Local SEO case with two physical locations
-
I hope someone can help me make some decisions. I did read a lot about Local SEO lately but I’m not sure what way to go with this client.
Client:
- Service provider with two physical locations (service is provided on the physical location).
- In the coming 12 month there will open 1-2 new physical locations in other cities.
- Has only one phone number. I will try to advise them to get a local phone number for both locations. But they prefer one (mobile) number to keep things simple.
- Clients are willing to travel for the service, since it’s a one day course they take. Current clients do come from a lot of different locations.
- The competition for around 5-6 big cities is pretty low since there aren’t a lot of service providers who deliver these courses.
Questions:
- Should I put both addresses in the footer? It’s a best practice with only one location. I think it’s handy for users with two locations as well but I’m worried about how Google sees this. Also this will get confusing when the client passes 3-4 locations.
- If the client sticks with one mobile phone number, should I make a Google + local page for both physical locations? The Google guidelines clearly state they prefer a local number as much as possible.
- If I add “Our service areas “ to the top navigation and make a unique place page for every city (to rank organic aswell) is it wise to link those local Google + pages to the unique page about this service? Normaly I would go for yes, but I want to add places with and without a physical location under the same navigation.
With just one location I would just focus on that city and add unique pages for the other pages. I’m getting a bit stuck between best practices since the client got opportunities with multiple strategies.
I hope you guys (and girls ) can help!
-
So glad that was helpful, Bob! Good luck!
-
Great! Glad you got it straightened out.
-
Ryan, my final thanks to you for taking the time to respond! I got what I need to make my decisions.
-
Thanks a lot Miriam! This definitly helps!
-
Hi Bob,
Okay, thanks for clearing that up. Let's look at your other questions now.
What’s your take on putting up two (or in the future 3 locations) in the footer?
There is no official rule about this. Personally, I have drawn the line at 8 locations in the footer and have never seen any issue from that many, so you should be okay with 3.
Besides that, how would you combine for example 3 pages about the physical locations with unique pages for a other 10 city’s that are in the service area of your business
Your description of the business model does not seem to me to be a service area business (like a plumber). You are a brick and mortar business - you do not travel to customers in a service area and the fact that customers come to you from other towns is not really enough reason to optimize for these town terms. If, however, you have a legitimate connection to these other towns, like you teach classes in them, host events in them, sponsor events in them or other connections along these lines, then there may be opportunities for content publication. If there are not connections, then you should focus on your 3 physical location cities and, perhaps, their hyperlocal neighborhoods. More on this:
http://moz.com/blog/local-landing-pages-guide
http://moz.com/blog/mastering-serving-the-user-as-centroid
Last but not least, would you say a part time entrepreneur with a physical location that’s only open for 3-4 days a week could claim a local google + page?
Google's only guideline about this is:
In order to qualify for a local Google+ page, a business must make in-person contact with customers during its stated hours.
There is no guideline stating that you have to be open 7 days a week, so if you have set hours of business during which someone walking up to your door is going to find a staffed business to receive them, you should be good to go. Just be sure you are accurately listing your hours of operation when you create the Google+ Local pages for your 3 locations.
Hope this helps!
-
It are day courses and we are the only one that does rents the place.
-
If we want we could place a huge billboard outside
-
It does have our company name on the door
-
We are there around 3 days a week fulltime.
I would definitely say we have the authority to represent this building since it's just a normal office building we rent and we turned it into a classroom, a place to lunch and a small place to do some administration.
So yes, it are classes. But we aren't part of a larger facility and it's our permanent location.
-
-
Hey Bob!
I'll look forward to replying in detail to each of your good questions, but first want to ask for clarification on one really important point. You write, "classes are only given with enough signups."
I should have caught this earlier in the thread. Are you saying these are not businesses, but classes, like an instructor teaching yoga classes a few times a week inside of a larger facility like a gym? If so, this is very important to know, as Google does not authorize creating Google+ Local pages in this scenario:
An ongoing service, class, or meeting at a location that you don't own or have the authority to represent. Please coordinate with your host to have your information displayed on the page for their business within their "Introduction" field. (from https://support.google.com/business/answer/3038177?hl=en)
Please, let me know if the above describes the business model, because the scenario is quite different if it does.
-
Hello Miriam,
Thanks for taking the time to respond. I learned a lot from your previous posts on Moz.
What’s your take on putting up two (or in the future 3 locations) in the footer?
I know it’s a best practice with one location but I’m not sure what will happen when we put two addresses in the footer (especially when we can only claim one local Google + page). We really want to communicate those locations to our clients since it’s really important information for anyone who takes our classes.
Besides that, how would you combine for example 3 pages about the physical locations with unique pages for a other 10 city’s that are in the service area of your business.
Normally I would add those service area pages to the main navigation, but would it make sense to use the same format for service area’s as for places with a physical location? With format I mean the combination of information and unique content based on the interests of those local searchers.
Last but not least, would you say a part time entrepreneur with a physical location that’s only open for 3-4 days a week could claim a local google + page?
I ask this because I want to know the borderline. Since our second location really feels like.. uhmm a legit physical location. We are there every week, are the only business that does rent this place (we pay for the whole month), serve our customers there and we communicate the address very frequently (that’s really needed since there are a few competitors located in the same area). So the only reason why it shouldn’t be a local Google + page is because we are not open the full 5 days a week (besides the phone number which can easily be fixed and I already did recommend to the client since the branding/trust benefits are already enough to switch).
It feels like the Google guidelines are written specific for classic retail companies. In our (niche) industry there are maybe one or two competitors who are open 5 days a week since classes are only given with enough signups.
I hope you can share your view on this case!
-
Good feedback from Ryan on this.
As he's mentioned, Google+ Local pages relate to staffed physical locations rather than service cities, so your client can have 1 Google+ Local page per staffed physical location he operates. Do not create Google+ Local pages for any service city where the client doesn't have a physical location.
He should definitely have a unique phone number for each location.
-
Currently your client is at a disadvantage due to not having physical, staffed, testing centers and thus doesn't qualify for Google Local in the same way as competitors that do. Even if your competitors have one receptionist staffing the building during non-testing hours but is open to receive inquiries and appointments that puts them ahead of your client. If the outlay isn't there for an additional phone number then I would compete on service and service area, not trying to outstrip the competition with fictitious locations. If you're successful at that then perhaps growing to the point of having fully leased centers makes sense. Cheers!
-
Hmm I find it hard to make a decision on this point. I fear that treating this as a brand isn’t optimal for the local SEO and will put the company in a disadvantage over competitors which are “based” in that city. Although the guideline does state “staffed during normal business hours”.
Normally I would say that’s the way to go but in this industry it’s very common to only be staffed when there are courses. And 50% staffed feels like the same as an entrepreneur who has a part time job as well (let’s say a coffee corner which is only open in the weekends). In that case I would say having a local page is just fine.
Decisions, decisions…
What is your view on point 1 and 3?
-
Hmm... This is kind of borderline with the physical location requirements outlined by Google, "If your business rents a temporary, "virtual" office at a different address from your primary business, do not create a page for that location unless it is staffed during your normal business hours." Even though it's staffed for testing it's not staffed when you'd expect people to contact you or 'visit'. That only happens with your online interactions. It'd probably be most accurate to do the business as a brand, with addresses for the testing centers. They likely don't need separate phone numbers as they're not staffed locations. Anyone visiting outside of testing hours would find an empty building.
-
Thanks for your response Ryan. The client rents this place full time but it isn't always staffed. There are 2-3 courses every week at the location (these take the whole day).
-
I'd definitely invest the minimum $$ required to get a phone number per location. These could all be setup to forward to the one mobile number--still keeping things simple that way while also allowing for each location to have a number.
Some questions though, are these physical locations client owned/leased and operated? Like is a permanent establishment with regular office hours and such? Or is this a testing service that is renting space just in time to deliver the course?
Cheers!
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
-
Title Too Long - Seo importance
Hey; What do you think Title Too Long for Seo importance my site adress almost all page Title Too Long warning is showing http://prntscr.com/ndykgw from many sites this way, how much difference does this order make?
Local Website Optimization | | mesutcandan0 -
How to Do Local Keyword Research
I am familiar with how to do regular keyword research, finding opportunity based on competition, search volume, etc. For local search, do I go to all the trouble of finding hidden gems or just pick higher volume terms that have local intent. For instance: A search for "physical therapy" is a high volume term that Google thinks has local intent. If i pick a low volume national term, that has 11-50 avg searches per month, I have lower chances...and even less chance that someone is searching locally. What say ye? Nails
Local Website Optimization | | matt.nails0 -
Multi location silo seo technique
A physical therapy company has 8 locations in one city and 4 locations in another with plans to expand. I've seen two methods to approach this. The first I feel is sloppy and that is the individual url for each location that points to from the location pages on the main domain. The second is to use the silo technique incorporated with metro scale addition. You have the main domain with the number of silos (individual stores) and each silo has its own content (what they do at each store is pretty much the same). My question is should the focus of each silo, besides making sure there is no duplicate copy, to increase their own hyperlocal outreach? Focus on social, reviews, content curated for the specific location. How would you attack this problem?
Local Website Optimization | | Ohmichael1 -
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 -
How does duplicate content work when creating location specific pages?
In a bid to improve the visibility of my site on the Google SERP's, I am creating landing pages that were initially going to be used in some online advertising. I then thought it might be a good idea to improve the content on the pages so that they would perform better in localised searches. So I have a landing page designed specifically to promote what my business can do, and funnel the user in to requesting a quote from us. The main keyword phrase I am using is "website design london", and I will be creating a few more such as "website design birmingham", "website design leeds". The only thing that I've changed at the moment across all these pages is the location name, I haven't touched any of the USP's or the testimonial that I use. However, in both cases "website design XXX" doesn't show up in any of the USP's or testimonial. So my question is that when I have these pages built, and they're indexed, will I be penalised for this tactic?
Local Website Optimization | | mickburkesnr0 -
Location Pages and Duplicate Content and Doorway Pages, Oh My!
Google has this page on location pages. It's very useful but it doesn't say anything about handling the duplicate content a location page might have. Seeing as the loctions may have very similar services. Lets say they have example.com/location/boston, example.com/location/chicago, or maybe boston.example.com or chicago.example.com etc. They are landing pages for each location, housing that locations contact information as well as serving as a landing page for that location. Showing the same services/products as every other location. This information may also live on the main domains homepage or services page as well. My initial reaction agrees with this article: http://moz.com/blog/local-landing-pages-guide - but I'm really asking what does Google expect? Does this location pages guide from Google tell us we don't really have to make sure each of those location pages are unique? Sometimes creating "unique" location pages feels like you're creating **doorway pages - **"Multiple pages on your site with similar content designed to rank for specific queries like city or state names". In a nutshell, Google's Guidelines seem to have a conflict on this topic: Location Pages: "Have each location's or branch's information accessible on separate webpages"
Local Website Optimization | | eyeflow
Doorway Pages: "Multiple pages on your site with similar content designed to rank for specific queries like city or state names"
Duplicate Content: "If you have many pages that are similar, consider expanding each page or consolidating the pages into one." Now you could avoid making it a doorway page or a duplicate content page if you just put the location information on a page. Each page would then have a unique address, phone number, email, contact name, etc. But then the page would technically be in violation of this page: Thin Pages: "One of the most important steps in improving your site's ranking in Google search results is to ensure that it contains plenty of rich information that includes relevant keywords, used appropriately, that indicate the subject matter of your content." ...starting to feel like I'm in a Google Guidelines Paradox! Do you think this guide from Google means that duplicate content on these pages is acceptable as long as you use that markup? Or do you have another opinion?0 -
Short EMD or Longer Partial MD: Which is better for SEO
Hey Guys, I appreciate all of the amazing responses you have been posting over the last two days.
Local Website Optimization | | Web3Marketing87
I have been a little tied up with Joomla 1.5 transfers, but I will make some comments soon! In the meantime, here is an interesting one: I have an existing domain with a little bit of DA - www.edmontonweb.ca as well as a parked domain with no DA - launchwebdesign.ca I have been advised to redirect (301) to the launch domain, but I still wonder if the current domain is better - after all it is very short & was registered over 5 years ago. Since launching the new site it has been about a month. We are currently #1 for almost every term on Bing & Yahoo (web design, edmonton web design etc.) but 14th on Google for "edmonton web design." Do you think switching the domain is a good call, or keep trying with edmontonweb.ca for a bit longer? Thanks guys, Anton0