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 -
How accurate are google keyword estimates for local search volume?
We've all used the Google Adwords Keywords Tool, and if you're like me you use it to analyze data for a particular region. Does anyone know how accurate this data is? For example, I'd like to know how often people in Savannah, Georgia search for the word "forklift". I figure that Google can give me two kinds of data when I ask for how many people in Savannah search for "forklift". They might actually give me rough data for how many people in the region actually searched for the term "forklift" over the last 12 months, then divide by 12 to give me a monthly average. Or they might use data on a much broader region and then adjust for Savannah's population size. In other words, they might say, in the US people searched for "forklift" and average of 1,000,000 times a month. The US has a population of 300,000,000. Savannah has a population of about 250,000. 250,000 / 300,000,000 is 0.00083. 1,000,000 times 0.00083 is 208. So, "forklift" is searched in Savannah an average of 208 times. 1. is obviously much more accurate. I suspect that 2. is the model that Google is actually using. Does anyone know with reasonable certainty which it is? Thanks,
Local Website Optimization | | aj613
Adam0 -
Service Area Location Pages vs. User Experience
I'm familiar with the SAB best practices outlined here. Here's my issue: Doing local landing pages as described here might not be ideal from a user experience point of view. Having a "Cities We Serve" or "Service Areas" link in the main navigation isn't necessarily valuable to the user when the city-specific landing pages are all places within a 15-mile radius of the SAB's headquarters. It would just look like the company did it for SEO. It wouldn't look natural. Seriously, it feels like best practices are totally at odds with user experience here. If I absolutely must create location pages for 10 or so municipalities within my client's service area, I'd rather NOT put the service areas as a primary navigation item. It is not useful to the user. Anyone who sees that the company provides services in the [name of city] metropolitan area will already understand that the company can service their town that is 5 miles away. It is self-evident. For example**, who would wonder whether a plumbing company with a Los Angeles address also services Beverly Hills?** It's just... silly. But the Moz guide says I've got to do those location pages! And that I've got to put them high up in the navigation! This is a problem because we've got to do local SEO, but we also have to provide an ideal experience. Thoughts?
Local Website Optimization | | Greenery1 -
Local Search Location Keyword Use
Hello. Whats the best way to approach the use of location phrases within the page content itself? Say your based in a large city but also work in smaller surrounding areas, would you target the main location i.e. "London" on the home page and the main product/service pages directly. Or would you leave this all to deeper pages where you can more easily add value? I can imagine that the inclusion of the location i.e. "London" might compromise the quality of the writing. And put off the users from other locations. For example on the Home Page if your targeting:
Local Website Optimization | | GrouchyKids
Keyword: Widgets
Location: London Widgets in London and Beyond For the best Widgets in London come to... And for a key product or service page if your targeting:
Keyword: Car Widgets
Location: London Car Widgets London and Beyond For the best Car Widgets in London come to... On deeper pages its going to be easier to make this work, but how would you approach it on the main pages and homepage? Hope that all makes sense?0 -
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 -
Moving to a new Location: SEO Website
I'm moving to a different state and want to keep my business and clients in both locations. Is it better to build two separate sites, one for Ohio locations and create a new site for Tennessee content? (www.ohiosite.com & www.tennesseesite.com) Or is it best to keep one site, and install a second wordpress site in a separate folder like ( www.site.com + www.site.com/tennessee )
Local Website Optimization | | morg454540 -
Different page for each service at each location? Where does it end!
If we have 15 different locations and 10 different services, do we need to make keyword targeted landing pages for each combination? Is that actually the best method or is there some alternative? For example, if we are a law office specializing in slip and falls and car accidents, do we need a page for EACH location for each service (ie. Miami Car Accident Lawyer, Miami Slip and Fall Lawyer, Orlando Slip and Fall Lawyer, Orlando Car Accident Lawyer) etc. to maximize our ranking potential in each location? Is there a better way or are we left with this until Google gets "smarter"?
Local Website Optimization | | RickyShockley0 -
How Best to do implement a Branch Locator for a Website with invididual location category pages
Hi All, We have an ecommerce Website with multiple locations for our stores and we currently display separate location specific pages for the different categories and sub categories. This has helped us previously to rank well for local search in each of the areas we have a store but over the last few months since humingbird, our local rankings on some things have dip a little . We want to implement a branch locator of some description to improve the user experience. From looking at other websites with branch locators, they tend to a separate button/page with which you can search for a branch etc. However, they don't have location specific pages. My query is should I do it so if a user comes in on a specific category location page and follows it through to product page , then to have a tab on the product page displaying the local branch from which he can come in. My thinking here is that , is that it would help confirm my local citations and help improve local rankings. Or Should the local branch be displayed on the local category pages instead or as well ?. If a user comes in from the homepage or not on a specific location page, then the branch locator will allow them to search for a specific branch. Should I also put in a branch locator as a separate page or can It be in more places. I don't want to damage anything which may have an effect on rankings due to citations and NAP on the location specific pages. Any advice or good examples to look at would be greatly appreciated thanks Sarah.
Local Website Optimization | | SarahCollins1