Google.com vs Google.co.uk

[zak]

Hi,

Can anyone explain to me why some of my sites do very well in Google.co.uk, but far less well in Google.com?

They are all .co.uk domains on UK servers.

The annoying thing is, a competitor does very well on both, with fewer backlinks and a less well optimised site. Confused!

Thanks for any feedback.

Zak

[glengara]

*...some of my sites...*

Might be relevant....

[zak]

Sorry... yeah. Er...

arlingtonhotelgroup.co.uk is the main one.

Cheers,

Zak

[dannysullivan]

google uk is going to favor uk based sites by default, even if you don't use the pages from the uk option. you want to do well in google.com, you should be using .com. want to do well in co.uk, use co.uk. want to do well in both? i'd use .com hosted out of the uk.

[zak]

Thats as I thought, but when you look at the top ten returns for a search like "Hotels in Norfolk", 9 out of the 10 are .co.uk domains!

The site has only been live since August, so maybe I'm expecting a little too much...in time it might start gaining better results.

[zak]

I also have the .com for this domain, which currently points to the .co.uk. Is there something I could be doing with it?

[glengara]

Ah, hotels... :-(

IMO it's less a domain thing and more a content/links one, you need to focus less on the Arlington Hotel Group and more on the individual hotels.
I found more info on the Wroxham Hotel in a hotel directory listing than on the site, and it also had links to a lot of info on Wroxham, while you have neither content nor links.

Y! returns about 80 links for the site, I'd suspect that's somewhat below par for the more competitive terms, personally I'd not try to compete with the big boys and their link networks, and would promote the hotels individually ;-)

BTW, I notice you're using a 302 to re-direct some of your other domains, not sure if that's the best one.....

[zak]

Thanks for the advice... 302? Er... can you explain? What's the better alternative?

Generally, would you say the site is well structured for search, and that really its now a case of getting more back-links?

I agree about playing against the big-boys is tough, but in UK search for "hotels in Norwich" the site is 5th on Google, and for "Hotels in Norfolk" is been on the third page. Not great, granted, but I had this down to the fact I had to build more links... but where from??? Starting to run out of options!

Regards your comment about content/linking - its tough to do for a site like this where content is limited to a specific hotel (not a great deal to say), and linking out is not possible because the client doesn't want to link to other sites. What would be your advice on this? Create a link page that has links to other sites of interest, but "hide" it in the footer?

Cheers

[glengara]

*.. would you say the site is well structured for search,,*

The only thing that stood out was using index.aspx on the hotel "home" pages.

*Create a link page that has links to other sites of interest, but "hide" it in the footer?*

Wouldn't do that, just looks bad all around...

*..client doesn't want to link to other sites..*

Clent needs introduction to AdWords ;-)

IIRC 302 is "moved temporarily", more commonly used is the 301 "moved permanently".

[zak]

I really appreciate your help.

Rather than "index" should I have used the names of the hotels?

Yes, I think Adwords is a sensible option... but personal pride drives me to try and get this site onto the first page of Google!! Be hard, but am determined... probably need a billion links though!

Thanks for the tip of 302s - it was a complicated situation all round! Will endeavour to get sorted.

So, in summary, I'm on the right tracks. Just need more links???!!!

Thanks again.