Welcome to the Q&A Forum

Kristina has good questions. You need to isolate the problem metrics as best as possible. In GA you can parse out influence of click bids vs. CTR having the effect on RPM/eCPM.

If it's a CTR issue that is responsible for 100% of your ad revenue drop and eCPM drop, ie. the click bids went unchanged, then you need to look at Mobile vs. Table vs. Desktop changes in CTR over the period in question.  You might want to take a look at CTR changes based on source/medium as well and drill into anything that seems significant. Some of the adsense metrics in GA are a bit suspect. I like checking earnings per click against adsense revenue / adsense ads clicked.

We noticed a big drop in mobile ad CTR cutting our ad revenue in half, disproportionately affecting iPhones and it was due to the change to HTTPS having an effect on who our advertisers were indirectly affecting ad relevance/quality. Desktop CTR actually went up but the overall decline hid the problem from the client.

Ah I'd just keep in mind that YEXT's software has backend access with their partnerships with directories whereas Moz Local just submits to a handful of data aggregating directories, so it takes much longer. I've had issues with Moz Local taking a long time to aggregate data to the directories they submit to. And then clients ask why something isn't updated and we have to go in and update it manually.

Also important to consider duplicate listing issues. Yext can directly suppress duplicates with their partners in 24 to 48 hours. I don't think Moz does that yet.

I recently had to do this. The client actually didn't tell me they were moving locations and I found out after the fact. I'm not sure there is a whole lot you can do if you're referring to local/universal placement rankings. The biggest impact on those ranking changes is going to come from proximity changes, most importantly physical address in city and proximity of location to centroid of city. For us the move was a couple blocks so it didn't make a difference.

The only thing I can think of is improving for non NAP related ranking factors, ie. brand mentions, fostering real reviews, domain authority/quality of locally relevant and topically relevant inbound links, etc., and be prepared to announce the move, which a press release would help with.

Will the company name and title tags if your doing company + phrases also match up on both? How different is the content? Same topics and format? What's your reasoning behind having two separate sites from the same company competing for same/similar keywords?

I would try to differentiate as much as possible using separate hosting accounts or c-blocks, or take it even further with separate hosts.

Hi David,

Can you run a: site:yourwebsite.com search in Google and report back? ie. find some of those pages and then check the cache date on them if the URLs are the same? Similarly, you can check the URL structure if that's changed by combing through all the google results of your sites pages in the SERP to see. If old URLs that have been 301'd exist, then it hasn't been recrawled and updated.

Once we know whether its an issue of them not having been recrawled, you'll better understand what the possible issue is and go from there.

I've noticed a glitch/bug when using moz's ose chrome addon where SERPs show a DA of 100 and then analyzing it in OSE its in the 20s or 30s. This has happened maybe 10 times over time. The 100 DA has always been wrong and I've picked up on it just from thinking, "oh that doesn't look right," so I think its just a matter of using your head. If its wikipedia, its probably the 100 DA, if its a local lawyer site, its probably the lower number.

I'm not sure. But just an observation, you have more linking root domains nofollow or not for the first three specific generic anchor text money phrases than for branded terms. That seems a bit unnatural to me 1. because of the brand vs. generic contrast for 3 highly related terms and 2. because its exact match for high traffic generic and then the number of linking route domains for related anchor text terms drops off significantly instead of a smoother curve

I'm not saying its penalty level unnatural. But in the context of the well known brands you're competing with, of which most of them above you I recognize, they likely beat you out on the brand metrics.

Additionally, your first money terms are much more competitive from what I can see in terms of search volume than your second terms. Like clothes drying rack is getting 4000+ searches a month while the umbrella one is listed as 30. And trends confirms that contrast:  http://www.google.com/trends/explore#q="clothes drying rack"%2C"outdoor umbrella clothesline"

I don't really believe in getting rid of links unless I'm walking into a clients site already penalized. Maybe one or two if I have control over them over time. I think you should pivot into brand building and testing different content assets for deeper links, video maybe? If they don't perform naturally at all, cut them or revise/enhance them. That will insulate you better from the risk of aggressive link building that's been done and help raise all phrases over time.

And nofollow does matter. A lot. As well as nofollow vs. follow break down across brand vs generic anchor text in the context of your industry. A strong natural link profile example in your industry would be hard to find because your so niche competing with conglomerates. But being extremely natural (ie. not trying to have any control over the anchor text of sites linking to you at all)

You're typing your domain into what browsers?

You need to figure out if you're pulling suggest data from a search engine or suggestions from browser search history?

Try clearing your browsing history and see what happens.

No, that's perfectly fine to do.

With real estate agencies I work with in vacation rentals markets, I've set up automated emails asking for feedback. If the feedback has a positive rating, we automatically send another email asking them to review us where our local listings are.

Personally, I don't like pushing them to one review source (like Google+) because typically people have their own review preferences, and I haven't tested this but giving them options likely means a higher review rate.