Target term hits a glass ceiling despite A grade
-
Greetings from 13 degrees C wetherby UK
Ive hit a roadbloack in my attempts to get a target term onto page one, below is a url pointing to a graph illustrting the situation. The target term is on the graph (I'm reluctant to stick it in here incase this page comes up)
http://i216.photobucket.com/albums/cc53/zymurgy_bucket/glass-ceiling-office-to-let.jpg
This is what Ive done to date for page -
http://www.sandersonweatherall.co.uk/office-to-let-leeds/1. Ensured the Markup follows SEO best parctice
2. Internally linked to the page via a scrolling footer
3. Shortened the URL
4. Requested the Social media efforts points links to the page
5. Requested additional contentBut i wonder... Is the reason for hitting a glass ceiling now down to lack of content ie just one page or is there a deeper issue of an indexing road block?
Any insights welcome
-
The points which you've mentioned/explained is only related to optimization. What exactly are you doing on promotion part.
I guess you must be promoting this page via:
- Guest Blogging
- Forum Participation
- Directory Listing (High quality directories, regardless of NO/DoFollow and PR)
- Article Syndication
- PRs, etc.
- Sharing content on FB, Twitter, G+, etc. (very important)
If not then start immediately. Optimization helps in better indexing but not directly in SE Rankings.
Apply variation in Anchor Texts while developing links, so that it looks natural. for e.g:
- office to let deals in Leeds
- office to let Leeds
- office to let in Leeds, etc.
It appears as if the bounce of this page would be relatively high, NO?
-
Hitting the A grade in terms of on page, in most cases, doesn't mean your site will make it to page one. So the next step is to delve deeper into your off page.
Couple of Suggestions:
- Maybe support the page more by linking through from your own blog (http://thesandersonweatherallblog.com/) with useful content. Have your social team spread the message to your target audience and you should earn a few back links for this.
- Take link data pulls from OSE or Majestic of your competition who are ranking on page one for your target term and have a look at the types of links they use and see if you can "piggy back" of their methods.
- With the geographic nature of your target search term, you will always be up against places listings within the SERP, it may be worth optimising you places listing at your office in the centre of Leets around this search term.
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
-
International targeting, translation, URL indexing confusion
Hi all! I rarely work with businesses who target countries outside of the US so I wanted to see if I'm missing anything here on the URL/translation front. I'm no developer, so this is crossing over a bit beyond my realm of expertise... From what I understand (and after briefly review Google's documentation) we should be good to go after having implemented the following two line items... We used a plugin to create different version of our site pages in multiple languages..those live at URLS like this https://www.exfreight.com/fr/ That plugin also implements the hreflang tag and I did check to see that it was actually in the site code Is there anything else we need to do to ensure proper indexing / organization by Google? Should we take the step of creating and adding sitemaps for each language version to our Webmaster account? K6nIhvD
Technical SEO | | RickyShockley0 -
Despite proper hreflang and lang attribute implementation using xml sitemaps, I'm seeing sitelinks from different countries. Any help please?
When someone searches for our brand in US, instead of only US links, users are served with canadian or iranian sitelinks. Despite we have properly implemented xml sitemaps with hreflangs, even we have implemented lang attribute in the head section of source code for every country. I'd be thankful for any advice.
Technical SEO | | eset0 -
How can you tell if you were hit by the Pay Day Loan update in 2013?
Hi All, I have a feeling that our site was hit by the Pay Day Loan update in 2013. We have a website offering serviced apartments - I have seen lots of talk in forums about porn, apartment rentals and finances being among the websites hit by this update. Can anyone offer any advice on whether this is the case and what action might be needed in order to get this penalty taken off our site? Thanks guys! Laura
Technical SEO | | Citybase0 -
GWT - International Targeting
By selecting a country in the Country Targeting section of GWT what effect does this have? For example if I select UK will this boost rankings on google.co.uk and decrease them on google.com etc? If we are based in the UK but our customer base is worldwide should we not select anything?
Technical SEO | | twitime0 -
Ranking for brand name but no other terms (no manual penalty) is this penguin?
Hi guys, I would like your opinions on this site www.colourbanners.co.uk Seems to be ranking for 'colour banners' but has dropped for keywords such as 'banners' and 'pvc banners' which were ranking well. There has been no manual actions against the site so im assuming this is an algo penalty? Any ideas/suggestions what could be causing this? regards Gerry
Technical SEO | | gezzagregz0 -
Duplicate pages in Google index despite canonical tag and URL Parameter in GWMT
Good morning Moz... This is a weird one. It seems to be a "bug" with Google, honest... We migrated our site www.three-clearance.co.uk to a Drupal platform over the new year. The old site used URL-based tracking for heat map purposes, so for instance www.three-clearance.co.uk/apple-phones.html ..could be reached via www.three-clearance.co.uk/apple-phones.html?ref=menu or www.three-clearance.co.uk/apple-phones.html?ref=sidebar and so on. GWMT was told of the ref parameter and the canonical meta tag used to indicate our preference. As expected we encountered no duplicate content issues and everything was good. This is the chain of events: Site migrated to new platform following best practice, as far as I can attest to. Only known issue was that the verification for both google analytics (meta tag) and GWMT (HTML file) didn't transfer as expected so between relaunch on the 22nd Dec and the fix on 2nd Jan we have no GA data, and presumably there was a period where GWMT became unverified. URL structure and URIs were maintained 100% (which may be a problem, now) Yesterday I discovered 200-ish 'duplicate meta titles' and 'duplicate meta descriptions' in GWMT. Uh oh, thought I. Expand the report out and the duplicates are in fact ?ref= versions of the same root URL. Double uh oh, thought I. Run, not walk, to google and do some Fu: http://is.gd/yJ3U24 (9 versions of the same page, in the index, the only variation being the ?ref= URI) Checked BING and it has indexed each root URL once, as it should. Situation now: Site no longer uses ?ref= parameter, although of course there still exists some external backlinks that use it. This was intentional and happened when we migrated. I 'reset' the URL parameter in GWMT yesterday, given that there's no "delete" option. The "URLs monitored" count went from 900 to 0, but today is at over 1,000 (another wtf moment) I also resubmitted the XML sitemap and fetched 5 'hub' pages as Google, including the homepage and HTML site-map page. The ?ref= URls in the index have the disadvantage of actually working, given that we transferred the URL structure and of course the webserver just ignores the nonsense arguments and serves the page. So I assume Google assumes the pages still exist, and won't drop them from the index but will instead apply a dupe content penalty. Or maybe call us a spam farm. Who knows. Options that occurred to me (other than maybe making our canonical tags bold or locating a Google bug submission form 😄 ) include A) robots.txt-ing .?ref=. but to me this says "you can't see these pages", not "these pages don't exist", so isn't correct B) Hand-removing the URLs from the index through a page removal request per indexed URL C) Apply 301 to each indexed URL (hello BING dirty sitemap penalty) D) Post on SEOMoz because I genuinely can't understand this. Even if the gap in verification caused GWMT to forget that we had set ?ref= as a URL parameter, the parameter was no longer in use because the verification only went missing when we relaunched the site without this tracking. Google is seemingly 100% ignoring our canonical tags as well as the GWMT URL setting - I have no idea why and can't think of the best way to correct the situation. Do you? 🙂 Edited To Add: As of this morning the "edit/reset" buttons have disappeared from GWMT URL Parameters page, along with the option to add a new one. There's no messages explaining why and of course the Google help page doesn't mention disappearing buttons (it doesn't even explain what 'reset' does, or why there's no 'remove' option).
Technical SEO | | Tinhat0 -
2 similar websites targetting different countries
I have a website that has a .com.au extension running on zencart. If I load up the exact same wesbite (with the same website name) on the .com, will my .com.au be penalised by Google? Thanks in advance.
Technical SEO | | theshining0 -
Setting a geographic target in webmaster tools
If a site is targeting traffic from around the world should I set the geographic targeting in webmaster tools under 'settings' or leave it? Any help would be much appreciated!
Technical SEO | | SamCUK0