301 or 404?
-
My client has a classified ads website with hundreds of thousands of classified ads. These ads expire quite fast. When the ad expires it gets removed. At the moment this results in a 404 page and thus hundreds of thousands of 404 erros in Webmasters Tools.
From what I know this damages SERP results due to slow indexing of important sites and 404 being just plain bad SEO.
I suggested doing a 301 from the expired ads to a upper category but this feels like cheating. The content hasn't actually moved, it has been removed.
What would you suggest?
-
Thank you for your quality comments. I think we are going to go for Evaretts suggestion since I do feel like hundreds of thousands of 301's might be a bad idea.
We are also discussing the possibility of keeping the old pages (do index, do follow) up with the old ads, just removing the seller information. We believe that users might well be interested in information about past items sold or expired. This wouldn't require any 301's, just dynamically adding the message suggested by Chris and a search engine/index to help find interesting sold/expired items.
This way we could generate hundreds of thousands of content pages which might over time bring plenty of quality traffic to the website. These pages would have dynamically generated fresh content (new suggestions about relevant ads) so I don't feel too worried about old content in Googles index. We could also consider scraping some details of the sold item from the manufacturer website.
I've never dealt with this many pages combined with this thin content before so The wrath of the Pand worries me a bit. However the root domain is quite strong and these ads seem to draw quite a few links.
The question that requires some further thought is whether or not having this many old, thin pages in Google's index will prove problematic. Thoughts?
ps. Since I didn't mention this before, the website is about used cars
-
When you're dealing with hundreds of thousands of 301 redirects you're going to probably notice some serverside performance issues. It is certainly an option, and if you don't see the site slowing down I'd use Chris's recommendation, including the messaging if possible.
But if you notice the site slows down significantly you could just leave the page up but dynamically add a follow,noindex meta tag in the header area, and show the message suggested by Chris on the original page instead of the old add. The message, of course, would link to the appropriate category to help them find what they're looking for. Users will no longer be able to get to that page from the search results, and I assume you'll keep those pages from showing up in internal search results too. The only way anyone would get to them would be a direct link, bookmark or some similar direct method.
This method would allow you to keep from having to do so many redirects, and would provide a good user experience. It would also solve the problem of having all of that old, thin content in Google's index and risking a lot of back-clicks or "block this site" clicks, which could bring on the wrath of Panda.
If you find that your old ads DO have a lot of links going into them it may be worth redirecting them so your category pages benefit from those links. Or you could use a combination. For instance, use my suggestion for most of them, but if you find some that have lots of external links you could redirect those on a one-by-one basis.
-
I would agree with Chris. Having the generic 404 appear is not very helpful for the user. Linking them over to the same category with a 301 would be better from the Search Engine perspective and the usability perspective.
-
I would not want to be generating all those 404 errors. My recommendation would be to 301 them to the top of the category and dynamically provide a error message that the classified they are looking for has expired, but here are lots of other ads in that category that might help them find what they are looking for.
You want to provide a good user experience and this would certainly be better for the user than simply a page not found error message.
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 auto directing to /#/id0 but no 301 in place?
I'm a little perplexed and hope someone technically savvy can help. Wordpress site. Our page: www.curveball-media.co.uk/animation Redirects to: www.curveball-media.co.uk/animation/#/id0 I cannot see any reason for this. No 301s, nothing.
Intermediate & Advanced SEO | | curveballmedia0 -
Is it bad I have a cluster of canonical urls that 301 re-direct?
Just went through a migration. We have a group of canonical URLs that are NOT the preferred url, but 301 re-direct to the preferred URL. Does this essentially "break even" and the incorrect canonical URL becomes obsolete? And/or would this be considered potentially bad and confusing for bots?
Intermediate & Advanced SEO | | lunavista-comm0 -
Using cononical tag instead of 301
I've got a bit of an odd situation... My business partner and I split up, and he's going to keep the company name. The website that I built for the company has some links to it, and I've managed to build up some DA and PA. I want to get the link juice over to my new website. My former partner doesn't care about the link juice, he just wants a website that he can show people. SO, I can't do a 301 or 302, because that would take down the existing site. Can I just use a canonical tag that refers link power to my new website? Would this be harmful in any way? What should I do to accomplish getting the link power without a redirect, and without contacting each person who has given us a backlink?
Intermediate & Advanced SEO | | Zing-Marketing0 -
Soft 404s for unpublished & 301'd content
Hi, One site I work with unpublished a lot of thin content. Great idea, right? These unpublished pages were then 301'd up to the main category page that they previously existed in. Now Google Webmaster Tools calls them out as soft 404 errors. This seems unexpected since the pages were 301'd. Here is my question; Is this a serious problem that may affect the site's overall organic results and if so what should I do about it? Thanks... Darcy
Intermediate & Advanced SEO | | 945010 -
What if a 301 redirect is removed?
Suppose the following scenarios after a 301 redirects from source URL to targent URL is removed. 1. If source URL raises a 404 error, will target URL retained the link juice previously passed from source URL? 2. If source URL starts to show different content than what is showing on target URL, will the previously passed link juice be credited back to the source URL?
Intermediate & Advanced SEO | | Bull1350 -
301 Re-direct Implementation & Its Possible Aftermaths
Hi all, I'm currently working on a domain that seems to be 'unofficially' blacklisted by Google. The reason behind my belief are, Ranking process of KW became stagnant. Current crawling and indexing rate has been decreased. Site performance deteriorate after every Search engine update or major data refreshes. And few major indications pointing out that search engines might started doubting its authority. The site is live n running for about 10+ yr and consists of 6000+ pages out of which 5000+ pages are indexed. The site also have some serious issues like, The site has been 2 times penalized by Google. The link ratio & inbound link quality of the site is quite unnatural (mostly directory links, links form spammy sites, bad-neighborhood links etc. ) The site is in flat file and not CMS, thus making it extremely difficult to maintain and update it. Due to the above reasons I was thinking of implementing 301 re-direction. I would like to redirect this poor performing existing domain to a new fresh one keeping the URL structure and files same and maintaining 1:1 redirection rules. I've read an awesome article by Danny Dover on 301 Re direction of a site here in SEOMOZ. It seems that if any one follow the steps mentioned there can actually get benefited by the overall re direction process. Now I'd like know your suggestion about following points: 1. Considering the factors that I've stated, do you think that it would be good to go with this re direction idea? 2. If 301 is implemented then what can be its immediate effects on current rankings and site performance? 3. Assuming that the ranks drowned or gets completely vanished from SERP, after what approx time period can be regain back? 4. Any other suggestion that might help me out to better understand the situation.
Intermediate & Advanced SEO | | ITRIX0 -
How long for a 301 redirect to pass PR?
Hi, How long does it take for a 301 redirect to pass PR/Juice to the new domain it's redirecting to? From what I understand you tell Google in Webmaster tools this domain is now going to this domain and then setup a file on the old domains hosting to redirect to the new. And that's it! If that is correct how long does it take? 2 days, 2 weeks, months, maybe never??? Cheers
Intermediate & Advanced SEO | | activitysuper0 -
Very Puzzled --- 301 ReDirects Did Not Work - Lost Rankings - Any Thoughts?
This one has us stumped and frustrated, hopefully someone out there in SEOMoz land can give us some thoughts and/or suggestions on what's going on and how to remedy. This is a follow-up to a post I made awhile back. Here is an excerpt from the original post -- We currently have 3 different versions of our State Business-for-Sale listings pages - the versions are: Version 1 -- Preferred Version (Links on Homepage www.businessbroker.net) http://www.businessbroker.net/State/Vermont-Businesses_For_Sale.aspx Title = Vermont Business for Sale Ads - Vermont Businesses for Sale & Business Brokers - Sell a Business on Business Broker (I realize the title needs work) Version 2: (Links on this page: http://www.businessbroker.net/listings/blistings.ihtml) URL Prior to 301 change --- http://www.businessbroker.net/Businesses_For_Sale-State-Vermont.aspx Title = Vermont Business for Sale | 120 Vermont Businesses for Sale | BusinessBroker.net Version 3: (Links on this page: http://www.businessbroker.net/businessesforsale.ihtml) URL Prior to 301 change --- http://www.businessbroker.net/listings/business_for_sale_vermont.ihtml Title = Vermont Businesses for Sale at BusinessBroker.net - Vermont Business for Sale While the page titles and meta data are a bit different, the bulk of the page content (which is the listings rendered) are identical. OK, so we decided to test this on 5 of our State pages - I will use VERMONT in this discussion. We did 301 ReDirects on Version 2 and Version 3 -- they now redirect to Version 1 - we did the redirects and also changed the URL's on the pages. Prior to the change, we were ranking for keywords like "Vermont Business for Sale" and some other similar keywords -- on 1st page of Google --- now, we have lost our rankings big time. Did we do something wrong? I thought when you did 301's the majority of link juice was supposed to be preserved (losing 10% or so) -- this didn't happen in our case. Any help on what we can do would be appreciated. We only did 5 States as a test and also noticed big drops for Maine as well. These were both states where VERSION 2 was the page that was showing up in SERPs. Thanks in advance for wading through this long post and any help you can provide!! Matt
Intermediate & Advanced SEO | | MWM37720