Placement of products in URL-structure for best category page rankings
-
Hi!
I have some questions regarding the optimal URL-hierarchy placement of products in a marketplace setting where the end goal is to attract traffic to category pages. Let me start off with some background, thanks in advance for the help.
TLDR
Goal: Increase category page rankings.
Alternative 1 - Products and category pages separated, flat product structure.
Category page: oursite.com/category/subcategory
Product / listing page: oursite.com/listing-1
Alternative 2 - Products and category pages separated, hierarchal product structure.
Category page: oursite.com/category/subcategory
Product / listing page: oursite.com/product/category/subcat/listing
Alternative 3 - Products placed directly under category page.
Category page: oursite.com/category/subcategory
Product / listing page: oursite.com/category/subcategory/listing
I run a commercial real estate marketplace, which means that our potential search traffic is _extremely _geographic. For example, some common searches are (not originally in english):
- Office space for lease {City X}
- Office space for lease {Neighborhood Y}
- Retail space {Neighborhood Z}
- And so on...
These terms are already quite competitive, where the top results are our competitors geographic and type category pages. For example: _competitor.com/type/city/neighborhood , _is a top result, where the user reaches a landing page that shows all the {type} spaces for lease in {neighborhood}.
These users are out to find which spaces are available for lease in these geographical areas, and not individual spaces. I.e. users do not search in the same extent for an individual product, in this case a specific empty space.
Our approach has been to place an extreme bias towards a heavy geographical hierarchy. This means that basically any search, resulting in a category page, on our site results in a well structured URL like the following:
_oursite.com/type/state/city/district/street, _since we are using Google Maps API's, this is easy and relevant for the user. Our geographical categorization beats our competitors both on extensiveness and usability, especially in long-tail search phrases where our competitors don't care to categorize where we are seeing real search volumes. The hierarchy only extends as far down as the user has searched, for example a lot of our searched just end up being _oursite.com/type/state/city/district. _
Now we are wondering how we should place our products, the empty spaces, in this URL structure. Our original hypothesis was that we should include the products in the original hierarchy, resulting in: oursite.com/category/subcategory/product. Our thinking was that we would both be serving the user with an understandable and relevant URL, and also provide search bots with a logical structure for our site and most importantly content for our category pages. Our landing pages are very dynamic, providing information by relaying graphical information on a map instead of in an SEO-friendly manner. I would however go as far as to say that these dynamic pages provide a ton of value for the user, much more so than our competitors, by describing relevant information about the neighborhood kind of like Trulia, just not in a bot-readable manner. This results in trying to rank them on their own merits being a challenge, whereas we were hoping we could create relevancy by placing products / listings and maybe even blog posts on the topic within the same URL-hierarchy.
As of right now our current structure is oursite.com/products/category/subcategory/product. In other words, they are categorized in the same geographical fashion but under a separate URL-path. Our results so far is that we basically only rank for the product pages, and rank extremely poorly for our category pages, which is our ultimate goal to enhance. This is why we developed the above hypothesis.
However, what we learned when we did some initial research is that very few e-commerce stores place their products directly below their categories. Most of the major websites we studied, and we looked at quite a few, just go for **alternative 1 **from above. The crux is that most of them choose alternative 1 but simultaneously implement bread crumbs that emulate alternative 3, just without the actual URL's.
So, what I'm asking is, what are the actual benefits or downsides of the three alternatives? I feel as if I have a pretty firm grasp on how this could be done, I just need to better understand why most seem to choose to flatline their products or listings in the alternative 1 fashion.
Thanks,
Viktor
-
I think I'm a little confused here as to what you mean by "product" in the context of real estate. Are you referring to different types of listings (e.g. office lease, retail lease etc?)
If I were designing a real estate website, the structure would be as follows:
website.com/listing-type/state/area/suburb
You mentioned the site isn't in English so just to clarify above, the last two will be depend on regional user preferences. For example, here in Brisbane (Aus) it would be expected that I can search for properties in the "Greater Brisbane" area, meaning Brisbane City and surround suburbs. Within that region there are a bunch more suburbs
More specifically:
website.com/office-lease/qld/greater-brisbane/west-end
The reason I'd be doing this is that not only is it an easy logic to follow but it really caters toward a user's intent. If I'm looking for an office space to lease, there's no point in presenting me with all types of listings from an area because all I want to see are office leases.
Having those lease types further up your hierarchy is going to give them a little more preferences in terms of SERP position as well. From what I understand, these are the sub-category pages you're looking to rank?
As a working example of this as well, I just had a look at realestate.com.au's URL structure and it's the same as my suggestions above. Their site is very flat because it's almost entirely search-driven but the URL still lets us see their site architecture
http://www.realestate.com.au/property-townhouse-qld-spring+hill-416944062
-
I think that N:3 is optimal for crawlers and for humans.
This was explained few times here:
https://moz.com/blog/information-architecture-for-seo-whiteboard-friday
https://moz.com/blog/ugly-seo-mess-recovery-case-study (read about "flat" structure)
http://www.bruceclay.com/blog/structured-urls/
http://www.bruceclay.com/eu/seo/silo.htm
https://yoast.com/how-to-clean-site-structure/
https://yoast.com/seo-friendly-urls
https://moz.com/learn/seo/internal-linkSo as you can see it's lot of information against flat structure and implementing silo url structure in site.
Edit1: there is also great article here:
http://www.stateofdigital.com/optimising-urls-seo-ux/
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
-
GMB Account Fallen Off Rankings in past 24 hours
My map pack presence has fallen off the face of the earth over the last 24 hours. My location The Escape Game Chicago was top 3 yesterday for 'escape room chicago' and now they only show up when searching for the exact brand name. What's weirder is I still rank #1 organically for that keyword.I have looked through the account, nothing seems to be totally amiss. Google has not notified me of any issues or penalties. I have no clue what happened.Can anyone point me in the right direction or provide some insight as to how I can recover my ranking?
Local Listings | | danieldaher0 -
Google Is Linking to Wrong Local Page - How To Change?
Hi All Thanks in advance for any support. I've setup two "local" pages to target the next door town for one of my clients. One page targets "t shirt printing" and one page targets "embroidered workwear" However when I search for "embroidered workwear town in question" google connects the search to my t-shirt printing page and not the embroidered workwear page. Would it be possible to advise on what I need to do for the correct page to be linked to the search term? Here is a link to the search term in question **https://tinyurl.com/vvgr5r5 ** and the page that we would like to appear in the results, not our tshirt printing page https://tinyurl.com/s77md9o Thanks in advance for any help
Local Listings | | ruislip180 -
How to rank local keywords?
Hi guys, I have been enjoying here to be a part of the community. A simple question: I have some local low volume keywords and want to rank on 1 with all. I have set up pages according to the keywords such as "california plumbers" and page is /california-plumbers.html To rank these types of keywords I am doing local listing and adding these particular page instead of "home page". Am I doing right? Would classifieds and local listings are suffice to get these keywords on 1 spot of Google? What else can I do? Can you suggest me some queries to find "deep local directories or classified or other stuff whereby I can target my pages? Thank you in advance for ideas.
Local Listings | | ksmith882 -
Should I get an SSL if my non-SSL site is ranking well?
I have a client with a local divorce law business. He's ranking really well, and I don't want to do anything to jeopardize that rank. His site does not have SSL. I feel like it would be good to get rid of the "not-secure" message from Chrome, but not important enough to risk ranks. Would love to get thoughts from this forum on this. Thanks!
Local Listings | | aj6130 -
1 company, 2 shop locations, 3 Google+ pages - help!
Hello, I work for a furniture retailer and I'm doing an audit of our digital presence and need a hand with our G+ pages. Thanks for reading! We are one company but with two shops, located about 10 miles apart. One shop has been established over 10 years, the other is roughly a year old. The shops are called: 'Our Company' and 'Our Company, Second Location' Each shop has its own website (which is confusing and we'll hopefully shortly revert back to just one) We currently have three Google+ profiles: the first G+ was set up a number of years ago and was set up as a personal page, not a business and it links to both shop's websites. The other two G+ pages appear to have been created when we created a Google Local listing for each shop. My questions are: What is the best tool to handle all this info across the web? Bright Local looks good. Should I junk the original G+ profile? If I do, how will I know I won't remove any important stuff from Google? Should I keep 2 G+ profiles, one for each store or have 1 G+ profile and put both store's details in there. Or should I have 3 G+ profiles: 1 for our company name, and 1 for each of our 2 locations? When I search for 'Our Company', I only ever get our original company to show in the Google Local listing on the right hand side of search results. Our second shop is shown in 'People also search for'. Is this the best I can hope for? Is there any way to control this? Both of the G+ profiles that are linked to our Google Local listings have the original G+ URL. Should I customise this and if so, are there any naming conventions I should follow? What should we do with the (2?) G+ profiles for each shop? Both have currently got no content on them. Thanks in advance for any tips and advice.
Local Listings | | Bee1590 -
Local Rankings for Second Business Location in the SAME City
I have an issue regarding local rankings for multiple locations within the SAME city, and I'm hoping to start a productive discussion about the various options for helping a second location gain visibility in the local pack. Here's the context…My business is an electronic cigarette shop in New Orleans, called Crescent City Vape. Our first location (Uptown) opened up a year ago and ranks very well in the local-pack as well as organic results for target keywords, as well as brand terms. Our second location opened up 2 months ago, also in New Orleans (Lower Garden District), about 3 miles away from the first shop. This shop, however, is not visible locally or organically, unless we get extremely specific with a branded search query like "Crescent City Vape Lower Garden District" or "Crescent City Vape St. Charles Ave." It does not rank locally for "Crescent City Vape" or "Crescent City Vape New Orleans" We have one website: crescentcityvape.com -- and both shops have a location landing page on the main site: crescentcityvape.com/uptown
Local Listings | | djreich
crescentcityvape.com/lower-garden However, when we launched our local SEO work for the first shop, we used the homepage as the URL in Google+ Local, as well as all of our citations. When we launched the second shop, we used the location landing page as the URL for G+ and all of our citations. We also added a location modifier to the business name on G+ Local: Crescent City Vape - Lower Garden District Both shops have 5+ reviews on Google+ Local, and both shops have citation profiles that are better than any other competitor. I'm confident that the local SEO basics are covered…and this is evident from the solid local and organic rankings for the original shop. My concern isn't that the second shop is ranking worse than the first. I expected this. But I am very concerned that the second shop doesn't even rank for a branded search like "Crescent City Vape." You have to get unrealistically specific with local descriptors to see the G+ local result for the second shop. e.g. "Crescent City Vape Lower Garden District". Here are some of the options and questions I've been pondering. Would love anyone's thoughts on what's worth trying and what might be too risky…since obviously I do not want to sacrifice rankings for the original shop. Changing the G+ URL of the second shop to the homepage (rather than that local landing page). In this case, G+ pages for both locations would link to the homepage. Then updating Moz Local and other citations accordingly with the URL as the homepage. My concern is that this will end up hurting rankings for the original shop more than helping rankings for the second shop. Removing the location modifier from the second shop's Google+ Local business name. When you google "Starbucks" or "McDonalds" you get a local-pack that usually includes 3 of their locations in the pack, and none have location modifiers. I'm wondering if the modifier is sending the wrong signal, because right now, when you Google "Crescent City Vape" only the original location shows up with a local result. Changing the modifier for the second shop's Google+ Local business name to something like "Crescent City Vape: New Orleans E-Cigs". Some of our competitors have added keywords to their G+ names and it's been effective for them. I know this is not aligned with Google guidelines, and may be a risky play. We don't have anything to lose with the second location if we try this…However, is there any chance this would negatively affect our original shop's rankings (since it's the same domain)? If we went in this direction, should I update our citations accordingly? And build new ones with this new "name"? Does page authority of the business URL have an impact on G+ Local rankings? i.e. would building quality links to the local landing page have much of an impact? i.e. is that a productive use of time and resources, as opposed to promoting the homepage and other more important landing pages? Appreciate your thoughts and feedback! Hopefully this discussion will be helpful for other businesses trying to rank for more than one location in the same city. Thanks!0 -
Connecting a google business page to my website
How do i connect a Google business page to my website? I have followed googles instructions but don't see the link to my website as advised here: https://support.google.com/business/answer/4569085?hl=en Can anybody shed any light please.
Local Listings | | mari-rose0 -
NAPtastic: Google updated G+ page to "correct" street spelling, but not Maps
A client's G+ page updated from "Jimmy" to "Jimmie" Rd. The change is technically correct according to the legal county road name, though the Places, G+, and indeed even the printed inscription on the Google map itself all say "Jimmy." So, too, does virtually all of the NAP instances around the web. Question - should we update Business Registration Managers with the updated address info and assume the Google change will also eventually filter to other Google assets, or make no changes? Weird, right? Here's the Place: https://www.google.com/maps/place/Georgia+Square+Collision/@33.9357517,-83.4885575,17z/data=!3m1!4b1!4m2!3m1!1s0x0:0x57927ad08d139333 Thanks!
Local Listings | | PerfectPitchConcepts0