Should Your Keep Out Of Stock Item Active On Your Site ?
-
If you have sold out products that will never come back in stock. Should you remove the items and urls from your sitemap and site. Or should you keep them active with a sold out image. The purpose would be for search engines will think your site is larger due the products and amount of urls you have ?
-
Also, critical to remember a person who bought the product in the past may want to view their history for some reason (see descriptions and such).
-
Before you keep these types of pages you should determine if they have any links or any traffic. If they are pulling traffic that you would not otherwise receive then you can use the page to tell the history of the item (such as an antique or other one-of-a-kind piece).
If it is a standard product such as a pair of running shoes that has been replaced by a different model you can make the page informative and explain that the item was replaced by a new model and the impovements that were made.
Both of the above showcase your helpfulness and knowledge.
However, if this page has no links and pulls no traffic then delete it and redirect it. You don't need useless pages on your site.
-
I would keep the sold out items on my site and have a "we also recommend" section below the item in the inner page to show the client that you have items similar to the one that is sold out. I wouldn't add a sold out image; instead, I would code it so if an item is sold out, then the purchase button is replaced by a sold out button/image. Depending on the products that you carry, some of your sold out items may carry weight within SEO and may show up for relevant keyword searches; you don't want to lose that.
-
It depends on the product. If the item is unique, such as a book that is now out of print, we keep it on the site with a pop-up pointing people to either a new version or the related category.
If it is a t-shirt design, we remove the item and redirect it to the category page for the item unless there is a new item that is a direct replacement.
You have to consider your audience. People will probably be grateful to know that a particular book they were looking for is out of print but they probably don't care that a specific color and cut of shirt is unavailable.
-
I agree with Virage. As long as it makes business sense and the volume of your OOS products is not more then your current products. I would not want to have 500 OOS products and 50 In stock products on a site.
Stop linking to that page from your navigation (obviously) and then if somebody does indeed navigate to your OOS product page from elsewhere on the web, then they can see it's OOS and see related products and so on. That's a much better user experience in my opinion vs a 404.
-
I do keep out of stock product pages active for the very reason you mentioned: it's more unique content for the search engines to read, and also, if someone is searching for my out of stock item, I would still want them to find my site because it is very likely we would have a similar alternative option of which they may purchase instead.
If anything, our product pages always include a ton of information, including PDFs and pictures, that just seem helpful from a consumer's POV. Even if they do not end up purchasing said product from us, they can still research it with us!
It really thus depends on the nature of your website and your products, but there is great value in retaining unique content, so if your product page is filled with useful product information, I'd say definitely keep it available for the search engines and consider linking to alternative in-stock options for your visitors to pursue as well!
Got a burning SEO question?
Subscribe to Moz Pro to gain full access to Q&A, answer questions, and ask your own.
Browse Questions
Explore more categories
-
Moz Tools
Chat with the community about the Moz tools.
-
SEO Tactics
Discuss the SEO process with fellow marketers
-
Community
Discuss industry events, jobs, and news!
-
Digital Marketing
Chat about tactics outside of SEO
-
Research & Trends
Dive into research and trends in the search industry.
-
Support
Connect on product support and feature requests.
Related Questions
-
Do we take a SEO hit for having multiple URLs on an infinite scroll page vs a site with many pages/URLs. If we do take a hit, quantify the hit we would suffer.
We are redesigning a preschool website which has over 100 pages. We are looking at 2 options and want to make sure we meet the best user experience and SEO. Option 1 is to condense the site into perhaps 10 pages and window shade the content. For instance, on the curriculum page there would be an overview and each age group program would open via window shade. Option 2 is to have an overview and then each age program links to its own page. Do we lose out on SEO if there are not unique URLS? Or is there a way using metatags or other programming to have the same effect?
Algorithm Updates | | jgodwin0 -
Why does my site dissappeare from the top 50?
Hellow I am having some problems with my site www.kondomanija.si. It was ranked on the first page for my main KW kondomi (in www.google.si, Slovenia) but now it is not in the top 10 pages. And this has happened before, it drops out of the top 10 pages and in a cople of moths it is back for a short time (till it drops out again). It think the site has a week link profile... Could this be the reason? Does anybody know what is going on?
Algorithm Updates | | Spletnafuzija0 -
Would 37,000 footer links from one site be the cause for our ranking drops?
Hey guys, After this week's Penguin update, I've noticed that one of our clients has seen a dip in rankings. Because of this, I've had a good link at the client's back link profile in comparison to competitors and noticed that over 37,000 footer links have been generated from one website - providing us with an unhealthy balance of anchor terms. Do you guys believe this may be the cause for our ranking drops? Would it be wise to try and contact the webmaster in question to remove the footer links? Thanks, Matt
Algorithm Updates | | Webrevolve0 -
Relevant site outranked by powerful un-relevant sites
One of my clients has a site in a niche market, and has been ranking well for years. Since the Penguin algorithm changes his site dropped and 4-5 other sites came out of nowhere to take to top spots. These are very large sites, but they are not really reliant to the search terms. Sure, they sell one or two of the niche products, but our site is dedicated to those products. The site has been updated since I took over on the site, and is well SEOed. The site in question still ranks 1st for the keywords in every other search engine imaginable. Has anyone else encountered this? If so, how did you combat it?
Algorithm Updates | | DavidWilsonSEO0 -
Should I use canonical tags on my site?
I'm trying to keep this a generic example, so apologies if this is too vague. On my main website, we've always had a duplicate content issue. The main focus of our site is breaking down to specific, brick and mortar locations. We have to duplicate the description of product/service for every geographic location (this is a legal requirement). So for example, you might have the parent "product/service" page targeting the term, and then 100's of sub pages with "product/service San Francisco", "product/service Austin", etc. These pages have identical content except for the geographic location is dynamically swapped out. There is also additional useful content like google map of area, local resources, etc. As I said this was always seen as an SEO issue, specifically you could see in the way that googlebot would crawl pages and how pagerank flowed through the site that having 100's of pages with identical copy and just swapping out the geographic location wasn't seen as good content, however we still always received traffic and conversions for the long tail geographic terms so we left it. Las year, with Panda, we noticed a drop in traffic and thought it was due to this duplicate issue so I added canonical tags to all our geographic specific product/service pages that pointed back to the parent page, that seemed to be received well by google and traffic was back to normal in short order. However, recently what I notice a LOT in our SERP pages is if I type in a geographic specific term, i.e. "product/service san francisco", our deep page with the canonical tag is what google is ranking. Google inserts its own title tag on the SERP page and leaves the description blank as it doesn't index the page due to the canonical tag on the page. Essentially what I think it is rewarding is the site architecture which organizes the content to the specific geo in the URL: site.com/service/location/san-francisco. Other than that there is no reason for it to rank that page. Sorry if this is lengthy, thanks for reading all of that! Essentially my question is, should I keep the canonical tags on the site or take them off since Google insists on ranking the page? If I am ranking already then the potential upside to doing that is ranking higher (we're usually in the 3-6 spot on the result page) and also higher CTR because we can get a description back on our resulting page. The counter argument is I'm already ranking so leave it and focus on other things. Appreciate your thoughts on this!
Algorithm Updates | | edu-SEO0 -
Mobi sites and sitemaps
Hi all, How does should one treat mobi sites which have a separate set of files to the main site - with regards to the sitemap? Doe we tell Google about them?
Algorithm Updates | | gazza7770 -
Why is this site ranking 1st?
I'm a relative SEO newbie, so please go easy on me. I've been an SEOMOZ pro user for a few months and have used it to dramatically improve my organic rankings. However, for the life of me, I cannot determine why the site that currently ranks number one, does so. For the factors I can determine, they shouldn't be ranking where they are, but reality is different. Could someone please offer me some ideas? My target keyword is "photography classes edmonton" My site is www.bsop.ca and I'm targetting the Google Canada engine. Any and all assistance is appreciated.
Algorithm Updates | | pburwell0 -
Google seems to have penalised one section of our site? Is that possible?
We have a page rank 5 website and we launched a new site 6 months ago in February. Initially we had horrible urls with a bunch of numbers and stuff and we since changed them to lovely human readable urls. This had an excellent effect across the site except on one section of the site: http://www.allaboutcareers.com/careers/graduate-employers Although Google has indexed these pages and several have a PR 2 they do not appear in Google when previously they were on page 1 when we had the old urls. We figured we just needed some time for Google to get used to it, but it hasn't done anything. It is also worth mentioning we changed the page titles from: FIRM NAME | DOMAIN NAME then... FIRM NAME | Graduate Scheme, Jobs, Internships & Apprenticeships | DOMAIN NAME then.. FIRM NAME | Graduate Scheme, Jobs, Internships & Apprenticeships Do you think these are being penalised? There are two types of page: Example A: http://www.allaboutcareers.com/careers/graduates/addleshaw-goddard.htm Example B: http://www.allaboutcareers.com/careers/graduates/accenture.htm
Algorithm Updates | | jack860