Client has 2 websites... won't do away with old site.
-
Ok my situation is: We have built a new site for a client and they would like to keep both sites working. Should I just attempt to optimize both sites to rank well in their area? Or should I be suggesting a 301 redirect from the old domain to the new? Other options?
Thanks in advance
-
My husband has two real estate sites. My plan, when I made the new one was to take the old one down. But for some reason it mysteriously ranks well for several terms and continues to bring us business.
With that being said, if there is duplicate content across the two sites then one is going to suffer.
If the old site is ranking well, it may be ok to keep it. But, it will be a challenge to optimize both sites. It's much better to work on one site. In most cases, I would redirect the old to the new site. The only reason I would personally keep the old one is if it was ranking well already for them.
-
Google isn't a fan of duplication. I've been watching more and more companies who had multiple sites realize it's going to bite them, and they have been merging (or, redirecting) into one.
I'd never advocate for two sites, mostly because of the same reasons others mentioned.
-
I think it comes down to whether you have the resources to keep both sites at the top of their games. Having two sites is pretty much twice the work of having one (see, I'm a maths genuis me!) if they are both to rank well. You "should" be able to grab a larger slice of the top ranking spots with two sites but it is hard work.
-
I had contemplated this a couple of years ago. We had an old site and just created a new one. The old site was performing well in the search results for popular keywords. We didn't want to risk losing any ranking doing a 301 redirect and we wanted to attempt having multiple listings on search results - so, we kept both!
We stopped updating the old site and let it coast then started working on SEO for the new site and eventually had two well performing sites on the SERPs.
And with google merging organic and place pages, you could use the new site as the URL for a place page if the company you are working with is a local business. So you'll have a organic listing and place listing.
I thought I would share my experience with you to consider what is possible with keeping both sites. However, there is nothing wrong with 301 redirecting to the new site.
-
Good question
It's a new site with new content... I believe their thinking is "2 sites is better than 1". I'm going to continue to fight the uphill climb and get them to ditch the old one.
-
Why do they want to keep it? Implementing 301 redirects is essential and is the best-practice as you want to have only unique content out there.
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
-
Does sending ecom traffic away from a site impact rankings?
I have a client that represents a few big brands but doesn't offer ecommerce capability onsite, they essentially send traffic to retailers and distributors that do sell their products online - they even point to an amazon store that they own. My question is, if they did offer ecom and the conversions took place on their site, rather than direct traffic away from them, would this impact on their rankings at all?
On-Page Optimization | | Algorhythm_jT0 -
Word Count - Content site vs ecommerce site
Hi there, what are your thoughts on word count for a content site vs. an ecommerce site. A lot of content sites have no problem pushing out 500+ words per page, which for me is a decent amount to help you get traction. However on ecommerce sites, a lot of the time the product description only needs to be sub-100 words and the total word count on the page comes in at under 300 words, a lot of that could be considered duplicate. So what are your views? Do ecommerce sites still need to have a high word count on the product description page to rank better?
On-Page Optimization | | Bee1590 -
Why ranks my site so bad?
hello together, i think, that you read questions like this very often, but i hope someone has some good ideas for me. https://goo.gl/3iOmcqy with the keyword "sophos sg 210" we rank very bad. But i don't know why 😞 We have trust elements, a very good "avergage time on page" unique content... But i don't know, what can we make better 😞 Thx you so much
On-Page Optimization | | enbitcon0 -
Title Tags for a Joomla Website
Does anyone know what is the best way or plugin to use to easily get title tags inserted for a Joomla website? Thanks!
On-Page Optimization | | Gavo0 -
On-Site Optimization Issue!
Hello, I have some confusion about how to structure my site to better in on-site optimization. I am using WordPress. Therefore, there are many things that I need to consider as following: Static Page for homepage OR Latest posts? Archive, Category, Author, Attachment and Tag pages - To put meta robots (no index, follow) or not to prevent duplication? If I use Static Page for homepage, do I need to add meta robots (no index, follow) to POINT 2 above or not? If I use Latest Posts for homepage, do I need to add meta robots (no index, follow) to POINT 2 above or not? To have breadcrumb or not? To have recent posts, comment, tag clouds or popular posts/comments widget or not? To have social sharing icons and related posts in single post or not? If you don't mind adding more tips that I don't know it would be very great! Thanks!
On-Page Optimization | | dinabrokoth0 -
404 errors on page urls that don't even exist
The Seomoz crawler found 404error of pages dont even exist. Ho can that be possible?? Pages like: URL: http://www.yoxo.it/catalog/seo_sitemap/category/falli/falli/falli/falli/falli/falli/falli/falli/falli/falli/falli/falli/falli/falli/falli/falli/falli/falli/falli/falli/falli/falli/falli/falli/falli/falli/falli/falli/falli/falli/falli/falli/falli/falli/falli/falli/falli/falli/falli/falli/falli/falli/falli/falli/falli/falli/falli/falli/falli/falli/falli/falli/falli/falli/falli/falli/falli/falli/falli/falli/falli/falli/falli/falli/falli/falli/falli/falli/falli/falli/falli/falli/falli/falli/falli/falli/falli/falli/falli/falli/falli/falli/falli/falli/falli/falli/falli/falli/falli/falli/falli/falli/falli/falli/falli/falli/falli/falli/falli/falli/falli/falli/falli/falli/falli/falli/falli/falli/falli/falli/falli/falli/falli/falli/falli/falli/falli/falli/falli/falli/falli/falli/falli/falli/falli/falli/falli/falli/falli/falli/falli/falli/falli/falli/falli/falli/falli/falli/falli/falli/falli/falli/falli/falli/falli/falli/falli/falli/falli/falli/falli/falli/falli/falli/falli/falli/falli/falli/falli/falli/falli/falli/falli/falli/falli/falli/falli/falli/falli/falli/falli/falli/falli/falli/falli/falli/falli/falli/falli/falli/falli/falli/falli/falli/falli/falli/falli/falli/falli/falli/falli/falli/falli/falli/falli/falli/falli/falli/falli/falli/falli/falli/falli/falli/falli/falli/falli/falli/falli/falli/falli/falli/falli/falli/falli/falli/falli/falli/falli/falli/falli/falli/falli/falli/falli/falli/falli/falli/falli/falli/falli/falli/falli/falli/falli/falli/falli/falli/falli/falli/falli/falli/falli/falli/falli/falli/falli/falli/falli/falli/falli/falli/falli/falli/falli/falli/falli/falli/falli/falli/falli/falli/falli/falli/falli/falli/falli/falli/falli/falli/falli/falli/falli/falli/falli/falli/falli/falli/falli/falli/falli/falli/falli/falli/falli/falli/falli/falli/falli/falli/falli/falli/falli/falli/falli/falli/falli/falli/falli/falli/falli/falli/falli/falli/falli/falli/falli/falli/falli/falli/falli/falli/falli/falli/falli/falli/falli/falli/falli/falli/falli/falli/falli/falli/falli/falli/falli/falli/falli/falli/falli/falli/falli/falli/falli/falli/falli/falli/falli/falli/falli/falli/falli/falli/falli/falli/falli/falli/falli/falli/falli/falli/falli/falli/falli/falli/falli/falli/falli/falli/falli/falli/falli/falli/falli/falli/falli/falli/falli/falli/falli/falli/falli/falli/falli/falli/falli/falli/falli/falli/falli/falli/falli/falli/falli/falli/falli/falli/falli/falli/falli/falli/falli/falli/falli/falli/falli/falli/falli/falli/falli/falli/falli/falli/falli/falli/falli/falli/falli/falli/falli/falli/falli/falli/falli/falli/falli/falli/falli/falli/falli/falli/falli/falli/falli/falli/falli/falli/falli/falli/falli/falli/falli/falli/falli/falli/falli/falli/falli/falli/falli/falli/falli/falli/falli/falli/falli/falli/falli/falli/falli/falli/falli/falli/falli/falli/falli/falli/falli/falli/falli/falli/falli/falli/falli/falli/falli/falli/falli/falli/falli/falli/falli/falli/falli/falli/falli/falli/falli/falli/falli/falli/falli/falli/falli/falli/falli/falli/falli/falli/falli/falli/falli/falli/falli/falli/falli/falli/falli/falli/falli/falli/falli/falli/falli/falli/falli/falli/falli/falli/falli/falli/falli/falli/falli/falli/falli/falli/falli/falli/falli/falli/falli/falli/falli/falli/falli/falli/falli/falli/falli/falli/falli/falli/falli/falli/falli/falli/falli/falli/falli/falli/falli/falli/falli/falli/falli/falli/falli/falli/falli/falli/falli/falli/falli/falli/falli/falli/falli/falli/falli/falli/falli/falli/falli/falli/falli/falli/falli/falli/falli/falli/falli/falli/falli/falli/falli/falli/falli/falli/falli/falli/falli/falli/falli/falli/falli/falli/falli/falli/falli/falli/falli/falli/falli/falli/falli/falli/falli/falli/falli/falli/falli/falli/falli/falli/falli/falli/falli/falli/falli/falli/falli/falli/falli/falli/falli/falli/falli/falli/falli/falli/falli/falli/falli/falli/falli/falli/falli/falli/falli/falli/falli/falli/falli/falli/falli/falli/falli/falli/falli/falli/falli/falli/falli/falli/falli/falli/falli/falli/falli/falli/falli/falli/falli/falli/falli/falli/falli/falli/falli/falli/falli/falli/falli/falli/falli/falli/falli/falli/falli/falli/
On-Page Optimization | | yoxo0 -
Large Site - Advice on Subdomaining
I have a large news site - over 1 million pages (have already deleted 1.5 million) Google buries many of our pages, I'm ready to try subdomaining http://bit.ly/dczF5y There are two types of content - news from our contributors, and press releases. We have had contracts with the big press release companies going back to 2004/5. They push releases to us by FTP or we pull from their server. These are then processed and published. It has taken me almost 18 months, but I have found and deleted or fixed all the duplicates I can find. There are now two duplicate checking systems in place. One runs at the time the release comes in and handles most of them. The other one runs every night after midnight and finds a few, which are then handled manually. This helps fine-tune the real-time checker. Businesses often link to their release on the site because they like us. Sometimes google likes this, sometimes not. The news we process is reviews by 1,2 or 3 editors before publishing. Some of the stories are 100% unique to us. Some are from contributors who also contribute to other news sites. Our search traffic is down by 80%. This has almost destroyed us, but I don't give up easily. As I said, I've done a lot of projects to try to fix this. Not one of them has done any good, so there is something google doesn't like and I haven't yet worked it out. A lot of people have looked and given me their ideas, and I've tried them - zero effect. Here is an interesting and possibly important piece of information: Most of our pages are "buried" by google. If I dear, even for a headline, even if it is unique to us, quite often the page containing that will not appear in the SERP. The front page may show up, an index page may show up, another strong page pay show up, if that headline is in the top 10 stories for the day, but the page itself may not show up at all - UNTIL I go to the end of the results and redo the search with the "duplicates" included. Then it will usually show up, on the front page, often in position #2 or #3 According to google, there are no manual actions against us. There are also no notices in WMT that say there is a problem that we haven't fixed. You may tell me just delete all of the PRs - but those are there for business readers, as they always have been. Google supposedly wants us to build websites for readers, which we have always done, What they really mean is - build it the way we want you to do it, because we know best. What really peeves me is that there are other sites, that they consistently rank above us, that have all the same content as us, and seem to be 100% aggregators, with ads, with nothing really redeeming them as being different, so this is (I think) inconsistent, confusing and it doesn't help me work out what to do next. Another thing we have is about 7,000+ US military stories, all the way back to 2005. We were one of the few news sites supporting the troops when it wasn't fashionable to do so. They were emailing the stories to us directly, most with photos. We published every one of them, and we still do. I'm not going to throw them under the bus, no matter what happens. There were some duplicates, some due to screwups because we had multiple editors who didn't see that a story was already published. Also at one time, a system code race condition - entirely my fault, I am the programmer as well as the editor-in-chief. I believe I have fixed them all with redirects. I haven't sent in a reconsideration for 14 months, since they said "No manual spam actions found" - I don't see any point, unless you know something I don't. So, having exhausted all of the things I can think of, I'm down to my last two ideas. 1. Split all of the PRs off into subdomains (I'm ready to pull the trigger later this week) 2. Do what the other sites do, that I believe create little value, which is show only a headline and snippet and some related info and link back to the original page on the PR provider website. (I really don't want to do this) 3. Give up on the PRs and delete them all and lose another 50% of the income, which means releasing our remaining staff and upsetting all of the companies and people who linked to us. (Or find them all and rewrite them as stories - tens of thousands of them) and also throw all our alliances under the bus (I really don't want to do this) There is no guarantee this is the problem, but google won't tell me, the google forums are crap, and nobody else has given me an idea that has helped. My thought is that splitting them off into subdomains will have a number of effects. 1. Take most of the syndicated content onto subdomains, so its not on the main domain. 2. Shake up the Domain Authority 3. Create a million 301 redirects. 4. Make it obvious to the crawlers what is our news and what is PRs 5. make it easier for Google News to understand Here is what I plan to do 1. redirect all PRs to their own subdomain. pn.domain.com for PRNewswire releases bw.domain.com for Businesswire releases etc 2. Fix all references so they use the new subdomain Here are my questions - and I hope you may see something I haven't considered. 1. Do you have any experience of doing this? 2. What was the result 3. Any tips? 4. Should I put PR index pages on the subdomains too? I was originally planning to keep them on the main domain, with the individual page links pointing to the actual release on the subdomain. Obviously, I want them only in one place, but there are two types of these index pages. a) all of the releases for a particular PR company - these certainly could be on the subdomain and not on the main domain b) Various category index pages - agriculture, supermarkets, mining etc These would have to stay on the main domain because they are a mixture of different PR providers. 5. Is this a bad idea? I'm almost out of ideas. Should I add a condensed list of everything I've done already? If you are still reading, thanks for hanging in.
On-Page Optimization | | loopyal0 -
How do Maximize WordPress with 2 SEO Plugins
I have 2 WordPress SEO Plugins, Yoast and All-in-One SEO. I have tried like heck to make them work together, but every time I crawl my site here, I get multiple error messages. My question is, how can I tweak the title settings to avoid having multiple meta desctiptions, titles etc.
On-Page Optimization | | TheSportsDaddy0