Few ways to look at it I guess...

1. PageRank is a shaky metrics to use for analysis any way.

2. Its an easily achieved, followed link simply by shedding some cash.

3. Its $149 or $299 - how does that sit vs, your marketing/link acqusition budget as a total? what is normal cost per acquisition? I don't mean in terms of buying links directly, but producing  "stuff"  that helps you to acquire them.

In essence, can you acquire as good if not better links for a lot cheaper? If so....save your money, invest it elsewhere.

If budget existed for directory listings I would still pop myself in there personally.

No, I don't need to watch the videos I've seen and heard that stuff before. I'm just saying I don't buy the fact that blue-widgets vs. blue_widgets has any impact whatsoever on a sites ability to rank for "blue widgets".

Maybe a few years ago, but not today.

Hence I see no value in risking link equity to change from underscores to hyphens.

Show me some examples where you think it impacts rankings....

**sorry didn't mean to sound arsey there I just don't think one variation its necessarily better than the other when it comes to rankings. I really do think it purely boils down to preference of how it looks.

Ben

I was considering doing the same thing a couple of weeks back and decided the change wasn't worth it.

1. Hyphenated URLs do generally speaking just look nicer, but how likely is that to impact things like UX or CTR rates? (unlikely). It certainly doesn't impact rankings - just do some generic searches and you'll find a real mixed bag of hyphens and underscored URLs in the listings.

2. If your underscored URLs have been around for a long time then chances are you have some link equity built up into at least some of those URLs. 301 redirecting from underscored to hyphenated versions of the same content is an  unnecessary risk to some of that link equity.

If I had a relatively new site, low traffic from organic search and no real link equity then I probably would take the plunge and update from underscores to hyphens, but it would be an almost cosmetic move based on my own personal preferences. In your case I would advise against updating the URLs unless the domain has no pre-existing equity to give up.

Ben

Thanks this is the kind of 2nd opinion I was looking for

Hi Ryan,

Sure, I've had 302's in place for years on some domains myself but this was more a question around two parts I guess:

1. Has anyone seen it potentially have an impact to the site the 302 is pointing at?
2. Has anyone found that having a 302 in place for a long period of time then has an impact on that domains ability to get re-picked up and indexed should the 302 become a 200 again.

If you take the "best practice" conversation out of the equation then my own personal view is there is no real risk in having a 302 in place for a considerable period of time.

Ben

I know what best practice is folks - the question is "how long is it safe to use a 302 temporary redirect?"

Hi All,

Lets assume there is site A and site B, both sites are live on the internet today as standalone businesses, but they sell very similar products.

Site B has built up some link equity and will eventually become the domain for site A due to an organisational re-brand.

For the time being however site A will remain, but site B needs to disappear temporarily, but not lose the link equity which has been built up against it.

My current thinking is to 302 redirect site B to site A such that users and search bots accessing site B will be redirected to site A whilst leaving the link equity that exists against site B fully intact and allowing us to continue to grow it should we wish to.

The question is, does anybody have a view on how long it is safe to use a 302 temporary redirect for? i.e., is 8-10 months to long.

Thanks,

Ben

I was considering doing the same thing a couple of weeks back and decided the change wasn't worth it.

1. Hyphenated URLs do generally speaking just look nicer, but how likely is that to impact things like UX or CTR rates? (unlikely). It certainly doesn't impact rankings - just do some generic searches and you'll find a real mixed bag of hyphens and underscored URLs in the listings.

2. If your underscored URLs have been around for a long time then chances are you have some link equity built up into at least some of those URLs. 301 redirecting from underscored to hyphenated versions of the same content is an  unnecessary risk to some of that link equity.

If I had a relatively new site, low traffic from organic search and no real link equity then I probably would take the plunge and update from underscores to hyphens, but it would be an almost cosmetic move based on my own personal preferences. In your case I would advise against updating the URLs unless the domain has no pre-existing equity to give up.

Ben

Few ways to look at it I guess...

1. PageRank is a shaky metrics to use for analysis any way.

2. Its an easily achieved, followed link simply by shedding some cash.

3. Its $149 or $299 - how does that sit vs, your marketing/link acqusition budget as a total? what is normal cost per acquisition? I don't mean in terms of buying links directly, but producing  "stuff"  that helps you to acquire them.

In essence, can you acquire as good if not better links for a lot cheaper? If so....save your money, invest it elsewhere.

If budget existed for directory listings I would still pop myself in there personally.