits of an SEO audit and how to explain the necessity to do it to a customer? Thanks for your answers, Jonathan
Technical SEO | | JonathanLeplang0 -
Canonical & rel=prev / next changes to website a good idea or not?
Hi all, I decided yesterday to make a load of changes to my website, and today i woke thinking, should i have done that! So below is an example of what i have done (i will try to explain clearly anyway), can you let me know if you think what i have done would harm or help my website in search results etc... ok, so lets take just one category - Cameras And it has the sub categories - box dome bullet it also has other sub categories (which are actually features, but the only way i can show them on my site is by having them as a sub-category with its own static page, and adding the products to these as secondary categories) vandal proof high resolution night vision previously i have it set up so that every single category / sub category / feature had its own static page, with a canonical tag to itself (i.e cameras.html canonical was to cameras.html, vandalproof.html canonical was to vandalproof.html). Any of the categories / sub cats / features that had more than one page were simply not in search results due to the canonical pointing to "Page 1"... What i have now done: Last night i decided to change all this, now for all categories / sub cats / features i have add rel=prev / next where applicable, and removed the canonical from second / third / fourth pages etc, but left the canonical on "page 1". I also removed any keywords from page 2,3,4 etc and changed descriptions to just page "X" + category name. So for example, page one looks like: and page two looks like: I also went a little further (maybe too far) and decided that the features pages would canonicalize back to cameras so for those i now have: Page 1: Page 2: Any advice is welcome on the above, in regards to which way may be better and why, and obviously if anything jumps out as a mistake... Please advise James
Technical SEO | | isntworkdull0