- Jun 28, 2012
Which Performs Better? High Pack or Organic Rankings?
Ask 10 local search consultants and you'll get 10 answers.
But BrightLocal did a survey that sheds some light on what many local search consultants think.
<a href="https://www.brightlocal.com/2015/07/30/seos-believe-high-local-rankings-deliver-greater-response-than-organic/">SEOs believe 'high' local rankings deliver greater response than organic</a>
Key 'Takeaways' From This Post
51% say local results deliver the greater response for their clients
30% say organic & local have the same impact overall
19% say organic results deliver the greater response for their clients
Don't just read the key takeaways... Head over to read the full post for graphs and also key insights from pros like Mike Ramsey, Joy Hawkins and Adam Dorfman.
So in the BrightLocal survey local (pack) results won out by a significant margin. However increasingly, especially with snack packs and other changes to local, I see consultants saying they are focusing more on organic.
Here are just a couple comments from the thread about: <a href="http://www.localsearchforum.com/google-local/35166-google-testing-new-paid-home-services-local-pack.html">Google Testing Paid Home Services Packs</a>.
I find going after local organic search results (not packs) to be a better ROI for our clients and a better use of their budget then either GMB or AdWords. YMMV.
Obviously there are several pros and cons to each.Dan: Having been doing this for a long time for local smb's (pre google maps), I'd agree. Organic results are GREAT. On the head terms one needs links to compete. On long tail...ooooh la la...there is a lot of value there with a lot of content.
So what do you guys think?
Obviously there is a lot of value in both, but if you could only focus on one, which one would it be???
<meta property="og:type" content="article"><meta property="og:title" content=""><meta property="og:description" content="">
<meta property="og:image" content="">