Link Reclimation & Redirects
-
Hello,
I'm in the middle of a link reclamation project wherein we're identifying broken links, links pointing to dupe content etc.
I found a forgotten co-brand which is effectively dupe content across 8 sub-domains, some of which have a significant number of links (200+ linking domains | 2k+ in-bound links).
Question for the group is what's the optimal redirect option?
Option 1: set 301 and maintain 1:1 URL mapping
- will pass all equity to applicable PLPs and theoretically improve rank for related keyword(s).
- requires a bit more configuration time and will likely have small effect on rank given links are widely distributed across URLs.
Option 2: set 301 to redirect all requests to the associated sub-domain e.g. foo.mybrand.cobrand.com/page1.html and foo.mybrand.cobrand.com/page2 both redirect to foo.mybrand.com/
- will accumulate all equity at the sub-domain level which theoretically will be roughly distributed throughout underlying pages and will limit risk of penalty to that sub-domain.
Option 3: set 301 to redirect all requests to our homepage.
- easiest to configure & maintain, will accumulate the maximum equity on a priority page which should positively affect domain authority.
- run risk of being penalized for accumulating links en mass, risk penalty for spammy links on our primary sub-domain www, won't pass keyword specific equity to applicable pages.
To be clear, I've done an initial scrub of anchor text and there were no signs of spam.
I'm leaning towards #3, but interested in others perspectives.
Cheers,
Stefan -
The optimal redirect for both visitors and search engines is to keep the structure as it was, meaning #1.
The optimal solution also follows your options numbering, meaning that for both search engine and visitors the last options is the least desirable.
The optimal solution workload wise, is the exact opposite, as it often is.
Depending on how well related the content is, it might be possible to opt for #2 but it is very rare that option #3 would work well as the content of the entire website, including all its subdomains, has to be extremely well related and basically only cover one single topic.
A few simple questions might help:
-
Are all the topics of every single page of the forgotten co-brands present on the homepage? If not, then #3 is not a very good option.
-
Are all the topics of every single page of the forgotten co-brands present on the associated subdomain? If not, then #2 is not a very good option.
Another thing to consider is the amount of pages that will be re-directed. I actually have a problem with that at the moment, as I am really not sure how well that will be treated by the search engines.
IMHO you should look at how the redirects are for people first, bots second and equity/domain authority/etc. last. Not to mention that I think that no matter which group you put first, the optimal solution out of the 3 options stays the same as your numbering anyway.
-
-
+1 to option 1 and Takeshi's response.
You should consider user experience as a huge decision-making factor in this. Landing on a page the user is looking for will ultimately provide a better user experience and therefore you should go with that option. That said, it's also slightly better for SEO purposes imo.
I have 2 sites I monitor. One I was allowed to redesign and the other is a disaster. Of the two sites, they both get similar keyword ranking and similar traffic. But about 65% more leads are generated through the purdier site.
TL;DR - make it purdy, make me happy = win.
-
I would personally go with Option 1. The purpose of 301 redirects is to say that a piece of content has permanently moved from one location to another. Therefore the content on the old location should point to the content on the new location, not the homepage.
Google will often not pass link equity if the new page is completely different from the original, which is why redirecting a bunch of domains to a new site isn't going to pass all their link equity to the new site. Like you pointed out, you will also dilute the value of the keyword relevancy.
It's also bad from a user perspective-- if you have a lot of links going to your co-brand, and people are clicking on those links, having them taken to your homepage is a poor user experience, and can result in increased bounce rate. If those visitors are getting to your co-brand through search, it could even be a negative signal for the search engines.
301s should be directed at content that's as similar as possible to the original content, that's the general rule.
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
-
Value of EDU Links?
Greetings: We are considering hiring a firm specializes in developing .EDU links. Is the ROI on EDU links better than non EDU backlinks from reputable domains? Will obtaining EDU links results in greater domain authority and improved ranking for search engine results? Thanks, Alan
Intermediate & Advanced SEO | | Kingalan10 -
Should I do a redirect
Hello, I am building a new website with a new web address for subpages. The domain name stays the same. I am wondering if I should do redirect to the few pages that have an outside link going to them. I noticed all my subpage that don't have any external link have an authority of 18. I only have 1 subpage that has 2 external links and 1 of them has a spam score of 32 and then other one of 1. My website is about a 100 pages. What should I do for my subpages redirect , not redirect, redirect only the ones that have external links ? Thank you,
Intermediate & Advanced SEO | | seoanalytics0 -
Should I remove all vendor links (link farm concerns)?
I have a web site that has been around for a long time. The industry we serve includes many, many small vendors and - back in the day - we decided to allow those vendors to submit their details, including a link to their own web site, for inclusion on our pages. These vendor listings were presented in location (state) pages as well as more granular pages within our industry (we called them "topics). I don't think it's important any more but 100% of the vendors listed were submitted by the vendors themselves, rather than us "hunting down" links for inclusion or automating this in any way. Some of the vendors (I'd guess maybe 10-15%) link back to us but many of these sites are mom-and-pop sites and would have extremely low authority. Today the list of vendors is in the thousands (US only). But the database is old and not maintained in any meaningful way. We have many broken links and I believe, rightly or wrongly, we are considered a link farm by the search engines. The pages on which these vendors are listed use dynamic URLs of the form: \vendors<state>-<topic>. The combination of states and topics means we have hundreds of these pages and they thus form a significant percentage of our pages. And they are garbage 🙂 So, not good.</topic></state> We understand that this model is broken. Our plan is to simply remove these pages (with the list of vendors) from our site. That's a simple fix but I want to be sure we're not doing anything wring here, from an SEO perspective. Is this as simple as that - just removing these page? How much effort should I put into redirecting (301) these removed URLs? For example, I could spend effort making sure that \vendors\California- <topic>(and for all states) goes to a general "topic" page (which still has relevance, but won't have any vendors listed)</topic> I know there is no distinct answer to this, but what expectation should I have about the impact of removing these pages? Would the removal of a large percentage of garbage pages (leaving much better content) be expected to be a major factor in SEO? Anyway, before I go down this path I thought I'd check here in case I miss something. Thoughts?
Intermediate & Advanced SEO | | MarkWill0 -
URL Re-Writes & HTTPS: Link juice loss from 301s?
Our URLs are not following a lot of the best practices found here: http://moz.com/blog/11-best-practices-for-urls We have also been waiting to implement HTTPS. I think it might be time to take the plunge on re-writing the URLs and converting to a fully secure site, but I am concerned about ranking dips from the lost link juice from the 301s. Many of our URLs are very old, with a decent amount of quality links. Are we better off leaving as is or taking the plunge?
Intermediate & Advanced SEO | | TheDude0 -
Rel canonical or redirect
Hi, my client has the following links pointing to the home page http://www.weddingrings.com/index.cfm http://www.weddingrings.com In this case would I use rel canonical or redirect?
Intermediate & Advanced SEO | | alexkatalkin0 -
'Nofollow' footer links from another site, are they 'bad' links?
Hi everyone,
Intermediate & Advanced SEO | | romanbond
one of my sites has about 1000 'nofollow' links from the footer of another of my sites. Are these in any way hurtful? Any help appreciated..0 -
Wikipedia links - any value?
Hello everyone. We recently posted some of our research to Wikipedia as references in the "External Links" section. Our research is rigorous and has been referenced by a number of universities and libraries (an example: https://www.harborcompliance.com/information/company-suffixes.php). Anyway, I'm wondering if these Wikipedia links have any value beyond of course adding to the Wiki page's information. Thanks!
Intermediate & Advanced SEO | | Harbor_Compliance0 -
How to ping the links
When i do link building for my website, how can i let the search engines know about that. is there any way of pinging?
Intermediate & Advanced SEO | | raybiswa0