The Local Stack Rollout - A New Day In Local
-
Hey There, all my fellow Local SEOs!
Yesterday morning, I was searching for a car wash and was really puzzled to see my search return snack pack-style results, given that I wasn't looking for a restaurant, hotel or an entertainment venue. Sure enough, what I had run into was the rollout of Google's latest local SERPs, which for the sake of clarity, let's call the Local Stack. This is happening in multiple countries and across thousands of keywords and your local clients (or your local business) are likely to be affected by it, so I thought I'd post a heads-up here.
Good Reading:
http://blumenthals.com/blog/2015/08/06/7-pack-becoming-3-pack-with-mobile-like-snak-pack-rollout/
That last one has a bunch more great links in it.
In June, I wrote a post here on Moz itemizing my concerns about the Snack Pack and its impacts on the hospitality/entertainment industries. Now, these same concerns are coming to me local-search-wide, with the rollout of the Local Stack. My early days key points from looking at the new Local Stack:
-
No phone numbers without clicking through to Local Finder, which I consider to be really poor usability, given the invention of the cell phone and the way we use it call businesses.
-
No links to the Google+ Local page, meaning that consultants like ourselves may have a really hard time explaining the value of creating a Google listing when so few SERPs will now actually lead to that listing.
-
3 chances to rank when your city has dozens or even hundreds or businesses in a single industry seems next-to-impossible. It's not a good reflection of the diversity of the business scene in the real world. There aren't 3 Italian restaurants in San Francisco or 3 lawyers in Boston. There are scores of them. Google's Local Stack is a poor reflection of the real world, in my view, and makes every city look like a one horse town.
-
On the other hand, the baldness of the Local Stack is making the 'more' link at the bottom of it really jump out at me, and if you click through, up to 20 businesses will show with the Local Finder. So, I'm a bit torn on this. Are the 4 businesses that just fell out of prominence with the removal of the 7 pack worse off or are 13 businesses now jumping for joy because they are in a sort of pack today that they weren't in 2 days ago? I guess this depends on how willing consumers are to click that 'more' link.
-
Given the meagerness of the Local Stack, organic is likely a great deal more important now for every local business, but I'm concerned by SERPs I'm looking at which are mainly taken up by directories rather than any actual local business websites.
So, those are some first thoughts from me and I would totally love to hear yours on this thread as you are trying to assess how you see this impacting your clients or your business. It's definitely a new day in Local!
-
-
That's a little odd. I'm still getting the old results.
-
A three pack.
-
What do you get for 'Plumber NYC'?
-
I'm seeing snack packs on my iPad.
-
Interesting thing... I was spoofing my user agent in developer's tools. Queries from Nexus and iPad tablets still return the old map pack et. al. Interesting. I kind of thought of mobile and tablet as 'one thing', but apparently it's not - at least at the moment.
Confirmed it on physical tablets I have laying around. Yay internet appliances!
-
Think of desktop search as a dying breed. That real estate doesn't really exist on mobile and tablet.
-
Those that have an address listed tend to have the Directions icon. Which isn't terribly useful for businesses that don't typically generate foot traffic. Poor SABs.
I initially thought The Googles were attempting to do away with the phone part of NAP confusion, for people. You know, click the Website icon... more than likely they'll get access to a good phone number. It may be unthinkable if all the listings have been well managed, but I would imagine that's the exception and not the rule.
I really want to know what they were thinking when they made packs for restaurants. No directions... no phone number... until one clicks through on a listing. Then you get what you wanted to know about to begin with (the actual listing... with phone, directions, menu...) followed by results related to the actual company. There's a difference between the click through display on desktop and mobile, but the gist is similar.
It seems like The Googles has been listening to an exceedingly drunk and confused focus group.
-
Yes, I don't expect that space to remain vacant for long. It's so hard for small businesses to compete. I really hope we don't see Google try to monetize it.
-
Hey Donna,
Agree with you. So much white space on so many SERPs, it looks like a blizzard. One thing I've been thinking about regarding this, as many Local SEOs are speculating that this could be a step on the path to monetized packs and also considering Google's move into the home service fulfillment arena - what if we will see an iteration of this in future where you have to pay to get your address/phone to show? And on mobile, what if Google started charging for clicks on the phone icons? I wonder...
Thanks for sharing your thoughts on this!
-
Hi Travis,
Yes, I'm seeing phone icons on mobile, but not on desktop ... and no addresses.
-
Disappointing.
I suppose not supplying the phone numbers will encourage a few more folks to click on the "more" link at the bottom (hoping to find one). It'll certainly be interesting to watch.
One thing that strikes me is the all the wasted real estate off to the right where the map used to display. When Ads are available, they're posted but often there is nothing but white space. I have a hard time imagining Google plans on leaving the space vacant for long.
-
Desktop Fun:
Well, if a listing doesn't have a site linked to their Google MyOMGWTFBBQ (If they can't make up their mind, that's what I'm calling it.) and they rely on service calls, that business is kind of screwed for the time being.
Yeah, one would have a higher likelihood of clicking on the business name section - if we're only talking about pixel height and width. But that graphic, though. People look for buttons, even if that button is only 84x106 on desktop.
People click on graphics. They don't visit plumbers.
Developer Console (emulated mobile):
I'm getting the little phone handset (what an anachronism) icon.
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 SEO penalty?
Hi Moz Community We are in a unique position. We just launched a new site for a client. The site was doing fine before but it wasn't very user friendly. We created a site with almost identical architecture and content as the last one, just new design and layout. Within 5 days, the site dropped off of LOCAL search almost completely, it now ranks on the 9th page in Austin Texas. (reliantplumbingdotcom). Every other location (Dallas, LA, Philadelphia, Houston) all show the site on the first page for relevant keywords (Austin Plumbers, Austin Plumber) I have no idea what to think about this and don't know if we're being penalized somehow (checked GSC and no manual penalty) I have never experienced a site being blacklisted locally but well ranked everywhere else. Thoughts?
Local Listings | | GrueBleenAgency1 -
Local citations - domain or business name
I have a bit of a tricky situation with a client where there is some history with old domains. But this is the current situation which I need to stick to: Business name (all made up) is Acme Print 2 live websites - acme-niche(dot)com and productsandservices(dot)com Third website acmeprint(dot)com is live and owned by an old partner, different NAP. acme-niche(dot)com and productsandservices(dot)com share the same NAP. Not much traffic and a bit of a poor domain profile for acme-niche(dot)com, so suggest just using productsandservices(dot)com. Also acme-niche(dot)com would be a bit misleading for use for the whole business in any case. However, all content for productsandservices(dot)com refers to Acme Print. Because of all the confusion should we keep the productsandservices(dot)com referring to Acme Print throughout, or update with new productsandservices(dot)com logo, mention that it is a trading name of Acme Print and refer to the trading domain name throughout the content. I want to know the best option for listings and citations - the trading name which is a domain name or Acme Print? I've not worked with a local site where domain name and business name and a separate business with domain are mixed up.
Local Listings | | MickEdwards0 -
Local Profile Struggling
Hi guys, we have a client that we are having some issues with. We have done extensive directory work for them, so this is unusual. Their Google My Business profile isn't ranking hardly at all, although they have decent organic rankings. Here is the company: https://plus.google.com/+ComfortAireHeatingCoolingPlumbingWisconsinRapids/about We have two possible reasons, but before we spend the time fixing these we were hoping for some reassurance from the Moz community. 1)Name in GMB looks spammy. This truly is their name, but we thought it may be an issue due to the keywords. 2)Address inconsistency: The client wanted us to use 880 Highway 73 South, Wisconsin Rapids, WI 54494 so that is how we submitted it to aggregators and directory sites. Google didn't accept that, they changed it to: 880 WI-73 Wisconsin Rapids, WI 54494. The USPS Zip code checker didn't accept either of these, they use 880 STATE HIGHWAY 73 S, WISCONSIN RAPIDS WI 54494. Do you guys think one of these is our issue, or could it be something else. Thanks in advance for your insights!
Local Listings | | JohnWeb120 -
SEO best practices for store locator and local pages - 301 or not?
I have been struggling to answer this on my own and now throwing up for the Moz community for a life line. Our company has several location across 6 states. We have local pages that we are working to improve with better content. We also have a store locator that will list the stores but the pages are not the same. See below example. I can't help but feel like I am splitting juice and traffic that should be combined to one page for each location. Any ideas or advice on how we can best combine/funnel the traffic to one optimized page? Here is an example: State local page - http://www.jakesfireworks.com/michigan/ Locator page for state - http://www.jakesfireworks.com/locator/?state=MI City local page - http://www.jakesfireworks.com/michigan/grand_rapids City Locator page - http://www.jakesfireworks.com/locator/?id=183&state=MI
Local Listings | | devonkrusich0 -
Unable to update client address in G+/Moz Local
Hello, I'm having an issue with Moz Local that involves a few complicating factors. I have a client who has moved to a new office and I was hoping to use Moz Local to help keep their NAP consistent during the transition. Unfortunately, I don't have access to the Google+ page that was set up for the business (and neither does my client). The client is relatively new, so we suspect the page was set up by the person/agency that set up their website previously. And since Moz Local gets the business address from the Google+ page it finds, and I can't access that page to change its address, I can't update the address in Moz Local. I DO have access to the client's website and Facebook account, and have already updated their listed address on those pages, but the Google+ page seems to still be a problem for verification. One of the other wrinkles is that since I have updated the Facebook page to show the new address, Moz Local has picked that up as a completely separate listing (a listing that uses an "and" instead of an "&" in the name). I was hoping to claim/verify THAT listing and see if I could merge the 2, but this other listing shows up as a separate purchase on Moz Local. I would prefer not to have to pay twice for the same listing, if at all possible. I would try to change the Facebook page name to use "&" instead of "and" in the hopes that Moz Local might recognize that it's the same business, but it looks like Facebook only allows you to change a page's name once, and I don't want to burn what might be needed to solve some other future problem. Lastly, the Moz Local listings are under another Moz account. I DO have access to that account, and can provide any specifics to the Moz staff if needed. To sum up: I can't change an address on Google+ and therefore cannot change the address on Moz Local. I'm not sure if this is a Moz Local issue, a Google+ issue, or (most likely) an issue on both ends, so any suggestions would be most appreciated. Thanks!
Local Listings | | BrianAlpert780 -
How valuable are citaitons/consistency (Moz Local) for a NON-local business?
Hi All! I'm doing some research for non-local SEO clients and finding that many of them have messy and extremely inconsistent listing profiles (via Moz Local checker). It seems to me that this would be a good thing to take care of, even for a non local site. Anyone have insights on whether or not this is something we should take care of? If so, any details on how or why it would or would not be a good idea? Thanks! Ricky
Local Listings | | SUCCESSagency0 -
Local SEO for a company with 3 sites, for 3 different type of businesses
Hi I've been working for an employment lawyer in Sydney for 3 years now, all good, I built many citations and fixed all ones and the website/blog are ranking fine. Imagine I created the citation using e.g Anton Forester Employment lawyers, name, phone and address. Now the client just launched a website about property with the same name/brand and a different business title e.g Anton Forrester Property Lawyer and another 3rd website about conveyancing with the same name/brand and another business title e.g Anton Forrester Conveyancing law. My question is how do I build citations now that the name is different in the 3 cases, 3 websites but possibly the same phone and address? Thanks a lot Cheers Nico
Local Listings | | niclaus780 -
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