I need to know more clearance on rel=canonical usage than 301 redirects ?

[Futura]

Hi all SEOmozs,

As we all know purposes of rel=canonical , I have a query to ask that If we don't have any possibility to use 301 redirects on a domain , can it be really right to use rel=canonical on an old domain to let search engine to treat those all pages should be not priority where the domain we are being promoted in the market to list up instead that. I found this interesting Matt Cutts video http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gJK5Uloy76g where he has told or cleared the point very nicely, yes we can use it if there is no possibility in your older domain or pages. So here i am asking the same to know more detailed clarity on this so that i can be more confidence on it.

I have been seeing issues in my domains where old one domain comes than new domain why with new domain contents, and can it be really very good to bring new domain with **rel=canonical without using 301 redirect :
Old   :   kanin.com (leaving) New  :   kangarokanin.com (promoting)

Where i might have not used yet the rel=canonical in old domain, will be going to use it soon , after finishing this discussion.**

Regards,
Teginder Ravi

tcSnN.jpg tcSnN.jpg dGd34.jpg

[BlueprintMarketing]

The thumbs up Dr. Pete,

You definitely explain that much better than I could. And completely agree once the 301 in place there should be nothing else associated with it.

Teginder

I thought I would send this link with a screenshot from Google searching for staplers Google I noticed in your screenshots you are logged in to Google I just wanted you to know if you're constantly searching for staplers and your URL Google will modify the search to suit what it thinks is your needs. Hence I did a very unscientific  incognito check allowing Google to give me a less biased search result. to make it more useful high logged into SEM Rush and searched staplers and received what you can find inside the CVS file for the top 10 organic results. So you know this is what came up In the photographs is different from what SEM Rush and Google are telling me.

https://blueprintmarketing.sharefile.com/d/scdb1ed7e9464929b

The very best of luck with your new website.

Sincerely,

Thomas Zickell

s969f00518094f02b

[BlueprintMarketing]

The thumbs up Dr. Pete,

You definitely explain that much better than I could. And completely agree once the 301 in place there should be nothing else associated with it.

Teginder

I thought I would send this link with a screenshot from Google searching for staplers Google I noticed in your screenshots you are logged in to Google I just wanted you to know if you're constantly searching for staplers and your URL Google will modify the search to suit what it thinks is your needs. Hence I did a very unscientific  incognito check allowing Google to give me a less biased search result. to make it more useful high logged into SEM Rush and searched staplers and received what you can find inside the CVS file for the top 10 organic results. So you know this is what came up In the photographs is different from what SEM Rush and Google are telling me.

https://blueprintmarketing.sharefile.com/d/scdb1ed7e9464929b

The very best of luck with your new website.

Sincerely,

Thomas Zickell

s969f00518094f02b

[Futura]

Thanks Dr. Pete for lighting more on this comparing with 301 redirects & rel tags.

[Dr-Pete]

One thing that I almost always see overlooked in these discussion - 301 and canonical have totally different impacts on the visitors to your site. A 301 will take the visitor to the new site, whereas a canonical won't. If you're really trying to phase out the old domain, canonicals could be self-defeating, because people won't know the site has moved and they'll still bookmark, tweet, link to, etc. the old URLs.

Keep in mind, too, that cross-domain canonicals are at Google's discretion. While they often work, and can pass PageRank, they're sometimes ignored. The are cases where canonicals may be safer, such as if you suspect the old domain carries a penalty. For a full site move, though, I'd almost always go with 301s.

[BlueprintMarketing]

Hi Teginder, When you apply the 301 Redirect to the new webpage Google will actually no longer index it it will believe that it has just become a part of the pages just pointed at meaning you literally could set the rel tags but that's all you'd have to do you definitely do not need to worry about. I hope I was of help Sincerely , Thomas Zickell

[Futura]

I want to know one more thing that i am going to use and bring new domain pages with using rel=canonical tags where there is no possibility of 301 redirect use WITH , I just want to know that Will Google not to index the pages where i will use noindex and get to know that the same page has been letting to move new primary versions of the page to crawl and index them. Regards, Teginder Ravi

[BlueprintMarketing]

prior to changing domains you want to do exactly this

with rel=canonical without using 301 redirect :
Old   :   kanin.com (leaving) New  :   kangarokanin.com (promoting)

** that will get Google on the same track but you really don't want take long before implementing the 301 redirect maybe 24 hours.**