Automotive part / OEM / Manufacturer numbers
-
Hi All,
What's the best way to optimise pages for OE / Manufacturer Part numbers?
Disclaimer: All part numbers in this post are fictional. I dont want this post out ranking my client for real part numbers
Take this for Throttle Body for example:
WOODYS S-AB-Q.123.53G
This is the main part number from WOODYS (the manufacturer).
However, these are all variations of exactly the same product:
- Woodys 2.78972.11.0
- Woodys 2.78972.16.0
- Woodys 2.78972.20.0
- Woodys 2.78972.26.0
Oh, and car brands use OE numbers for these parts, such as:
-
VWA 9808e40923G
-
VWA 9808e40923L
-
VWA 9808e40923M
-
VWA 9808e40923P
-
VWA 9808e40923Q
These internal part numbers are vitally important as most of my clients customers are garages/mechanics so they're very likely to search on OE numbers.
So, would you suggest:
-
Optimising 10 different pages for the same product (using the part numbers in the URL, Title and H1). The problem is there's no unique content for these pages, only the part number varies, so this would likely get penalised for dupe content, or not enough unique content.
-
Optimising one page for all terms. If so, how do you suggest doing this to ensure all part/OE numbers rank well and part numbers are prominent in the SERPS?
Could Schema.org help here by marking up these EO numbers with the isSimilarTo property of the Product type? I'm trying to ensure these part number get equal presence in the SERP snippet when searched for, even though I can't physically include all these numbers in the Title tag, URL and H1 of one page.
3. Something else?
Thanks,
Woody
-
Thanks Tom,
I like the idea of anchoring links down to specific OE number sections using the H2 headings, my concern is what content would these sections contain?
You mention a brief description and history. The problem is there's nothing different about the product so the description/history would be exactly the same as the main product number. These number are literally alternative numbers for EXACTLY the same product.
Client did have option 1 set up and working when I came onboard and they did rank well for these OE numbers which brought in visitors/business. These pages had nothing more than a H1 Heading and one line of text on these pages containing OE number. I advised client to 301 these into main product page which also listed these OE number as alternate numbers.
In the short term I suspect this move will lose them visitors, until we build strength into main product page and in the long term protect their domain from a Panda penalty for thin content.
Would you agree?
-
This is a really, really tricky one. Here's how I see it:
I think you need to avoid running the risk of any duplicate content at all costs - this could certainly be an issue with option 1, as you have pointed out. With that in mind, I feel we have to rule that one out completely.
That leaves with optimising multiple products on a single page. How many products can be grouped together by manufacturer? For instance, is this feasible?
Page Title: Audi Exhausts, URL domain.com/audi-exhausts/ H1: Audi Exhausts
10-15 exhausts on the page with brief description and history.Page title: Mitsubishi Exhausts, URL domain.com/mistubishi-exhausts H1: Mitsubishi Exhausts
12 on the page with its own brief description and historyPage title: Audi Suspensions URL domain.com/audi-suspensions etc and so on.
That way, from a user perspective, at least they know that they've landed on a relevant page (or would click through to it via search). Products are missing from H1, titles and URLs - but those factors aren't that significant any more anyway. Provided that the products are on the page, I think you're fine.
If you can keep the page length to a reasonable size, you could have the parts listed next to each other high up the page with internal links. For instance, if you click on one part, the page moves to that part's section. You can achieve this by having something like a <a <="" span="">href="#PARTNUMBER"> href on the part number and/or image, that then links to </a>
<a <="" span=""></a><a <span="" class="webkit-html-attribute-name" data-mce-mark="1">name="PARTNUMBER"></a>Part Number
lower down the page.
With this way you're making a pretty rich content page, users are taken to a URL they will think is relevant and land on a relevant landing page, but then don't have to navigate off the page to find what they want. Plus, with the part numbers present on the page, it gives you a chance to link-build specifically for that part number. And because you might be trying to build links for a number of parts on one page, chances are that the page itself will become quite strong because of the links and social signals it will accrue over time.
That's one method, but would definitely consult others here and further afield.
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
-
Content Strategy/Duplicate Content Issue, rel=canonical question
Hi Mozzers: We have a client who regularly pays to have high-quality content produced for their company blog. When I say 'high quality' I mean 1000 - 2000 word posts written to a technical audience by a lawyer. We recently found out that, prior to the content going on their blog, they're shipping it off to two syndication sites, both of which slap rel=canonical on them. By the time the content makes it to the blog, it has probably appeared in two other places. What are some thoughts about how 'awful' a practice this is? Of course, I'm arguing to them that the ranking of the content on their blog is bound to be suffering and that, at least, they should post to their own site first and, if at all, only post to other sites several weeks out. Does anyone have deeper thinking about this?
Intermediate & Advanced SEO | | Daaveey0 -
Page / Domain Authority Question
If my website were to purchase a sponsored article on a site with a powerful domain authority that contained a do-follow link, and the link would be "domain.com/articles/new-article" ... obviously new-article would have 0 page authority, being new... is that still considered a valuable link and why or why not?
Intermediate & Advanced SEO | | cat5com0 -
Pros vs Cons - Navigation/content embedded within javascript
My programmer showed me this demo website where all the navigation and content is embedded within javascript: http://sailsjs.org/#! Google site search returned 51 in results, all pages pretty much unique Title Tags and Meta Descriptions Bing site search returned 24 results with pretty much identical Title Tags and Meta Descriptions Matt Cutts said it's fine but to test first: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Mibrj2bOFCU Has anyone seen any reason to avoid this web convention? My gut is to avoid this approach with the main drawback I see is that websites like this won't do well on search engines other than Google that have less sophisticated algorithms. thoughts?
Intermediate & Advanced SEO | | Rich_Coffman0 -
Technical Question on Image Links - Part of Addressing High Number of Outbound Links
Hi - I've read through the forum, and have been reading online for hours, and can't quite find an answer to what I'm searching for. Hopefully someone can chime in with some information. 🙂 For some background - I am looking closely at four websites, trying to bring them up to speed with current guidelines, and recoup some lost traffic and revenue. One of the things we are zeroing in on is the high amount of outbound links in general, as well as inter-site linking, and a nearly total lack of rel=nofollow on any links. Our current CMS doesn't allow an editor to add them, and it will require programming changes to modify any past links, which means I'm trying to ask for the right things, once, in order to streamline the process. One thing that is nagging at me is that the way we link to our images could be getting misconstrued by a more sensitive Penguin algorithm. Our article images are all hosted on one separate domain. This was done for website performance reasons. My concern is that we don't just embed the image via , which would make this concern moot. We also have an href tag on each to a 'larger view' of the image that precedes the img src in the code, for example - We are still running the numbers, but as some articles have several images, and we currently have about 85,000 articles on those four sites... well, that's a lot of href links to another domain. I'm suggesting that one of the steps we take is to rel=nofollow the image hrefs. Our image traffic from Google search, or any image search for that matter, is negligible. On one site it represented just .008% of our visits in July. I'm getting a little pushback on that idea as having a separate image server is standard for many websites, so I thought I'd seek additional information and opinions. Thanks!
Intermediate & Advanced SEO | | MediaCF0 -
Indexing/Sitemap - I must be wrong
Hi All, I would guess that a great number of us new to SEO (or not) share some simple beliefs in relation to Google indexing and Sitemaps, and as such get confused by what Web master tools shows us. It would be great if somone with experience/knowledge could clear this up for once and all 🙂 Common beliefs: Google will crawl your site from the top down, following each link and recursively repeating the process until it bottoms out/becomes cyclic. A Sitemap can be provided that outlines the definitive structure of the site, and is especially useful for links that may not be easily discovered via crawling. In Google’s webmaster tools in the sitemap section the number of pages indexed shows the number of pages in your sitemap that Google considers to be worthwhile indexing. If you place a rel="canonical" tag on every page pointing to the definitive version you will avoid duplicate content and aid Google in its indexing endeavour. These preconceptions seem fair, but must be flawed. Our site has 1,417 pages as listed in our Sitemap. Google’s tools tell us there are no issues with this sitemap but a mere 44 are indexed! We submit 2,716 images (because we create all our own images for products) and a disappointing zero are indexed. Under Health->Index status in WM tools, we apparently have 4,169 pages indexed. I tend to assume these are old pages that now yield a 404 if they are visited. It could be that Google’s Indexed quotient of 44 could mean “Pages indexed by virtue of your sitemap, i.e. we didn’t find them by crawling – so thanks for that”, but despite trawling through Google’s help, I don’t really get that feeling. This is basic stuff, but I suspect a great number of us struggle to understand the disparity between our expectations and what WM Tools yields, and we go on to either ignore an important problem, or waste time on non-issues. Can anyone shine a light on this for once and all? If you are interested, our map looks like this : http://www.1010direct.com/Sitemap.xml Many thanks Paul
Intermediate & Advanced SEO | | fretts0 -
Double Forward Slash in URL //
My client is using double forward slahes in URL like this "//" is this affecting SEO?
Intermediate & Advanced SEO | | yanaiguana1110 -
Changing Domain / Site Name - An SEO Nightmare?
My company will be changing its name and moving to a new domain in about a month. What can I do from an SEO perspective to get ready for the big move? Do I just need to 301 redirect all my URLs to their new corresponding pages? Thanks!
Intermediate & Advanced SEO | | Travis-W0 -
Panda/Penguin & more than one services site in niche
Hello, My friend has a personal development training site. I have been advised not to make separate personal coaching sites for the owners of the training sites. Do you have experience that Panda/Penguin could penalize for separate sites in a similar niche? Do you need any more info to give a good response? Thank you.
Intermediate & Advanced SEO | | BobGW0