- Joined
- Jul 23, 2012
- Messages
- 498
- Reaction score
- 145
I'd like to start a discussion on this topic today, as it's an FAQ I've seen in various fora.
When optimizing a site, local business owners and local SEOs want to know whether they should be putting focus on city+keyword or keyword+city.
My advice is to use both, of course, but there are some nuances to this that deserve further discussion, I believe.
First of all, while keyword research tools can't really be relied upon to deliver accurate numbers when geo phrases are included in the search terms, you may have noticed that tools like Google's Adwords Keyword Tools will often yield identical numbers for:
chiropractor san jose
and
san jose chiropractor
Not always, but often. So, that's an interesting thing to note.
However, when writing titles and copy, it's usually easier to make good sounding sentences out of the second version. For example, this sentence:
Call The San Jose Chiropractor Who Can Straighten Out Your Life By Straightening Out Your Back
...reads more naturally than:
Call the Chiropractor San Jose Who Can Straighten...etc.
You could, of course, fix this awkwardness by adding 'in' (i.e. Call the Chiropractor in San Jose), but then you're actually dealing with a different search phrases and, as you have probably noticed, Google sometimes brings up altered SERPs for searches that include the word 'in'.
So, what have you noticed about this situation of word order? Do you give preferential treatment to city+keyword or keyword+city? Why? I'd love to hear your thoughts on this - and - when doing your own local searches, how do you type queries into Ye Olde Google Search Box? City or keyword first? Or are you leaving off city altogether more and more these days, relying on Google to know where you are?
Hope you have something to say on this subject, because it's one that comes up every day in the life of the Local SEO
When optimizing a site, local business owners and local SEOs want to know whether they should be putting focus on city+keyword or keyword+city.
My advice is to use both, of course, but there are some nuances to this that deserve further discussion, I believe.
First of all, while keyword research tools can't really be relied upon to deliver accurate numbers when geo phrases are included in the search terms, you may have noticed that tools like Google's Adwords Keyword Tools will often yield identical numbers for:
chiropractor san jose
and
san jose chiropractor
Not always, but often. So, that's an interesting thing to note.
However, when writing titles and copy, it's usually easier to make good sounding sentences out of the second version. For example, this sentence:
Call The San Jose Chiropractor Who Can Straighten Out Your Life By Straightening Out Your Back
...reads more naturally than:
Call the Chiropractor San Jose Who Can Straighten...etc.
You could, of course, fix this awkwardness by adding 'in' (i.e. Call the Chiropractor in San Jose), but then you're actually dealing with a different search phrases and, as you have probably noticed, Google sometimes brings up altered SERPs for searches that include the word 'in'.
So, what have you noticed about this situation of word order? Do you give preferential treatment to city+keyword or keyword+city? Why? I'd love to hear your thoughts on this - and - when doing your own local searches, how do you type queries into Ye Olde Google Search Box? City or keyword first? Or are you leaving off city altogether more and more these days, relying on Google to know where you are?
Hope you have something to say on this subject, because it's one that comes up every day in the life of the Local SEO