New building ownership and NAP - strategies for removing old listings with bad reviews
-
I have a question based on this scenario: An apartment building changes ownership. Previous owners were terrible and online listings have had terrible reviews. Since the apartment building now has a new brand name, new office address and phone number, the new owners want to create new online listings instead of claiming the old listings with the bad reviews. Also they want to report the old listings as "closed". They would like to remove the old listings with bad reviews from the old management and old brand name and start fresh, since they plan many improvements. Has anyone tried this strategy? How much luck has anyone had rebranding an apartment building and reporting old business listings as closed?
-
My pleasure, Robert! I liked your answer, too
-
Miriam,
Thanks for these links; they are quite helpful!
-
Hey Dragon!
Robert is offering good advice. I'll just add a few things here.
Different platforms have different policies on this. For example, look at this conversation on TripAdvisor about ownership changes and old reviews: http://www.tripadvisor.com/ShowTopic-g1-i12105-k7183031-Removing_bad_reviews_with_new_ownership-TripAdvisor_Support.html
And here's a good discussion of the details of Google's policy: https://productforums.google.com/forum/#!topic/business/Vz8WIPI95M4;context-place=topicsearchin/business/new$20ownership$20reviews
And here's Yelp's section on what to do in a variety of scenarios surrounding a change of ownership/management:
http://www.yelp-support.com/Reporting_Business_Changes?l=en_US
So, I'm mentioning the above because it will likely be worth it to handle this on a platform-by-platform basis, researching general best practices and deciding how to proceed.
Hope this helps!
-
I think you will run into some problems with this:
** Since the apartment building now has a new brand name, new office address and phone number, the new owners want to create new online listings instead of claiming the old listings with the bad reviews. Also they want to report the old listings as "closed". **
Let's say I own an Apt complex or other business and I suck at it. I realize that all the bad reviews are killing me so I go out and change my business name and office address and then try to report all as new... This is the same thing even though your intent is different. This is one of the tactics used by "reputation management" firms of the less than notable variety. So, I do think you will run into issues and you need to tread quite softly.
Can it be done... maybe; but be prepared for issues with trying this approach. I think a danger you could face is that Google can look at it as simple reputation management play and you can then have trouble ever getting it to list. While we do not do reputation management, we do get clients who come to us due to Local problems who are now not showing up in Local from doing things that are outside terms of service. It is really hard to fix these.
Remember that in Local, the key is NAP. Name, Address, Phone. You are changing two of the three ( I realize you say there is a new office address but people will not search for the new office address and you are going to run into issues with the actual address of the apartments.) What are you going to do when someone searching for the apartment address gets the old listing. Remember there will be a ton of citation sources with old info.
With apartments, your other issue will be citation sources like Yelp or the BBB. Are they going to buy what you have to say about the management change, etc.? My guess is that is also going to be a bit tough to sell. With the new name, are you using a new URL and redirecting any value from the old? If so, you are trying to use what is helpful and jettison what is not, which again makes people question.
So, you might be better with getting new reviews showing the behaviors have changed and using a lot of under new management content, etc. Saying you are going to change is not inspiring at all. Even in your question you say the new management "...plan many improvements." That is not change, that is planned change. Show people the improvements in everything you do and make it clear it is not the same. Then even with the bad original reviews, when you start getting good reviews you will have much higher legitimacy.
Hope that helps even though there is no clear yes or no,
Robert
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
-
Structured Data Reviews in Knowledge Panel
I need help with getting my site appearing in the knowledge panel for reviews. Our reviews are appearing in the search snippets but not on the knowledge panel when our competitors with far fewer reviews are. We’ve labored over best practices in perfecting our markup but would love a second opinion to see if there’s something we’re overlooking. For example take this venue on our website: https://www.eventsource.ca/cathedral-centre It has 136 of our own reviews. https://www.google.ca/search?q=cathedral+centre We are the 1st result and it shows our star rating, reviews and price range. However, we don’t appear in the knowledge panel - this is happening for almost every business we have listed on our site. In this particular example, the knowledge panel has en Ville Catering with 45 reviews. I cannot find any errors in our structured data but I see it in our competition: https://search.google.com/structured-data/testing-tool#url=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.eventsource.ca%2Fcathedral-centre https://enville.com/saint-james-cathedral-centre-wedding-catering/ Example 2: Search: https://www.google.ca/search?q=burlington+convention+centre US: https://www.eventsource.ca/burlington-convention-centre
Reviews and Ratings | | Neumarkets.com
SDTT: https://search.google.com/structured-data/testing-tool#url=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.eventsource.ca%2Fburlington-convention-centre Competitor in KP: https://www.weddingwire.ca/wedding-banquet-halls/burlington-convention-centre--e12513
SDTT: https://search.google.com/structured-data/testing-tool#url=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.weddingwire.ca%2Fwedding-banquet-halls%2Fburlington-convention-centre--e12513 Example 3: US: https://www.eventsource.ca/mississauga-convention-centre
SDTT: https://search.google.com/structured-data/testing-tool#url=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.eventsource.ca%2Fmississauga-convention-centre Search: https://www.google.ca/search?q=mississauga+convention+centre
Competitor 1 in KP: https://www.facebook.com/MississaugaConventionCentre/
SDTT: https://search.google.com/structured-data/testing-tool#url=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.facebook.com%2FMississaugaConventionCentre%2F (I know it’s Facebook. However, there’s about 6-8 competitors appearing in the KP with Schema issues and we aren’t. We’ve compared ourselves against each one of them and cannot determine what the issue might be.) Competitor 2 in KP: https://www.weddingwire.ca/wedding-banquet-halls/mississauga-convention-centre--e8086
SDTT: https://search.google.com/structured-data/testing-tool#url=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.weddingwire.ca%2Fwedding-banquet-halls%2Fmississauga-convention-centre--e8086 Competitor 3 in KP: http://www.eventvenues.ca/b/54/mississauga-convention-centre-on-mississauga-75-derry-road-west/
SDTT: https://search.google.com/structured-data/testing-tool#url=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.eventvenues.ca%2Fb%2F54%2Fmississauga-convention-centre-on-mississauga-75-derry-road-west%2F CMxg9Z10 -
BazaarVoice Paginated Reviews Not Honoring Canonical & Indexing Multiple Pages
If there are enough reviews on a product page to warrant page 2, 3 etc, BazaarVoice appends the below snippets to each new page of reviews, which are then also indexed, despite BazaarVoice SEO settings that automate a canonical tag (seemingly since the differing reviews on each page are not similar enough to honor the canonical). <cite class="iUh30">?bvstate=pg:2/ct:r</cite> <cite class="iUh30">?bvstate=pg:3/ct:r</cite> It seems Target.com has found a way to hack the BV code to create a dedicated page to view all reviews: https://www.target.com/p/ultra-soft-fitted-sheet-300-thread-count-threshold-153/-/A-13973172?showOnlyReview=true While Ikea.com blocks it in the Robots file (defeats SEO value) - Noindex: */catalog/products/bvroute=Review Noindex: */catalog/products/bvtab Tons of brands apparently have the issue, and you can see more examples if you search "inurl:bvstate=pg" Anyone aware of a solution to this?
Reviews and Ratings | | Eroc2 -
How many reviews should i have previewed for marking up a page?
I have a separate /reviews URL, but want to markup the main page with aggregate reviews and also add preview reviews on there. Roughly, how many reviews do I need on the page in order to markup with aggregate review?
Reviews and Ratings | | imjonny1230 -
How many Google reviews can I collect at once?
I work for a University with 10,000+ students and alumni that could submit reviews. But how many reviews should I be collecting at one time? I don't want to overload the reviews and put up a red flag in Google...any insight on how much is too much?
Reviews and Ratings | | GabeGibitz0 -
Does Google's 3rd Party Reviews Guideline Update make Review Aggregators Obsolete?
Good day!We are concerned about Google's updated Guidelines in ratings and reviews, specifically as quoted in the SEO Roundtable: "The new guidelines specifically disallows you from using 3rd party reviews, found on other sites, and marking those up on your site."https://www.seroundtable.com/google-updates-reviews-markup-guidelines-22608.htmlThe Guidelines are here https://developers.google.com/search/docs/data-types/reviews#local-business-reviewsWe enlist the use of a 3rd party aggregate for one of our client's (service business). Since, in effect, it is a 3rd party review site, and what the shortcode does is copy reviews from that third party site and mark them up on the client website. What do you guys know about this update, and what are is your take on what the update says and how it relates to a 3rd party review aggregators? Thanks!
Reviews and Ratings | | LinkRightMedia0 -
Started using a 3rd Party Review Company for our Website. Do we need to show the reviews or is a widget (badge) with a link back to review company sufficient enough from an SEO ranking point of view?
Hi All, We have started to use a 3rd party review company and now have the choice of either implementing their re-supplied widgets (Java ) on our site showing customer reviews or use their an API to get this information. The widgets (Java) , would be loaded once the page is actually loaded so I am not sure how and if google will read this information if at all? If we use a widget then we won't be able to implement it with Schema.org although we will be able to use rich snippets to it will appear on any PPC (once we have had 30 reviews). If we go down the API route, it's more expensive for us but we can use the review schema.org for this. Does anyone have any experience of what works best for them ?.. We have a choice of having a widget showing latest reviews or just a badge (which is actually a link to the review site showing our reviews). From an SEO point of view, is one better than the other ? Does google actually read the content of the review or is the link back to the 3rd party review company sufficient enough to help with rankings etc. Am I correct in assuming that by linking to a 3rd party review company and showing our reviews on our site , this will help with rankings as even though the content in the reviews doesn't really say much ,. I did see it was a ranking factor on the survey but not sure how google uses this. ? I've read up some information on reviews etc but wondered what the general consensus was with what others found works best for them Any help greatly appreciated Pete
Reviews and Ratings | | PeteC120 -
Google Reviews
We operate a printing company, and at the moment we have two locations in Houston, Texas. Our newest location just opened and so it has no reviews and no real content on Google +. A very satisfied customer seems to have posted two back to back reviews on the second location and it now seems that location no longer pulls up. It used to be that when you googled our business name that both locations pulled up it seems to pull just first more well established location. The second location can still be found but for whatever reason it no longer shows up with our other results. Should we tell the client to remove one of the reviews? I hope we don't get penalized for this Appreciate your feedback. C
Reviews and Ratings | | RETEX0 -
Having Yelp Reviews Removed
Since we all work with Yelp on a local basis, I believe many are aware that if a review is placed by a non customer about a company, Yelp will typically remove them if you show that it isn't valid, etc. We all know they made a show of outing those who posted fake reviews as well. Here is a question I have though: Have any of you been aware of Yelp taking down valid negative reviews for companies? I have just run into this and find it somewhat perplexing. If you know of this, I would love to hear how it happens? Thanks,
Reviews and Ratings | | RobertFisher2