Does Unique Content Need to be Located Higher on my webpages?
-
I have 1 page that ranks well with unique written content located high up on page (http://www.honoluluhi5.com/new-condos-in-honolulu/). I struggle to rank for 200+ other pages where unique content requires scrolling (ex: http://www.honoluluhi5.com/oahu/honolulu-homes/). I am thinking to do as follows:
- Change layout of all my pages to have unique content higher on page
- When users are on my site (not coming from search engines) and use my search filters, then users will land on pages where unique content is lower on page (so keep this layout: http://www.honoluluhi5.com/oahu/honolulu-homes/). I will then add these pages to my robots.txt file so they do not show in Google's index. Reason: unique content lower on page offers best user experience.
With unique content higher on page, I expect bounce rate to increase about 10% (based on the 1 page I have with unique content higher), but I think it is worthwhile, as I am sure search engines will start having my pages rank higher.
-
follow backlinks. site artchitecture and quality of content way above competition. I see businesses buying up 100+ keyword rich domains and ranking well for all domains. It tells me 2 things: 1) search engines are not always that clever, 2) I need to be patient, because of 1).
-
Google has not stated anything saying that is is harder for new websites to rank quickly, and I doubt that they would implement something like that into their alogorithm. The reason is it harder for a new website to rank is due to the lack of backlinks and ciatation sources. Without a history, it's harder for Google to see if a website is better or worse than others. This is why they place such a high prioroity on backlinks, as it tells them a broad picture of how trustworthy a site or domain really is. This is one of many factors, but its an important one to consider.
You stated that you have backlinks, have you checked to see if all of them are followed? If the link is not followed, it will only help to direct traffic at your site, not pagerank or weight.
I know a lot of people say this, but focus on laying out your page in a way that will help the user. Moving all your text higher up on the page will not make a magic improvement in your ranking, and I fear that you will spend a lot of time modifying and not get the results you want. Spend time creating really nice listing pages, and having other sites link back to them. Focus on gaining high quality relationships with real estate sites that have authority in the eyes of consumers, and in search engines. Look at large sites that are already successful in search results, and see what you can learn from them. We wrote an article a while back about analyzing your competitors SEO strategy. Might be worth a read for you. Focus on the content of your site, improving the conversion messages, improving the keyword density, and your overall message.
Thats where I would start
-
thanks for the answer. "...placement of the content (above the fold, bellow the fold ..) it's important for ranking - it's not what makes your page rank or don't rank that high" - I am not sure if you are saying it is important or not?
If you look at the URL I sent: http://www.honoluluhi5.com/oahu/honolulu-homes/ - besides the 10 MLS real estate listings on the left side (which all Realtors share), the content lower on the page is all unique - aerial photos, written overview, history of the area and advanced statistical data. My website has only been live for 8 months, has relatively few backlinks (though more than most competitors already, and all natural links - several high quality).
Do we have evidence that Google has tightened the grip and it is tougher for new websites to rank quickly? I am puzzled what may be the reason for the lack of those pages ranking well yet and I think location of the unique content too low on the page may be a main factor. Some insight would be appreciated.
-
Hi,
Although you are right, "real estate" / placement of the content (above the fold, bellow the fold ..) it's important for ranking - it's not what makes your page rank or don't rank that high - for the ones you've sent as examples. The quality of the content (duplicate or unique), competitors, metrics, on-page approach you are taking, keywords targeted, format of serp for some of the keywords there are way more important then placement ....
Thanks.
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
-
Need help with best practices on eliminating old thin content blogs.
We have about 100 really old blog posts that are nothing more than a short trip review w/ images. Consequently these pages are poor quality. Would best practices be to combine into one "review page" per trip, reducing from 100 to about 10 better pages and implement redirects? Or is having more pages better with less redirects? We only have about 700 pages total. Thanks for any input!
Intermediate & Advanced SEO | | KarenElaine0 -
No content in the view source, why?
Hi I have a website that you don't see the article body in the view source but if you use the inspect element tool you can see the content, do you know why? Thanks Roy
Intermediate & Advanced SEO | | kadut0 -
#! (hashbang) check help needed
Does anybody have experience using hashbang? We tried to use it to solve indexation problem and I'm not fully sure do we use right solution now (developers did it with these FAQ and Guide to Ajax crawling as information source). One of our client has problem, that their e-shop categories, has solution where search engines aren't able to index all products. In this example a category, there is this "Näita kõiki (38)" that shows all category products for users but as I understand search engines aren't able to index it as /et#/activeTab=tab02 because of #. Now there is used #! (hashbang) and it is /et#!/activeTab=tab02. Is this correct solution? Also now example category URL is defferent for better indexation with:
Intermediate & Advanced SEO | | raido
/et#!/
../et And when tabs "TOP ja uued" and "Näita kõik" where activated/clicked then:
/et#/activeTab=tab01
/et#/activeTab=tab02 I tried to fetch it in Google Webmaster Tools but it seems it didn't work. I would appreciate it if anybody can check this solution?0 -
Duplicate Content: Is a product feed/page rolled out across subdomains deemed duplicate content?
A company has a TLD (top-level-domain) which every single product: company.com/product/name.html The company also has subdomains (tailored to a range of products) which lists a choosen selection of the products from the TLD - sort of like a feed: subdomain.company.com/product/name.html The content on the TLD & subdomain product page are exactly the same and cannot be changed - CSS and HTML is slightly differant but the content (text and images) is exactly the same! My concern (and rightly so) is that Google will deem this to be duplicate content, therfore I'm going to have to add a rel cannonical tag into the header of all subdomain pages, pointing to the original product page on the TLD. Does this sound like the correct thing to do? Or is there a better solution? Moving on, not only are products fed onto subdomain, there are a handfull of other domains which list the products - again, the content (text and images) is exactly the same: other.com/product/name.html Would I be best placed to add a rel cannonical tag into the header of the product pages on other domains, pointing to the original product page on the actual TLD? Does rel cannonical work across domains? Would the product pages with a rel cannonical tag in the header still rank? Let me know if there is a better solution all-round!
Intermediate & Advanced SEO | | iam-sold0 -
How do you archive content?
In this video from Google Webmasters about content, https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=y8s6Y4mx9Vw around 0:57 it is advised to "archive any content that is no longer relevant". My question is how do you exactly do that? By adding noindex to those pages, by removing all internal links to that page, by completely removing those from the website? How do you technically archive content? watch?v=y8s6Y4mx9Vw
Intermediate & Advanced SEO | | SorinaDascalu1 -
Blog Duplicate Content
Hi, I have a blog, and like most blogs I have various search options (subject matter, author, archive, etc) which produce the same content via different URLs. Should I implement the rel-canonical tag AND the meta robots tag (noindex, follow) on every page of duplicate blog content, or simply choose one or the other? What's best practice? Thanks Mozzers! Luke
Intermediate & Advanced SEO | | McTaggart0 -
Duplicate Content Question
My client's website is for an organization that is part of a larger organization - which has it's own website. We were given permission to use content from the larger organization's site on my client's redesigned site. The SEs will deem this as duplicate content, right? I can "re-write" the content for the new site, but it will still be closely based on the original content from the larger organization's site, due to the scientific/medical nature of the subject material. Is there a way around this dilemma so I do not get penalized? Thanks!
Intermediate & Advanced SEO | | Mills1