Is my other domain making me not rank?
-
Hi there,
We have a .co.uk website which was ranking well for a number of highly competitive keywords, however in February 2012 those rankings for those keywords suddenly dropped off Google all together and have never came back.
A few possibilties to why this has happened:
- We launched a .ie website which has exactly the same content, could this be the reason for the drop? I have put in all the necessary steps in making sure Google ranks these geographically correct by using hreflang and making sure everything is setup properly in webmaster tools.
Why I think it could be this:
If I copy and paste the first few paragraphs of text from the pages in the .co.uk website that were ranked highly in Google.co.uk it's the .ie version that appears not the .co.uk version.
Here is the webpages in question:
http://www.avogel.co.uk/health/menopause/
http://www.avogel.ie/health/menopause/
Forgot to mention, the reason we have these two websites is due to different currency and legalities.
Hope someone can help me out with this.
-
Yes, it seems that this is the case that it's the .ie website that been crawled more often.
I have recently launched a new section on the .co.uk website which has been crawled by Google and is not currently on the .ie website:
http://www.avogel.co.uk/health/tinnitus/
However even though this copy is all original verified using copyscape, when I copy and paste the first paragraph into Google.co.uk, this webpage above is not the one that appears in Google.co.uk, so maybe there is something else going on?
Thanks
-
On the information you've given, I'd say the issue does come down to the .ie being crawled more regularly and given credit for being the original source.
It's worth testing this. Why don't you launch a new page on the .co.uk, wait until it's been indexed, and then launch the same page on the .ie site. This will confirm if it's simply an issue of the .ie being given crawl preference.
If this works, then there are ways of ensuring the .co.uk is indexed prior to the .ie going forward (that's if you really want to avoid using the canonical tag)
David
-
Yes, it looks likely that I will need to use "rel= canonical" tag which is far from ideal.
At the moment we are writing lots of new pages, for example, this page has recently been launched on the .co.uk & .ie websites:
http://www.avogel.co.uk/health/fibromyalgia/
http://www.avogel.ie/health/fibromyalgia/
Again if I copy and paste the first few paragraphs of the text on the .co.uk version or .ie as they are the same into Google.co.uk, its the .ie version that appears, you can check it out for yourself if you wish.
Is this a signal that the .ie webpage is getting all the credit for being the source? Even though it should not be an issue as I am using hreflang tags and everything is setup correctly in webmaster tools geographically for both domains.
A plan could be delaying the new pages/content on the .ie website until Google has crawled the .co.uk version of those new pages/content, however doing this will have the same affect on the irish website as it's having on the .co.uk website at the moment.
Thanks
-
That might be your answer then.
We're assuming the .co.uk should rank for the copy on those pages as it's the original source, however there is every chance that they picked up the .ie page first so that's why they are showing that (as they believe it was the original source).
If the .ie site was newly launched then it's likely that Google were still crawling your site regularly before they figured how often you update content and settling on an ongoing schedule.
If it was crawled before the .co.uk, which now seems likely, then that is the answer to the anomaly
David
-
Hi David,
I had freshened up the menopause & related pages after the launch of the .ie website and them copied this content over to the relevant pages on the .ie website.
The new written content was published on the .co.uk website and the .ie website about 10 days after the .ie website went live and around 10 days before all these pages dropped:
/health/menopause/
/health/menopause/symptoms
/health/menopause/hot-flushes
/health/menopause/night-sweats/
It just seems from the above the .ie website is the issue?
Thanks
-
Hi Gary,
It seems that when given that particular phrase, and no canonical source, Google is deciding the the .ie site is the best answer. This is probably based on freshness, although I would have expected Google to still opt for the original source.
Did this content change at all at the time of the .ie launch, or had it been established on the .co.uk for some time?
If this home page text is the only real issue and you're enjoying positive rankings in both .co.uk and .ie, there may be no need to rock the boat by making changes. It is bizarre, but it's not going to lose you any business.
In an ideal world you would have original content on both, or at least have the canonical tag in place. However it seems that Google is generally doing a good job of recognising the definition between the .co.uk & .ie sites, so I wouldn't let yourself lose any sleep of this anomaly.
David
-
Hi there,
It's just not practical to re-write all the .ie pages, there is literally hundreds of pages, most of which contain 500 - 700 words.
It looks like canonical could be my only option, however it's just something I do not want to do, as the .ie website is ranking well for a number of keywords in Google.ie
What I would say is that not one .ie webpage is out ranking any .co.uk webpage in Google.co.uk for any keyword, it's just when I copy and paste the first few paragraphs from a .co.uk webpage into Google.co.uk it's the .ie webpage that is appearing, surely this is telling me that something is just not quite right?
-
Change the robot.txt file accordingly.
Yeah the canonical tag will have an effect, its basically saying this is a duplicate, any Authority this dup page has pass it on to the original.
2 options: re-write all the content for .ie or canonical tag .ie pages to .co.uk pages.
I would re-write all the content for .ie.
-
Hi David,
Thanks for your quick response.
I was thinking about using the canonical tag on the .ie website, however would this not have an affect on the rankings for the .ie website on Google.ie?
I have just noticed on the .ie website that the robots.txt file has this:
**Allow: / **
http://www.avogel.co.uk/sitemap.xml
I'm not sure what negative affect this would have if any, would it be best practice to take this out? I think what has happened here is that the developer has copied across the whole .co.uk website over .ie without actually changing the robots.txt file.
Thanks
-
Hi Gary,
This is one of the exact scenarios that the "rel= canonical" tag was created for; when there is a legitimate reason for duplicating content across pages or sites.
If you include this tag on the .ie site and thus indicate to Google that the UK page is the original source, this combined with the localised identification in Webmaster tools should restore the balance.
It's an odd one, as on paper the .co.uk should still be ranking, so it seems that Google has taken the .ie site as a fresher update of the content from the same source.
It's also worth checking if any changes have been made to robots.txt or htaccess, which would also explain the issues you're having.
Cheers
David
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
-
When does it make sense to make a meta description longer than what's considered best practice?
I've seen all the length recommendations and understand the reasoning is that they will be cut off when you search the time but I've also noticed that Google will "move" the meta description if the search term that the user is using is in the cached version of the page. S I have a case where Google is indexing the pages but not caching the content (at least not yet). So we see the meta description just fine on the Google results but we can't see the content cache when checking the Google cached version. **My question is: **In this case, why would it be a bad idea to make a slightly lengthier (but still relevant) meta description with the intent that one of the terms in that description could match the user's search terms and the description would "move" to highlight that term in the results.
Intermediate & Advanced SEO | | navidash0 -
Why Keyword is not ranking
I have blog website - http://uncutweb.com/ My website ranked for keywords - What Color Shoes To Wear With Gold Dress, Keywords is having Moz Difficulty Score: 35% with A grade moz On page Score. But why my website is not ranked for What Color Shoes To Wear With Purple Bridesmaid Dress or **What Color Shoes To Wear With Coral Dress???**They have less difficulty score and having A grade.
Intermediate & Advanced SEO | | ross254sidney0 -
Trouble ranking
I have a site that got messed over pretty hard by a BigCommerce issue. They used to rank but then Big Commerce had a glitch that set every page on the site to a https which was auto set, by their system, to not be indexed. This caused the entire site to go missing. It was then fixed by me, only to have the same glitch happen again. I again fixed it, and BigCommerce released a patch to resolve the issue. They admitted blame to my client and said it can take a while to resolve. It has been a few months now, and google is slowly recrawling the site. It has about half the pages indexed. The pages that are indexed do not rank at all. I was wondering if you guys see any major flags that would cause this or if it is still related to the big commerce glitch. link
Intermediate & Advanced SEO | | Atomicx0 -
Does a dash in your domain name effect your ranking?
Does a dash in your domain name effect your ranking? or it dosen't really matter?
Intermediate & Advanced SEO | | Radomski0 -
How do i redirect www.domain.com/ to www.domain.com/index.php
I keep getting in my analytics www.domain.com/ and www.domain.com/index.php how do i make it consistently redirect to one version and not to both. I know about htaccess redirect and am already using this so am puzzle to which is the best one to use. below is the example .htaccess file im using. Options +FollowSymlinks
Intermediate & Advanced SEO | | mattmillen
RewriteEngine on
rewritecond %{http_host} ^domain.co.uk [nc]
rewriterule ^(.*)$ http://www.domain.co.uk/index.php$1 [r=301,nc] which is better for SEO should i forward to www.domain.com/ or www.domain.com/index.php0 -
Affects of vanity domains?
Hi there! My client's domain name is his name, let's say (www,myname.com) because he is well-known in his industry. He is a physician with a very specific specialty and organic competition is fierce for the most relevant keyword to his specialty. A domain has just become available that includes the keyword. If we bought the domain, how could we use it to our advantage? I'm confused about redirecting, etc., with this type of situation. Am i making any sense here? Help! Thanks. 🙂
Intermediate & Advanced SEO | | Mills0 -
Does duplicate content on a sub-domain affect the rankings of root domain?
We recently moved a community website that we own to our main domain. It now lives on our website as a sub-domain. This new sub-domain has a lot of duplicate page titles. We are going to clean it up but it's huge project. (We had tried to clean it even before migrating the community website) I am wondering if this duplicate content on the new sub-domain could be hurting rankings of our root domain? How does Google treat it? From SEO best practices, I know duplicate content within site is always bad. How severe is it given the fact that it is present on a different sub-domain?
Intermediate & Advanced SEO | | Amjath0