How to deal with number swaps for organic results?
-
Hi mozzers,
We used to have a proxy URL for our paid search campaigns and we just transferred all of that into the main domain(that ranks organically). Since we were using phone numbers swapping for paid search, I am afraid that it will harm our organic local results as I am seeing phone number swapping.
Can the bots distinguish a swap number and a real phone number or will it impact our local SEO results( because of an inconsistent phone number)?
Thanks for letting me know!
-
Nope, you're good to go. Ifbyphone is a good service. I agree with Spencer, you should be good to go as long as the javascript is working correctly.
-
You need to look at the actual render of the webpage and see what number it's rendering.
I believe that getgoaliath.com script that it is blocking is the number swapping javascript so I would imagine that you should be fine.
I've never used if by phone but I've heard good things. I think you're most likely good to go.
-
Hi Jasmine
Didn't create it on my own, paid search team did it. The call tracking service is if by phone. Should i use another service or we're good.
Thanks
-
Hi Spencer,
thanks for your answer, I did a fetch and render and here are the result
http://cl.ly/image/3r0K1m3B2w3G
I am not sure if the swap is made via an image or text. It may be text. Do you think based on the result I'm good.
FYI: We are using call tracker called **if by phone **
Thanks!
-
Hey Taysir,
Which call tracking service are you using for this? Or did you create one yourself? Ideally, you would be using javascript to change the number dynamically depending on source & medium, which will not interfere with local.
-
I would say that it most likely won't have any negative effect but the best practice is to only use call swapping via an images for local seo.
If you're curious you can see what phone number google-bot sees by using the new fetch and render option in webmaster tools under crawl.
If you want to use call tracking via changing text on the page I would suggest setting it up to only swap out numbers for paid searchers. I don't know if this is a standard option for most call tracking providers but I use CallRail and I know that they allow you to set it up that way.
Browse Questions
Explore more categories
-
Moz Tools
Chat with the community about the Moz tools.
-
SEO Tactics
Discuss the SEO process with fellow marketers
-
Community
Discuss industry events, jobs, and news!
-
Digital Marketing
Chat about tactics outside of SEO
-
Research & Trends
Dive into research and trends in the search industry.
-
Support
Connect on product support and feature requests.
Related Questions
-
Technical Organization of E-commerce Site
Hi Mozzers! I'm working on a site that is a bit of a mess (http://www.selectequipment.net/) and wanted to ask for some feedback on a couple of items. In addition to organizing the site by product category types, the client also has brand pages that include all products of a certain brand. One problem, however, is that I want to be able to target the relatively large number of consumers who are using searches of BRAND + PRODUCT type in the most optimal fashion. For example, someone looking for "Cutler Hammer Transformers". We have several products with different part numbers that would fit this bill and I'm wondering if we'd be okay just having several products (ie Cutler Hammer Transform 100xa, Cutler Hammer Transform 110xb) or if we'd be better off adding an organizational page for all "Cutler Hammer Transformers for Sale". There are a LOT of different combos that we'd need to do this for. Is it a good call?
Intermediate & Advanced SEO | | RickyShockley0 -
Can a "site split" cause a drastic organic search decline?
Let's say you have a client. They have two big, main product offerings. Come early April of this year, one of the product offerings decide to move their product offering over to a new domain. Let's also say you had maybe 12 million links in your inbound link portfolio for the original domain. And when this product offering that split opened their new domain, they 301 redirected half of those 12 million links (maybe even 3/4s) over to their new domain. So you're left with "half" a website. And while you still have millions of links; you lost millions as well. Would a ~25-50% drop in organic traffic be a reasonable effect? My money is on YES. Because all links to a domain help "rise" the page authority sea level of all URLs of the domain. So cutting off 50-75% of those links would drop that sea level a somewhat corresponding amount. We did get some 301 redirects that we felt were "ours" in place in late July... but that really accounted for 25% of the total amount of pages with inbound links they took originally. And those got in place almost 4 months after the fact. Curious what other people may think. LnEazzi.png
Intermediate & Advanced SEO | | ChristianMKG0 -
Substantial difference between Number of Indexed Pages and Sitemap Pages
Hey there, I am doing a website audit at the moment. I've notices substantial differences in the number of pages indexed (search console), the number of pages in the sitemap and the number I am getting when I crawl the page with screamingfrog (see below). Would those discrepancies concern you? The website and its rankings seems fine otherwise. Total indexed: 2,360 (Search Consule)
Intermediate & Advanced SEO | | Online-Marketing-Guy
About 2,920 results (Google search "site:example.com")
Sitemap: 1,229 URLs
Screemingfrog Spider: 1,352 URLs Cheers,
Jochen0 -
Google Mobile Friendly designation in Search results
We have recently deployed a mobile (http://m.pssl.com) version of our desktop website (http://www.pssl.com). We've followed the guidelines in their documentation (https://support.google.com/webmasters/answer/6101188) & (http://googlewebmastercentral.blogspot.com/2015/04/rolling-out-mobile-friendly-update.html), added the appropriate rel=alternate/rel=canonical tags updated site maps and robots.txt files, etc. A mobile search for our company shows the "mobile-friendly" flag in the search results for our home page, but for some reason other pages such as category and brand are not showing showing as "mobile-friendly". I can submit the pages using the mobile-friendly tester (https://www.google.com/webmasters/tools/mobile-friendly/) and all of the pages I test come back as mobile friendly. Does anyone have any experience or advice they'd be willing to share that might help us resolve this issue?
Intermediate & Advanced SEO | | ovenbird0 -
Why is my page not showing in Google results
Hi, My website chka.org is showing up in Google but this page is not : http://www.chka.org/kickboxing-classes-nyc/ I cannot figure it out why. I submitted in manually to be crawled and it showed up for a day or two and then it disappeared again. The website is not copy pasted, it has unique content.
Intermediate & Advanced SEO | | leokadiarapczynska0 -
An improved search box within the search results - Results?
Hello~ Does anyone have any positive traffic results to share since implementing this? Thanks! MS
Intermediate & Advanced SEO | | MargaritaS0 -
Will SEO cause a drop in the number of impressions?
Hello, I have been a member of the Moz community for a long time. I very seldom ask questions here but this time I really need your help to make sure I will not make mistakes that will negatively affect my site. My site monetizes according to the number of impressions visualized by the users who visit it. I now want to try to optimize it by using all those nice SEO techniques I have learned through Moz. My goal is to make sure that if I use the various SEO strategies, I will still be able to obtain the high number of impressions I get now. If not, I prefer to leave the situation untouched and I will not start optimizing the site for SEO. Please kindly read the situation below and give me a little support to make sure I am doing the right thing. I would like to ask for your professional advice to solve and issue related to duplicate content. Please visit my site: www.chhedonna.it. The sitemap has indexed 21.890 articles, but if I digit the command 'site:www.chedonna.it', I obtain 158.000 results.I believe that the duplicated content has emerged due to three errors I would like to indicate in order for you to tell me whether my interpretation is correct or not: The article writers made a mistake in that although the content of the articles is different, they have employed the same title for all of them. Therefore, you can see 5 articles with similar/duplicated Tag Titles but the content of said articles is different. For example, http://www.chedonna.it/attualita/cronaca-rosagossip/2012/12/03/heidi-klum-senza-trucco-e-parrucco-foto and http://www.chedonna.it/attualita/cronaca-rosagossip/2012/12/03/heidi-klum-senza-trucco-e-parrucco-foto-2/ are different articles (i.e., the content of the articles is different from each other) that have been published using the same titles. If I inserted the 'follow-noindex' tag to 3 of the 4 duplicates, as shown in the example above, would that be a solution? I fear that if I did insert the follow-noindex, I would cause a drop in the number of impressions visualized by my site's users. It is important to point out, in fact, that I monetize the site via the number of impressions I generate. Therefore, it is fundamental that I do not compromise the number of impressions that the site gets, if I try to optimize it for SEO reasons. On the other hand, I believe that the idea to operate via a 'rel canonical' would not be right, considering that the content of every post having the same title is different, that is, the articles are different even if they focus on the same topic. Also, I would not find it beneficial to use a '301 redirect', since the number of duplicated Titles Tags is very consistent. 2. The second error concerns the duplicate content due to the images that have been included in the articles. For instance, http://www.chedonna.it/che-donna-di-mondo/fare-la-valigia/2012/08/06/campeggio-vacanza-in-liberta/attachment/tenda/ http://www.chedonna.it/che-donna-di-mondo/fare-la-valigia/2012/08/06/campeggio-vacanza-in-liberta/attachment/tenda-2/ http://www.chedonna.it/che-miss/2012/12/04/tatuaggi-fiore-di-loto-significato-e-foto/attachment/tatuaggio-fiore-di-loto-2/ http://www.chedonna.it/che-miss/2013/03/15/tatuaggi-fiore-di-loto-significato-e-foto-2/attachment/tatuaggio-fiore-di-loto-2-2/. I could solve this problem by preventing the media indexing. But I fear that this would produce a very high number of '404 error' messages. If such a thing did happen, my site would stop monetizing overall and I cannot allow this to occur, as you can understand. My very important question is the following: if I prevent the indexing of the photos, will I get in return a drop in the number of impressions that my site would normally generate? 3. Duplicate content generated by the indexing of archive subpages. For example: http://www.chedonna.it/tag/angelica-e-ferdinando/ http://www.chedonna.it/tag/angelica-e-ferdinando/page2/ http://wwwchedonna.it/tag/angelica-e-ferdinando/page3/ If I prevented the media indexing, will I get in return a drop in the number of impressions and many 404 errors? Thank you very much for taking the time to help me sort out this very important issue. Cheers, Sal
Intermediate & Advanced SEO | | salvyy0 -
Technical Question on Image Links - Part of Addressing High Number of Outbound Links
Hi - I've read through the forum, and have been reading online for hours, and can't quite find an answer to what I'm searching for. Hopefully someone can chime in with some information. 🙂 For some background - I am looking closely at four websites, trying to bring them up to speed with current guidelines, and recoup some lost traffic and revenue. One of the things we are zeroing in on is the high amount of outbound links in general, as well as inter-site linking, and a nearly total lack of rel=nofollow on any links. Our current CMS doesn't allow an editor to add them, and it will require programming changes to modify any past links, which means I'm trying to ask for the right things, once, in order to streamline the process. One thing that is nagging at me is that the way we link to our images could be getting misconstrued by a more sensitive Penguin algorithm. Our article images are all hosted on one separate domain. This was done for website performance reasons. My concern is that we don't just embed the image via , which would make this concern moot. We also have an href tag on each to a 'larger view' of the image that precedes the img src in the code, for example - We are still running the numbers, but as some articles have several images, and we currently have about 85,000 articles on those four sites... well, that's a lot of href links to another domain. I'm suggesting that one of the steps we take is to rel=nofollow the image hrefs. Our image traffic from Google search, or any image search for that matter, is negligible. On one site it represented just .008% of our visits in July. I'm getting a little pushback on that idea as having a separate image server is standard for many websites, so I thought I'd seek additional information and opinions. Thanks!
Intermediate & Advanced SEO | | MediaCF0