Has anyone seen a ranking boost by adding a GTIN (barcode)
-
Hi All,
I wondered if anyone has seen any ranking improvements from adding a GTIN (barcode) number to their product pages?
-
Thought I'd provide a bit of an update on this one for you all, I add the gtin number to two different products one gtin was added as a product attribute (text and number) and the other was added with schema markup (Gtin14 - https://schema.org/gtin14).
I've seen no ranking boost to either product on the keywords I'm tracking for them however, I have seen a small increase in traffic to the product which uses schema markup. From what I can tell from my analytics it would appear that some users actually search google using the gtin number!
It seems as if gtin14 isnt widely used at present and as such I'm ranking in top spot. So i'm thinking of adding the gtin to all our products as a bit of a quick win to rank top for a small percentage of searches.
i suppose it all depends on what products your selling and your user demographic as to wether your potential customers would ever search using the gtin? My personal view after some more reading (gs1 smart search, formally gtin on the web - http://www.gs1.org/gs1-smartsearch) is that gtin is going to become more prominent in the not too distant future, but hey I'm no expert. I'd love to know if anyone else has tested this out or if they try it and get the same results as I have?
-
Thanks for the response Dmitrii, I haven't seen the GTIN used anywhere so it got me thinking. I try testing it and see what happens.
Cheers Jon
-
Hi there.
I personally haven't seen any ranking boost from barcodes, in fact I don't think I've ever seen barcodes being used on websites at all
However, even if Google can read and understand what barcodes stand for, it would get only the name of product, maybe SKU number, manufacturer etc. - none of the important stuff. You gonna have all that information on a page anyway, but what would make a difference is compelling description, which is not transferrable with barcodes.
So, no, I haven't seen boost, I don't think it would help no matter if Google can understand barcodes or not.
Hope this helps.
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
-
Will adding 1M (legitimate/correct) internal backlinks to an orphan page trip algo penalty?
We have a massive long tail user generated gamification strategy that has worked really well. Because of that success we haven't really been paying enough attention to SEO and in looking around caught some glaring issues. The section of our site that works as long tail goes from overview page > first classification > sub classification > specific long tail term page. Looks like we were relying on google to crawl/use forms to go from our overview page to the first classification BUT those resulting pages were orphaned - so www.mysite.com/product/category_1 defaulted back to the search page creating duplicate issues. www.mysite.com/product/category_1 and www.mysite.com/product/category_2 and www.mysite.com/product/category_3 all had duplicate content as they all reverted to the overview page. It's clear we need to make an actual breadcrumb trail and proper site taxonomy/linkage. I'm wanting to do this on just this one area first, but it's a big section with over 3M indexed "specific long tail term pages". I want to just add a simple breadcurmb trail in a sub navigation menu but doing so will literally create millions of new internal backlinks from specific term pages to their sub & parent category pages. Although we're missing the intermediary category breadcrumbs, we did have a breadcrumb coming back to the main overview page - that was tagged nofollow. So now I'm contemplating adding millions of (proper) backlinks and removing a nofollow tag from another million internal back links. All of this seems in line with "best practices" but what I have not been able to determine is if there is a proper/better way to roll these changes out so as to not trigger an algorithm penalty. I am also reticent about making too many changes too quickly but these are SEO 101 basics that need to be rectified. Is it a mistake to make good improvements too quickly? Thanks!
On-Page Optimization | | DrewProZ1 -
Will "internal 301s" have any effect on page rank or the way in which an SE see's our site interlinking?
We've been forced (for scalability) to completely restructure our website in terms of setting out a hierarchy. For example - the old structure : country / city / city area Where we had about 3500 nicely interlinked pages for relevant things like taxis, hotels, apartments etc in that city : We needed to change the structure to be : country / region / area / city / cityarea So as patr of the change we put in place lots of 301s for the permanent movement of pages to the new structure and then we tried to actually change the physical on-page links too. Unfortunately we have left a good 600 or 700 links that point to the old pages, but are picked up by the 301 redirect on page, so we're slowly going through them to ensure the links go to the new location directly (not via the 301). So my question is (sorry for long waffle) : Whilst it must surely be "best practice" for all on-page links to go directly to the 'right' page, are we harming our own interlinking and even 'page rank' by being tardy in working through them manually? Thanks for any help anyone can give.
On-Page Optimization | | TinkyWinky0 -
Page Rank drop from 4 to ?
Our site (ecommerce) has been around since 1998. The pagerank has gone from a 4 to a ? The Moz score is still good, but traffic is way down. Never got a warning from Google, and were never part of a BH linking scheme? I'm puzzled? There are some duplicate content issues and missing meta tags, but they were on customer login pages that we have since blocked? Thanks
On-Page Optimization | | rglaubinger0 -
Keyword in URL: Ranking Factor?
I've got a site about a specific topic, which we'll call "themes" for the sake of this discussion. I personally like to keep the url structure short and clean (for usability purposes, but mainly because I'm a perfectionist and a minimalist). I feel that adding "themes" to the url structure is a bit redundant. However, nearly every keyword phrase that my site should rank for includes the word "themes." So I'm wondering how much I'm handicapping myself by not including the keyword "themes" in the url? The domain name itself sort of includes the keyword . . . although it's in Italian (I chose the domain for it's brand-ability, not for the keyword). A quick example: My Url Structure: www.themo.com/topic/abc My Competitor's Url Structure: www.sitesample.com/themes/topic/abc For many of the keywords, the competitors with the keyword in the url rank highest. But, I'm not sure how much emphasis to place on this, because from my understanding Google doesn't pay as much attention to url keywords anymore . . . and those sites might just be ranking high because they've been around for so long (which also happens to be the reason why they coincidentally also include the keyword in the url, because they started the site when that was a high ranking factor). Thoughts? Should I just trash my perfectionism and add the keyword to the url structure? (By the way, the site is only a couple months old and doesn't have any significant backlinks to inner pages yet, so changing the url structure wouldn't be a big deal if I decided to do that).
On-Page Optimization | | JABacchetta0 -
Splash page - is it possible to rank well?
Hi there, I have a website with splash page - http://veda4.com/ . It's trully cool looking, the owner of our company wants the home page to be this way. But is it ok from SEO viewpoint? Can it rank well for keywords. All my SEO strategy were not using splash pages and I am not sure what should I change so it work with splash page also. I myself won't choose splash page but my boss trully liked it.
On-Page Optimization | | HrishikeshKarov0 -
When Adding content to the site. Should I use the same keyword term on each page or select a secondary keyword to focus on?
I have created a site www.autoinsurancefremontca.com. The index page is SEO for the key term auto insurance fremont ca. I want to add more content on another page of this site. Should I have that page also SEO'd for the same keyword or should I pick another keyword to focus on?
On-Page Optimization | | Greenpeak0 -
Will deleting excess self serving links from old posts damage established ranking
My SEOmoz report showed many posts with "too many links." I can easily go back into wordpress and delete self serving links. But is there a downside to this if these posts are already ranked well on google search for the desired key words? Or will deleting the excess self serving links improve ranking
On-Page Optimization | | wianno1680 -
Should I include location in title tag to rank higher in local search
I'm working on a site for a small guest house (http://www.tommysonthebeach.com). I have created a Google Place page (Bing and Yahoo Local) as well and I have the address in the footer on every page. I have the location (Indian Rocks Beach) at the beginning of most titles tags because that is how people tend to search, e.g. "Indian Rocks Beach vacation rental." In theory I would think that I don't need location in the title tag because Google knows the location, and I could use the real estate for other keywords suchs as "pet friendly" or "beach hotel," etc. But when I look at the SERPS, those ranking highly all seem to have the location at the beginning of the title tag. Thanks. P.S. The site is currently not showing up in Google local search apparently because Google thinks it's a vacation rental agency, which are not allowed in local search. I'm trying to get that fixed.
On-Page Optimization | | bvalentine0