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
-
Shortened URL showing as linking page
I'm using Open Site Explorer to look at backlinks and referring pages to my site. I'm seeing 3 links coming from http://j.mp/XXXXXX (not actual link) which is a bitly shortened URL. It shows as a 301 redirect, and I'm trying to figure out if there is any way to find where that link is originating from? When I try to search for the exact j.mp url in google it brings up one result which is the page the link redirects to. Any Ideas? Thanks a lot.
Competitive Research | | CJ50 -
At a bit of a loss as to poor rankings
I have a site in the UK, with these metrics: 15 years old 500 pages in sitemap, but Majestic says 186,000 indexed URLs ? DA of 45, PR of 3 1000 links from 200 linking root domains, across from 150 IP's (from OSE) 33,000 links in OSE when I use the compare tool and look at the "links to this root domain" section 24,000 external links according to Majestic 350 shares, 2,000 tweets, 60 +1's Median PA of linking root domains (from OSE export) = 20 no Moz on-page errors, or webmaster tools issues The above metrics are better than 2 competitors who have only just launched, have fewer links, lower DA, etc, and are ranking for keywords like "wedding entertainment", "corporate entertainers" Our site is www.superted.com Why doesn't OSE show 33,000 links when I select "links to this root domain". Why will those links only be shown when I do a domain comparison in OSE? I'm thinking our anchor text distribution is the problem. We have very few links containing the keywords want. Also maybe our sitemap is an issue as it only lists 500 of our pages? But given our domain age, DA, etc... surely anchor text / site map isn't the only issue here? Any hints would be awesome.
Competitive Research | | eatyourveggies0 -
Building a high-traffic website in a jobs-related domain
Hi, We are currently planning upon starting a website that’s targeted towards people looking for government jobs in India. Here are the primary / base keywords that we are targeting: Sarkari Naukri Government Jobs / Govt Jobs Latest Government jobs Banking Jobs Bank jobs Railway jobs Employment News IBPS SSC We’re confused that how should we go about ranking on top for these / long tail keywords around it? Because, we think that this is not a domain where you can write long and information-oriented posts (1400-1500 words) to crack SEO. People come to websites under this domain to look for latest jobs and that might or might not be around the high-traffic keywords mentioned above. Secondly, it might not be possible to write a lot of long & information-oriented content around these newer job posts. How do we go about building a high-traffic website in this domain? Thanks...
Competitive Research | | Shalin.TJ0 -
Help! New site won't rank locally but should...
any help would be greatly appreciated... picked up a new client, a used car dealer in New Jersey. Have a VERY spammy site before, tons of keyword stuffing and lots of dupe content. also had a horrible design. (www.coopscars.com) We updated the design and the content, made it relevant and unique, fixed title tags, etc. Now he's not ranking for anything locally other than his business name. He's got a decent number of links, we've added relevant citations, his social signals are much stronger than they were... We do lots of SEO for car dealers, and we know that he should be ranking SOMEWHERE at this point - not saying he should be page 1, but he should at least be somewhere in the top 5... and yes, bing/yahoo are different, but he ranks over there... one page 1 for "used cars south river" - so why completely non-existant on Google? just as a test, he put up a free website at www.coopscars.net just last week - and it's already ranking for several local terms. I'm completely confused here - i'm not a noob, I know the tactics we've used on him work for other dealers. Thinking there's got to be something that's blocking him, especially since there aren't but maybe 15-20 car dealers to compete against locally and he still doesn't show up... thought i'd come over here and see if anyone has any ideas...
Competitive Research | | Greg_Gifford0 -
Using Semantic Language to rank, how much stock do you put into this? (LSI)
In theory, analyzing the top results for a given phrase and comparing the common words and phrases would indicate what google considers relative language to the query. Latent Semantic Indexing (LSI) was and still is a buzz phrase for some SEOs. But how much stock do you give to the idea that if you can determine the common language for top rankers and then duplicate that language and density of common words that your website will then rank for that query you desire? Has anyone here tested the theory of using semantic language from the results themselves to better rank?
Competitive Research | | Thos0030 -
How can stale, poor quality sites rank above fresh, high quality sites?
Dear Community, How is it that a Google search for temperature sensors shows the second result as site **A **(http://goo.gl/zRS1L) in a higher positionthan site B (http://goo.gl/3Xy2O) which is on the 2nd page of the SERPs. Site A blatantly does not follow Google's webmaster guidelines and recommendations for design, content or code. Site B scores an 'A' for on page analysis using SEOmoz, it also has a much higher number of root domains in and Moz rank, we have checked that site B has only quality inbound links, and anchor text is natural, it follows Google's guidelines for content and code diligently, and it is on an older domain. We are satisfied that site B has not been penalised by Google, e.g Penguin algorithm updates. We have also done a website verification with Google. Site B has fresher content compared to site A. Site B also has a sitemap yet site A doesn't. We're satisfied that we can rule out the following Algorithm Factors: Penguin algorithm updates Google Notified penalties Dodgy Inbound links Dodgy Anchor text Website verification with Google Fresh vs. static content Sitemap present Server Speed Server location Domain age and about 170 other algorithm factors Does anyone have any ideas as to why site A is ranking higher than site B in Google.co.uk? Thanks in advance. CD.
Competitive Research | | chichesterdesign0 -
Competitor's Ranking's Reports are Showing Blank Values for Rankings
When selecting competitors to see how they rank for specific terms in the ranking's report page here, it loads the page normally, but without any actual rankings. Where values should be, it lists all values as our competition not ranking whatsoever (for all competitors). I'm not sure if there is something we're doing wrong, or perhaps we just need to wait for a refresh, but if anybody could help out, that would be wonderful!
Competitive Research | | ACLens0 -
Trying to rank against keyword in domain
I am trying to rank for let's say the keyword "their site" , my competitor has theirsite.com, with next to no seo but are ranking #1 , my site lets say is mysite.com/their-site my site is about the same age and has a PR of 4,their site has a PR of 0 and 2 backlinks, how difficult will it be to get to number 1, am at spot # 5 in google now. Thanks David
Competitive Research | | David750