Solving Keyword Cannibalisation WITHOUT exact match internal links
-
Hi guys,
I have an ecommerce client I'm working with (they are a tour operator).
The client has multiple variations of very very similar tours which has created a keyword cannibalisation issue.
I've read this blog from Rand on the issue, and I understand that I need to use internal links to show the bots which page I want to rank for which term.
Problem is, I cant use exact match anchor text as it wouldn't adequately describe the tour from a user's perspective.
eg I want a single page to rank for 'Los Angeles Tour' however, because the tour also takes in san francisco, I cant use the exact match anchor text 'Los Angeles Tour' because it doesn't give users a realistic indication of the page that they are going to.
My solution...
Is to use the internal linking structure eg 'San Francisco & Los Angeles Tour', This has the keyword phrase I want to optimise for within the anchor text.
Does this have the same effect as using the exact match anchor text?
I cant really see any other solution, so I'm guessing that s the right course of action
Your thoughts would be much appreciated
-
Consistent anchor text can help you resolve the issue. If you have several pages which cover very similar topics, that's great! You can rank for multiple pages in SERPs. You can even land several of your links at the top of the first page.
"Los Angeles tour", "Los Angeles tours", "LA tour", "LA tours", etc. can all be used. If you have 4 strong pages that cover that topic, split up your keywords and if your pages are great quality you can dominate the SERPs.
Do you have more the 4 pages for that topic? "Two day LA tours", "2 day LA tours", "LA tours 2 days", etc. You can expand or contract to meet your needs. The key is generated GREAT content, and consistently using proper anchor text throughout your site.
-
Hi Ryan,
That's very clear and you've stated exactly what i'm planning to do, which is always good to hear:)
I know that I need to map keywords intelligently and use on page content and meta data to reinforce those keyword choices, however the crux of my issue (keyword cannibalisation) is that I have tens or hundreds of pages with similar content and phraseology.
Normally, I would use internal linking to indicate to the bots what page I want to rank for what phrase.
But if (for whatever reason) I cant use exact match internal links, do non-exact match internal links have the same effect?
I suppose to attempt to answer my question, (and to avoid going round in circles!), because I cant fix the problem as usual through exact match internal linking, I need to look at the issue holistically and rather than say the internal linking structure will fix the problem for me, I also need to be very careful with every aspect of on page (meta tags, alt tags, image filenames, on page content).
It's not the silver bullet that I was hoping for, but do you think that is the best solution?
thanks for all your help
j
-
Cannibalization happens when your site has multiple pages competing for the same keyword or phrase.
Let's assume your site has a page offering a tour of Los Angeles, another page which offers tours of Bevery Hills (part of the LA area for those not familiar with California), and another page offering a combined tour of LA + San Francisco. It would be reasonable to refer to all three pages with the term "Los Angeles tour".
The problem is when someone types "Los Angeles tour" into a search engine, which page does Google return to represent your site? While all three pages can represent your site somewhere in SERP, it is more likely that you can miss the first few pages because you are cannibalizing your own traffic. Rather then having one strong "Los Angeles Tour" page, you have three pages dividing the juice.
The solution is, for any page on your site, determine which keyword phrases are the primary focus of that page. Going forward, always direct any appropriate phrases to the page using anchor text. What you would not want to ever do is use the same "Los Angeles tour" text as a link to different pages on your site.
Is that a bit clearer?
-
Hi Ryan,
Thanks for the response. Unfortunately it's not 100% clear to me still though.
I think the problem stems from the fact that I don't have a simple 'vanilla' product, I have a complex product that needs to be described properly in the internal linking to be clear to users
So in response to your response!
I do appreciate the good point you make in the second paragraph about relevance, however following my example:
My page is highly relevant for the query 'Los Angeles Tour' as the product spends 5 days in LA and one day in SF.
Therefore my page should quite rightly rank for 'los angeles tour'...however it is not just a 'Los Angeles tour' it also takes in SF, and I need to specify that in the internal link to be clear to users.
So, if I cant use the exact match phrase "Los Angelese Tour" my intention is to use the phrase "San Francisco & Los Angeles Tour" in the internal linking and that by having the phrase "los angeles tour" within the internal link (as long as I dont use that phrase in internal links anywhere else on the site), I will indicate to Google that that is the page I want to rank for the phrase "los angeles tour", thus preventing keyword cannibalisation
Does that work as a way of preventing keyword cannibalisation, and if not, how do I avoid the keyword cannibalisation problem without exact match internal linking?
thanks v much for your help
j
-
Hi James.
You can certainly use "San Francisco & Los Angeles Tour" as your anchor text. Clearly, that will only offer an exact match if a user entered in that phrase as their search query. All things being equal, if someone entered "Los Angeles Tour" as their search query, your page would not appear until after all the "Los Angeles tour" exact match pages. Of course, all things are never equal, but I think this is the information you were seeking.
If your client offers tours of Los Angeles, tours of San Francisco, and a combined tour of both I would consider offering a page dedicated to each tour. If the only tour is a combined tour, then clearly your tour is less relevant to the "Los Angeles tour" term, and your rankings should reflect that relevancy.
Your question jumped around a bit so I am not sure if that is the answer you are seeking.
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
-
Are These Links Junk?
I hired an SEO to create incoming links to me website insisting that only white hat techniques be used. The SEO was highly recommended by a family friend. In 3 months about 14 links to my site were obtained. The URLs for the domains where the links originate are below. I paid $8,000 for the services of the SEO provider to create the links over 4 months. When I looked at the links more carefully I noticed that the sites did not seem to have owners. That there was no phone number, physical address and scant information about ownership. I also noticed that most pages had outgoing links of a promotional nature. Also, that content created for me had grammatical and occasional spelling errors. The links did not look bad in terms of MOZ domain authority and MOZ page authority, but when I went subscribed to AHREFS a few days ago and evaluated the links, I noticed that the URL rating (somewhat equivalent to MOZ page authority) was really low. Furthermore, noticed that one of the domains solicits paid links from gambling sites. The SEO who sourced the links on my behalf says he will explain why I "have nothing to worry about". Dividing his monthly fee by the number of links and I paid $571 per link. Is it possible the the below domains could have pages that I would want links from? Would these links be potentially worth more than a few hundred dollars? O are these sites more like a cheap PBN or maybe "the hoth". If the links are in fact good I would be delighted. But if they are of poor quality could I legitimately ask for a refund? Also, are these domains so bad that it is imperative for me to get the links removed? <colgroup><col width="198"></colgroup>
Intermediate & Advanced SEO | | Kingalan1
| https://www.equities.com |
| http://www.realestaterama.com |
| https://moneyinc.com |
| https://homebusinessmag.com |
| http://digitalconnectmag.com |
| https://suburbanfinance.com/ |
| http://www.homebunch.com |
| http://inman.com |
| https://www.propertytalk.com/ |
| http://activerain.com |
| https://www.conservativedailynews.com/ |
| http://moneyforlunch.com/ |
| http://baltimorepostexaminer.com/ |
| https://www.tgdaily.com/ |
| |0 -
Hyphens in Keyword
Hi everyone, I was wondering if anyone had any experience of whether Google treats keywords with hyphens differently. One of my websites main keywords is 'buy to let', however all across our website it is referred to as 'buy-to-let'. People always search without the hyphens. I recently heard that Google may only treat us as a highly relevant match and not an exact match for this keyword. I was wondering if anyone had any experience of this, and what is the best course of action to take. Thanks
Intermediate & Advanced SEO | | brian-madden0 -
Affiliate Links Dilemma
Hello everyone. Our e-commerce website virtualsheetmusic.com has several hundreds affiliate incoming links, and many of them are "follow" links. I thought to redirect all incoming affiliate links to a "intermediate" page excluded by the robots.txt file in order to avoid any possible "commercial links" penalty from Google, but I now face a dilemma... most of our best referral links are affiliate links, by excluding those links from our back link profile could give us a big hit in terms of rankings. How would you solve this dilemma? What would you suggest doing in this sort of cases?
Intermediate & Advanced SEO | | fablau0 -
Links from MOZ, Harmful?
I have listed my domain in several Ask the Community requests. These have resulted in links from the Ask the Community posts showing up in MOZ site explorer. So actual links have been detected. Are these links harmful to my link profile? The content is not at all related to commercial real estate which is the subject of our website. Thanks, Alan
Intermediate & Advanced SEO | | Kingalan10 -
Should I remove all vendor links (link farm concerns)?
I have a web site that has been around for a long time. The industry we serve includes many, many small vendors and - back in the day - we decided to allow those vendors to submit their details, including a link to their own web site, for inclusion on our pages. These vendor listings were presented in location (state) pages as well as more granular pages within our industry (we called them "topics). I don't think it's important any more but 100% of the vendors listed were submitted by the vendors themselves, rather than us "hunting down" links for inclusion or automating this in any way. Some of the vendors (I'd guess maybe 10-15%) link back to us but many of these sites are mom-and-pop sites and would have extremely low authority. Today the list of vendors is in the thousands (US only). But the database is old and not maintained in any meaningful way. We have many broken links and I believe, rightly or wrongly, we are considered a link farm by the search engines. The pages on which these vendors are listed use dynamic URLs of the form: \vendors<state>-<topic>. The combination of states and topics means we have hundreds of these pages and they thus form a significant percentage of our pages. And they are garbage 🙂 So, not good.</topic></state> We understand that this model is broken. Our plan is to simply remove these pages (with the list of vendors) from our site. That's a simple fix but I want to be sure we're not doing anything wring here, from an SEO perspective. Is this as simple as that - just removing these page? How much effort should I put into redirecting (301) these removed URLs? For example, I could spend effort making sure that \vendors\California- <topic>(and for all states) goes to a general "topic" page (which still has relevance, but won't have any vendors listed)</topic> I know there is no distinct answer to this, but what expectation should I have about the impact of removing these pages? Would the removal of a large percentage of garbage pages (leaving much better content) be expected to be a major factor in SEO? Anyway, before I go down this path I thought I'd check here in case I miss something. Thoughts?
Intermediate & Advanced SEO | | MarkWill0 -
On-site links
Hi everybody, There's a lot of information about getting sitewide backlinks, but so few about on-site optimization. Is there a maximum of links to put on a page ? Is there a maximum of link that a page should receive ? etc ... ? So, what is the optimal strategy ? And I'm only concerned about on-page and on-site link, not backlinks commming from other sites. Thanks
Intermediate & Advanced SEO | | DavidPilon0 -
What url should i link to?
Hi everybody, after some discussions i decided to keep my page on the old domain for better seo rankings; However, the new third level domain sounds better: poltronafraubrescia.zenucchi.it.... the question is: i'm going to recive a high value link and i don't know if i should link directly to the old adress ( www.zenucchi.it/ITA/poltrona-frau-brescia.it ) where the page is located or to the new one by making a 301 redirect to the previous. what's best? and second question what's the way to keep the page on this adress ( www.zenucchi.it/ITA/poltrona-frau-brescia.it ) but show poltronafraubrescia.zenucchi.it as url? thank you guido
Intermediate & Advanced SEO | | guidoboem0 -
How important is sticking to an exact keyword?
The latest article I'm writing for my site is "Friends With Benefits Rules"... So the first part of my question is, what does SEOMoz advocate as being the ideal # of times to include the entire key phrase in the article? I know nobody but Google knows for certain, but is 4 (including in H1's etc.) generally considered enough, other than in the page title? Second part is, what is the consensus about how important is it to stick to the exact keyword? For the example I gave, is it just as good to include a comma, E.g. "...friends with benefits, rules..." or a hyphen "Friends with Benefits - Rules for..."? One thing I'm unclear about on this topic is stop words and plurals. I've been told before that Google ignores stop words, but results for searches with or without the word "how," for example produce very different results... Same thing with plurals. In any case, all of the above is assuming that the quality of the content would not be affected in either case...
Intermediate & Advanced SEO | | corp08030