Big Problems Using &'s in Business Name?

[gbkevin]

One of my clients is a law firm with a Business name like the following:
Rosenberg & Dalgren, LLP

They get A TON of organic search traffic on their brand name above, but most people (95%) search "Rosenberg and Dalgren" instead of "Rosenberg & Dalgren". **Notice use of ampersand being used and alternatively, the word "and" being used. ** Currently, their local citations across the Internet (G+, YP, Yelp, etc) use the business name, "Rosenberg & Dalgren, LLP" (with ampersand).

Here is the dilemma we are in...

When someone searches "Rosenberg and Dalgren" in Google (which the majority of our search traffic does), Google does NOT show our local one-box on the right hand side of the SERPs (see example of a one-box I am referring to here http://blumenthals.com/blog/wp-content/uploads/2013/09/Screen-Shot-2013-09-28-at-9.59.58-AM.png).

But when someone searches "Rosenberg & Dalgren" in Google, it does trigger our local one-box with photos, review ratings, links to our Google+ Local page, etc. WHICH IS GREAT! They have AWESOME reviews that command powerful social proof. We want that local one-box to show up!

So my question is, what can I do to trigger that local one-box for both brand name searches for "Rosenberg & Dalgren" as well as "Rosenberg and Dalgren"?

I am considering changing our NAP citations to have the business name be "Rosenberg and Dalgren" since that is what 95% of people search in Google to find them. I am guessing Google doesn't quite understand that "Rosenberg and Dalgren" is linked to "Rosenberg & Dalgren" via what it sees in the knowledge graph of the Internet (citations, website, etc).

So how best should I handle this and get that local one-box triggering for the majority of our branded search traffic?

Lastly, what is the best advice for including company/corporate designations in the NAP citations? (ie. LLP, LLC, Inc, etc)

Thank you for any help and guidance! We appreciate it!

[MiriamEllis]

Hi Again,

I figured that must be the case, with the fictitious name. Totally respect your NDA, but need to mention that this makes it impossible to research nuances that might be affecting the firm uniquely. There could be so many factors involved.

Regarding the comma, best practice is to use a single format across all listings of the business, whether with or without the comma. I've never seen this issue formally addressed by Google, so we have to go with a 'it's safe to say' stance here. In other words, it's safe to say that keeping your business title formatting identical will free you of the possibility of problems, while any discrepancy might put you at risk for problems. Upshot: aim for total consistency here.

[gbkevin]

Hi Guys, thanks so much for some great insights and thoughts on how best to proceed.  I am going to try some of your suggestions and I will be sure to report back on any findings and results.

Miriam - I am using a closely similar, albeit fictitious name, because I had to sign an NDA with this law firm.

I do have a final, somewhat related question for you two...

When building citations, should the law firm list their business name as...

Rosenberg & Dalgren, LLP (notice us of comma before LLP)

• or -
  Rosenberg & Dalgren LLP (notice no comma before LLP)

Does it even make a difference whatsoever?

Thanks!

[MiriamEllis]

Gbkevin - one other thing I wanted to ask about. Where is the business located, and are you providing the real name of the law practice? When I searched for the business name you used, I found zero record of it in Google, so I'm kind of surmising that this may not be the actual business name. Please let me know if this is so, and also, the country in which the business is located.

[MiriamEllis]

Hi Dana,

Thanks for the list of ampersand brands! Fun.

The thing about this that is odd to me, from a local perspective, is that I know Google can surface a onebox/knowledge graph for law firms with both the ampersand and non-ampersand versions of their names. I've seen it. This may all boil down to authority or a lack thereof. Interesting.

[danatanseo]

I've seen this problem rear its ugly head in a number of instances that cause various, interesting problems. For example, there are two major Audio Video brands: Allen & Heath and K & M Stands that both feature ampersands in their branding. The problem we've had with it is from a database perspective. Ampersands just cause all kinds of problems. Still, these brands have been around a long time.

Think "M&Ms" - no one really searches "M and M" [unless it's "Eminem" ]  - So, I think it's a matter of choosing one for branding purposes and sticking to it. In your case, with a law firm, searchers are really searching proper names (I'm thinking). So if I were to search for a string of last names, I might be more likely to use "and" instead of "&" - Until the "&" becomes part of the branding, I think Google is probably going to defer to the "and" version. Even if the law firm was huge, I'm not sure it would ever reach that level of brand recognition. Some successful brands with ampersands [Just for fun!]:

H&M, A&W Rootbeer, A&P Grocers, Proctor & Gamble, B&H Photo, Bang & Olufson, AT&T, Ben&Jerry's, Arm&Hammer, Boys&Girls Clubs of America, A&M Records, Bed, Bath & Beyond, Johnson & Johnson, H&R Block, Ernst&Young, Fod&Wine, Black&Decker

(Thanks to Sporcle, but they left M&Ms off their list! How can that be?) Thanks for the fun question

[MiriamEllis]

Hi GBKevin,

Wow - I find your question extremely interesting. Common wisdom has it that Google understands that '&' and 'and' are equivalents in Local, but that it's a wise idea to stick to one version or the other in your citation building. Your client's scenario appears to indicate that Google is differentiating between the ampersand and the '&', and that is fascinating. So, basically, it appears that Google is only considering the business as being onebox/knowledge graph-worthy if you are searching for the exact name version that you've provided in your citations, website, etc. (Rosenberg & Dalgren). I must tell you that this is the first instance I have a ever encountered of this issue and don't have ready advice to give because of that.

It would be interesting to test whether editing all citations would reverse the situation - in other words, that the client would get a onebox/knowledge graph display for the 'and' version and lose it for the ampersand version. That could be the outcome, but I can't be sure. If Google is being that sensitive about an ampersand, some questions that come to my mind relate to whether the change to 'and' would require re-verification of the Google+ Local listing (name changes often do) and whether the client would temporarily lose rankings or reviews if you made these changes. Again, I'm not sure about this, because I've just not seen it come up before.

I've done some searching in the Google and Your Business Forum to see if I can find any reports of scenarios like yours and am coming up empty-handed. I'm going to ask around a bit in the Local SEO community to see if anyone I know has encountered a similar issue. Sorry not to have clear advice on this, but there's always something new to learn.

Finally, it's perfectly fine to use designations like LLC, PC, etc., if these are part of your legal business name. Google is cool with this. What they don't like is if a business name as too many capital letters in it (i.e. BEST PLUMBER).

If I do get a response from any of my colleagues, I'll return to this thread. If not, I'd recommend you consider posting about this in the Google and Your Business Forum to see if you get any nibbles.