Microsites for Local Search / Location Based sites?
-
Referring to the webinar on SEOMoz about Local Search that was presented by Nifty Marketing (http://www.seomoz.org/webinars/be-where-local-is-going). I have a question my client asked us regarding why we broke out their locations into microsites, and not just used subfolders. So here are the details:
- The client has one main website in real estate.
- They have 5 branches.
- Each branch covers about a 50 mile radius.
- Each branch also covers a specialized niche in their areas.
- When we created the main site we incorporated the full list of listings on the main site;
- We then created a microsite for each branch, who has a page of listings (same as the main site) but included the canonical link back to the main site.
- The reason we created a microsite for each branch is that the searches for each branch are very specific to their location and we felt that having only a subfolder would take away from the relevancy of the site and it's location.
- Now, the location sites rank on the first page for their very competitive, location based searches.
- The client, as we encourage, has had recommendations from others saying this is hurting them, not helping them.
My question is this... How can this hurt them when the microsites include a home page specific to the location, a contact page that is optimized with location specific information (maps, text, directions, NAP, call to action, etc.), a page listing area information about communities/events/etc., a page of the location's agents, and of course real estate listings (with canonical back to the main site)?
Am I misunderstanding? I understood that if the main site could support the separation of a section into a microsite, this would help local search. Local search is the bread and butter of this client's conversions.
AND if you tell me we should go back to having subfolders for each location, won't that seriously hurt our already excellent rankings? The client sees significant visitors from their placement of the location URLs.
THANKS!
Darlene -
Hi Darlene,
I found your question rather interesting as I have also been looking into the entire Local SEO thing recently.
I opted to go for localised pages on the main site though:
http://www.jhbathrooms.com/showroom/stockton-on-tees
Couldn’t you rather use your microsites for back-linking purposes in an attempt to boost your main site’s DA (and pages PR)? You could probably get away with more aggressive linking techniques towards these microsites without putting your main site at risk? Or am I wrong in assuming this? I would love to see other people’s opinion on this…
I am rather an SEO newbie, only being back into SEO for about 6 months after a very long absence. Used to do SEO back in 2000-2001; remember Alta Vista and Webposition Gold anyone?Cheers
Greg
-
Darlene,
I think there are a couple of issues here that may be causing confusion. First and foremost, are the sites "microsites?" It does not sound like they are in the most exact sense. Because you are not giving an example, it is more problematic. Secondarily, it is easy in SEO to get caught up in should you or should you not do a specific thing and what are the effects of that, as if all is in a vacuum. Obviously, it is not and there is more at play than just the variables you describe.
Otherwise, if it were simple the question would be: We can build an RE Site with listings, title tags, etc. based on location such that BigCity/neighborhood/address (All - I am being simplistic for brevity only). Or we can build big city with listings in that city then build micro sites based on the neighborhoods.
If that were the case, I am going with big city and sub directories as opposed to multiple sites due to competing against myself. Also, if you are really the same company, and you are using the sites to appear as 5 different companies and be in the rankings 5 or 6 times (to "lock" others out) that would be against Google guidelines.From what you have, I would say you have this:
MainTownRESiteExample.com (This site receives all MLS listings)- I am assuming using IDX or RETS feeds for the MLS to sites. You covered your duplicate content bases for the listings by using a canonical tag for each back to the main site (and this was likely not necessary IMO if using IDX or RETS feeds)
AreaofGeoSiteA - you said each covers a niche which to me means say TownHome sales or Leasing, etc. Do you mean niche to mean geographic niche?
AreaofGeoSiteB
AreaofGeoSiteC, etc. (I am assuming there is over lap of each of the 50mile radius points. If not, and main site is city center, you are in a city larger than Houston in area.
You state: "We then created a microsite for each branch..." I am assuming therefore, that each of the "microsites" has its own physical location with its own NAP.
Most importantly, you state
The reason we created a microsite for each branch is that the searches for each branch are very specific to their location and we felt that having only a subfolder would take away from the relevancy of the site and it's location.
To this, I would say, uhhh, nope, it does not decrease the relevance of the main site in the least. Nor, would a search on neighborhood X be more or less relevant due to the whole site being neighborhood X versus being MainSite.com/neighborhood-X. Either way, what ranks in the serps is a page, not a site and that is relevant to what you say about the site. If main site has a ton of DA, and small site has OK DA, where does the page better reside?
You also state:
**I understood that if the main site could support the separation of a section into a microsite, this would help local search. **From where did you understand that? I have not heard of separating sites into locations to support local. I am not saying you are wrong, just had not heard of it.
So the big questions are: will your arrangement hurt your client and if so, how? It can end up just competing with the main site and even if it wins, why do you have the data in two places to start with? But, if you are seeing no harm and the client is ranked well for a given area, you have to walk them through how a change would take place and what might happen, etc. Then, they get to make the decision, not you. (At least in my shop that's how we do it).
For me, for real estate, I would rather use small sites for an individual listing and the big site for the mls feeds. So, while I would not do it the way you have done it, it does not mean you are not getting a result you want. I personally believe you could have done it with sub directories, but you are where you are. Again, personal preference for me is in RE to have a site for Townhomes, Single family, Condos, etc., but again, the SEO in me says you can accomplish the same with other means.
Yes, if you change back to main site, you will lose your rankings when you remove your pages but you can 301 to capture some of that juice, etc. It won't guarantee that ranking though.
When people say you are taking "power" away, I believe they mean you are competing with yourself and your efforts on one site would be better served. Not that the micro site in some way leeches from the main.
Dave is on the right track from a business perspective and I would caution rushing out and taking the sites down. But, again, having done a LOT in dating starting back in the late 90's, I can tell you the microsite in its original iteration was meant to look like a different business and be able to rank organically and in PPC five different ways. That is against the rules and will get you penalized no matter how unique the content might be.
So, I hope I helped you out a bit and let us know what you did. If the decision is to take them down, get the clients to agree to start with one and track what happens, etc. Then learn and go to number two.
Best to you and to Dave,
Robert
PS - I am a vegetarian
really.
-
Power? That sounds like some SEO guru baloney. If the sites are ranking and full of high quality non-spun unique relevant content - what's the problem?
-
Thanks Dave,
They aren't really complaining. It's more of the advice that's being offered to them by other parties. Other's are saying that I'm taking "power" away from the main site by using these smaller sites.
But...these smaller sites are pretty substantial in their own right. I believe that keeping them as microsites is the better way for local search.
Like Dave said, ANY info from anyone else is greatly appreciated.
-
I've done a TON of research on this to get Google's opinion and the only thing I could find was this:
As long as the new site has unique and relevant content it is not considered spam.
I've probably spent over 20 hours researching this EXACT topic and that was the best I could find in terms of spam vs not spam.
Another route to take is to create relevant content on the main site specific to each location. Perhaps you can create 1 page for the location with the NAP, site manager etc. and then another page off of that page that lists that specific location's directions and then another page off of that page that lists the reviews for that location. That gives you 3 unique relevant pages and 3 new Title tags. You can target the main city on the main page with the NAP info, a sub-city on one of the review pages and another sub-city on the direction page. I suppose this method is more "whitehat" but who really knows.
If the client has good rankings in all of those cities with your microsites what are they complaining about? Fear of a penalty?
If anyone else has ANY info on this I would LOVE to know as well!
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
-
Search console
I'm submitting my site map via search console and the site map is waiting for approval. I've been taking this error for two or three months. my site is not getting index. Therefore, I have experienced a decline in many words. Can the new search console solve my error? help please . for this site
Algorithm Updates | | Analizaraclari0 -
Google search console: 404 and soft 404 without any back-links. Redirect needed?
Hi Moz community, We can see the 404 and soft 404 errors in Google web masters. Usually these are non-existing pages which are found somewhere on internet by Google. I can see some of these reported URLs don't have any back-links (checked on ahrefs tool). Do we need to redirect each and every link reported here or ignore or marked to be fixed? Thanks
Algorithm Updates | | vtmoz0 -
Google domain search
Hello all, I'm a newbie to SEO, so you'll have to bear with me. I just started a website LangleyHomeSaerch.com a few months ago and am having trouble ranking with google. When I search "Langley Home Search" with Yahoo or Bing, it comes up on the first page. However when I search it with google it doesn't seem to rank even in the first few hundred pages. The only way I can get a match from google is if I search "Langley HomeSearch" or "LangleyHomeSearch". I know due to google's newer algorithms that there is less importance put on domain name matches, but is this normal, or is there anything I can do to improve it? Thx, Colby Langley, BC
Algorithm Updates | | colbygedak0 -
Google Site Links question
Are Google site links only ever shown on the top website? Or is it possible for certain queries for the site in position #2 or #3 or something to have site links but the #1 position not have them? If there are any guides, tips or write ups regarding site links and their behavior and optimization please share! Thanks.
Algorithm Updates | | IrvCo_Interactive0 -
Does articles for SEO purposes have a minimal and maximum word count in ordered to be crawled/indexed by Google and other search engines?
Does articles for SEO purposes have a minimal and maximum word count in ordered to be crawled/indexed by Google and other search engines?
Algorithm Updates | | WebRiverGroup0 -
Page details in Google Search
I noticed this morning a drop in the SERPs for a couple of my main keywords. And even though this is a little annoying the more pressing matter is that Google is not displaying the meta title I have specified for the majority of my sites pages, despite one being specified and knowing my site has them in place. Could this sudden change to not using my specified title be the cause of the drop, and why would they be being displayed by Google in the first place, when they are there to be used. The title currently being displayed inthe SERPs is not anything that has been specified in the past or from the previous latest crawl etc. Any insight would be appreciated. Tim
Algorithm Updates | | TimHolmes0 -
Do you think Google is destroying search?
I've seen garbage in google results for some time now, but it seems to be getting worse. I was just searching for a line of text that was in one of our stories from 2009. I just wanted to check that story and I didn't have a direct link. So I did the search and I found one copy of the story, but it wasn't on our site. I knew that it was on the other site as well as ours, because the writer writes for both publications. What I expected to see was the two results, one above the other, depending on which one had more links or better on-page for the query. What I got didn't really surprise me, but I was annoyed. In #1 position was the other site, That was OK by me, but ours wasn't there at all. I'm almost used to that now (not happy about it and trying to change it, but not doing well at all, even after 18 months of trying) What really made me angry was the garbage results that followed. One site, a wordpress blog, has tag pages and category pages being indexed. I didn't count them all but my guess is about 200 results from this blog, one after the other, most of them tag pages, with the same content on every one of them. Then the tag pages stopped and it started with dated archive pages, dozens of them. There were other sites, some with just one entry, some with dozens of tag pages. After that, porn sites, hundreds of them. I got right to the very end - 100 pages of 10 results per page. That blog seems to have done everything wrong, yet it has interesting stats. It is a PR6, yet Alexa ranks it 25,680,321. It has the same text in every headline. Most of the headlines are very short. It has all of the category and tag and archive pages indexed. There is a link to the designer's website on every page. There is a blogroll on every page, with links out to 50 sites. None of the pages appear to have a description. there are dozens of empty H2 tags and the H1 tag is 80% through the document. Yet google lists all of this stuff in the results. I don't remember the last time I saw 100 pages of results, it hasn't happened in a very long time. Is this something new that google is doing? What about the multiple tag and category pages in results - Is this just a special thing google is doing to upset me or are you seeing it too? I did eventually find my page, but not in that list. I found it by using site:mysite.com in the search box.
Algorithm Updates | | loopyal0 -
Google removing pages from Index for Panda effected sites?
We have several clients that we took over from other SEO firms in the last 6 months. We are seeing an odd trend. Links are disappearing from the reports. Not just the SEOmoz reports, but all the back link reports we use. Also... sites that pre Panda would show up as a citation or link, have not been showing up. Many are these are not Indexed, and are on large common Y.P or other type sites. Any one think Google is removing pages from the Index on sites based on Panda. Yours in all curiosity. PS ( we are not large enough to produce quantity data on this.)
Algorithm Updates | | MBayes0