Why is a poor optimized url ranked first on Google ?
-
Hi there, I've been working in SEO for more than five years and I'm always telling clients about the more than 200 factors that influence rankings, but sometimes I meet several urls or websites who haven't optimized their pages nor built links and still appear first.
This is the case of the keyword "Escorts en Tenerife" in google.es. If you search that keyword in google.es you'll find this url: escortislacanarias.com... (I don't want to give them a link).
My question is why the heck this url is ranking first on Google for that keyword if the url isn't optmized, the page content isn't optimized and hasn't got many or valuable incoming links?
Do an on page grader to that url regarding that keyword an it gets an F !!! So there is no correlation between better optimization and good rankings.
-
Thansk again for the effort. I like your answers, they are very helpful. Although in this case our target aren't English speaking people, just Spanish people from or in Tenerife for vacations.
-
_Google knows that Tenerife is a geographic location in the Canary Islands. This website has the word Tenerife on it many times. It has pages with Tenerife in the title, in the URL. _
Egol is just explaining why their page shows up for 'Tenerife' searches.
I have no idea if you're targeting tourists, but I expect you are, this means you're effectively targeting two types of customer - those that plan ahead and those than plan 'on the fly'.
So if I wanted an escort for my trip to Tenerife (LOL, no, I don't... happily married lady!) I might search for one before I leave the UK to get it all organised ahead of time. So I would search 'Escorts in Tenerife' (and maybe localise even further to find one close to where I was staying)...
Or, I may be lonely on one night when I get to Tenerife, and do a search to find an escort from Tenerife.
These two scenarios might show different results - the person searching from Tenerife would get localised results, whereas the person searching from the UK is relying on 'Tenerife' being included on the website to appear in the SERPs.
I hope this makes sense!
I think Egol has a lot of great information to share, and I've often found his /her responses to questions in this forum to be very useful and informative. That last comment though was a little harsh, but the point is: _if you feel the current situation is hard to overcome, then imagine how bad it would be if they did know what they are doing!!! _This is how I read it anyway. Perhaps it's just a case of what my colleague calls ‘the impersonal interaction impertinence imperative’ - sounds like something from the hitch hikers guide, doesn't it! But basically means sometimes written, impersonal communications, can be misinterpreted. I often send stuff that sounds harsher than it's meant to be because I forget that sarcasm and suchlike are not easy to interpret in written form!
I'm glad you found my answer helpful
-
Agreed the end user doesn't care about SEO. But if the user experience is even horrendous difficult to navigate it must have a high bounce rate.
One site I am not going to mention but the server he is running is blacklisted for email spam, I know one SEO company report them for Spam to Google, they're keywords stuff, poor user experience looks like its from 1999 and has spammy links. Still sites above sites which if we took Google advise. High quality content, good user experience, not too many links on page,nice and quick to load it is absolutely everything opposite to Google is recommending.
-
Hi and thanks for the comment. It helps. But tell me, what are the great insights you are talking about EGOL? Did I miss anything? Was his/their answer profound for you? I really can't see any good in EGOL's answer but a bit of arrogance instead.
That kind of answer doesn't help. Yours, on the other hand, is very usefeul, thank you ameliavargo ! I really did like and very much appreciate your third parragraph most of all !
-
I completely agree with you, there seems to be no correlation. I don't mean to say all this metrics don't work or aren't useful, I0m just saying there are sites up there in top positions and they still don't deserve it according to moz tools, for example. Thanks for your comment.
-
1.- I did give them a mention and I knew it would be good for them, but I did it because I wanted moz people to understand the precise case, but perhaps I was wrong in that, in that case sorry.
2.- I didn't say it was hard to beat. I'm only asking why is that url on top position when according to all metrics it doesn't deserve it. There are 3 or 4 competitors that have more and better incoming links, a better page optimization, better content, etc.
About user experience. have you entered the site? Did you really see anything that you did like of that page for the user?
What would you say is the main reason for them to be on top? "This website has the word Tenerife on it many times. It has pages with Tenerife in the title, in the URL." So that is your conclusion ? Thanks in advance.
-
As always, EGOL has some great insights and I agree with them...
Onsite usage metrics are also used in the algo. I'm not entirely sure exactly what Google uses, but I imagine it's something like bounce rate (though not bounce rate as they've said they don't use it... but they lie too so they might do!...), time on site, pages per visit - that kind of thing. The stuff that tells you if people are engaging with your website.
They also use organic CTR (though again, I don't think this is ever explicitly stated by them) - if your CTR is high then they will reward you (though a high CTR with bad usage metrics would not on its own help you - rather hinder I think).
This is why pi$$ poor sites often end up in high positions - people like them. Doesn't always make sense, but if the site you mention provides something people want, they aren't going to CARE whether it's been 'SEO'd' or not - and really Google doesn't either. If visitor behaviour indicates that people are getting value from visiting that site then Google is not going to move it from its high position - until you provide something that people like more and importantly onsite behaviour indicates the same.
Hope this helps
-
Google knows that Tenerife is a geographic location in the Canary Islands. This website has the word Tenerife on it many times. It has pages with Tenerife in the title, in the URL.
Even though you did not give them a link you gave them a mention... and in the same sentence you associated it with the keyword that you are searching for. All of that helps them.
Google thinks beyond the page.
If you think this website is hard to beat, wait until they get an SEO who knows what to do.
-
I don't think Google really has sorted the algo's out, there seems to be absolutely no correlation. There are sites on my targeted keyword list which no way should be on the 1st page of Google however they're up at the top. Even with higher domain authority, page authority better link profile and sites speed. Sites which are keyword stuffed also rank in the top 3 positions.
It would be great to see what other moz'ers are experiencing
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
-
URL indexed but not submitted in sitemap, however the URL is in the sitemap
Dear Community, I have the following problem and would be super helpful if you guys would be able to help. Cheers Symptoms : On the search console, Google says that some of our old URLs are indexed but not submitted in sitemap However, those URLs are in the sitemap Also the sitemap as been successfully submitted. No error message Potential explanation : We have an automatic cache clearing process within the company once a day. In the sitemap, we use this as last modification date. Let's imagine url www.example.com/hello was modified last time in 2017. But because the cache is cleared daily, in the sitemap we will have last modified : yesterday, even if the content of the page did not changed since 2017. We have a Z after sitemap time, can it be that the bot does not understands the time format ? We have in the sitemap only http URL. And our HTTPS URLs are not in the sitemap What do you think?
Intermediate & Advanced SEO | | ZozoMe0 -
Not ranking
Hi,
Intermediate & Advanced SEO | | SharonEKG
so our website (www.18brandz.com) has been up for 8 months now and has not been ranking yet, we are indexing, moz crawler SEO issues are regularly fixed and we are down to about 25 non major issues, i started using google lighthouse to optimize and had made changes. we post GOOD quality in house written unique content, we follow an SEO templet of guideline i wrote for titles/meta title tags, structure, site speed has been optimized and as for the moment we rank A OR B with no major issues on all speed checking sites possible (gtmetrix/google speed insights/ webspeed... etc) but nothing. and i cant figure out why we wont rank, our field of digital marketing is a tough one and very competitive , i know, yet not ranking for so long seems odd. our only know fact major disadvantage is the lack of links and no link building strategy. any suggestions? any idea?1 -
Ranking after redirecting two URLs to a new domain
I run two websites which operate in similar business sectors. Each has a calculator tool that offers the same functionality. The pages rank 2nd and 5th for the key search term. I'd like to improve the functionality of this and have thought about setting up a new domain for this calculator to move it away from the main sites. If I did this and 301 redirected both pages to the new domain do you think I'd maintain a strong ranking position for this search term on the new domain? Thanks for any advice.
Intermediate & Advanced SEO | | craigramsay0 -
Migrating From Parameter-Driven URL's to 'SEO Friendly URL's (Slugs)
Hi all, hope you're all good and having a wonderful Friday morning. At the moment we have over 20,000+ live products on our ecomms site, however, all of the products are using non-seo friendly URL's (/product?p=1738 etc) and we're looking at deploying SEO friendly url's such as (/product/this-is-product-one) etc. As you could imagine, making such a change on a big ecomms site will be a difficult task and we will have to take on A LOT of content changes, href-lang changes, affiliate link tests and a big 301 task. I'm trying to get some analysis together to pitch the Tech guys, but it's difficult, I do understand that this change has it's benefits for SEO, usability and CTR - but I need some more info. Keywords in the slugs - what is it's actual SEO weight? Has anyone here recently converted from using parameter based URL's to keyword-based slugs and seen results? Also, what are the best ways of deploying this? Add a canonical and 301? All comments greatly appreciated! Brett
Intermediate & Advanced SEO | | Brett-S0 -
Google + and Schema
I've noticed with a few of the restaurant clients I work with that Schema isn't contributing at all to their SERP -- their Google + page is. Is there any way to have more control over what Google is pulling to help make UX better? I.e. showing photos of the restaurant without a logo, etc.
Intermediate & Advanced SEO | | Anti-Alex0 -
Removing Parameterized URLs from Google Index
We have duplicate eCommerce websites, and we are in the process of implementing cross-domain canonicals. (We can't 301 - both sites are major brands). So far, this is working well - rankings are improving dramatically in most cases. However, what we are seeing in some cases is that Google has indexed a parameterized page for the site being canonicaled (this is the site that is getting the canonical tag - the "from" page). When this happens, both sites are being ranked, and the parameterized page appears to be blocking the canonical. The question is, how do I remove canonicaled pages from Google's index? If Google doesn't crawl the page in question, it never sees the canonical tag, and we still have duplicate content. Example: A. www.domain2.com/productname.cfm%3FclickSource%3DXSELL_PR is ranked at #35, and B. www.domain1.com/productname.cfm is ranked at #12. (yes, I know that upper case is bad. We fixed that too.) Page A has the canonical tag, but page B's rank didn't improve. I know that there are no guarantees that it will improve, but I am seeing a pattern. Page A appears to be preventing Google from passing link juice via canonical. If Google doesn't crawl Page A, it can't see the rel=canonical tag. We likely have thousands of pages like this. Any ideas? Does it make sense to block the "clicksource" parameter in GWT? That kind of scares me.
Intermediate & Advanced SEO | | AMHC0 -
Bing and Yahoo Ranks work, google ranks not happening
Bing and Yahoo Ranks work, google ranks not happening please help
Intermediate & Advanced SEO | | Djdealeyo0 -
Dynamic URLs Appearing on Google Page 1\. Convert to Static URLs or not?
Hi, I have a client who uses dynamic URLs thoughout his site. For SEO purposes, I've advised him to convert dynamic URLs to static URLs whenever possible. However, the client has a few dynamic URLs that are appearing on Google Page 1 for strategically valuable keywords. For these URLs, is it still worth it to 301 them to static URLs? In this case, what are the potential benefits and/or pitfalls?
Intermediate & Advanced SEO | | mindflash0