How does this domain / page rank for this particular term?
-
Hi everyone, I'm wondering whether someone can enlighten me as to how a particular page / domain is ranking for a term that the page appears to be in no way optimised to receive traffic to.
The search engine is Google Australia and the Search Term (albiet low volume) is "Bunbury Builders" the top organic result is the homepage for "Content Living" www.contentliving.com.au/
There is one single mention of Bunbury on the page (as a phone number in the footer of the page). I've disabled javascript, css, and spoofed my user agent as Googlebot and I can't see anything suspect going on here at all.
I also ran the domain through open site explorer and I couldn't find a single anchor text reference to bunbury directing visitors back to this domain.
We haven't yet begun targeting this term, but I was curious to see (for my own education as much as anything else) how they were achieving this ranking position.
Any feedback would be appreciated.
-
Hi Andrew.
When I began looking at this question I did not immediately realize it was a ccTLD of .au so I looked in Google.com and the results are quite different and probably more in alignment with what you would expect. The question is how much of the difference is attributed to the fact Google.com's algorithms are more updated with respect to Panda and other changes (it seems quite a lot), and how much of the difference is due to geographic targeting differences.
When I look at the site if I were to make a case to support the Bunbury association I would point out five items:
-
Bunbury is mentioned on the page
-
Bunbury is not in the footer, but above the actual footer. You could say the site has two footer areas, but clearly the area where Bunbury is located has more value then the smaller footer area below it.
-
Bunbury is in bold. More to the point, the page has no h1 tag, no italics used, no alt tags used, and only a total of 3 words in bold, so this emphasis has a lot of meaning. This isn't a case of a page with 100 attention getting mechanisms are in place with the emphasis weight divided.
-
Bunbury is one of only two locations mentioned on the page, Bunbury and Perth. This isn't a case where a page is trying to stuff 20+ locations to manipulate associations. It seems quite authentic.
-
A phone number is listed right below the Bunbury mention. I have no familiarity with Australian phone numbers but I presume it is a Bunbury number.
With all of the above considered, the question is whether that is enough for Google to associate Bunbury with the page. I understand your position that it isn't much. Google clearly feels it is enough. I would also share it appears very authentic so clearly Google got it right, but the question is how?
Well either the above alone is enough, or there are some external factors influencing the decision. Some external factors are:
-
You are correct the backlinks do not show any use of Bunbury in anchor text, but there are many links which have addresses in the URL linking to the page. These linking pages clearly have a strong association with a particular physical location, and this can definitely be understood by Google.
-
Google could consider the site's contact page which shows only two locations, one of which is Bunbury. In addition to the information from the home page, there is also a Bunbury fax number, a Bunbury physical address and an e-mail to the bunbury office which shows as bunbury@.
-
The domain ownership and hosting records do not show any Bunbury association and there is not any Google Places listing, but Google could also access business records such as business licensing for example. Google's algorithms are a closely guarded secret and we simply do not use what information is and is not used.
-
-
I concur that link two is absolutely spammy (it's not mine, we've not targeted this term yet), but there are other sites in the top 'x' results that have a higher domain authority, page authority, similar moz trust that could easily hold that position. The only thing holding the top 10 together (besides spam entry number 2) is that they all get an 'F' rating for on-site optimisation.
I just thought there would be more to this particular ranking.
Thanks for the response.
-
Low query volume does impact it, but the first site while not screaming Bunbury builders, is a good site with a bunbury office (on the footer of every page and on the contact page with map, etc.)
When I look at site in position two..., sorry, but it says Bunbury builders too many times:
Bunbury House Builders
Home Builders Australia Bunbury page lists Bunbury builders including Bunbury new home Builders, Bunbury unit builders, Bunbury colonial home and timber home builders, Bunbury project home builders, Bunbury renovation builders, Bunbury removable home builders, carpenter builders in Bunbury, Bunbury design and construct or custom home builders.
The first site also has 28 linking root domains versus 1 for the higher domain auth site. This would seem counter intuitive, but it makes sense.
So, content is king, links are king, and when there are a low number of queries it would seem the better site with a few mentions of the keyword will beat out the stuffed site with 100 mentions.
-
Low query volume does impact it, but the first site while not screaming Bunbury builders, is a good site with a bunbury office (on the footer of every page and on the contact page with map, etc.)
When I look at site in position two..., sorry, but it says Bunbury builders too many times:
Bunbury House Builders
Home Builders Australia Bunbury page lists Bunbury builders including Bunbury new home Builders, Bunbury unit builders, Bunbury colonial home and timber home builders, Bunbury project home builders, Bunbury renovation builders, Bunbury removable home builders, carpenter builders in Bunbury, Bunbury design and construct or custom home builders.
The first site also has 28 linking root domains versus 1 for the higher domain auth site. This would seem counter intuitive, but it makes sense.
So, content is king, links are king, and when there are a low number of queries it would seem the better site with a few mentions of the keyword will beat out the stuffed site with 100 mentions.
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
-
Does link equity still count after an expired domain is purchased?
Hi guys, We've recently noticed a (very) minor competitor competing with us, as well as some of our industry's biggest names, in the Google SERPs - and the reason why has us absolutely stumped. Aside from an awful website from an aesthetic/UX point of view, their on-site content is horribly over-optimised, with keywords on the homepage even STRONG TAGGED for crying out loud! A backlink check using OSE and Ahrefs found 19 linking domains - most of which were just trash - but there were 5 that boasted some decent DA, the highest being 43. The thing is, these 5 sites are all very generic industry-relevant "blogs" that provide exceptionally poor quality content. The thing is, they have some very high quality backlinks (the BBC, the Guardian and CNN to name just three) acquired when the websites were something different entirely. The competitor has basically bought expired domains, turned them into basic websites related to our industry and linked them to their main domain. My question then is: is this competitor benefiting from the very high quality links that are pointing at sites that are then linked to their main domain? I found an article from 2009 that suggested old links stop counting after being purchased by someone else, but we are stumped as to why they could be otherwise. Thanks in advance everyone! John
Competitive Research | | NAHL-14300 -
Site Ranking for keywords that they haven't targeted in content
There is a site that I am constantly battling for the #1 spot for a particular keyword and I can't see that they are doing any link building, they are not using any anchor text for the keyword "at all" just their company name (not exact match) and their content doesn't even contain the keyword. I used Open site explorer to analyze their activity, but they are doing something I can't figure out from that data. Any other tools to use? I have higher quality links than them, post content nearly 5 times per week to my blog and their blog hasn't been updated in ages, I kill them in social media, there isn't one instance that they are better than my site and I only build quality driven links, no blog comment crap and get featured on lots of industry blogs for our work. I distribute my content very effectively, I just can't figure it out. They were no where about 5 months ago now they are tearing it up for lots of keywords in the industry top spots. I can build a few links and surpass them, but I have to do it every week or so and I think they are doing something fishy. I just want to figure out what they are doing and bury them. I don't want to post their url and mine here as I don't want them to see this post in search results.
Competitive Research | | photoseo10 -
Why is my competitor's site ranking #1?
I'm about to work for a local business website that offers cleaning services and products. The keyword they want the most is ruled by a very odd site; My client's competitor's site has been around for 7 years. (Less than the average of it's competitors. Less than my client's) Has 1 backlink. Lower PA MR MT & DA than any other in the SERP. It's a 1 page site made with Flash. They do not have FB or Twitter accounts. So I thought maybe they were ranking so well because of their traffic. But neither my client, me or my coworkers have ever heard of this company. And yet, they are ranking #1. And the only thing I notice that might have helped is that the title of their page is the exact keyword and nothing more. Any ideas?
Competitive Research | | Eblan0 -
Any Tool for Tracking Domain / Page Authority Growth?
Is there any tool available in the market where there is a ranking list of fastest growth in Domain and Page Authority? I launched a job site 8 months ago and I am curious to see what % of websites (not just job specific) have experienced faster growth in a similar time frame in Domain and Page Authority to get a sense of what may have been accomplished. thank you very much,
Competitive Research | | knielsen0 -
Competitor Keyword Rankings
Is there a way within SEOMoz to uncover the keywords your competitors rank for and their respective SERPs? Thx
Competitive Research | | qiherbs.com1 -
What is the difference between "external backlinks" & "referring domains" on Majestic SEO?
According to Majestic SEO's glossary, a "Referring domain, also known as "ref domain", is a domain from which a backlink is pointing to a page or link." Given this definition, I'm not sure what an external backlink is?
Competitive Research | | nicole.healthline0 -
Twitter as a website's #2 ranked linked page?
A site I'm researching on open-site explorer has a #2 link with page authority of 52 and Domain authority of 97, and that link is the site's twitter page. No other sites I've researched have had their twitter page show up in it's link rankings like this, can someone explain?
Competitive Research | | TheSquareFoot0 -
1 domain dominating unbranded search terms?
Anyone have any insight or comments? We’ve been negatively impacted by the last Google algorithm update - not by a penalization of our site but because another site is now grabbing the top 3-4 search results for long tail physician name searches thereby pushing us lower in the rankings. Being that we’ve never seen this happen with unbranded search terms, we’re not sure how to address it. To see an example, click http://www.google.com/search?q=dr.+elizabeth+eads. You’ll notice that the top 4 results are all from 1 site - HealthGrades - with 2-3 of the 4 pages being canned, pre-written templates without any unique content (see malpractice & sanction pages). It seems that they are doing this by paginating their information into separate pages, thus appearing in multiple search results, instead of putting all the information on 1 page, as we do and Google’s best practices suggest. Any advice or comments would really be appreciated.
Competitive Research | | irvingw0