Will we no longer need Location + Keyword? Do we even need it at all?
-
Prepare yourselves. This is a long question.
With the rise of schema and Google Local+, do you think Google will now have enough data about where a business is located, so that when someone searches for, a keyword such as "Atlanta Hyundai dealers" a business in Atlanta that's website:
- has been properly marked up with schema (or microdata for business location)
- has claimed its Google Local+
- has done enough downstream work in Local Search listings for its NAP (name, address, phone number)
will no longer have to incorporate variations of "Atlanta Hyundai dealers" in the text on the website? Could they just write enough great content about how they're a Hyundai dealership without the abuse of the Atlanta portion?
Or if they're in Boston and they're a dentist or lawyer, could the content be just about the services they provided without so much emphasis tied to location?
I'm talking about removing the location of the business from the text in all places other than the schema markup or the contact page on the website. Maybe still keep a main location in the title tags or meta description if it would benefit the customer.
I work in an industry where location + keywords has reached such a point of saturation, that it makes the text on the website read very poorly, and I'd like to learn more about alternate methods to keep the text more pure, read better and still achieve the same success when it comes to local search.
Also, I haven't seen other sites penalized for all the location stuffing on their websites, which is bizarre because it reads so spammy you can't recognize where the geotargeted keywords end and where the regular text begins.
I've been working gradually in this general direction (more emphasis on NAP, researching schema, and vastly improving the content on clients' websites so it's not so heavy with geo-targeted keywords).
I also ask because though the niche I work in is still pretty hell-bent on using geo-targeted keywords, whenever I check Analytics, the majority of traffic is branded and geo-targeted keywords make up only a small fraction of traffic.
Any thoughts? What are other people doing in this regard?
-
Currently I am using free version of ahrefs.com, will convert account into paid if required. I also use opensiteexplorer but I like anchor text distribution functionality of ahefs.com.
-
Thanks SanketPatel. Do you have a pay-for account with ahrefs.com or are you using the free version? Do you like it better than opensiteexplorer?
-
I user keyword + location but other way. Lets take your keyword: "Atlanta Hyundai dealers". If I have to optimize this keyword I prefer content "atlanta" in title or content. And Anchor text linking on hyundai dealers or directly on domain. ( Anchor text based upon current backlink profile using ahrefs.com ).
-
Thanks SankelPatel! I'll check them out. So do you not use any location + keyword on the clients' websites?
-
Hi, Apart from Schema, Google + local, Google map.... I do below things to generate local Signals: Local Business Listing, Press Release Distribution with Address, Clients Testimonial... Listing in social sites with same address twiiter, facebook, pinterest, Linkedin etc... Let me share blogpost which I like on local on seomoz: http://www.seomoz.org/blog/40-important-local-search-questions-answered http://www.seomoz.org/blog/you-asked-i-answered-qa-from-you-probably-think-this-citation-source-is-about-you-dont-you
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
-
Page content is not very similar but topic is same: Will Google considers the rel canonical tags?
Hi Moz community, We have multiple pages from our own different sub-domains for same topics. These pages even rank in SERP for related keywords. Now we are planning to show only one of the pages in SERP. We cannot redirect unfortunately. We are planning to use rel canonical tags. But the page content is not same, only 20% is similar and 80% is different but the context is same. If we use rel canonicals, does Google accepts this? If not what should I do? Making header tags similar works? How Google responds if content is not matching? Just ignore or any negative score? Thanks
Algorithm Updates | | vtmoz0 -
Is it possible (or advisable) to try to rank for a keyword that is 'split' across subfolders in your url?
For example, say your keyword was 'funny hats' - ideally you'd make your url 'website.com/funny-hats/' But what if 'hats' is already a larger category in your site that you want to rank for as its own keyword? Could you then try to rank for 'funny hats' using the url 'website.com/hats/funny/' ? Basically what I'm asking is, would it be harmful to the chances of ranking for your primary keyword if it's split across the url like this, and not necessarily in the correct order?
Algorithm Updates | | rwat0 -
Keyword optimisation: Google's eyes before users' eyes?
Hi all, So the default and ultimate suggestion about how to rank a page high is to get favoured by users, so by the Google. But if write content in favour of users, it may miss out the keywords or will not have much keyword density and variety of keywords to get in to Google's eyes. Then we may appear around 3rd page; then how do we get into top slots? I can see some top results without even a single mention of the keyword they are ranking for. How that would be possible? Thanks
Algorithm Updates | | vtmoz0 -
When Is It Okay To Use Bold, Underline & Italic Text? Should I Stay Away From My Keywords?
Hey guys I have a few questions. I am pretty sure that I was penalized by Panda a few years back because I went very heavy on bold, italic and underlining my keywords. Since then I removed the bold, italic and underlines and never have used them again. I was just reading an article on the Moz Blog and I saw some bold words. My questions are, When Is It Okay To Use Bold, Underline & Italic Text? Should I Stay Away From My Keywords? Any help would be great! Thank you.
Algorithm Updates | | Videogamefan1 -
Google penalty for one keyword?
Is it possible to get penalized by Google for a specific keyword and essentially disappear from the SERPs for that keyword but keep position for the brand (#1) and some other keywords (#4 and #7)? And how would you find out that this is what happened if there is no GWT message?
Algorithm Updates | | gfiedel0 -
Do we need to worry about where our domain is hosted anymore?does it make a difference anymore?
I went to a really interesting conference last week and one of the speakers who has been working in the SEO industry for 15 years now said that it doesn't make a difference anymore ranking wise. I would like to see what the community thinks on this subject? Thanks Ari
Algorithm Updates | | dublinbet0 -
Why would my keywords never ranking in Bing but have great position in both Google and Yahoo?
I have several keywords ranking top 5 for Google and Yahoo but nothing from Bing. Any ideas?
Algorithm Updates | | CIEEwebTeam0 -
Rankings changing based on location within a country... normal?
I recently had a satellite office across the country come to me and say that they couldn't find us on Google, based on a number of keywords they were searching on. I thought that isn't right... I know we rank for those terms. So, I did a search here, and there we were for those very terms, and ranking quite nicely. Sooo, what's going on there? I know there are variations from Google.com to Google.ca in terms of ranking. But within Google.ca I've not seen this before. Can anyone shed some light on that?
Algorithm Updates | | atcosl0