Placement of products in URL-structure for best category page rankings
-
Hi!
I have some questions regarding the optimal URL-hierarchy placement of products in a marketplace setting where the end goal is to attract traffic to category pages. Let me start off with some background, thanks in advance for the help.
TLDR
Goal: Increase category page rankings.
Alternative 1 - Products and category pages separated, flat product structure.
Category page: oursite.com/category/subcategory
Product / listing page: oursite.com/listing-1
Alternative 2 - Products and category pages separated, hierarchal product structure.
Category page: oursite.com/category/subcategory
Product / listing page: oursite.com/product/category/subcat/listing
Alternative 3 - Products placed directly under category page.
Category page: oursite.com/category/subcategory
Product / listing page: oursite.com/category/subcategory/listing
I run a commercial real estate marketplace, which means that our potential search traffic is _extremely _geographic. For example, some common searches are (not originally in english):
- Office space for lease {City X}
- Office space for lease {Neighborhood Y}
- Retail space {Neighborhood Z}
- And so on...
These terms are already quite competitive, where the top results are our competitors geographic and type category pages. For example: _competitor.com/type/city/neighborhood , _is a top result, where the user reaches a landing page that shows all the {type} spaces for lease in {neighborhood}.
These users are out to find which spaces are available for lease in these geographical areas, and not individual spaces. I.e. users do not search in the same extent for an individual product, in this case a specific empty space.
Our approach has been to place an extreme bias towards a heavy geographical hierarchy. This means that basically any search, resulting in a category page, on our site results in a well structured URL like the following:
_oursite.com/type/state/city/district/street, _since we are using Google Maps API's, this is easy and relevant for the user. Our geographical categorization beats our competitors both on extensiveness and usability, especially in long-tail search phrases where our competitors don't care to categorize where we are seeing real search volumes. The hierarchy only extends as far down as the user has searched, for example a lot of our searched just end up being _oursite.com/type/state/city/district. _
Now we are wondering how we should place our products, the empty spaces, in this URL structure. Our original hypothesis was that we should include the products in the original hierarchy, resulting in: oursite.com/category/subcategory/product. Our thinking was that we would both be serving the user with an understandable and relevant URL, and also provide search bots with a logical structure for our site and most importantly content for our category pages. Our landing pages are very dynamic, providing information by relaying graphical information on a map instead of in an SEO-friendly manner. I would however go as far as to say that these dynamic pages provide a ton of value for the user, much more so than our competitors, by describing relevant information about the neighborhood kind of like Trulia, just not in a bot-readable manner. This results in trying to rank them on their own merits being a challenge, whereas we were hoping we could create relevancy by placing products / listings and maybe even blog posts on the topic within the same URL-hierarchy.
As of right now our current structure is oursite.com/products/category/subcategory/product. In other words, they are categorized in the same geographical fashion but under a separate URL-path. Our results so far is that we basically only rank for the product pages, and rank extremely poorly for our category pages, which is our ultimate goal to enhance. This is why we developed the above hypothesis.
However, what we learned when we did some initial research is that very few e-commerce stores place their products directly below their categories. Most of the major websites we studied, and we looked at quite a few, just go for **alternative 1 **from above. The crux is that most of them choose alternative 1 but simultaneously implement bread crumbs that emulate alternative 3, just without the actual URL's.
So, what I'm asking is, what are the actual benefits or downsides of the three alternatives? I feel as if I have a pretty firm grasp on how this could be done, I just need to better understand why most seem to choose to flatline their products or listings in the alternative 1 fashion.
Thanks,
Viktor
-
I think I'm a little confused here as to what you mean by "product" in the context of real estate. Are you referring to different types of listings (e.g. office lease, retail lease etc?)
If I were designing a real estate website, the structure would be as follows:
website.com/listing-type/state/area/suburb
You mentioned the site isn't in English so just to clarify above, the last two will be depend on regional user preferences. For example, here in Brisbane (Aus) it would be expected that I can search for properties in the "Greater Brisbane" area, meaning Brisbane City and surround suburbs. Within that region there are a bunch more suburbs
More specifically:
website.com/office-lease/qld/greater-brisbane/west-end
The reason I'd be doing this is that not only is it an easy logic to follow but it really caters toward a user's intent. If I'm looking for an office space to lease, there's no point in presenting me with all types of listings from an area because all I want to see are office leases.
Having those lease types further up your hierarchy is going to give them a little more preferences in terms of SERP position as well. From what I understand, these are the sub-category pages you're looking to rank?
As a working example of this as well, I just had a look at realestate.com.au's URL structure and it's the same as my suggestions above. Their site is very flat because it's almost entirely search-driven but the URL still lets us see their site architecture
http://www.realestate.com.au/property-townhouse-qld-spring+hill-416944062
-
I think that N:3 is optimal for crawlers and for humans.
This was explained few times here:
https://moz.com/blog/information-architecture-for-seo-whiteboard-friday
https://moz.com/blog/ugly-seo-mess-recovery-case-study (read about "flat" structure)
http://www.bruceclay.com/blog/structured-urls/
http://www.bruceclay.com/eu/seo/silo.htm
https://yoast.com/how-to-clean-site-structure/
https://yoast.com/seo-friendly-urls
https://moz.com/learn/seo/internal-linkSo as you can see it's lot of information against flat structure and implementing silo url structure in site.
Edit1: there is also great article here:
http://www.stateofdigital.com/optimising-urls-seo-ux/
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
-
Best address to use on Google business listing for youth sports program
Hello, Moz Community! I'm helping a friend with some local marketing for his youth sports program. He trains his kids at a community center and a public park where court times are managed by the city. His address in his Google business listing is currently the community center, but that is shared with multiple businesses including the community center itself. I know he needs an address that is unique to his business, but he lives outside of the city in which his program is located. Our goal is to boost exposure in the city in which his program is located. Since 1) his business address is located outside of the city in which he conducts business and 2) the addresses at which he conducts his business is utilized by multiple businesses including the actual property owner, what options do I we have for an address that Google will recognize as valid and won't cause ranking issues? If there is nothing we can do in the current situation, what are steps we can take to address this issue for his business? Thanks a lot!
Local Listings | | Tony_GP0 -
Do any Local Rank Trackers Report This Way?
I'm having trouble finding a local rank tracking service with useful reporting. I've tried several and for the money, have gravitated toward's Whitespark's service as for $25/month I can track unlimited locations. But their report is indicative of what I've seen time and time again in my 18-year experience as a Software Developer and Internet Marketer. Whomever is making the design decisions isn't a Seasoned (Local) SEO, and/or probably hasn't done their homework well enough by talking to seasoned SEOs. Their Summary Report looks like this (see attachement). When I'm doing Local SEO I'm looking at a lot of reporting data but among that, probably the most important is: How many of the listings moved up into position #1-3 on Local Finder which is also usually the Local 3-Pack (sometimes a 2-pack explaining the discrepancy in the first two rows between the number in the #1-3 column.) I also want to know how many listing moved UP into the #4-10. And vice versa, what fell out of #1-3 and #4-10. The problem with the format of this report, if a listing falls from #2 to #5, it will be a decrease in #1-3 and an INCREASE for #4-10. This would give me the false impression that a listing that was below #10 came into the #4-10 when in actuality the increase in #4-10 was because of a decrease in #1-3!! One situation is positive the other is negative. What I want to know is how many listings (totals without getting out the calculator): moved up into #1-3 (White Spark does this via the Increase column in the Local 3-Pack row) moved up into #4-10 moved down out of #1-3 to #4-10 moved down out of #1-3 to below #10 moved down out of #4-10 to below #10. Does anyone know of local tracking services that give you this kind of data in this way? XQppQKs.jpg
Local Listings | | Consult19010 -
I have a site with a lot of subdomains and I want to see what keywords each is ranking for.
Do I have to enter them manually, one at a time, in the keyword subdomain search or is there a way to submit a list of subdomains and have Moz generate a report of the results?
Local Listings | | thallstd0 -
Should I get an SSL if my non-SSL site is ranking well?
I have a client with a local divorce law business. He's ranking really well, and I don't want to do anything to jeopardize that rank. His site does not have SSL. I feel like it would be good to get rid of the "not-secure" message from Chrome, but not important enough to risk ranks. Would love to get thoughts from this forum on this. Thanks!
Local Listings | | aj6130 -
Should I change my local listing Service type from Brick and Mortar to Service Area in Google? And will it affect my ranking in a negative manner?
Currently my company Big Boy Bail Bonds, Inc is ranking very well for the city it is located and, currently service type is brick and mortar. But my Company does not only service people at our location but we service the entire county of Los Angeles. And I wanted to know if you would advise me on weather I should change the service type from brick and morter to service area. and if doing that would effect me in a negative manner when it came to my ranking? Plz advice Thank you in advance.
Local Listings | | LittleDog1 -
New Local Search Results Appearance/Rankings?
Hi everybody! My team and I are all noticing a new layout for local search results. We just noticed it today. Mobile and desktop results appear to be affected. Specifically, we are looking at searches like "event spaces in Richmond" and "restaurants in Raleigh" as 2 examples. The listings appear differently in the SERPs, and the top results really are not relevant to the search queries. Is anybody noticing anything similar, or does anyone have any insight into whether this is something Google is testing or if it's here to stay? Also, any advice for overcoming rankings drops as a result of these changes? Thanks in advance!
Local Listings | | TriMarkDigital0 -
Local Search - Multiple Locations, do i link the home page or the inner page?
Hello, For a business with multiple locations that has a web url built for each location such as: Website.com/miami Website.com/los-angeles For local search (Google+, Yelp, etc), is it best to link the local search pages to the specific page of that location? Or is the homepage sufficient enough? I ask that because it is ALREADY touch getting NATURAL links to a location page, so would local search do me good by linking to the exact page of the location?
Local Listings | | Shawn1241 -
How is a competitor franchise ranking all for all 3 Local results with unclaimed G+ pages in a search for the national corporation?
My company is an individual franchise of a national corporation - every franchise is operates as [National Corporate Brand Name] + a chosen descriptor such as "Premiere" or the names of the owners such as "Smith Jones". A logged-out Google search for just the national brand name returns the corporate website first, followed by the website of a competing local franchise and 3 Local listings for their offices. These listings are all unclaimed and unverified on Google+ and have no reviews or posts. The corporate Twitter is next, followed by my franchise's website. The corporate Facebook is the last result on the page. How can this competing franchise rank for all 3 Local listings with unclaimed pages? My company operates several more offices than the competitor in the same area and I regularly post to their G+ pages which I verified several months ago. Is it because the competitor's website just holds significantly more weight in Google than our own? A search for the brand name + the town where our offices are in does usually return our Local listing pages, but that limits our reach to those specific towns. Anyone have any insight on this?
Local Listings | | WGW0