This one:
http://www.seomoz.org/blog/the-seomoz-office-gets-a-new-do
I know it's not strictly SEO related, but it came at a really cool time in my freelance career and was awesome motivation.
Welcome to the Q&A Forum
Browse the forum for helpful insights and fresh discussions about all things SEO.
This one:
http://www.seomoz.org/blog/the-seomoz-office-gets-a-new-do
I know it's not strictly SEO related, but it came at a really cool time in my freelance career and was awesome motivation.
Nope. I would buy the .com, and if/when you're ready explore international SEO with it; but for now I would just 301 it to the domain you've had this whole time. It's the one with links to it, the original content, and the right top-level country code for your target audience.
I say this generally because the TLD isn't going to have the impact. But, I don't know anything about either domains. Was it used for a very similar business model/is it getting traffic, all that other stuff?
Simply age and domain extension aren't enough reasons, but if you're buying a running and successful site, consider how you want to use that content.
Hey Brandon,
I think it depends on how much more relevant that desired category would be. If it truly is a better fit, and the one the put you in isn't, then yeah, see if they will update it.
If it's good enough though, I would say leave it. The Yahoo! directory can be a decent link, and I wouldn't want to delay getting a solid listing if it isn't too terribly important.
Rather, I would take my link, and move on. Depending on the business I have some clients that actually get business because of that listing. But a lot don't, they sometimes barely get traffic. I still think it's a good listing, but don't waste too much time on it if it isn't going to actually convert.
Hey Warren,
Man, I'm really sorry to hear about the drop. I took a quick look but I'm gonna answer given what you said first.
If the content really is duplicated, that's going to be the first and loudest bell for me. The other domains that ranked are of higher authority (they have an established history, more quality links, etc.). Given the opportunity to rank a site of such high authority (which in turn offers several listing to clients, thus enhancing their browsing experience) vs. yours it's going to be tough to change their mind.
Food for thought:
The fact that the domain is so closely matched to the address could potentially look spammy. Pair that up with the duplicate content and it could appear rather nefarious to the Goog. I don't think it's that bad, but keep that in your noggin for future reference.
A long time ago the real estate industry felt a slap by Google for shotty link practices. I got a ton of real estate work back then (cleaning stuff up mostly). We often played with the idea to create mini sites for each property but simply didn't think it was the best way or working their online marketing. Large risks were among the hurdles.
Fast forward a few years and there's so much one can do to gain local exposure. That arena is really built for sites like those that are out-ranking yours (sites that have many listings, sort features, etc.). There are so many things you can do to promote individual properties on a single site that it's generally your best route.
Not knowing your business model, that's my first suggestion. Have a single site and promote the listings that way.
But if this is where you're at, then it may be as simple as getting some unique content on the site. You might read some advice to "make sure it is XX% different" but I would say scrap and write something truly unique. If it's in your budget, you can find freelance writers all over the place on the web that will get some decent content on there for you.
I'm totally with Nicholas on that one. Generally the <title>is the more appropriate method.</p> <p>A bunches of years ago I worked for a company that provided a closed CMS to their clients. They didn't have access to the <head> section, so this was the only way to actually get a title; but that was many years ago, at a company that had no idea. </p> <p>Just to clarify, they totally don't do that anymore. This was a really long time ago. </p></title>
Man, please don't sue me if this doesn't work, but I say go for it.
Think about it like this. What's to stop a competitor from getting a bunch of those links, wait til a site is penalized and then redirecting it to you? Nothing. It's unlikely I think, and quite the investment but it could happen, right?
Plus, if you're getting hit because your links look shotty to Google, then wouldn't a redirect to a well-established site help to curb that perception.
I vote do it. But seriously, let me know how it goes.
Right off the bat I point you here:
http://www.seomoz.org/blog/mission-imposserpble-establishing-clickthrough-rates
These numbers are actually pretty close to what I usually see. There are exceptions and it can be wildly different depending on the results, type of business, etc.
1% might seem low for 4th position, but I've actually seen that quite a bit. The traffic estimates by Google are usually BS. Are you looking at broad match or exact match?
Also, I know "icebreaker" is your brand, but it is a pretty vague search term. As you said, you're the first retailer. I see other results; something about a ship, etc.
I also see Amazon up there, which is a well-known brand. Sometimes it's not the fact that you're being out-ranked, but by whom you are being out-ranked. What I mean is, if you were being out-ranked by lesser-known brands, then you would probably see better CTR. But Amazon is super well-known.
All those things combined, not bad I would think.
To answer your question though, it really all depends on the brand. I work with a group that is very well-known right now. And their brand terms bring more traffic than any other type of terms.
It's always so hard to get a straight answer on this. There isn't much in the way of an official one from Google (of course), and I've experienced what I think to be both results (penalty passed, and penalty not passed).
Personally, I think it has a lot to do with the penalty, etc.
More importantly though, why do you think it has been penalized. You mention that it hasn't completely lost visibility, but you've lost rankings. There are many things that can cause that.
First, I would check this vid to get a grasp on your situation:
http://www.seomoz.org/blog/whiteboard-friday-oh-i-got-a-penalty
If you still think you have a penalty it can be a bit tricky. Like I said, I constantly hear debates on this, and have anecdotedly seen both results. It's tough to test really.
I would take a step back and put the SEO goggles down. Ask yourself "How do I genuinely fix this situation?" Not the penalty itself, but the cause of the penalty. If you think a 301 is your best hope, then go for it.
As for actually redirecting the penalty, I don't think that's going to happen...unless you did something really naughty. Rather I think people 301 without fixing the underlying issues, and when they get penalized they assume that it was transferred via the redirect.
I'm pretty interested though. Let us know what happens/what you decide to do.
OK cool. So we know that the address isn't specifically the problem.
When I say over-accommodate, I mean that sometimes I get clients who aren't even close to the city center. In those cases, we have to build substantially more citations, etc. to compete.
So let's look at those aspects. I can't believe I didn't ask you about reviews. Those are pretty important. Does your client have more, fewer, on-par reviews? Tab up the negative reviews vs. positive. Do you respond to any negatives?
I did a lawyer not long ago and I remember Google pulling judysbook reviews. And sometimes from NOLO. But I think Google doesn't pull from other sources like they used to (sorry Yelp). See if you have any links to more reviews. You might not actually see the reviews, but there will be a link for "reviews from around the web" or similar. If you see that there are listings to third-party reviews that your client doesn't have, get those. Hell, even if your competition doesn't have them, I would still head to Judy's Book and nolo and get listed, and try to solicit reviews as much as you can.
The reviews on the Google Places page are going to be more prominent/important, but those still have an impact.
I would keep the address as you have it. At this point it's more important to keep it as consistent as possible than to try and change it now.
While you're at it, where are you on the GPlace Page itself? Have videos and images? All that stuff? Don't stop when it says "100% complete" fill up the image and videos spots the best you can.
Alright, let me know about the reviews and completeness. I would try to get the "basics" as out of the way as possible.
I wrote (however ugly it may be) an eBook on this exact thing. Get all the foundation stuff under control first then poke at the detailed issues. I may be sending you on a goose chase for a second though as it sounds like you have this part under wraps. Just in case: http://seo-factor.com/ranking-in-google-places/
It's a little tough without looking at all the details, but here are my thoughts/suggestions.
Missing Old Pages - This may be happening because of a new design/CMS. I see this a lot when clients go for a new, WordPress site. It's a great idea, but they neglect to implement 301 redirects for all those old pages that had rankings, etc.
Check your 404 errors/Google Webmaster Crawl errors. You might find a bunch of pages that are being linked to, were updated with a new URL structure and now result in an error. You might find that setting up the 301s does the trick (give it a couple weeks once you're done).
Check for keyword cannibalization - See if the keywords you were targeting on those "main" pages are also being targeted on those blog posts. Might need to clean that up a little; ensure that each page has unique info/focus/titles, etc.
It is possible that the links to those posts is spreading your link juice a little too thinly, but I wouldn't jump to that conclusion just yet. I only say it because a year is a long time, and you could have tons of posts that are drawing from that link juice.
Hey David,
Man, you certainly have your ducks in a row. I have a couple questions for you to consider. It's kinda weird dealing with Google Places as so much is so inconsistent sometimes. It can be so many little things that impact rankings.
How old are your citations? If you have competition that had tons of citations for a long time, and your client recently got theirs; it won't matter how many you have for just a bit. There's going to be a small element of waiting. Give it a month, see what happens.
How does you client's location relate to the competition? If they are all closer to the city center, and your client is much farther, that's usually the culprit. Then, you're going to have to over-accommodate a bit (which it actually sounds like you're doing, so good on ya).
Generally speaking, the shared space shouldn't hold you back. I say shouldn't because by design Google should be showing "locations at this address" depending on your search. If you have sufficient citations to confirm your address, address on the site, etc. then you should be ok. You can test it though.
Look at a few of the other businesses with the same address and search for their keywords (just like a....GASP...common user...yuck). See how they perform compared to their competition. It's a lot of digging, but if you see that there are places at that address that do indeed perform, then you know that it should be ok.
If you only see one listing that performs, and all the others do not, then you might have some issues. But from the way you describe it, you're already "performing" on some level, so I think you should be ok.
Let me know if my thoughts so far aren't it. I wanna hear more.
Hey Andrew,
In fact, the more a link has aged, the better. It's a sign of stability to have a wide range of dated links pointing to your site. It shows that your site is continuously and consistently sought after by others (people referencing your material, etc.).
It is still important that you continue to build links though, as you don't only want to have old links. If you haven't gotten any new links to your site in a long time, it can be a sign that your site may have gone stagnant.
So, the old links are good, but keep building them.
Hey Pedro,
This really depends on what you want to do with your site, and how you want to deliver the content to your readers.
The tags are generally used to help people find articles that interest them (by searching or clicking the tags, etc.) so they are an important usability feature for a lot of blogs. But they can create a bit of duplicate content if they are allowed to run rampant.
Because you can place tags with more/less specificity, you can give a much better description to each post. So if your site is about "SEO" you may have a post that goes into the "beginning SEO" category. But the post is about title tags. So you would give that post the tags of "title tags, meta tags, on-page seo" etc. depending on how your site is organized.
So you see how they allow you to place just a bit more info so you can tell your visitors what the post is all about.
The reason you hear about them so much in the SEO arena is due to their ability to grossly inflate the number of your pages on your site with content that is duplicated elsewhere.
If you have that same post and tagged the way I described, you now have the same/very similar content on the archive pages for each of the tags you assigned to it. This is usually handled by either blocking the search engines from indexing those pages, or creating canonical pages appropriately.
There's a really good plugin to make this a non-issue by Joost de Valk, but before you download and start setting it up, you might want to also read his WP SEO article.
The Article:
http://yoast.com/articles/wordpress-seo/
The Plugin:
Hey Lawrence,
It may not be a problem at all, at least not by design. Google began merging organic information with Google Places a while back. If you notice that the title of the Place page on the results page is the same as that of your website page that ranked, this happened.
And when that happens, short of a few cases I have right now it always takes place of the organic listing. Meaning that you only get the one.
In some cases this is ok, as the Google Places page is taking the top spot of the results page. I've also noticed an increased conversion rate depending on the service.
It can depend on your server, but usually this is normal (at least by design). When you make URL/structure changes in WP, it automatically creates 301 redirects. So if you change the permalink, or category info for a page, it should update all "old" links to redirect to the new way.
Keep in mind that this is by design, and not always the most accurate. I've had a few clients with weird permissions and it didn't work. Keep watch over your GWT for 404s.
GWT can take some time to update. When you're looking at the errors, check the date of the last time Google noticed the problem. Check them manually. If everything appear to be fine then you're likely good to go.
Check in a week or so, and if things are still amiss, then something went wrong.
I can tell you from experience that it doesn't matter. In fact, Matt Cutts suggested (quite some time ago, mind you) to keep the extensions. I almost never keep the extensions myself, and have not been given a reason to think it matters.
Here's the vid from Matt Cutts:
I'm with Brandon. I would try to match the URLs/pages where I could. But other than that if you're coming from a heavy Flash site you're likely to be doing a great service just by uploading the new site. Where you can't match the pages, make sure you implement 301 redirects to the new, similar content.
You can good list of your current pages/URLs, as well as meta information with the Screaming Frog Spyder:
http://www.screamingfrog.co.uk/seo-spider/
This way you can plan out your redirect/rewrite/conversion strategy before you have to implement it.
I always make sure to manually check stuff on a regular basis as well as use tools. Tools are great, but like Steve said this is always going to be the case with software, especially in an industry as unregulated as ours.
Try to use the tools as a means of directing your attention to items that need it; rather than trusting them implicitly and using them as a checklist.
And again, Steve is correct in that Google's Webmaster Tools (as great as it is) can be a little dated. They will sometimes show errors that have been cleaned for a while. And keep in mind that seomoz tools are created within the context of SEO interests (Google will just show technical errors, SEO tools will show those, plus other warnings based on experience on things that will impact your rankings).
Hey edeb,
This is one of those cases where you really have to evaluate what is going to work best for your bottom line. Remember that SEO is a means to achieve a goal.
I would start by finding out where you are. Do the plant pages rank well enough? If so, maybe you don't need to do anything, and your site can handle the minor leaks in juice (but hey, keep building links). If not, then yeah I would start looking at solutions to this.
You mention that you placed those products on the main pages to reduce call volume. I know how costly that is so I feel you there. But has it actually helped? And if so, how much? Is it worth the loss in rankings for those main pages?
If you aren't saving the cost you thought you would, or it's not enough to risk the rankings for those pages then I would get em off there (and look for more solutions to reducing that call volume. Man, that's so expensive).
If your major pages are ranking nicely, and the reduction in call volume has been a major relief, son't do anything. Well, call you competitors and brag, but nothing else on this front.
Hey Sebastian,
Right off the bat I would say go over this article real quick:
http://www.seomoz.org/learn-seo/internal-link
More to your question though, you'll want to talk this over with someone looking into your site specifically (your SEO). This really depends on the type of site you have, the competitive nature of those deeper pages, what you consider a "conversion" and how one would actually convert.
If your homepage plays a major role in your funnel, then you may not want to put too many links on it. If you want those deeper pages to rank, and they need a little extra juice then it may constitute placing a link on the homepage.
If you have some historical information (traffic, conversion rates, etc.) then you may also want to keep an eye on that. If you gain rankings and lose conversions, why? Is is because the added links took away from the desired flow?
In regard to implementation, it again depends on your site. I wouldn't jump on any changes just for SEO if it's going to have an undesired effect on your overall performance. I hate giving vague answers like that, but it's important to make the right changes depending on your goals.
Hey Kesh,
An acceptable number is going to be difficult to come up with. It all depends on your content, the types of links you're getting, etc.
When you say that they don't work, do you mean they are broken links? If so, is it because your site no longer has the page that it linked to (resulting in a 404)? If so, I would work with your SEO to have that content re-created or redirected as appropriate.
http://seo-factor.com/404-reports-for-link-building/
I would also attempt to contact those sites and have them update the links to your site.
If they are broken because the linking site mis-coded something, again I would have your SEO contact them and see if you can't get them updated.
Are they just being dropped by the linking sites all together? Then I would definitely talk to your SEO and discuss what types of sites are dropping your links, why they may be doing so, and what other types of links you are getting.
I'm having a hard time thinking of a situation where the links built to your site would regularly drop, other than being paid for or in some sort of directory service. This isn't to say that there isn't a more "legitimate" reason, but I would talk with your SEO to get answers to those.
I also don't know about placing a KPI on that until you hammer out some of the finer points. Generally speaking we as SEOs don't always have power over third parties. At least, until I finally invent my 'SEO Brain Control' device. Odds are, your SEO has noticed already and should have some sort of plan. But we are a funny in that we sometimes assume that everyone knows all about this stuff and it's not a talking point.
Given my vague answers I'll give you a couple of scenarios and my opinions on them.
If you're getting bunches of links from low quality sites, and regularly seeing those links drop and new links added, then it's likely because those links are paid-for in some capacity. If that's the case, call your SEO and make sure they explain their plan, and the risks associated with buying links. Basically, poke and prod until you get answers (and ask many questions here for second opinions).
But if your SEO is helping you promote the awesome content created through your site, and building many quality links to your site. Then maybe those dropped links are because scraper blogs pick it up sometimes. This is in a way a sort of flattery. In that case your SEO might be totally kicking...you know. Just make sure they have in place methods to prevent/combat/make use of those scraper sites.
That might work too. Admittedly I am unfamiliar with your market so my answers are of a more "generally, what I would do is" type. If you can expand that content and get a blog post out of it too, why not?
Lol, it appears you answered while I was updating my comment. Sorry about that.
I looked at that page. I gotta say I would add the content to it directly. Perhaps you could separate it so that it's easily identified as an additional option. Or again, get some advice from someone with a bit more experience on that front than I (I don't make them pretty, I just make them rank).
That's a bit interesting. Do you have just the one "caps" page that you would like to expand, or are there many?
I ask because if you have multiple pages on which you're going to put the same content, you could run into duplicate issues. In that case it may be best to have a separate page.
From an SEO perspective, it would technically prove beneficial to get another page of content on there, but careful with this one. This is information regarding a product, and if you can deliver that information to the customer without forcing them to click for it, you are reducing your bounces a little. The fewer clicks to buy, the better.
If this would all be on just one page, I would opt for expanding that content. In that case, you may want to consult a designer who can help you find creative, yet user-friendly ways of delivering that content to ensure that it's above the fold, etc. And depending on the target terms, the additional content could/should help that page to rank.
Think "user first" and the SEO part seems to fall in line....most times.
Edit/Update: Hey I looked at your site, is this the page in question?
http://www.stadriemblems.com/direct-embroidered-caps.html
If so, then I would certainly opt for placing the content on here. I think that expanding that would help more than a link to more info. But again, for so long as it's going to be unique.
Indeed it is. I don't know how paranoid I really am about that stuff; but I guess I don't usually work in situations that would call for it.
I usually side with the crowd that says "come on, do you really think Google is researching and analyzing such distant aspects in an attempt to catch a spammer?"
But then again, if I were a search engine...I would indeed research stuff that most people don't think about. Especially if I had such the resources as held by Google. Just sayin'
My interest is kinda peaked though. Let me know what you do and how it works out.
This is a bit of a tricky one. If you're really able to keep them separated then you should be fine. After all, many people download the same WP themes from not only their repository, but from third-party places like themeforest.
Just to be safe though, I would really make sure they are different; regarding sidebar content, etc. I would also make some changes to the heads and footers. Not just the meta, but placement of code, inclusion/exclusion of pieces, etc. Really get in there and make sure.
Honestly though, I don't know what your niche/strategy is; but you're going to have your hands full promoting 10 sites of the same type. If this is an attempt to get them all to rank for the same searches, I would re-consider your strategy. Google is pretty good at figuring that stuff out, especially if a competitor points them in your direction. It can be difficult enough to promote just one site sometimes, let alone having to also worry about what flags you may be throwing up with each of 10 sites.
If you're still going to do it, I would be super paranoid about it. Log into Google Analytics from different computers, never speak about them to people, and each time you meet someone, give them a fake name. I'm certain Google's street view cameras are equipped with microphones to catch spammers on ground-level. But maybe I only think that because the aliens told me....and what do they know about SEO?
Hey Finn,
If the link is exactly like that (no extra JS code, etc.) then you're probably fine. You may not be seeing it for a few reasons, primarily:
As a matter of fact, Google promotes (sorta) the use of schema.org, which uses a lot of tag and link attributes to identify pieces of your code. So a simple css class won't hinder them.
But just to be sure, make sure there are no "hidden" elements to that class in the CSS. They can "read" and identify that stuff rather well.
Hey Ayetti,
There used to be a list in here somewhere, but I can't seem to find it. If you're looking for more directories, check out this post by Ross Hudgens:
http://www.rosshudgens.com/do-link-directories-work/
There are many ways that you can go about finding directories yourself, and focus on higher quality types.
Hey ShaneO,
You say your rankings have increased, and you're getting an 'A' in the seomoz tool. If you've grouped your targetted keywords like you're describing, I'm gonna say you're good to go on that front.
1. On-page SEO tools are awesome, and I'm sure most others around will agree that these are some of the best (why else would we pay for it, yeah?). But it's also important to take a step back and read it without "SEO eyes." If you have your primary keyword in there, and variations could be easily found contextually, and it doesn't read like it was written by a robot; then I think you're good to go.
2. The answer to this could get a bit in-depth but I'll take a stab at it. Once you've begun to analyze your competition and are on the lookout for link opportunities, you'll get an idea for how much you'll be able to control in regard to anchor text (some sites will force only the domain name, some will allow your input).
The first bit of advice is to try an keep it natural looking. I even go so far as to throw a few completely-off-kw-focus anchors if I think I'm getting too many "good" ones.
Other than that, start with your primary keyword (assumed to be the most competitive and the most beneficial) and build those. When I'm building for variations, I don't build for each of the various keywords for which I'm targetting, I literally try to just mix it up as best I can while keeping the KW focus.
So if I'm going after"blue widgets, red widgets" I'll get a bunch for each if I can, then work out some of the like:
Remember that the anchor is a big factor, but so is the context of the surrounding text. Getting a link with the best anchor from a completely unrelated article, from an even more unrelated/focused site won't help too much (with a few "super high quality" site exceptions).
On the other hand, if you can get a halfyway decent anchor on an article about "blue widgets" specifically, on a blog written by the foremost expert in "blue widgetry" then you'll reap more benefits.
Like I said, it's a complex subject sometimes...and I ramble. Let me know if any of that didn't make sense.
It's a little difficult to tell right now (and even if they do, to what extent).
They are also pushing schema.org a bit themselves along with the other SE's, so I think (and am currently betting) that they would use this info instead, or with more priority.
The Schema.org tags allow you to get specific with not only the item (an image) but with it's context as well (an image of the author, or an image of a specific product, broken down by type, and so on).
It's all still in dev and about the only thing I've read from Google regarding its impact is along the lines of:
"We aren't saying it will increase your rankings. But this stuff will help us better catalog the Interwebs, which will help us better serve the users who search in our SE."
One could infer that Google ranks sites that are better for users higher, and so this would impact it. But you know how they are their official responses.
It's really important to take that to heart. I get clients all the time that have had their listings/accounts rejected because they had been advised to game the local system.
But it's also important to understand your client. Back to Marriott, each of those locations is technically a different business (the hotel itself being owned by someone else, operating under the Marriott name). As an aside, it's also a ton of fun trying to establish and manage hotel Places listings while the brand is attempting the same thing for the same locations. Especially one so authoritative as Marriott.
And to throw another wrench in it, you also have to consider that Google attempts to solve as many problems as they can algorithmically (did I just make that up?). By this I mean that they don't know the inner working of your business/niche, they can only make assertions based on the info they find. I had no idea that all these Marriotts you see on the highway weren't actually "owned" by Marriott themselves until I worked with a hotel management group. The folks on the Local team didn't didn't either for a very long time.
If you're in doubt, or there is even a remote idea that your intentions are to cover more SERP space outside of legitimate reason, it's better to play it safe.
Hey Josh,
This really depends in the situation specifically, but I can give you a few cases I've had in the last year or so.
Generally, it's OK, to have each location on a sub-folder/page specific to that address; along with a Google Places page for that page. But it depends on the type of business, locations, etc. You can kinda ask yourself the intent on adding multiple Places listings as the resulting indicators are what Google will use.
What I mean is, if you have a client that wants to get a bunch of "addresses" so they can dominate a larger area in Google Places, then you are going to run into issues. Google doesn't like PO Boxes and the like (UPS mailboxes, etc.). I've seen/got them listed a ton of times, but they are more likely to run into problems later.
If you have real locations that a person can visit, then you'll usually be ok. I handled the Places pages for a Marriott client, and each location under the Marriott brand has its own Google Places page, with links to the specific page on the primary site.
On the other hand, I just took on a lawyer that was previously advised to get a bunch of FedEx boxes around town and use those for multiple listings. He came to me for a reason.
I'm really thinking that Google takes the business type into consideration, so be mindful of that.