301 redirect vs. UTMs in the GBP website link

[Brian - TGL]

Does anyone have any experience or thoughts about adding UTM parameters to the URL in the GBP (website.com/?utm_source=gbp) vs using a 301 redirect like website.com/gbp which then forwards to website.com/?utm_source=gbp?

This is in the case that there is not a specific page yet to direct the GBP traffic to (a clean services page etc.)

I like to be able to see the traffic source in Fathom Analytics but I hate how sloppy a URL looks in the profile with UTM parameters (I think the longer a URL is the less likely people are to click on them).

Eventually, once a destination page is made, the redirect could then be updated to the destination page is my thinking, but I'm wondering if there are any aspects of that process that might interfere with what Google is expecting.

 

[Professor M]

301 redirect is not allowed on a GBP

 

[Brian - TGL]

301 redirect is not allowed on a GBP

I have been searching for that information, do you have a link to where that is referenced in the TOS?

 

[JS Girard]

I have been searching for that information, do you have a link to where that is referenced in the TOS?

Whether it is referenced is irrelevant: as far as I can tell Google automatically deletes them from the GBP as is. What you can do is have a delayed meta refresh to the redirect URL. That doesn't get Google's panties in a bunch.

 

[Brian - TGL]

Whether it is referenced is irrelevant: as far as I can tell Google automatically deletes them from the GBP as is. What you can do is have a delayed meta refresh to the redirect URL. That doesn't get Google's panties in a bunch.

I have a 301 redirect on several GBPs including my own:

https://maps.app.goo.gl/j1hbjKyJGSw7Tczd8
The 301 has been on that GBP for almost 2 years:

https://app.screencast.com/YddSrXCndWXDh
It's definitely not something that gets automatically deleted . . . I'm just trying to figure out if there are any downsides from a visibility & relevance point of view that have a real-world effect on a GBP.

 

[mblumenthal]

Typically Google doesn’t like redirects to a different domain. I have no experience with same domain redirects. The URL that is used for the GBP is the one that assigns prominence to the listing. So you want to pick one that has the most strength.

 

[whitespark]

@Brian - TGL, the page that you link to in GBP is super important for both prominence, as @mblumenthal mentions, and relevancy. It's the key page that Google uses to understand what your business is and what you do.

So, it's possible that if that page doesn't exist (because it gets redirected) then Google gets no additional information about your business, and that would definitely have a negative impact on your rankings. It's also possible that Google follows the 301 redirect and just gathers data from the new page.

Since you already have the redirect in place, I wonder if we could test what happens if you update your website URL in your GBP to point at the final page instead of the URL that redirects. Do rankings go up? Do they stay the same?

Prior to implementing the change, I'd want to make sure we have some baseline ranking data established. Do you already have local rank tracking set up? If not, I could set up a campaign for you in the Whitespark Local Rank Tracker.

Let me know what you think.

 

[Brian - TGL]

@whitespark I wouldn't mind seeing how things work in the Whitespark tools (especially being Canadian, I spend part of my year in Bentley, AB). I have an account that I just used to do some citation research but I have never used any ongoing Whitespark services yet.

 

[bdlowery]

I have a 301 redirect on several GBPs including my own:

https://maps.app.goo.gl/j1hbjKyJGSw7Tczd8
The 301 has been on that GBP for almost 2 years:

https://app.screencast.com/YddSrXCndWXDh
It's definitely not something that gets automatically deleted . . . I'm just trying to figure out if there are any downsides from a visibility & relevance point of view that have a real-world effect on a GBP.

Use UTM parameters. Every website in existence uses them for tracking things. Instagram, pinterest, twitter, even google themselves. I'd recommend using something that's standard across every single industry (UTM parameters), versus redirecting to a different page.

Something as simple as example.com/?utm_source=gmb would be enough to differentiate the clicks coming from your GBP profile.

 

[Brian - TGL]

@bdlowery that's literally what I have example.com/gbp set to redirect to: example.com/?utm_source=gmb_profile

I just thought /gbp looked cleaner in the profile, but I definitely see new things that I should be taking into consideration thanks to the replies in this thread.

 

[daniowens]

@whitespark I wouldn't mind seeing how things work in the Whitespark tools (especially being Canadian, I spend part of my year in Bentley, AB). I have an account that I just used to do some citation research but I have never used any ongoing Whitespark services yet.

How did this end up? Did you test using a URL that doesn't redirect? If so, did it impact rankings?

 

[Brian - TGL]

How did this end up? Did you test using a URL that doesn't redirect? If so, did it impact rankings?

I never ran into a suspension issue of any kind but I don't have any GBPs that I am not consistently posting content to that I would have been able to test for that single variable . . . I just made the UTM my go to moving forward.