Local Vs. National Targeting - Pointless?
-
Hi,
I have a client, in Maryland, that wants to rank on the first page for "yoga teacher training". But to my understanding Google (don't know about Yahoo! & Bing at the moment) is prioritizing local listings first based on the user's IP (or preferred city if using a logged in Google Account).
-
Am I right about the priority of local listings? Is that a common occurrence now?
-
Is it possible for my client to rank for yoga teacher training for someone searching in New York, for example, or is this a huge chalenge?
Thanks for any advice!!
Kindly, Michael
-
-
Will do, thanks!
-
Thanks - the client doesn't even come up locally for the search - but if you append the state she is in, she ranks on the first page.
I think I'm going to go back and explain that moving up even for a local search is going to bring in substantial more traffic.
-
Hi Michael,
Yes you are right about #1, this type of thing would probably be best explained with an in person meeting where you do the searches together live and explain the results. If face to face isn't possible setup using gotomeeting and share your desktop and show the client. If the client doesn't rank for local yet suggest getting ranked local first (easier) and then going national.
It is possible to rank for other cities and your strategy would come down to the goal. Do you want to show up as a local result or just have the site show up in the regular SERPs. There are ways to show up for local results without having a physical location but it starts to fall in the grey hat tactics area.
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
-
LocalBusiness vs. Physician
I have a physician who is a client and I'm wondering: is there any advantage to having their schema.org as "LocalBusiness" vs. Physician? Clearly as Physician is a sublisting, it should be fine. But I'm just curious. Other than future-proofing is there any "real-time" advantage? Thanks for any insight!
Algorithm Updates | | Titan5520 -
Getting squeezed out of SERP by local results
Hi All, I wanted to get some opinions on a phenomenon that I know others are dealing with... We have a client who is an online-only business (though they do have an office/warehouse location). The on-page is great, and the site has good domain authority for its niche. The issue is that Google is localizing most of their search terms - And our client is getting squeezed down and out in the SERPs by the local listings. How is everyone dealing with this issue? It seems like we'll never get the site to out-rank the local listings in a given geo. Thanks, Lee
Algorithm Updates | | vectormedia0 -
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!
Algorithm Updates | | gXeSEO
Darlene1 -
Dropped from Universal Result: Local
For quite some time our Google Places listing has been in the Universal Results...(for this keyword there is a 7-pack result). Which was great, we had a PPC ad at the top of the page, we were 3rd in the Universal Results (there was 3 places listings before the natural results)...and we were 6th in the natural results - meaning we were on the first page 3 times...which means a happy boss....and lots of traffic. The old places listing was linked to our new Google+ Page pending the eventual demise of places and the merge. The merge has happened, all information from the places listing has migrated (apart from reviews and photos??) and the places listing has been deleted (URL returns 404 error). Problem is now my Google + Page is not even within the first 2 or 3 pages of places results never mind in the Universal results. So it would appear the rank / authority that the places listing had...hasn't been transferred to the Google+ page. My competitors...who were in 1 + 2 in the universal results above the natural results and who have Google+ Pages with NOTHING on...bar their name, are still there! Why would I be dropped when my Google+ Page, has more info, more followers, more photos, more relevant content (they don't have any content ) than my 2 competitors. It seems I've been penalised....somebody suggested that I had the keyword twice in my "About" and twice in my "Introduction" info and that could be it. I thought the loss of the review might be it too...but neither of the businesses now occupying the first 3 spots..have any reviews at all. Anybody else suffered from this? Anybody any other suggestions to why I might have been dropped so dramatically in the places listings? (My SERP listing is unaffected for this keyword) Keyword being mentioned twice hardly seems like "stuffing"! I'm actually not too concerned about the places ranking....not a great driver of traffic...but appearing in the Universal Results did obviously drive traffic...and to appear in the Universal Results...I've now got about 30 positions to climb...... The whole Google+ Local / Google Places thing has been a nightmare from start to finish.... Thanks in advance for any help or advice!
Algorithm Updates | | MarbellaSurferDude0 -
SinglePlatform's Restaurant Menu Across Web Properties vs "SEO-Optimized"
Surprised I wasn't able to find an existing answer given that SinglePlatform apparently serves 500,000 SMBs with menus that appear on over 150 publisher websites. Given Panda's razor-sharp intolerance for duplicate content, am I safe to assume that any claim of SinglePlatform's menu on a local restaurant being beneficial to your SEO is now spurious? If so, what's best way to handle this as a potential SEO liability while still having one of their nicely formatted restaurant menus on your site? For reference: http://www.openforum.com/articles/using-singleplatform-to-build-a-digital-presence Update May 7, 2012 Connected directly with the folks at SinglePlatform, and the answer here is a lot simpler than my over-thinking of it. The menu usually sits within an iFrame or widget so that's that. But the ability to truthfully show an up-to-date menu for any given establishment is a legit way to address the healthy amount of local search intent that seems to be directed at exactly that. Overall a pretty slick platform, looking forward to seeing how they grow into the SMB, local & mobile in the coming months, I think the space is ripe to benefit from products/services that take advantage of these sorts of economies of scale.
Algorithm Updates | | mgalica0 -
Question about Local / Regional SEO
Good Morning Moz Community, I have a local SEO/regional SEO question. I apologize if this question is duplicated from another area on this forum but, a query of the term Regional SEO showed no results, as did similar queries. Please preference this entire question with "Knowing what we know about the most recent changes to local search" I know what has worked in the past, my concern is Now. Working with a heavily regulated client that is regional, mostly East Coast US. They are in Financial Services and state licensing is a requirement. They are licensed in 15 states. Obviously, it would look foolish, in this day in age, to Title Tag individual pages with local modifiers and have numerous pages covering a similar topic with not much difference than localized modifiers in front of the keyword. I've never found that SE's can understand broad regional terms such as New England or Mid Atlantic or Southeast or Northeast, if someone knows different please share. Aside from an exact match search. The client does have 7 offices in various states. Perfectly matching and consistent listings in G Places, Bing Local and Yahoo Local was step one and all their locations are now in those services and there are many more smaller local citation listings are in the works. We have also successfully implemented a plan to generate great reviews from actual customers, for each location, they're receiving a few a day right now. Their local places listings, where they have physical locations, are doing very well but: 1. What would the community's suggestion be on generating more targeted traffic in the 8 states where they have no physical location? 2. The client wants to begin creating smaller blogs that are highly localized to the states and major population centers that they do not have a physical location in. There is an open check book to dedicate to this effort however, I do a lot of work in this industry so I want to offer the best possible, most up to date advice, my concern is that these efforts will have two results: a. be obscured by the ”7 pack" by companies with local brick and mortar b. would detract from the equity built in their existing blog by generating content in other domains, I would prefer to continue growing the main blog. 3. As a follow up, it has been documented that Google is now using the same algorithm for local, personal and personalized, that being the case, is there any value in building links to you Places page? Can you optimize your Places page by using the same off site techniques as you would traditionally? Sorry to kill you with such a long question on a Sunday 🙂
Algorithm Updates | | dogflog1 -
Organic ranking vs Local ranking
After reading this blog entry from Dr Pete on Mirametrix, my question would be:
Algorithm Updates | | echo1
What's more important for a local company, being in the 7 pack or in the top 10 organic results? Which one attracts more clicks? Is the optimization for local ranking just became more important than the traditional SEO?0 -
Google Directory vs DMOZ
What is the difference between the Google Directory and the DMOZ if any?
Algorithm Updates | | BrandonC-2698870
