Multi-country, multi-language strategy: which markets deserve their own content, how to declare it with hreflang and how to stop them cannibalising each other.
Request a proposalBrands we've worked with abroad
Selling abroad isn't translating the site. It's deciding which markets deserve their own content, with what structure, and how it's declared so each version reaches its country.
The decision is made and the important part is missing: whether that country needs a domain, a subfolder or just a language, and what content deserves to exist from day one.
There are domains, subdomains and folders piled up from old decisions, and nobody knows what happens if one piece moves.
The tags are there, but they aren't reciprocal, they point to redirects or non-indexable pages, and Google keeps choosing the wrong country.
Spain ranks in Mexico, the .com eats the local market and two versions of the same language cannibalise each other with nobody measuring it.
You have one key country or region in the business plan and need to know if it deserves its own structure, what content must exist and how not to compete against your other versions.
Each country publishes its own way, with literal translations and different criteria, and the result doesn't look like one brand.
These four are in every project, though the weight of each changes a lot: opening three markets from scratch isn't the same as tidying fifteen inherited versions.
Decide which countries are worth competing in, with data, before spending on content and development.
So the structure supports growth instead of becoming the next emergency migration.
So each version reaches its country and none competes with another by mistake.
So each market's content was thought for that market, not translated from the original.
Depending on the countries, the current model and the type of business, specific fronts are added that wouldn't make sense in every expansion.
When domains have to become subfolders, or markets get consolidated, the work enters migration protocol with its own redirect plan.
Different catalogue, stock and pricing per market: what gets indexed in each country and how to stop the feed creating thousands of empty URLs.
When the target country isn't played on Google alone, we review the specifics of the dominant engine.
Models answer differently in each language. Where relevant, we review how you're cited outside your main market.
Choosing between local domains, subfolders or subdomains isn't a technical preference: it defines the authority you can build, the teams you need and the cost of maintaining it for years. We compare the three options against your real context and recommend one, in writing and with its downsides on the table.
marca.es · marca.fr · marca.pt
In favour
Against
Fits whenWhen each market has its own business, catalogue and team, and expansion is progressive.
marca.com/es/ · marca.com/fr/ · marca.com/en/
In favour
Against
Fits whenWhen catalogue and brand are the same abroad and what changes is the language, not the business.
es.marca.com · fr.marca.com
In favour
Against
Fits whenAlmost always discarded. It only holds when the platform forces infrastructure separation.
Six criteria that weigh more than any opinion, because they decide whether the model holds when you open the next market.
Changing the model almost always means a migration. If the main domain has history and authority, moving it has to be well worth it.
A new language doesn't justify a new domain. A market with its own pricing, catalogue and competition usually does.
The structure has to fit the real team: if nobody publishes and measures in each country, you don't open domains.
Opening five markets in a year isn't sustained like opening one per quarter. The model must let you stop without breaking anything.
Hreflang only works where real equivalence exists. If each country's blog differs, those URLs aren't equivalent and shouldn't be marked as such.
Which version lives at the root, whether there's a country selector, whether geo-IP suggests a market, and what the crawler sees in each case.
Senior profiles who sit with engineering and each country's team without an interpreter. Whoever diagnoses is who explains it and who reviews it again.
Because expanding badly costs more than not expanding.
Opening countries is easy; picking the ones with demand, holding them with a structure that lasts and coordinating local teams is what changes the outcome.
Opening a country without demand costs content, development and internal credibility. We'd rather tell you three markets are worth more than twelve.
Domain, subfolder or subdomain isn't a technical preference: it shapes authority, teams and budget for years.
Consolidating or migrating international versions is a migration with all its consequences, and we treat it as one.
Whoever knows the market is the one in it. Our role is to bring judgement, order and a guide they can actually use.
We coordinate and set the criteria; translation is done by native market profiles.
The first findings and decisions land within weeks. Impact on visibility and revenue depends on your platform and your team's implementation speed: on mid-sized projects we usually talk about three to six months for solid movement.
What usually fails is judgement, not effort: tasks get executed without deciding what matters. Before proposing anything we review your data, and if the problem isn't visibility we'll tell you, even if it means not selling the project.
With the countries you're in, the ones you want to open and your current structure, we can tell you where we'd start. We look at your project before proposing anything.
We look at what's there, what deserves investment and with what structure, and write it up so your team can execute it.
We look at your project before proposing anything. Reply within two working days at most.
Talk to us about your markets
