Google Places - Top Listing & Strange Analytics
-
Hello, we have been working with this customer for a few years, doing their PPC, organic marketing, and we had established one google places listing for them as well. I guess the owner got sold on having someone else work with us to do google places for an additional office location they recently set up, and for whatever reason, they bypassed having us do it. This company never gained FTP access to the website. And despite heavy competition (apparantly), they have that new location listed in the #1 - A spot, without making any changes to the website.
And, to top it off, when you review the Google places performance, there is a weird result I had never before seen labeled as "* loc:". You can see what I'm talking in both screen shots.
Is there any guidance you can offer, first as to what that listing label means, and second, do you have any ideas how to 'reverse engineer' how they were able to get top listing so quickly for our customer like that?
-
Here is the data on the other listing we did. Top listing for the other search term location. These places results also actually have that "* loc:" listing in it as well as you will see. This second listing received less impressions, but more actions.
I just still can't decipher how a top tier spot for a second location was obtained without any FTP access to the website. Thanks for the help everyone, if anyone has more info after seeing this additional info, feel free to chime in
-
loc: is a Google search operator that returns results for your search query near a particular location. The average searcher wouldn't be familiar enough with it to use it deliberately. I wonder if those could be Google Maps searches?
How do citations on their listing compare to yours?
I have to wonder if some clickstream data is coming into play somehow, but that's pure speculation on my part.
-
I can't help on the * loc but I would also be interested to know how they achieved this so quickly. I tend to see a 2-3 week turnaround until Places listings start to show
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 Google Update My Title?
I have waited plenty of time. Google has cached several pages with the updated title placed in the <title>tags.<br /><br />However search results, continue to show otherwise.<br /><br />I read the following (https://support.google.com/webmasters/answer/35624?hl=en)</p> <p style="padding-left: 30px;"><em>If we’ve detected that a particular result has one of the above issues with its title, we may try to generate an improved title from anchors, on-page text, or other sources. However, sometimes even pages with well-formulated, concise, descriptive titles will end up with different titles in our search results to better indicate their relevance to the query. There’s a simple reason for this: the title tag as specified by a webmaster is limited to being static, fixed regardless of the query. Once we know the user’s query, we can often find alternative text from a page that better explains why that result is relevant. Using this alternative text as a title helps the user, and it also can help your site. Users are scanning for their query terms or other signs of relevance in the results, and a title that is tailored for the query can increase the chances that they will click through.</em></p> <p>The reason I want to change my title, is because there seems to be a relevancy issue (as pointed out my other community members here.) Google is having trouble recognizing understanding what our site is about.<br /><br />So instead of a title that reads, "Felix And Fingers: Dueling Pianos" (as Google continues to use) I prefer "Dueling Pianos - Felix And Fingers"<em> </em> I don't believe Google is recognizing us correctly as a dueling piano company.<em><br /></em>Google doesn't seem to like that. Any idea why or how I might go about getting this updated?</p></title>
Competitive Research | | osaka730 -
I Got A Scraper Delisted From Google ...
I have an electronics niche news website. A scraper who had an online store selling products in my niche copied every one of my articles and posted them on his site under the heading "News" ... generally within 1/2 hour of me posting them on my site. His site was even showing up in the rankings before mine. I filed a copyright infringement claim with Google two weeks ago via their online form explaining what he was doing. Today, I received an email from Google saying that they have reviewed his site and have delisted it from the search engine. I just checked, and he is GONE ... completely delisted, no trace. My site traffic has also jumped at least 25% today. It pays to complain! Just sharing 😉
Competitive Research | | Humanovation3 -
Absolute vs Relative URL Interlinking Observation & Question
So I've read a few articles about this here on SEOMOZ and other sites. I understand the benefit of relative url linking from a developer's point view. I've also read that using either internal linking methods doesn't really have any real SEO benefits or cons that would impact your rankings greatly. (Except with the slight chance of getting traffic and backlinks from a scraper site.) But I'm seeing examples where this may not be true. I did a search for 5 star hotels in Vegas in google. Some of the top results were Hotels.com and Expedia.com Priceline.com was on the second page. I used the search operator link: to Hotels.com, Expedia.com and Priceline.com vegas hotel pages respectively: Hotels.com: http://www.google.com/search?hl=en&tbo=d&site=webhp&q=link%3Ahttp%3A%2F%2Fwww.hotels.com%2Fde1504033-st5%2Ffive-star-hotels-las-vegas-nevada%2F&oq=link%3Ahttp%3A%2F%2Fwww.hotels.com%2Fde1504033-st5%2Ffive-star-hotels-las-vegas-nevada%2F&gs_l=serp.3...3650.7043.0.7972.8.7.1.0.0.0.90.363.7.7.0.les%3B..0.0...1c.1j2.4kALxt0jpxI Expedia.com: http://www.google.com/search?hl=en&tbo=d&site=webhp&q=link%3Ahttp%3A%2F%2Fwww.expedia.com%2F5Star-Las-Vegas-Hotels.s50-0-d178276.Travel-Guide-Filter-Hotels&oq=link%3Ahttp%3A%2F%2Fwww.expedia.com%2F5Star-Las-Vegas-Hotels.s50-0-d178276.Travel-Guide-Filter-Hotels&gs_l=serp.3...1681.3746.0.4076.6.6.0.0.0.0.100.348.5j1.6.0.les%3B..0.0...1c.1j2.KxqwbH-YFV0 Priceline: http://www.google.com/search?hl=en&tbo=d&site=webhp&q=link%3Ahttp%3A%2F%2Fwww.priceline.com%2F5-star-hotels-las-vegas-nevada-NV-filter-tk-s5-c291680-hl.hotel-reviews-hotel-guides&oq=link%3Ahttp%3A%2F%2Fwww.priceline.com%2F5-star-hotels-las-vegas-nevada-NV-filter-tk-s5-c291680-hl.hotel-reviews-hotel-guides&gs_l=serp.3...11265.12321.0.12767.5.5.0.0.0.0.0.0..0.0.les%3B..0.0...1c.1.HYtfct4MS7M The results were that priceline had no backlinks internally or externally to their vegas page. Whereas their competitors did, most of which were from their own internal pages. Looking at priceline's linking structure and architecture, they use a relative url structure and sessions ids to link to various pages. Their competitors don't. Wouldn't you argue that this may be adversely affecting their rankings. I know other things are to be factored in if you dig deeper. But that seems to be a major difference. It just seems that their content management system or how their site is coded isn't really passing link juice.
Competitive Research | | workathomecareers0 -
SEO's done, 301s in place, old site STILL outranks new site. What to do?
Since Sep 2010 I have had a site up with minimal SEO optimization (www.chrisbrushmusic.com). Oct 29, 2012, I launched a new site on a new domain (www.chrisbrushdrums.com) with more content and tons of SEO work behind it. The content of the new site is significantly different from the old site, and I wish to keep the old site around. I have 301's in place for specific URLs on the old site that point to the new site. I have submitted xml sitemaps for the new site. As of now, the old site still outranks the new site (i.e. Google search for "nashville session drummer" and my old site is #9 - my new site is nowhere). What should I do? Thanks.
Competitive Research | | cbrush0 -
Why is different the difficulty of a keyword in Google Spain and Google mexico?
In your opinion, Which are the main reasons of this difference?
Competitive Research | | BorjaUrreta910 -
How come the results in Google vary with domains
Hello, How is everyone doing? My question is about the google search engine results page. How come some results have the www. in front of them and some don't. Also what are the SEO implications of having www. in front of your search results vs. not. Is this something to do with canonical? I have included a screen shot so you will see what I mean. One result is www.gearyi.com and the result without the www is ingenexdigital.com. R6GLL.png
Competitive Research | | digitalops0 -
Why do i not receive google traffic?
İ have published over 3000 unique articles to pr3 drupal site over the past 3 months, yet only get about 20-30 visitors a day from google to my new 3000 articles. i have spent over 10 000usd for those articles, all range between 400-800 words and all pass copyscape. 90 percent of the articles are indexed and site pr3 site. the site is alltopics.com why do i not receive traffic?
Competitive Research | | rxesiv0 -
Image only site on top of Google
Hi Everyone, I'm trying to rank in Google for 'Hid xenon' in the netherlands, but there is one site above all results: http://bit.ly/qlsjne As you can see the site almost has no backlinks, and has not a single word in it's content, all images. it's a keyword only domain, and that's probably the only reason why it's ranking that high, but that means then that i can never get higher then him in Google because of it's domainname? Even when it's such a shitty site? Thank you, regards yannick
Competitive Research | | iwebdevnl0