Welcome to the Q&A Forum

I think this might be what you're after.

I had the same problem. I made the SEOMoz team aware of it, and they said that if they hear of any other people having the same problem, they may look to change it. So do let them know via the Feedback button on the left hand side of the screen.

I thought it was just me being blind!

There's quite a lot going on here, so I'm going to chime in where I feel I can add the most value.

I think it is a given that using geo keywords within the URL indisputably impacts a site's local rank; however, few (if any) SEOs would describe that impact as dramatic. It is a signal, but it isn't the biggest factor, and will always be overshadowed by off-page efforts.

Google have said they're aware of too-powerful, keyword- rich URLs, though that's mainly referring to the domain name, as oppose to page/filenames. Your best friend kolkermd only ranks 6th for the query the page you specified is targeting (see: tummy tuck new york city), with superior <title>tags and, I'd wager, keyword-rich backlinks, winning the day.</p> <p>So my advice would revolve around two principles: focus your onpage efforts, including your site's structure, on usability (which is currently very good), taking the battle to your competitors instead with your link building efforts.</p> <p>Also, don't forget Places... perhaps the single most important thing when it comes to local search, particularly for the broader, more competitive terms (i.e. plastic surgery in...).</p></title>

This one fleshes out Q2:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=971qGsTPs8M&feature=relmfu

Like Barry, I've not tested this conclusively; however, I'd be very surprised if natural comma usage has much if any negative effect.

In this instance you'd probably be better off with a comma splitting the two (very similar) keywords just for the human factor: "cheap books free books" looks spammy and is likely to put people (and potentially Google, depending on how far you take it) off.

The fact is, quality editorial is going to be doing a lot of the hardwork for you, particularly in the long tail. (Content is king, yada yada.) What you need to be worried about is making sure that content is accessible both to the three major search engines and, as is becoming ever more important, easily shareable.

If the content is in the form of articles or blogs, ensure that the template itself (probably generated by a CMS?) is optimised and free of any duplicate content or canonical issues.

Are the major on-page things - title, h1, image file names / alt text - in place and optimised on a per-article basis?

Is it easily shareable? FB, Twitter, major bookmarking services, RSS etc. Are these well positioned and performing well from a landing page optimisation point of view?

You're right, it's got to match, but it's not quite as strict as you fear.

"Please be sure that your display URL accurately represents your destination URL, the page within your site to which users are taken via your ad. The display URL should have the same domain (such as example.com) as your landing page."

So you're unlikely to have problems by adding the /Coupons suffix to the display URL, particularly as your site is a coupon site and is, therefore, in line with what a user clicking such an advert would expect.

It's hard to give specifics without seeing the data itself, but yes, your assumption is a fair one. Do you use traditional marketing methods like leafleting, newspaper/magasine adverts etc? Is your brand a fairly well known one locally, or nationally? If so, this would fit in with what you are seeing.

You're not, for example, ranking for summer camp carolina, and are only in the 10th slot for [summer camp north carolina](summer camp north carolina).

As I'm not sure of your SEO experience, I think it's fair to point you toward Google's keyword tool which can give you lots of ideas of what key phrases to target, as well as their rough search volume and competition.

summer camp nc is one such example that it threw up at a glance.

So yes, in an effort to increase traffic and leads, you almost certainly want to focus on the broader, less brand-orientated phrases (though this can be said for almost any SEO campaign).

It may also be worth making sure you are meeting the requirements and expectations of the demand you are already experiencing. If people are searching for "the name of [...] our programs", make sure you're making every effort to provide them with a relevent page.

"Surprised there's not more about this in discussion forums as would imagine that other franchise businesses face similar issues."

I've noticed this as well.

It appears (though I've no proof) that many SEOs are playing their cards very close to their chest with Places following last October's update -- not least because of the rapidity of changes since, and the struggle to stay abreast of them.

SERPs for local search queries have evolved and local search is a completely different ball game compared to the days of the 7-pack. As such, there's been a rush to take advantage of the opportunities that have presented themselves.

It's a YouMoz post waiting to happen, except that by the time you've written it, Google will have changed something again..!

It sounds like you have a very good idea of what you're doing and what you're trying to achieve, so I'll be brief with my response:

• If you feel like one of your blogs may be of interest to your readership of another, you should absolutely consider linking two (or more) of them. Just be honest, transparent, and try and do it in a natural way that provides value to your readership. (Glen Allsopp does a good job of this.)
• Do any of your blogs have a community element? Have you considered ways you can leverage them to essentially automate your link building efforts, either through social media (FB, Twitter) or their own blogs? If not, is this something you could work on?
• It sounds to me like by doing what you're doing, blogging, and providing high quality posts in your niches as link bait, then you're doing the right thing. You could try and scale this up with interviews, guest posts (this works both ways) etc.

It's hard to give any specifics without knowing in which niche you operate.

Hope this helps,

Martin

Like Barry, I've not tested this conclusively; however, I'd be very surprised if natural comma usage has much if any negative effect.

In this instance you'd probably be better off with a comma splitting the two (very similar) keywords just for the human factor: "cheap books free books" looks spammy and is likely to put people (and potentially Google, depending on how far you take it) off.

It sounds like you have a very good idea of what you're doing and what you're trying to achieve, so I'll be brief with my response:

• If you feel like one of your blogs may be of interest to your readership of another, you should absolutely consider linking two (or more) of them. Just be honest, transparent, and try and do it in a natural way that provides value to your readership. (Glen Allsopp does a good job of this.)
• Do any of your blogs have a community element? Have you considered ways you can leverage them to essentially automate your link building efforts, either through social media (FB, Twitter) or their own blogs? If not, is this something you could work on?
• It sounds to me like by doing what you're doing, blogging, and providing high quality posts in your niches as link bait, then you're doing the right thing. You could try and scale this up with interviews, guest posts (this works both ways) etc.

It's hard to give any specifics without knowing in which niche you operate.

Hope this helps,

Martin

"Surprised there's not more about this in discussion forums as would imagine that other franchise businesses face similar issues."

I've noticed this as well.

It appears (though I've no proof) that many SEOs are playing their cards very close to their chest with Places following last October's update -- not least because of the rapidity of changes since, and the struggle to stay abreast of them.

SERPs for local search queries have evolved and local search is a completely different ball game compared to the days of the 7-pack. As such, there's been a rush to take advantage of the opportunities that have presented themselves.

It's a YouMoz post waiting to happen, except that by the time you've written it, Google will have changed something again..!

I had the same problem. I made the SEOMoz team aware of it, and they said that if they hear of any other people having the same problem, they may look to change it. So do let them know via the Feedback button on the left hand side of the screen.

I thought it was just me being blind!

There's quite a lot going on here, so I'm going to chime in where I feel I can add the most value.

I think it is a given that using geo keywords within the URL indisputably impacts a site's local rank; however, few (if any) SEOs would describe that impact as dramatic. It is a signal, but it isn't the biggest factor, and will always be overshadowed by off-page efforts.

Google have said they're aware of too-powerful, keyword- rich URLs, though that's mainly referring to the domain name, as oppose to page/filenames. Your best friend kolkermd only ranks 6th for the query the page you specified is targeting (see: tummy tuck new york city), with superior <title>tags and, I'd wager, keyword-rich backlinks, winning the day.</p> <p>So my advice would revolve around two principles: focus your onpage efforts, including your site's structure, on usability (which is currently very good), taking the battle to your competitors instead with your link building efforts.</p> <p>Also, don't forget Places... perhaps the single most important thing when it comes to local search, particularly for the broader, more competitive terms (i.e. plastic surgery in...).</p></title>

The fact is, quality editorial is going to be doing a lot of the hardwork for you, particularly in the long tail. (Content is king, yada yada.) What you need to be worried about is making sure that content is accessible both to the three major search engines and, as is becoming ever more important, easily shareable.

If the content is in the form of articles or blogs, ensure that the template itself (probably generated by a CMS?) is optimised and free of any duplicate content or canonical issues.

Are the major on-page things - title, h1, image file names / alt text - in place and optimised on a per-article basis?

Is it easily shareable? FB, Twitter, major bookmarking services, RSS etc. Are these well positioned and performing well from a landing page optimisation point of view?

I've got a fair amount of experience doing just that, as the company I work in-house for operates in a series of very specific geographic areas.

I'll use your site as an example.

You'll do well to start with 20 of these, one for each of your areas.

www.abbottclarkeifa.co.uk/high-wycombe/
www.abbottclarkeifa.co.uk/reading/
www.abbottclarkeifa.co.uk/oxford/

This is a relatively common practice. Be sure to add as much unique content to each as possible: local maps, phone numbers, addresses, reviews/testimonials. The bulk of the on-page effort (H1s, title, body) should then be focused primarily on the town name and your brand name, with at least a couple of instances of your primary keyword.

You can then spiral this out to the next level, e.g.:

www.abbottclarkeifa.co.uk/reading/financial-adviser-reading
www.abbottclarkeifa.co.uk/reading/pension-advice-reading
www.abbottclarkeifa.co.uk/reading/retirement-planning-reading

Again, focus each landing page toward the particular keyphrase, reflecting it in everything from the <title>to the image file names and alt attributes. (Don't go overboard or worry too much about keyword density.)</p> <p>Be sure to promote internal linking where possible (whereby as many of the pages link to as many of the others in as natural of a way as possible, with a focus on providing value and usability to prospective customers, not just for baiting crawlers).</p> <p>You can then, of course, start building keyword-rich anchor text backlinks from relevant sources to these landing pages.</p> <p>Hope this helps,</p> <p>Martin</p> <p> </p></title>

This is a very grey area, but one I feel I am qualified to answer.

I'll be frank: there have been numerous loopholes in the Google Maps (and now Places) system over the past few months. Many of these have now been closed. Even the top local SEOs are struggling to keep up, with all eyes resting on this year's collaborative study from David Mihm for some valuable insights (see 2010's here).

I'm not going to go into too many details, but suffice to say if you managed to exploit them at the time, it's a case of counting yourself lucky: your listings are likely to be intact.

You need two things for a Places listing first and foremost: a unique physical address and a unique phone number. Even if you can get around the phone number issue (which doesn't take too much imagination), it's a much harder premise to get around the physical address issue without using clients' addresses (bad idea!).

G know this, and so they've enforced verification by post only in many (if not all?) instances. I've read that this may be a temporary restriction to prevent certain groups of spammers doing their thing, but I'd be surprised to see wide scale telephone verification in place again.

I think this might be what you're after.