Hi Searchout,

Good for you for creating a unique page for each of your locations. I like to keep URLs as simple as possible, for users, so I'd go with:

mysite.com/dallas

mysite.com/boston

mysite.com/chicago

etc.

From an SEO perspective, I don't think there's a big difference between root URLs and subfolders. If you're using one structure, I doubt you'd see any difference from doing it differently (unless you were using subdomains, which is a different conversation).

Just a thank-you for sharing your experience and tips with the community, Arowland! Much appreciated! Very creative workaround you've come up with. Neat.

Hello there!

Thanks so much for asking your question! My answer here is going to be that doing this as part of an SEO strategy will not likely be a good use of your resources. Schema implementation is not, per se, a ranking factor, though it can affect how results look, if not how they rank. In addition to this, Google has never been a fan of large blocks of zip codes within website text, so I wouldn't think they would be positively influenced by the same information presented in Schema.

The business model you are describing sounds virtual rather than local. If you are a local service area business (SAB) like a plumber, with a single physical address from which you head out to serve a variety of zip codes/towns, then you can utilize local search marketing best practices to attempt to gain organic rankings for these service cities. But this is predicated on having at least one real address for your business.

But, if the business is entirely virtual (like an e-commerce website or an Internet Service Provider or something like that and has no face-to-face contact with customers) then locally marketing the business isn't really an option, and use of Schema to attempt to show up as though the business is local isn't likely to yield results.

Rather, you'll likely need to work on your website UX+organic SEO to make it clear to consumers that you ship to/service their area.

If I've misunderstood the business model in any way, please definitely provide further details!

Good morning!

Great question, and a little history on this may be helpful.

In 2015, Google drew attention to the fact that users were increasingly using "near me" as a modifier for searches, and in an effort to prompt local results. According to Google the use of such terms as "near me" and "nearby" had doubled within the foregoing year. As a result of this, the use of "near me" terms became the subject of optimization experiments.

However, fast forward a couple of years, and Google came out with an update on this topic, which you can read in full here: https://www.thinkwithgoogle.com/consumer-insights/local-search-mobile-search-micro-moments/ To sum up, these near-type searches had begun to subside. The obvious answer to the "why" of this is that users are becoming increasingly aware of that fact that Google will automatically localize a huge variety of searches to which they assign a local intent, without the user having to modify their search at all, with "near me" or even with a city name. You look up "pizza" on your phone in downtown San Francisco and you can be pretty sure Google is going to show you pizza places nearest you without you having to add a modifier of any kind.

So, does this mean that brands should no longer be including terms like "near me" in their website optimization? No, it doesn't mean that, as, according to Google, people are still searching this way. It's just that fewer of them are, so whereas in 2015 SEOs might have advised quite a good sprinkling of near-type language in a website's tags and text, in 2018, the recommended sprinkling would likely be quite a bit less. And I'll add an it-depends on this, too. There could be some demographics, perhaps by region, or age, or level of technological sophistication, or even business type where use of "near me" could still be quite prevalent. And let's not forget about voice search, and whether more natural language patterns might be leading folks to be asking their assistants, "Where's the best pizza near me?" instead of just saying "pizza".

Which brings me to why I'm voting in major favor of your A/B testing! It will help you identify which language best matches your customers' style of search. It would be really nice if, after your test, you might come back to this thread and let the community know how it went. Good luck!

Hi Eport12!

A couple of suggestions:

1. I highly recommend checking out GetFiveStars, which I've personally test-driven and have been extremely impressed by. The product was co-founded by Local SEO guru Mike Blumenthal and the rate of innovation of the tool has been amazing.

2. I would be absolutely positive that whatever service you sign up for, it does not auto-populate review stars in reviews. One of the larger ORM software companies, Birdeye, recently fell out of Google's good graces for this practice and the case is serving as a warning now to everyone in the industry: be sure automated review requests do not auto-generate review stars. So, as you're considering your options, do keep that little proviso in mind.

My pleasure!

Hey There,

Donald is correct that virtual offices, P.O. boxes, etc. are ineligible as far as Google My Business listings go. What you are describing is a Service Area Business (SAB) if you are going to the homes of your clients or other remote locations to serve them. So, in order to be guideline-compliant, you'll want to list yourself as an SAB, using your home address, which Google will then hide publicly. The most important thing here is to avoid violating Google's guidelines ... that is a much more important consideration than how something affects your rankings.

There has been debate over the years as to whether businesses with physical, public addresses have a ranking advantage over home-based businesses with hidden addresses, it's true, but until you do get a staffed physical office to which customers come to do business with you, it's not accurate to represent your business as having one. So, list yourself accurately and focus all the energy you have on the ranking factors you can control. Hope this advice is helpful!

I thought you raised some really thoughtful points, Kane. This particular situation isn't one of those black-and-white ones with a super obvious call - it's nuanced. So, I thought the points you brought up were very valid in an "it depends" kind of scenario. Thanks for the very kind words.

Thanks for the clarification (and so sorry I addressed you as "Mike" - I read your screenname incorrectly).

My thoughts on this would be based on a few factors:

1. If the brand were the same across all properties (Blue Apartments), then, no question, I would consolidate. This would be like having a single website for Taco Bell or any other brand, vs. having thousands of Taco Bell microsites representing their many locations. A single site would not only be easier to manage, but would consolidate all SEO benefits into a single site, building its authority. I'd have a single site at BlueApartments.com with a landing page for each complex (Blue Apartments on The Beach, Blue Apartments Theater District, Blue Apartments Downtown, Blue Apartments Westside, etc.) And, I'd build a GMB listing for each of these complexes IF (and only if) it had an on-site office, and link these listings to their respective, very well-built landing pages.

2. If each apartment complex has entirely distinct branding (Blue Apartments, Green Apartments, Red Apartments) then the conversation changes. I want to state that I've never done Local SEO for a multi-apartment-complex enterprise, but I see these business models doing both the single and multi-site approach in the city nearest me, and both approaches are managing to rank. I'm just looking at this at a glance, of course, but that's what I see. At the end of the day, I think that the unique branding scenario would incline me to go with a multi-site approach, for better ease-of-use for consumers, whether it impacts SEO or not. These are distinct physical places, and unlike Taco Bell, they each provide a different living experience. If I had the resources, I think I'd create a good, strong site for each property (and, if it has an on-site office, build listings for each). But, if I was shaky on resources, I would not attempt to manage multiple websites for fear I couldn't do them justice. What I would not want to end up with would be a handful of weak, duplicate websites that aren't earning any links. Lack of resources would turn me away from this approach. But sufficient resources would make it appeal to me.

My answer is a bit general here, not knowing the precise details of the business and its available resources. I'd recommend looking at the competition in your target city, and look at how direct competitors who are ranking best are operating. This would contribute to my final decision on this.

Hey Mike,

Great discussion going on here. I want to clarify - when you say "apartments" you are talking about apartment complexes, right, not individual apartment units within a development? In other words, Tan Apartment Community, Green Apartment Community, Blue Apartment Community; not Apartment 3, 20, and 35 within communities?

Hi Johnny,

I'd like to be able to give you a 100% certain "yes" or "no" answer on this, but Facebook's lack of documentation always makes me say "I think", instead of "I know", for fear I've overlooked some hidden thing about their system I don't understand.

In this case, I "think" you should be fine so long as you are consistently designating the same location as the company headquarters so that its phone number and address are always the same across FB and the web.

But, you might want to ask here, in case you get a different opinion: https://www.facebook.com/help/community

Hi Johnny,

So, is what you're describing something along the lines of:

1. I have a multi-location business, and one location is the headquarters

2. I want to use the HQ's phone number on the brand page

Is that it? Please, let me know if I'm not quite following, and also, just to confirm, you are talking about Facebook, yes?

That's so nice of you to say, Roman. Thank you.