Does Unique Content Need to be Located Higher on my webpages?
-
I have 1 page that ranks well with unique written content located high up on page (http://www.honoluluhi5.com/new-condos-in-honolulu/). I struggle to rank for 200+ other pages where unique content requires scrolling (ex: http://www.honoluluhi5.com/oahu/honolulu-homes/). I am thinking to do as follows:
- Change layout of all my pages to have unique content higher on page
- When users are on my site (not coming from search engines) and use my search filters, then users will land on pages where unique content is lower on page (so keep this layout: http://www.honoluluhi5.com/oahu/honolulu-homes/). I will then add these pages to my robots.txt file so they do not show in Google's index. Reason: unique content lower on page offers best user experience.
With unique content higher on page, I expect bounce rate to increase about 10% (based on the 1 page I have with unique content higher), but I think it is worthwhile, as I am sure search engines will start having my pages rank higher.
-
follow backlinks. site artchitecture and quality of content way above competition. I see businesses buying up 100+ keyword rich domains and ranking well for all domains. It tells me 2 things: 1) search engines are not always that clever, 2) I need to be patient, because of 1).
-
Google has not stated anything saying that is is harder for new websites to rank quickly, and I doubt that they would implement something like that into their alogorithm. The reason is it harder for a new website to rank is due to the lack of backlinks and ciatation sources. Without a history, it's harder for Google to see if a website is better or worse than others. This is why they place such a high prioroity on backlinks, as it tells them a broad picture of how trustworthy a site or domain really is. This is one of many factors, but its an important one to consider.
You stated that you have backlinks, have you checked to see if all of them are followed? If the link is not followed, it will only help to direct traffic at your site, not pagerank or weight.
I know a lot of people say this, but focus on laying out your page in a way that will help the user. Moving all your text higher up on the page will not make a magic improvement in your ranking, and I fear that you will spend a lot of time modifying and not get the results you want. Spend time creating really nice listing pages, and having other sites link back to them. Focus on gaining high quality relationships with real estate sites that have authority in the eyes of consumers, and in search engines. Look at large sites that are already successful in search results, and see what you can learn from them. We wrote an article a while back about analyzing your competitors SEO strategy. Might be worth a read for you. Focus on the content of your site, improving the conversion messages, improving the keyword density, and your overall message.
Thats where I would start
-
thanks for the answer. "...placement of the content (above the fold, bellow the fold ..) it's important for ranking - it's not what makes your page rank or don't rank that high" - I am not sure if you are saying it is important or not?
If you look at the URL I sent: http://www.honoluluhi5.com/oahu/honolulu-homes/ - besides the 10 MLS real estate listings on the left side (which all Realtors share), the content lower on the page is all unique - aerial photos, written overview, history of the area and advanced statistical data. My website has only been live for 8 months, has relatively few backlinks (though more than most competitors already, and all natural links - several high quality).
Do we have evidence that Google has tightened the grip and it is tougher for new websites to rank quickly? I am puzzled what may be the reason for the lack of those pages ranking well yet and I think location of the unique content too low on the page may be a main factor. Some insight would be appreciated.
-
Hi,
Although you are right, "real estate" / placement of the content (above the fold, bellow the fold ..) it's important for ranking - it's not what makes your page rank or don't rank that high - for the ones you've sent as examples. The quality of the content (duplicate or unique), competitors, metrics, on-page approach you are taking, keywords targeted, format of serp for some of the keywords there are way more important then placement ....
Thanks.
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
-
Blog with all copied content, should it be rewritten?
Hi, I am auditing a blog where their goal is to get approved to on ad networks but the whole blog has copied content from different sources, so no ad network is approving them. Surprisingly (at least to me), is that the blog ranks really well for a few keywords (#1's and rich snippets ), has a few hundred of natural backlinks, DA is high, has never been penalized (they have always used canonical tags to the original content), traffic is a few thousand sessions a month with mostly 85% organic search, etc. overall Google likes it enough to show them high on search. So now the owner wants to monetize it. I suggested that the best approach was to rewrite their most visited articles and deleted the rest with 301 redirects to the posts that stay. But I actually haven't worked on a similar project before and can't find precise information online so I'm looking to know if anyone has a similar experience to this. A few of my questions are: If they rewrite most of the pages and delete the rest so there is no repeated/copied content, would ad networks (eg. adsense) approve them? Assuming the new articles are at least as good quality as the current ones but with original content, is there a risk on losing DA? since pretty much it will look like a new site once they are done They have thousands of articles but only about 200 hundred get most visits, which would be the ones getting rewritten, so it should be fine to redirect the deleted ones to the remaining? Thanks for any suggestions and/or tips on this 🙂
Intermediate & Advanced SEO | | ArturoES0 -
Content question please help
Would content behind a drop down on this site Https://www.homeleisuredirect.com/pool_tables/english_pool_tables/ you have to click the - more about English pool tables text under the video Work just as well for SEO as content on the page like this site http://www.pooltablesonline.co.uk/uk-slate-bed-pool-tables.asp
Intermediate & Advanced SEO | | BobAnderson0 -
Google Places Multiple Location
Hi everyone, I have a client with multiple locations in the same city. I would like to have their Goolge places listing show up under the main website listing. Currently, one of the Google places listings in being pulled in directly below the main website but not the other. The Zagat rating is being pulled in as well. I would like to have both locations show up when you type in the name of the business. Any ideas how to do this?
Intermediate & Advanced SEO | | SixTwoInteractive0 -
Copying my Facebook content to website considered duplicate content?
I write career advice on Facebook on a daily basis. On my homepage users can see the most recent 4-5 feeds (using FB social media plugin). I am thinking to create a page on my website where visitors can see all my previous FB feeds. Would this be considered duplicate content if I copy paste the info, but if I use a Facebook social media plugin then it is not considered duplicate content? I am working on increasing content on my website and feel incorporating FB feeds would make sense. thank you
Intermediate & Advanced SEO | | knielsen0 -
Is it possible to "undo" canonical tags as unique content is created?
We will soon be launching an education site that teaches people how to drive (not really the topic, but it will do). We plan on being content rich and have plans to expand into several "schools" of driving. Currently, content falls into a number of categories, for example rules of the road, shifting gears, safety, etc. We are going to group content into general categories that apply broadly, and then into "schools" where the content is meant to be consumed in a specific order. So, for example, some URLs in general categories may be: drivingschool.com/safety drivingschool.com/rules-of-the-road drivingschool.com/shifting-gears etc. Then, schools will be available for specific types of vehicles. For example, drivingschool.com/cars drivingschool.com/motorbikes etc. We will provide lessons at the school level, and in the general categories. This is where it gets tricky. If people are looking for general content, then we want them to find pages in the general categories (for example, drivingschool.com/rules-of-the-road/traffic-signs). However, we have very similar content within each of the schools (for example, drivingschool.com/motorbikes/rules-of-the-road/traffic-signs). As you could imagine, sometimes the content is very unique between the various schools and the general category (such as in shifting), but often it is very similar or even nearly duplicate (as in the example above). The problem is that in the schools we want to say at the end of the lesson, "after this lesson, take the next lesson about speed limits for motorcycles" so there is a very logical click-path through the school. Unfortunately this creates potential duplicate content issues. The best solution I've come up with is to include a canonical tag (pointing to the general version of the page) whenever there is content that is virtually identical. There will be cases though where we adjust the content "down the road" 🙂 to be more unique and more specific for the school. At that time we'd want to remove the canonical tag. So two questions: Does anyone have any better ideas of how to handle this duplicate content? If we implement canonical tags now, and in 6 months update content to be more school-specific, will "undoing" the canonical tag (and even adding a self-referential tag) work for SEO? I really hope someone has some insight into this! Many thanks (in advance).
Intermediate & Advanced SEO | | JessicaB0 -
Duplicate content clarity required
Hi, I have access to a masive resource of journals that we have been given the all clear to use the abstract on our site and link back to the journal. These will be really useful links for our visitors. E.g. http://www.springerlink.com/content/59210832213382K2 Simply, if we copy the abstract and then link back to the journal source will this be treated as duplicate content and damage the site or is the link to the source enough for search engines to realise that we aren't trying anything untoward. Would it help if we added an introduction so in effect we are sort of following the curating content model? We are thinking of linking back internally to a relevant page using a keyword too. Will this approach give any benefit to our site at all or will the content be ignored due to it being duplicate and thus render the internal links useless? Thanks Jason
Intermediate & Advanced SEO | | jayderby0 -
Duplicate content from development website
Hi all - I've been trawling for duplicate content and then I stumbled across a development URL, set up by a previous web developer, which nearly mirrors current site (few content and structure changes since then, but otherwise it's all virtually the same). The developer didn't take it down when the site was launched. I'm guessing the best thing to do is tell him to take down the development URL (which is specific to the pizza joint btw, immediately. Is there anything else I should ask him to do? Thanks, Luke
Intermediate & Advanced SEO | | McTaggart0 -
Duplicate Content
Hi everyone, I have a TLD in the UK with a .co.uk and also the same site in Ireland (.ie). The only differences are the prices and different banners maybe. The .ie site pulls all of the content from the .co.uk domain. Is this classed as content duplication? I've had problems in the past in which Google struggles to index the website. At the moment the site appears completely fine in the UK SERPs but for Ireland I just have the Title and domain appearing in the SERPs, with no extended title or description because of the confusion I caused Google last time. Does anybody know a fix for this? Thanks
Intermediate & Advanced SEO | | royb0