Localization without proper address?
-
Hi Mozzers,
recently I received a project to promote a hotel website in a third world country. They have no street names, no landline phone, no zip-code.
So far I tried to give a good address description in all social networks and on the homepage (footer) and signed into hotel directories.
Suddently a new website of another hotel came up on google and made it up to number 1. They put a fake telefon number (landline) on the website. Is that a good idea of localizing a business? Do you have recommendations for me how to enhance.
Thanks
-
Hi Miriam,
to get a grey pin you only need to mark a place somewhere in the world on google maps. Example: I have a hotel website for a hotel on a river in Nicaragua. The next village is 20 miles away. But still google localized the place and I can put a mobile phone number with it. Or another hotel is located at a deserted beach. I put the marker on the position and describe the position in the address fields as good as possible (e.g. Street name: Playa del Sol, City: Islandname, Zipcode: a random figure).
In my specific case we talk about the listing for "Hotel Little Corn Island" and "hotel bellavista corn island". Thanks for help...
-
Hi Falk, I'm stumped. I don't understand how you are seeing your hotel in the main results with a true grey/pinned local result if you have no address or phone number. Unfortunately, without being able to actually look at the listing, I can't get any further with this. What you are describing is not something I've ever seen before, and I have to wonder if Google is handling things very differently than one would expect, given the remoteness/other factors about your location. If you can share the listings, I'm happy to look at it. If not, I can't really provide any further insight.
-
First of all, thanks for the quick answers of you.
The localization works. There is a grey pin next to the hotel, thanks to google maps and/or Panoramio. Most of the people, when it comes to look for a hotel, they search for "cityname/area + hotel". That's how it works on the island here too. None of our island hotels had a telephone number so far until this one now which reaches number 1 on google within days. Can a telephone number make such a difference (even when the number is not valid on the island)?
The page of my competitor has nearly no content! Mine is full of content about the hotel and the destination. He hardly has backlinks...me too so far because it is a new website.
Thanks for further advice.
-
Hi Falk,
I agree with much of the advice offered by EEE3. Unfortunately, your client is not eligible for inclusion in Google's local products if they lack a physical street address and local phone number. The competitor's usage of a fake phone number is not advisable...he is misdirecting his own potential guests and, there is a good chance Google will see through this.
So, local inclusion just isn't appropriate for your client, meaning you will have to rely on Organic SEO rather than Local SEO to gain visibility for the hotel. I am presuming that if no one in this region of the world has a street address, Google isn't showing any truly local results for the area (no results with the grey, lettered pins on them). So, make the website as strongly optimized as you can for the town and region where the hotel exists and rely on traditional SEO techniques for gaining high organic visibility for the client. That would be my best advice.
-
Okay, so this may not be the answer you're looking for, but maybe another tactic would better serve this hotel?
What about a marketing campaign something like "So off the grid even Google can't find it"? There are lots of adventurous people on this planet--and though the true cause behind the lack of street name, landline phone or zip code may be due to poor infrastructure and not because it's in the middle of a jungle reached only by canoe--you have an audience there.
As far as tackling the local issue, Mike Blumenthal and David Mihm might have some resources for you on their websites and blogs.
http://www.davidmihm.com/blog/
Best of luck to you.
P.S. A fake phone number is not a great idea. If you do go that route, please make sure someone familiar with the hotel is able to answer it. I heard at Local U stories of Google calling phone numbers to check on the location and make sure they were accurate.
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
-
Proper 301 redirect code for http to https
I see lots of suggestions on the web for forwarding http to https. I've got several existing sites that want to take advantage of the SSL boost for SEO (however slight) and I don't want to lose SEO placements in the process. I can force all pages to be viewed through the SSL - that's no problem. But for SEO reasons, do I need to do a 301 redirect line of code for every page in the site to the new "https" version? Or is there a way to catch all with one line of code that Google, etc. will recognize & honor?
Technical SEO | | wcksmith10 -
An article we wrote was published on the Daily Business Review, we'd like to post it on our site. What is the proper way?
Part 1
Technical SEO | | peteboyd
We wrote an article and submitted it to the Daily Business Review. They published the article on their website. We want to also post the article on our website for our users but we want to make sure we are doing this properly. We don't want to be penalized for duplicating content. Is this the correct way to handle this scenario written below? We added a rel="canonical" to the blog post (on our website). The rel="canonical" is set to the Daily Business Review URL where the article was originally published. At the end of the blog post we wrote. "This article was originally posted on The Daily Business Review." and we link to the original post on the Daily Business Review. Should we be setting the blog post (on our website) to be a "noindex" or rel="canonical" ? Part 2 Our company was mentioned in a number of articles. We DID NOT write those articles, we were only mentioned. We have also posted those same articles on our website (verbatim from the original article). We want to show our users that we have been mentioned in highly credited articles. All of these articles were posted on our website and are set to be a "noindex". Is that the correct thing to do? Should we be using a rel="canonical" instead and pointing to the original article URL? Thanks in advance MOZ community for your assistance! We tried to do the leg work of our own research for the answers but couldn't find the exact same scenario that we are encountering**.**0 -
Setting up addon domains properly (bonus duplicate content issue inside)
A new client of mine is using 1and1 hosting from back in the dark ages. Turns out, her primary domain and her main website (different domain) are exactly the same. She likes to have the domains names of her books, but her intention is to have it redirect to her main site. Unfortunately, 1and1's control panel is light years behind cpanel, so when she set up her new domains it just pointed everything to the same directory. I just want to make sure I don't make this up, so please correct me if I'm wrong about something. I'm assuming this is a major duplicate content deal, so I plan to create a new directory for each add-on domain. Since her main site is an add-on itself, I'll have to move all the files into it's new home directory. Then I'll create an htaccess file for each domain and redirect it to her main site. Right so far? My major concern is with the duplicate content. She's had two sites being exactly the same for years. Will there be any issues leftover after I set everything up properly? Is there anything else I need to do? Thanks for the help guys! I'm fairly new to this community and love the opportunity to learn from the best!
Technical SEO | | Mattymar0 -
Google Local Gone Loco
I am a bankruptcy attorney in Southern California. I have been doing my own SEO since I had a couple of bad experiences paying someone to "do" it in the past. If you want it done right, do it yourself I suppose. Anyway, I have been ranking well in Google local results. At first I peeked in at 3/3 showing on the first page of the searches. Then I climbed to Number 2 in local searches, probably as a result of finding sites and making sure my addresses, phone numbers and business names were all correct. However, this week (as I climbed to #3 spot in the local search for my city+ bankruptcy attorney, my Google local result dropped to page 2. One of my employees rated me on google local and gave me a google + which is gone and the pictures that I uploaded to Local Google are gone. I don't know if this is some kind of penalty because an employee gave me a rating (they were completely up front about working for me) or if something else is going on. I was also trying to claim my business on Yahoo (which resulted in some kind of "Account Suspension"). I have no idea what is going on. You can take a look at my site if it helps: http://ashcraftfirm.com We are trying to rank for "murrieta bankruptcy attorney" Thanks for any help you can provide.
Technical SEO | | gcashcraft0 -
Google Places for Local SEO
I am a webmaster at a company with over 50 clients, and I have to list the businesses of our clients in Google Places. Most of our clients are architecture agencies and construction companies, so they are unfamiliar with these things, and that's why I have to list their businesses on Google Places. It would be easier for me to manage all the places for these different businesses if I create the places with one gmail account. Can I use one gmail account to list the businesses for all our clients?
Technical SEO | | Arianittt2 -
Differing numbers of pages indexed with and without the trailing slash
I noticed today that a site: query in Google (UK) for a certain domain I'm looking at returns different numbers depending on whether or not the trailing slash is added at the end. With the trailing slash the numbers are significantly different. This is a domain with a few duplicate content issues. It seems very rare but I've managed to replicate it for a couple of other well known domains, so this is the phenomenon I'm referring to: site:travelsupermarket.com - 16'300 results
Technical SEO | | ianmcintosh
site:travelsupermarket.com/ - 45'500 results site:guardian.co.uk - 120'000'000 results
site:guardian.co.uk/ - 121'000'000 results For the particular domain I'm looking at the numbers are 19'000 without the trailing slash and 800'000 with it! As mentioned, there are a few duplicate content issues at the moment that I'm trying to tidy up, but how should I interpret this? Has anyone seen this before and can advise what it could indicate? Thanks in advance for any answers.0 -
Un-Indexing a Page without robots.txt or access to HEAD
I am in a situation where a page was pushed live (Went live for an hour and then taken down) before it was supposed to go live. Now normally I would utilize the robots.txt or but I do not have access to either and putting a request in will not suffice as it is against protocol with the CMS. So basically I am left to just utilizing the and I cannot seem to find a nice way to play with the SE to get this un-indexed. I know for this instance I could go to GWT and do it but for clients that do not have GWT and for all the other SE's how could I do this? Here is the big question here: What if I have a promotional page that I don't want indexed and am met with these same limitations? Is there anything to do here?
Technical SEO | | DRSearchEngOpt0 -
How to use overlays without getting a Google penalty
One of my clients is an email subscriber-led business offering deals that are time sensitive and which expire after a limited, but varied, time period. Each deal is published on its own URL and in order to drive subscriptions to the email, an overlay was implemented that would appear over the individual deal page so that the user was forced to subscribe if they wished to view the details of the deal. Needless to say, this led to the threat of a Google penalty which _appears (fingers crossed) _to have been narrowly avoided as a result of a quick response on our part to remove the offending overlay. What I would like to ask you is whether you have any safe and approved methods for capturing email subscribers without revealing the premium content to users before they subscribe? We are considering the following approaches: First Click Free for Web Search - This is an opt in service by Google which is widely used for this sort of approach and which stipulates that you have to let the user see the first item they click on from the listings, but can put up the subscriber only overlay afterwards. No Index, No follow - if we simply no index, no follow the individual deal pages where the overlay is situated, will this remove the "cloaking offense" and therefore the risk of a penalty? Partial View - If we show one or two paragraphs of text from the deal page with the rest being covered up by the subscribe now lock up, will this still be cloaking? I will write up my first SEOMoz post on this once we have decided on the way forward and monitored the effects, but in the meantime, I welcome any input from you guys.
Technical SEO | | Red_Mud_Rookie0