Awful ranking after site redesign
-
Hello everyone,
I have a situation here and I’d like to have your opinion about it.
I am working on a site which has been recently redesigned from scratch: in a nutshell, as soon as the new site went live their rankings dropped and, of course, so did their visitors and so on..
The guys who redesigned the site didn’t do any 301 redirect whatsoever, so now the old pages are just 404s and blocked by robots. My question is: if they 301 redirect now, do you think it would be possible they could get their rankings back?
One more thing: when they launched the new site, the indexed pages basically doubled overnight; there were 700 and now there are 1400. Do you think this could affect their ranking as well?
Thank you for you insights
Elio
-
Hello everyone and thank you for your answers. I sincerely appreciate it!
I didn’t follow the redesign phase, I’ve just jumped on board now so I actually have no idea why they didn’t go for the 301 solution.
As Monica pointed out the 404ed pages were actually valuable pages and, at least in my opinion, this is proved by the fact that now their traffic is close to 0. Their traffic literally dropped in a matter of days (kind of scary to see such a steep fall). I agree with Travis when he says that just the valuable pages should be 301ed, but the thing is that they sell their products online, meaning that hypothetically every (product) page is equally important. They were neither old nor poor quality…I guess they just skipped the 301 step. I will do some more research but I guess that, as you guys suggest, the best way to go is 301 all those pages and see what happens.
I have no idea if they did anything on the social side but that’s worth investigating some more.
Thank you very much for now! I will keep you updated
Cheers
-
I would imagine if the pages were previously ranking they had value. The rule of thumb is to discard pages not ranking on pages 1-3. Since there has been such a decrease in traffic it is reasonable to assume that valuable pages have been 404ed when they should have been 301ed.
I have migrated 7 sites over the past 5 years, so I feel reasonably comfortable saying the duplicated pages are causing the influx in indexed pages. Redirecting the 404 pages is the strongest strategy right now. They basically created 700 valueless pages that won't rank until they are fully indexed and gain some value to the engine, which could take months. It is starting over from 0, which is why the 301 redirects are "normally" best practice.
Any 301 will lose a little bit of link juice. It goes from having a strong page rank alone to diluting its value by sharing it with another link. While it will help salvage some of the sites juice, it won't put them on page 1.
You can wait for these pages to start ranking alone, but that could take months based on the level of on page op and if there are any good links pointing at those pages currently. I am not a fan of the wait and see game, therefore, I try to do everything I can up front. The 301 redirects of the old pages would be best practice in this situation.
-
You can recover page authority from a 404 page for a surprising amount of time--I once did a 301 redirect on some pages that had been 404 for a couple of years and they quickly gained rank. What was the thinking behind not redirecting old pages? Were they poor quality? You don't have to redirect all of them at once--you can start with the best pages (and at least some of them must have been good since you had traffic to lose).
-
When a page is a 404, The Googles will come back to it in an undisclosed period of time. This is in order to make sure the page is really gone. Now if the pages that are gone used to receive referral traffic, it would be super handy to get those pages up soon, forget about the search engines. That way, you're recovering links and pages for the right reasons.
What should be your first order of questioning is if those pages were worth anything to begin with. I can rank a site for 'left handed profession city st', overnight. It doesn't mean any of that is going to work for the client.
But if they didn't redirect any of the old pages to their new, relevant, equivalents - I highly doubt they took the time to block those pages via robots.txt. If they did, wow. I'll leave it at that.
The increase of indexed pages could be due to any number of things. Perhaps a site search function is misconfigured? Perhaps the site uses tags in a way I wouldn't recommend? Perhaps the CMS, if there is one, is prone to duplicate content.
That's pretty much the best I can do without a specific example. Anyone with more 'skeelz' than I would be guessing as well. But thanks much for your question.
-
Ugh... I hate when this happens. It is such a pain in the butt to fix.
1st, you absolutely need those 301 redirects. Don't wait any longer to get them done. Those 404s are affecting your rankings considerable at this point. Basically you have 700 of them, whoa.
Secondly, the double index is because you have 700 new pages added to the 700 old pages. You can wait it out if you want to, but I don't recommend it. Get rid of the no follow on those old pages, 301 them so that the rankings might be salvaged. Once the new pages start ranking on their own you can get rid of the 301s. But, for now, get them going.
The 301s add a little bit of juice to the new pages, and that is a good thing. The reason they are important is because they are still ranking and bringing traffic to your site. The new pages will start to get some traffic which in turn will help their rankings.
Did you do anything on social with the site redesign? If you send out a post you might be able to salvage some traffic from you followers. Social signals will also help the rankings of the new pages.
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
-
Page Speed or Site Speed which one does Google considered a ranking signal
I've read many threads online which proves that website speed is a ranking factor. There's a friend whose website scores 44 (slow metric score) on Google Pagespeed Insights. Despite that his website is slow, he outranks me on Google search results. It confuses me that I optimized my website for speed, but my competitor's slow site outperforms me. On Six9ja.com, I did amazing work by getting my target score which is 100 (fast metric score) on Google Pagespeed Insights. Coming to my Google search console tool, they have shown that some of my pages have average scores, while some have slow scores. Google search console tool proves me wrong that none of my pages are fast. Then where did the fast metrics went? Could it be because I added three Adsense Javascript code to all my blog posts? If so, that means that Adsense code is slowing website speed performance despite having an async tag. I tested my blog post speed and I understand that my page speed reduced by 48 due to the 3 Adsense javascript codes added to it. I got 62 (Average metric score). Now, my site speed is=100, then my page speed=62 Does this mean that Google considers page speed rather than site speed as a ranking factor? Screenshots: https://imgur.com/a/YSxSwOG Regarding: https://etcnaija.com
Technical SEO | | etcna0 -
Why are these blackhat sites so successful?
Here's an interesting conundrum. Here are three sites with their respective ranking for "dental implants [city]:" http://dentalimplantsvaughan.ca - 9 (on google.ca) http://dentalimplantsinhonoluluhi.com - 2 (on google.com) http://dentalimplantssurreybc.ca - 7 (on google.ca) These markets are not particularly competitive, however, all of these sites suffer from: Duplicate content, both internally and across sites (all of this company's implant sites have the same exact content, minus the bio pages and the local modifier). Average speed score. No structured data No links And these sites are ranking relatively quickly. The Vaughan site went live 3 months ago. But, what's boggling my mind is that they rank on the first page at all. It seems they're doing the exact opposite of what you're supposed to do, yet they rank relatively well.
Technical SEO | | nowmedia10 -
Why is my site ranking so poorly compared to my competition?
I own a car shipping business (www.carshippingcarriers.com) and I was ranking very high last year, but around the end of August our site lost a TON of rank. Afterwards I had my SEO team at the time (no longer working with them) do a complete overhaul of the website (rewrote content, combined many pages together so no duplicate content issue, made it mobile friendly, etc.. Since then we continue to still lose rankings on Google. Yahoo and Bing seem to keep performing decently, but Google we are getting destroyed. I have been a member of Moz for a few months and I have been using the open site to check my competitors and their linking profile. One in particular, www.joescarshipping.com, has been ranking extremely well and the site looks horrible, doesn't have many links, hardly a social media presence, etc.. Compared my my website which has ton of content, articles on our website, social profile is great (tons of Google+ usage), not a ton of links so a decent amount of links, etc.. Why would a company like that be ranking so high while I keep falling? Any advice or reasoning as to what is wrong or what could be done to get better rankings? I am just at my wits end on this matter. 😕
Technical SEO | | Dutko23851 -
Site hacked in Jan. Redeveloped new site. Still not ranking. Should we change domain?
Our top ranking site in the UK was hacked at the end of 2014. http://www.ultimatefloorsanding.co.uk/ The site was the subject of a manual spam action from Google. After several unsuccessful attempts to clean it up, using Securi.net and reinstating old versions of the site, changing passwords etc. we took the decision to redevelop the site. We also changed hosting provider as we had received absolutely no support from them whatsoever in resolving the issue. So far we have: Removed the old website files off the server Developed a new website having implemented 301's for all the old URL's (except the spam ones) Submitted a reconsideration request for the manual spam action, which was accepted. Disavowed all the spammy inbound links through Webmaster Tools Implemented custom URL parameters through Google to not index the SPAM URLs ( which were using parameters) Our organic traffic is down by 63% compared to last year, and we are not ranking for most of our target keywords any longer. Is there anything that I am missing in the actions I have taken so far? We were advised that at this stage changing domain and starting again might be the way to go. However the current domain has been used by us since 2007, so it would be a big call. Any advice is appreciated, thanks. Sue - http://www.ultimatefloorsanding.co.uk/
Technical SEO | | galwaygirl0 -
301'd site, but new site is not getting picked up in google.
Hi I'm having big issues! Any help would be greatly appreciated This is the 3rd time this happened. Every time I switch my old site greatcleanjokes.com to the new design of chokeonajoke.com traffic goes almost completely down (I even tried out the new design on greatcleanjokes [to see if it was a 301 issue] and traffic also went down.) What can possibly be wrong with this new site that google just doesn't like it ?! I was ranking high up for many big phrase like joke of the day, corny jokes, clean jokes, short jokes. Now It's all gone. I also think it's strange that when I search for site:chokeonajoke.com the post pages show up before the category pages!? Here is the old site http://web.archive.org/web/20140406214615/http://www.greatcleanjokes.com/ Here is the new one http://chokeonajoke.com/ If you can't figure out anything do you know of anyone I can hire who may be able to figure it out?
Technical SEO | | Nickys22111 -
Google and QnA sites
My website has a QnA site - a bit like this one except it's not private to premium members. It is a page with a left colomn for category links and it has a list of recently asked questions, each question is a link to view the full question and answers etc. Does google know this is a QnA ? Or will it say - hey, there are far too many links on this page, tut tut. Is there anything I can do to help it understand what the page is.
Technical SEO | | borderbound0 -
Dismal content rankings
Hi, I realize this is a very broad question, but I am going to ask it anyways in the hopes that someone might have some insight. I have created a great deal of unique content for the site http://www.healthchoices.ca. You can select a video category from the top dropdown, then click on a video beside the provider box to see. The articles I've written are accessible by the View Article tab under each video. I have worked hard to make the articles informative and they are all unique with quotes from expert physicians. Even for strange health conditions that don't have a lot of competition - I don't see us appearing. Our search results are quite dismal for the amount of content we have. I guess I'm checking to see if anyone is able to point me in the right direction at all? If anything jumps out... Thanks, Erin
Technical SEO | | erinhealthchoices0 -
Why did our site drop in Google rankings?
My site's URL (web address) is: http://tinyurl.com/3svn2l9 Hi there, We operate a travel site that lists numerous tours, accommodation and activities. Since 6th August 2011 we have dropped from top 10 SERP rankings of our pages to around result number 100 (page 10) and losing massive amount of visitors via Google Search. Our Yahoo and Bing rankings are still in the top10. We need your advice and quick! The last changes we have made are the following: -redirected the non-www version to the www version on the 1st August -bought advertising with a follow link in a sidebar that is being populated across the site (+4000 pages) about 2 months ago -added a blog to the website 2 weeks ago and posted 2 posts to date. Additionally, our website structure allows visitors (and bots) to see the same listings via different URLs which caused duplicate content. This has been the case since the launch of our website about 1 year ago. To prevent this duplicate content we have placed canonical tags on the individual listings pages. Why did our site all of a sudden plummet in the rankings?
Technical SEO | | Robbern0