Different steps on the funnel competing with each other on the SEPR
-
Two steps in the same funnel are both ranking and competing with each other on the SERP. So www.example.com/step1 and www.example.com/step2 are both ranking. What is the best way to deal with this?
Thanks
-
Thanks for this Keri.
-
If you don't want the second page showing at all, exclude it in robots.txt.
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
-
Google keeps marking different pages as duplicates
My website has many pages like this: mywebsite/company1/valuation mywebsite/company2/valuation mywebsite/company3/valuation mywebsite/company4/valuation ... These pages describe the valuation of each company. These pages were never identical but initially, I included a few generic paragraphs like what is valuation, what is a valuation model, etc... in all the pages so some parts of these pages' content were identical. Google marked many of these pages as duplicated (in Google Search Console) so I modified the content of these pages: I removed those generic paragraphs and added other information that is unique to each company. As a result, these pages are extremely different from each other now and have little similarities. Although it has been more than 1 month since I made the modification, Google still marks the majority of these pages as duplicates, even though Google has already crawled their new modified version. I wonder whether there is anything else I can do in this situation? Thanks
Technical SEO | | TuanDo96270 -
Why is there a difference in the number of indexed pages shown by GWT and site: search?
Hi Moz Fans, I have noticed that there is a huge difference between the number of indexed pages of my site shown via site: search and the one that shows Webmaster Tools. While searching for my site directly in the browser (site:), there are about 435,000 results coming up. According to GWT there are over 2.000.000 My question is: Why is there such a huge difference and which source is correct? We have launched the site about 3 months ago, there are over 5 million urls within the site and we get lots of organic traffic from the very beginning. Hope you can help! Thanks! Aleksandra
Technical SEO | | aleker0 -
Will it make any difference to SEO on an ecommerce site if they use their SSL certificate (https) across every page
I know that e-commerce sites usually have SSL certificates on their payment pages. A site I have come across is using has the https: prefix to every page on their site. I'm just wondering if this will make any difference to the site in the eyes of Search Engines, and whether it could effect the rankings of the site?
Technical SEO | | Sayers1 -
Are permalinks ending in / different than permalinks with nothing at the end?
In my Google Analytics, I have different stats for what I think is the same page, win-a-party and win-a-party/ I searched all over for the win-a-party/ page and I couldn't find it anywhere. Why would it be tracking these differently? Should I set a 301 from win-a-party/ to win-a-party?
Technical SEO | | howlusa0 -
Huge ranking difference between google and bing
I am trying to rank for the keyword "trash bags" I did a lot of on-page optimization and link building. We started ranking #2 on bing and yahoo but google seems to be stubbornly fluctuating between being as high as 20 and as low as 45 and even dropped our rankings for a couple of weeks. Is there any need for concern if google is acting so different from bing/yahoo?
Technical SEO | | EcomLkwd0 -
Do search engines treat 307 redirects differently from 302 redirects?
We will need to send our users to an alternate version of our homepage for a few hours for a certain event. The SEO task at hand is to minimize the chance of the special homepage getting crawled and cached in the search engines in place of our normal homepage. (This has happened in the past so the concern is not imaginary.) Among other options, 302 and 307 redirects are being discussed. IE, redirecting www.domain.com to www.domain.com/specialpage. Having used 302s and 301s in the past, I am well aware of how search engines treat them. A 302 effectively says "Hey, Google! Please get rid of the old content on www.domain.com and replace it with the content on /specialpage!" Which is exactly what we don't want. My question is: do the search engines handle 307s any differently? I am hearing that the 307 does NOT result in the content of the second page being cached with the first URL. But I don't see that in the definition below (from w3.org). Then again, why differentiate it from the 302? 307 Temporary Redirect The requested resource resides temporarily under a different URI. Since the redirection MAY be altered on occasion, the client SHOULD continue to use the Request-URI for future requests. This response is only cacheable if indicated by a Cache-Control or Expires header field. The temporary URI SHOULD be given by the Location field in the response. Unless the request method was HEAD, the entity of the response SHOULD contain a short hypertext note with a hyperlink to the new URI(s) , since many pre-HTTP/1.1 user agents do not understand the 307 status. Therefore, the note SHOULD contain the information necessary for a user to repeat the original request on the new URI. If the 307 status code is received in response to a request other than GET or HEAD, the user agent MUST NOT automatically redirect the request unless it can be confirmed by the user, since this might change the conditions under which the request was issued.
Technical SEO | | CarsProduction0 -
Using differing calls to action based on IP address
Hi, We have an issue with a particular channel on a lead generation site where we have sales staff requiring different quality of leads in different parts of the country. In saturated markets they require a stricter lead qualification process than those in more challenging markets. To combat the problem I am toying with the idea of severing very slightly different content based on IP address. The main change in content would be in terms of calls to action and lead qualification processes. We would plan to have a "standard" version of the site for when IP location can not be detected. URLs on this version would be the rel="canonical" for the location specific pages. Is there a way to do this without creating duplicate content, cloaking or other such issues on the site? Any advice, theories or case studies would be greatly appreciated.
Technical SEO | | SEM-Freak1 -
Different pages first results on same keyword search
Hi, Sometimes Google does not show the page you intended for a certain keyword. Logically you would say that the intended page is not relevant/strong enough. But in my case several pages ranked fine for a long period of time and all of a sudden another less important page gets the highest result on a keyword search. (We are in the camping business) For instance: One of our campsites called Tenuta primero used to rank position 9 in google with page below for a long time (search: 'camping tenuta primero') This was the page we intended to rank with. http://www.suncamp.nl/nl/nl/campings/italie/friuli-venezia-giulia/camping-tenuta-primero/uc19-l1-n797-c13-r115-cp104959/ Now all of a sudden the position for search 'camping tenuta primero' is position 33 with review page below. http://www.suncamp.nl/nl/nl/campings/italie/friuli-venezia-giulia/camping-tenuta-primero/beoordelingen/uc19-l1-n797-c13-r115-cp104959-t22598/ What could have caused this? Pages are in Dutch but main keywords are camping are tenuta primero. Thank you very much in advance! Kind regards, Dennis Overbeek Dennis@acsi.eu | www.suncamp.nl |
Technical SEO | | SEO_ACSI0