Local SEO vs. International SEO: A Guide to Technical SEO Strategy

Mandarin Oriental, The Ritz, & Iberostar are three examples of global luxury hotel groups that leverage local SEO well. Each hotel location must rank highly for location-specific searches for its city, while competing with other major chains.

These businesses understand that for a user searching “five star hotels in Paris,” the local pack listings provide an opportunity to stand out and attract customer attention. Their strategy revolves around optimising the Google Business Profile for every single property:

• Review Management: Mandarin Oriental, for example, maintains exceptional star ratings across its dozens of Google Business Profile listings and responds to nearly every review. This consistent review velocity and response rate signals active management, and conveys reliability.
• Local landing pages: Each hotel (e.g. The Ritz London) has a dedicated, highly optimised landing page. This page often targets long-tail terms like “luxury spa day packages in London” and is linked directly from the Google Business Profile, ensuring the business listing and the web page are perfectly aligned for local relevance.
• Structured data: Iberostar, with its vast portfolio of global resorts, uses local schema markup (e.g., LocalBusiness or Hotel schema) on its location pages. This code explicitly tells search engines the hotel’s exact coordinates, ratings, and price range, boosting its relevance for specific, high-value searches.

Despite their strengths, large hotel chains often struggle with consistency, which opens the door for competitors:

• Underutilised Google Business Profile features: Many chains, including top brands like The Ritz, fail to regularly use Google Posts to announce events, offers, or news, missing a key opportunity to show activity and relevance to local searchers. For a business with multiple dining or spa facilities, they often fail to create separate, dedicated Service listings within the Google Business Profile.
• Location page cannibalisation: With a vast number of sister properties, hotels and restaurants sometimes create very similar location pages. If the content for the “Mandarin Oriental, London” is too generic and doesn’t explicitly talk about the local area, it can end up competing with (or even being overshadowed by) the brand’s other location pages in other  cities.

A single business location’s success in local SEO is independent of the brand’s global domain authority; it hinges entirely on the quality of its GBP and NAP consistency.

International SEO is a technical, structural challenge. The aim is to direct search engines to deliver the most relevant version of your website – based on country and language – to any individual searching. International SEO also must prevent internal competition, also known as cannibalisation, and ensure the correct version of a page ranks in the correct regional search engine (e.g., Google.co.uk vs. Google.de).

International SEO focuses on two critical technical elements:

Choosing the right structure signals your target country to Google:

• ccTLDs (Country Code Top-Level Domains): E.g., brand.co.uk, brand.de. This is the strongest signal for geotargeting but is the most expensive and resource-intensive to manage, requiring separate hosting, security, and SEO & link building for each domain.
• Subdomains: E.g., fr.brand.com. A clear country signal, easier to manage than ccTLDs, but typically requires separate domain authority building.
• Subdirectories: E.g., brand.com/fr/. Easiest and cheapest to implement, as it leverages the main domain’s authority, but the geotargeting signal is weaker and can rely heavily on hreflang declarations.

For a detailed analysis including the pros and cons read our article on international SEO domain structure best practices.

The complex technical backbone of international SEO, Hreflang declarations, tell Google the relationship between language/region versions of a page.

• hreflang=”x-default”: The fallback page when no other language/country matches the user’s settings.
• hreflang=”en-GB”: Targets English speakers in the United Kingdom.
• hreflang=”en”: Targets English speakers globally (regardless of country).

Getting this wrong results in the wrong version of a page being shown to a user, leading to a poor user experience and potential regional compliance issues.

Booking.com employs an international SEO strategy built on a massive-scale technical structure. They are not a local business – they don’t own the hotels – but their global dominance relies on structural SEO:

• Content generation at scale: Booking.com scales content generation with templated descriptions, FAQs, reviews that are localised into dozens of languages. This allows them to create millions of highly-optimised pages for every permutation of “hotels in [city] with [feature]” across all target countries.
• Strategic structure: They use a subdirectory structure (e.g., booking.com/city/au/sydney.html) that leverages their main domain’s high authority while clearly defining the target region. They then use hreflang declarations to manage canonicalisation across different language versions of the same city page.
• Internal linking and link equity: Booking.com’s city and country pages operate as large-scale internal linking hubs. The structure is hierarchical: Country pages aggregate authority and pass it to city pages, which in turn pass it to individual hotel pages. This structured distribution of “link juice” is critical for ranking their most valuable landing pages against local competitors.

Booking.com’s success isn’t due to brilliant prose; it’s due to a rock-solid, data-driven architecture that is A/B tested constantly for maximum search engine efficiency.