.com Outranking my ccTLD's and cannot figure out why.
-
So I have a client that has a number of sites for a number of different countries with their specific ccTLD. They also have a .com in the US. The problem is that the UK site hardly ranks for anything while the .com ranks for a ton in the UK. I have setup GWT for the UK and the .com to be specific to their geographic locations. So I have the ccTLD and I have GWT showing where I want these sites to rank. Problem is it apparently is not working....Any clues as to what else I could do?
-
rel=alternate works for GB vs US, for example. I don't see it as a problem!
-
The problem I see with the rel=alternate tag is how do I set this up for a locale versus just setting this up with the hreflang? Both are english so it really doesn't qualify as alternate in a different language.
-
I would definitely try the rel=alternate tag in this instance, and start working on some decent links from .co.uk sites to the .co.uk site. Good luck!
-
The content is fairly similar as we sell most of the same products in all the locales but the problem I have is this is true for all my regions but the UK is where I am seeing most of the trouble. The backlink profile is pretty garbage for the UK site.
Would using the rel=alternate tag on the XML sitemap for the .com help any you think?
-
I think we'd need some more info to provide a helpful answer.
- Is the content the same between the sites?
- What does the backlink profile look like for the sites?
If you have all your links and great content on the .com and nothing (or worse,duplicate content) on the .co.uk (for example), then I'd absolutely expect the .com to rank, especially if you have UK-specific links pointing to it, regardless of what you set in GWT.
Does that help a bit?
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
-
Syndicated content with meta robots 'noindex, nofollow': safe?
Hello, I manage, with a dedicated team, the development of a big news portal, with thousands of unique articles. To expand our audiences, we syndicate content to a number of partner websites. They can publish some of our articles, as long as (1) they put a rel=canonical in their duplicated article, pointing to our original article OR (2) they put a meta robots 'noindex, follow' in their duplicated article + a dofollow link to our original article. A new prospect, to partner with with us, wants to follow a different path: republish the articles with a meta robots 'noindex, nofollow' in each duplicated article + a dofollow link to our original article. This is because he doesn't want to pass pagerank/link authority to our website (as it is not explicitly included in the contract). In terms of visibility we'd have some advantages with this partnership (even without link authority to our site) so I would accept. My question is: considering that the partner website is much authoritative than ours, could this approach damage in some way the ranking of our articles? I know that the duplicated articles published on the partner website wouldn't be indexed (because of the meta robots noindex, nofollow). But Google crawler could still reach them. And, since they have no rel=canonical and the link to our original article wouldn't be followed, I don't know if this may cause confusion about the original source of the articles. In your opinion, is this approach safe from an SEO point of view? Do we have to take some measures to protect our content? Hope I explained myself well, any help would be very appreciated, Thank you,
Intermediate & Advanced SEO | | Fabio80
Fab0 -
ExampleSite.com vs ExampleSite.com.br
What would you say to a client who is concerned he'd have to run around buying his .com.??? in alot of other countries. Thanks!
Intermediate & Advanced SEO | | 945010 -
Complicated Duplicate Content Question...but it's fun, so please help.
Quick background: I have a page that is absolutely terrible, but it has links and it's a category page so it ranks. I have a landing page which is significantly - a bizillion times - better, but it is omitted in the search results for the most important query we need. I'm considering switching the content of the two pages, but I have no idea what they will do. I'm not sure if it will cause duplicate content issues or what will happen. Here are the two urls: Terrible page that ranks (not well but it's what comes up eventually) https://kemprugegreen.com/personal-injury/ Far better page that keeps getting omitted: https://kemprugegreen.com/location/tampa/tampa-personal-injury-attorney/ Any suggestions (other than just wait on google to stop omitting the page, because that's just not going to happen) would be greatly appreciated. Thanks, Ruben
Intermediate & Advanced SEO | | KempRugeLawGroup0 -
Hidden text that's not show in default view, does it hurt my on page optimization?
Hello, I am developing our new site that will create tabs such as "design", "tech specs", "customer ratings" etc. just like http://www.dell.com/us/p/inspiron-15z-5523/pd. My question is, if most of my content is on the 2nd and 3rd tabs, would my content effect my overall SEO if it's not on it's default view? Because, if users don't physically click on the 2nd and 3rd tab, does it mean that since there is no impression of that content, that content will be allocated to half of its SEO juice? Let me know, I would love to know! Shawn
Intermediate & Advanced SEO | | Shawn1241 -
Can SEO increase a page's Authority? Or can Authority only be earned via #RCS?
Hi all. I am asking this question to purposefully provoke a discussion. The CEO of the company where I am the in-house SEO sent me a directive this morning. The directive is to take our Website from a PR3 site to a PR5....in 6 months. Now, I know Page Rank is a bit of a deprecated concept, but I'm sure you would agree that "Authority" is still crucial to ranking well. When he first sent me the directive it was worded like this "I want a plan in place with the goal being to "beat" a specific competitor in 6 months." When I prodded him to define "beat," i.e. did he mean "outrank" for every keyword, he answered that he wanted our site to have the same "Authority" that this particular competitor has. So I am left pondering this question: Is it possible for SEO to increase the authority of a page? Or does "Authority" come from #RCS? The second part of this question is what would you do if you were in my shoes? I have been devoting huge amounts of time on technical SEO because the Website is a mess. Because I've dedicated so much time to technical issues, link-earning has taken a back seat. In my mind, why would anyone want to link to a crappy site that has serious technical issues (slow load times, no persistent cart, lots of 404s, etc)? Shouldn't we make the site awesome before trying to get people to link to us? Given this directive to improve our site's "Authority" - would you scrap the technical SEO and go whole hog into a link-earning binge, or would you hunker down and pound away at the technical issues? Which one would you do first if you couldn't do both at the same time? Comments, thoughts and insights would be greatly appreciated.
Intermediate & Advanced SEO | | danatanseo1 -
Pinging SE's - is this spam?
Hi, Just read on ViperChill that Matt Cutts told Glen (owner of ViperChill) that ping services can help your blog posts. Now lets say you have a list of 10 that you ping and you put an article up everyday, thats 300 pings a month, is that not spammy? Here is the link to the post: http://www.viperchill.com/future-of-blogging/ If you scroll down your see a screen print of Google search box, its the para above and below this screen print.
Intermediate & Advanced SEO | | activitysuper1 -
Will blocking google and SE's from indexing images hurt SEO?
Hi, We have a bit of a problem where on a website we are managing, there are thousands of "Dynamically" re-sized images. These are stressing out the server as on any page there could be upto 100 dynamically re-sized images. Google alone is indexing 50,000 pages a day, so multiply that by the number of images and it is a huge drag on the server. I was wondering if it maybe an idea to blog Robots (in robots.txt) from indexing all the images in the image file, to reduce the server load until we have a proper fix in place. We don't get any real value from having our website images in "Google Images" so I am wondering if this could be a safe way of reducing server load? Are there any other potential SEO issues this could cause?? Thanks
Intermediate & Advanced SEO | | James770 -
Can you see the 'indexing rules' that are in place for your own site?
By 'index rules' I mean the stipulations that constitute whether or not a given page will be indexed. If you can see them - how?
Intermediate & Advanced SEO | | Visually0