Ranking opportunity if we omit county in citations
-
I am looking to rank highly in local search for Birkenhead but have not currently filled in the county on Google + so Moz local is not picking the county up.
I am wondering whether I should continue and keep the county off there as there is a potential problem: on our website we are listed as being based in the Wirral and we are also based in a county called Merseyside so have two different possible citations.
We are ranking well for the term Wirral and do not want to effect this. I am thinking of building citations without Wirral or Merseyside and was wondering if anyone can advise?
The address that I have in the citation would be - business name, building number, Birkenhead then Wirral or Merseyside and post code.
I am currently using business name, building number, Birkenhead and post code and we want to rank highly for Birkenhead.
Could anyone advise me here?
The Wirral is a peninsular as can be seen on Wilipedia - https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Metropolitan_Borough_of_Wirral
-
Great answer thank you.
Can anyone advise me on this?
-
Hi Stephen,
My apologies, but I am simply not very familiar with geographic designations in your country. In the US, Local SEO geared toward local pack rankings is totally hinged on cities, never counties. If counties are an important search term for your business, you can make an organic effort in that regard with content you build on your website to reflect these terms, but the core of your Local SEO will be city-based, not county-based, and will apply to the city/cities in which you are physically located.
I hope you'll receive further feedback from the community.
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
-
This page should be ranking but it's not even in top 50
Please help! Ive been trying to rank this page https://www.visitmanchester.com/where-to-stay/hotels It appeared on age 2 for a day and disappeared again. It's like it's being algorithmically kicked out. Can anyone see why?
Local Listings | | Andrew-SEO0 -
Should I get an SSL if my non-SSL site is ranking well?
I have a client with a local divorce law business. He's ranking really well, and I don't want to do anything to jeopardize that rank. His site does not have SSL. I feel like it would be good to get rid of the "not-secure" message from Chrome, but not important enough to risk ranks. Would love to get thoughts from this forum on this. Thanks!
Local Listings | | aj6130 -
Citations, SEO and a skeptical client
What do you say to a client who recently purchased an online business and says 'I don't really care if the phone number or address on a directory is old or incorrect'?I've tried to explain the value from an SEO point of view, but he's not really buying it.Anyone encountered this skepticism before and if so, how did you handle it?
Local Listings | | muzzmoz0 -
Placement of products in URL-structure for best category page rankings
Hi! I have some questions regarding the optimal URL-hierarchy placement of products in a marketplace setting where the end goal is to attract traffic to category pages. Let me start off with some background, thanks in advance for the help. TLDR Goal: Increase category page rankings. Alternative 1 - Products and category pages separated, flat product structure. Category page: oursite.com/category/subcategory Product / listing page: oursite.com/listing-1 Alternative 2 - Products and category pages separated, hierarchal product structure. Category page: oursite.com/category/subcategory Product / listing page: oursite.com/product/category/subcat/listing Alternative 3 - Products placed directly under category page. Category page: oursite.com/category/subcategory Product / listing page: oursite.com/category/subcategory/listing I run a commercial real estate marketplace, which means that our potential search traffic is _extremely _geographic. For example, some common searches are (not originally in english): Office space for lease {City X} Office space for lease {Neighborhood Y} Retail space {Neighborhood Z} And so on... These terms are already quite competitive, where the top results are our competitors geographic and type category pages. For example: _competitor.com/type/city/neighborhood , _is a top result, where the user reaches a landing page that shows all the {type} spaces for lease in {neighborhood}. These users are out to find which spaces are available for lease in these geographical areas, and not individual spaces. I.e. users do not search in the same extent for an individual product, in this case a specific empty space. Our approach has been to place an extreme bias towards a heavy geographical hierarchy. This means that basically any search, resulting in a category page, on our site results in a well structured URL like the following: _oursite.com/type/state/city/district/street, _since we are using Google Maps API's, this is easy and relevant for the user. Our geographical categorization beats our competitors both on extensiveness and usability, especially in long-tail search phrases where our competitors don't care to categorize where we are seeing real search volumes. The hierarchy only extends as far down as the user has searched, for example a lot of our searched just end up being _oursite.com/type/state/city/district. _ Now we are wondering how we should place our products, the empty spaces, in this URL structure. Our original hypothesis was that we should include the products in the original hierarchy, resulting in: oursite.com/category/subcategory/product. Our thinking was that we would both be serving the user with an understandable and relevant URL, and also provide search bots with a logical structure for our site and most importantly content for our category pages. Our landing pages are very dynamic, providing information by relaying graphical information on a map instead of in an SEO-friendly manner. I would however go as far as to say that these dynamic pages provide a ton of value for the user, much more so than our competitors, by describing relevant information about the neighborhood kind of like Trulia, just not in a bot-readable manner. This results in trying to rank them on their own merits being a challenge, whereas we were hoping we could create relevancy by placing products / listings and maybe even blog posts on the topic within the same URL-hierarchy. As of right now our current structure is oursite.com/products/category/subcategory/product. In other words, they are categorized in the same geographical fashion but under a separate URL-path. Our results so far is that we basically only rank for the product pages, and rank extremely poorly for our category pages, which is our ultimate goal to enhance. This is why we developed the above hypothesis. However, what we learned when we did some initial research is that very few e-commerce stores place their products directly below their categories. Most of the major websites we studied, and we looked at quite a few, just go for **alternative 1 **from above. The crux is that most of them choose alternative 1 but simultaneously implement bread crumbs that emulate alternative 3, just without the actual URL's. So, what I'm asking is, what are the actual benefits or downsides of the three alternatives? I feel as if I have a pretty firm grasp on how this could be done, I just need to better understand why most seem to choose to flatline their products or listings in the alternative 1 fashion. Thanks, Viktor
Local Listings | | Viktorsodd0 -
Local Search and Schema.org - Do I need to tag up the "same as" Property to all my citations to help with local rankings?
Hi All, We have implemented Schema.og on our website and this also includes the local business schema for all of our branches.However I've read an article (see below ) which says we should also be doing "same as " property and linking this to ALL of our citations such as google plus page , yelp , bing places, city search etc etc as this will help with citations. I am wondering if anyone has done this ? - And if so , has this helped with local rankings etc - I don't really want to invest the extra costs to get this done if I can't find anywhere that says its made a difference - The article from whitespark - says - "when you create new citations for your business (or for your client’s), it’s a waiting game hoping that Google and the other search engines will find your new citations quickly and make the connection between those listings, the business, and the website. The “sameAs” property can help make that process much quicker _and _easier. Schema.org explains that the “sameAs” property is used along with the “URL of a reference Web page that unambiguously indicates the item's [or business’] identity.” By using the “sameAs” property in your NAP schema markup, you can tell search engines that the business you’ve marked up is the same one found at a certain citation URL Of course, Google+ isn’t the only important citation source. There’s also Bing Places, Facebook, Yelp, Citysearch and a few others. The nice thing about many schema.org properties is that you can use them multiple times in your markup." I am wondering what peoples thoughts were and whether they has implemented this and if so , did it help ? thanks Pete | [sameAs](http://schema.org/sameAs) | URL | URL of a reference Web page that unambiguously indicates the item's identity. E.g. the URL of the item's Wikipedia page, Freebase page, or official website. |
Local Listings | | PeteC121 -
Duplicate Websites - Only one ranking
Hello Everyone, I have a client that has 2 website, that have the same content, with he same phone numbers and contact details. However, there are a few different that we want to do for both. 1. mywebsitevan.com ( Has Google Places (and they don't want to lose this listing, as it is a main reason why they are surviving. not rank organically mywebsitevancouver.com
Local Listings | | EVERWORLD.ENTERTAIMENT
- ranked organically No Google Place listings. This is the actual branding of the company What is the best way to make this work with google, so that we have both websites, and without losing the google places listings. Do add any tags? Rel=? Thanks for your help.0 -
How To Rank Individual Pages Locally?
Hello, A fellow business owner recommend that I signup for Moz to ask questions about local SEO. I just have a few questions, but please excuse my ignorance since SEO isn't something I'm very familiar with. My company has locations in 3 different cities in the state of Arkansas. I've noticed that when I type in certain keywords on Google such as "web design", I see a lot of organic listings from web design companies in my local area - but if I were to search from another city, different listings show up that are related to that city. I have 3 different pages on my company's website for each of our locations that gives a little bit of information about them - such as the general manager, storefront photos, and the employee of the month. What can I do to get each of the pages to rank higher on Google in their respective cities? I've heard a lot of different things mentioned such as having the name, address, and phone number listed. Including Google Maps on the page with our location. And some other stuff such as including stuff such as a "KML file" and a "schema markup". If anyone can give me a list of definitive suggestions, it would be greatly appreciated.
Local Listings | | CyberAlien1