Is there actual risk to having multiple URLs that frame in main url? Or is it just bad form and waste of money?
-
Client has many urls that just frame in the main site. It seems like a total waste of money, but if they are frames, is there an actual risk?
-
In that case I agree with Kane; the short answer is it probably doesn't 'hurt' anything, but it's most likely not helping anything either. Those domains are an investment in a way, in terms of hosting, bandwidth, code maintenance, etc. And currently that investment isn't really being used to its full potential. I don't know if it's still the case, but WayFair (née CSN Stores) used to have at least 20-30 domains 301'd to all of their major properties, usually mispellings, (name)sucks, that kind of thing.
-
Interesting, thanks for sharing. I don't think his test justifies the assumption that the links are treated as standard links, but it appears you could certainly assume that they're passing anchor text.
I didn't see any mention of whether the iframed page was considered to be the linking page or whether the top level page was considered to be the linking page, however. I'd like to see how the link shows up in his Google Webmaster Tools, since that would be more valuable information IMO.
-
This thread just came out on Search Engine Roundtable today, which suggests Google may actually pay attention to content on an iframed site. I haven't had a chance to look at it in real detail yet, but it is interesting.
-
From what I understand, Google won't 'count' any content that is iframed on a site, so essentially Google will just see a blank page with an iframe to another site. That won't be a risk to the main domain that's in the iframe, but it's not doing anyone any good most likely.
Are they ranking for anything with these extra sites, and do they get any traffic?
I would probably see if they'll dedicate any budget & time to creating secondary sites on the better keywords, and I'd encourage them to 301 the rest. Possibly even dump some of the worse domains if they're not worth keeping, but the client might be trying to do a land grab on keywords to keep competitors out, which might be worth the annual fee to them.
-
@Valery, thanks for the reply. You did read it right, but I'm still looking for input on whether it's actually a risk or just a waste.
-
If I take your meaning correctly they have something like 'site.com' as their main page, but also have 'site1.com' which is just 'site.com' content in an iframe on 'site1.com'? It depends on what they're trying to accomplish I guess, but from a link juice/seo perspective that seems kind of backwards. Usually people just 301 the domains over.
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
-
Date in permalinks. Bad?
Hello! I have a recipe website with over 1000 posts. Currently I have the month and year in the permalink that everyone is hinting off to me is bad. On the same front people tell me if I change the permalinks to just the post name it's going to significantly slow down my site. I'm torn on this one about changing. From Google's standpoint is it better to change to the post name and if so should I be fearing I'm going to run into trouble with the change? Any suggestions you have would be appreciated. Thanks!!!
Technical SEO | | Rich-DC1 -
Is it bad to update product titles and URLs if they are only slightly modified
I am doing some house cleaning on the site and made some minor updates to product titles and a rule was written in and it auto updated the URL to what the product title was with a redirect put in place from the old URL. If this a bad thing and should i leave the URL alone and just update the product title? Then for the ones i did change the Product title and the URL was updated is this a bad thing and should i have just left the URL alone? These are all high ranking popular products so dont want to mess with any rankings going into busy season?
Technical SEO | | isle_surf0 -
Just saw a competitor jump in rank by double digits, questioning my url structure choice now.
Currently I have for our big keyword oursite.com/big-keyword/ and clicking on a material type will be oursite.com/big-keyword/material-type/ Our competition has **theirsite.com/big-keyword/ **and when you click on their material type **theirsite.com/material-type-big-keyword/ ** The also have 20 some pages, while we have around 652 as a eCommerce site as well, not sure why they jumped so high in rankings, while their backlink structure is so small still and they have a DA half of ours. I'm in the middle of a site redesign and very close to restructuring the urls the way they have it, since it really seems to have worked well. How do you feel about that?
Technical SEO | | Deacyde0 -
Best way to deal with these urls?
Found overly dynamic urls in the crawl report. http://www.trespass.co.uk/camping/festivals-friendly/clothing?Product_sort=PriceDesc&utm_campaign=banner&utm_medium=blog&utm_source=Roslyn Best way to deal with these? Cheers Guys
Technical SEO | | Trespass0 -
GWT, URL Parameters, and Magento
I'm getting into the URL parameters in Google Webmaster Tools and I was just wondering if anyone that uses Magento has used this functionality to make sure filter pages aren't being indexed. Basically, I know what the different parameters (manufacturer, price, etc.) are doing to the content - narrowing. I was just wondering what you choose after you tell Google what the parameter's function is. For narrowing, it gives the following options: Which URLs with this parameter should Googlebot crawl? <label for="cup-crawl-LET_GOOGLEBOT_DECIDE">Let Googlebot decide</label> (Default) <label for="cup-crawl-EVERY_URL">Every URL</label> (the page content changes for each value) <label style="color: #5e5e5e;" for="cup-crawl-ONLY_URLS_WITH_VALUE">Only URLs with value</label> ▼(may hide content from Googlebot) <label for="cup-crawl-NO_URLS">No URLs</label> I'm not sure which one I want. Something tells me probably "No URLs", as this content isn't something a user will see unless they filter the results (and, therefore, should not come through on a search to this page). However, the page content does change for each value.I want to make sure I don't exclude the wrong thing and end up with a bunch of pages disappearing from Google.Any help with this is greatly appreciated!
Technical SEO | | Marketing.SCG0 -
/out/ URLs in GWMTs
I am recently seeing some URLs come up as 404s in GWMTs for a client. They look like this: http://client-url/out/www.linkedin.com/company/client-linkedin-name /out/client-url/sub-directory/postname/ We thought they might have something to do with the social plugins but they are all over the place and they are sometime for internal pages on the site. Anyone run into these and know why they are happening?
Technical SEO | | DragonSearch0 -
/$1 URL Showing Up
Whenever I crawl my site with any kind of bot or a sitemap generator over my site. it comes up with /$1 version of my URLs. For example: It gives me hdiconference.com & hdiconference.com/$1 and hdiconference.com/purchases & hdiconference.com/purchases/$1 Then I get warnings saying that it's duplicate content. Here's the problem: I can't find these /$1 URLs anywhere. Even when I type them in, I get a 404 error. I don't know what they are, where they came from, and I can't find them when I scour my code. So, I'm trying to figure out where the crawlers are picking this up. Where are these things? If sitemap generators and other site crawlers are seeing them, I have to assume that Googlebot is seeing them as well. Any help? My developers are at a loss as well.
Technical SEO | | HDI0