Moz Q&A is closed.
After more than 13 years, and tens of thousands of questions, Moz Q&A closed on 12th December 2024. Whilst we’re not completely removing the content - many posts will still be possible to view - we have locked both new posts and new replies. More details here.
Geo-location by state/store
-
Hi there,
We are a Grocery co-operative retailer and have chain of stores owned by different people. We are building a new website, where we would geo-locate the closest store to the customer and direct them to a particular store (selected based on cookie and geo location). All our stores have a consistent range of products + Variation in 25% range. I have few questions
-
How to build a site-map. Since it will be mandatory for a store to be selected and same flow for the bot and user, should have all products across all stores in the sitemap? we are allowing users to find any products across all stores if they search by product identifier. But, they will be able to see products available in a particular store if go through the hierarchical journey of the website.
-
Will the bot crawl all pages across all the stores or since it will be geolocated to only one store, the content belonging to only one store will be indexed?
-
We are also allowing customers to search for older products which they might have bought few years and that are not part of out catalogue any more. these products will not appear on the online hierarchical journey but, customers will be able to search and find the products . Will this affect our SEO ranking?
Any help will be greatly appreciated.
Thanks - Costa
-
-
If you consistently see the IP address and redirect, or change content, based only on that then you will want to exempt Googlebot from those personalizations in one way or another. There are many options to this, like blocking the resources that handle this (i.e. the JavaScript.js file associated with personalization based on history or geo-location), or what was suggested above. Blocking that piece of script in the robots.txt file is less likely to be seen as cloaking.
All of this begs the question though: If you're looking at the IP, then setting a cookie, then updating the content based on the cookie, it shouldn't be an issue in the first place. Googlebot isn't accepting your cookies. So if I were to browse in Incognito mode using Chrome (and thus not accept cookies), would I see the same site and product assortments no matter which location I was in? If that's the case, maybe you don't have a problem. This is pretty easy to test.
Ultimately, I think you're going to want a single product page for each Sku, rather than one for each product at each location. The content, pricing, etc.. can be updated by location if they have a cookie, but the URL should probably never change - and the content shouldn't change by IP if they don't have a cookie.
1. Check IP
2. Embed their location in a cookie
3. Set cookie
4. If cookie is excepted and thus exists, do personalize.
If the cookie does not exist, do not personalize. You can show a message that says you must accept cookies to get the best experience, but don't make it block any major portion of the content.
-
Thanks for this. Few clarifications please,
Isnt having a different journey for a user and bot cloaking? Will google not penalise a site for that? - To make it clear - we have a single website and based on the Geo of the user, we will filter product availability. If a customer is from state A, we will should "X" products and if a customer is from State B, we will show X+Y or X-Y. All the products will have a canonical URL as part of the sitemap, so even if the product is not navigatable through the hierarchy on the website, crawlers will be able to find it through the direct canonical URL.
Here us a link to the article where John Mueller from google has some comments on the subject - https://www.seroundtable.com/google-geolocation-redirects-are-okay-26933.html
I have picked excerpts from you reply where I have some doubts, great if you can throw more light into these?
-
- "It seems like you'll have to have the same products available in multiple stores. You will want them all indexed, but will have to work hard to differentiate them (different images, different copy, different Meta data) otherwise Google will probably pick one product from one store as 'canonical' and not index the rest, leading to unfair product purchasing (users only purchasing X product from Y store, never the others)"
Since, we will have same (X products) across all our stores and across stores these products will have a single canonical URL, what will be the advantage of having different content by stores. we are thinking the content on the product pages will be the same, but, the availability of the product alone will differ based on geo. The sitemap will also remain the same across stores with the canonical product URLs
-
- "Will the bot crawl all pages across all the stores or since it will be geolocated to only one store, the content belonging to only one store will be indexed?" - No it won't. Every time Google crawls from a different data centre, they will think all your other pages are being redirected now and that part of the site is now closed. Exempt Googlebot's user-agent from your redirects or face Google's fiery wrath when they fail to index anything properly
Could you please explain a bit more on what do you mean by re-direct, as all products will exists in the website for a crawler to see if the canonical URL is used for crawling. Only the availability and the product visibility through the navigation journey will change based on geo.
Thank you for your time on this. Its extremely useful
Thanks - Costa
-
-
-
"We are a Grocery co-operative retailer and have chain of stores owned by different people. We are building a new website, where we would geo-locate the closest store to the customer and direct them to a particular store (selected based on cookie and geo location). All our stores have a consistent range of products + Variation in 25% range. I have few questions" - make sure you exempt Googlebot's user-agent from your geo-based redirects otherwise the crawling of your site will end up in a big horrible mess
-
"How to build a site-map. Since it will be mandatory for a store to be selected and same flow for the bot and user, should have all products across all stores in the sitemap? we are allowing users to find any products across all stores if they search by product identifier. But, they will be able to see products available in a particular store if go through the hierarchical journey of the website." - any pages you want Google to index should be in your XML sitemap. Any pages you don't want Google ti index should not be in there (period). If a URL uses a canonical tag to point somewhere else (and thus marks itself as NON-canonical) it shouldn't be in the XML sitemap. If a URL is blocked via robots.txt or Meta no-index directives, it shouldn't be in the XML sitemap. If a URL results in an error or redirect, it shouldn't be in your XML sitemap.The main thing to concern yourself with, is creating a 'seamless' view of indexation for Google. It seems like you'll have to have the same products available in multiple stores. You will want them all indexed, but will have to work hard to differentiate them (different images, different copy, different Meta data) otherwise Google will probably pick one product from one store as 'canonical' and not index the rest, leading to unfair product purchasing (users only purchasing X product from Y store, never the others). In reality, setting out to build a site which such highly divergent duplication is never going to yield great results, you'll just have to be aware of that from the outset
-
"Will the bot crawl all pages across all the stores or since it will be geolocated to only one store, the content belonging to only one store will be indexed?" - No it won't. Every time Google crawls from a different data centre, they will think all your other pages are being redirected now and that part of the site is now closed. Exempt Googlebot's user-agent from your redirects or face Google's fiery wrath when they fail to index anything properly
-
"We are also allowing customers to search for older products which they might have bought few years and that are not part of out catalogue any more. these products will not appear on the online hierarchical journey but, customers will be able to search and find the products . Will this affect our SEO ranking?" - If the pages are orphaned except in the XML sitemap, their rankings will go down over time. It won't necessarily hurt the rest of your site, though. Sometimes crappy results are better than no results at all!
Hope that helps
-
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
-
Service Area Location Pages vs. User Experience
I'm familiar with the SAB best practices outlined here. Here's my issue: Doing local landing pages as described here might not be ideal from a user experience point of view. Having a "Cities We Serve" or "Service Areas" link in the main navigation isn't necessarily valuable to the user when the city-specific landing pages are all places within a 15-mile radius of the SAB's headquarters. It would just look like the company did it for SEO. It wouldn't look natural. Seriously, it feels like best practices are totally at odds with user experience here. If I absolutely must create location pages for 10 or so municipalities within my client's service area, I'd rather NOT put the service areas as a primary navigation item. It is not useful to the user. Anyone who sees that the company provides services in the [name of city] metropolitan area will already understand that the company can service their town that is 5 miles away. It is self-evident. For example**, who would wonder whether a plumbing company with a Los Angeles address also services Beverly Hills?** It's just... silly. But the Moz guide says I've got to do those location pages! And that I've got to put them high up in the navigation! This is a problem because we've got to do local SEO, but we also have to provide an ideal experience. Thoughts?
Local Website Optimization | | Greenery1 -
In local SEO, how important is it to include city, state, and state abbreviation in doctitle?
I'm trying to balance local geographic keywords with product keywords. I appreciate the feedback from the group! Michael
Local Website Optimization | | BFMichael0 -
Multi location silo seo technique
A physical therapy company has 8 locations in one city and 4 locations in another with plans to expand. I've seen two methods to approach this. The first I feel is sloppy and that is the individual url for each location that points to from the location pages on the main domain. The second is to use the silo technique incorporated with metro scale addition. You have the main domain with the number of silos (individual stores) and each silo has its own content (what they do at each store is pretty much the same). My question is should the focus of each silo, besides making sure there is no duplicate copy, to increase their own hyperlocal outreach? Focus on social, reviews, content curated for the specific location. How would you attack this problem?
Local Website Optimization | | Ohmichael1 -
Listing multiple schema Things (e.g. Organization, LocalBusiness, Telephone, Locations, Place, etc)
Greetings All, My law office features many pages with what are essentially directory listings (names, addresses, and phone numbers of places, agencies, organizations that clients might find helpful). Am I correct in assuming that using schema for each of these listings might cause confusion for search engines? In other words, are search engines looking for schema on pages or sites to tell them only about the company running that page or site, or do search engines appreciate schema markup to tell them about all the pieces of content on the pages or that site?
Local Website Optimization | | micromano0 -
Local SEO - Multiple stores on same URL
Hello guys, I'm working on a plan of local SEO for a client that is managing over 50 local stores. At the moment all the stores are sharing the same URL address and wanted to ask if it s better to build unique pages for each of the stores or if it's fine to go with all of them on the same URL. What do you think? What's the best way and why? Thank you in advance.
Local Website Optimization | | Noriel0 -
Multiple location pages are they bad?
Hello all, I am research some competitors of a client of mine. My client specializes in H.P. printer repair and over the last 8 years has lost market shares to the competition. I want to reclaim market share. As I was searching some of the service companies many have page that list multiple towns that they service. here is an example. http://printerrepairservice.com/locations-we-service/ Should I be recommending this to my client? To me it seems like a spam keyword process. I know an employee of this particular company and he say their online business is booming. I want my clients to boom too! What are your thoughts on these location type pages?
Local Website Optimization | | donsilvernail0 -
Location Pages and Duplicate Content and Doorway Pages, Oh My!
Google has this page on location pages. It's very useful but it doesn't say anything about handling the duplicate content a location page might have. Seeing as the loctions may have very similar services. Lets say they have example.com/location/boston, example.com/location/chicago, or maybe boston.example.com or chicago.example.com etc. They are landing pages for each location, housing that locations contact information as well as serving as a landing page for that location. Showing the same services/products as every other location. This information may also live on the main domains homepage or services page as well. My initial reaction agrees with this article: http://moz.com/blog/local-landing-pages-guide - but I'm really asking what does Google expect? Does this location pages guide from Google tell us we don't really have to make sure each of those location pages are unique? Sometimes creating "unique" location pages feels like you're creating **doorway pages - **"Multiple pages on your site with similar content designed to rank for specific queries like city or state names". In a nutshell, Google's Guidelines seem to have a conflict on this topic: Location Pages: "Have each location's or branch's information accessible on separate webpages"
Local Website Optimization | | eyeflow
Doorway Pages: "Multiple pages on your site with similar content designed to rank for specific queries like city or state names"
Duplicate Content: "If you have many pages that are similar, consider expanding each page or consolidating the pages into one." Now you could avoid making it a doorway page or a duplicate content page if you just put the location information on a page. Each page would then have a unique address, phone number, email, contact name, etc. But then the page would technically be in violation of this page: Thin Pages: "One of the most important steps in improving your site's ranking in Google search results is to ensure that it contains plenty of rich information that includes relevant keywords, used appropriately, that indicate the subject matter of your content." ...starting to feel like I'm in a Google Guidelines Paradox! Do you think this guide from Google means that duplicate content on these pages is acceptable as long as you use that markup? Or do you have another opinion?0 -
Single Site For Multiple Locations Or Multiple Sites?
Hi, Sorry if this rambles on. There's a few details that kind of convolute this issue so I'll try and be as clear as possible. The site in question has been online for roughly 5 years. It's established with many local citations, does well in local SERPs (working on organic results currently), and represents a business with 2 locations in the same county. The domain is structured as location1brandname.com. The site was recently upgraded from a 6-10 page static HTML site with loads of duplicate content and poor structure to a nice, clean WordPress layout. Again, Google is cool with it, everything was 301'd properly, and our rankings haven't dropped (some have improved). Here's the tricky part: To properly optimize this site for our second location, I am basically building a second website within the original, but customized for our second location. It will be location1brandname.com/secondcity and the menu will be unique to second-city service pages, unique NAP on footer, etc. I will then update our local citations with this new URL and hopefully we'll start appearing higher in local SERPs for the second-city keywords that our main URL isn't currently optimized for. The issue I have is that our root domain has our first city location in the domain and that this might have some negative effect on ranking for the second URL. Conversely, starting on a brand new domain (secondcitybrandname.com) requires building an entire new site and being brand new. My hunch is that we'll be fine making root.com/secondcity that locations homepage and starting a new domain, while cleaner and compeltely separate from our other location, is too much work for not enough benefit. It seems like if they're the same company/brand, they should be on the same sitee. and we can use the root juice to help. Thoughts?
Local Website Optimization | | kirmeliux0