“Service Location” in Lieu of Separate NAP to Avoid Merge on Google+Local?
-
A client has two businesses out of the same address, same phone: an eat-in restaurant and a catering service. He has a separate website for each.
He’s dying to optimize the catering, although long-term wants to optimize both.
For the moment, Google only knows this restaurant and his only social media presence is set up as the restaurant as well -- thus the links to his social media even off of the catering site link to his restaurant accounts.
I think he has two options:
1. Really do separate them. Get a different address (suite # or use his home address?) and phone. Set up new, separate social media. Register both, separately, at all the directories, etc.
2. Merge them both into the restaurant site and have the restaurant offer both eat-in and catering. Have some pages on the site optimized for lunch and others for catering, with the home page saying both.
Register the one domain with all the directories, social media under the restaurant, but with a description that includes both lunch and catering as services offered.
Variation on #2: Continue to have Google show the address, since it’s a restaurant, but add the “service location” area to show as well, for the catering part.
My questions are:
1. If he kept the two websites separate, would hiding the address and just using a “service location” area for the catering one keep Google happy?
I mean, could he keep the same address -- although I suppose he’d still have to get a new phone -- and set up the catering entry to show only the service area? And if he did that, would Google not merge them then?
In directories, though, he’d still be listing both the restaurant and the catering separately but under the same address, so maybe this is a silly scenario anyway. What do you think?
2. Which option would you choose?
3. Are there any other better options?
4. In the #2 scenario, if a directory allows registry under one category, would you choose “restaurant” or “catering” -- or sometimes one and sometimes the other?
Thank you for your insight!
-
Perfect. Thank you!!!
-
Hi Raymond,
The guiding rule for this client is:
-
If he's a single business, he should promote himself as one, via every format, including Social Media.
-
If he's running two businesses then every aspect of them, including Social Media, should be completely separate with no crossover of any kind.
He needs to pick one direction and adhere to in all actions he takes, including on and offline promotion, and stick with that plan.
-
-
Got it! And gosh, thanks so much for the time to write out all the detail!
A related question: What about the social media aspect? Can he keep the two together, at least from an SEO perspective?
Or will Google not like it if his catering business site links to his restaurant social media accounts? (Or is it simply a question of his not getting the "juice" from Facebook, say, for his catering site if his FB account references the restaurant only?)
Again, so appreciative of the guidance!
-
Hi Raymond,
If the restaurant and the catering business share either a physical address or phone number, only one of them should be locally optimized and locally promoted. If you were to try to promote both this this way, Google would be confused. The listings might be penalized, merged, etc.
So, back to my earlier point, if he wants to gain a local presence on the web for 2 different companies, then he needs to get a distinct physical address and phone number for the catering company. With that, he can promote both businesses locally, as 2 distinct entities. Without that, he has to pick only one to promote.
I hope this is totally clear. It is a little complicated!
-
You're welcome
So you mean that if he keeps the catering site separate, he should not only hide the (non-restaurant) address from Google and show only the service area, but also he should NOT publish that address -- even if it's different from the restaurant -- anywhere?
How would he ever locally optimize the catering one, then? Or wouldn't he?
Or did I not understand correctly?
-
Hi Raymond,
That's nice of you to say!
So, here's the thing: if he's going to go with just 1 brand for both the restaurant and the catering service, it is VITAL that he not publish any kind of NAP in indexable text on the catering site or anywhere else. You don't want anything (the website, social media profiles, citations, etc.) to be saying that this second website/second business is competing with the restaurant website in terms of name, address, phone number or website. Honestly, if the catering is just part of his business, I would way rather he only had one website, but if he wants to maintain 2, he should not publish the NAP of the catering business anywhere that can be indexed because it will confuse Google about which business is located at 211 Main St in Happy City, MI at (663) 311-3333 at www.joespizza.com.
Does this make sense?
-
Yea!! I was hoping you'd answer, Miriam.
I tend to think the catering is really part of the restaurant's brand in his case, but of course ultimately this is up to him.
What do you think about the role of his social media accounts? Could he still keep everything under the restaurant or do you you recommend splitting that too?
(Does Google care that links from his catering site link to the social media accounts of his restaurant?)
-
Hi Raymond,
Great question. Here is what I would advise this client if he were mine.
First, I would determine how distinct the 2 businesses are. If, for example, one is a pizza parlor named Joe's Pizza and the other does high end catering for weddings and is called Weddings by Josef, then these really are distinct businesses. In this case, the owner should be utilizing a completely distinct:
-
Name
-
Phone
-
Street Address
-
Website
-
Google+ Local Page
I do not recommend that Joe's Pizza and Weddings by Josef go the suite number route at the same address because I think their is a chance the businesses could be merged. Instead, I think your suggestion of the catering business being run out of the home of the owner makes sense. And, yes, he should definitely be hiding his address on the Google+ Local page for the catering company, though not, obviously, on the listing for the restaurant.
There are other business models in which catering is just a service offered under the same brand. For example, there is the big franchise, Subway. You can go eat sandwiches at their restaurant, or you can hire them to cater an event. In this case, Subway should simply be building out their own brand to reflect that they offer both in-house food and catering services. They are entitled to only one Google+ Local page, and can select catering as one of their categories. They can build up content on their corporate website to reflect that they do catering.
So, I think the answer to which of these 2 routes is right for your client is to totally clarify his business model. Is catering part of his restaurant's brand, or is he really operating 2 different businesses? Hope this 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
-
Google June Core update massive drop in visibility and rank
Following Google Core update in June, I noticed that some websites has seen small improvements or stayed on same positions in SERPs, but our website received nearly 60% visibility drop. Now, after two weeks, some keywords shows "slight" improvement, while majority of keywords still sits on quite low places in searches. Even others big brands got hit after update, but some competitors didn't and overtook our positions. Anyone else noticed any patterns after update and can share some thoughts? Thank you.
Algorithm Updates | | Optimal_Strategies1 -
De-indexed homepage in Google - very confusing.
A website I provide content for has just suffered a de-indexed homepage in Google (not in any of the other search engines) - all the other pages remained indexed as usual. Client asked me what might be the problem and I just couldn't figure it out - no linkbuilding has ever been carried out so clean backlink profile, etc. I just resubmitted it and it's back in its usual place, and has maintained the rankings (and PR) it had before it disappeared a few days ago. I checked WMT and no warnings or issues there. Any idea why this might've happened?
Algorithm Updates | | McTaggart0 -
Page details in Google Search
I noticed this morning a drop in the SERPs for a couple of my main keywords. And even though this is a little annoying the more pressing matter is that Google is not displaying the meta title I have specified for the majority of my sites pages, despite one being specified and knowing my site has them in place. Could this sudden change to not using my specified title be the cause of the drop, and why would they be being displayed by Google in the first place, when they are there to be used. The title currently being displayed inthe SERPs is not anything that has been specified in the past or from the previous latest crawl etc. Any insight would be appreciated. Tim
Algorithm Updates | | TimHolmes0 -
Dropped from Universal Result: Local
For quite some time our Google Places listing has been in the Universal Results...(for this keyword there is a 7-pack result). Which was great, we had a PPC ad at the top of the page, we were 3rd in the Universal Results (there was 3 places listings before the natural results)...and we were 6th in the natural results - meaning we were on the first page 3 times...which means a happy boss....and lots of traffic. The old places listing was linked to our new Google+ Page pending the eventual demise of places and the merge. The merge has happened, all information from the places listing has migrated (apart from reviews and photos??) and the places listing has been deleted (URL returns 404 error). Problem is now my Google + Page is not even within the first 2 or 3 pages of places results never mind in the Universal results. So it would appear the rank / authority that the places listing had...hasn't been transferred to the Google+ page. My competitors...who were in 1 + 2 in the universal results above the natural results and who have Google+ Pages with NOTHING on...bar their name, are still there! Why would I be dropped when my Google+ Page, has more info, more followers, more photos, more relevant content (they don't have any content ) than my 2 competitors. It seems I've been penalised....somebody suggested that I had the keyword twice in my "About" and twice in my "Introduction" info and that could be it. I thought the loss of the review might be it too...but neither of the businesses now occupying the first 3 spots..have any reviews at all. Anybody else suffered from this? Anybody any other suggestions to why I might have been dropped so dramatically in the places listings? (My SERP listing is unaffected for this keyword) Keyword being mentioned twice hardly seems like "stuffing"! I'm actually not too concerned about the places ranking....not a great driver of traffic...but appearing in the Universal Results did obviously drive traffic...and to appear in the Universal Results...I've now got about 30 positions to climb...... The whole Google+ Local / Google Places thing has been a nightmare from start to finish.... Thanks in advance for any help or advice!
Algorithm Updates | | MarbellaSurferDude0 -
How do you determine if Google thinks you’re guilty of Key Word Stuffing?
I believe that Google sees our website: www.getyourphotosoncanvas.com/
Algorithm Updates | | rdominey
as being guilty of keyword stuffing. I don’t see any specific tools on SEOmoz
that will evaluate Keyword Density as viewed by Google. Just to be clear; I have not attempted to use KWS as a SEO tactic. I feel that the
content of each page is written for the customer. I do realize that Google may
see it differently. I think that I am being penalized for the use of the words
Photo and Canvas. My domain name is “GetYourPhotosonCanvas.com” The business
name is “Get Your Photos on Canvas”, the website title is “Get Your Photos on Canvas”, and each page of our website talks about Photos and Canvas. I have tried to
vary the use of Photo with Pictures, Photographs, Prints, Digital Images and so
on. It is difficult to vary the word Canvas. I guess according to Google this paragraph
would be guilt of Keyword Stuffing! I have conducted some tests on other SEO site tools and some indicate that KWS is
a problem on my website. If you search a specific page title that contains either Photo or Canvas it does
not rank in the top 200 on Google, although it is #1 or #2 on Yahoo or Bing. Drop those two Keywords and the page shows up
as #2 on Google. I think that is a good indication that we are being penalized
for KWS. Pease take a look at our website and give me your opinion/advice regarding the Key
Word Stuffing Issue. Do I need to rewrite my site content for Google?0 -
Urgent input needed on huge drop in Google
As of today we got huge drops in SERP across all our pages. We can see a drop between 10 to 80% on most of our pages on this domain: http://www.meresverige.dk Some background info: Never bought any links Yes, did optimize the site, but only in fair way, using SEO moz On-Page Optimization. Most pages get an A-grade No cloaking, all pages do look exactly same to visitors and Google Any input on what this could be? We are hugely grateful for any input that might lead us in the correct direction Have a nice day Fredrik
Algorithm Updates | | Resultify0 -
What is the best way for a local business site to come up in the SERPs for a town that they are not located in?
At our agency, we work with many local small business owners who often want to come up in multiple towns that are near to their business where they do not have a physical address. We explain to them again and again that with the recent changes that Google in particular has made to their algorithms, it is very difficult to come up in the new "blended" organic and Places results in a town that you don't have a physical address in. However, many of these towns are within 2 or 3 miles of the physical location and well within driving distance for potential new clients. Google, in it's infinite wisdom doesn't seem to account for areas of the country, such as New Jersey, where these limitations can seriously affect a business' bottom line. What we would like to know is what are other SEOs doing to help their clients come up in neighboring towns that is both organic and white hat?
Algorithm Updates | | Mike-i0