Not Showing Up in Local Pack - Possible Possum Filter?
-
We have a medical practice client who isn't showing up at all on local category searches for their zip code. Wondering whether it's a Possum algorithm filter, and if so, how we can resolve this. The client is named Wall Street Dermatology, and is located in the same building as two other medical practices in the same dermatologist specialty. They share the same address (65 Broadway, New York, NY), but have different unit numbers. My client is Suite 904. To be clear, these are entirely separate businesses that are not affiliated with each other. They happen to be located in the same building. When running local searches (for example, in US zip code 10004) for the category term "dermatologist", my client is not appearing at all. The two other practices are appearing just fine. In fact, one of the competing practices has not only their practice listed, but one of their doctors individually and even one of the physician assistants. My client, Wall Street Dermatology, isn't showing up. IMO, the GMB profile is robust, with more reviews than competitors, and more content overall. While there's SEO work to be done, the citations and link profile exceeds some of the other practices who are showing up in "dermatologist" (use zip code 10004) searches. Google is showing profiles of dermatologists who haven't even claimed their profiles or have websites.One more thing: For a two-week span, the business was showing up in the 3-pack for "dermatologist" after making upgrades to the GMB profile. This was a first. So they've been there before. However, they made some changes to NAP. 1) added the providers name to the business name: "Business Name: Provider Name". 2) Updated "Suite" to "Ste" in order to match USPS. After that change, the business fell off entirely again.Note: We do appear on searches for the business name. And we do appear for some secondary keywords (for example, "Cosmetic Dermatology"), but not for the main keyword. Is this related to Possum (https://moz.com/learn/seo/google-possum)? Is Google confused that my client is related to the other practices in the same building? Any suggestions?
-
@ClaytonJ nice
-
This could be because you simply need to improve your local SEO even more, because there is often only three businesses that are displayed in the map listing, it could be because you haven't got enough quality business citations?
-
Thanks everyone for responses, although it's not been figured out. To recreate the issue (which still exists), use Bright Locals local search results checker: Choose "dermatologist" in zip code 10006, which is the location of the practice:https://www.brightlocal.com/local-search-results-checker/Then open up the Maps results to see all of the dermatologists listed. My client Wall Street Dermatology isn't appearing at all under "dermatologist" which suggests some kind of suppression that we're trying to get to the bottom of.
-
Would be nice to know what type of medical practice it is. You have companies that pioneer experimental treatments who have a foot in various buildings, then you have actual local surgeries and traditional medical practices. If you are working with medical practitioners of a very new, pioneering treatment - it may have been flagged YMYL (Your Money Your Life) and taken an EAT hit
Just throwing this out there as others seem to have the basics nailed down
-
sponnu0123,
They show up for me. I searched for "dermatologist 10004" as well as "dermatology 10004". Wall Street Dermatology ranks #1 in the local pack for both phrases.
-
There is probably not enough information for me to assist greatly.
I would recommend an audit of all location citations for the client. Check the consistency of NAP. Secondly, I would then be auditing what directories the competitors are listed in. Would analyse the companies that are listed versus yours. I would start there before -spreadsheet up competitors your client.
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
-
Why won't a business show up in the local pack when all signs point to that it should?
Hello! I've been trying to figure out why a business won't show up in the local pack even though their GMB has more reviews, seems to be doing everything right, and just doesn't show. The business is "A Senior Journey", and should be showing up for searches relating to "senior placement services tucson" or "senior placement tucson", but no dice. Been doing a competitor analysis and they are doing better or on par with all of their competitors. The same businesses in Tucson that are competitors show up both times, even Phoenix locations, but not A Senior Journey...any ideas? Thank you!
Local Listings | | WebMO-Tech-Rep0 -
Local SEO Issue or Penguin? Or both?
Hey folks I have a fairly complicated SEO issue we have been looking at for a few years now. There are two parts to this problem so would be interested to get the input of the community here and any experienced in Penguin and Local SEO issues. I am going to have to change the names to protect the innocent a bit here as some of the issue relates to a competitor and a shared address. History My client originally worked for company A which we will call Events R us. He then set up on his own at a new address and lets call his company Fantastic Events. EventsRus never had a good website or SEO Fantastic Events set up a great website and really focused on adding tons of relevant content for all the myriad event options available and subsequently did really well. This is a few years back and they were also doing some article marketing on sites like ezinearticles.com to build links (1). As time went on they did get a bit carried away with these low quality links and were buying $5 spun content articles and other low quality links. They ranked really well for a few key terms. There was a suspected local SEO issue as fantastic events used the same office as their fathers business called fantastic finance and the citations / phone number issues etc all had to be cleared up (2). Fantastic Events and Events R Us remained friends and over time Fantastic Events moved to the same farm address as Events R Us so they could offer a wider range of services based on the farm (and ran by fantastic events) and to some extent run away from the address confusion with the same office and very similar name to the other fantastic finance business. Events R Us wanted some of the Fantastic Events success and built a new website and largely copied the website of Fantastic Events - at times even lifting entire pages of content but certainly mirroring the structure of the site. Fantastic Events tussled with them for a few years over this and over time they updated the content but the structure and services and address all pretty much mirrored what was offered on the Fantastic Events site. (3) Two companies - same address (it's a farm so whilst there are different barns I believe Google can only get as far as the farm gate so same address to all intents and purposes. Same services give or take. Events R Us was the older company overall by several years and was at the farm address many years longer than Fantastic Events (4). Fantastic Events starts running a blog and adding regular, useful event orientated content. The first true team building blog out there as far as we could tell and traffic tripled over a six month period. Penguin hits and Fantastic Events loses a lot of traction - this gets worse with Penguin 2.0. Both the homepage and the evening events page lose visibility and traction. The owner gives up on the blog to a large degree. Subsequent clean up happens and is rigorous - all bad links are pretty much removed and the remaining elements are disavowed. (90% of it is actually gone by now). Penguin 3.0 comes and no recovery at all. Nothing. If anything it gets worse and the once strong blog is now losing traction. Events R Us starts to do really well in search for exactly the same terms that Fantastic Events used to do well for. In particular one page ranks for exactly the same keywords and in exactly the same position (#1) as what was believed to be the primary traffic driver on the Fantastic Events site. It is almost like they exchanged positions and Events R Us went from nowhere to a strong footing with some national and local keywords and Fantastic Events fell from grace. A new website is built. All content is refreshed and bought up to date. Some light investment back in the blog. Some light link building is done around digital PR and infographics. Some initial movement in the right direction but overall this did not move the dial. Certain pages on the site that used to rank are nowhere - looks very much like a page level / keyword level penguin penalty. These same pages rank great, often first on the competitor site (an exchange of positions to some extent). Advice from myself and other esteemed consultants was to clean up, build some good links and wait for Penguin 4.0 to remove that eventuality. Also that the address issue could be causing some local SEO issue where Google believes the two businesses are one and has somehow merged the two with some local SEO filter or some such (same business with multiple websites at same address). Penguin 4.0 comes along and no improvements. Events R us sit pretty. Feeling is that the local issue must play a part here now that Penguin should be eliminated due to the extensive link clean up etc and there must now be some action to resolve this address / local issue. Issues low quality links - but cleaned up 100% now. same business name and address as fathers business initially older business copied the structure and content of newer business moved to same address as older more established business with very similar content older business now seems to have taken all the exact keywords and positions the newer business used to occupy Penguin 4.0 and no resolution. Local SEO issue seemingly remains Summary So we are left in a difficult position. The business does not want to move. But if there is some filtering or merging going on here then how can we get around this? The client is likely collateral damage to an algorithmic component designed to stop single businesses having multiple websites. I know there are reports of this happening but I have never seen such a thing for an innocent business like this but the nature of the address (two separate barns on a gated farm) and the history and similarities between the businesses makes this difficult. Things are somewhat desperate though - a move has to be made now. Even if that is a physical one. The client has considered a virtual address to take that variable out the picture but I have advised caution. I am even cautious about a change in physical address. Google has a long memory. If such a move was made at considerable expense would it help or would the other business retain Is the best option a new start? New brand, address, website, services etc - cut all ties with the historic Fantastic Events brand and by association the Events R Us brand. This is not a recommendation I can quickly or easily make so would be really interested to hear the feedback on anyone who has come across such a multi faceted and complex issue before. This is a tough one. We know what we are doing on the local front. We know what we are doing on the Penguin front. We know how to build links and authority. We are doing this work of the clock to help a long term friend / client get back to where they really deserve to be. The history is not spotty clean but the good work and effort far outway a short spell building dodgy links several years ago now. As an SEO consultant I don't want to advise for the company to rebrand and move offices at considerable expense but whilst I have a theoretical understanding of the issue how can we prove it and be sure this is the best possible advice? Thanks folks - hope this at least makes for interesting reading. This is something of an edge case. A good business likely caught up in a filter designed to stop abuse. Cheers
Local Listings | | Marcus_Miller
Marcus1 -
Has Google Local search algorithm changed in the last 6 months?
My organic search results have increased, but I noticed that my Google local search results have dropped drastically. I haven't changed anything on the local side. I consistently get reviews. In my industry, I have more reviews (all 5 star) than anyone else. It actually shows weird results, like competitors that have no reviews and don't even have all of their information filled out. It is even showing competitors that are out of business. I have a lot of citations with the same NAP. I use Moz local for this purpose as well. So, I am wondering if the algorithm has changed and if I need to update my profile to match it. Thank you in advance!
Local Listings | | CalicoKitty20000 -
Is the new local 3-pack the death of Google+ as factor?
So now we have the new 3-pack local results, which obviously cut the listings Google+ link from the results. What I find strange is that is now even when searching the business name alone, there is no sign of the associated Google+ page in the results. I still get other local third party listings like Facebook, Yellowpages, and Yelp – but no link anywhere for the Google+ page. I noticed this today when I wanted to verify something on a client’s page. There was nothing I could do search wise to bring up this business Google+ page. I finally got it by clicking the link through Moz local. After exploring this with some other clients, when I do get a Google+ page in the search results some have produced a 500 error when clicked on. If Google wasn’t killing off Google+, why would they completely omit the pages from their own search results? Another extremely strange thing, the majority of my clients are independent local businesses inside a large national company. Their Google+ listings have always been managed corporately using a bulk listing feed. We could never gain access to these pages and would always manage our listings to match that of the corp. controlled page. Well the last week of July they announced they were giving us the option to take control of the page. This happened with two different companies, MAJOR national competitors in the same industry, within a couple days of each other. They now treat it just like another version of social media, instead of a major factor within search. I find it hard to believe that something isn’t going on…
Local Listings | | masonrj0 -
A site is preforming well for 1 local term, but with a slight change to the term it dosnt rank.
Ive got a site thats currently ranking #2 in the local 7 pack listings for the search term : "garden design [city]" but is not ranking at all for "garden designer [city]" (note the "er" at the end of designer). The search traffic for these 2 terms is pretty much the same, and id like to get the site ranking for "garden designer [city]". The only thing i can think of is thats different is that in the <title>tag for the homepage of the site we have "Garden Design [City] - .....", is there any other way i can try and up the local 7 pack ranking for my site other than changing the title tag ?</p> <p>Im thinking of running a link building campaign for the phrase "garden designer [city]", but apart from that i cant think of anything else that could help up my rankings for this, any ideas ?</p></title>
Local Listings | | Sam-P0 -
Does anyone use Moz Local + Yext? How valuable is this for local businesses?
For brands that have a budget to pay $600 / year for valuable backlink directories, would you recommend Moz Local + Yext? I would like to hear some feedback on marketers that use Yext. Thanks,
Local Listings | | ColeLusby
Cole0 -
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
