Why did our ranking go up, then drop down again?
-
Hello SEOMoz community.
I work for a website that runs a collectibles news service and sells collectibles online.
I recently renamed one of the pages from "Stock for Sale" to "Collectibles for Sale" anticipating this would help our ranking for the term "collectibles for sale". This changes the Title, URL and h1 to Collectible for Sale.
A few days later we were up to 5th on Google UK for that keyword.
But now after the weekend we've dropped off the face of the earth... Or at least somewhere low down in the rankings.
I imagine there could be multiple reasons for this, but what are the most likely causes?
There is not much text on the page, it contains an iFrame with image boxes that link to relevant collectibles categories.
Website: www.paulfrasercollectibles.com
-
We used to use a different style URL which just included the docid and catid. At this point we manually entered friendly URL redirects in the CMS.
At the beginning of this month we converted to an automatic friendly url system. The url is generated from the article title. Old urls now use the rel="canonical" to direct to the correct page which is always of the format:
www.paulfrasercollectibles.com/category/article-title/0000.page
I'm not entirely sure if we have the ability to make 301 redirects.
-
Hey everyone.
Can I just add something else. I changed the text on another page, adding more information about the service the company provides. The page is titled "Investment Newsletter" it was page 3 Google UK for that term and had been for a while.
It went up to page 2. And now its dropped away somewhere. This change was implemented over a week ago.
Why is this happening? Surely it shouldn't be a result of me changing the content on the page?
I've never seen anything on SEOMoz to suggest that improving a pages content will lose my rank in Google.
Any suggestions?
Can I also add, that we changed the Meta description on the home page from being the same as the title:
"Latest news from the world of high-end collectibles and investments"
to
"Free daily news for collectors plus antiques, memorabilia and investment-grade collectibles for sale."
This has seen us drop from 5th place on the 1st page in the UK. to the 3rd page on Google.
But the Meta description only has limited SEO effect and surely this is a change for the better?
-
Adrian,
We always see an initial high ranking that last about a week then goes back down sometimes a few pages..Over a 2 month period we see the ranking usually restore.
-
Hi Adrian
In regards to the other tags, I take it back, it was Chrome's view source code coloring, made tags look broken at quick glance. Sorry!
As far as the canonical, I was just curious why there are two URLs for that page to begin with? Is it that you need the '1850' in the URL to provide the GET call to the database?
It appears as if all your category level pages operate this way? Â You should be able to get a singular, clean URL and make your category call without the need for duplicate pages at all.
If this is not the case, you may want to 301 Redirect the '1850' page to the other page. There doesn't seem to be a need for both pages to be accessible by users.
Hope that helps!
-Dan
-
Hi Dan, thanks for the response.
I see what you mean about the two versions. It seems to be worse than that as well. The page was originally called "Stock for Sale" which is also indexed twice.
We were under the impression that using rel="canonical" would mean Google only indexed one url for the page. Even if older URL's are still used on the website. Should this other urls drop out of the index on their own?
As for the unclosed title and style tags. I don't see what you mean. To me they seem to be perfectly fine, and he haven't encountered any problems with these before.
Cheers
-
It appears as if you have two versions of the page indexed;
http://www.paulfrasercollectibles.com/Collectibles-for-Sale/1850.page
and
http://www.paulfrasercollectibles.com/Collectibles-for-Sale/
The rel="canonical" cites http://www.paulfrasercollectibles.com/Collectibles-for-Sale/1850.page as the page that should count in the index, however on your site its the other page which is linked to from the menu.
It would require a deeper look at things to tell what is going on for sure, but having duplicate versions of the same page in the index is certainly something of concern.
At quick glance I see a few other things that should be addressed when I view source; including a style tag and title tag not closing correctly.
-Dan
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
-
Google ranking content for phrases that don't exist on-page
I am experiencing an issue with negative keywords, but the “negative” keyword in question isn’t truly negative and is required within the content – the problem is that Google is ranking pages for inaccurate phrases that don’t exist on the page. To explain, this product page (as one of many examples) - https://www.scamblermusic.com/albums/royalty-free-rock-music/ - is optimised for “Royalty free rock music” and it gets a Moz grade of 100. “Royalty free” is the most accurate description of the music (I optimised for “royalty free” instead of “royalty-free” (including a hyphen) because of improved search volume), and there is just one reference to the term “copyrighted” towards the foot of the page – this term is relevant because I need to make the point that the music is licensed, not sold, and the licensee pays for the right to use the music but does not own it (as it remains copyrighted). It turns out however that I appear to need to treat “copyrighted” almost as a negative term because Google isn’t accurately ranking the content. Despite excellent optimisation for “Royalty free rock music” and only one single reference of “copyrighted” within the copy, I am seeing this page (and other album genres) wrongly rank for the following search terms: “free rock music”
On-Page Optimization | | JCN-SBWD
“Copyright free rock music"
“Uncopyrighted rock music”
“Non copyrighted rock music” I understand that pages might rank for “free rock music” because it is part of the “Royalty free rock music” optimisation, what I can’t get my head around is why the page (and similar product pages) are ranking for “Copyright free”, “Uncopyrighted music” and “Non copyrighted music”. “Uncopyrighted” and “Non copyrighted” don’t exist anywhere within the copy or source code – why would Google consider it helpful to rank a page for a search term that doesn’t exist as a complete phrase within the content? By the same logic the page should also wrongly rank for “Skylark rock music” or “Pretzel rock music” as the words “Skylark” and “Pretzel” also feature just once within the content and therefore should generate completely inaccurate results too. To me this demonstrates just how poor Google is when it comes to understanding relevant content and optimization - it's taking part of an optimized term and combining it with just one other single-use word and then inappropriately ranking the page for that completely made up phrase. It’s one thing to misinterpret one reference of the term “copyrighted” and something else entirely to rank a page for completely made up terms such as “Uncopyrighted” and “Non copyrighted”. It almost makes me think that I’ve got a better chance of accurately ranking content if I buy a goat, shove a cigar up its backside, and sacrifice it in the name of the great god Google! Any advice (about wrongly attributed negative keywords, not goat sacrifice ) would be most welcome.0 -
Specific Ranking Mystery
Hello Mozzers I don't understand this specific ranking example, maybe somebody can help? For the serach term "elipslife" on Google Switzerland a client's page ranks around position 13. A competitor's page ranks at 9. And I don't get why: the competitor's page has no content and its DA is lower. Its PA is higher so I set a link in the client's homepage navigation a couple of weeks ago to lift the client's page PA above that of the competitor. This is not yet reflected in OSE currently however. Any ideas as to what may be the cause? Thx, Chris
On-Page Optimization | | ChrisCronimund0 -
Why am I ranking on both Bing and Yahoo and yet the rankings are declining on Google
I'm seeing ranking go up on both Bing and Yahoo and yet they are going down on Google. Â I did see a bunch of spammy links show up about a month ago but have managed to get all those taken down although did not get any warnings from Google in Webmaster tools about them was more of a preemptive measure. The site in question. http://www.gocitrusnow.com
On-Page Optimization | | mwaters19790 -
Help required to get the right landing page ranking
Hi, I've taken on a new ski client who wants to rank on page 1 on google.co.uk for [ski instructor courses]. When I first put that keyword into Moz rank tracker the landing page http://www.snowrehab.com/ski-instructor-courses/revelstoke-12-week-csia-level-1-&-2.html came up and it was ~ #30 Instead we wanted http://www.snowrehab.com/ski-instructor-courses to rank and I've optimised the copy (perhaps over optimised?) and have been redirecting & building links to that page. When I check in the SERPs (as unpersonalised as I can get) that new page appears to be ranking ~ 20 and the old page is nowhere to be seen. So far so good. However in the rank tracker Moz says the new page (exact URL) isn't ranking (not in top 50) and that when I put in 'entire subdomain' that the old page still comes up (and has improved to ~ 25). Any help / advice really appreciated! I want to prove to the client the rankings have improved / work I've been doing has helped!
On-Page Optimization | | richardpatey0 -
Dropping Old Site After Too Many Penalties. What Do You Think About the New One?
I finally decided to drop my website after it kept losing traffic even though I spent hundreds of hours and lots of $$$ trying to recover from both Panda and Penguin. I should've started a new website a lot earlier. So here's my new website, let me know if it's worthy of Big G:Â http://www.webhostinghero.com/ Thank you in advance for your constructive comments!
On-Page Optimization | | sbrault740 -
Site is not ranking for a particular keyword !!
One of my site is ranking for all the main keywords except one. This keyword is just a variant of those keywords which are all ranking in top 10 (page 1) in Google. Why is it happening? Does Google punishes site for one keyword. I know competition of keyword matters but other keywords with similar competition are ranking. And even the site is very well optimized for this keyword (titles and site copy without any stuffing) Any Solutions ?
On-Page Optimization | | Personnel_Concept0 -
Why is my key word rank so horrible?
I've been with seomoz for a couple of months now. I've been working hard trying to rank for the key word "kayak fishing" on my site yakangler.com. My onpage report for my home page is an A, my moztrust rank is higher than my competitors. I don't have the most links but I don't have the fewest either. Why am I ranking so horribly. Last I checked I wasn't on the first 50 pages for Google search. Any advice would be greatly appreciated!
On-Page Optimization | | mr_w0 -
Should I include location in title tag to rank higher in local search
I'm working on a site for a small guest house (http://www.tommysonthebeach.com). I have created a Google Place page (Bing and Yahoo Local) as well and I have the address in the footer on every page. I have the location (Indian Rocks Beach) at the beginning of most titles tags because that is how people tend to search, e.g. "Indian Rocks Beach vacation rental." In theory I would think that I don't need location in the title tag because Google knows the location, and I could use the real estate for other keywords suchs as "pet friendly" or "beach hotel," etc. But when I look at the SERPS, those ranking highly all seem to have the location at the beginning of the title tag. Thanks. P.S. The site is currently not showing up in Google local search apparently because Google thinks it's a vacation rental agency, which are not allowed in local search. I'm trying to get that fixed.
On-Page Optimization | | bvalentine0
