Subdomain vs Subdirectory - does the content make a difference?

[giffgaff]

So I've read through all of the answers that suggest using a subdirectory is the best way to approach this -  you rank more quickly and have all of your content on one site.  BUT what if you're looking to move into a totally new market that your current site/content isn't in any way relevant to?

Some examples are Supermarkets such as Tesco (who seem to use a mix of methods) http://www.tesco.com/groceries/, http://www.clothingattesco.com/, http://www.tesco.com/bank/ which links out from their main site to http://www.tescobank.com/ etc and Sainsburys http://www.sainsburys.co.uk/ who use subdomains - here they have their grocery offering, their bank offering, clothes, phones etc split into subdomains.

If you have a product that is totally new to your Brand and different from all the products on your current site, does this change the answer to subdirectory vs subdomain?

Would be great to hear your expert opinions on this.

Thanks

[Stramark]

for the subdomain to domain issue:
From a SEO perspective a subdomain is less favorable.

From a user perpective: Please explain to my father the domain zoekmachinemarketing.stramark.nl how are you going to explain that there should not be a www. in front of it? how are you going to explain the fact that it is not only stramark he has to go to, but actualy the subdomain because it has a different offer?

I think young people can adapt somewhat better, but they are very used that they do not have to think. They just search from the adres bar and need the top result.

[Matthew_Edgar]

I agree with what John Cross said here - multiple domains means more work. If there is a business case to justify that increase in work, then that is an easier decision. If there isn't enough business case to justify the work, then maybe from an SEO standpoint you should keep it on the same domain to get the new content ranking more quickly.

Along with SEO considerations, though, there are a few other ways to break down this question...

First, what are the user expectations? Yes, the products are different and not highly related but are the customers different? In the Tesco example, would people who are interested in groceries also be interested in banking? Or, put another way, would people who are interested in groceries (but not in banking) be offended to see that this company also offers banking services? If the users are interconnected or are (at minimum) not put off by the variety of products, then why not have everything on one domain? That way you get the strong SEO benefit of using sub-directories. This isn't always a cheap investment though, as it requires a strong architecture to keep the directories and content types/voices distinct, but totally doable and a good solution from an SEO standpoint.

Second, I'd look at this from a brand perspective. Is this all the same company delivering these goods? Is it all Tesco or Sainsburys? If it is the same brand name, then why not have everything live on one authoritative domain name (assuming you aren't going to chase away customers by showing the breadth of products offered)? Google is an example of this - look at the wide variety of services they offer mail, analytics, drive, G+, search, etc. - it is all Google, even though they offer a wide range of products to a diverse range of customers. Now, if New Product A is a different brand and a really different thing from anything else being done by the company (in Google's case - Android), then that likely justifies a separate domain and a larger business investment (not just for SEO, but for design and other types of marketing too).

Finally, you do need to look at this technically I think. Chances are that Tesco Bank has to live on a different domain just because of security considerations. Some times the technology limitations have to dictate what we do with SEO. If those are great enough, then we may have to do the work to create two distinct domains and get those domains earning rankings/traffic. In that case, the business/technical needs justify the work required.

Hope that helps!

[ClaytonJ]

To optimize SEO outcomes the short answer answer would use your current domain.

However a counter argument could be you own an exact matching domain to keywords so that maybe push you to a new URL. Big marketing budget or maybe you just want a clean start - because of pigeon or panda issues plaguing teh current site.

That said using Tesco & Sainsbury as examples both have in common "big wallets".  So they would have planned multi million dollar marketing campaigns around the new products/URL's.  Hence they can drive backlinks. So if the company is a monster - with a massive marketing spend for the launch you may think a new brand and URL are in order.

I am old school - a brand new domain to start from scratch - new domain, no history and no backlinks is a far harder task, but certainly not unachievable. I would steer form it. Personally I believe you should try and limit new domains as practically it increases your required SEO output in this case by double. Have to review two lost of GA and Webmaster each day... So just to keep level you need to work extra hours each week with a new domain...

They are my views but there is plenty of info on moz heading the other way.