How stupid is it to launch a new URL structure when our traffic is climbing?
-
We decided to redesign our site to make it responsive as Google is ranking sites based on mobile friendliness. Along with this we have changed our URL structure, meta tags, page content, site navigation, internal interlinking.
How stupid is it to launch this site right in the middle of record traffic? Our traffic is climbing 10,000 more visitors every day with the current site. Visitors have increased 34% over the last 30 days compared to the previous 30 days.
-
I would tend to agree with Lynn Patchett. Could you tier out your changes and plan to methodically release it in small increments while monitoring the effects? This way you could begin with smaller changes, even a few url's with an update and gauge its effectiveness (or non)...
-
I think I speak for everyone with that type of traffic increase you should not gamble mixing it out.
-
Is all that new traffic organic? Is your sale/conversion rate increasing at the same rate?
If the answer to either of those questions is yes then you should be moving cautiously. If the main aim is to make the site mobile friendly then do that first and monitor traffic/rankings for a couple of weeks. After that depending on what you see try implementing the other changes you have planned in order and give a week or two in between each change to monitor how things are going.
Changing urls, titles, metas, internal linking and content all at the same time on a site with that much traffic (and I am assuming at least some profit).... is crazy. If rankings/traffic plummet, which change caused it? Where do you even start diagnosing with that many changes at once? Nightmare!
-
Hire someone to make sure all of your redirects are setup correctly.
-
First off, getting your site mobile optimized is smart.
Next, you need to have a clear understanding of where all this traffic is coming from. If it's organic, dig into Google Webmaster Tools & even Semrush to determine how much of it is from branded queries. If a large percentage of your traffic is from non-branded organic searches, I would be very cautious of changing URLs & title tags - unless your organization is completely okay with the possible ranking & traffic loss that will most likely come with all the necessary 301 redirects. The current URLs are already far, far cleaner than a lot of sites (especially ecommerce sites that have crazy dynamic URLs).
With all that said, I have worked with a few brands in similar situations where we decided to move forward with a site overhaul (which is what you're describing) because (a) most of their traffic was either direct or branded organic and (b) they worked with an SEO agency years ago that implemented a number of spammy tactics that we needed to clean up. Ultimately, we decided that the benefits of sort of "getting straight with Google" was worth the possible ranking & traffic loss.
I hope this helps!
-
Have you looked at your analytics to see which mobile devices are driving the greatest amount of traffic then tested your site on those devices? This would be a key step in my opinion. It might be that your site already works great and doesn't need the redesign. If the redesign does go forward however, make sure that it looks stellar on these devices as well. It's highly likely that you can cover 80 - 90% of your mobile visits by checking the look and feel on 10 - 20 devices.
-
Traffic is 7.7 million in the last 30 days. Domain is 16 years old. The URLs are not bad - instead of /used-perfume-for-sale/chanel-number5 it would now be /perfume/chanel-number-5/
-
It depends on if the traffic is extremely low and how old the domain? How bad the URLs are there's a lot of different questions that need to be answered with the actual .if you're only doing 100 people a month and he went up by 30 people yeah it's safe to say you should be okay to changing them there are good reasons to change URL structures however there are also awesome reason keep them. If you cansend me a URL I would be happy to tell you if I agree with your choice or not.
tom
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
-
Regret changing the URL structure, Would it be appropriate to change it back?
Hi Moz Community, We changed the URL structure 6 months ago for our new site, and we experienced a ranking drop since then. From my understanding, changing URL structure and using 301 redirects will lose link juice, more or less. We think the ranking drop is because of the loss of link juice, assuming other factors remain constant. Here are my questions: How do those link juice losses have an impact on our ranking? Would changing URL structure back to original version regain the lost link juice, with all the redirects done properly? Would it take a lot of efforts? Is it recommended to change it back? Thank you so much in advance. Any thoughts and opinions are appreciated! Best, Raymond
Intermediate & Advanced SEO | | raymondlii0 -
When the site's entire URL structure changed, should we update the inbound links built pointing to the old URLs?
We're changing our website's URL structures, this means all our site URLs will be changed. After this is done, do we need to update the old inbound external links to point to the new URLs? Yes the old URLs will be 301 redirected to the new URLs too. Many thanks!
Intermediate & Advanced SEO | | Jade1 -
Will disallowing URL's in the robots.txt file stop those URL's being indexed by Google
I found a lot of duplicate title tags showing in Google Webmaster Tools. When I visited the URL's that these duplicates belonged to, I found that they were just images from a gallery that we didn't particularly want Google to index. There is no benefit to the end user in these image pages being indexed in Google. Our developer has told us that these urls are created by a module and are not "real" pages in the CMS. They would like to add the following to our robots.txt file Disallow: /catalog/product/gallery/ QUESTION: If the these pages are already indexed by Google, will this adjustment to the robots.txt file help to remove the pages from the index? We don't want these pages to be found.
Intermediate & Advanced SEO | | andyheath0 -
Confused: Url Restructure
Hello, We're giving our website a bit of a spring clean in terms of SEO. The site is doing ok, but after the time invested in SEO, content and last year's migration of multiple sites into one, we're not seeing the increase in traffic we had hoped. Our current urls look something like this: /a-cake-company/cup-cakes/strawberry We have the company name as the first level as we with the migration we migrated many companies into one site. What we're considering is testing some pages with a structure like this: /cup-cakes/cup-cake-company-strawberry So we'll lose a level and we'll focus more on the category of the product rather than the brand. What's your thoughts on this? We weren't going to do a mass change yet, just a test, but is this something we should be focusing on? In terms of organisation our current url structure is perfect, but what about from an SEO point of view? In terms of keywords customers are looking for both options. Thanks!
Intermediate & Advanced SEO | | HB170 -
Canonical URL availability
Hi We have a website selling cellphones. They are available in different colors and with various data capacity, which slightly changes the URL. For instance: Black iphone, 16GB: www.site.com/iphone(black,16,000000000010204783).html White iphone, 16GB: www.site.com/iphone(white,16,000000000010204783).html White iphone, 24GB: www.site.com/iphone(white,24,000000000010204783).html Now, the canonical URL indicates a standard URL: But this URL is never physically available. Instead, a user gets 301 redirected to one of the above URLs. Is this a problem? Does a URL have to be "physically" available if it is indicated as canonical?
Intermediate & Advanced SEO | | zeepartner0 -
Can you nofollow a URL?
Hey Moz Community, My questions sounds pretty simple but unfortunately, it isn't. I have a domain name (we'll use example.com for this) http://example.com which 301 re-directs to http://www.example.com. http://example.com has bad links pointing to it and http://www.example.com does not. So essentially, I want to stop negative influences from http://example.com being passed on to http://www.example.com. A 302 re-direct sounds like it would work in theory but is this the best way to go about this? Just so you know, we have completed a reconsideration request a long time ago but I think the bad links are still negatively affecting the website as it does not rank for it's own name which is bizarre. Actual Question: How do I re-direct http://example.com to http://www.example.com without passing on the negative SEO attached to http://example.com? Thanks in advance!
Intermediate & Advanced SEO | | RiceMedia0 -
Expired urls
For a large jobs site, what would be the best way to handle job adverts that are no longer available? Ideas that I have include: Keep the url live with the original content and display current similar job vacancies below - this has the advantage of continually growing the number of indexed pages. 301 redirect old pages to parent categories - this has the advantage of concentrating any acquired link juice where it is most needed. Your thoughts much appreciated.
Intermediate & Advanced SEO | | cottamg0 -
Acquisition of a new site in the same field.
Hello, I work with SEO for a company that just bought another in the same field. What is better to do? Just a 301 domain? Make 301 per page for a related page (more than 10,000 URLs, i'am afraid that this may be interpreted as blackhat ) or make crossdomain canonical tag urls related to (I believe this is not good, because the pages are not fully equal). thank's
Intermediate & Advanced SEO | | j0a0vargas0