Being listed in Google Places can remove your organic listing!
Yes it is true! Believe it or not.
Let me start with a little history to set the surroundings a little bit. Up until appr. one year ago we let a room in our office to a local photographer and designer named Maria. This was before Google Place search had hit the SERP's here in Sweden. So back then I helped her out with her website and told her some tricks on how to optimize for "fotograf piteå" ("photographer piteå" for all you non sweeds, Piteå is the small town where i live) which is her most important query since her business is very much targeted to the local area.
After some time she gained the number one position and she was quite happy. Then Google Place search came along and literally took over the SERP with 3 - 8 BIG listings preceding the organic listings. So traffic from the oh so important search phrase dropped like a stone.
So I told her to go claim her listing in Google Places and I would help her optimize that listing. Thought it would be good training since it was quite some time ago since I worked with Google Places myself.
After some adjustments and client reviews she got the 2nd postition in the local listings. Hurray!
But when I looked a little closer I could see that her normal "top spot" in the organic listings was gone. I wonder how different rank tracking software is able to handle that little pickle?
So it seems like Google decides that if a page is already listed higher up in the result page, via a Google Places listing, it should not be listed in the normal web results further down!
Klikki AB
Comments
It actually depends on what kind of "places-result" you have on the phrase. If it's the one looking similar to the old map in the SERP it's still not integrated with the normal algo from what I can tell. The new one is integrated on the other hand, all factors counting and that gives you only 1 spot - in this case in the local results.
Hi Magnus, thanks for commenting, and sharing!
I was sort of suspecting that myself, but I didn't have any sites that I am monitoring where I could say for sure what was going on.
So what's your take. Do you think it is OK, or do you have mixed feelings about is as I have?
Bernt Johansson
I definately have mixed feelings and I have noticed that Google are optimizing for something else but the best results.
A good example is Hotell Stockholm, a SERP that used to have the old fashion map in the top but changed to the new integrated results. Googles map results didn't really make it in the new algorithm and I managed to get the real no 1 spot with my Stockholmshotell.com. I saw a big bump in traffic and revenue and Google probably noticed this too becasue a few days later the old result with the list in the top came back.
Hi Bernt!
If I understand this correctly, you are saying that when a result is showing up among the Places (which is on the top of the page), it does not show on the same SERP lower down, right?
The way I understand this is that Google does not want to show you two of the same results, especially not on one page. As a user, I get to click on all the links which show up on the first page, and I would be surprised if I landed on the same homepage of your photographer twice. From a user's point of view this is redundant.
Hence, it makes some sense that Google simply skips repeated results. Matt Cutts was saying this with regards to duplicate content - Google does not actually "penalize" duplicate content, but they only show one result which leads to the same content so that you don't get one article served 15 times on one SERP. You can see how that would decrease user satisfaction. (So they only show the duplicate with the highest score/PR.)
But yes, it does get rather annoying when Places automatically take precedence over organic, but that's another issue.
What do you think?
R
Hi Ruben, and thanks for the comment.
Yes I can see your point here and I agree that from a user point of view it is better to have more diversity in the SERP.
However, there have been studies made showing that a high organic ranking also leads to a higher credibility in the eyes of the user (the one searching). Who is to know how this percieved credibility is effected by a high "places" ranking intead of a high organic ranking?
I have not made up my mind 100% on if I like this change or not, and I am a bit afraid of the future since Google is testing things like Google Boost, where you get a more prominent Places listing by paying $25 per month.
But I guess we can only sit back and monitor the changes and adapt our strategies as best we can.
Bernt Johansson
I have a directory site for a major canadian city. I was the top 1-3 results on most searches for that city ie hotels, restaurants etc.
since google places I am now not in the top 7 . I land up at the bottom or on page 2.
How does a directory site compete and how could I get listed for each category ie City Restaurants , City nightlife?
or am I just out of the game?
Well @anonymous (you should have left a name so it is easier to reply), since Google demands that you have a physical address and contact infomation for each city, the only thing you can do to get listed for each city is to setup a business in each city. Bummer right?
There are of course ways around that, but Google is pretty harsh on listings that are not legit.
Maybe you could look into partnering with one, or maybe even a few, of the companies that you have listed in your directory?
Bernt Johansson
Post new comment