Localized vs Professional Images
-
When it comes to local directory sites such as Google+ Local for business, Yelp, Bing places for business, etc., what is everyone's opinion on the type of images that should be used?
I am trying to decide if I want to use 10 professionally produced images (the same 10 will be used across hundreds of locations under the same brand across the country) or if each location should use their own unique 10 images that show localized images from that exact location.
When it comes to profile completeness, I think each site does not care, as long as they represent your company well. However, I am curious if there are any case studies or the like that show that one image type is better to use over the other in terms of helping customers make decisions to contact your business or not.
really appreciate any comments you have to share.
-
i think my solution will be a unique exterior storefront image of each location and then 9 images that show the range of products and services offered at all locations, using the same 9 images on all like brand profiles. so, the primary image will be unique and the 9 supporting images will be the same across each brand (200-300 locations each).
If a location wants to go the extra mile and send me 9 unique images to use, I will add those as provided, but not make it a requirement.
the logistics of trying to get 921 busy business owners to send me 10 images that meet my requirements is nearly impossible, so I have to be realistic in my solution for now.
-
Hi Brad, I think you are right on with your instinct. You are, after all, a consumer as well.
While it may not in fact hurt your rankings online to use the same photo for all locations, I would suggest that the end-user would appreciate the opportunity to see location-specific images. That is what they are there for.
However, if you do have the 10 photos, you could offer these up to what I assume are either your partners, franchisors, or licensees as a benefit while making the suggestion that they also get their own images.
-
Thanks for your input, Miriam.
My instinct is that while local images set a stronger expectation for customers of what they can actually expect when they visit each location, ultimately, it probably has little influence on whether or not they decided to come in the first place.
Also, yes, each location will have an image of the outside of the building (storefront) as the first image and then probably the same general images for the other 9 spots.
Again, thank you for your feedback.
Anyone else have any insight?
-
Hi Brad,
Your question is so great, and I'm sorry not to be able to point right to a study that's been done along the lines you've mentioned. Unfortunately, I've never seen such a study defining that certain types of images engender better impressions than others, beyond people stating that the images should be appropriate and of high quality.
I think the question here is one of uniqueness vs. reasonableness. If the company has the ability to produce thousands of images (taking your hundreds of locations into account) then a completely unique approach might be possible, but this really seems like an enormous undertaking. Remember, too, that it is typically only the first photo uploaded to the Google+ Local dashboard that would appear side-by-side in something like local results, so I'm not sure there would be a genuine issue with duplication, if you could ensure that at least the first image on each profile was unique. This would cut the work down to one unique photo for each physical location, rather than 10 for each location. This might make the project a little easier to handle.
I hope others will comment on this, as it's such a good question, and if anyone has done a case study, please link to it!
-
also, please consider when replying that there may be occasions where several locations are in the same general geography and the likelihood of a customer seeing multiple locations next to one another in search results is probable.
My instinct as a marketer is to say that each location should look different than the others, but is this how consumers think?
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
-
Star rating not showing up in local pack, and knowledge panel pulling in healthgrades
Hello, I have a client that when you Google just their business name a couple of odd things are happening. First off, they show up in the map pack, but it's now showing their review rating. They have 29 reviews, with an average star rating of 4.6, but at first glance, it doesn't look like they have any reviews:
Reviews and Ratings | | ElaineBushey0 -
How I can improve Local SEO in 2018
Hi. I have already applied this strategy: Capture Your Space on All Local Business Directories. Leverage the Power of Local Link Building Focus on Reviews and Ratings Use Local Structured Data Markup What could I do to improve my strategy in 2018?
Reviews and Ratings | | martinxm1 -
How can I improve my rank on Google Local?
I am bringing this topic up again. Last year, I suddenly stopped ranking for Google Local search results. I tried backing away and hoping it would correct itself, but it has not. When I do a search for myself, I rarely show up in the results anymore, and this image shows AFTER I've zoomed WAY in just to find myself. I think it has something to do with many fishing charters having the same address. I read the Moz article about which signals are most important, but to be quite honest, I don't think any of these competitors really bother with SEO or even have filled out their Google My Business in its entirety. They all have way less reviews than I do as well. I really try to do everything right, but it doesn't seem to help. Is there something small ad obvious that I am missing. Any ideas on what to do?
Reviews and Ratings | | CalicoKitty20000 -
Local Listing only Showing out of the Local Market. Have you seen this? What are my options?
I have a client (law firm) who has been dominant locally for years. A few months ago he stopped showing locally when you search in his city, but when you search from other cities, he's still dominant. Here are a couple facts: 1. None of the competition is in his building. 2. He does rank dominant locally if you select "top rated" in Google maps.* *Interestingly enough, his competitors on regular searches have great ratings too so its a bit weird that he shows up in front of them but only when you select top rated. Have you seen this? Any suggestions?
Reviews and Ratings | | mgordon1 -
We have a link we to: Grace Construction, but the company has switched owners, and is not local anymore.
I have a second question to put forward! Probably close to 8 years ago I exchanged a link with a good friend's construction company, Grace Construction. We are a local fence company in Oklahoma City, Oklahoma. They were new home builders and we sometimes would build a fence for their new home owners. They wrote a positive review of our business and I published it on our reviews page: (it's near the very bottom) http://www.a-better-fence-construction.com/fence-reviews.html And, they linked to our website from their website. However, now after 8 years, they no longer build homes and have let their domain name expire and has been repurchased by a construction company in Florida. I had linked to their website from the text and the image of their logo. I am not up to speed on what is best practice. What do you recommend I do? dwhAV
Reviews and Ratings | | SuperNovi0 -
Schema markup for employees and local business on same page - Possible?
Hello, We have some local business sites where we have user submitted reviews. We then post those reviews on that business' page and use the schema aggregate markup. Works like a charm in getting stars in SERPs on branded searches for these location. We already have information about the persons who work at these locations and are about to work out a process where we can get even better data on these persons. Right now they are marked up as employees on the local business pages. Right now the ratings are for the business as a whole, but we are looking at expanding where you can not only submit a location review, but designate which employee you worked with. We work in the health care industry and so you can see why this would make sense. Right now we mark up a local clinic and employees in the following way Local Business > Employee > Person > Name of Person Person Bio > Person info etc We are going back and forth on if this would be worth marking up reviews at the employee level as well. So, on a page each employee would have an aggregate rating and then the location would have an aggregate rating that consists of all of the reviews for that location - a combination of all employees. As I looked through the schema standard for person https://schema.org/Person there is nothing there that shows a markup for the aggregate rating of a person. Also when I look at other more specific business types https://health-lifesci.schema.org/MedicalBusiness same thing. It looks like schema has rating tied to a business vs a person. Right now - the markup validates. It shows up in the SERPs. People are happy. So, I am inclined to say, if it aint broke ... but we are always looking for better ways to present our data to user and to Google. My gut right now, based on how Google is reading things, to just keep the aggregate rating on the location, but start to track reviews on a per employee basis for potential future use. Lemme know what you all think!
Reviews and Ratings | | HeaHea0 -
Different results & page layout in Google local for plurals?
I realize that the general results websites can rank differently for singular vs plural keywords, but today when checking local rankings for a client, I noticed that not only does the client rank differently for "church in San Diego" vs "churches in San Diego" but the layout and info of the local results pages are different. "Church in San Diego" (screenshot) shows the phone number and has links for Website and Directions "Churches in San Diego" (screenshot) doesn't show any of that instead has an image. If you click on the image, it brings up a card almost like a popup with info, reviews, and links for the organization. Anyone ever noticed that before? Anyone know why the difference? And if there are different optimization strategies?
Reviews and Ratings | | Kurt_Steinbrueck0 -
Google Local Results - Incorrect Listing Url's
I have decided to re launch a small side project that I had to abandon a few years ago. I want to specifically target Google Local Results. I do need to overcome a proximity to centroid issue in a fairly competative niche. Unfortunately a number of my listings i.e. Facebook and Yelp have less than optimal URL's. For example: https://www.facebook.com/businessname.targetlocation.keyword/
Reviews and Ratings | | GrouchyKids
http://www.yelp.com/biz/business-name-key-phrase-and-keyword-location Well you get the idea. NB: None of these listings currently have reviews. Now I know that its best to keep the info consistent across the board, so I wonder if I would be better off scrapping these listings in favor of ones with URL's that match the business name. I can see that I can merge FB pages so am guessing that this would work for FB, has anyone any experience of this? Am assuming yelp will have to be deleted in some way. Any thoughts?0