Type of redirect?

[kylesuss]

I'm almost ready to launch a website redesign. We are going to move what's currently being hosted on olddomain.com to newdomain.com. We want to do this early to avoid error and to have olddomain.com redirect to newdomain.com until the new content is ready.

Once the redesign is complete, we'll push the new content to olddomain.com (as it holds a higher SEO value) and take away the redirect.

A. Does this sound like a good idea?

B. What kind of redirect should I use? 302? 307?

Thanks, and sorry for the confusion

[RyanKent]

The 301 cancellation itself is immediate. It may take time for search engines to crawl your site and notice the change on any given page.

[Mcarle]

How long does it take to cancle the 301?

I had a 301, I just canceled it & uploaded my new content.

[RyanKent]

If you needed to proceed with your plan, then a 302 allows you to redirect traffic for a short period such as what you are describing. I would define "short" as being 7 days or less.

If you are going to move for 30 days or more, I would use a 301 redirect. Once the upgrade is complete, cancel the 301 and send your traffic back.

[kylesuss]

I get why you're confused -- it lies with the presence of our old site and the permissions we have to change content.

So we're not just taking the site down for maintenance upon completion -- we're pointing the domain to a different server (both domains will be pointing to different places). The main question for me is how to do this smoothly?

But, mostly I just needed confirmation that the developer's idea wasn't the best one and reading your responses has helped me understand this a bit better.

[RyanKent]

I am still a bit confused.

You are currently using olddomain.com. You wish to upgrade the site.

You have beta.olddomain.com. You perform your development work on beta.olddomain.com while your live site continues to receive traffic.

Upon completion of development you would take "olddomain.com" down for maintenance. You update the site with the changes from the beta site, then you re-open the site and are live.

The above method represents the stand process under which most sites are upgraded. What you are describing sounds more like what happens in the offline world. You own an office which needs to be remodeled. You then move to a temporary office because the construction workers require access to your old office to make the changes. That method is not required in the virtual world.

[kylesuss]

You're correct in the direction things need to go.

The point isn't to preserve link juice in 2 ways -- it's to maintain a domain that we've had for years and that has tons of links pointing to it.

Pretty confusing stuff if you ask me.

[kylesuss]

We want to use olddomain.com because we've had it for years, our customers know it, and we have tons of links pointing to it. We set up beta.olddomain.com for testing.

The only reason we even need newdomain.com is because our old site was mandated to us by the manufacturer and we need to keep it per their rules. We don't care about that site at all though -- we just need to transfer it at the same time that we get the new content onto the old domain, does that make sense?

[RyanKent]

I agree with Dan's approach.

It sounds like you want to use your current "olddomain.com" as your development area. That doesn't make sense to me. If you use your "newdomain.com" site for development, then when you are ready upgrade/switch your current domain with the newly re-designed content, you wont need to use any form of redirect. It's less work for you and search engines.

[danrawk]

so your saying that:
beta.olddomain.com  will go to: olddomain.com
existing content at olddomain.com will go to  newdomain.com

if that's correct it may be a bit over my head. perhaps someone else can chime in?

it sounds like you are trying to preserve link juice two ways, which i don't think you can do .  perhaps a staggered launch that will allow the 301 to redirect the content, and then a relaunch via the beta content later (no 301s)?

[kylesuss]

Hi Dan, thanks for the response.

I agree that it sounds risky, that's why I posted here It was the route my developer suggested.

The site is being developed on a local server but we also have a subdomain set up (beta.olddomain.com). We'll be using the same domain, but the content that used to be there will be going to a new domain because it is a website that was mandated to us by our corporate manufacturer.

We have already planned to set up the 301 redirects from our old urls to the new ones. The main concern I have is the transfer of the new content to the old domain (from beta.olddomain.com to olddomain.com). Do you have any suggestions for a smooth transition in this regard?

[danrawk]

hi Kyle,
all the domain forwarding sounds kind of dangerous to me.

i've done a few site redesigns and can offer the following advice:
1.) if it ain't broke, don't move it.

2.) if you can develop your new site via a local server, or a cheap host (set up a pw so only you can see it while you develop), i would do that.  again, just moving domains seems risky.

301 redirects communicate to the search engines that you are permanently redirecting your content to your new site. you want to consider doing a 301 for ALL content/urls. this will help preserve rankings. a lot of times you can use a program like rewrite to handle this if you have tons of urls.

your best bet is to get all your "new" content ready to go, live, and then 301 redirect to it at your new domain. if that is happening on THE SAME domain (old content -> new content ; same domain), you want to 301 redirect your old url's to their equivalent new urls.

hope that helps! :>)