Google Plus for Businesses - Should I add users to Company's Circles (branded page)?
-
Hi All,
I know (or think I know) that one of the easiest ways to gain followers for my brand on G plus is to add people to our company's circles. Naturally, they often add you back.
However, what does it mean to people who watch my brand (my G Plus page), the fact that I'm following thousands of people? Should I do it? How does it reflect on us?
Is there a better way to gain followers (specifically for G Plus)?P.S
We obviously have the badge on site but we hardly gain followers that way.Thanks
-
Best way to get useful followers on G+ lately is have your people and the page active in communities and discussions. You are much more likely to get interactive people adding than just going out and following a bunch of people - anyone with a decent following isn't going to notice or react to your adding them, as they probably get upwards of 50-100 new people a day adding them. Most of whom turn out to be spam or fake accounts. I long ago stopped caring who added me on G+, or even looking!
Since communities, stream following and circle sharing matters less. So get your page to join topical and relevant communities (and if there aren't any for your niche, consider starting one if you can cope with the overhead of managing/maintaining it - nothing more offputting than a dead community), and get active in them. If your people are constantly active in the widgets communities, posting good quality info and tech help, you'll gain a lot of good followers.
However, people who've made good/interesting/insightful/funny comments on threads I'm active in, communities are likely to be pro-actively added as I've decided they are worth a try in the stream.
G+ can be a heck of a time-sink, but if you're willing to put the time in the right places it's more than worthwhile.
Got a burning SEO question?
Subscribe to Moz Pro to gain full access to Q&A, answer questions, and ask your own.
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
-
Switch domain's CRYPTO focus to B2B
Hi everyone! I have my tough question, hope you'll help with your recommendations! I have a domain for blockchain company (DA 38, 590 linking domains), which started as an ICO project, but rapidly grew to a recognized B2B company with a few B2B clients. What we want is to attract more B2B prospects via Google Search, but the problem is when our prospects google our brand name (which also happens to be our domain, so this domain must be kept) they see mainly ico/crypto SERPs (as the result of ICO ad campaigns, online publicity etc). And they get prejudice towards us and don't trust us in the first place. What we already managed to do is to add some B2B news and links in 1-10 SERPs for our brand name, but still old ones (crypto related don't go so fast). Our management wants our prospects to be able to clearly see the difference between the current company domain (which must be remade to B2B focus only) and the new domain (our token-oriented, since our product is on blockchain). Question: is it possible to do such differentiation in the eyes of Google (and thus our prospects)? if yes, what is the best way to do that? 2 separate domains, not linking to each other or any other way?
Branding | | MariY
Do you have any other ideas?0 -
My question is in regards to possible conflict in creating an additional website under a new domain for our company.
Our companies, Vulcan Information Packaging and ATC both live under the domain “www.binders.com”. This is a great thing as far as us dominating in the binder industry. However, in the next 2-3 years and forward, we want to build our presence as a company who offers packaging products such as boxes, marketing kits, and other forms of packaging. Obviously, the “binders.com” brand/domain does not contribute much to this effort and can be confusing to customers visiting the site. Essentially, we want to build an additional branding for our company in the packaging industry. Keeping this in mind, we own the domain “www.vulcaninformationpackaging.com” and we are considering building a new website using this domain which contains the word “packaging”. This new site would only promote and contain packaging related products. This new website will advertise and direct traffic to our company Vulcan Information Packaging, which is the same company “binders.com” directs traffic to. So my question is to determine whether doing this might be a practice that Google and other search engines might frown upon. I tend to think it will be fine because we will be promoting and driving traffic for non-binder products where as, binders.com is heavily in binder related products. thank you, Dominic Zaidan
Branding | | dzaidan0 -
Best Resources for taking Facebook and Google Plus to the next level
Hello, I'm doing some research on Facebook and Google Plus. I have more experience with Facebook. I'm going to do my own research, but what do you guys think is the best articles or videos for taking Facebook and Google Plus to the next level? My goals are to engage and promote for Ecommerce and Informational sites. Low budget. Thanks, Bob
Branding | | BobGW1 -
Renaming of Link within Site Links - Brand Issues
Hi, We welcome your thoughts on the current problem we are experiencing: When searching for our client's brand name, their previous sponsors name is shown within the Site Links to a very important page. We are keen to change this reference within the Site Link but keep the link itself. We have untaken the following without any change to the words used within this particular Site Link: 1) Removal of previous-sponsors name sitewide: Title tags Alt attribute Anchors Page names Image names 2) Removal of sponsors name from 200+ sister sites: Title tags Alt attribute Anchors Page names Image names 3) Modification of [previous-sponsor + client] within Wikipedia:
Branding | | PhilYarrow
There were 250+ mentions of the sponsor + client within Wikipedia. References have either been deleted or changed to past tense. (Google has been extremely slow at indexing these changes.) 4) Removal of off-site mentions:
After using Advanced Filters within OSE, we extracted all links that included the previous-sponsors name. We filtered these by DA and approached these sites and requested they update their links/on-site content to include the up-to-date name. This included large news organisations and reference sources. We also used Google operators (inurl, inanchor, intitle) to search for references mentions of [previous-sponsor + client]. We used Buzzstream to collate this data and contacted hundreds of sites sorted by DA. 5) We have twice requested demotion of the Site Link via GWT without success. Google clearly see's the Site Link as too important to remove it. The following is useful background information:
The [client + previous-sponsor] worked together for 5+ years. Our client is known by it's own brand, but it was also called in certain arenas as [client + previous-sponsor].
Fresh mentions of [client + previous-sponsor] are frequent. Examples of this are from collectors merchandise and videos that are posted frequently. The page being shown within the Site Links is essential. It cannot be moved. With a PA of mid-70's.
We have changed the Title of the page multiple times, without any change to the Site Link. Thanks
Phil0 -
Big Problems Using &'s in Business Name?
One of my clients is a law firm with a Business name like the following:
Branding | | gbkevin
Rosenberg & Dalgren, LLP They get A TON of organic search traffic on their brand name above, but most people (95%) search "Rosenberg and Dalgren" instead of "Rosenberg & Dalgren". **Notice use of ampersand being used and alternatively, the word "and" being used. ** Currently, their local citations across the Internet (G+, YP, Yelp, etc) use the business name, "Rosenberg & Dalgren, LLP" (with ampersand). Here is the dilemma we are in... When someone searches "Rosenberg and Dalgren" in Google (which the majority of our search traffic does), Google does NOT show our local one-box on the right hand side of the SERPs (see example of a one-box I am referring to here http://blumenthals.com/blog/wp-content/uploads/2013/09/Screen-Shot-2013-09-28-at-9.59.58-AM.png). But when someone searches "Rosenberg & Dalgren" in Google, it does trigger our local one-box with photos, review ratings, links to our Google+ Local page, etc. WHICH IS GREAT! They have AWESOME reviews that command powerful social proof. We want that local one-box to show up! So my question is, what can I do to trigger that local one-box for both brand name searches for "Rosenberg & Dalgren" as well as "Rosenberg and Dalgren"? I am considering changing our NAP citations to have the business name be "Rosenberg and Dalgren" since that is what 95% of people search in Google to find them. I am guessing Google doesn't quite understand that "Rosenberg and Dalgren" is linked to "Rosenberg & Dalgren" via what it sees in the knowledge graph of the Internet (citations, website, etc). So how best should I handle this and get that local one-box triggering for the majority of our branded search traffic? Lastly, what is the best advice for including company/corporate designations in the NAP citations? (ie. LLP, LLC, Inc, etc) Thank you for any help and guidance! We appreciate it!0 -
'The Guardian' Is Moving to a New Domain
'The Guardian' Is Moving to a New Domain according to this article on Mashable - http://mashable.com/2013/05/24/the-guardian-dot-com/ Interested to see all the thoughts from SEOs to see how you would suggest they could implement this correctly, without dropping traffic / rankings etc...
Branding | | Webrevolve0 -
Google+ Vanity Urls: Brand vs Keyword
We have recently been assigned a Google+ vanity URL for our Google page. By default, Google has assigned to us our top performing non-branded keyword. (Probably roughly twice the highly targeted search volume of our brand) My question is: Should I go with my BRAND NAME as my Google+ vanity url, or should I go with my TOP KEYWORD as my Google+ vanity url?
Branding | | Czarto0 -
Yahoo Directory, BOTW, BBB and Business.com for local SEO?
I've heard conflicting reports about using these paid directories for SEO purposes. I am a local Realtor with a website and blog. My site is on page one but near the bottom since the national sites dominate the top. Would these directories help me for local seo purposes? Does Google consider these paid links and therefore devalues them? How difficult is it to get into these directories since they can decline a submission and there goes my money? Are these directories worth the money? In total it would be like $1200 do get on all. I've already done what I believe to be a lot of good seo practices. Emphasis on I believe since I'm no expert. Just learning as I go. Now I'm up against the big brands in real estate and meet to compete. Any tips if these directories are worth it and anything else I should look to do?
Branding | | bronxpad0