Hi Samuel,

I see ... thank you for explaining what you meant about the dates. You're right, no one is going to search for the business name/year. Good luck with the citation building!

Hey Ryan!

I've really been enjoying your super contributions of late to the community. Just terrific! I want to include a little addendum here ... advice regarding using mailboxes might bear more investigation. Google wants all addresses to represent a physical location ... not a P.O. box, UPS box or what have you, so this might be something to research further. Thought I would mention, and thanks again for your recent generous contributions to so many local discussions!

Hi John!

Good questions. I'll answer it in 3 parts for the sake of organization:

1. No - Google does not penalize anyone for hiding their address. If the business does not receive customers at a staffed location during stated hours of operation, then not hiding the address is a violation of Google's guidelines (see: https://support.google.com/business/answer/3038177?hl=en) and this violation is what could lead to possible action on Google's part. So, don't think of hiding the address as something that will incur a penalty.

2. That being said, there is a school of thought in the Local SEO world that in a scenario of uneven competition, businesses with a staffed, physical office that welcomes customers during stated business hours may have a slight advantage over competitors who do not have these amenities and are therefore hiding their address in compliance with Google's guidelines. So, the nuance to understand here is that if in the 7 or 3 packs in your client's industry/geography, some competitors can show their address while others have to hide it, the former may have some advantage. No one knows the exact degree of this hypothetical advantage, but it may exist. On the other hand, if in your client's packs, all of their competitors are in the same boat and are having to hide their addresses, the playing field is completely even so no one has any hypothetical advantage. It just depends on what the field of competition is like in your client's packs.

3. To my knowledge, Google is the only major engine with this hidden address requirement. For any other local business platform, the choice to display or hide the address is a personal one. Your clients can be broken down into two categories, when it comes to this:

a- Client has privacy concerns and doesn't want their street address displayed anywhere. In this case, the Local SEO on the project will need to stick to building citations only on those platforms that support hidden addresses.

b- Client has no privacy concerns and doesn't care if their street address is displayed in various places. In this case, there are no restrictions on where you can build citations.

Obviously, client B is at an advantage, because he will be able to create citations in more places.

Hope this breakdown helps clarify your options.

Hey Ruben,

Curious to know what the email said...

Hi Samuel!

That is an unusual situation (and kudos to Ryan for surfacing the Burger King story!). If, in your geography, Google is only showing one local result for a branded search (not a keyword search) then the client may be stuck. In some geographies, a branded search will show a pack of all nearby locations of that brand, but it sounds like in your client's scenario, Google is showing a local one-box or something like that. Unless the customer wants to re-brand, he is likely going to be stuck with this situation unless:

1. Google starts showing multiple results for the brand

2. He manages to completely surpass the competitor so that he becomes the #1 result

Right now, Google is likely thinking that both businesses are the same entity. I'm not quite sure what you mean about adding a date to the business name - please feel free to clarify that. If the client can't re-brand then the second option is really the only active thing he can pursue. You might like to check out the How To tab of this tutorial for using our Check Listing tool to identify weaker competitors:

http://moz.com/help/guides/local/check-listing

Good question, Wick!

You know, this really does get into the murky water. We can state the dilemma this way:

1. Google wants a precise, accurate address, as Linda has so correctly referenced. Linda is completely on the money about the use of a suite number where no such suite exists falling afoul of Google's clear guidelines. If I walk up to your door and can't find Suite B, then I've been misled.

2. So, if the business owner follows Google's guideline and doesn't add a non-existent suite, then the reality has to be faced that the risk of merging and duplicates may be increased by adhering to the guidelines. This is the tough part. If I live with my sister and she runs her yoga business out of the same building I'm running my photography studio in, we are both running the risk of Google jumbling our listings up.

3. So, where does this leave us? Basically, it leaves us with possibly having problems with our presence on Google because we are abiding by Google's rules. That's a rather imperfect situation, of course, but is the reality. And it leaves me wondering things like:

• Whether Google actually would have a problem with a suite number legally obtained from postal or local authorities, even if I don't put up a dividing wall and a second front door for the second business. Wikipedia defines a 'secondary suite' this way: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Secondary_suite ; it normally has a second entrance. But is this a legal definition? And, is it Google's definition? In my hypothetical scenario, could I technically have a suite with a shared entrance and no interior partition dividing me from my sister's yoga business? I honestly don't know if there is a rock solid answer to this.

• And, here's one Linda would be better able to answer than I, given her position as a TC in Google's own forum: in instances in which a cluster of businesses have no suites, how is Google's track record of merging looking these days? I've heard they've gotten better at this than the formerly were, but it seems like it has been some time since I've seen much commenting on this topic.

Just some thoughts. I would welcome further discussion on this thread from all community members!