International SEO - cannibalisation and duplicate content
-
Hello all,
I look after (in house) 3 domains for one niche travel business across three TLDs: .com .com.au and co.uk and a fourth domain on a co.nz TLD which was recently removed from Googles index.
Symptoms:
For the past 12 months we have been experiencing canibalisation in the SERPs (namely .com.au being rendered in .com) and Panda related ranking devaluations between our .com site and com.au site.
Around 12 months ago the .com TLD was hit hard (80% drop in target KWs) by Panda (probably) and we began to action the below changes. Around 6 weeks ago our .com TLD saw big overnight increases in rankings (to date a 70% averaged increase). However, almost to the same percentage we saw in the .com TLD we suffered significant drops in our .com.au rankings. Basically Google seemed to switch its attention from .com TLD to the .com.au TLD.
Note: Each TLD is over 6 years old, we've never proactively gone after links (Penguin) and have always aimed for quality in an often spammy industry.
**Have done: **
- Adding HREF LANG markup to all pages on all domain
- Each TLD uses local vernacular e.g for the .com site is American
- Each TLD has pricing in the regional currency
- Each TLD has details of the respective local offices, the copy references the lacation, we have significant press coverage in each country like The Guardian for our .co.uk site and Sydney Morning Herlad for our Australia site
- Targeting each site to its respective market in WMT
- Each TLDs core-pages (within 3 clicks of the primary nav) are 100% unique
- We're continuing to re-write and publish unique content to each TLD on a weekly basis
- As the .co.nz site drove such little traffic re-wrting we added no-idex and the TLD has almost compelte dissapread (16% of pages remain) from the SERPs.
- XML sitemaps
- Google + profile for each TLD
**Have not done: **
- Hosted each TLD on a local server
- Around 600 pages per TLD are duplicated across all TLDs (roughly 50% of all content). These are way down the IA but still duplicated.
- Images/video sources from local servers
- Added address and contact details using SCHEMA markup
Any help, advice or just validation on this subject would be appreciated!
Kian
-
Hey Simon,
The Australia is lang="en-au"
The UK is lang="en-gb"
The US is lang="en-us"
We've tried to keep these as tight per country as possible so opted not to use the straight 'en'.
In analytics, there has been some reduction is language referrals, mainly "en-gb" falling from the number one language type for the US site, which is a positive. Interstingly enough, once we removed the .co.nz fro mthe Index the .com site remove in to dominate the SERPs for brand and some core-KW searches in Google.co.nz.
Its a little unfortunate as Panda, from my understanding, is keen to spare ccTLDs from any harsh devaluations, but we'll hopefully be able to hit whatever threshold for % of unique content in the near future.
We have review functionality planned for each TLD which should help add value to existing duplicate content. Once this is up and I have some more robust data I'll pull a post together for YouMoz.
Thanks for the feedback!
Kian
-
Wow, that's a pretty comprehensive list of actions you've compiled there and you seem to have covered pretty much all the bases. I almost think your post should be promoted on Youmoz as a great step of actions for targeting regional websites.
My experience of hreflang is that it is not perfect in that you occasionally get the wrong versions of pages served in SERPs. I wonder do you specify the .com as 'en' in the hreflang mark up in order that it is the generic English language version as opposed to being country specific?
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
-
How to solve JavaScript paginated content for SEO
In our blog listings page, we limit the number of blogs that can be seen on the page to 10. However, all of the blogs are loaded in the html of the page and page links are added to the bottom. Example page: https://tulanehealthcare.com/about/newsroom/ When a user clicks the next page, it simply filters the content on the same page for the next group of postings and displays these to the user. Nothing in the html or URL change. This is all done via JavaScript. So the question is, does Google consider this hidden content because all listings are in the html but the listings on page are limited to only a handful of them? Or is Googlebot smart enough to know that the content is being filtered by JavaScript pagination? If this is indeed a problem we have 2 possible solutions: not building the HTML for the next pages until you click on the 'next' page. adding parameters to the URL to show the content has changed. Any other solutions that would be better for SEO?
Intermediate & Advanced SEO | | MJTrevens1 -
Kind of duplicate categories and custom taxonomy. Necessary, but bad for SEO?
Hello Everyone! I'm new here! My husband and I are working on creating a website: https://sacwellness.com .The site is an online therapist directory for the the Sacramento California area. Our problem is this: In wordpress our category system is being used for blog posts. Our theme is using a custom taxonomy system to categorize different therapist specialties, therapeutic approaches, etc. We've found ourselves in a position where our custom taxonomy and categories are near duplicates. for example we have the blog categories: ADHD counseling, Anxiety therapy, and Career counseling our corresponding custom taxonomy/therapist categories are: ADHD, Anxiety, and....(oops) career counseling. My understanding is that google doesn't see a difference between identically named categories and custom taxonomies and will so choose one to rank and disregard the other, effectively leaving you competing against yourself. is this true in a case like this? Can google maybe understand the difference because of the custom taxonomy and/or URL paths? if this is a problem is it ok to have near duplicates....like ADHD vs. ADHD counseling. This has been our solution so far....but now we're questioning it....derp x_x. I thought about tagging the categories with no index, but I think the archive pages would be useful for people. Essentially we have 2 sets of archives for each keyword. One is for blog posts, and one is for therapists who work with that particular issue along with the 6 most recent blog posts in that category.....because we are putting the 6 most recent blog posts at the bottom of the therapist pages I feel like it wouldn't be as terrible of a loss if we had to noindex the category pages. ....what do you think? Thank you!
Intermediate & Advanced SEO | | angelamaemae0 -
Is tabbed content okay or bad for SEO? Google takes both sides.
Hello Moz Community! It seems like there are two opinions coming from directly from Google on tabbed content: 1) John Mueller says here that content is indexed but discounted 2) Matt Cutts says here that if you're not using tabs deceptively, you're in good shape I see this has been discussed in the Moz Q & A before, but I have an interesting situation: The pages I am building have ~50% static content, and ~50% tabbed content (only two tabs). Showing all tabbed content at once is not an option. Since the tabbed content will make up 50% of the total content, it's important that it is 100% weighted by Google. I can think of two ways to show it: 1) Standard tabs using jQuery Advantage: Both tab 1 and tab 2's content indexed Disadvantage: Tabbed content may be discounted? 2) Make the content of the tabs conditional on the server side website.com/page/ only shows tab 1's content in html website.com/page/?tab=2 only shows tab 2's content in the html. Include rel="canonical" pointing to website.com/page/. Advantage: Content of tab 1 indexed & 100% counted by Google Disadvantage: Content of tab 2 not indexed Which option is best? Is there a better solution?
Intermediate & Advanced SEO | | jamiestu130 -
Duplicate Content Question
Hey Everyone, I have a question regarding duplicate content. If your site is penalized for duplicate content, is it just the pages with the content on it that are affected or is the whole site affected? Thanks 🙂
Intermediate & Advanced SEO | | jhinchcliffe0 -
Duplicate Content in News Section
Our clients site is in the hunting niche. According to webmaster tools there are over 32,000 indexed pages. In the new section that are 300-400 news posts where over the course of a about 5 years they manually copied relevant Press Releases from different state natural resources websites (ex. http://gfp.sd.gov/news/default.aspx). This content is relevant to the site visitors but it is not unique. We have since begun posting unique new posts but I am wondering if anything should be done with these old news posts that aren't unique? Should I use the rel="canonical tag or noindex tag for each of these pages? Or do you have another suggestion?
Intermediate & Advanced SEO | | rise10 -
Duplicate Content/ Indexing Question
I have a real estate Wordpress site that uses an IDX provider to add real estate listings to my site. A new page is created as a new property comes to market and then the page is deleted when the property is sold. I like the functionality of the service but it creates a significant amount of 404's and I'm also concerned about duplicate content because anyone else using the same service here in Las Vegas will have 1000's of the exact same property pages that I do. Any thoughts on this and is there a way that I can have the search engines only index the core 20 pages of my site and ignore future property pages? Your advice is greatly appreciated. See link for example http://www.mylvcondosales.com/mandarin-las-vegas/
Intermediate & Advanced SEO | | AnthonyLasVegas0 -
Duplicate Content Question
My client's website is for an organization that is part of a larger organization - which has it's own website. We were given permission to use content from the larger organization's site on my client's redesigned site. The SEs will deem this as duplicate content, right? I can "re-write" the content for the new site, but it will still be closely based on the original content from the larger organization's site, due to the scientific/medical nature of the subject material. Is there a way around this dilemma so I do not get penalized? Thanks!
Intermediate & Advanced SEO | | Mills1 -
Duplicate content - canonical vs link to original and Flash duplication
Here's the situation for the website in question: The company produces printed publications which go online as a page turning Flash version, and as a separate HTML version. To complicate matters, some of the articles from the publications get added to a separate news section of the website. We want to promote the news section of the site over the publications section. If we were to forget the Flash version completely, would you: a) add a canonical in the publication version pointing to the version in the news section? b) add a link in the footer of the publication version pointing to the version in the news section? c) both of the above? d) something else? What if we add the Flash version into the mix? As Flash still isn't as crawlable as HTML should we noindex them? Is HTML content duplicated in Flash as big an issue as HTML to HTML duplication?
Intermediate & Advanced SEO | | Alex-Harford0