60% Internal Redirects
-
A new client I am working with has a site with over 9,000 internal 301 redirects. These are as a result of old links not being updated and the number of internal 301 redirects far outweighs the number of 'correct' links on the site.
My personal opinion is that creates the risk of crawl errors/issues and whilst a 301 redirect is correct in this case, it does not negate the need to update internal links.
The problem I have is that when I explain this to the client, they reply with an Matt Cutts video from 2008 that talks about 301 redirects being correct for site migrations. Even though the video is not entirely relevant to the point, I can not get the client to move from his position.
Ideally, what I am looking for help with is the following:
- Am I right in my position that having this many redirects is a potential issue and that internal links should be updated?
- Does anyone know of any articles from 'notable/reputable' sources that I can use in order to support my position?
Thanks in advance for your help.
-
Hello Matt,
Two things:
#1 - "The amount of pagerank that is lost through a redirect is currently the same as the amount of pagrank that dissapates through a link". So they are exactly the same. Source: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Filv4pP-1nw
It was thought that more pagerank was lost through a redirect because Google does not want webmasters relying on redirects instead of actually updating internal links. At least that's what Matt told us at a search conference many years before denying it in this video. So.... That's sort of a non-issue - for now. Until Matt changes his mind about how he wants to explain it again.
#2 - It is still "best practice" to update your internal links after a site migration instead of relying on the 301 redirects. The reason is that you don't just migrate once. Think long-term and you will see there is always going to be a possibility of changing the URLs again at some point in the future. If you do not update your internal links you're going to be sending users through multiple redirect hops, which will THEN probably lose more page rank than what is lost in a normal links because it will be happening multiple times.
-
Hi Matt,
I agree that it's a potential issue, but not a highly likely to be one. Another argument in in favor to restructuring the internal links is the internal link juice that can be lost through re-directs. Saying that, your client could be right in thinking time could be better spent on other tasks.
-
Hi Matt,
Unfortunately the point of a 301 is to point the user / bot to the correct location. Having said that there is nothing wrong with tweaking the site structure so it is more accessible to users however the 301 redirects would still be a valid point. It does sound like long term a restructure would be more beneficial.
As long as they are making the user experience better they are doing their job, make the user happy make Google happy.
Best of luck though.
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
-
I have a question about the impact of a root domain redirect on site-wide redirects and slugs.
I have a question about the impact (if any) of site-wide redirects for DNS/hosting change purposes. I am preparing to redirect the domain for a site I manage from https://siteImanage.com to https://www.siteImanage.com. Traffic to the site currently redirects in reverse, from https://www.siteImanage.com to https://siteImanage.com. Based on my research, I understand that making this change should not affect the site’s excellent SEO as long as my canonical tags are updated and a 301 redirect is in place. But I wanted to make sure there wasn’t a potential consequence of this switch I’m not considering. Because this redirect lives at the root of all the site’s slugs and existing redirects, will it technically produce a redirect chain or a redirect loop? If it does, is that problematic? Thanks for your input!
Technical SEO | | mollykathariner_ms0 -
Missing 301 redirects
I just had a developer friend call me in a panic, because they had gone live with a new site and found out (the hard way) that they had missed some pages on their 301 redirects. So the pages are appearing in Google but serving 404s. Ouch! So their question was: other than running a report for 404 errors in something like Screaming Frog, is there a way to hunt down ONLY pages serving 404s, then export to CSV so they can be redirected? Anyone got any tricks up their sleeve?
Technical SEO | | muzzmoz0 -
Internal Link Rank Flow
I've read in many articles that pages can "pass" rank to other pages internally. Is anyone aware of any well done internal linking case studies which confirm this? If my homepage has the strongest Page Authority, would linking to another page deeper into my website from my homepage boost my rank for the deeper page in Google (more so than linking to the deep page from a page with lower page authority)?
Technical SEO | | poke10 -
Redirect URLS with 301 twice
Hello, I had asked my client to ask her web developer to move to a more simplified URL structure. There was a folder called "home" after the root which served no purpose. I asked for the URLs to be redirected using 301 to the new URLs which did not have this structure. However, the web developer didn't agree and decided to just rename the "home" folder "p". I don't know why he did this. We argued the case and he then created the URL structure we wanted. Initially he had 301 redirected the old URLS (the one with "Home") to his new version (the one with the "p"). When we asked for the more simplified URL after arguing, he just redirected all the "p" URLS to the PAGE NOT FOUND. However, remember, all the original URLs are now being redirected to the PAGE NOT FOUND as a result. The problems I see are these unless he redirects again: The new simplified URLS have to start from scratch to rank 2)We have duplicated content - two URLs with the same content Customers clicking products in the SERPs will currently find that they are being redirect to the 404 page. I understand that redirection has to occur but my questions are these: Is it ok to redirect twice with 301 - so old URL to the "p" version then to final simplified version. Will link juice be lost doing this twice? If he redirects from the original URLS to the final version missing out the "p" version, what should happen to the "p" version - they are currently indexed. Any help would be appreciated. Thanks
Technical SEO | | AL123al0 -
301 redirects - an ongoing argument in our agency
ok fellow marketers. we have an on-going argument in our office regarding 301 redirects. for seo best practices, should a 301 be done at the registrar level or in the htaccess file. We have arguments going both ways and I'd love to hear what everyone has to say about it. Thanks, Stephan
Technical SEO | | Stephan_Boehringer0 -
301 Redirect
Hello, On the 26.2.13 we changed domain names having followed the guidance of both Matt Cutts Youtube videos and googles own online documentation. We have a 301 redirect in place from our old domain ukmotorhomehirerental.com to our new site leisurerentalsdirect.com on a page to page basis. The site structure has not been altered in anyway. Google has been informed of the change of address. After the change the new domain transition was pretty seamless and ranked in the same postion in the SERPsThe one thing I've not done yet is tell all the webmasters who link to the old site that the address has changed (could this be it?)
Technical SEO | | Badapplemedia0 -
301 redirects and seo..
I bought a domain and it has nice traffic. It only has about 5 main pages in php When i got the site i switched to html because php was overkill. I did the 301 and google deleted the php files and replaced with html version when i check site:domain.com It has been about 7 days. I DID NOT use 301 for each of the 5 pages to go php to html instead is used this code RewriteEngine On
Technical SEO | | samerk
RewriteCond %{HTTP_HOST} ^mydomain.com
RewriteRule (.) http://www.mydomain.com/$1 [R=301,L]
RedirectMatch 301 (.).php$ http://www.mydomain.com$1.html So basically if you load php it will load the html version. dog.php > dog.html Is this OKAY? or should it be done differently.... worried! Thanks !0 -
Should I change a 301 redirect?
I recently moved all the content from an old site to a new site on a new domain. I lost a significant amount of traffic as a result. There are 301 redirects for every page on the old site. Generally, these point to the same content as was on the relevant page of the old site. However, the 301 redirect for the homepage on the old site points to the homepage on the new site, not to the content from the old site homepage. I'm wondering whether to change the 301 to point at the content from the old site homepage. Any advice would be much appreciated.
Technical SEO | | seqal0