Address consistency issue between GMB and directories

[Gavo]

We have a mortgage broker client, ABC, who shares an address with another business, XYZ who is a loans company. A previous SEO agency created GMBs for these 2 businesses using the same physical address and recently, we had to resolve this issue of duplicate address with Google. ABC was happy for us to fix the issue up by putting a unit no. "A" thus making their address "#7A Smith Street" and business XYZ now has #7B on their GMB.

Our question is will this affect consistency if we were to build citations without "#7A Smith Street" but just using "7 Smith Street" which is their REAL physical address? Business XYZ has also just contracted us for SEO which means we will end up building citations for 2 businesses with the same business address (but different phone numbers). Should we actually continue using "#7A" and "#7B" for citation building even though that's not what their address is?

Thank you in advance for your response!

[MiriamEllis]

Hi Gavo,

Quick questions: Do these 2 businesses share the same Google My Business categories and are these legally two unique businesses?

[Gavo]

Hi Miriam,

Good questions - they both share the same GMB categories and they are indeed legally two unique businesses.

[MiriamEllis]

Hi Gavo,

Sorry for my delayed reply. Had to take a few sick days off.

So, there are a few rather complex different aspects here. I'll try to hit everything:

1. If they are two legally distinct companies, then, yes, they can both have a GMB page. Be sure they've each got their own phone number and website.

2. You should not add fictitious suite numbers to businesses. If you get a legal suite number from the post office, that's okay, but Google's guidelines wants you to represent your business exactly as it appears in the real world. Anything else is a violation of the guidelines.

3. Now we start getting complicated. The truth is that Google doesn't even recognize suite numbers for most businesses, as recently highlighted by Joy Hawkins in her guest post here at Moz: https://moz.com/blog/7-citation-building-myths-plaguing-local-seo. So, there's that. Basically, if you have suite inconsistencies across your citations, it's not believed to be a big deal SEO-wise, though it can be very confusing for customers trying to find you (making it a big deal in a different way) All this being said, please refer back to point #2 - Google doesn't want fictitious location info in the address.

4. And, finally, the fact that the two businesses share an address and categories means that one or the other of them may be filtered out by Possum in the local packs/finders. So, ranking issues may be a pain in the neck here. Hat tip again to Joy here: read point number 2 in her SEL article about Possum: http://searchengineland.com/everything-need-know-googles-possum-algorithm-update-258900 When last I looked, having separate suite numbers did not enable businesses in the same building/same category scenario to escape Possum. So, it will be important to explain to the business owner that their results may play hide-and-seek due to this issue.

So, there you go: a real crash course in the complexities of the scenario you've described. Hope this helps illuminate some of the details.

[Gavo]

Hi Miriam,

Hope you're much better now!

Thanks heaps for your informative response as well as Joy's article. The only reason we'd come up with a unit number 'A' and 'B' for the 2 clients was to resolve the issue of duplicate address with Google. We had to resolve an issue with ABC's GMB with the help of a Google Business consultant and that's how they noticed business ABC and XYZ shared the same address (but both GMBs managed to be verified). We tried explaining to no avail that it was possible in Australia for 2 businesses to share the same office premise (with no separate entrance, they're not on different levels, they do not occupy different rooms within the same office space). Hence, we finally thought to 'resolve' it by creating unit numbers to fix the issue of duplicate address on G+.

What a 'fix'!