Page authority old and new website
-
Dear all,
I tried to find this question using the search option but cannot find the exact same problem.
This is the thing: I launched a new website in January, replacing our old website that did pretty good in the SERPs. The old website is still running on a subdomain old.website.com and the new website is on www.website.com (www.denhollandsche.nl)
Both sites are indexed by google right now, but I'm not sure if that's a good thing. For our main keyword, the page on the new website has an authority of "23" and the exact same page (some minor differences) on the old website still has an authority of "30". Both currently are on the second page of google while some time ago, they where still on position 2/3/4.
My question is: if I would take down the old website and make a 301 redirect for the old page with P/A 30, to point to the new page with a P/A 23, will the p/a of this new page take over the P/A of the old page? What effects can I expect?
The reason the old website is still running is that google images still shows images from old.domain.com in stead of images from the new website...
Thanks for your help guys!
-
Thanks Andy! I know what to do now! Let's mark this question as 'answered!'
-
Thats correct.
Ok my suggestion is to 301 your old.domain to your www.domain AND add the whole subdomain old.domain to robots.txt to ban indexing of that subdomain. Once the domain itself is gone from search results delete the files or back them up etc etc...
As for image search as long as you've pointed old urls to new ones you should be fine
-
Ah ok I understand. The old.domain pages indeed are the former www.domain pages and the for each of the old www pages, a redirect to the new www.domain URL is in place in the .htaccess. However, the old www pages are now running on the subdomain old.domain.com and are indexed again by Google and if I now understand correctly, are actually competing with our new domain website that is running on the www.domain.com.
-
I assume that your website curerntly in old.domain was formerly of www. my question is do the 301's you have in place point to old.domain or to the new page within www.domain ?
-
Thanks a lot Tom and Andy. The info is really useful, and as the html code and structure of the pages is a lot better than from the old site, there is nothing else that I could think of that is causing our positions to drop...
There is one part I do not fully understand:
"is the new website structure sat on top of old urls which are redirected to the new site or old site?"
Could you explain what you mean by this?
Thanks again for your help!
-
Hey Martijn
Let's address this in 2 parts:
First, if you 301 redirected the page with the higher authority, in theory the new page will receive that authority and your score could go up. The 301 tells Google to pass the link equity of the old URL to the new URL and in the SEOMoz crawler this is replicated. If you look at websites that have had old domains 301'd to the new root domain, you can see the old links that point to the old URL come up as links for the new URL. With that in mind, you can expect that the SEOMoz crawler will pass the authority on as well.
Now, as for whether or not you should do this - I think you should straight away. If it subdomain is just showing images this may not apply, but by having the 2 versions of the website live you may be running the risk of having duplicate content. If this is the case, this could severely harm your site's ranking, so I'd address it straight away with a 301 redirect or by rewriting the content.
Another potential issue, and one that might explain why your rankings have dropped to page 2, is that you are "cannibalising" your keywords. By having similar content, title tags etc - even if it is not technically duplicate - you could be confusing the search engine crawlers. It may not know which page to prioritise.
Now, if the images that are showing up on Google images are attracting a healthy amount of traffic, I would think twice about redirecting straight away. You may want to leave it where it is, but adjust the copy and on-page elements to ensure that you're not cannibalising your keywords. Having said that, the links to that page, which may be ranking it highly in Google images, could theoretically work again if 301 redirected, as all link equity is passed when you do so.
Overall, I'd keep things neat and simple for the user and have 1 version of the site, implementing a 301 redirect to the appropriate new URLs. Include the images on these equivalent new URLs.
-
Ok a few things here to talk about.
PA won't instantly move across, just as "page rank" and other ranking factors wouldn't. What would happen though is that a large portion of the link worth from the old urls would move the the new ones - though this raises the question... is the new website structure sat on top of old urls which are redirected to the new site or old site? ... if the first great if the later move them to the new urls and slowly watch PA move across.
In terms of images being indexed, they will remain in the index and searchable for sometime after deletion, also when they try to send someone across to the page with it on - if you've 301'd it correctly it will be a link to the new site and product anyhow and also Google will find that image again to index. (hope that makes sense).
In all honesty you set up sound a little odd, I would suggest making the move sooner rather than later to ensure you don't get a duplicate content issue too.
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
-
Over 40+ pages have been removed from the indexed and this page has been selected as the google preferred canonical.
Over 40+ pages have been removed from the indexed and this page has been selected as the google preferred canonical. https://studyplaces.com/about-us/ The pages affected by this include: https://studyplaces.com/50-best-college-party-songs-of-all-time-and-why-we-love-them/ https://studyplaces.com/15-best-minors-for-business-majors/ As you can see the content on these pages is totally unrelated to the content on the about-us page. Any ideas why this is happening and how to resolve.
Technical SEO | | pnoddy0 -
A new client has image urls showing above their page rankings for the same key phrase.
New client website https://yorkshirefoodguide.co.uk/ has for some key phrase searches the URL for an image showing above or as well as the url for the landing page. I'd be happy for it to show in the image pack but I want to url to rank in the main serp. The site is in WordPress and I'm sure this is just a setting I need to manage. Can you help please?
Technical SEO | | Marketing_Optimist0 -
Getting high priority issue for our xxx.com and xxx.com/home as duplicate pages and duplicate page titles can't seem to find anything that needs to be corrected, what might I be missing?
I am getting high priority issue for our xxx.com and xxx.com/home as reporting both duplicate pages and duplicate page titles on crawl results, I can't seem to find anything that needs to be corrected, what am I be missing? Has anyone else had a similar issue, how was it corrected?
Technical SEO | | tgwebmaster0 -
"One Page With Two Links To Same Page; We Counted The First Link" Is this true?
I read this to day http://searchengineland.com/googles-matt-cutts-one-page-two-links-page-counted-first-link-192718 I thought to myself, yep, thats what I been reading in Moz for years ( pitty Matt could not confirm that still the case for 2014) But reading though the comments Michael Martinez of http://www.seo-theory.com/ pointed out that Mat says "...the last time I checked, was 2009, and back then -- uh, we might, for example, only have selected one of the links from a given page."
Technical SEO | | PaddyDisplays
Which would imply that is does not not mean it always the first link. Michael goes on to say "Back in 2008 when Rand WRONGLY claimed that Google was only counting the first link (I shared results of a test where it passed anchor text from TWO links on the same page)" then goes on to say " In practice the search engine sometimes skipped over links and took anchor text from a second or third link down the page." For me this is significant. I know people that have had "SEO experts" recommend that they should have a blog attached to there e-commence site and post blog posts (with no real interest for readers) with anchor text links to you landing pages. I thought that posting blog post just for anchor text link was a waste of time if you are already linking to the landing page with in a main navigation as google would see that link first. But if Michael is correct then these type of blog posts anchor text link blog posts would have value But who is' right Rand or Michael?0 -
50,000 pages or a page with parameters
I have a site with about 12k pages on a topic... each of these pages could use another several pages to go into deeper detail about the topic. So, I am wondering, for SEO purposes would it be better to have something like 50,000 new pages for each sub topic or have one page that I would pass parameters to and the page would be built on the fly in code behind. The drawback to the one page with parameters is that the URL would be static but the effort to implement would be minimal. I am also not sure how google would index a single page with parameters. The drawback to the 50k pages model is the dev effort and possibly committed some faux pas by unleashing so many links to my internal pages. I might also have to mix aspx with html because my project can't be that large. Anyone here ever have this sort of choice to make? Is there a third way I am not considering?
Technical SEO | | Banknotes0 -
Does google like Category pages or pages with lots of Products on them?
We are having an issue with getting Google to rank the page we want. To have this page http://www.jakewilson.com/c/52/-/346/Cruiser-Motorcycle-Tires rank for the key word Cruiser Motorcycle Tires; however, this page http://www.jakewilson.com/t/52/-/343/752/Cruiser-Motorcycle-Tires is ranking instead and it has less links and page authority according to site explorer and it is farther down in the hierarchy. I am wondering if google just likes pages that have actual products on them instead of a page leading to the page with all the products. Thoughts?
Technical SEO | | DoRM0 -
Changed URLs from Upper to Lower Case, and lost page authority should we switch back?
During an overhaul of our site architecture we switched from having capitals in our urls to all lower case, we did the 301's but the page authority is not nearly what it was should we switch back? (new) http://www.usleaseoption.com/rent-to-own/florida vs (old) http://www.usleaseoption.com/rent-to-own/Florida/
Technical SEO | | mjo1360 -
Getting Google to index new pages
I have a site, called SiteB that has 200 pages of new, unique content. I made a table of contents (TOC) page on SiteB that points to about 50 pages of SiteB content. I would like to get SiteB's TOC page crawled and indexed by Google, as well as all the pages it points to. I submitted the TOC to Pingler 24 hours ago and from the logs I see the Googlebot visited the TOC page but it did not crawl any of the 50 pages that are linked to from the TOC. I do not have a robots.txt file on SiteB. There are no robot meta tags (nofollow, noindex). There are no 'rel=nofollow' attributes on the links. Why would Google crawl the TOC (when I Pinglered it) but not crawl any of the links on that page? One other fact, and I don't know if this matters, but SiteB lives on a subdomain and the URLs contain numbers, like this: http://subdomain.domain.com/category/34404 Yes, I know that the number part is suboptimal from an SEO point of view. I'm working on that, too. But first wanted to figure out why Google isn't crawling the TOC. The site is new and so hasn't been penalized by Google. Thanks for any ideas...
Technical SEO | | scanlin0