Http > https Switch Before Platform Migration?
-
We are planning a series of large site migrations over the next 12-18 months, moving from one platform to another. It's likely the first will be completed by around Aug this year, with the process running until the back end of 2018.
The sites are currently on http, and the plan is to first of all migrate all sites to https in the next couple of months. The concern is that, due to the http>https 301 redirects that will be in place, are we putting ourselves at unnecessary risk by effectively carrying out 2 migrations in the space of a year (in terms of loss of potential authority caused by redirects)? Would we be better to wait, and implement https at point of platform migration instead?
Thoughts appreciated.
-
"The concern is that, due to the http>https 301 redirects that will be in place, are we putting ourselves at unnecessary risk by effectively carrying out 2 migrations in the space of a year (in terms of loss of potential authority caused by redirects)?"
In February 2016, Google’s John Mueller announced that SEO equity or PageRank will no longer be lost when a 301 or 302 redirect is used in conjunction with an HTTP to HTTPS migration. While some of us doubted this statement, Gary Illyes tweeted the same thing in July 2016 and Barry Schwartz at Search Engine Land confirmed it. There is no loss of authority caused by redirects when you implement HTTPS.
"Would we be better to wait, and implement https at point of platform migration instead?"
I think the approach you're taking (convert to https first) is a good one. It affords you better control and is a good use of available resources.
-
Do you have a list of all links pointing to the webpages you are trying to redirect on the new launch? If the structure of your website changes, I would use my remaining development time to minify the time you are going to invest in changing them. So 301 is good, but it is better if you can change the external and internal links that you can to point to the new pages. After that, do the 301s. The migration will take development changes but also a lot of link fixing. Although https is a ranking factor, I don't see it as an urgent move. It is your call but I would use the time to prepare a really good migration. Good luck!
-
Thanks for the responses both.
The only reason we are splitting is because the new platform is still being completed (custom built), whereas we have spare development resource on the legacy platform. From that point of view, it would appear to make sense to complete the http>https migration now. Of course, the earlier we implement, the earlier we stand a chance of seeing a positive impact.
I am just slightly wary of the potential for ranking losses, based off migrating our URLs twice in one year. What would be your thoughts on this?
We do process sensitive data, but on those relevant pages we do already implement secure protocol. The above relates to site wide pages.
-
Hi Nicola! What are your reasons for splitting the migration? Is your site processing sensitive data? If yes, https is an ASAP problem for you since Chrome will already give your users some trouble when navigating your website. If not, I think you will be better of with a single migration. But again, could you give some details regarding your thoughts and reasoning about this? There could be multiple aspects that influence this decision.
-
Hey Nicola,
I'll share my thought about this issue. However, I'm sure there are many approaches to that.
I would suggest to do firstly the HTTP -> HTTPS migration as far as it's one of the ranking factors according to Google - see the official Google blog here: https://webmasters.googleblog.com/2014/08/https-as-ranking-signal.html
You'll save the precious time, Google will see that you "upgraded" your website and that you keep pace with the trends. If you would start firstly with the platform migration, you would loose several months waiting for this to be done before starting HTTP -> HTTPS.
Hope you get my idea. Cheers, Martin
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
-
Consolidating product pages during website migration
Hello, We are an e-commerce & content site undergoing a website migration and redesign in the coming months. We will be getting an entirely new website. Many of our URLs will be changing: Current URL setup: www.mysite.com/catalog/SKU12345/product-title-here
Intermediate & Advanced SEO | | katelynroberts
Future URL setup: www.mysite.com/catalog/product-title-here So we're aware we will be using plenty of 301 redirects to achieve this. Further to this though, we currently have a product page for each configuration of a product - for example, a single-sided bookmark has its own page and URL, and the double-sided version of the same bookmark has its own page and URL. In our site redesign, we are hoping to consolidate each of these instances into one product page where users can select single or double-sided and the price will update accordingly. The bookmark URLs would then go from:
_www.mysite.com/catalog/SKU12345/bookmark-single-sided _(call this URL A for simplicity)www.mysite.com/catalog/SKU67890/bookmark-double-sided (call this URL B) To (after migrating to the new URL structure for the new site, and the now-consolidated single- & double-sided product pages):
www.mysite.com/catalog/bookmark (call this URL C) What is the best way to make this transition without losing too much of our SEO value? I understand there is nearly always traffic loss with URL changes but I'd like to at least minimize the damage as best I can. We have backlinks and ranks for many product pages so I want to make sure we pass as much of this as we can. (And is this at all further complicated by the fact that URL A & B won't exist on the new site, and URL C doesn't exist on the current site? Does this impact the use of the 301 redirects and if so, how?) Are we better off to approach this page consolidation after the site migration and treat it as a separate project? This is something that is important to our user experience, and is definitely a change we want to make. Any advice is appreciated - thank you! I'm a fairly beginner-intermediate SEO so this is all somewhat new but I want to be able to at least convey some understanding to our developer of what we need to do. I was able to find this discussion (https://moz.com/community/q/merging-pages-and-seo) which describes a similar situation and solutions if we were just consolidating the pages but doesn't quite have the complicating factor of the entire site migration happening at the same time. Thanks so much!0 -
After Server Migration - Crawling Gets slow and Dynamic Pages wherein Content changes are not getting Updated
Hello, I have just performed doing server migration 2 days back All's well with traffic moved to new servers But somehow - it seems that w.r.t previous host that on submitting a new article - it was getting indexed in minutes. Now even after submitting page for indexing - its taking bit of time in coming to Search Engines and some pages wherein content is daily updated - despite submitting for indexing - changes are not getting reflected Site name is - http://www.mycarhelpline.com Have checked in robots, meta tags, url structure - all remains well intact. No unknown errors reports through Google webmaster Could someone advise - is it normal - due to name server and ip address change and expect to correct it automatically or am i missing something Kindly advise in . Thanks
Intermediate & Advanced SEO | | Modi0 -
Should I switch all paid-for directory backlinks to nofollow backlinks?
Hello Mozzers, I'm looking at a niche party services directory (b2c), established for over 8 years. They're not using nofollow tags on backlinks from their paid entries (free entries only get phone numbers and not backlinks). If they suddenly switch all the paid-for backlinks in their directory to nofollow backlinks, might that have some kind of negative impact. Switching sounds like the best way forward, but I want to avoid any unintended consequences. Perhaps I should only implement this change gradually? Thanks in advance, Luke Edited 30 minutes ago by Luke Rowland
Intermediate & Advanced SEO | | McTaggart0 -
Traffic impact from switching hosting.
Good Afternoon! Does anybody know what sort of impact I can expect to see from switching hosting? Not only that but how long it takes to come back from that sort of thing? Our website has steadily been dropping since I took it over about a month ago. I have been slowly, tediously trying to prune the bad stuff, and one of our issues is with out host. Any thoughts would be great! Thanks.
Intermediate & Advanced SEO | | HashtagHustler0 -
Is the <a data-uri="">link SEO friendly?</a>
We've earned a great link from a popular website but it is in a strange format: <a data-uri="http:;;;;;;;;www.domain.com;;;;" target="_blank">blue widgets</a> It is still visible as a link from the web browsers, but I was wondering how will it perform in terms of SEO visibility and crawabillity? Any ideas?
Intermediate & Advanced SEO | | MartinPanayotov
Thanks!
Martin0 -
Http and https duplicate content?
Hello, This is a quick one or two. 🙂 If I have a page accessible on http and https count as duplicate content? What about external links pointing to my website to the http or https page. Regards, Cornel
Intermediate & Advanced SEO | | Cornel_Ilea0 -
Http Response on bulk list
Do you know any tool that can find the http response code for a bulk list of urls?
Intermediate & Advanced SEO | | Melia0 -
One platform, multiple niche sites: Worth $60/mo so each site has different class C?
Howdy all, The short of it is that I currently run a very niche business directory/review website and am in the process of expanding the system to support running multiple sites out of the same database/codebase. In a normal setup I'd just run all the sites off of the same server with all of them sharing a single IP address, but thanks to the wonders of the cloud, it would be fairly simple for me to run each site on it's own server at a cost of about $60/mo/site giving each site a unique IP on a unique c-block (in many cases a unique a-block even.) The ultimate goal here is to leverage the authority I've built up for the one site I currently run to help grow the next site I launch, and repeat the process. The question is: Is the SEO-value that the sites can pass to each other worth the extra cost and management overhead? I've gotten conflicting answers on this topic from multiple people I consider pretty smart so I'd love to know what other people say.
Intermediate & Advanced SEO | | qurve0