Goodbye, GetListed. Hello, Moz Local!

[manny1020]

Do you have any more insight on this Drew? Would you consider this a replacement for Yext? How many citations can I estimate will be had with Moz Local? I know with Yext it'll be around 50, how about with Moz Local?

 

[Dave Cosper]

Nice category tool:

https://moz.com/local/categories

 

[Drew Goettemoeller]

Do you have any more insight on this Drew? Would you consider this a replacement for Yext? How many citations can I estimate will be had with Moz Local? I know with Yext it'll be around 50, how about with Moz Local?

Well, it's hard to say. Their individual distribution lists aren't public, but you can use their published data to make an educated guess.

Like looking at this comparison site: you can see what each of the feeds would provide individually. https://www.neustarlocaleze.biz/directory/localeze-difference

Also, if you make sense of David's "spaghetti graph" you can see that the majority of your needs are going to be taken care of. Major Local Search Data Sources - Moz Local

It's probably going to be a much larger number than you could manage to complete by hand in the same time period, and it should definitely help you scale your local work immensely. Duplicates & cleanup are still going to be a pain though.

Does this have any current competitors that i.e. take care of all the aggregators at once? I don't think so, but we've been working on trying to find a list on reddit: GetListed Relaunches as MOZ Local : bigseo

 

[manny1020]

Well, it's hard to say. Their individual distribution lists aren't public, but you can use their published data to make an educated guess.

Like looking at this comparison site: you can see what each of the feeds would provide individually. https://www.neustarlocaleze.biz/directory/localeze-difference

Also, if you make sense of David's "spaghetti graph" you can see that the majority of your needs are going to be taken care of. Major Local Search Data Sources - Moz Local

It's probably going to be a much larger number than you could manage to complete by hand in the same time period, and it should definitely help you scale your local work immensely. Duplicates & cleanup are still going to be a pain though.

Does this have any current competitors that i.e. take care of all the aggregators at once? I don't think so, but we've been working on trying to find a list on reddit: GetListed Relaunches as MOZ Local : bigseo

Thanks Drew, really helped me out with this. That Moz.com Major Local Search Data link you provided was exactly what I was looking for.

I wonder if there would be any problems when used alongside Yext, since a bit of the listing sources overlap. I'm thinking Yext would take precedence in this case.

 

[JordanJCaron]

I like it as it gives you a snapshot of incomplete and inconsistent listings. I wish brightlocal provided that. Too bad I only have two US clients.

 

[Linda Buquet]

Hi Jordan and welcome!

 

[JordanJCaron]

Thanks Linda. I've known about you and this site for a few years, just finally got around to joining. Looking forward to connecting with other local SEO's!

 

[Linda Buquet]

Joshua Mackens, one of our members was excited not too long ago about becoming a Localeze distributor. He was just starting to resell Localeze to other local search consultants. He breaks down why he will be changing his plans and does a nice comparison between Localeze and Moz Local, showing ML is the clear winner.

Localeze's Future with Moz Local - tutelarymarketing.com

 

[Adam Steele]

I am eager to see where they take this. I mean, it's David...there will be great things surely. Him, plus the very capable ppl at moz will undoubtedly create something awesome.

Having used ML now, I am still cautiously optimistic. If you have used UBL in the past, then you probably can see that this isn't tremendously different. Sure there some extra bells and whistles, but boiled down, it seems to me that ML has done not too much more than put lipstick on a pig. The lipstick being the UI/UX stuff, which undoubtedly makes ML a pleasure to use, especially in comparison. And the pig being UBL, though not of course.

UBL and the like have always been a touchy subject for me. Lots of horror stories there, and even more wasted time and money. I eventually took to doing everything manually, even if it meant spending lots hours submitting one by one - thank goodness for roboform! And if you ask me, we were better for it, because we spent the time, creating profiles that were robust and valuable. You can't automate that, well you can, but no one has brought that to market yet.

Having worked with companies with 100+ locations last year, I now get it. I understand why companies like Yext, UBL and now ML are around. Even for busy SMBs who just don't have the time, nor care to build profiles themselves. I get it. Is it the best route, I still don't think so.

What I value more than anything is what I hope to be a more efficient avenue to the aggregators. It is such a pain the butt to update my info there, and if ML can tackle that task, I am a happy guy. What I fear more than anything is what might come of my citations that exist, post upload to ML. Will, if all seems in order, ML just pass over them, or will they re-write them? While Andrew covered this I believe in his review, I am eager to see what happens in practice.

My ideal ML would take my data, if the AGG didn't already have it, publish it, and then have it be uploaded to any sources I may have missed. IF I had a incorrect citation w/in its reach, it would only replace the piece of info that was incorrect, leaving everything else untouched. My ideal ML would also not allow publishers to revert back to old data if I stopped paying for ML, but I know that is out of their hands, and frankly why would they care to have me keep it anyways? What incentive would I have to stay with them. Right? And for that reason, I would prefer a 1 time fee, understandably higher. Course, 1 time fees isn't good business. Recurring FTW.

Anyways, regardless of my sentiments and early observations, like I said, they couldn't have a better team. They are poised to change the game, and so my and I would imagine the communities expectations are going to be high. Am looking forward!

 

[Laustin1878]

Figured I'd give this thread a bump. Anyone else tried this and have feedback? I started looking at Moz Local again, among other tools and was hoping someone had tried on these shoes.

 

[Blake Denman]

For the price, it's worth it. I submitted a feed a few months ago. The UX is really clean and easy to get around. It does find dupes pretty well, though getting them corrected is another story.

Example: Factual doesn't allow any user contributions anymore (unless you use there API), Moz Local is one of the recommended third parties. When Moz Local finds a duplicate on Factual, how do you fix it? From the Moz Local dashboard, if you click on the "Fix Duplicate" button it's a href=mailto:datacontributions@factual.com with a pre-written message. Pretty nice, but we haven't had any luck getting dupes removed using this method. Not Moz's fault, but would like to find a way to effectively get dupes removed from Factual.

 

[Linda Buquet]

Thanks for the feedback Blake!

See updates:

<a href="http://localsearchforum.catalystemarketing.com/local-seo-tools-software/22090-moz-local-updates-price-increase-coming.html">Moz Local Updates + Price Increase Coming</a>

FYI this was initially posted in Local Search News, because it was news at the time.
But now I'm moving to the Tools forum.

 

[Kristen]

For the price, it's worth it. I submitted a feed a few months ago. The UX is really clean and easy to get around. It does find dupes pretty well, though getting them corrected is another story.

Example: Factual doesn't allow any user contributions anymore (unless you use there API), Moz Local is one of the recommended third parties. When Moz Local finds a duplicate on Factual, how do you fix it? From the Moz Local dashboard, if you click on the "Fix Duplicate" button it's a href=mailto:datacontributions@factual.com with a pre-written message. Pretty nice, but we haven't had any luck getting dupes removed using this method. Not Moz's fault, but would like to find a way to effectively get dupes removed from Factual.

My experience with Moz is similar to Blake's. Information is submitted easily, but Best of the Web seems to be VERY slow to accept/approve listing data. For Factual, we've actually seen a good deal of success requesting removal by email. Sometimes it takes two or three requests to remove duplicates, but if you track them and follow through, they will eventually delete them. Generally it seems to take about 1-2 months for the duplicate requests to go through.

 

[JoshuaMackens]

BotW is slow either way, either manual or automated.

I've wondered privately if they just quit trying over there.

 

[JacobMaslow]

Factual doesn't maintain listings like other providers. They accept all sorts of data and uses an algorithm to decide what to feed to their downstream.

You can use synup to see what factual is serving or you can look at who factual feeds to.

https://factual.com/about

You are right about Moz not being a great choice to remove dupes. Moz Local is a way to get correct info out there. Removing old addresses and the like is a very manual process.

I use Yext in addition to Moz for my higher paying clients.

For the price, it's worth it. I submitted a feed a few months ago. The UX is really clean and easy to get around. It does find dupes pretty well, though getting them corrected is another story.

Example: Factual doesn't allow any user contributions anymore (unless you use there API), Moz Local is one of the recommended third parties. When Moz Local finds a duplicate on Factual, how do you fix it? From the Moz Local dashboard, if you click on the "Fix Duplicate" button it's a href=mailto:datacontributions@factual.com with a pre-written message. Pretty nice, but we haven't had any luck getting dupes removed using this method. Not Moz's fault, but would like to find a way to effectively get dupes removed from Factual.

 

[Tyson Downs]

Has anybody that uses Moz local ever been able to get a duplicate or incorrect listing removed by clicking on the 'remove duplicate' button?

I'm 7 months into my subscription, and I have 13 active accounts in my dashboard, and I've yet to have a duplicate listing correct or deleted because of any action I've taken within Moz. I've had to manually go and get these duplicates taken care of.

Moz reports that it is because they are a low priority for the websites that they update to.

It's pretty frustrating...

 

[Adam Steele]

Hey Tyson -

How abouts are you going in manually and correcting them? Via the ML system? Or manually mailing the directory? Or?

I haven't ever leaned on ML for cleanup of duplicates, we do that all manually by mailing. But I am very curious to hear what (if any) capabilities they have of tackling such things.

Adam
Loganix.net

 

[JoshuaMackens]

My experience has been similar but I've been told by support it should work as early as 3 weeks ago.

It would be nice to hear from someone at Moz Local regarding this.

 

[Tyson Downs]

Hey Tyson -

How abouts are you going in manually and correcting them? Via the ML system? Or manually mailing the directory? Or?

I haven't ever leaned on ML for cleanup of duplicates, we do that all manually by mailing. But I am very curious to hear what (if any) capabilities they have of tackling such things.

Adam
Loganix.net

Adam, in the moz dashboard is a section for duplicates.

Click on that and it'll show you the duplicates they found for each of the profiles that they monitor.

Some of them allow you to 'close' the duplicate and it is supposed to delete the listing.

Problem is that never works. Though, they tell me it does. Tired of filing tickets asking them for updates on these.

So, we resort to working with the website directly to close them, which increases our cost, lowers profitability, and creates headaches as you know; getting duplicate listings deleted is never easy. (well almost never)

 

[Adam Steele]

Thanks for that Tyson.

I've not explored the dashboard too much, as I only ever use it as means to get to the aggregators. I will have to have a better look this week.

Yes, that is our approach too. It's a pain in the ass no doubt, but it's got to be done.