301-Redirects, PageRank, Matt Cutts, Eric Enge & Barry Schwartz - Fact or Myth?
-
I've been trying to wrap my head around this for the last hour or so and thought it might make a good discussion. There's been a ton about this in the Q & A here, Eric Enge's interview with Matt Cutts from 2010 (http://www.stonetemple.com/articles/interview-matt-cutts-012510.shtml) said one thing and Barry Schwartz seemed to say another: http://searchengineland.com/google-pagerank-dilution-through-a-301-redirect-is-a-myth-149656
Is this all just semantics? Are all of these people really saying the same thing and have they been saying the same thing ever since 2010? Cyrus Shepherd shed a little light on things in this post when he said that it seemed people were confusing links and 301-redirects and viewing them as being the same things, when they really aren't. He wrote "here's a huge difference between redirecting a page and linking to a page." I think he is the only writer who is getting down to the heart of the matter. But I'm still in a fog.
In this video from April, 2011, Matt Cutts states very clearly that "There is a little bit of pagerank that doesn't pass through a 301-redirect." continuing on to say that if this wasn't the case, then there would be a temptation to 301-redirect from one page to another instead of just linking.
VIDEO - http://youtu.be/zW5UL3lzBOA
So it seems to me, it is not a myth that 301-redirects result in loss of pagerank.
In this video from February 2013, Matt Cutts states that "The amount of pagerank that dissipates through a 301 is currently identical to the amount of pagerank that dissipates through a link."
VIDEO - http://youtu.be/Filv4pP-1nw
Again, Matt Cutts is clearly stating that yes, a 301-redirect dissipates pagerank.
Now for the "myth" part. Apparently the "myth" was about how much pagerank dissipates via a 301-redirect versus a link.
Here's where my head starts to hurt:
Does this mean that when Page A links to Page B it looks like this:
A -----> ( reduces pagerank by about 15%)-------> B (inherits about 85% of Page A's pagerank if no other links are on the page
But say the "link" that exists on Page A is no longer good, but it's still the original URL, which, when clicked, now redirects to Page B via a URL rewrite (301 redirect)....based on what Matt Cutts said, does the pagerank scenario now look like this:
A (with an old URL to Page B) ----- ( reduces pagerank by about 15%) -------> URL rewrite (301 redirect) - Reduces pagerank by another 15% --------> B (inherits about 72% of Page A's pagerank if no other links are on the page)
Forgive me, I'm not a mathematician, so not sure if that 72% is right?
It seems to me, from what Matt is saying, the only way to avoid this scenario would be to make sure that Page A was updated with the new URL, thereby avoiding the 301 rewrite?
I recently had to re-write 18 product page URLs on a site and do 301 redirects. This was brought about by our hosting company initiating rules in the back end that broke all of our custom URLs. The redirects were to exactly the same product pages (so, highly relevant). PageRank tanked on all 18 of them, hard. Perhaps this is why I am diving into this question more deeply.
I am really interested to hear your point of view
-
Yes Doug, you totally get my confusion. Your scenarios describe more clearly exactly what I am wondering. In the case of your third example, Matt even stated pretty clearly in the video (perhaps even both videos) that chains of redirects can be a problem.
I totally agree with you that avoiding redirects altogether and updating the links is the way to go. Even Google's own Pagespeed Insight's tool often makes this recommendation when evaluating pagespeed of a site. If 301's are exactly the same as links, why would the tool recommend avoiding them?
Yes, I think perhaps Matt said what he did because he was looking at 301s and links in complete isolation. If so, then what he says is believable in theory, but I can't think of how it would actually happen in practice.
-
It is confusing and it's something I was wondering when I first saw the Matt Cutts, Feb 2013 video. From what Matt says:
- We know that a link won't pass all the page rank. Some page rank disipates over each link.
- the amount of page rank that dissipates though a 301 is identical to the amount that passes through a link.
But, I guess the problem with understanding this is that you can't take 301s and links and consider them in isolation. It's not an either/or.
Consider the following:
1. Page 1 -[link to]-> Page 2
Nice and simple, page 2 gets it's full entitlement of page rank ( taking into account share/link and dissipation)
2. Page 1 -[link to]-> 301 -> Page 3
Now I've got an extra step. Does this mean that the page rank that Page 3 inherits is affected by both the link and then the 301? Does the page rank dissipation happen twice?
If, say 50% (not real numbers!) of page rank value is lost for each link/301, then the original link to the 301 would lose %50 and the 301 would lose the same, (50% of the 50%) which means that page 3 get's just 25%
What if I end up in the horrible situation of having
3. Page 1 -[link to]-> 301 -> 301 -> 301 -> Page 3
Does page rank decay happen on every redirect?
Personally, I've only used redirects where necessary and, where I can, I've tried to get inbound links updated to point to the correct page.
-
Dana,
When you say "inherits about 72% of Page A's pagerank if no other links are on the page", I think that's where your understanding goes off track....either that, or it's where mine goes off track, because my understanding is that the percentage of PR that is passed from one page to another page is based on an unknown "X amount", not on the linking page's toolbar pagerank. I think is better to say ...inherits about 72% of the pagerank that page A is able to pass...---not 72% of Page A's pagrerank. Does that make sense?
-
In your second example above, the link would still pass 85% pagerank not 72%. Obviously, in order for a 301 to pass pagerank, it needs to be used in a link. If a 301 link only passed 72% pagerank, then it would always pass less pagerank than a regular link, which would contradict what Matt said.
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
-
Website's server IP address is redirected to blog by mistake; does Google responds?
Hi all, Our website's server IP address is set to be redirected to our blog by mistake and it stayed same for months. Is there any way Google recognises it and how it responds if so? Thanks
Algorithm Updates | | vtmoz1 -
Do we need to worry about external redirects?
Hi all, We always avoid internal redirects. Just wonder what if many of the out going links are redirecting to new links. I presume there is nothing wrong to host such links. Any ideas? Thanks
Algorithm Updates | | vtmoz0 -
Have name.org want to get name.com should .com redirect to .org or other way around?
Its a non profit organization. With name.org acquired in 2006. name.com will be acquired soon. In SEO terms it would make sense for me just to get .com and redirect to the original .org but from the standpoint of 7 year history of name.org is it worth keeping or its irrelevant or not that important or really important. I am in the process of rebuilding the site other than the initial domain home links to other pages do not matter at the moment. Thanks Mozzies
Algorithm Updates | | vmialik0 -
301 a purchased domain
I've purchased a competitor. They rank well organically for keywords that I target, and I want to optimize the way I get value from their current rankings and traffic (and customers -- we will obviously market to their email/customer list). Which is better: (1) use a 301 redirect for any access to their domain and point it to my home page. I think this would force Google to de-index all of their pages, right? (2) put up a stub page as their homepage that announces the site has been bought, and have a do-follow link to my home page (which maybe is auto-redirected after 10 seconds or something)? Maybe this is better to keep their home page in Google's index for a while? As for option (1), I thought I read somewhere recently that 301'ing a domain to the home page of another domain would no longer pass link juice (?). Maybe I should 301 the newly purchased domain to a sub-page on my site that explains the acquisition and asks them to sign up on my site? Both sites are legit. No spamming happening here; just industry consolidation as one competitor acquires another. Thanks in advance...!
Algorithm Updates | | scanlin0 -
301 Redirects?
Hello fello Mozzers, I have just read a post about 301 redirects on the Blog. A great read and has provided me with a bit more insight and highlights what could be a potential issue for a managed site I look after. On this website I manage, I have inherited a .htaccess file with literally hundreds of non file based existant 301 links. e.g. redirect 301 /dealerbrandname http://www.domain.com/ So we have lots of dealers and they place a link on there site to http://www.domain.com/dealerbrandname We then redirect it to the homepage or a relevant topic page along with some tracking variables. Is this likely causing significant issues, based on the post I read I imagine it will be, but anymore thoughts on this would be hugely helpful. CheersTim
Algorithm Updates | | TimHolmes0 -
Anyone else noticing that Bing & Yahoo are delivering widely different results
Anyone else noticing that Bing & Yahoo are delivering widely different results in past week. Prior to that after they started using Bing SE it seemed like they were identical, but no more. I am using RankTracker and getting this on several web sites.
Algorithm Updates | | BrandTastic0 -
301 from multiple domains to one single webshop
First of all i want to introduce myself. My name is Jennifer and i am a webshop owner from the Netherlands (we sell plants/herbs products) I have a very important question (and i can`t find a clear answer on the internet). So i hope someone can help me, At this moment me and 4 other friends own each a seperate webshop. We all started the webshops 5 -7 years ago and work all in the same business. (plants/herbs). We talked last week, and we want to make one big company and combine all 5 company`s. All 5 webshops have a huge pagerank, lots of organic traffic and very good incomming links. We registered new domainnames and want to redirect the 5 "old" domains to one new domain to pass over the Google juice. Our new company is a multilanguage webshop and each language has its own domain. (for example) (www. plantsandherbs example .nl)
Algorithm Updates | | snorkel
(www. plantsandherbs example .de)
(www. plantsandherbs example .de)
(www. plantsandherbs example .es)
(www. plantsandherbs example .fr)
(www. plantsandherbs example .com) Does it harm us if we 301 redirect all the 5 "old" websites to the new webshop? And what is the best way to redirect the "old" webshops to the new one? I am afraid of a Google penalty because it maybe looks like we bought some domains to pass the juice to the new project.0 -
PageRank Updates Again
Toolbar PageRank updates seem quite frequent this year. When they did the re-update in July after Twitter stuff-up I thought they were going to settle down for a while. Now in August there is a new one. From what I can see the data is refreshed and the snapshot seems to originate from at least 29th July with the calculated values as recent as 25th July. I wonder why they're doing this and what they are up to...
Algorithm Updates | | Dan-Petrovic0