Successfully reported this slideshow.
We use your LinkedIn profile and activity data to personalize ads and to show you more relevant ads. You can change your ad preferences anytime.

Duplicate Supression Case Study

2,689 views

Published on

This is a case study about duplicate suppression at scale.

Published in: Marketing
  • Be the first to comment

  • Be the first to like this

Duplicate Supression Case Study

  1. 1. DUPLICATE SUPPRESSION CASE STUDY What Does NAP consistency do at scale? 1Twitter: @danleibson Email: dan@localseoguide.com
  2. 2. THE DATA SET 1,239 locations 48 Keywords per location 59,329 data points checked on a weekly basis 8,115 true duplicate or incorrect listings suppressed across 37 publishers 2Twitter: @danleibson Email: dan@localseoguide.com
  3. 3. THE METHODOLOGY All keywords were geo-located by zip as there are multiple locations per city.  Donuts  Location set to 92627 Explicit geo-location was called out both before and after the term.  Donuts Costa Mesa  Costa Mesa Donuts This is the first large scale study to demonstrate a direct correlation between citation consistency and Google My Business ranking. 3Twitter: @danleibson Email: dan@localseoguide.com
  4. 4. STUFF HAPPENED 4Twitter: @danleibson Email: dan@localseoguide.com 0 2000 4000 6000 8000 10000 12000 12/21/14 12/28/14 1/4/15 1/11/15 1/18/15 1/25/15 2/1/15 2/8/15 2/15/15 2/22/15 3/1/15 3/8/15 3/15/15 Local / 3 Pack Progress by Pack Type and Position Counts 3 Pack #1 Local Pack A 3 Pack #2 Local Pack B 3 Pack #3 Local Pack C Local Pack D Local Pack E Local Pack F
  5. 5. LOTS OF AMAZING STUFF 5Twitter: @danleibson Email: dan@localseoguide.com 0 2000 4000 6000 8000 10000 12000 12/21/14 12/28/14 1/4/15 1/11/15 1/18/15 1/25/15 2/1/15 2/8/15 2/15/15 2/22/15 3/1/15 3/8/15 3/15/15 Local / 3 Pack Progress by Pack Type and Position Counts 3 Pack #1 Local Pack A 3 Pack #2 Local Pack B 3 Pack #3 Local Pack C Local Pack D Local Pack E Local Pack F -1000 -500 0 500 1000 1500 2000 -100% -50% 0% 50% 100% 150% 200% 3 Pack #1 Local Pack A 3 Pack #2 Local Pack B 3 Pack #3 Local Pack C Local Pack D Local Pack E Local Pack F Total Overall Gain by Pack Type and Position Counts Gain % Gain
  6. 6. AND EVEN THINGS WE DIDN’T EXPECT 6Twitter: @danleibson Email: dan@localseoguide.com 0 500 1000 1500 2000 2500 3000 3500 4000 Positive 6 Positive 5 Positive 4 Positive 3 Positive 2 Positive 1 Zero Change Negative 1 Negative 2 Negative 3 Negative 4 Negative 5 Negative 6 Rank Changes within Local or 3 Pack Series1
  7. 7. TAKEAWAYS 7Twitter: @danleibson Email: dan@localseoguide.com Enforcing citation consistency and removing duplicates produced a net 23% increase in pack presence. This brand has an anemic SEO strategy No indexable page per location No Google My Business optimization Don’t measure GMB traffic

×