New website branding, differences between http://www and http://

[Riggz]

Hey Mozers!

We will be creating another brand pretty soon with some pretty cool interactive features and before we start development of the site I was wondering if there are any pros/cons to branding the site sans the www.

For example http://example123.com and http://www.example123.com. I would much prefer to brand it has http://example123.com but I just wanted to check first to see if that would have any negative SEO ramifications.

It seems that it might just be a preference as I looked at Facebook and Twitter and they both do it differently, same with Groupon and LivingSocial.

Looking forward to hearing from you guys!

[AmsiveDigital]

Given that we know there isn't any difference from an SEO perspective it comes down to purely external factors.  Some questions to think about...

1. Are people going to constantly link to the www version any way?
2. In a competitive space is one more eye-catching than the other?
3. What's more memorable to the visitor?

[Riggz]

Yea that was a concern I had going in, but I was thinking about it and in general when people link to different products or areas of the site I would assume they might just go copy the link from the url bar (at least that is what I do).

I wonder if the % is really enough to matter when people link to http://zebraswithhats or http://www.zebraswithhats - no thankfully that is not the domain

[Riggz]

Oof, massive failure on my part lol, there just so happens to be this "check, this answered by question!" Thanks for pointing it out for me

[StalkerB]

Actually a pretty neat feature of the Q&A forum is that you can mark answers as helpful (which highlights the post in green and gives the person a shiny 3 MozPoints).

There should be a text link saying something like 'This answered my question' with a tick at the bottom of their posts which you can click (at least I think that's how to mark them, I've not asked a question yet :D)

[eyepaq]

More people out there are linking to the www.name version and even if you do the 301 redirect you will still lose some vote %.

Since it's a new brand and you are starting this now you should take your time and consider every aspect from the start and make your call based on all facts.

I always vote for the www version but that, beside the linking and look factor of the url is a personal thing.

[Riggz]

Definately what I was looking for guys, thank you for the awesomely quick responses! I figured that it wasn't that big of a concern for SEO but since we are starting from scratch I just want to make sure its correct from the start! Tossed you both thumbs up!

[RyanOD]

The only difference is from the user perspective. Search engines treat both versions the same.

What you want to be careful about is maintaining consistency within your site. This is especially true at larger organizations with multiple publishing points. If everyone isn't made aware (and reminded from time to time) of this branding decision, inconsistencies will begin to pop up.

Furthermore, you should be sure to redirect all versions of pages to the option you choose. This is true for both the home page and all other pages. For example, if you choose http://example123.com...

• http://www.example123.com should be 301 redirected to http://example123.com
• http://www.example123.com/whatever should also be 301 redirected to http://example123.com/example123

Finally, be sure to share your choice with all parties that communicate externally. This includes PR, Social Media, Marketing, etc. for inclusion in their posts, your company boilerplate, emails, etc.

[DanDeceuster]

No difference from an SEO perspective. After the Q&A last year at SMX Advanced with Matt Cutts, I went up and asked him this very question. He said make sure one version redirects to the other, and if it is an existing site, Google will likely display the version with more pagerank. If this site is still in development, when you release it, have all links go to the sans www versions and make sure the www versions 301 redirect to the sans www URL's.

From a branding perspective, it only matters if you plan on displaying the .com on the page or in the logo or something like that. If you plan to display the .com, then sans www. Looks cleaner and just better recognition overall.

If you aren't planning to display the .com anywhere, then it really doesn't matter as hardly anyone outside this industry pays attention to which version of a URL they are on.