For a classifieds site, should we keep deleted/sold/expired ads?
-
Unlike a blog, classified sites tend to sell items that eventually are no longer available, and it's almost every page on the site that works like that (except category pages for example)
We have 2 options at the moment:
- We keep the old ad urls. Note that these urls won't be linked from on the site anymore. They will technically only exist in Google's index. When someone comes through to them, they are present with a suggested replacement ad that is currently available. So 5 years from now, most of the "indexed" pages on the site that google sends traffic to will be these pages that simply tell you about another ad. Not nice, but so many classifieds are doing it like this.
- 301 the deleted/sold/expired ads to a relevant existing ad. Might have scenarios resulting in soft-404s.
Both have pro's and con's, but any further insight into the matter will be great!
-
If I had a site like that I would eliminate the individual ad pages and have much longer-tail ad categories. Then the category pages would each have multiple ads, most recent at the top, and expiring ads at the bottom.
That puts much more substantive content on every page of the site, more potential keyword matches per page, more ranking power per page.
-
I honestly see your point, and understand both sides of the dillema.
As long as the replacement ad is highly relevant, and you are already ranking well for the expired ad, you could leave it in place. Ebay is known for doing this, in which an indexed ad is left in place, and you are shown relevant ads like the expired one. This is a risk you are taking. What you don't want to happen is have your users get frustrated by constantly seeing expired ads. I'm betting most people will come to the site by searching, and not by an internal link. You don't want to be known as the company that sells ads, not products.
Morally, no its not right. You should only have an ad for an item that exist, but yes, this method does work, and often.
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
-
Local Pack Ads v. Organic Business Listings
Hey everyone, So I'm noticing lately that Google is showing ads via AdWords for my locations in the local pack. I am fine with that, but unfortunately it is now driving me a little bit insane wondering how much Google really cares about NAP, distance from centroid and or user, links to domain, completed business profile and so on. They will pull an ad into the top of the local pack for my location, yet, my actual organic business listing in some cases will not even show up until I hit the second page of business results. I get that it's Adwords, it's pay-to-play, but from most accounts, the differences in ranking for traditional listings results compared to business results on both desktop and mobile are pretty different. For example, by doing my traditional SEO best practices, I can rank high in traditional listing results even when my business does not show in the local listings. I have done this time and time again. I am able to accept that since we have 100 locations in the US and our lists were an absolute mess before I got here, that some of our NAP across multiple directories and listing sites are not exactly up to snuff which I have been working on. So I guess the thing is, if my location in Google's eyes is not good enough to be shown organically for the user even at the bottom of page of one of business results, why is it good enough to show an ad for my business location for that query as the absolute first result? Again, I know its Ad Words which basically allows you to cut in line like that special pass you can buy at a roller coaster park, but still. Isn't their goal to provide the best possible experience for their user? If they feel something is worth holding back my organic listing from the user, why is it fine with them to show the user that same location with the top possible local pack spot in an ad? I guess this is more of a rant than anything but I wanted to know if anyone else is dealing with this or anyone has any info they have found that could help shed light on this? It kind of just kicked everything I thought about trust, authority, links in order to rank in the local pack organically out the window. Thanks! -Ben
Local Listings | | Davey_Tree0 -
How does Google choose the photo added above a Google+ result?
When I do a brand name search for a client, it pulls their G+ info into the right side bar and it adds three images above the G+ info. One is a photo, one is the Streetview, and one is the Google Maps results. On this particular client, the photo being pulled is from Google Images and not from the G+ page. Their G+ page is verified and has 17 photos in it, none of which are this particular photo. Please advise.
Local Listings | | LocalEnthusiast0 -
How do you go about updating / correcting bad business listings when you cannot contact the website directly?
There is a business listing I wish to correct / update on 411dir.biz There is no way to contact the website online, and in cases like this, I try to do a whois lookup, and reach out via the email / phone number there. This site seems impossible to connect with, has anybody else come up against situations like this in the past, if so what do you tell your client / what other approaches do people have? Thanks!
Local Listings | | ParadigmPCB0 -
Google Local: When moving locations, is a new website/content needed?
I've effectively moved companies before, but I've heard that ranking locally in a competitive market after an address move it is necessary to redesign the entire website/content/domain as Google associates the old website/content/domain with the old location. Is this true? Does anyone have any direct experience with this? NOTE- I have updated citations across the internet and have regular social signals going to the new location, and this has been the case for almost 6 months now.
Local Listings | | mgordon0 -
New Local Search Results Appearance/Rankings?
Hi everybody! My team and I are all noticing a new layout for local search results. We just noticed it today. Mobile and desktop results appear to be affected. Specifically, we are looking at searches like "event spaces in Richmond" and "restaurants in Raleigh" as 2 examples. The listings appear differently in the SERPs, and the top results really are not relevant to the search queries. Is anybody noticing anything similar, or does anyone have any insight into whether this is something Google is testing or if it's here to stay? Also, any advice for overcoming rankings drops as a result of these changes? Thanks in advance!
Local Listings | | TriMarkDigital0 -
Help Understanding Localized Search Results/Ranks
I have a Moz campaign for duvalasphalt.com where I want to track a non-location specific keyword, then variations that include a location. For example, here are the rankings for a keyword and the 2 location variations. asphalt company (not in top 50) asphalt company jacksonville (ranked 6) jacksonville asphalt company (ranked 6) When I do a search for just "asphalt company," I see duvalasphalt.com ranked 11. Why does Moz not show an 11 rank? I understand Google tries to show me location specific results even if my search is not location specific. Is Moz's ranking crawler searching from a location where Google will not serve Jacksonville-related results? It would make sense, but how can I get Moz to capture the rankings that are important to my client? The rankings we want to see are the results made from in and around Jacksonville. Any help here is appreciated!
Local Listings | | ElykInnovation0 -
Does anybody have any data on what percentage of people actually click on a Google Places / Google+ listing VS call the business direct from the SERPs?
I've had a few SMB clients who have experienced drops in website traffic once their Google Places listing has gone live. It's hard for the average SMB to understand that this may not be a bad thing because they actually may be received more leads direct from the local SERPs. So while I can try to explain this to my clients, it'd be nice to have some broad data on how searchers interact with Google local listings. I'd love to learn what percentage of people call direct from the SERPs instead of clicking through to the business' website link. Obviously, the percentages would vary across different verticals, different devices & depending on whether the search query was branded or non-branded. I'm after some rough average data, so if anyone could point me in the right direction, that'd be great! 🙂
Local Listings | | Dave_Eddy0 -
Which Local Listing to Delete?
A local business has two Google+ Local listings: an unverified unclaimed listing an unverified, but claimed listing Both are duplicates with correct address and phone numbers. Listing 1 ranks. Listing 2 doesn't rank. Should I: A) report listing 1 and verify listing 2, or B) claim and verify listing 1 and delete listing 2 With A there's a risk of killing a listing that's ranking well and not getting a replacement. With B there's a chance of going against Google guidelines, as I understand claiming duplicate listings is a no-no (?) Suggestions? Thanks!
Local Listings | | MatterSolutions0