Local Landing Pages struggling with rankings although I've done most things needed. Any idea?
-
Hi Mozzers,
I am wondering if someone could advise if there's anything obvious here as to why my local landing pages suck ranking wise even though I have done all of the following. http://goo.gl/Lr4HXa
I am trying to rank for Garden tool hire Bristol on my landing page. Main category page is garden tool hire
- Consitant NAP - Citations.
- Local branch address on Page , in title tag, H1 tag and the address is in on page content which is unique.
- Schema.org has been set up with address in this aswell etc.
- Pagination set up and view all page has concanical tag pointing to page 1
- Speed not an issue as this is a fast site.
- Currently all the product links on the page are H3 tags but I've seen this on lots of other sites.
- All my NAP Citations point to the parent branch pages although I don't have any individual deep links pointing to this page.
- Unique Content
I currently don't have internal links to relevant articles on my blog page as I have those on my main category landing page as you can see here - http://goo.gl/sO9A9U but I can add these as well to all my location specific landing pages if you think it would help.
Any thoughts greatly appreciated
Pete
-
Content needs to be vastly different, not just slightly varied.
This can be painful, and take a lot of time and creativity to figure out how to write the same 300-500 words in a different way.
I wrote a personal blog post not too long ago on ways to write content for location pages: http://doyledigital.com.au/content-for-location-pages/
-
My pleasure, Pete, and don't overlook the nice medium of the blog for continuing to showcase your involvement in various cities. I think Google is still very much in love with fresh content
-
Many thanks Andy and Miriam, I think you may well be right. Whilst this technique was extremely successful a couple of years back for me Google changes have stopped this method performing as well so it may be perceived as spammy in their eyes. Whilst I've got unique content etc , I could still be getting affected by some form of algorithmic penalty
Will have to look at how to restructure things.
thanks
Pete
-
Hi Peter,
My own preference for doing this type of Local SEO/copywriting is to structure sites like this:
-
A page for every office or a page for every city served
-
A page for every service
I feel like once you get into trying to cover every possible city/service combo on landing pages, there can be some danger of creating thin or throwaway content. Unless your city A lawn mowing service is somehow totally different than your city B lawn mowing service, you probably shouldn't be creating these pages. Instead, have a page for city A, a page for city B and a page for lawn mowing.
I'm not saying that what I'm describing is the only way to do this - just that it's my personal preference for small-to-medium businesses.
-
-
My competitors do it and they do okay ranking wise hence I thought it may be page specific issue.
thanks for your input though, I will try and see what can be changed.
Pete
-
although the products are the same on the pages.
This is what is going to prevent you from reaching these goals. Google isn't going to rank two pages the same with just a difference in basics. It isn't enough for them.
There is usually a lot more to look at in these circumstances if you want to start ranking for location phrases too, because what you are doing there alone isn't enough. This is more likely to bring down problems than help you gain rankings.
-Andy
-
Hi Andy,
Yes I see what you mean but I have a main category page and then branch specific landing pages of those category pages each with unique content on each of them.
The title tags etc all have the location in there to make them unique although the products are the same on the pages.
I don't see how else one can rank for specific location pages for their categories any other way as it's to competitive to try and compete with the majors so local search for each branch is an better way forward if I can get it work.
thanks
Pete
-
Hi Pete,
Just a very quick observation, you might be running into pages that are quite similar:
- http://www.bestathire.co.uk/branches/bristol-tool-hire-shop
- http://www.bestathire.co.uk/garden-tools-bristol
Then you also have...
Pages 2 & 3 appear to be exactly the same, but with a different title, heading, etc. Google won't thank you for that.
I would spend some time thinking about the phrases you wish to rank for and making sure your pages are all suitably different in content and offerings.
-Andy
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
-
Old pages not mobile friendly - new pages in process but don't want to upset current traffic.
Working with a new client. They have what I would describe as two virtual websites. Same domain but different coding, navigation and structure. Old virtual website pages fail mobile friendly, they were not designed to be responsive ( there really is no way to fix them) but they are ranking and getting traffic. New virtual website pages pass mobile friendly but are not SEO optimized yet and are not ranking and not getting organic traffic. My understanding is NOT mobile friendly is a "site" designation and although the offending pages are listed it is not a "page" designation. Is this correct? If my understanding is true what would be the best way to hold onto the rankings and traffic generated by old virtual website pages and resolve the "NOT mobile friendly" problem until the new virtual website pages have surpassed the old pages in ranking and traffic? A proposal was made to redirect any mobile traffic on the old virtual website pages to mobile friendly pages. What will happen to SEO if this is done? The pages would pass mobile friendly because they would go to mobile friendly pages, I assume, but what about link equity? Would they see a drop in traffic ? Any thoughts? Thanks, Toni
Technical SEO | | Toni70 -
Rel=canonical on landing page question
Currently we have two versions of a category page on our site (listed below) Version A: www.example.com/category • lives only in the SERPS but does not live on our site navigation • has links • user experience is not the best Version B: www.example.com/category?view=all • lives in our site navigation • has a rel=canonical to version A • very few links and doesn’t appear in the SERPS • user experience is better than version A Because the user experience of version B is better than version A I want to take out the rel=canonical in version B to version A and instead put a rel=canonical to version B in version A. If I do this will version B show up in the SERPS eventually and replace version A? If so, how long do you think this would take? Will this essentially pass page rank from version A to version B
Technical SEO | | znotes0 -
2 pages ranking for same keyword.. Need some advice on what to do.
Here's my question. When I first started my website we started Using keyword anchor building links To my homepage . Over the years Our business has expanded to more than just baby headbands. I now have a baby headband page. When tracking my rankings. I sometimes see Both pages in Google for the same keyword. Other days I do not see both of them. My question is Should I continue building links and keyword anchor text for the home page Or should I switch them and start building keyword-rich anchor text for my baby headband page. I'm just wondering if the Search engine is confused by the two. When searching for the keyword baby headbands. I will sometimes show up for eight and nine. 8 is my home page and 9 is for the baby headband page. I have always shown up for the keyword "baby Headbands" for my home page.
Technical SEO | | PB20070 -
Test site got indexed in Google - What's the best way of getting the pages removed from the SERP's?
Hi Mozzers, I'd like your feedback on the following: the test/development domain where our sitebuilder works on got indexed, despite all warnings and advice. The content on these pages is in active use by our new site. Thus to prevent duplicate content penalties we have put a noindex in our robots.txt. However off course the pages are currently visible in the SERP's. What's the best way of dealing with this? I did not find related questions although I think this is a mistake that is often made. Perhaps the answer will also be relevant for others beside me. Thank you in advance, greetings, Folko
Technical SEO | | Yarden_Uitvaartorganisatie0 -
After I 301 redirect duplicate pages to my rel=canonical page, do I need to add any tags or code to the non canonical pages?
I have many duplicate pages. Some pages have 2-3 duplicates. Most of which have Uppercase and Lowercase paths (generated by Microsoft IIS). Does this implementation of 301 and rel=canonical suffice? Or is there more I could do to optimize the passing of duplicate page link juice to the canonical. THANK YOU!
Technical SEO | | PFTools0 -
Would duplicate listings effect a client's ranking if they used same address?
Lots of duplication on directory listings using similar or same address, just different company names... like so-and-so carpet cleaning; and another listing with so-and-so janitorial services. Now my client went from a rank around 3 - 4 to not even in the top 50 within a week. -- -- -- Would duplication cause this sudden drop? Not a lot of competition for a client using keyword (janitorial services nh); -- -- -- would a competitor that recently optimized a site cause this sudden drop? Client does need to optimize for this keyword, and they do need to clean up this duplication. (Unfortunately this drop happened first of March -- I provided the audit, recommendations/implementation and still awaiting the thumbs up to continue with implementation). --- --- --- Did Google make a change and possibly find these discrepancies within listings and suddenly drop this client's ranking? And they there's Google Places:
Technical SEO | | CeCeBar
Client usually ranks #1 for Google Places with up to 12 excellent reviews, so they are still getting a good spot on the first page. The very odd thing though is that Google is still saying that need to re-verify their Google places. I really would like to know for my how this knowledge how a Google Places account could still need verification and yet still rank so well within Google places on page results? because of great reviews? --- Any ideas here, too? _Cindy0 -
Do 301 redirects pass page rank quickly
Hi I have been asked to carry out a site audit for a potential client. The site has that many issues I don't where to start in explaining them however, there is one question we are debating and would like to get a second opinion on it. The site I am auditing used to have a homepage rank 7. The site has currently had a redesign (new template with new URLs) and now the root domain 301 redirects to a sub folder two levels deep (not ideal I know!). This happened about a month ago and we are still getting N/A for toolbar page rank. The question is, does Google page rank transfer quicker than normal due to the redirects? or do we still have to wait on the next Google Page Rank update? Thanks in advance Gavelect
Technical SEO | | Equatorites0 -
Any good ideas on how to quickly rank a new site for a new product laucnh?
Hi, I'm thinking of examples like the wii u - when it was announced all wii u sites were new. what ways could one get an edge quickly when competing against other sites without a great deal of authority on this 'new' keyword? obvious ones are social bookmarking, what else could easily be used to quickly (<24hrs) at least help a bit in non competitive kws?
Technical SEO | | dmn020