Google Product Feeds - New Requirements
-
We are in the jewelry industry, and for Google product feeds, we list our products under "Apparel & Accessories > Jewelry".
As of the new Google feed requirements, they are saying that we have to choose a gender and color for each product that is in the Apparel category.
While this makes sense for clothes, it doesn't exactly for jewelry because many items are for both men and women, and there's not always a color associated with each product.
I can enter some of these fields manually, but with 5,000+ products, it makes it difficult w/ each update.
Anyone have solutions for this? Or a way around it? Can we just include those fields but leave them blank?
Any other solutions?
-
it is automatic. thanks. see above reply.
-
we are auto-generating the feed, but our shopping cart doesn't differentiate between different genders and what color a piece of jewelry is, so any added fields like that we would have to add in manually.
To alleviate the issue, for now, we put unisex for the gender and "metal" for the color and it seemed to take.
-
Definitely echo the suggestion about looking into automating feeds. I've got a couple thousand SKUs affected by this as well and I would go nuts if I had to do it manually.
You could leave it blank but Google might reject those products, especially as they've marked the field as 'required':
http://support.google.com/merchants/bin/answer.py?hl=en&answer=1346661
Google is obviously also going to favor the more information rich feeds.
EDIT-
Sorry didn't realize you might not know how to do that. The Google feed is pretty straightforward; you just have to render an XML file from your database. That link I put up above should have the info in it for the spec, it's been forever since I coded mine.
Your ecommerce platform might support it too; for example I think osCommerce, ZenCart, e.g. the popular open source ones, have plugins to render Product Feeds.
-
How are you creating the feed? is it all done manually?
If you arent already it would be a good idea to look into auto generating the feed, that way you would be able to set rules at say category and sub category level or take more information about the products from your product database.
The more information you get in the feed the better, eg will imporve the optimisation process.. and automating it should also mean it takes much less of your time to manage 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
-
Using Google Reviews for non local business
Hi All, We are deciding on what site is best to capture reviews from customers and I'm just not sure what is the ideal option. We are a SaaS business with multiple offices in different locations but the specific geographies are not really relevant to our customers. Is it worth focusing on google reviews so that when our brand is searched there are plenty of nice shiny stars (plus maybe they can be added into adwords adverts as well...). Search volume for the keywords we don't yet rank for are not massive although still important. Alternatively should we be thinking about something like G2Crowd. None of our competitors are doing anything so there's no real need to our muscle them on a review website and I don't think our end user will visit these sites before buying but we would point to them and say 'hey, look at all these great reviews'. Finally I searched my old company recently who and just under news results were facebook reviews. Maybe that's another option. All advice welcome. All advice appreciated.
Industry News | | jafayeh1 -
Google penalty removal expert questions
We have searched online for a Google penalty “expert” (individual or company) and have located what appear to be “experts”. Please provide feedback on the following 2 individuals/companies we have found that can help with penalty removal. Have you or one of your clients used either of the “experts” below? What were the results? How many disavows and reconsideration requests did you/they have to make? 1.www.penaltypros.com . To give a quote and to see what your links are they use links from Google Webmaster Tools only. Penaltypros.com disavows first and then removes bad links second. This is opposite of what Google and Seo’s recommend but penaltypros.com claims 100% success using this non-traditional approach. See imgur.com link for screenshot. 2.http://www.hiswebmarketing.com/ To give a quote and to see what your links are they use links from https://ahrefs.com/ only. Please provide any and all feedback on the above 2 “experts” and also post the websites, individual names, company names of those that you consider Google penalty removal “experts” so that we may obtain a quote from them. Lp9F3FI
Industry News | | RetractableAwnings.com1 -
Are large property portals going to continue to dominate Google's search results?
We are having a discussion (potential argument) in our office around whether large portals (namely property portals) have longevity in Google's search. Argument 1:
Industry News | | NeilPursey
Google's rise in local search and rewarding strong brand names rather than keyword driven domain names will devalue property portals with keyword rich domain names. Property portals are essentially duplicating content on smaller individually owned property websites, therefore in time Google will devalue property portals. **Argument 2: **
Property portals have more property stock listed on their websites so therefore Google will reward them by ranking these websites higher than the smaller real estate agencies with niche stock in their areas that they operate in. The property portals that already are already in a dominate position already carry authority and their own sense of branding, therefore it's difficult for Google to ignore them. If we assume that Google is looking into user behaviour as a ranking factor, then this will help portals as they have more stock which means higher engagement on the website. I'd love to read the moz community thoughts and opinions on this. I reckon it's a worthy debate..0 -
Google Site Warnings via Phone?
I received a voicemail earlier stating that "there are two issues with your company's current Google listing that we need to discuss with the business owner. it is very important that we talk as soon as possible. press 1 to speak with an agent immediately. press 8 if you have already verified your account information or if you are no longer in business and want to be removed from this list. thank you" that's it. no contact number, no reference to what listing or what type of listing (organic, places, etc.) Checked GWT, GA, and the Gmail - there are no warnings or messages in any of those accounts. Has anyone else experienced this?
Industry News | | EmpireToday0 -
Does anyone have a copy of the 2011 Google Quality Raters Handbook that was recently leaked?
http://searchengineland.com/download-the-latest-google-search-quality-rating-guidelines-97391 Google has been on a conquest taking them down online but I would really like to take a look at it if you have a copy! [moderator note - please use the PM system and exchange email addresses there. We've removed emails from this thread before it gets indexed and exposed to the world]
Industry News | | altecdesign4 -
Google+ profiles and Rel Author. Extensive question
A bit of a mammoth question for discussion here: With the launch of Google+ and profiles, coupled with the ability to link/verify authorship using rel=me to google+ profile - A few questions with respect to the long term use and impact. As an individual - I can have a Google+ Profile, and add links to author pages where I am featured. If rel=me is used back to my G+ profile - google can recognise me as the writer - no problem with that. However - if I write for a variety of different sites, and produce a variety of different content - site owners could arguably become reluctant to link back or accredit me with the rel=me tag on the account I might be writing for a competitor for example, or other content in a totally different vertical that is irrelevant. Additionally - if i write for a company as an employee, and the rel=me tag is linked to my G+ profile - my profile (I would assume) is gaining strength from the fact that my work is cited through the link (even if no link juice is passed - my profile link is going to appear in the search results on a query that matches something I have written, and hence possibly drain some "company traffic" to my profile). If I were to then leave the employment of that company - and begin writing for a direct competitor - is my profile still benefiting from the old company content I have written? Given that google is not allowing pseudonyms or ghost writer profiles - where do we stand with respect to outsourced content? For example: The company has news written for them by a news supplier - (each writer has a name obviously) - but they don't have or don't want to create a G+ profile for me to link to. Is it a case of wait for google to come up with the company profiles? or, use a ghost name and run the gauntlet on G+? Lastly, and I suppose the bottom line - as a website owner/company director/SEO; Is adding rel=me links to all your writers profiles (given that some might only write 1 or 2 articles, and staff will inevitably come and go) an overall positive for SEO? or, a SERP nightmare if a writer moves on to another company? In essence are site owners just improving the writers profile rather than gaining very much?
Industry News | | IPINGlobal541 -
Googles' Anonymous data sharing "pool"
Is sharing this information good for my websites? And Is it Open information for anyone to hack into, and see my sites analytics? Bottom line, good or a bad thing?
Industry News | | smstv0