Using the same content on different TLD's
-
HI Everyone,
We have clients for whom we are going to work with in different countries but sometimes with the same language.
For example we might have a client in a competitive niche working in Germany, Austria and Switzerland (Swiss German) ie we're going to potentially rewrite our website three times in German,
We're thinking of using Google's href lang tags and use pretty much the same content - is this a safe option, has anyone actually tries this successfully or otherwise?
All answers appreciated.
Cheers,
Mel.
-
Short answer: Using the same content on different country-targeted TLDs is generally not a problem.
The explanation:
1. Matt Cutts, the head of Google's web-spam team, says in this video that what you describe is generally not a problem (because you're not being a spammer who is trying to game the system). You can have the same content on different international domains under the same company / brand.
2. I'd review the international best SEO practices described here by Google just to make sure you're all in the clear. Google says you shouldn't worry too much about it, either. But I'd be sure to follow all of these guidelines -- geo-targeting settings for each domain in Webmaster Tools, for example -- in general to "tell" Google that you've got different TLDs targeting different countries.
So, having sites with similar content at multiple international domains should be fine.
Good luck! I hope everything's clear.
-
Coinidentally, I just touched on that today here http://moz.com/community/q/duplicate-title-tags-how-to-solve-that
I would go the way of subfolder over subdomain. There is a lot of info out there, but the crux of it comes down to all traffic improving domain rank for a single TLD. If you go the route of ccTLDs instead of subfolders, then you're spitting that rank among those domains. What circumstances would prevent you from concentrate all link juice to one domain? Then that duplicate content issue you're fearing becomes a nonissue.
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
-
Community Discussion: Are You Optimizing Your Brand's Content for Featured Snippets?
My latest post on the Moz Blog, Featured Snippets: A Dead-Simple Tactic for Making, explores how to keep Featured Snippets once you have them. I'm curious to know how many brands are actively working to get in the answer box, and for those who are, what's been the results?
Intermediate & Advanced SEO | | ronell-smith2 -
Migrating From Parameter-Driven URL's to 'SEO Friendly URL's (Slugs)
Hi all, hope you're all good and having a wonderful Friday morning. At the moment we have over 20,000+ live products on our ecomms site, however, all of the products are using non-seo friendly URL's (/product?p=1738 etc) and we're looking at deploying SEO friendly url's such as (/product/this-is-product-one) etc. As you could imagine, making such a change on a big ecomms site will be a difficult task and we will have to take on A LOT of content changes, href-lang changes, affiliate link tests and a big 301 task. I'm trying to get some analysis together to pitch the Tech guys, but it's difficult, I do understand that this change has it's benefits for SEO, usability and CTR - but I need some more info. Keywords in the slugs - what is it's actual SEO weight? Has anyone here recently converted from using parameter based URL's to keyword-based slugs and seen results? Also, what are the best ways of deploying this? Add a canonical and 301? All comments greatly appreciated! Brett
Intermediate & Advanced SEO | | Brett-S0 -
Is the image property really required for Google's breadcrumbs structured data type?
In its structured data (i.e., Schema.org) documentation, Google says that the "image" property is required for the breadcrumbs data type. That seems new to me, and it seems unnecessary for breadcrumbs. Does anyone think this really matters to Google? More info about breadcrumbs data type:
Intermediate & Advanced SEO | | Ryan-Ricketts
https://developers.google.com/search/docs/data-types/breadcrumbs I asked Google directly here:
https://twitter.com/RyanRicketts/status/7554782668788531220 -
Should I be using meta robots tags on thank you pages with little content?
I'm working on a website with hundreds of thank you pages, does it make sense to no follow, no index these pages since there's little content on them? I'm thinking this should save me some crawl budget overall but is there any risk in cutting out the internal links found on the thank you pages? (These are only standard site-wide footer and navigation links.) Thanks!
Intermediate & Advanced SEO | | GSO0 -
Google crawling different content--ever ok?
Here are a couple of scenarios I'm encountering where Google will crawl different content than my users on initial visit to the site--and which I think should be ok. Of course, it is normally NOT ok, I'm here to find out if Google is flexible enough to allow these situations: 1. My mobile friendly site has users select a city, and then it displays the location options div which includes an explanation for why they may want to have the program use their gps location. The user must choose the gps, the entire city, or he can enter a zip code, or choose a suburb of the city, which then goes to the link chosen. OTOH it is programmed so that if it is a Google bot it doesn't get just a meaningless 'choose further' page, but rather the crawler sees the page of results for the entire city (as you would expect from the url), So basically the program defaults for the entire city results for google bot, but for for the user it first gives him the initial ability to choose gps. 2. A user comes to mysite.com/gps-loc/city/results The site, seeing the literal words 'gps-loc' in the url goes out and fetches the gps for his location and returns results dependent on his location. If Googlebot comes to that url then there is no way the program will return the same results because the program wouldn't be able to get the same long latitude as that user. So, what do you think? Are these scenarios a concern for getting penalized by Google? Thanks, Ted
Intermediate & Advanced SEO | | friendoffood0 -
Removing Dynamic "noindex" URL's from Index
6 months ago my clients site was overhauled and the user generated searches had an index tag on them. I switched that to noindex but didn't get it fast enough to avoid being 100's of pages indexed in Google. It's been months since switching to the noindex tag and the pages are still indexed. What would you recommend? Google crawls my site daily - but never the pages that I want removed from the index. I am trying to avoid submitting hundreds of these dynamic URL's to the removal tool in webmaster tools. Suggestions?
Intermediate & Advanced SEO | | BeTheBoss0 -
Website monitoring online censorship in China - what's holding us back?
We run https://greatfire.org, a non-profit website which lets you test if a website or keyword is blocked or otherwise censored in China. There are a number of websites that nominally offer this service, and many of them rank better than us in Google. However, we believe this is unfortunate since their testing methods are inaccurate and/or not transparent. More about that further down*. We started GreatFire in February, 2011 as a reaction to ever more pervasive online censorship in China (where we are based). Due to the controversy of the project and the political situation here, we've had to remain anonymous. Still, we've been able to reach out to other websites and to users. We currently have around 3000 visits per month out of which about 1000 are from organic search. However, SEO has been a headache for us from the start. There are many challenges in running this project and our team is small (and not making any money from this). Those users that do find us on relevant keywords seem to be happy since they spend a long time on the website. Examples: websites blocked in china: 6 minutes+
Intermediate & Advanced SEO | | GreatFire.org
great firewall of china test: 8 minutes+ So, here are some SEO questions related to GreatFire.org. If you can give us advice it would be greatly appreciated and you would truly help us in our mission to bring transparency and spread awareness of online censorship in China: Each URL tested in our database has its own page. Our database contains 25000 URLs (and growing). We have previously been advised that one SEO problem is that we appear to have a lot of duplicate data, since the individual URL pages are very similar. Because of this, we've added automatic tags to most pages. We then exclude certain pages from this rule that are considered high-priority, such as domains ranked highly by Alexa and keywords that are blocked. Is this a good approach? Do you think the duplicate content factor is still holding us back? Can we improve? Some of our pages have meta descriptions, but most don't. Should we add them on URL pages? They would be set to a certain pattern which again might make them look very similar and could cause the duplicate content warning to go off. Suggestions? Many of the users that find us in Google search for keywords that aren't relevant to what we offer, such as "https.facebook.com" and lots of variations of that. Obviously, they leave the website quickly. This means that the average time that people coming from Google are spending on our website is quite low (2 minutes) and the bounce rate quite high (68%). Can we or should we do something to discourage being found on non-relevant keywords? Are there any other technical problems you can see that are holding our SEO back? Thank you very much! *Competitors ranking higher searching for "test great firewall china": 1. http://www.greatfirewallofchina.org. They are only a frontend website for this service: http://www.viewdns.info/chinesefirewall. ViewDNS only checks for DNS records which is one of three major methods to block websites. So many websites and keywords that are not DNS poisoned, but are blocked by IP or by keyword, will be specified as available, when in fact they are blocked. Our system uses actual test locations inside China to try to download the URL to be tested and checks for different types of censorship. 2. http://www.websitepulse.com/help/testtools.china-test.html. This is a better service in that they seem to do actual testing from inside China. However, they only display partial results, they do not explain test results and they do not offer historic data on whether the URL was blocked in the past. We do all of that.0 -
Robots.txt: Link Juice vs. Crawl Budget vs. Content 'Depth'
I run a quality vertical search engine. About 6 months ago we had a problem with our sitemaps, which resulted in most of our pages getting tossed out of Google's index. As part of the response, we put a bunch of robots.txt restrictions in place in our search results to prevent Google from crawling through pagination links and other parameter based variants of our results (sort order, etc). The idea was to 'preserve crawl budget' in order to speed the rate at which Google could get our millions of pages back in the index by focusing attention/resources on the right pages. The pages are back in the index now (and have been for a while), and the restrictions have stayed in place since that time. But, in doing a little SEOMoz reading this morning, I came to wonder whether that approach may now be harming us... http://www.seomoz.org/blog/restricting-robot-access-for-improved-seo
Intermediate & Advanced SEO | | kurus
http://www.seomoz.org/blog/serious-robotstxt-misuse-high-impact-solutions Specifically, I'm concerned that a) we're blocking the flow of link juice and that b) by preventing Google from crawling the full depth of our search results (i.e. pages >1), we may be making our site wrongfully look 'thin'. With respect to b), we've been hit by Panda and have been implementing plenty of changes to improve engagement, eliminate inadvertently low quality pages, etc, but we have yet to find 'the fix'... Thoughts? Kurus0