Local Listing Question
-
We have a client that has signed on with a national business network for contractors. This was done without our consent, so I wanted to get everyone's feel on whether or not we should talk them out of continuing this partnership.
The example I am showing is not our client, but they are part of this network and have the exact type of setup.
Regular website: http://www.palmerheatingandcooling.com
Network webpage: http://www.heatingandair.com/annapolis-marlyandRegular Google Plus Local Profile: https://plus.google.com/117245435648294066529/about?hl=en
Network Google Plus Local Profile: https://plus.google.com/112323273882064003718/about?hl=enHere is a local search with both profiles showing up:http://goo.gl/8fxZV
I have attached a screenshot of the results.Is this type of partnership ok in Google's eyes? Is this network listing going to hurt their regular listing in the future?
-
Hi JohnWeb12,
Your final link is actually not taking me to the intended results, because it's localizing to my own city, so I can't see this. But, yes, in the other links, there is reason for concern if any third party is creating a Google+ Local page for your client. The one thing I'm not clear on is that, in your provided example, 2 different addresses and phone numbers are being used - one in Edgewater and one in Annapolis. I would need to fully understand the situation to totally 'get' what is going on here. If the company in your example is just one company, and, let's say, the address on the directory page is virtual rather than a real location, then, yes, that could certainly hurt the business. If, in your client's case, 2 Google+ Local pages have been built for the same location, then that is totally a violation.
It's fine to list a business on a directory, but I would never recommend that you link a Google+ Local page of any kind to a directory page. In fact, I will go so far as to say that no third party should ever be creating Google+ Local pages for businesses. Those should always, always belong to/be in the control of the business owner, and not anyone else. So, while I wasn't able to access that very important final link to get what's going on here, I do think you have reason for concern, but how harmful the situation may be isn't something I can ascertain unless you can publish your actual client's own details so that the nuances of the situation are clear.
-
John,
Not quite sure what you're asking there, homey. What is your definition of a network?
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
-
Question RE: Links in Headers, Footers, Content, and Navigation
This question is regarding this Whiteboard Friday from October 2017 (https://moz.com/blog/links-headers-footers-navigation-impact-seo). Sorry that I am a little late to the party, but I wanted to see if someone could help out. So, in theory, if header links matter less than in-content links, and links lower on the page have their anchor text value stripped from them, is there any point of linking to an asset in the content that is also in the header other than for user experience (which I understand should be paramount)? Just want to be clear.Also, if in-content links are better than header links, than hypothetically an industry would want to find ways to organically link to landing pages rather than including that landing page in the header, no? Again, this is just for a Google link equity perspective, not a user experience perspective, just trying to wrap my head around the lesson. links-headers-footers-navigation-impact-seo
White Hat / Black Hat SEO | | 3VE0 -
Question regarding subdomains and duplicate content
Hey everyone, I have another question regarding duplicate content. We are planning on launching a new sector in our industry to satisfy a niche. Our main site works as a directory with listings with NAP. The new sector that we are launching will be taking all of the content on the main site and duplicating it on a subdomain for the new sector. We still want the subdomain to rank organically, but I'm having struggles between putting a rel=canonical back to main site, or doing a self-referencing canonical, but now I have duplicates. The other idea is to rewrite the content on each listing so that the menu items are still the same, but the listing description is different. Do you think this would be enough differentiating content that it won't be seen as a duplicate? Obviously make this to be part of the main site is the best option, but we can't do that unfortunately. Last question, what are the advantages or disadvantages of doing a subdomain?
White Hat / Black Hat SEO | | imjonny0 -
Backlink Question
I have a backlink on a very popular sports news site PR5 this is a sitewide link. The link is near the top on righthand side. As you scroll down, the page keeps loading more and more information. According to my Google webmaster tools the link is on the site over 21,400 pages. As the stories being submitted are new most of the pages have no PR however there are around 30-40 categories that have PR ranging from 0-4. According to my AHREFS account on a daily basis it picks up between 100-200 new links with on average around 10-20 being lost as the stories are being removed. Would anyone advise I just ask for my link to be on the category pages only or should I leave it as it is? Many Thanks in Advance for any Feedback.
White Hat / Black Hat SEO | | Palmbourne0 -
301 domain name URL variants for canonicalization question in htaccess?
#1 RewriteCond %{HTTP_HOST} ^xyz.com [NC] RewriteRule ^(.*)$ http://www.xyz.com/$1 [L,R=301] What I want to do here is to redirect URLs that have omitted the “www.” prefix to the full “www.xyz.com” home page URL. That means the home page URL http://xyz.com will not resolve on its own, but instead will redirect to http://www.xyz.com (without trailing slash). #2 RewriteCond %{THE_REQUEST} ^[A-Z]{3,9}\ /([^/]+/)*(default|index).(html|php|htm)\ HTTP/ [NC] RewriteRule ^(([^/]+/)*)(default|main|index).(html|php|htm)$ http://www.xyz.com/$1 [L,R=301] What I want to do here is to ensure that any home page URL that includes several versions of explicit page name references, such as default.htm or index.html, will be redirected to the canonical home page URL, http://www.xyz.com (without trailing slash). Are the rewrite rules correct? Thanks in advance!
White Hat / Black Hat SEO | | esiow20130 -
LOCAL SEO / Ranking for the difficult 'service areas' outside of the primary location?
It's generally not too hard to rank in Google Places and organically for your primary location. However if you are a service area business looking to rank for neighboring cities or service areas, Google makes this much tougher. Andrew Shotland mentions the obvious and not so obvious options: Service Area pages ranking organically, getting a real/virtual address, boost geo signals, and using zip codes instead of service area circle. But I am wondering if anyone had success with other methods? Maybe you have used geo-tagging in a creative way? This is a hurdle that many local business are struggling with and any experience or thoughts will be much appreciated
White Hat / Black Hat SEO | | vmialik1 -
Local area coverage
Hi Moz people... I have a little one that i can't quite get my head into the best way of achieving the clients goals. My client has a local business but also travels. His area coverage is around 50 miles from his base. He also has a few skills, all under the main discipline. When users search for his skills set, they would search for a specific skill against where they live ie. "skill1 in city A" What is the best way concentrate on these locations, and make sure his is targeting them? I know int he old days dynamic pages where created for each location (now black hat?), but I don't think this is now the best way forward? Any help, tips or just 'look at this' would really help me out.
White Hat / Black Hat SEO | | Jimboroberts0 -
Link directories question
Looking over a clients site and they have a bunch of link directory links that seem very skeptical to me, but the mozrank and authority seem to be ok on the home page. One directory is addlinkzfree and they have the same template and layout as a few other directories this client has. Link page has no juice whatsover, but home page has PA 54, MR 5.04 and root domain is DA 45. At first glance this would appear to be respectable numbers right? But the title of the directory and multitude of links lead me to think its nothing but a link farm. Should I advise the client to run and try to remove links from these type sites even though home page has decent scores? Im of the mindset that anything diredctory with links, free, partners etc in title need be avoided. Would appreciate any backup on this or am I just being paranoid?
White Hat / Black Hat SEO | | anthonytjm0 -
Partners and Customers logo listing and links
We have just created a program where we list the customers that use our software and a link to their websites on a new "Customers" page. We expect to have upwards of 100 logos with links back to their sites. I want to be sure this isn't bordering on gray or black hat link building. I think it is okay since they are actual users of our software. But there is still that slight doubt. Along these same lines, would you recommend adding a nofollow or noindex tag? Thanks for your help.
White Hat / Black Hat SEO | | PerriCline0