Localized vs Professional Images
-
When it comes to local directory sites such as Google+ Local for business, Yelp, Bing places for business, etc., what is everyone's opinion on the type of images that should be used?
I am trying to decide if I want to use 10 professionally produced images (the same 10 will be used across hundreds of locations under the same brand across the country) or if each location should use their own unique 10 images that show localized images from that exact location.
When it comes to profile completeness, I think each site does not care, as long as they represent your company well. However, I am curious if there are any case studies or the like that show that one image type is better to use over the other in terms of helping customers make decisions to contact your business or not.
really appreciate any comments you have to share.
-
i think my solution will be a unique exterior storefront image of each location and then 9 images that show the range of products and services offered at all locations, using the same 9 images on all like brand profiles. so, the primary image will be unique and the 9 supporting images will be the same across each brand (200-300 locations each).
If a location wants to go the extra mile and send me 9 unique images to use, I will add those as provided, but not make it a requirement.
the logistics of trying to get 921 busy business owners to send me 10 images that meet my requirements is nearly impossible, so I have to be realistic in my solution for now.
-
Hi Brad, I think you are right on with your instinct. You are, after all, a consumer as well.
While it may not in fact hurt your rankings online to use the same photo for all locations, I would suggest that the end-user would appreciate the opportunity to see location-specific images. That is what they are there for.
However, if you do have the 10 photos, you could offer these up to what I assume are either your partners, franchisors, or licensees as a benefit while making the suggestion that they also get their own images.
-
Thanks for your input, Miriam.
My instinct is that while local images set a stronger expectation for customers of what they can actually expect when they visit each location, ultimately, it probably has little influence on whether or not they decided to come in the first place.
Also, yes, each location will have an image of the outside of the building (storefront) as the first image and then probably the same general images for the other 9 spots.
Again, thank you for your feedback.
Anyone else have any insight?
-
Hi Brad,
Your question is so great, and I'm sorry not to be able to point right to a study that's been done along the lines you've mentioned. Unfortunately, I've never seen such a study defining that certain types of images engender better impressions than others, beyond people stating that the images should be appropriate and of high quality.
I think the question here is one of uniqueness vs. reasonableness. If the company has the ability to produce thousands of images (taking your hundreds of locations into account) then a completely unique approach might be possible, but this really seems like an enormous undertaking. Remember, too, that it is typically only the first photo uploaded to the Google+ Local dashboard that would appear side-by-side in something like local results, so I'm not sure there would be a genuine issue with duplication, if you could ensure that at least the first image on each profile was unique. This would cut the work down to one unique photo for each physical location, rather than 10 for each location. This might make the project a little easier to handle.
I hope others will comment on this, as it's such a good question, and if anyone has done a case study, please link to it!
-
also, please consider when replying that there may be occasions where several locations are in the same general geography and the likelihood of a customer seeing multiple locations next to one another in search results is probable.
My instinct as a marketer is to say that each location should look different than the others, but is this how consumers think?
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
-
How can I improve my rank on Google Local?
I am bringing this topic up again. Last year, I suddenly stopped ranking for Google Local search results. I tried backing away and hoping it would correct itself, but it has not. When I do a search for myself, I rarely show up in the results anymore, and this image shows AFTER I've zoomed WAY in just to find myself. I think it has something to do with many fishing charters having the same address. I read the Moz article about which signals are most important, but to be quite honest, I don't think any of these competitors really bother with SEO or even have filled out their Google My Business in its entirety. They all have way less reviews than I do as well. I really try to do everything right, but it doesn't seem to help. Is there something small ad obvious that I am missing. Any ideas on what to do?
Reviews and Ratings | | CalicoKitty20000 -
Aggregate Rating Markup for Local Restaurant
Hello Moz Community, I am finally getting around to creating markup for a bunch of the sites we work with using JSON-LD. I have a question specifically regarding adding review markup for a local restaurant. It's my understanding that putting the aggregate rating on the homepage never results in stars being shown in the SERP's. So what would be the best practice for taking advantage of all the great Google reviews we've accumulated over the years? These are reviews for the restaurant in general and not for any specific service or product. Should I create a reviews page on the site and use the markup there? Thanks for any and all suggestions.
Reviews and Ratings | | robertsteck0 -
Google My Business - Switching from Local to National Presence
Hi, Before I started with my current employer (a national B2B company), someone set them up with a Google My Business page that has resulted in the home office appearing as a local search result. As a result, our competitors have a much more professional national Knowledge Graph sidebar complete with logo, Wikipedia blurb, social links, etc. displayed while we have a local result with reviews, images, and Google Map location. Since we are a B2B business with a national presence, I am trying to transition from the local to broader company Knowledge Graph result, but I'm struggling to find information on the best steps to remove the local result. While the reviews are improving, this is a service-based business with a B2C element when it comes to end users, so historical reviews have been unkind -- to the point that I'd like to make the transition to a national presence not only to better reflect the entire region we serve, but also to remove as much review visibility as possible. The only option in Google My Business I've seen so far is to report the business as being closed, which, of course, it is not. I know a big Step 1 is to get a new Wikipedia page for the business created. (The company is legitimately deserving of one. I'm still trying to find the most effective approach to tackling this without violating Wikipedia policies. ) Outside of that step, however, is there any sort of process someone can recommend for tackling this local-to-nation Google transition? Thanks, Andrew
Reviews and Ratings | | Andrew_In_Search_of_Answers1 -
Local pack ranking anomaly -- help?
At a bit of a loss on this one... If anyone has any ideas about what's going on or how to tackle this, I'm all ears. One of my clients, an orthodontist, is appearing in the top three organic positions and in the local pack for almost all keywords we're targeting. However, for the keyword "orthodontist" without any location modifiers attached to it, we're appearing in the top three organic results but our Google listing is not appearing in the local pack. The three listings appearing in the local pack are his next-door competitor, one practice that closed almost a year ago, and a practice in two towns over. He and his competitor are the only two orthodontists in this town, so they should theoretically be the two main listings that are being pulled in. The listing for the closed practice is marked as closed on Google and has been reported to Google several times in the last few months. The listing has no website or reviews on it, although it does have an address and a phone number. We have spent months doing aggressive, in-depth NAP/local listing cleanups. We have 24 Google reviews with an average rating of 4.6 stars, and we're organically gathering reviews every week. We went through a site redesign at the beginning of this year, so we now have a mobile responsive website. We are appearing in the local pack for almost every other keyword that we have high organic rankings for, so we know it isn't necessarily an issue with our Google My Business listing. Does anyone have any ideas of what's going on, or what we can do to get our listing to appear in the local pack for this keyword? The keyword "orthodontist" is the single most important keyword to this client and our strategy, so we're open to any and all suggestions or thoughts.
Reviews and Ratings | | mothner0 -
Schema markup for employees and local business on same page - Possible?
Hello, We have some local business sites where we have user submitted reviews. We then post those reviews on that business' page and use the schema aggregate markup. Works like a charm in getting stars in SERPs on branded searches for these location. We already have information about the persons who work at these locations and are about to work out a process where we can get even better data on these persons. Right now they are marked up as employees on the local business pages. Right now the ratings are for the business as a whole, but we are looking at expanding where you can not only submit a location review, but designate which employee you worked with. We work in the health care industry and so you can see why this would make sense. Right now we mark up a local clinic and employees in the following way Local Business > Employee > Person > Name of Person Person Bio > Person info etc We are going back and forth on if this would be worth marking up reviews at the employee level as well. So, on a page each employee would have an aggregate rating and then the location would have an aggregate rating that consists of all of the reviews for that location - a combination of all employees. As I looked through the schema standard for person https://schema.org/Person there is nothing there that shows a markup for the aggregate rating of a person. Also when I look at other more specific business types https://health-lifesci.schema.org/MedicalBusiness same thing. It looks like schema has rating tied to a business vs a person. Right now - the markup validates. It shows up in the SERPs. People are happy. So, I am inclined to say, if it aint broke ... but we are always looking for better ways to present our data to user and to Google. My gut right now, based on how Google is reading things, to just keep the aggregate rating on the location, but start to track reviews on a per employee basis for potential future use. Lemme know what you all think!
Reviews and Ratings | | HeaHea0 -
Why does Google return 1 star reviews in local listings as the "most helpful"?
I have a client who has recently received two 1 star reviews on Google local (unhappy customer and unhappy customers boyfriend). This is affecting an otherwise flourishing business as these two 1 star reviews are displayed prominently when you search for the brand in Google. They have since received more positive reviews, however Google insists on displaying, what they term, the "most helpful" reviews first. Why are these 1 star reviews deemed "most helpful"? In all honesty, they aren't even really that helpful, with the latter verging on slanderous. We are in the process of reporting this one as it personally attacks a member of staff, however, whilst we tentatively wait weeks for a response, I wondered if anyone has any idea on how G decides which reviews are "most helpful"? When there is no option for other users to rate these reviews as helpful (such as on play store).
Reviews and Ratings | | Silkstream0 -
Ups store and local listings
HI,
Reviews and Ratings | | corn2015
Does google look negatively if an address is at a UPS store? A client has their address there because they don't have a physical locaiton yet. Corn1 -
Local review site discovery
Rand and others have shared a link to a free service where you type in a state location and it shows a list of the most used local listings & review sites for that area. I can't find this service or link anywhere. Was this a service that was on getlisted.org that no longer exists?? Anyone know where it is or where it went?
Reviews and Ratings | | clearlyseo1