Keywords with locations
-
I've seen quite a few threads that orbit around my questions, but none in the last year, so I'll ask it
I'm seeing some strange results when testing various keywords with and without locations included. For a foundation repair company in Indiana, we've optimized for all the big cities, since the company services the whole state. Here's a sample of weird stuff:
Test 1: If I set my location (all other Google 'helps' turned off) to Indianapolis and search
'foundation repair' result is #3
'foundation repair indianapolis' result is #20
'indiana foundation repair' result is #18
Test 2: Location set to the small town the company is based in (Rossville, IN)
'foundation repair' result is #1
'foundation repair rossville' result is #3 behind other companies located in Rossville, GA, and Rossville, PA!!
I suppose I was under the impression that the ip location data Google gathers would weigh more heavily than how place names are optimized as part of keywords (or just that the physical location would supplant the place name typed into the search if it happened to be the same). But according to these tests, it seems that inferred location is by far a secondary factor.
I can deduce that we're more optimized than our competitors for 'foundation repair', but less optimized for keywords with place names in them (we feel like we'd be verging on stuffing if we did more).
Am I missing something here? Has anyone else seen this sort of thing?
-
This makes sense, and is a good way of framing it. Thanks very much.
Your answer here made me see that my two tests (Indianapolis and Rossville) actually showed somewhat different algorithm principles.
I understand that with the increase of mobile and thus 'conversational' voice searches, the inclusion of a place name is less and less common. Thus with the 'Rossville' example, since 'Rossville' is ambiguous and was not differentiated from other Rossvilles I can see how others might creep in.
Even so, I would think Google would be programmed to first see that my location is set in Rossville, IN, and thus conclude that Rossville, IN must be the one I'm referring to. If every search was done on mobile, then I can maybe understand seeing Rossville, PA, and Rossville, GA in the SERPs. But even then, not in position 1 and 2 before Rossville, IN, where I am located...
So, when I specified a very unambiguous place name (Indianapolis), while my location is set to that same unambiguous place (Indianapolis, IN), would Google's algos look outside of Indianapolis, like it did with Rossville? It turns out the inverse process is happening here (I think). I went back to look at the results for 'foundation repair indianapolis' and found that the listings were extra-localized, starting with businesses that have an indianapolis address, and moving concentrically outward from there.
But again, we rank highly when location is set to Indianapolis, IN, and simply search 'foundation repair'. Apparently in this case, when a search string does not specify disambiguated place-names, Google produces items related to {foundation repair} in the general vicinity of {indianapolis}, based on the inferred location data, instead of the other approach which yields limited results within the city. This is surprising to me (though beneficial to us).
I'm probably constructing too detailed of a process here based on just a couple small tests. I'd love any other input. And sorry for the novel!! I'm trying to work all this out. It's an interesting discussion though. I hope it's helpful to someone in the forums.
-
Good Morning!
Ah, I think I see what you were explaining now. So, this is how I find it most helpful to think of this.
If I am located in Topeka, Kansas (or have my location set there) and I search for 'hotels', Google assumes that I am looking for a hotel near me.
But, if I am located in Topeka, Kansas (or have my location set there) and I search for 'hotels Dallas, TX' I'm making it very clear to Google that I am looking for lodgings elsewhere.
In other words, if I don't tell Google to be specific to some region other than my own, Google assumes I want the results nearest me. But if I am specific that I want results from somewhere else by including that location in my query, Google shows me the local results for that location.
-
Thanks for responding Miriam! I really appreciate it.
I suppose my conclusions may not have been expressed well, or made some jumps. First, yes, I was actually really surprised by how strong the inferred location data influenced the results when no place name was typed in the search bar!
It's the second part that surprised me though; that when a location is specified in the search, that the typed location name seems to supersede Google's gathered ip location data. I didn't expect it to work this way -- especially not to the degree of bringing up #1 and #2 listings from totally different regions of the country! Does this make sense or am I still missing something?! Haha
-
Hi Joshua!
I'm a little puzzled by the conclusion your are drawing. Don't your tests prove that inferred location is actually the stronger force here, if your client is ranking highest for non-geo-term searches with your location set to a city rather than including a city in the search phrase? From the result set you've shared, that's how I would read it, but it may be that I am the one who is missing something:)
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
-
Multiple service area pages that rank well. However the primary keyword page tends to bounce around between the pages. How can I stabalise the ranking to the primary page
We have multiple service area pages attached to the primary keyword for the site which arent in the navigation and we have the primary page which is in the navigation. Currently Google is choosing different service area pages to rank for the primary keyword so the rankings bounce around a lot for the keyword when it doesn't have a service area target in it. Eg work shirts vs work shirts brisbane.
Local Website Optimization | | jonathan.k0 -
Looking to create a "best practice" doc on location pages. Anyone know of a useful resource?
I'm working for a few regional brands and would like to create a best practice doc for the structure of a location page. Has anyone seen anything recent regarding a structure for local, regional and national pages? Thanks all, Kevin
Local Website Optimization | | Kevin.Bekker1 -
Does having a host located in a different country than the location of the website/website's audience affects SEO?
For example if the website is example.ro and the hosting would be on Amazon Web Services. Thanks for your help!
Local Website Optimization | | IrinaIoana0 -
Applying NAP Local Schema Markup to a Virtual Location: spamming or not?
I have a client that has multiple virtual locations to show website visitors where they provide delivery services. These are individual pages that include unique phone numbers, zip codes, city & state. However there is no address (this is just a service area). We wanted to apply schematic markup to these landing pages. Our development team successfully applied schema to the phone, state, city, etc. However for just the address property they said VIRTUAL LOCATION. This checked out fine on the Google structured data testing tool. Our question is this; can just having VIRTUAL LOCATION for the address property be construed as spamming? This landing page is providing pertinent information for the end user. However since there is no brick and mortar address I'm trying to determine if having VIRTUAL LOCATION as the value could be frowned upon by Google. Any insight would be very helpful. Thanks
Local Website Optimization | | RosemaryB1 -
Theory: Local Keywords are Hurting National Rankings?
I've read a good amount here and in other blog posts about strategies for national brands to rank locally as well with local landing pages, citations, etc. I have noticed something strange that I'd like to hear if anyone else is running into, or if anyone has a definitive answer for. I'm looking at a custom business printing company where the products can and are often shipped out of state, so it's a national brand. On each product page, the client is throwing in a few local keywords near where the office is to help rank for local variations. When looking at competitors that have a lower domain authority, lower volume of linking root domains, less content on the page, and other standard signals, they are ranking nationally better than the client. The only thing they're doing that could be better is bolding and throwing in the page keyword 5-10 times (which looks unnatural). But when you search for keyword + home city, the client ranks better. My hypothesis is that since the client is optimizing product pages for local keywords as well as national, it is actually hurting on national searches because it's seen as local-leaning business. Has anyone run into this before, or have a definitive answer?
Local Website Optimization | | Joe.Robison2 -
Closed Location Pages - 301 to open locations?
I work with several thousand local businesses and have a listing page for each on my site. Recently a large chunk of these locations closed, and a number of these pages rank well for localized keywords. I'm trying to figure out the best course of action.
Local Website Optimization | | Andrew_Mac
What I've done so far is make a note on each of the closed location pages that says something to the effect of "This location is currently closed. Here are some nearby options" and provide links to the location pages of 3 open places nearby. The closed location pages are continuing to rank well, but conversion rates from visitors landing on these pages has dropped. What I'm considering doing is 301ing these pages to the nearest open location page. I'm hoping this will preserve the ranking of the page for keywords for which the nearby location is still relevant, while not hurting user experience by serving up a closed location. I'm also thinking of, as a second step, creating new pages (with slightly altered URLs) for the closed listings. They won't rank as well obviously, but if someone searches for the address or even the street of the closed location, my hope is that I could still capture some of that traffic and hope to convert it through someone clicking through to an open location from there. I spoke with someone about this second step and he thought it sounded spammy. My thinking is, combined with the 301, I'm telling Google that the page it is currently ranking well no longer has the importance it once did and that the page I'm 301ing to does, but that the content on the page I'm creating for the closed location still has enough value to justify the newly created page. I'd really appreciate thoughts from the community on this. Thanks!0 -
RE: Keep Losing Keyword Ranking Position for Targeted Keyword Terms Can't Figure It Out, Please Help!!!
Hey Mozzers, I am pulling my hair out trying to figure out why one of my clients keeps losing their SERP for their targeted keyword terms. We're actively pursuing local citations, making sure their NAP is consistent across the board and refining on-page content to make sure that we're maximizing opportunities. The only thing I've found is a 4xx error that my Moz 'crawl diagnostics' keep returning back to me, however, when I check to see if there's any problems with Google Webmaster Tools, it doesn't return any errors. Is this 4xx error the culprit? Are there any suggestions any of you could give me to help me improve the SERP for my targeted keyword terms. Anyway, any and all insight can help. I'm at my wits end. Thanks for reading and for all of your help!
Local Website Optimization | | maxcarnage0 -
Search Result Discrepancy: Keyword "Dresses" shows international sites in the search results of Google.co.in.
Hi All, What would be the reason that Google shows international websites in the first page results while there are huge local players available. Eg: Dresses - Keyword that shows results with almost all the results from International websites whereas the local big players in the same category are not shown. This is not the case for other keywords like Women dresses, Clothing, Shoes etc., Is it a bug or any particular reasons? Thanks,
Local Website Optimization | | Myntra0