Should I use individual product pages for different formats of the same product?
-
Hi All --
I'm working with a publishing client who is launching a new site. They have a large product catalogue offered in a number of format types (print, ebook, online learning, packages) with each one possessing a unique ISBN code. From past experience, I know that ISBN codes can be a really important ranking factor.
We are currently trying to sort out product page guidelines. The proposed methods are:
- A single product page for all formats. The user then has the option to select which format they wish to purchase. The page would contain all key descriptors for each format, including: individual ISBN, format, title, price, author, etc. We would then use schema mark-up just to assist search engines with understanding and crawling. BUT we worry that the single page won't rank as well as say an invidual product page with a unique ISBN in the URL (for example: http://www.wiley.com/WileyCDA/WileyTitle/productCd-0470573325.html)
Which leads to the next option...
- Individual URLs for each format. We understand that most e-commerce guidelines state you shouldn't dilute link equity amongst multiple pages with very similar products and descriptions. BUT we want searchers to be able to search by individual ISBN and still find that specific format within the SERPs. This seems to rule out canonicalizing, because we don't prefer one format over the other and still want say the ebook to show up as much as the print version.
If anyone has any other options or considerations that we haven't thought about, it would be greatly appreciated.
Thanks,
U
-
No, I would not. In fact, I just signed two new online product companies for SEO, and I'm taking them away from different product pages for each variation of the product. Here's why:
(1) Confusing Google not good.
You will confuse Google all to death if you have 4 different product pages for your BOOK. One for online, one for ebook, hardback, paperback, etc.... You need to be clear on which page you want Google to land when I search for "the best book ever"(2) Risk Duplicate Content
By putting the same book/product/service description on each variation page, you risk being tagged for duplicate content. Again, this upsets Google. Don't do that.(3) Lack of Content Depth
You will get tired and burned out on writing details on all those products, you will cut corners, and your content will end up being short or non-descriptive. Better to write one very long product/book/service page and have buttons that allow customers to add the variations into their cart from that page. In this way, this particular page will have deep content, images and everything else Google loves, and it won't be confused one bit on what you are trying to rank for.I've got my work cut out for me on fixing these two product pages, so at some point I'll have to follow up and share the results on my little scientific experiment. My money is on my theory. Bet yours is too!
-
I agree with the other poster, just use one url for each product, don't create pages for each variation. The content will be a nightmare to try to write, especially from the time > gain aspect of things. One option you have is using a shebang to determine which product is selected in the page. Something like
Link to hardover book
Link to paperback
site.com/book-name.html#!paperback
Link to ebook
site.com/book-name.html#!ebook
ect.
That would be what I would recommend to a client and have them use. Then you can canonicalize at the url without the shebang, but still offer the variations and have links to the variations.
-
There are a few things I would take into consideration before deciding to implement individual product pages for different formats of the same product.
Next to the arguments you mention for not using individual product pages for different formats of the same product, I see a few more:
- To prevent duplicate content issues, you will need to invest more in content creation (only 2 options per product will already double the costs)
- It is not easy to create truly unique pages for different formats of one product
- Link juice and social signals will be spread over more pages and for that reason diluted
- People expect to see all different formats of the same product on one page. You have to find an intelligent way not to loose 'ebook customers' who enter the site via the 'hard cover page'.
There is however one strong argument for using multiple URLs for different formats of one product:
- Every extra page you create is a SEO opportunity. The more pages you have the more keywords you can target.
One last remark on ISBN numbers: Is the search volume on ISBN numbers high enough to target your SEO efforts on these?
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
-
Pages excluded from Google's index due to "different canonicalization than user"
Hi MOZ community, A few weeks ago we noticed a complete collapse in traffic on some of our pages (7 out of around 150 blog posts in question). We were able to confirm that those pages disappeared for good from Google's index at the end of January '18, they were still findable via all other major search engines. Using Google's Search Console (previously Webmastertools) we found the unindexed URLs in the list of pages being excluded because "Google chose different canonical than user". Content-wise, the page that Google falsely determines as canonical instead has little to no similarity to the pages it thereby excludes from the index. False canonicalization About our setup: We are a SPA, delivering our pages pre-rendered, each with an (empty) rel=canonical tag in the HTTP header that's then dynamically filled with a self-referential link to the pages own URL via Javascript. This seemed and seems to work fine for 99% of our pages but happens to fail for one of our top performing ones (which is why the hassle 😉 ). What we tried so far: going through every step of this handy guide: https://mza.bundledseo.com/blog/panic-stations-how-to-handle-an-important-page-disappearing-from-google-case-study --> inconclusive (healthy pages, no penalties etc.) manually requesting re-indexation via Search Console --> immediately brought back some pages, others shortly re-appeared in the index then got kicked again for the aforementioned reasons checking other search engines --> pages are only gone from Google, can still be found via Bing, DuckDuckGo and other search engines Questions to you: How does the Googlebot operate with Javascript and does anybody know if their setup has changed in that respect around the end of January? Could you think of any other reason to cause the behavior described above? Eternally thankful for any help! ldWB9
Intermediate & Advanced SEO | | SvenRi1 -
Google pulling brand snippets from only some of my pages. Different settings or are they just being selective?
Hi, Moz community For some of the category-pages, Google is showing some of the brands in the SERP, like this: http://www.screencast.com/t/62wldbwc
Intermediate & Advanced SEO | | Inevo
This is the page-url: https://www.gsport.no/sport/loep/lopeklaer/loepebukse For other category-pages that seemingly is built with similar code and settings, Google doesn't show brands in the snippet: http://www.screencast.com/t/zU9cg7odf
The page-url: https://www.gsport.no/sport/loep/lopeklaer/loepejakke This all begs the questions:
If the two pages contain the same code/html in terms of schema.org / rich snippets, why is Google choosing to display the brands in the SERP for only one of them? And is there something I can do in order to make them display the brands for all my pages? Thank you
Sigurd Bjurbeck, INEVO (digital agency)0 -
Using subdomains for related landing pages?
Seeking subdomain usage and related SEO advice... I'd like to use multiple subdomains for multiple landing pages all with content related to the main root domain. Why?...Cost: so I only have to register one domain. One root domain for better 'branding'. Multiple subdomains that each focus on one specific reason & set of specific keywords people would search a solution to their reason to hire us (or our competition).
Intermediate & Advanced SEO | | nodiffrei0 -
My landing page changed in google's serp. I used to have a product page now I have a pdf?
I have been optimizing this page for a few weeks now and and have seen our page for up from 23rd to 11th on the serp's. I come to work today and not only have I dropped to 15 but I've also had my relevant product page replaced by this page . Not to mention the second page is a pdf! I am not sure what happened here but any advice on how I could fix this would be great. My site is www.mynaturalmarket.com and the keyword I'm working on is Zyflamend.
Intermediate & Advanced SEO | | KenyonManu3-SEOSEM0 -
Are these doorway pages?
I've added category pages for counties/town on http://www.top-10-dating-reviews.com but will google see these as doorway pages? If you click on categories from the menu at the top and view some of the pages you'll hopefully see what I mean? Should I continue building these or delete them? Any advice appreciated.
Intermediate & Advanced SEO | | SamCUK0 -
There seems to be something obvious stopping our product pages from being listed in organic results - help!
Hello All Firstly new to SEO MOZ but what a fantastic resource, good work! I help run a platform at ethical community (dot) com (have phrased it like that so google doesn't pick up this thread hope thats ok). We seem to have something glaringly obvious with the SEO ability of our product pages. We now have over 7000 products on the site and would like to think we have done a pretty good job in terms of optimisning them, lots of nice keywords, relevant page titles, good internal links, and even recently have reduced the loading speeds a fair amount. We have a sitemap set up feeding in URLS to Google and some of them are now nearly a year old. The problem, when doing an EXACT google search on a product title the product pages dont show up for the majority of the 7000 products. HOWEVER.... we get fantastic ranking in google products, and get sales through other areas of the site, which seems even more odd. For example, if you type in "segway" you'll see us ranking on the first page of google in google products, but the product page itself is nowhere to be seen. For example "DARK CHOCOLATE STRANDS 70G CAKE DECORATION" gets no results on google (aside from google products) when we have this page at OURDOMAIN/eco-shop/food/dark-chocolate-strands-70g-cake-decoration-5592 Can anyone help identify if there is a major bottleneck here our gut feeling is there is one major factor that is causing this.
Intermediate & Advanced SEO | | ethicalcommunity0 -
301 Redirect or Canonical Tag or Leave Them Alone? Different Pages - Similar Content
We currently have 3 different versions of our State Business-for-Sale listings pages - the versions are: **Version 1 -- Preferred Version: ** http://www.businessbroker.net/State/California-Businesses_For_Sale.aspx Title = California Business for Sale Ads - California Businesses for Sale & Business Brokers - Sell a Business on Business Broker Version 2: http://www.businessbroker.net/Businesses_For_Sale-State-California.aspx Title = California Business for Sale | 3124 California Businesses for Sale | BusinessBroker.net Version 3: http://www.businessbroker.net/listings/business_for_sale_california.ihtml Title = California Businesses for Sale at BusinessBroker.net - California Business for Sale While the page titles and meta data are a bit different, the bulk of the page content (which is the listings rendered) are identical. We were wondering if it would make good sense to either (A) 301 redirect Versions 2 and 3 to the preferred Version 1 page or (B) put Canonical Tags on Versions 2 and 3 labeling Version 1 as the preferred version. We have this issue for all 50 U.S. States -- I've mentioned California here but the same applies for Alabama through Wyoming - same issue. Given that there are 3 different flavors and all are showing up in the Search Results -- some on the same 1st page of results -- which probably is a good thing for now -- should we do a 301 redirect or a Canonical Tag on Versions 2 and 3? Seems like with Google cracking down on duplicate content, it might be wise to be proactive. Any thoughts or suggestions would be greatly appreciated! Thanks. Matt M
Intermediate & Advanced SEO | | MWM37720