URL structure for multiple cities?
-
Hi, i am in the process of setting up a business directory site that will be used in a number of cities, though i am initially launching with only one city.
My question is, what is the best URL structure to use for the site and should i start using this URL structure from day one?
At the moment i am using www.mysite.com.au as my primary website where it contains all listings for the the one initial launch city.
Though to plan for the future i was considering this URL structure:
so for example, if i launch in the city Sydney initially then all website traffic that goes to www.mysite.com.au would simply be redirected (302 temp redirect?) to www.mysite.com.au/sydney.
When i expand to other cities www.mysite.com.au would simply be a "select your city" screen that then redirects to the city of choice (similar to www.groupon.com page).
How would doing a 302 redirect from www.mysite.com.au to www.mysite.com.au/city impact on SEO for the initial launch? Or should i just place this on the root domain since no other cities exist at the moment?
-
If it's just a few cities, it's probably not a big deal either way, and the search results could give you a landing page. If you really plan to expand down the road, I think I'd go with your alternative approach, at least for now. Keep Google on the main site, and you can let users select their appropriate city page (and cookie that).
If, down the road, you've got a good structure and solid back-links, and you want to open up the city pages to crawlers, you can always change that later. It's not black-and-white, but in 2012 I think it's best to go out narrow and really focus your link profile on your core pages, expanding once you've got the authority and history to make it work.
-
Thanks Peter.
Just a question in regards to your first point (1). Each city page page will simply have a search box. The results will be filtered to only return entries for that particular city (as derived from the URL - ie Sydney filter will be applied if URL is www.mysite.com.au/sydney).
I am now thinking the best option for this setup would be to have the search box located on the root domain www.mysite.com.au (and no longer have the city pages), and simply have a drop down list box next to the search box to allow the city filter to be applied. What do you think of this idea?
I could then also use cookies to set the default value of the city select list based on previous visit selection.
-
Unfortunately, it's a tricky situation, and I'm not sure there's one "right" answer. I think some of the feedback in the comments is definitely accurate, but it depends on the circumstances. There are two big factors to consider:
(1) It's probably best not to spin out hundreds of city pages, if they're just a template with a few geo-targeted words changed around. This used to be common practice to rank for long-tail terms, but since Panda, it's really gotten to be risky. If Google sees hundreds or thousands of thing pages, your entire site could be penalized. Meanwhile, those thin pages don't generally rank well, even best-case.
(2) The 302-redirect is going to leave link-juice at the home-page, but still allow Google to crawl the city-based pages. If you're using geo-location, it probably doesn't matter whether you use a 301 or 302, honestly, because Google is going to come via US IPs and it will never trigger an Australian-based location. So, you need to make sure your solution works for the crawlers and decide where you want them to land.
-
Ok i see.
Does having a much heavier weight on the city page (ie Sydney), rather than the root domain have much of an impact if people are searching for "[business name] Sydney"? I guess www.mysite.com.au/sydney would be shown in search results rather than www.mysite.com.au?
Are you suggesting that having a "city selection" page hosted on www.mysite.com.au would be the best option from an SEO perspective? (Even though there is only one city).
Thanks
-
You wouldn't get penalized for the 302. 302's normally aren't used because they don't pass along link juice but in this case that is not your concern. What might create an issue for you is that people will like your site and then choose to link to it, but it will most likely be the Sydney link structure if that's the route you go, most people copy and paste the URL and then use it as a link. Then when you redo all your structures you will have one city page with a crazy amount of link juice but a main URL with no link juice. You won't be able to fix it either with a 301 because then no one will be able to see your Sydney page. You will create a problem for yourself in that sense. Hope this helps.
-
HI, first i will support other answers and will not recommend the redirect from the same reasons.
regard the URL i will like you to look at this site that i am working on www.123locksmith.com and see the way we did the city pages.
working great with this system and this site is up in major keywords and city, i will recommend you have some changes in the content and not just change the city name.
i will recommend to start with the city pages from day one because if you will work on a strong DA by the time you get to this pages it will be easy to work on.
hope that help you
Mike
-
Plan for today didn’t make sense to me and as far as the URL structure is concern you should have to have ea long term planning for that.
If I would be at your place I would be happy to see the URL structure which is somewhat similar to you. For example I launch a bakery business in Melbourne my ideal URL should be:
this way the URLs will be organized and user can easily find where his business can be available, even by looking at the URL.
As far as your idea of 302 redirections is concern I might not support that so if redirection is necessary at any point then go for 301 permanent redirections.
Hope this helps!
-
Thanks for the reply Joel.
Since there will only be one city initially, is there any negative impact (in terms of SEO), in doing a simple redirect from www.mysite.com.au to /sydney?
-
I'm a believer in planning for the future. So I would go with www.mysite.com.au and then have the city option of Sydney and with a comment "more cities coming soon" this way you wouldn't have to worry about having a 302 redirect or changing domains later. Hope this helps good luck.
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
-
URL Structure's Effect on SEO
Hello all, I have a client who currently has a very poor URL structure. As it stands, their URLs are formatted in the following manner: http://www.domain.com/category/subcategory/page In all my years of SEO, however, I have always tried to implement the following format: http://www.domain.com/category/page The web designer for this particular project has been very reluctant to change the structure for obvious reasons, but I'm convinced that by modifying the URL structure, SEO will improve. I am correct in thinking this? Likewise, if I am able to get the URL structure changed, what do I need to look out for to make sure we don't lose any traction for our keyword terms? Any and all insight/suggestions is greatly appreciated. Thanks for reading!
Web Design | | maxcarnage0 -
When Site:Domain Search Run on Google, SSL Error Appears on One URL, Will this Harm Ranking
Greetings MOZ Community: When a site:domain search is run on Google, a very strange URL appears in the search results. The URL is http://www.nyc-officespace-leader.com:2082/ The page displays a "the site's security certificate is not trusted." This only appears for one URL out of 400. Could this indicate a wider problem with the server's configuration? Is this something that needs to be corrected, and if so how? Our ranking has dropped a lot in the last few months. Thanks,
Web Design | | Kingalan1
Alan0 -
What structured data would you recommend marking up for a companies 'service'?
Hi, I'm finally starting to use structured data in my clients sites now that Google has embraced it so much. I have a client that is a cosmetic physician and has associated services. I thought it would be beneficial to markup each service according to http://schema.org/Service I'll be doing a similar thing with a new local surveyors website too. I'm just wondering if it is worth doing and what Schema properties would you recommend using. For the cosmetic physician I'm thinking of: description
Web Design | | morktron
name
url
sameAs
provider
serviceArea
serviceType0 -
Multiple Local Schemas Per Page
I am working on a mid size restaurant groups site. The new site (in development) has a drop down of each of the locations. When you hover over a location in the drop down it shows the businesses info (NAP). Each of the location in the Nav list are using schema.org markup. I think this would be confusing for search robots. Every page has 15 address schemas and individual restaurants pages NAP is at the below all the locations' schema/NAP in the DOM. Have any of you dealt with multiple schemas per page or similar structure?
Web Design | | JoshAM0 -
Can you use a base element and mod_rewrite to alleviate the need for absolute URLs?
This is a follow up question to Scott Parsons' question about using absolute versus relative URLs when linking internally. Andy King makes the statement that this can be done and that it saves additional space (which he claims then can improve page speed). Is this a true and accurate statement? Can using a base element and mod-rewrite alleviate the need for absolute URLs? I need to know before going off on a "change all of our relative URLs to absolutes" campaign. Thanks in advance! Dana
Web Design | | danatanseo0 -
Yes or No for Ampersand "&" in SEO URLs
Hi Mozzers I would like to know how crawlers see the ampersand (& or &) in your URLs and if Google frown upon this or not? As far as I know they purely recognise this as "and" is this correct and is there any best practice for implementing this, as I know a lot of people complained before about & in links and that it is better to use it as &, but this is not on links, this is on URLs. Reason for this is that we looking to move onto an ASP.Net MVC framework (any suggestions for a different framework are welcome, we still just planning out future development) and in order to make use of the filter options we have on our site we need a parameter to indicate the difference on a routing level (routing sends to controller, controller sends to model, model sends to controller and controller sends to view < this is pattern of a request that comes in on the framework we will be using). I already have -'s and /'s in the URLs (which is for my SEO structuring) so these syntax can't be used for identifying filters the user clicks or uses to define their search as it will create a complete mess in the system. Now we looking at & to say; OK, when a user lands on /accommodation and they selects De Kelders (which is a destination in our area) the page will be /accommodation/de-kelders on this page they can define their search further to say they are looking for 5 star accommodation and it should be close to the beach, this is where the routing needs some guidance and we looking to have it as follow: /accommodation/de-kelders/5-star&close-to-the-beach. Now, does the "&" get identified by search engines on a URL level as "and" and does this cause any issues with crawling or indexation or would it be best to look at another solution? Thanks, Chris Captivate
Web Design | | DROIDSTERS0 -
What's the best way to structure original vs aggregated content
We're working on a news site that has a mix of news wires such as Reuters and original opinion articles. Currently the site is setup with /world /sports etc categories with the news wire content. Now we want to add the original opinion content. Would it be better to start a new top /Opinion category and then have sub-categories for each Opinion/world, Opinion/sports subject? Or would it be better to simply add an opinion sub-category under the existing news categories, ie /world/opinion? I know Google requests that original content be in a separate directory to be considered for inclusion in Google news. Which would be better for that? Regarding link building, if the opinion sub-categories were under the top news categories, would the link juice be passed more directly than if we had a separate Opinion top category?
Web Design | | ScottDavis0 -
How to serve a Mobile & Full Site using one URL?
Hello, Does anyone know of any resources or tutorials that outline how to serve a smartphone-formatted website using the same URL as the full site? I know that one solution is using media-queries to serve a seperate CSS stylesheet, but you still have the full HTML source code. In other words, I might want to serve a smartphone & desktop user different content, but under one URL. WP Touch (Wordpress Plugin) is a perfect example of what I mean, but how is it technically achieved? It serves two different sets of HTML for smartphone & full, but using one URL http://www.bravenewcode.com/store/plugins/wptouch-pro/
Web Design | | petecampbell-bmi0