Keywords with locations
-
I've seen quite a few threads that orbit around my questions, but none in the last year, so I'll ask it
I'm seeing some strange results when testing various keywords with and without locations included. For a foundation repair company in Indiana, we've optimized for all the big cities, since the company services the whole state. Here's a sample of weird stuff:
Test 1: If I set my location (all other Google 'helps' turned off) to Indianapolis and search
'foundation repair' result is #3
'foundation repair indianapolis' result is #20
'indiana foundation repair' result is #18
Test 2: Location set to the small town the company is based in (Rossville, IN)
'foundation repair' result is #1
'foundation repair rossville' result is #3 behind other companies located in Rossville, GA, and Rossville, PA!!
I suppose I was under the impression that the ip location data Google gathers would weigh more heavily than how place names are optimized as part of keywords (or just that the physical location would supplant the place name typed into the search if it happened to be the same). But according to these tests, it seems that inferred location is by far a secondary factor.
I can deduce that we're more optimized than our competitors for 'foundation repair', but less optimized for keywords with place names in them (we feel like we'd be verging on stuffing if we did more).
Am I missing something here? Has anyone else seen this sort of thing?
-
This makes sense, and is a good way of framing it. Thanks very much.
Your answer here made me see that my two tests (Indianapolis and Rossville) actually showed somewhat different algorithm principles.
I understand that with the increase of mobile and thus 'conversational' voice searches, the inclusion of a place name is less and less common. Thus with the 'Rossville' example, since 'Rossville' is ambiguous and was not differentiated from other Rossvilles I can see how others might creep in.
Even so, I would think Google would be programmed to first see that my location is set in Rossville, IN, and thus conclude that Rossville, IN must be the one I'm referring to. If every search was done on mobile, then I can maybe understand seeing Rossville, PA, and Rossville, GA in the SERPs. But even then, not in position 1 and 2 before Rossville, IN, where I am located...
So, when I specified a very unambiguous place name (Indianapolis), while my location is set to that same unambiguous place (Indianapolis, IN), would Google's algos look outside of Indianapolis, like it did with Rossville? It turns out the inverse process is happening here (I think). I went back to look at the results for 'foundation repair indianapolis' and found that the listings were extra-localized, starting with businesses that have an indianapolis address, and moving concentrically outward from there.
But again, we rank highly when location is set to Indianapolis, IN, and simply search 'foundation repair'. Apparently in this case, when a search string does not specify disambiguated place-names, Google produces items related to {foundation repair} in the general vicinity of {indianapolis}, based on the inferred location data, instead of the other approach which yields limited results within the city. This is surprising to me (though beneficial to us).
I'm probably constructing too detailed of a process here based on just a couple small tests. I'd love any other input. And sorry for the novel!! I'm trying to work all this out. It's an interesting discussion though. I hope it's helpful to someone in the forums.
-
Good Morning!
Ah, I think I see what you were explaining now. So, this is how I find it most helpful to think of this.
If I am located in Topeka, Kansas (or have my location set there) and I search for 'hotels', Google assumes that I am looking for a hotel near me.
But, if I am located in Topeka, Kansas (or have my location set there) and I search for 'hotels Dallas, TX' I'm making it very clear to Google that I am looking for lodgings elsewhere.
In other words, if I don't tell Google to be specific to some region other than my own, Google assumes I want the results nearest me. But if I am specific that I want results from somewhere else by including that location in my query, Google shows me the local results for that location.
-
Thanks for responding Miriam! I really appreciate it.
I suppose my conclusions may not have been expressed well, or made some jumps. First, yes, I was actually really surprised by how strong the inferred location data influenced the results when no place name was typed in the search bar!
It's the second part that surprised me though; that when a location is specified in the search, that the typed location name seems to supersede Google's gathered ip location data. I didn't expect it to work this way -- especially not to the degree of bringing up #1 and #2 listings from totally different regions of the country! Does this make sense or am I still missing something?! Haha
-
Hi Joshua!
I'm a little puzzled by the conclusion your are drawing. Don't your tests prove that inferred location is actually the stronger force here, if your client is ranking highest for non-geo-term searches with your location set to a city rather than including a city in the search phrase? From the result set you've shared, that's how I would read it, but it may be that I am the one who is missing something:)
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
-
Which URL and rel=canonical structure to use for location based product inventory pages?
I am working on an automotive retailer site that displays local car inventory in nearby dealerships based on location. Within the site, a zip code is required to search, and the car inventory is displayed in a typical product list that can be filtered and sorted by the searcher to fit the searchers needs. We would like to structure these product inventory list pages that are based on location to give the best chance at ranking, if not now, further down the road when we have built up more authority to compete with the big dogs in SERP like AutoTrader.com, TrueCar.com, etc. These higher authority sites are able to rank their location based car inventory pages on the first page consistently across all makes and models. For example, searching the term "new nissan rogue" in the Los Angeles, CA area returns a few location based inventory pages on page 1. The sites in the industry that are able to rank their inventory pages will display a relatively clean looking URL with no redirect that still displays the local inventory like this in the SERP:
Local Website Optimization | | tdastru
https://www.autotrader.com/cars-for-sale/New+Cars/Nissan/Rogue
but almost always use a rel=canonical tag within the page to a page with a location parameter attached to the end of the URL like this one:
https://www.autotrader.com/cars-for-sale/New+Cars/Nissan/Rogue/Los+Angeles+CA-90001"/>
I'm having a hard time figuring out why sites like this example have their URLs and pages structured this way. What would be the best practice for structuring the URL and rel=canonical tags to be able to rank for and display location based inventory pages for cars near the searcher?0 -
Service Area Location Pages vs. User Experience
I'm familiar with the SAB best practices outlined here. Here's my issue: Doing local landing pages as described here might not be ideal from a user experience point of view. Having a "Cities We Serve" or "Service Areas" link in the main navigation isn't necessarily valuable to the user when the city-specific landing pages are all places within a 15-mile radius of the SAB's headquarters. It would just look like the company did it for SEO. It wouldn't look natural. Seriously, it feels like best practices are totally at odds with user experience here. If I absolutely must create location pages for 10 or so municipalities within my client's service area, I'd rather NOT put the service areas as a primary navigation item. It is not useful to the user. Anyone who sees that the company provides services in the [name of city] metropolitan area will already understand that the company can service their town that is 5 miles away. It is self-evident. For example**, who would wonder whether a plumbing company with a Los Angeles address also services Beverly Hills?** It's just... silly. But the Moz guide says I've got to do those location pages! And that I've got to put them high up in the navigation! This is a problem because we've got to do local SEO, but we also have to provide an ideal experience. Thoughts?
Local Website Optimization | | Greenery1 -
Is Keyword Density Still Relevant?
Good afternoon everyone! I wanted to ask everyone here a question, one that has been being discussed around my office with a lot of different sides being taken. Does Keyword Density matter? If it does, what percentage do you try to have your keyword hit?
Local Website Optimization | | TaylorRHawkins1 -
Do location pages boost the homepage?
Google has stated that businesses should spend time creating location pages for the various service areas that businesses operate in. What I want to know is, it is equally about boosting the relevance of the site as a whole, as well as ranking that individual page in the local area. Does Google take into account the fact that you have the location page and reward the homepage by favoring it more in that local area, or is it simply about ranking an individual page in each town/city?
Local Website Optimization | | OliverNeely2 -
How to approach SEO for a national umbrella site that has multiple chapters in different locations that are different URLS
We are currently working with a client who has one national site - let's call it CompanyName.net, and multiple, independent chapter sites listed under different URLs that are structured, for example, as CompanyNamechicago.org, and sometimes specific to neighborhoods, as in CompanyNamechicago.org/lakeview.org. The national site is .net, while all others are .orgs. These are not subdomains or subfolders, as far as we can tell. You can use a search function on the .net site to find a location near you and click to that specific local site. They are looking for help optimizing and increasing traffic to certain landing pages on the .net site...but similar landing pages also exist on a local level, which appear to be competing with the national site. (Example: there is a landing page on the national .net umbrella site for a "dog safety" campaign they are doing, but also that campaign has led to a landing page created independently on the local CompanyNameChicago.org website, which seems to get higher ranking due to a user looking for this info while located in Chicago. We are wondering if our hands are tied here since they appear to be competing for traffic with all their localized sites, or if there are best practices to handle a situation like this. Thanks!
Local Website Optimization | | timfrick0 -
Onsite Optimization for 2 Locations on One Site
Hello, We have multiple client who have 2 office locations n the same state in varying counties and would like to have their site rank for two counties. Is this plausible ? For instance they would like their header tags to read "Lawyer in Middlesex & Monmouth County NJ" Rather than "Middlesex County NJ Lawyer" Would this be an effective strategy or be seen as stuffing by Google?
Local Website Optimization | | Armen-SEO0 -
Schema for same location on multiple sites - can this be done?
I'm looking to find more information on location/local schema. Are you able to implement schema for one location on multiple different sites? (i.e. - Multiple brands/websites (same parent company) - the brands share the same location and address). Also, is schema still important for local SEO? Thank you in advance for your help!
Local Website Optimization | | EvolveCreative0 -
Overuse of Keyword in Blog Articles
I have a business that I just recently started working with and he has written a ton of blog articles (some of which are really good) and decided it would be a good idea to insert the keyword hes targeting into the content or title of many of his blogs. Lets just say for example that the keyword is plumbers chicago. So I searched on Google and the words "plumbers chicago" (in that exact order) are on 199 pages on his site, not including filtered content. He is on page 2-3 for that keyword and I'm wondering what people's advice would be for a site that has so much content referencing the same exact keyword. It is a keyword that is service + location too so it actually doesn't even make sense when you read it in half the sentences it's in. I think one of the main issues of why it's on so many pages is he has a tag for it in Wordpress and tons of the blog articles have that particular tag.
Local Website Optimization | | ImprezzioMarketing1