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
-
Purpose of Putting "/collections" in URL String
I'm noticing that on many of my competitor's eCommerce sites, the URL for every subcategory of products is preceded by "website.com/collections/subcategory" rather than "website.com/maincategory/subcategory" Can anyone tell me why this is, and if it is beneficial to SEO to have URL strings designs this way?
Competitive Research | | acubine0 -
Can deceptive ads help sites to rank? Pogosticking effect involved...
Hello,
Competitive Research | | fablau
I have a question for you. I have noticed that many music sites that appear in the first top results for keywords our users search for, include all the same ads that deceive people by inviting them to "Download" or get the "Full Album" of what people may be search for. Look at the following websites that are often displayed at the first spots for keywords like "Christmas Sheet Music" (just an example): [....] They all have, most of the times, the same ads. Look at the following screenshots taken from the sites above (the ads are at the top of the page): http://www.virtualsheetmusic.com/storage/google/Shot1.jpg
http://www.virtualsheetmusic.com/storage/google/Shot2.jpg Those deceptive ads could engage users more than legitimate websites not showing those ads or not showing ads at all, making Google think that people are more engaged on those website showing those deceptive ads. If it is quality that Google is looking for, shouldn't they do something to avoid having sites ranking well just because of some deceptive ads that take users into action, but without any useful result? I am eager to know your ideas on this issue. Thanks! Fab.0 -
My (properly optimised) webpage outscores page#1 ranked competitors on page/domain authority ... but I'm only on page#2\. Huh?
I'm puzzled. I've optimised a particular page for a particular search term, and the SEOMoz tool gives me an A for on-page optimisation. So no problem there. I can understand why my webpage/site is being outranked by pages from (for example) the Guardian and Oxford University, but there are several sites that Google is ranking on page #1 though their page and domain scores are well below ours. Specifically: my page/domain authority scores are 46/52, compared with 22/46 for the competitor that Google is ranking #5 - yet we only rank a lowly #12. And it's not as though the particular page in question isn't an obvious and appropriate part of our site. We work with new writers and the page in question offers a selection of creative writing courses. It's not like we're a writing-related site that suddenly has a page advertising fake rolexes. It's not a timing issue either, as most of our links have been in place for a couple of years at least. So I'm puzzled. And concerned. This page of ours was a reliable revenue generator for us and it's dying out there on the page#2 wilderness. If anyone can help, I'd be massively grateful. I don't know if this is helpful, but the page in question is http://www.writersworkshop.co.uk/Creative-Writing-Courses.html and the search term is ... well, heck, you take a wild guess. We're a British firm, so the only search engine that really matters to us is google.co.uk
Competitive Research | | harrybingham0 -
Moz metrics / PageRank Incoherence
I'm checking some domains/pages where I could acquire some links, but I'm seeing huge differences between Moz metrics and PageRank and I'm hesitant about the meaning of it.. Given that PR was updated recently, is it safe to assume tons of crappy inbound links or a penalization by Google? Here is an example: Page Authority: 60
Competitive Research | | Branagan
Page MozRank: 6.0
Page MozTrust: 6.0
Domain Authority: 50
Domain MozRank: 4.0
Domain MozTrust: 4.0 Google PageRank: 1 Any clues?
Cheers!1 -
Looking for a recommendation for a site ranking comparison tool.
Hi, It seems that SEOMOZ provides only link ranking comparison with competators. I'm not conviced that this is valuable for my purposes as the comeption often has few links tool, probably the nature of the business.. First, is it worth trying to compare keyword ranking with competators? I think it is, but I'm not that experienced with SEO, especially with Wordpress/Buddpress sites. Second, any recommenations for a tool that will make this easier? Larry
Competitive Research | | tishimself0 -
Question about Keywords & Ranking
I hope this isn't too basic of a question, but I am confused about something. If you use the Keyword Research tool and type in "Stained Concrete Flooring", the 3rd result (stainedconcrete.org) has the lowest numbers of any of the sites in the top 8-10... Is it because they have a large amount of traffic? or is there some other factor that I am missing?
Competitive Research | | Timvroom0 -
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 -
Whats the best way to see why your competitor is out ranking you?
I am trying to rank in the number on position for Part Time CFO. Currently we are in 2nd and 3rd. We have way more quality inbound links then the site in first position, more content etc. How would you go about investigating why they are ahead of us?
Competitive Research | | b2bcfo0