Local Search and Schema.org - Do I need to tag up the "same as" Property to all my citations to help with local rankings?
-
Hi All,
We have implemented Schema.og on our website and this also includes the local business schema for all of our branches.However I've read an article (see below ) which says we should also be doing "same as " property and linking this to ALL of our citations such as google plus page , yelp , bing places, city search etc etc as this will help with citations.
I am wondering if anyone has done this ? - And if so , has this helped with local rankings etc - I don't really want to invest the extra costs to get this done if I can't find anywhere that says its made a difference -
The article from whitespark - says - "when you create new citations for your business (or for your client’s), it’s a waiting game hoping that Google and the other search engines will find your new citations quickly and make the connection between those listings, the business, and the website.
The “sameAs” property can help make that process much quicker _and _easier. Schema.org explains that the “sameAs” property is used along with the “URL of a reference Web page that unambiguously indicates the item's [or business’] identity.” By using the “sameAs” property in your NAP schema markup, you can tell search engines that the business you’ve marked up is the same one found at a certain citation URL
Of course, Google+ isn’t the only important citation source. There’s also Bing Places, Facebook, Yelp, Citysearch and a few others. The nice thing about many schema.org properties is that you can use them multiple times in your markup."
I am wondering what peoples thoughts were and whether they has implemented this and if so , did it help ?
thanks
Pete
|
[sameAs](http://schema.org/sameAs)
| URL | URL of a reference Web page that unambiguously indicates the item's identity. E.g. the URL of the item's Wikipedia page, Freebase page, or official website. | -
Hi Peter,
I believe you're referring to a David Deering article on Whitespark (http://www.whitespark.ca/blog/post/50-how-to-make-your-local-business-schema-better) from earlier this year. I would trust pretty much any advice regarding citations published on Darren Shaw's company's website and I think that's a great article from David.
I'd like to know more about his/Darren's experience with seeing quicker citation pick-up using sameAs. I'm not sure if the speed they are citing comes from something Whitespark has noted handling the massive numbers of citations they manage, or if this is something David Deering is experimenting with on his own, or what have you. The folks are extremely nice and friendly up there in Canada, and if I were you, I'd reach out to David and ask him if he can tell you a bit more about any phenomena they have documented regarding use of sameAs, to see whether any gains in speed would warrant you investing in implementing this. I've not seen any side-by-side testing done, but maybe the fellows at Whitespark have done some? Great topic!
-
Hello Josh,
Many thanks for your input. This is really for our branch pages - see please example - http://goo.gl/zpdWfj - Please feel free critic the page if you feel there are mistakes here being made .
The search volumes here are always quite competitive - tool hire <city name="">so it's not to easy to boost these pages. We've done alot of citations and I am going through trying to make sure they are consistent. The content is unique and we have tried to localize the pages to by including local directions etc etc.</city>
We've done the schema.org so really , I was thinking, what else can I do to help this pages.The idea about using "same as " property came from an article written by whitespark hence my query about what else I can and should i use it .
thanks
Pete
-
Many thanks for your insight. I will look at implementing this aswell as it's one part of our schema markup we havent' done. I like your idea on using tag manager to.
Many thanks
Pete
-
We have been using it in tandem with a rather aggressive local campaign for clients. We have yet to see the results show up in the knowledge graph (links to social) but all of our properties perform very well in local searches. Hard to tell if it's just this part of our campaign that is causing it or the sum of all of the parts.
As for investing extra costs. If you are using Google Tag Manager (GTM) and doing schema with JSON-LD, it is an investment of 15 minutes. Very little cost for a potentially great pay off. If you aren't using JSON-LD in GTM I would suggest the switch, it saves a huge amount of time.
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
-
Local SEO without a GBL
Hey everyone, I'm working with a local catering company that does not have a physical address available for use. Because of privacy concerns, the company is not open to using their home address. The local competition in the targeted area is fairly strong and established already. Does anyone have ideas on how I can work around this?
Local Listings | | a_toohill0 -
Facebook Locations - Good or Bad for Local Rankings?
Our company has multiple (3) offices, including our headquarters, and each has its own Facebook page. Other than the primary company page, the other two locations have only been claimed and do not have posts, reviews, check-ins, etc. Now, Facebook recently granted us access to Facebook Locations, which, if I understand correctly, would remove 2-out-of-3 office pages and add a "Locations" tab to our primary company page where people can see the other offices. _See Starbucks Example: https://www.facebook.com/pg/Starbucks/locations/?ref=page_internal _ I've read mixed reviews regarding using the Locations feature, but nothing definitively answers whether or not this would negatively affect local rankings. Does anyone have firsthand experience going from individual business pages to a single parent business page with Locations? Is there any trustworthy documentation out there about this?
Local Listings | | MPlata1 -
Local Ranking Factors?
For Google, has anyone got a finger on how much of a factor the address type "service customers only at their location" versus "service customers at my business location AND customers location is" is as far as local search ranking especially for 3-pack results? (The former they hide the address the latter they show the street address) It seems to me the primary factors are obviously (a) proximity of user's location or location intent to the business location, then (b) natural organic ranking (age of business, domain authority, inbound links, quality content, relevance to the actual keywords searched for). But where does the address type rank amongst all the "secondary factors" like is business currently open, number of reviews and average rating, etc. etc. My guess would be reviews and average rating along with is business currently open would be third, and then address type would factor in - but for all I know the address type could be given much more importance than I am guessing?
Local Listings | | MrSem0 -
Individual practitioner NAP - unique "N", repeated "AP" Help!
We have a business where we have a number of doctor's offices, and at each office there are a few individual doctors. Customers often search for either the overarching brand or the specific doctors. Our hope is to optimize our listings so that we can rank in local SEO for both the brand name and doctor names. We have set up our local listings in Google My Business for all of the offices (common brand name, unique address, unique phone, unique landing page), but would like to explore adding individual doctor names in the listings too. The challenge is that each doctor within an office shares the address and phone number. They do have unique names (obviously) and landing pages, although the doctor landing pages don't have any specific contact information on them. My understanding is that we should have unique phone numbers for each listing. Unfortunately, this is a management and IT maintenance challenge. My question is - if we didn't use a unique phone number and instead used both the same address and phone number across multiple listings (office and doctors practicing there), are we violating Google's guidelines / damaging our overall rankings for all the listings? Does anyone have a sense of how bad this might be, so we can understand the risk/benefit? And secondly, would we make things worse by adding the non-unique address/phone to the individual doctor pages? Would this just reinforce inconsistent NAP, right on our site? Thanks!
Local Listings | | OneMedical0 -
Did anybody else notice a big change in local/map results in late Jan early Feb
Hi, We work on quite a few local campaigns for clients and saw a fair bit of movement in the UK in late January/early February. Did anybody else notice this? Some of ours have improved, some have lost out, but the results generally seem to have shifted against usual guidelines for listing optimisation (reviews, local phone numbers, consistency with website etc.). Any thoughts? Thanks
Local Listings | | jasarrow0 -
How does the new local pack change rankings?
So I just saw this afternoon that google has changed how the local pack displays listings, only 3 listings now show. Also Google continues to distance itself from Google+. Now it seems getting in the top 3 of the local pack is going to be even more competitive. What should the strategy be now for competing in the local pack? Has it changed? Or just stick to tried and true local optimizations?
Local Listings | | websitemusclemarketing0 -
Ranking Go Down
Hello My website www.prismpharmamachinery.com Ranking Down last from 5 to 6 month, Before It was Up, goes down By 5 to 6 pages. Any Expert can help for this query, Then Please reply. Thanking you in advance,
Local Listings | | Sanjayth0 -
Duplicate Websites - Only one ranking
Hello Everyone, I have a client that has 2 website, that have the same content, with he same phone numbers and contact details. However, there are a few different that we want to do for both. 1. mywebsitevan.com ( Has Google Places (and they don't want to lose this listing, as it is a main reason why they are surviving. not rank organically mywebsitevancouver.com
Local Listings | | EVERWORLD.ENTERTAIMENT
- ranked organically No Google Place listings. This is the actual branding of the company What is the best way to make this work with google, so that we have both websites, and without losing the google places listings. Do add any tags? Rel=? Thanks for your help.0