Welcome to the Q&A Forum

Hi.

I'm trying to figure out a solution to two questions one of my current clients has asked me in regards to Google Analytics tagging, and I'm unsure how to respond. Can anyone help? See below the questions,

1. In Google Acquisition > Overview, their paid media is reporting as "Other". They do not run any Google paid ads. They only run Facebook paid ads. Is there a way to update the source so that it says "Paid" versus "Other" within the default channel?

The current solution was advised to create a channel group that the client has to then tick on overtime they want to see this data with the correct labeling. They would prefer to see it in the default.

Is it just a matter of going into the *default channel, choosing the "Paid" option, and then specifying the source/medium that contains Facebook, CPC, or referral to be categorized under this channel? Or is it something else?

*Aware that changes to the Default Channel are permanent changes and will change how new traffic is classified.

2. Audience segmentation > The client wants to be able to define it's audience by shopping intent and informational intent. Is there a clear way to do this, for example, by keywords used, e.g. buy, product name, entry (shopping intent), versus e.g. non-purchase intent, entry to the blog, length of time on site (info intent). Would be happy to have a conversation about the last question, since I'm conscious that there are probably multiple ways to define this - thanks.

To the group, thank you for readying my questions and helping me with these solutions - your time is appreciated and valued.

Sincerely,

Amanda

Hi.

I'm trying to figure out a solution to three questions one of my current clients has asked me in regards to Google Analytics tagging, and I'm unsure how to respond. Can anyone help? See below the questions,

1. In Google Acquisition > Overview, their paid media is reporting as "Other". They do not run any Google paid ads. They only run Facebook paid ads. Is there a way to update the source so that it says "Paid" versus "Other" within the default channel?

The current solution was advised to create a channel group that the client has to then tick on overtime they want to see this data with the correct labeling. They would prefer to see it in the default.

Is it just a matter of going into the *default channel, choosing the "Paid" option, and then specifying the source/medium that contains Facebook, CPC, or referral to be categorized under this channel? Or is it something else?

*Aware that changes to the Default Channel are permanent changes and will change how new traffic is classified.

2. In Google Acquisition > Overview > Referral, the clients website is showing up as a referring domain, both the TLD and the subdomain. My understanding is that it should actually be reporting under the "Direct" channel. How do I correct this? Is it just a matter of updating the Direct channel to include those domains? Or do I need to update the settings? The domain's www. http: all 301 redirect to their https://domain.com and https://subdomain.domain.com. Within settings it has been specified as www.domain.com and URL is http:// - also noticed that Bot Filtering has not been checked, assuming this could mess up the analytic data if not define? Do you know?

3. Audience segmentation > The client wants to be able to define it's audience by shopping intent and informational intent. Is there a clear way to do this, for example, by keywords used, e.g. buy, product name, entry (shopping intent), versus e.g. non-purchase intent, entry to the blog, length of time on site (info intent). Would be happy to have a conversation about the last question, since I'm conscious that there are probably multiple ways to define this - thanks.

To the group, thank you for readying my questions and helping me with these solutions - your time is appreciated and valued.

Sincerely,

Amanda

Hahaha! Thanks Brent for the advice, and the your approach. It is appreciated.

You welcome. Good luck.

Sounds simplistic but keyword research categorized by estimated volume based around semantic relativeness, Google Trends, competitor research, and the 90 foot view of those three things together to then define a content strategy.

~Amanda

Not sure if it is required by law, but their lawyer has advised them to stay away from what they can and can't do, and having an onsite blog with the mentions of conditions is a no, sadly. To bad as the equity of the home site would help the blog. I also know that the FDA is starting to regulate the supplements industry more, so they are picking and choosing their battles.

Hi Brent. Here are my thoughts, and I too have done my fair share of mergers and redesigns for URL migrations, etc.

• stick with a similar URL structure to H Corp through the migration (my normal process) but deviate from pretty much every best practice for structuring URLs with keywords, common sense and logic. Pro: follow my process (which has always worked in the past) Con: don't implement SEO/On-page best practices at this stage and wait for the site redesign to implement best practices (more work) Follow your process, especially if they are redesigning, that way you can advise on SEO/on-page during phase two. Doing it this way you are able to set expectations (this is key). If they know the risk, you might be able to advise them to migrate the websites during the redesign versus multiple times (advised option 3). We all know that the more redirects that occur, the more equity is diluted. Present the options, define the risk, provide your perspective, and let the client make their decision. Then implement <wink>, that's all we can do.</wink>
• Implement new URL structure now and deviate from my trusted process.
  If you have a proven process, I'd stick with it and just educate the client on the process and risk.

Do you see a third option? Third option is to advise them to wait, and migrate the sites during the redesign process. I think this is the cleanest, and smartest way to proceed. However, I appreciate when the client wants to do it, they want to do. So then you provide the options, present the risk.

Am I overthinking it? Nothing wrong with being thorough. Validating is key, and the more minds you reference, the better perspective you can gain.

Good luck.
~Amanda

Hi Chris.

As long as the new pages you are 301 redirecting are optimized for the same elements that you are 301ing you should be okay. A couple things you'll also want to do are, look at the backlink profile of the 301 page, and overtime, make it a point to update any external links pointing to the old URL to be updated with the New URL to ensure equity to the new page is maintained overtime, otherwise equity can begin to be lost. You can also use that exercise to request more search friendly (e.g. keyword you are targeting) in the hyper-text.

I would also advise to baseline what the old page is currently getting in existing traffic, so that you can monitor the transition. You might see a little dip while the search engines are reconnecting everything up, but in my experience. It'll all go back to normal as long as similar optimizations are maintained, e.g. folder depth, h1, title tag, content, updated backlink structure, alt-tags.

Hope that helps, holler if you have any other questions, or something is unclear.

~Amanda

Thanks for your response rhonda002. Your thoughts are along mine, so it's validating - thank you. The only difference is it can't be onsite. It would have to be it's own stand-alone blog.

Hi.

I looking to the community for support around how others have dealt with restrictions involving keyword usage. I have a client that is within the health supplements industry, and though not as highly regulated as medicine, they still have restrictions on words they CANNOT use on their store/website. Which of course is restrictive when you are trying to help them rank for Diabetes Supplements, but they can't mention the condition at all.

So, what say the community, have you dealt with a similar issue? If so, how did/would you solve it? And can you share the solution/case study/website?

In general, I was thinking they create a stand alone blog that talks about alternative medicine, health conditions, ingredients/recipes, etc. First identify what people around, e.g. Diabetic Supplements are searching for and then build content around those searches. Then once the community has had time to grow, start offering banner ads that direct them to the types of supplements they are selling on their direct website. *Just so you know, I'd also advise to put a disclaimer on the blog so people knew who owned it.