Schema for same location on multiple sites - can this be done?
-
I'm looking to find more information on location/local schema. Are you able to implement schema for one location on multiple different sites? (i.e. - Multiple brands/websites (same parent company) - the brands share the same location and address). Also, is schema still important for local SEO? Thank you in advance for your help!
-
Hey There! If your scenario is like those in which two brands share a location, Google speaks to this in the guidelines, which read: ------ Two or more brands at the same location If your business location combines two or more brands, do not combine the brand names into a single listing. Instead, pick one brand’s name for the listing. If the brands operate independently, you may use a separate listing for each brand at this location. Not Acceptable: "KFC / Taco Bell" or "Dunkin' Donuts / Baskin Robbins" Acceptable: "Taco Bell", "KFC", "Dunkin’ Donuts", "Baskin Robbins" ------ So, in this scenario, Google does permit a unique GMB listing if the brands 'operate independently', and, one could infer from this that separate Schema would be okay. To be honest, the part of this I'm not totally clear on is Google's personal definition of what 'operate independently' means, and my best advice would be to get on the phone with them to request a specific definition. In your shoes, if your brands do not have the recognition of KFC or Taco Bell, I would feel some concern about merging or listing takedowns, if Google were to determine internally that you've got 1 brand trying to appear like 2. So, best advice: call Google on this and be prepared to show exactly what the 2 businesses are. Hope this helps!
-
Hi Miriam,
Thank you for your response. I agree with what you're saying, but have a quick question about your response. The businesses that I'm working with have the same parent company and they fall under the same general category. i.e. 2 different home improvement stores (different products) and/or food (2 different product offerings). These businesses have the same address, hours and usually the same phone number, but the following things are different: URL, exact product offering, local Google+ page and email address. I think now that these brands have two separate Google+ pages we should be good to implement schema for each of the locations.
The best example that I can give/think of when thinking about schema mark is when a Baskin Robbins and Dunkin Donuts share a location. They may have the same address, offer food, etc. but they are two different business units.
Thanks again for your response and help!
-
Hey there!
Sorry I was slow to pick this up again. I think the issue here is likely deeper than what you do with Schema. Schema, after all, simply exists to make NAP a bit clearer. I think the core question here is whether you are genuinely running two different businesses, in which case, you would have a unique legal business name, unique phone number and website for each. Google can generally handle two businesses occupying the same address. I don't recommend, at this point, creating a fictitious suite. Represent the business/es exactly as in the real world. Google has gotten better at not merging the listings of truly distinct companies occupying the same address provided all other signals besides the address are unique.
What Google would have a problem with would be a single company promoting itself as two companies. So, for the sake of example, let's say you are a landscaping materials company called Greenscape. You deliver compost, gravel, etc. You also do custom landscaping consultations. So, you've got two services (product delivery and consultation) operating out of your site at 123 Main Street. In this scenario, you are only entitled to 1 Google+ Local page. You aren't entitled to one for the delivery service and another for the consulting service. A business that decided to bend the guidelines on this would be in danger of punitive action on Google's part, which could hurt both listings they've created. I think the guidelines are very clear about this.
The only other proviso here is that merging is a possibility, even if it seems to be less of an issue now than formerly. So, there is a possibility that even if you are running two absolutely distinct businesses out of the same building, Google could mix them up, and the chance of that happening is likely greater if there is some unifying factor between the two businesses (two podiatrists, two auto service businesses, etc.). So, do be sure you're doing everything possible to keep two companies in this scenario distinct, including different legal business names, phone number, websites, citations and, of course, totally unique content.
Hope this helps!
-
Hi again
If they don't have separate numbers (as you said they are part of a larger company) I would focus on building citations for the main parent company, and attach the "subsites" as part of the brand through Schema on their respective websites. You can still mark up the address/contact information, but make sure that you utilize "brand" in the schema markup to the parent company on the "subsites" so that crawlers can associate the smaller brands to the larger brand.
There's also subOrganization opportunities as well.
Let me know if this makes sense.
-
Hi there
No, it doesn't. Try the resources above, look into citations, and also Google My Business for each business. If they have different numbers that's helpful.
I would see if there is a way you can figure out a suite situation with your landlord if possible.
Keep in mind, through Schema you do have brand opportunities as well as connecting products to a brand. So you could markup on the product sites that connect them to the brand. Does that make sense?
Let me know if this helps at all - good luck!
-
Hi Miriam,
I added more details in my response to Calin. Let me know if that answers your questions and/or if you have any more feedback for me. Thanks!
-
Hi Calin,
Great questions. This is for a business that has multiple companies at one location, but the companies serve two different target audiences/demographics. Which results in two different location pages on two different URLS for the same location. The content on these pages are unique since they'e about two different product lines. As we continue to optimize the sites, we're looking for different ways to optimize the location pages.So what I'm gathering from your response is, Schema mark up should only be added to one of the locations, unless we separated the addresses by suite number (the address isn't currently set up this way).
Thank you again for your help!
-
Hey There,
My thinking is along the same lines as Calin's here. Assuming that it's your NAP you're encoding with Schema, why are you putting the same NAP on more than one website? It could be I'm not quite understanding the scenario you're describing.
-
Howdy,
I can back up Patrick's sage-like advice. Schema is still important for local SEO.
In terms of having multiple website's use the exact same schema markup for an address, I would just be curious as to why you would want to do that. Are you building a bunch of microsites for rankings?
The microsites would act almost as citation sources for your parent website, the one linked to from your Google My Business page. At any rate, assuming the NAP information is correct, you shouldn't run into any issues.
Cheers,
-
Thank you Patrick. The locations do not have their own suite number. They share the same address. Knowing that about the address ... does that change your answer? Thanks again!
-
Hi there
Yes, you can do this if in fact those different brands and companies do work out of the same location. I would also make sure you look at your local SEO and make sure citations and listings for each are upto date as well. I imagine each have their own suite number?
And yes, schema is extremely valuable when implemented and utilized correctly.
Hope this helps! Good luck!
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
-
GMB Website Create Competition That Can Hurt Your Own Site?
Hello, Does anyone know if creating a Google My Business website for a business using the GMB builder creates competition for that business's main, non-GMB website? Thanks.
Local Website Optimization | | lawfather0 -
Wordpress Blog, Schema and Authorship Settings
Hi Everyone, What is the best practice for authorship in 2018 and going forward? I am moving my entire blog over to a new wordpress theme so it's easier to read and navigate in an attempt to make it look better on the mobile and give better UX / CRO and implicit user feedback signals to google. On the old blog I would say who the author is in the URL, H1 and in the content. This includes an image of the author with an image alt with their name, qualifications and blurb. I've now set up each author as a 'user' for the new blog and their image and name comes up because I've marked those blogs as authored by that particular user in Wordpress. What should I do as far as the SEO elements are concerned? I have read Eric Enge's blog about authorship being dead here and also that authorship should be marked up in schema correctly - which I've done. Also I've read around how it provides indirect signals even though it's no longer a direct ranking factor. Should I tell wordpress to ignore the authorship SEO element by unticking the boxes relating to publishing authorship or let wordpress just do it's thing? Should I keep the images and alt tags and H1 in there or take them out and let the wordpress system take over the authorship SEO elements? It's going to look funny to have author (in wordpress theme) and then author details again just below? So what is the best practice for authorship in 2018 and going forward? Am I making too big a deal of it and can just let wordpress sort it out. Something it seems to do very well? Thanks in advance, Ed.
Local Website Optimization | | Smileworks_Liverpool0 -
Can I block blexhn30.webmeup.com. Or does it have anything to do with my Moz Local
I am getting alot of hits from blexhn30.webmeup.com. My web host says it could be a web service. Is this part of moz local activity? Otherwise I want to block it. Have you seen this before??
Local Website Optimization | | stephenfishman0 -
What is the SEO effect of schema subtype deprecation? Do I really have to update the subtype if there isn't a suitable alternative?
Could someone please elaborate on the SEO effect of schema subtype deprecation? Does it even matter? The Local business properties section of developers.google.com says to: Define each local business location as a LocalBusiness type. Use the most specific LocalBusiness sub-type possible; for example, Restaurant, DaySpa, HealthClub, and so on. Unfortunately, the ProfessionalService page of schema.org states that ProfessionalService has been deprecated and many of my clients don't fit anywhere else (or if they do it's not a LocalBusiness subtype). I find it inconvenient to have to modify my different clients' JSON-LD from LocalBusiness to ProfessionalService back to LocalBusiness. I'm not saying this happens every day but how does one keep up with it all? I'm really trying to take advantage of the numerous types, attributes, etc., in structured data but I feel the more I implement, the harder it will be to update later (true of many things, of course). I do feel this is important and that a better workflow could be the answer. If you have something that works for you, please let us know. If you think it's not important tell us why not? (Why Google is wrong) I understand there is always a better use of our time, but I'd like to limit the discussion to solving this Google/Schema.org deprecation issue specifically.
Local Website Optimization | | bulletproofsearch0 -
Google plus page multiple domains
Hi I have had a .com domain for many years linked to my google plus page and local verified to my UK office address. This site sells and advertises my products, some of them are uk only like the school and computers I sell and the rest are digital and world wide. I decided to start a .co.uk domain to be more targeted to the uk and advertise only the school and computers which I sell to the uk and just link to the .com for digital products. I want the .com domain to attract world wide customers and the .co.uk for uk customers. What do I do, does it make sense to connect my google plus business page to the .co.uk site? Should I still have a google plus page for the .com site? I only have 1 office and thats in the uk. Not sure what to do here. I dont want to lose rankings or do anything negative. Thoughts? Thanks.
Local Website Optimization | | theindic0 -
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 -
How can I get a Google places 'widget' displaying on SERPS?
Hi all, My query relates to the Google Places 'Widget' (not sure what they are called exactly). If you do a search for, let's say 'Apple' you get the regular SERPs and on the right of the page they display a Google Places panel which includes map, company details & reviews. (and also a G+ panel for some businesses, where appropriate) What determines this being displayed? I had presumed a correctly formatted and optimised 'Places' page and making sure this was linked and verified. We have Google Places set up for quite a long time (and verified) but for some reason it's not being displayed. Any thoughts? On another note, a client of ours has the opposite issue - they would like to remove this panel from SERPs. I'm guessing the only way to do that would be to remove the Google Places page? Thanks in advance...
Local Website Optimization | | davidmaxwell0 -
Duplicate content on a proxy site?
I have a local client with a 500 page site.
Local Website Optimization | | TFinder
They advertise online and use traditional media like direct mail.
A print media company, Valpak, has started a website
And wants the client to use their trackable phone number
And a proxy website. When I type the proxy domain in the browser
It appears to be client home page at this proxy URL. The vendor
Wishes to track activity on its site to prove their value or something
My question is: is their any "authority" risk to my clients website
By allowing this proxy site??0