Duplicate Content Question With New Domain
-
Hey Everyone,
I hope your day is going well. I have a question regarding duplicate content.
Let's say that we have Website A and Website B. Website A is a directory for multiple stores & brands. Website B is a new domain that will satisfy the delivery niche for these multiple stores & brands (where they can click on a "Delivery" anchor on Website A and it'll redirect them to Website B). We want Website B to rank organically when someone types in " <brand>delivery" in Google. Website B has NOT been created yet.
The Issue
Website B has to be a separate domain than Website A (no getting around this). Website B will also pull all of the content from Website A (menus, reviews, about, etc).
Will we face any duplicate content issues on either Website A or Website B in the future? Should we rel=canonical to the main website even though we want Website B to rank organically?</brand>
-
Great pleasure - good luck with it all!
-
Great response Nigel and thank you so much for your insight!
-
Hi imjonny
I'm glad you have asked around to be honest. Like I said, I would.
You are right that even if you canonicalize ultimately Google will decide whether to rank a page it deems to be important and can ignore the canonicalization. If the canonical isn't bona fide then it could call in to doubt the other canonicals on your site which would be a strong negative signal for SEO and lead to a drop in trust.
So - it depends on what you want to rank for.
Let's say you have Product A on site A and you then have an equivalent checkout page on site B. Then you can't try and rank for the term Product A because it just isn't going to happen. We've already said that we will need to canonicalize that page anyway to the equivalent page on site A.
The only thing you can hope to do is rank for 'Delivery Options', 'Branded Delivery' The Big 'Delivery Option Site'
What you can't do is try and rank for the product names, It will be impossible. But then why would you want to? Surely the important thing is to maintain rank for site A's products with site B being more of a slave site - solely functional.
Ultimately you would be canonicalizing the product pages not the whole site so maybe there are other pages that you can add. Maintenance, Technology, How to etc But frankly they would suit Site A anyway because if I am buying a product I want as much info as possible before purchase, not on the delivery page.
Oh and don't create branded content for site B because once again you will crave up site A.
I know it's a big conundrum but I haven't seen anything like you are trying to do so can only generalise on best practice.
I hope that helps!
Regards
Nigel
-
Hi Nigel,
I got some more responses from other sources and it seems like duplicating a new site IS a bad idea.
Let's say we canonical to website A so that Google knows that the main page is on site A. Would Website B have chances to index & rank? I've heard that canonical is just a signal to Google. Google will ultimately determine which page they will want to show even if the canonical is there. Is this true?
-
The bigger the site the bigger the potential loss. No SEO in my honest opinion would snaction what you are thinking no matter how big the site is.
Like I said - cast the question wider than here. It's shame that other SEOs haven't come on to help you with your thinking.
-
Hi Nigel,
Thanks for the response again! I understand that you may have had sites that had shared content, but what was the scale of these websites? Do you think if Website A was a huge authority that this issue won't be as big of a deal?
We're talking millions of sessions per month.
-
Hi
I have had sites myself with shared content and the end result was that neither of them ranked at all. They were set up in a pre-Penguin world (before 2011) and when the update really cut in September 2012 I lost 60% of my traffic in one day.
I have also worked on many sites who shared content across their own pages resulting in the same collapse in SERPS - You can read about the biggest mistake that website owners make here: https://moz.com/learn/seo/duplicate-content
In certain circumstances, you can share others' content by way of syndication. You'll see it on MOZ occasionally. They will have produced a great article and at a later date will share it across some other article sites as the authority will have been established as a MOZ article. Note that these are small'ish articles, not whole sites.
What you are talking about is basically, willingly, creating a duplicate site to site A. If you do that your rankings on site A will fall and site B will never gain any rank at all if the content pages are duplicates.
Yes, a competitor could damage your site if they were so inclined. Negative SEO is the practice of sharing your content to a number of sources thereby creating mass duplication. While Google should recognise yours as the original that is rarely the the case.
Duplicate content is at the very core of SEO. If someone is telling you differently then they are wrong.
However, it is your website and I would completely agree with your strategy of playing devil's advocate. If it was my site I would want as much corroboration as possible. So go and ask other SEOs but make damn sure they know what they are talking about and it isn't a 'bloke down the pub! because it can cost you hugely.
We probably lost £½m through our own naivete - never again!
Regards Nigel
-
Hi Nigel,
Thanks for the response again! I have a few questions:
- Why do you think I will destroy Site A? If that logic is true, theoretically, wouldn't you be able to copy someones site 100% and cause it to get destroyed?
- Have you seen any examples of this before?
I don't mean to neglect your advice, I'm just hearing different things from different people and need an accurate response in order to make the right decision.
-
If you use Website A content then you must canonicalize otherwise you will destroy the site (A). If you want B to rank independently then it MUST have original content.
This is how it works I'm afraid. Get help from a copywriter, or a few if that helps keep the cost down,
Regards
Nigel
-
Hey Nigel,
Thanks for your answer! Just to give some reference, Website A is currently up and has been up for a long time. It is getting A LOT of traffic and we don't want to risk anything on website A which is ranking REALLY well. Also, Website B is being made because of legal issues (can't really get into it) but it's best if we keep them as separate entities.
Because we're looking at scale for 1000s of pages to rewrite content, that doesn't seem like an option. And yes, we will be pulling all of the content from Website A to Website B.
Is the only solution to create completely new content for Website B? Will I face any issues with Website A at all whichever strategy I choose?
-
Hi imjonny
You are going to have a major problem trying to get these two sites listed at all in my opinion.
1. You are creating a multi-brand/store website in website A with menus reviews and about the stores & brands.
2. When someone clicks the brand delivery on website A they will be directed to site B. - presumably, because site B handles all of the shipping and checkout processes.If site B pulls the information from site A then you will kill both sites. I presume when you say 'pull' you mean it will also have that information on the pages?
So you are creating an unindexable monster that no amount of canonicalization, redirecting or iframe manipulation will help.
Presumably, you need to rank for site A but that is not possible if you are pulling content into site B. The only sensible thing I can think of is.
1. Canonicalize 'Store 1' on Site B to the equivalent store page on Site A. So store 1 on Site B effectively does not exist at all.
2. Call Store B - 'Brand Delivery' and write acres of content about delivering brands on the home page and a load of supporting pages. You just won't rank for anything on the second site apart from 'Brand Delivery' and any contextually similar words.
It's a weird way of setting stuff up. If I were shopping on a site I would not want to go to a different site to check out. You will have two sites to manage presumably with the same NAP - (site ownership and address) as well so that will not help.
The only way is to keep the two sites content mutually exclusive and use canonicals which of course can be done between different URLs.
If it was me I would keep site A and ditch the B idea but ho hum!
Kind Regards
Nigel
-
Unfortunately, there is no way around it
I think, imo, the best option is to just use the same domain, but that is really something we aren't able to do.
iframe sounds interesting, but we do still want the content (at least the menu of products) indexed.
Changing the content is also out of the question. Way too hard to scale with how many we would have to change.
-
Hey. If you rel=canonical I don't see how these pages would rank anymore. You're basically telling google that the other pages are the better ones. Is there no going around the duplicate content? This is a really strange / problematic situation.
I think your best bet is either using some sort of iframe if that's an option (it doesn't necessarily need to look bad). Or do your best to change content.
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
-
Are feeds bad for duplicate content?
One of my clients has been invited to feature his blog posts here https://app.mindsettlers.com/. Here is an example of what his author page would look like: https://app.mindsettlers.com/author/6rs0WXbbqwqsgEO0sWuIQU. I like that he would get the exposure however I am concerned about duplicate content with the feed. If he has a canonical tag on each blog post to itself, would that be sufficient for the search engines? Is there something else that could be done? Or should he decline? Would love your thoughts! Thanks.
Intermediate & Advanced SEO | | cindyt-17038
Cindy T.0 -
Same content, different languages. Duplicate content issue? | international SEO
Hi, If the "content" is the same, but is written in different languages, will Google see the articles as duplicate content?
Intermediate & Advanced SEO | | chalet
If google won't see it as duplicate content. What is the profit of implementing the alternate lang tag?Kind regards,Jeroen0 -
Duplicate content on URL trailing slash
Hello, Some time ago, we accidentally made changes to our site which modified the way urls in links are generated. At once, trailing slashes were added to many urls (only in links). Links that used to send to
Intermediate & Advanced SEO | | yacpro13
example.com/webpage.html Were now linking to
example.com/webpage.html/ Urls in the xml sitemap remained unchanged (no trailing slash). We started noticing duplicate content (because our site renders the same page with or without the trailing shash). We corrected the problematic php url function so that now, all links on the site link to a url without trailing slash. However, Google had time to index these pages. Is implementing 301 redirects required in this case?1 -
Content Transfer for Penguin Induced Domain Switch
One of my customers has a mature site that performs very well in ranking and traffic for major keywords, prosun.com. A few years ago we started welproma.com because they were changing their name and branding. We built up welproma.com as an eventual replacement and ramped up to 30% of the Prosun.com traffic. Penguin hit a bit in 2012 but very bad May 24, 2013 and it keeps getting worse. Now they are backing out of the name change, reverting back to prosun.com as the main website. Unfortunately the Welproma.com content is far better in quantity and quality so we would prefer not to waste it. Does anyone think it is a problem to take essentially the exact content from the newer, penalized site and move it to the older well performing site. We will use no links whatsoever between the two sites and take down the new one once we switch.
Intermediate & Advanced SEO | | phogan0 -
News sites & Duplicate content
Hi SEOMoz I would like to know, in your opinion and according to 'industry' best practice, how do you get around duplicate content on a news site if all news sites buy their "news" from a central place in the world? Let me give you some more insight to what I am talking about. My client has a website that is purely focuses on news. Local news in one of the African Countries to be specific. Now, what we noticed the past few months is that the site is not ranking to it's full potential. We investigated, checked our keyword research, our site structure, interlinking, site speed, code to html ratio you name it we checked it. What we did pic up when looking at duplicate content is that the site is flagged by Google as duplicated, BUT so is most of the news sites because they all get their content from the same place. News get sold by big companies in the US (no I'm not from the US so cant say specifically where it is from) and they usually have disclaimers with these content pieces that you can't change the headline and story significantly, so we do have quite a few journalists that rewrites the news stories, they try and keep it as close to the original as possible but they still change it to fit our targeted audience - where my second point comes in. Even though the content has been duplicated, our site is more relevant to what our users are searching for than the bigger news related websites in the world because we do hyper local everything. news, jobs, property etc. All we need to do is get off this duplicate content issue, in general we rewrite the content completely to be unique if a site has duplication problems, but on a media site, im a little bit lost. Because I haven't had something like this before. Would like to hear some thoughts on this. Thanks,
Intermediate & Advanced SEO | | 360eight-SEO
Chris Captivate0 -
Duplicate content for swatches
My site is showing a lot of duplicate content on SEOmoz. I have discovered it is because the site has a lot of swatches (colors for laminate) within iframes. Those iframes have all the same content except for the actual swatch image and the title of the swatch. For example, these are two of the links that are showing up with duplicate content: http://www.formica.com/en/home/dna.aspx?color=3691&std=1&prl=PRL_LAMINATE&mc=0&sp=0&ots=&fns=&grs= http://www.formica.com/en/home/dna.aspx?color=204&std=1&prl=PRL_LAMINATE&mc=0&sp=0&ots=&fns=&grs= I do want each individual swatch to show up in search results and they currently are if you search for the exact swatch name. Is the fact that they all have duplicate content affecting my individual rankings and my domain authority? What can I do about it? I can't really afford to put unique content on each swatch page so is there another way to get around it? Thanks!
Intermediate & Advanced SEO | | AlightAnalytics0 -
Why duplicate content for same page?
Hi, My SEOMOZ crawl diagnostic warn me about duplicate content. However, to me the content is not duplicated. For instance it would give me something like: (URLs/Internal Links/External Links/Page Authority/Linking Root Domains) http://www.nuxeo.com/en/about/contact?utm_source=enews&utm_medium=email&utm_campaign=enews20110516 /1/1/31/2 http://www.nuxeo.com/en/about/contact?utm_source=enews&utm_medium=email&utm_campaign=enews20110711 0/0/1/0 http://www.nuxeo.com/en/about/contact?utm_source=enews&utm_medium=email&utm_campaign=enews20110811 0/0/1/0 http://www.nuxeo.com/en/about/contact?utm_source=enews&utm_medium=email&utm_campaign=enews20110911 0/0/1/0 Why is this seen as duplicate content when it is only URL with campaign tracking codes to the same content? Do I need to clean this?Thanks for answer
Intermediate & Advanced SEO | | nuxeo0 -
Mobile version creating duplicate content
Hi We have a mobile site which is a subfolder within our site. Therefore our desktop site is www.mysite.com and the mobile version is www.mysite.com/m/. All URL's for specific pages are the same with the exception of /m/ in them for the mobile version. The mobile version has the specific user agent detection capabilities. I never saw this as being duplicate content initially as I did some research and found the following links
Intermediate & Advanced SEO | | peterkn
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mY9h3G8Lv4k
http://searchengineland.com/dont-penalize-yourself-mobile-sites-are-not-duplicate-content-40380
http://www.seroundtable.com/archives/022109.html What I am finding now is that when I look into Google Webmaster Tools, Google shows that there are 2 pages with the same Page title and therefore Im concerned if Google sees this as duplicate content. The reason why the page title and meta description is the same is simply because the content on the 2 verrsions are the exact same. Only layout changes due to handheld specific browsing. Are there any speficific precausions I could take or best practices to ensure that Google does not see the mobile pages as duplicates of the desktop pages Does anyone know solid best practices to achieve maximum results for running an idential mobile version of your main site?1