Specific KW question...
-
Hi,
I have this site: http://www.aerlawgroup.com.
It's ranking very well overall for all targeted KWs. However, I have seen a drop for one main KW: "Los Angeles criminal defense attorney." It currently ranks #8 (it used to be as high as #2). What's interesting is that for similar (yet slightly less competitive KWs, he ranks much better - "Los Angeles Criminal Defense Lawyer."
I'm not trying to be greedy with rankings, but I would love feedback and/or tips regarding any issues that could be contributing to this drop.
Thanks.
-
Hi, thank you. I probably should have specified my question was focused on Organic, not Local. I think he's doing fine on local, given that his office is in Pasadena.
I agree with you 100%. He needs more reviews for his listing. Most of his reviews have gone to Avvo, as real criminal defense clients don't want to leave non-anonymous reviews.
Thanks again for the excellent feedback. I appreciate it.
-
Good question. It's funny to hear you say "less competitive" as all searches related to "legal" and "Los Angeles" are going to be really competitive--fluctuations within the top 10 are normal, and are going to happen. I did a search for those keywords and it seems that your site shows up twice--once in the middle of the local pack, and again in the serps. Your drop in rankings could simply be because so many local listings are showing right now (7 by my search) pushing the serps down the page.
I'm noticing that you don't have any reviews for your local listing, while your competition has 22, 37, 22, and 35 reviews respectively, and are getting the much-coveted "5 stars" next to their local listing. I'd focus on getting some good reviews, as that will help with conversions.
Also, the hummingbird update really changed the chess board on long tail search, which will also effect rankings. The days of creating separate pages for "Los Angeles criminal defense attorney" and "Los Angeles Criminal Defense Lawyer" are over. Google is rewarding high quality sites optimized for the general category, and preferring them for all types of long-tail searches. --Hope this helps!
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
-
Subdomain vs Subdirectory - Specific Case: A big blog in a subdomain
Hi. First of all, I love MOZ and learned a lot about SEO by reading articles here. Thanks for all the knowledge that i received here. I read all the articles about "Subdomain vs Subdirectory" in the MOZ community and I have no doubt that subdirectories are the best option for a blog. But, the company that I work now has a blog with more than 17.000 articles, 1.000 categories and tags, hosted on a subdomain structure. The website has a Domain Authority of 78 (I am working to improve these numbers) and the blog subdomain has the same (78). We had 2.7 million hits per month in the blog and 4.5 million hits per month in the site. I am advising the company to change the blog structure to subfolders inside the domain, but I'm finding resistance to the idea, because the amount of work involved in this change is enormous and there is still the fear of losing traffic. My questions are: Is there any risk of losing traffic with the amount of articles we have? What do we probably get if we change the blog structure to subfolders? Could we have increased authority for the domain? More Traffic? How can I explain to my superiors that we would probably have increase traffic for our keywords? Is there any way to prove or test the gains from this change before we run it? Thanks in Advance.
Intermediate & Advanced SEO | | Marcus.Coelho0 -
Portfolio Image Landing Page Question/Issue
Hello, We have a client with a very image heavy website. They have Portfolio pages with a large number of images. We are currently working on adding more copy to the site but wanted to confirm we are taking the right approach for the images on the site. Under the current structure each image has its own landing page (with no copy) and is fed in (or generated on) to a Portfolio Page. While we know this is not ideal as it would be best to have the images on the Portfolio Page directly or even fill out the landing pages with copy; due to the amount of images and the fact these are only images (and not a 'targeted' page) that would not really be feasible. Aside from the thin content concern these individual landing pages were being indexed so they are showing hundreds of pages on their sitemap.xml and in GSC even though they only have a few actual pages. In the meantime we went into each image-page and placed a canonical tag back to the main Portfolio Page (with the hopes to add content to that page and have it as the ‘overarching’ page). Would this be the right approach? – We considered ‘noindex-follow’ tags but would want the images to be crawled; the issue is because the pages are not on the actual page are we canonicalizing these images to nothing? Any insight would really be appreciated. Thank you in advance.
Intermediate & Advanced SEO | | Ben-R0 -
301 or 404 Question for thin content Location Pages we want to remove
Hello All, I have a Hire Website with many categories and individual location pages for each of the 70 depots we operate. However, being dynamic pages, we have thousands of thin content pages. We have decided to only concentrate on our best performing locations and get rid of the rest as its physically impossible to write unique content for all our location pages for every categories. Therefore my question is. Would it cause me problems by having to many 301's for the location pages I am going to re-direct ( i was only going to send these back to the parent category page) or should I just 404 all those location pages and at some point in the future when we are in a position to concentrate on these locations then redo them with new content ? in terms of url numbers It would affect a few thousand 301's or 404's depending on people thoughts. Also , does anyone know what percentage of thin content on a site should be acceptable ?.. I know , none is best in an ideal world but it would be easier if there we could get away with a little percentage. We have been affected by Panda , so we are trying to tidy things up as best at possible, Any advice greatly appreciated? thanks Peter
Intermediate & Advanced SEO | | PeteC120 -
Structured Data Questions
I am showing 2 items with errors. These products have both been removed from the site, and will trigger a 404 Page Not Found. I am still seeing the page URLs in Webmaster Central > Search Appearance > Structured Data. They are shown as items with errors, the errors being that they are missing price too. Should I 301 redirect these on an htaccess file, or should I remove the page url in some other way from Google? Also, I have a site with over 50,000 products and 2,000 category level pages. In Structured Data, there are only 2,848 items. Does it seem like Google is collecting very little data compared to how many urls I have on my site?
Intermediate & Advanced SEO | | djlittman0 -
Htaccess rewrite rule (very specific)
Hello, Awhile back my company changed from http: to https: sitewide (before i started working here). We use a very standard rewrite rule that looks like this: RewriteEngine On
Intermediate & Advanced SEO | | Waismann
RewriteCond %{SERVER_PORT} 80
RewriteRule ^(.*)$ https://opiates.com/$1 [R,L] However, with this rule in place, some http: urls are being redirected with a 302 status code. My question is, can I safely change the above code to look like this: RewriteEngine On
RewriteCond %{SERVER_PORT} 80
RewriteRule ^(.*)$ https://opiates.com/$1 [R=301,L] to ensure that every redirected is returned with a 301 status code. The only change is in the [R,L] section. Thanks to whomever can help with this. I'm pretty sure its safe but I dont want the site to go down, even for a second, so figured I would ask first.0 -
Scraping / Duplicate Content Question
Hi All, I understanding the way to protect content such as a feature rich article is to create authorship by linking to your Google+ account. My Question
Intermediate & Advanced SEO | | Mark_Ch
You have created a webpage that is informative but not worthy to be an article, hence no need create authorship in Google+
If a competitor comes along and steals this content word for word, something similar, creates their own Google+ page, can you be penalised? Is there any way to protect yourself without authorship and Google+? Regards Mark0 -
Canonical or 301 redirect, that is the question?
So my site has duplicate content issues because of the index.html and the www and non www version of the site. What's the best way to deal with this without htaccess? Is it a 301 redirect or is it the canonical, or is it both?
Intermediate & Advanced SEO | | bronxpad0 -
Rel Alternate tag and canonical tag implementation question
Hello, I have a question about the correct way to implement the canoncial and alternate tags for a site supporting multiple languages and markets. Here's our setup. We have 3 sites, each serving a specific region, and each available in 3 languages. www.example.com : serves the US, default language is English www.example.ca : serves Canada, default language is English www.example.com.mx : serves Mexico, default language is Spanish In addition, each sites can be viewed in English, French or Spanish, by adding a language specific sub-directory prefix ( /fr , /en, /es). The implementation of the alternate tag is fairly straightforward. For the homepage, on www.example.com, it would be: -MX” href=“http://www.example.com.mx/index.html” /> -MX” href=”http://www.example.com.mx/fr/index.html“ />
Intermediate & Advanced SEO | | Amiee
-MX” href=”http://www.example.com.mx/en/index.html“ />
-US” href=”http://www.example.com/fr/index.html” />
-US” href=”http://www.example.com/es/index.html“ />
-CA” href=”http://www.example.ca/fr/index.html” />
-CA” href=”http://www.example.ca/index.html” />
-CA” href=”http://www.example.ca/es/index.html” /> My question is about the implementation of the canonical tag. Currently, each domain has its own canonical tag, as follows: rel="canonical" href="http://www.example.com/index.html"> <link rel="canonical" href="http: www.example.ca="" index.html"=""></link rel="canonical" href="http:>
<link rel="canonical" href="http: www.example.com.mx="" index.html"=""></link rel="canonical" href="http:> I am now wondering is I should set the canonical tag for all my domains to: <link rel="canonical" href="http: www.example.com="" index.html"=""></link rel="canonical" href="http:> This is what seems to be suggested on this example from the Google help center. http://support.google.com/webmasters/bin/answer.py?hl=en&answer=189077 What do you think?0