Well done, good point on pref setting in WMT. Thanks,

OK Ryan, you don't sleep and that was funny ;).

Thanks for this Alan, I use Linux / Apache but having the IE info is a big help. Usually have Chrome or Firefox up, but some real estate sites here only use IE.

I shot you a PM. Just dont want the other guys info out. If it was my site and I had full control would tell all. Sha got one too. Thanks

I shot you a PM. Just dont want the other guys info out. If it was my site and I had full control would tell all. Sha got one too. Thanks

We are linux on all though. So the .htaccess file is the bomb with a 301 and we follow up with setting preference in Google webmaster tools.

Unfortunately, the other developer controls all. We develop a set of sites that are essentially micro sites that advertise particular facets of our clients professional practice. With our sites when we have the main site and the micro sites, we make the 301 change in the .htaccess and then set the preference with Google per webmaster tools. We look first to see where the page authority lies and redirect from weak to strong if just for www/non www. With a new TLD, obviously, it is from old to new.

I want a sure way to know this ...person....did what they are telling their client they did. It does not appear so. With ours when we do a site:OurSite we get what we assumed on every page of Google search. With this one it is four pages with the 13 www and 20 non www. Some www urls resolve to the non and some do not. When I look in OSE, I see where there is mention of a redirect from www to non www, and the non www all with PA of 1, DA of 15. With www, PA is 25 for home page.

Is my assumption that if a 301 was done in .htaccess, there should be no www showing in Google Site:?

Thanks

no .htaccess file access.......hard to even get to site pages to place links to microsites.

I will PM the url. Thanks Sha

You are correct, I want to know did this other developer really do a 301 in the .htaccess file that will allow all weight to inure to one or the other url.

no .htaccess file access.......hard to even get to site pages to place links to microsites.

I will PM the url. Thanks Sha

You are correct, I want to know did this other developer really do a 301 in the .htaccess file that will allow all weight to inure to one or the other url.

no .htaccess file access.......hard to even get to site pages to place links to microsites.

I will PM the url. Thanks Sha

You are correct, I want to know did this other developer really do a 301 in the .htaccess file that will allow all weight to inure to one or the other url.

Ok, I know it has been asked, answered, and re-asked but I am going to ask for a specific reason. As you know, anyone who is a graphic designer or web developer is also an expert in SEO....Right??? 
I am dealing with a client who is clinging to a developer but wants us to do the SEO on a myriad of sites. All connect to his main site via links, etc. The main site was just redeveloped by a developer who claims extensive SEO knowledge. The client who referred me to them is getting over twenty times the organic clients they are and is in a JV with the new client. Soooo, I want to show them once and for all they are wrong on the www. versus non-www.

When I do a Site:NewClient.com in Google I get a total of 13 www.newclient.com url's and 20 newclient.com url's without the www. Oddly, none are dupes of the other. So, where the www.NewClient/toy-boat/ is there, the other might be non www.  NewClient/toy-boat/sailing-green/

Even the contact page is in the www.NewClient/contact versus the non www of NewClient/Contact-us/

But, both pages seem to resolve to the non www. (A note here is that I originally instructed the designer to do non www to www. because the page authority was on the www.NewClient and he did opposite.

With pages that are actually PDF files, if you try to use the www.NewClient/CoolGuy.pdf it comes up 404.

When I check our sites, using Site:We-Build-Better.com ours return all www.We-Build-better/ url's.

So, any other advice on how to insure these correct or incorrect? Oddly, we have discovered that sometimes in OSE, even with a correct canonical redirect it shows one without authority and the other with....we have contacted support.

Come on mozzers, hook a brother up!

EGOL - I always appreciate your answers.

A question arises with this: If NearlyKeyword.com purchases Keyword.com and 301's each url to the new site URL's (Keyword.com redirects now to NearlyKeyword.com) does it increase the aggregate value in a one to one addition assuming all links and content are different (obviously this is a stretch and there are other factors). If no, then with two similar ECommerce sites as above, similar content, similar on site optimization, etc. what would one transfer to the other? Would it even be a 5% increase in domain or page rank?

If the Domain name is the only change and there is a cost that would not be recouped for say 3 to 4 years, is it even a reasonable idea? Could they not insure that they have good keyword use in the urls and spend the money on other SEO, etc. and be better served?

I do think the keyword domains rank a little easier for exact match queries, but have not seen a significant conversion increase one to the other when I am comparing multiple sites under my management all targeting the same keywords.

Good question. Good answer EGOL.

We did a non E commerce site in late July/early August. Client had home page PA of 42 and DA of 38. This was to an entirely new domain. It took about 3 - 4 weeks and he is at same as before. (Not always the case, but this was 99.9%)

I would make sure that in the changeover, if someone new is handling new domain they have correctly handled the canonical redirect. Especially if there is any issue around web site and compensation, etc.

Make sure you do the url to url wherever possible. If you don't, you won't know in a couple of weeks based on my experience. (One of the best pieces of SEO advice ever came about that very issue. When we went back in and changed each url to 301 within days we saw DA and PA go up!). 
I look forward to hearing your progress.

Robert

Good question Bonprix. My most recent experience was with a law firm that had a previous site several years ago and 301'd and then hired a developer recently to build a new site. Due to change in url structure and menus, etc. it was necessary to 301 from the one they had to the new. I have no answer on link juice other than thinking it through a bit. If the first redirect was set up several years ago and the new one is recent, I do not think you will see to much of a loss assuming it is done correctly. Here are my suggestions:

If using a CMS, do not use an extension and instead use .htaccess file. Here is tutorial suggested in Google webmaster tools: http://httpd.apache.org/docs/2.0/howto/htaccess.html

Make sure you do a 301 for each url and not domain to domain.

I would then go into webmaster tools and let Google know which domain you prefer from a canonical point of view. Here is the link for that: http://www.google.com/support/webmasters/bin/answer.py?answer=44231

If you do all of this you should be able to capture as much of the link juice as possible.  I also noted recently that a client's developer had done a 301 redirect for the canonical and chose to redirect the www to the non www. The non had a PA of 1 for the homepage and the www had a PA of 27 for the homepage. If he had simply redirected it the opposite way, he would not be waiting or worrying about link juice. So check that rel=canon is there and check each domain for PA so that you have best outcome.

Good Luck