Interesting SERP trend I'm observing
-
I know Google has been favoring brands a big names lately, but I'm seeing something a bit more alarming
Our company offers custom embroidered patches, and through keyword and search research I have discovered that almost all searches for "embroidered patches" are by people who need embroidered patches and are looking to purchase them, or learn more about the process of purchasing them. The SERPs for this term used to be all embroidered patch companies such as ours.
In the past month:
We've been outranked by a page on Amazon that's fairly irrelevant.
An equally irrelevant ebay page has emerged
The Wikipedia page for "embroidered patch" is now number seven.
This has pushed three other embroidered patch companies off the first page (not that I'm complaining because it wasn't our company . . . yet).
My question is, has anyone else noticed something similar happening, where large sites are gaining ground, in spite of the fact that they have low relevance to the search term?
-
I have absolutely no idea. I don't think they really need to at this point.
-
Does Wikipedia actively do SEO?
-
Our Client are UK base and we are seeing same kind of results
Keyword like Radiator cabinets big brand are now appearing and taking over the serps. Ebay and Amazon about a year ago they were not even on top 3 pages. The page that you land on from there SERPs is also not relevant at times. This is just one example but similar scenarios on other industries e.g. baby, children's furniture etc. Seems like Google like big boys and it feels its no longer fair game especially for small businesses.
We have started to work on other avenues like facebook, niche directories, amazon, E bay, Direct email marketing, monthly newsletters etc.
all these are geared towards getting sales.
.
-
Could be. I don't see why they'd waste any effort trying to dominate a result they're irrelevant for and no one will click on, or if they do, will bounce.
-
Yes Marisa. I have seen both Amazon and eBay creeping into the top results for a niche product we sell that only churches buy. I am wondering if this is less Google and more a concerted effort by Amazon, eBay and Wikipedia to dominate. Let's face it, they have resources for research that we little guys don't have.
-
I feel like the latest hidden update behind the EMD update has hurt sites with lots of low quality links. This means that a site like Amazon just needs to internally link to a page with a specified term and they can rank for it. I am sure this will not last too long, when searchers don't find what they are looking for the searchers are going to return to SERPs more often for different result.
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
-
Is it bad from an SEO perspective that cached AMP pages are hosted on domains other than the original publisher's?
Hello Moz, I am thinking about starting to utilize AMP for some of my website. I've been researching this AMP situation for the better part of a year and I am still unclear on a few things. What I am primarily concerned with in terms of AMP and SEO is whether or not the original publisher gets credit for the traffic to a cached AMP page that is hosted elsewhere. I can see the possible issues with this from an SEO perspective and I am pretty sure I have read about how SEOs are unhappy about this particular aspect of AMP in other places. On the AMP project FAQ page you can find this, but there is very little explanation: "Do publishers receive credit for the traffic from a measurement perspective?
Algorithm Updates | | Brian_Dowd
Yes, an AMP file is the same as the rest of your site – this space is the publisher’s canvas." So, let's say you have an AMP page on your website example.com:
example.com/amp_document.html And a cached copy is served with a URL format similar to this: https://google.com/amp/example.com/amp_document.html Then how does the original publisher get the credit for the traffic? Is it because there is a canonical tag from the AMP version to the original HTML version? Also, while I am at it, how does an AMP page actually get into Google's AMP Cache (or any other cache)? Does Google crawl the original HTML page, find the AMP version and then just decide to cache it from there? Are there any other issues with this that I should be aware of? Thanks0 -
Looking to condense SERP reults
For several of our keywords we have two listings on page 1 of the SERP's, both pages on the same domain. It's the "top"
Algorithm Updates | | absoauto
level category and than sub category within that top level category. Ideally, we could condense and have just the one result, at a higher position in the SERP. I thought Google would eventually do this for us as I've seen in the past, but it's been a few years now and still hasn't happened. Any suggestions?0 -
Difference between Google's link: operator and GWT's links to your sites
I haven't used the Google operator link: for a while, and I noticed that there is a big disparity between the operator "link:" and the GWT's links to your site. I compared these results on a number of websites, my own and competitors, and the difference seem to be the same across the board. Has Google made a recent change with how they display link results via the operator? Could this be an indication that they are clean out backlinks?
Algorithm Updates | | tdawson090 -
Is it allowed to put a word in all domains URLs to get higher in SERP?
Hello, What good or bad could happen if someone put the same keyword in all site's URL's? (i.e. I would be selling cars and my domain isn't included any word cars, so i put all of my pages in one folder like domain.com/cheap-cars/etc)
Algorithm Updates | | komeksimas0 -
Could EMD (Exact Match Domain) have cause SERP drops?
Hi all, Another suggestion was given for our fall in SERPS. Recently Matt Cutts announced that EMDs would be hit by new algoritms. http://www.seroundtable.com/google-panda-20-15789.html Only our site with exacts matches... cours-telephone-anglais, curso-ingles-telefono, kurse-englisch-telefon, and corso-inglese-telefono were hit. Does anyone else have experience of this? Would a solution be to create new URLS and redirect? Or would a redirect carry the penalty over? Is there anyway to fix that sort of penalty? Many thanks for your help.
Algorithm Updates | | Quime0 -
Sub-Links of Organic SERP
I would like to know if you can modify (or suggest) the sub-links under an organic listing. For Example: Main Link/Title = COMPANY NAME - What We Do.... Sub-Links (popular pages within site) currently include links like: Locations / Catalog Request / Bestsellers Is it possible to suggest other pages as sub-links or do the search engines determine these? Please advise, and thanks in advance....
Algorithm Updates | | WhiteCap0 -
Why is a website with lower content interest reaching higher in google
there is a website that i am competing with <cite>www.gastricbandhypnotherapy.net for the term gastric band hypnotherapy and for some reason it is now ranching higher than me.</cite> I have been number one in google with http://www.clairehegarty.co.uk/virtual-gastric-band-with-hypnotherapy for the term Gastric Band Hypnotherapy but for some reason in the past few days it has ranked number one and pushed me down to number three. i do not understand it as there is not much relevant content to gastric band hypnotherapy and also it does not have many links pointing into it can you please help with this question
Algorithm Updates | | ClaireH-1848860
