100% Complete Doesn't Impact Ranking

[Colan Nielsen]

I came across an interesting thread where Mike Blumenthal indicates that getting the places dashboard to 100% complete has no affect on ranking. I found this very interesting as I have always wondered about this. I've heard people say it does have an impact on ranking, but this is the first time I've heard that is doesn't.

It makes sense if you consider all of the high ranking listings that are clearly not 100% complete.

Google Groups

 

[Don Berthiaume]

Interesting...was totally under the same impression as you, Colan, that it did matter. I can even recall reading an article where someone actually had tested to see how much of an impact each piece of information made - and how they all got to total 100%.

I guess what I picked up on most was Mike's seemingly emphatic tone, "It has absolutely no affect." Like it doesn't even help in the least.

I agree that there might be other high ranking listings out there that are not 100% but there are sooooo many other factors involved, that all of us can attest to, that would also impact why a listing is where it is - sometimes despite itself.

And...if it doesn't matter, why is it there to fill out? Why does Google give us the ability to include this information only to have her ignore it, or not care about it? Geez...wish she was less temperamental then about the categories we might want to use.

IMHO it just doesn't make sense that it bears absolutely no weight. Wonder where he got that info from and if it was directly from the mare's mouth.

Going to have to try do dig that old article up...just out of curiosity now.

------

Well, I just did a quick search at Mike's blog and found the following information, though it is not the source from where I had seen it before. However, he does say again here, that it has no impact on rank.

http://blumenthals.com/blog/?s=places+completeness

 

[Linda Buquet]

I've always thought the same thing as Mike - in my gut. Never had anything to back it up, so I'm really glad to hear him come right out and confirm what I've always thought.

Thanks for catching that thread and bringing it up Colan!

I always got to 100% purely for completeness and thought it would look bad to client if they saw it was 86% complete or whatever. Also feel the more info you give her and the better job you do, the more you can potentially increase relevance and trust in the listing. (Boosting trust does not necessarily increase rank directly either.)

Just realized in my Advanced training where I try to cover only the VERY MOST advanced and important stuff - I don't even talk about 100% complete. Have never even uttered the words. IF it was a ranking factor at all, it would be in there. So that kinda tells you where it is on my radar. (Plus I just assume everyone does it, just to be complete and look good for client.)

So for me, getting 100% was always more like building a solid foundation - not so much a ranking factor.

 

[David Fesler]

Fear drives me to get my listings 100% complete. Just can't risk it.

 

[Linda Buquet]

Fear of Google drives us all!

 

[MiriamEllis]

Yep, I recall Mike saying that as well. This doesn't mean that you shouldn't make the effort to have a well filled-out profile, but I wouldn't stress about the 100% complete thing.

This reminds me of something though. Some time ago, I remember that one of the Local SEOs (maybe Mike) noticed that adding just 1 video to a Google Places listings would actually DECREASE the percentage of completeness. Once you added 2 videos, you'd see an improvement in completion, but if you only added 1, it actually lowered your completion.

Anyone know if this weirdness still exists? Hadn't thought about it in awhile.

 

[Linda Buquet]

Ya I teach that in my course but say I'm not sure if still true.

It was: 1 vid = MINUS 4 points. 2 vids I think = +2.

But since vids don't work now anyway kinda of a moot point.

 

[Flash]

I've always agreed with those that said 100% wasn't necessary.

And...if it doesn't matter, why is it there to fill out? Why does Google give us the ability to include this information only to have her ignore it, or not care about it? Geez...wish she was less temperamental then about the categories we might want to use.

Map Maker users have been deleting extra information for a long time. Google has been pretty clear on this for a while... give them the information necessary, but don't start making up extra crap as filler, that's considered spammy. This applies to numerous fields, but using the categories as and example; if there's only one or two categories that fit your business because the service is pretty focused, then don't make up extra categories that repeat the same information. That is actually defined as category spam in the Map Maker guidelines and when we delete them we mark the reason for the edit as cleaning up spam content.

Places guidelines just states to use at least one category. The others are not required fields.

 

[Linda Buquet]

Ahhh, good to know. I've been intuitively teaching that without even knowing there was a MM guideline.

I've just been teaching that I think repeating keywords in cats would look like spam to the algo. Example: Plumbing company, plumbing contractor, plumbing service. But that was just based on my gut and knowing how Google thinks, didn't even know there was anything official because it's not spelled out in the Places guidelines.