Google's mobile-friendly update. How significant is the impact for us?
-
Hi guys.
Recently I got an email from Webmaster-tools saying our site is poorly optimised for mobile devices, and that it’s going to heavily affect rankings from April 21st. I’m worried to say the least. We literary cannot afford a hit on traffic at the moment
We rank well for niche terms like ‘customised diary’ and ‘personalised diary’.
So question...
Because we rank well for these very specific searches will we still take a hit on rankings after the update? Won’t our high relevancy for those search terms be enough to keep us high in the results?
Also, do you know if this change is specific to the users device? E.g) Someone on a mobile device will get mobile-friendly results, whilst users on a laptop will get different results altogether?
I'm just trying to get a sense of how much this update will effect us. Any isights, suggestion, or thoughts would be greatly appreciated. Our site.
Thanks in advance. This community is invaluable to us
Isaac - TOAD Diaries.
-
Hi Dirk. Thank you so much again for your response.
Yes we must get your whole site sorted for our mobile users. But like you say focusing on the landing pages are essential
Better get cracking!
Thanks again
Isaac.
-
Hi
according to this article http://searchengineland.com/google-mobile-friendly-ranking-factor-runs-real-time-page-page-basis-216100 Google has confirmed that it based on page rather than site level.
From user experience perspective it would be better to have the full site responsive, given the urgency it would focus on landing page.. Your designer tool pages seem not that important in terms of search - you could eventually put them on noindex if you don't want Google to see them, although I don't think this absolutely necessary.
Dirk
-
Hi Dirk. Thank you so much for you're response! Greatly appreciated!
On what you said....
"It also seems that it's defined on page - not site level, so you could try to provide mobile versions for your most important landing pages (dedicated or responsive)."
Is this to say that if our home page (and other landing pages) were mobile-friendly we may not see any change in (mobile) rankings? Even if these pages link to poorly optimised pages?
On our site our designer tool is where you buy our product. This is a very difficult page to make mobile friendly. So won't google just see that the majority of links are going to this page and penalise accordingly?
Thanks.
Isaac.
-
Google has stated that it's going to impact a large significant amount of results but it's definitely going to be for mobile only so you should check your traffic sources to see if you get a good chunk of mobile traffic.
Dirk is right so you should look at your pages that have good mobile traffic and push out a temporary solution for that until you get a good mobile end for your website.
Good luck!
-
"most discussions seem to agree that the impact will only be for mobile searches"
I agree this is Google's intent. I don't think it'll necessarily be the actual result. If you lose a lot of traffic or your bounce rates go up or your SERP bounce-back rates go up, etc. it could affect desktop search.
I think this update has the potential to affect desktop but as you said, difficult to predict. Great answer & very helpful.
-
There is a similar thread here: http://moz.com/community/q/what-if-my-site-isn-t-ready-for-mobile-armageddon-by-april-21st
If you have a lot of mobile visitors coming in via Google, I think you may expect that this traffic will disappear (unless your competitors aren't very mobile friendly as well).
Nobody really knows what the impact is going to be, most discussions seem to agree that the impact will only be for mobile searches, but again, it's difficult to predict.
It also seems that it's defined on page - not site level, so you could try to provide mobile versions for your most important landing pages (dedicated or responsive). Your lay-out seems pretty straight forward, so I guess it shouldn't be too difficult to adapt it Remember that it doesn't have to perfect - it just needs to pass the "mobile friendly" test - https://www.google.com/webmasters/tools/mobile-friendly/ - you can always improve later on.
Hope this helps
Dirk
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
-
Does Google penalize you for reindexing multiple URLS?
Hello, Just a quick, question! I was wanting to know if multiple page indexing (site overhaul) could cause a drop in organic traffic ranking or be penalized by Google for submitting multiple pages at one time. Thanks
On-Page Optimization | | InternetRep0 -
Any idea how Google is doing this? Is it schematic? http://techcrunch.com/2014/02/28/google-adds-full-restaurant-menus-to-its-search-results-pages/
Google is now showing menus on select searches. Any idea how they are getting this information? I would like to make sure my clients get visibility this way.
On-Page Optimization | | Ron_McCabe0 -
Does Google use 302's to pass value to the target page?
Hi, I've received the below advice, is this correct? Throughout the site, the 302 (moved temporarily) status code is used for redirects, which Google will use to pass value to the target page. Is this correct? I was under the impression a 301 was used to pass value to the target page? Could someone explain the difference between a 301 and a 302, I'm not 100% sure. Thanks, Nathan
On-Page Optimization | | Heehaw0 -
Building an optimised friendly website
We are in the process of having a new website built and was wondering what factors do we need do we need to instruct our web company to include, at the build phase, to ensure that we can easily optimise it for SEO purposes. They have designed us a previous site that has excessive duplicate URLs and they haven’t given us access to the code so we can’t add 301 redirects etc and would like to avoid this in the future. I look forward to hearing from you
On-Page Optimization | | Hardley1110 -
H2's vs Meta description
in some of my serp results the h2's are showing up instead of the meta description. i have read that H2's arent really valid anymore. can someone clarify this for me?
On-Page Optimization | | dhanson240 -
Does 'XXX' in Domain get filtered by Google
I have a friend that has xxx in there domain and they are a religious based sex/porn addiction company but they don't show up for the queries that they are optimized against. They have a 12+ year old domain, all good health signs in quality links and press from trusted companies. Google sends them adult traffic, mostly 'trolls' and not the users they are looking for. Has anyone experienced domain word filtering and have a work around or solution? I posted in the Google Webmaster help forums and that community seems a little 'high on their horses' and are trying to hard to be cool. I am not too religious and don't necessarily support the views of the website but just trying to help a friend of a friend with a topic that I have never encountered. here is the url: xxxchurch.com Thanks, Brian
On-Page Optimization | | Add3.com0 -
SEOmoz's On-page Checker upto date?
Helllo Mozzers, Just wondering if SEOmoz's on-page optimisation checker is upto date with google recent updates? If not... what do you suggest?
On-Page Optimization | | Prestige-SEO0 -
Canonical URL's - Fixed but still negatively impacted
I recently noticed that our canonical url's were not set up correctly. The incorrect setup predates me but it could have been in place for close to a year, maybe a bit more. Each of the url's had a "sortby" parameter on all of them. I had our platform provider make the fix and now everything is as it should be. I do see issues caused by this in Google Webmaster, for instance in the HTML suggestions it's telling me that pages have duplicate title tags when in fact this is the same page but with a variety of url parameters at the end of the url. To me this just highlights that there is a problem and we are being negatively impacted by the previous implementation. My question is has anyone been in this situation? Is there any way to flush this out or push Google to relook at this? Or is this a sit and be patient situation. I'm also slightly curious if Google will at some point look and see that the canonical urls were changed and then throw up a red flag even though they are finally the way they should be. Any feedback is appreciated. Thanks,
On-Page Optimization | | dgmiles
Dave0