How To Internationalize - Big Question
-
Hi all,
Here is a big question.
We have a long-established good content website with a .co.uk domain. The site is UK focussed.
However, we are planning a new feature which will be UK and worldwide.
So do we:
1. Keep it all on our .co.uk ?
2. Put the non-UK parts on a .com domain ?
We don't have any content as such for a separate domain, and are not planning any.
But, we are not sure if for example US users would be unimpressed with a UK domain. We could fudge it with "co.uk/us" etc.
(Notice how we have not mentioned Google. Fed-up chasing big G the whole time. We just want to concentrate on our users and the service we provide to them. But G remains the elephant crapping in the corner of the room.)
Also, we are asking this question before we let our developers and designers get to work. Basically we value Moz community opinions over and above theirs.
Realise this is a big question, but you have big brains.
Please chip in.
-
Ignoring everything else (elephants included), from a users point of view, if someone is in the US and sees content on a UK domain, they are less likely to click on it.
I would go down the route of a .com and then find content to make it worthwhile.
You also don't need to wonder where best to point GWT - UK or US. From a positioning point in the SERPs, remember that a .com is generic whilst a .co.uk is UK-centric. Even if it was a part of a .co.uk, I don't know how well it would rank in the US. There are so many factors to take into consideration.
Andy
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 Syntax in Robots.txt
So if I want to block any URL from being indexed that contains a particular parameter what is the best way to put this in the robots.txt file? Currently I have-
Intermediate & Advanced SEO | | DRSearchEngOpt
Disallow: /attachment_id Where "attachment_id" is the parameter. Problem is I still see these URL's indexed and this has been in the robots now for over a month. I am wondering if I should just do Disallow: attachment_id or Disallow: attachment_id= but figured I would ask you guys first. Thanks!0 -
Questions About Link Detox
Greetings: In April of 2014 an SEO firm ran a link removal campaign (identified spammy links and uploaded a disavow). The overall campaign was ineffective and MOZ domain rank has fallen to 24 from about 30 in the last year and traffic is 20% lower. I purchased a basic package for Link Detox and ran a report today (see enclosed) to see if toxic links could be contributing to our mediocre rankings. As a novice I have a few questions for you regarding this the use of Link Detox: -We scored a domain wide detox risk of 1,723. The site has referring root domains with 7113 links to our site. 121 links were classified as high audit priority. 56 as medium audit priority. 221 links were previously disavowed and we uploaded a spreadsheet containing the names of the previously disavowed links. We had LinkDetox include an analysis of no-follow links as they recommend this. Is our score really bad? If we remove the questionable links should we see some benefit in ranking? -Some of the links we disavowed last year are still linking to our site. Is it worthwhile to include those links again in our new disavow file? -Prior to filing a disavow we will request that Webmaster remove offending links. LinkDetox offers a package called Superhero for $469.00 that automates the process. Does this package effectively help with the entire process of writing and tracking the removal requests? Do you know of any other good alternatives? -A feature called "Boost" is included in the LinkDetox Super Hero package. It is suppose to expedite Google's processing of the disavow file. I was told by the staff at Link Detox that with Boost Google will process the disavow within a week. Do you have any idea if this claim is valid??? It would be great if it were true. -We never experienced any manual penalty from Google. Will uploading a disavow help us under the circumstances? Thanks for your feedback, I really appreciate it!!! Alan p2S6H7l
Intermediate & Advanced SEO | | Kingalan10 -
Pagination and View All Pages Question. We currently don't have a canonical tag pointing to View all as I don't believe it's a good user experience so how best we deal with this.
Hello All, I have an eCommerce site and have implemented the use rel="prev" and rel="next" for Page Pagination. However, we also have a View All which shows all the products but we currently don't have a canonical tag pointing to this as I don't believe showing the user a page with shed loads of products on it is actually a good user experience so we havent done anything with this page. I have a sample url from one of our categories which may help - http://goo.gl/9LPDOZ This is obviously causing me duplication issues as well . Also , the main category pages has historically been the pages which ranks better as opposed to Page 2, Page 3 etc etc. I am wondering what I should do about the View All Page and has anyone else had this same issue and how did they deal with it. Do we just get rid of the View All even though Google says it prefers you to have it ? I also want to concentrate my link juice on the main category pages as opposed being diluted between all my paginated pages ? - Does anyone have any tips on how to best do this and have you seen any ranking improvement from this ? Any ideas greatly appreciated. thanks Peter
Intermediate & Advanced SEO | | PeteC120 -
Purchased Domain Not Related to Vertical and Moved Questions
Hello, We used to reside on a longer domain name character wise but had an opportunity to purchase a three letter acronym before my time. We advertise heavily on TV and other traditional media channels so it was simpler for individuals to remember. After purchasing this domain we moved over from the old one to the new one. We followed all of your standard protocols (301s, change of address in Webmaster Tools, new sitemap, etc, etc.) Google and Bing both index the new site and there isn't a significant issue there but we're having incredible difficulty in ranking for any of our core terms. We're the largest company in our space but continue to rank for terms that have nothing to do with our vertical. This is due to the fact that the site used to be owned by a company that is completely separate from ours. The site that we have today contains none of the old content but it does have links pointing to it from similar sites from that vertical. Bing was incredibly helpful and had indicated it's these links that's potentially causing us the issue in that search engines are seeing two different verticals over time on a domain. It's been a year since this took place and it seems that the only recommendation is to contact the non related sites to remove links or disavow. Bing had indicated that disavowing was not as relevant as getting the links removed. Any other thoughts?
Intermediate & Advanced SEO | | seo--team-jlck0 -
What is better for SEO keywords in folder or in filename - also dupe filename question
Hey folks, I've got a question regarding URL structure. What is best for SEO given that there will be millions of lawyer names and 4 pages per lawyer www.lawyerz.com/office-locations/dr-al-pacino www.lawyerz.com/phone-number/dr-al-pacino www.lawyerz.com/reviews/dr-al-pacino www.lawyerz.com/ratings/dr-al-pacino OR www.lawyerz.com/office-locations-dr-al-pacino www.lawyerz.com/phone-number-dr-al-pacino www.lawyerz.com/reviews-dr-al-pacino www.lawyerz.com/ratings-dr-al-pacino OR www.lawyerz.com/dr-al-pacino/office-locations www.lawyerz.com/dr-al-pacino/phone-number www.lawyerz.com/dr-al-pacino/reviews www.lawyerz.com/dr-al-pacino/ratings Also, concerning duplicate file names: In the first example there are 4 duplicate file names with the lawyers name. (would this cause Google to not index some) In the second example there are all unique file names (would this look spammy to Google or the user) In the third example there are millions of duplicate file names (if 1 million lawyers then 1 million files called "office-locations" etc (could so many duplicate filenames cause ranking issues) Should the lawyers name (which is the main keyword target) appear in the filename or in the folder - which is better for SEO in your opinion? Thanks for your input!
Intermediate & Advanced SEO | | irvingw0 -
Questions about 301 Redirects
I have about 10 - 15 URLs that are redirecting to http://www.domainname.comwww.domainname.com/. (which is an invalid URL)The website is on a Joomla platform. Does anyone know how I can fix this? I can't figure out where the problem is coming from.
Intermediate & Advanced SEO | | JohnParker27920 -
Canonical URL Question
Hi Everyone I like to run this question by the community and get a second opinion on best practices for an issue that I ran into. I got two pages, Page A is the original page and Page B is the page with duplicate content. We already added** ="Page A**" />** to the duplicate content (Page B).** **Here is my question, since Page B is duplicate content and there is a link rel="canonical" added to it, would you put in the time to add meta tags and optimize the title of the page? Thanks in advance for all your help.**
Intermediate & Advanced SEO | | DRTBA0 -
Question regarding **and <bold>tags</bold>**
I've read that these 2 tags both carry equal weight for seo purposes but in my opinion it looks a little spammy when you see keywords in bold type face scattered over your site. So will they still carry the same weight for seo if I applied a class to them that turned them back to normal?
Intermediate & Advanced SEO | | JasonHegarty0