Welcome to the Q&A Forum

Both of those pages have canonical tags that point to https://lurento.com/city/ which 404s out.... I would start there.

For anyone who may care - this appears to have worked out really well.  So far way better than expected.  Very competitive market and we are on page 1 for most of our most important phrasing.... cool.

No problem at all

The vast majority of my clients are hotels.  Because of this I deal with rebranding all of the time (a property switching brands, a branded property dropping the brand to become independent etc...)  If you feel comfortable leaving your old and new domains I would be happy to take a look for you.  As Ikkie said, it could be any number of things.

I would say--and many may disagree with me--that if you are building a directory to honestly help users than that is great.  However, to do so on a subdomain of your company's website is very likely going to seem fishy.  I wouldn't do that, personally.

Yeah, trust me, I have strongly advised against it.  They don't use us for design, just marketing, and the company they use for design (while, admittedly, very, very good) was almost done with this before we were brought in to the loop about the redesign.  Down the road I hope to convince them to add more pages etc... but for now this is what I have to work with.  I am hoping the rel=canonical will take care of the duplicate content issues while perhaps giving a bit more authority to the content sections of the one page design.  This is something I have not done before, however, and I wanted to bounce it off my peers.  Thank you for the response!  I'll come back and post how it goes in a few months.

I'm sorry if I am giving bad news but 'some good links' just doesn't mean much.  What do your competitors have?  How relevant is your content?  There is just a lot more to it than links.....  give some more info and we can all look in to it.

I have a client who is moving to a one page website design.  So, content from the inner pages is being condensed in to sections on the 'home' page.  There will be a navigation that anchor links to each relevant section.  I am wondering if I should leave the old pages and use rel=canonical to point them to their relevant sections on the new 'home' page rather than 301 them.  Thoughts?

Just curious... if you uninstall the plugin does the page load speed return to what it was before the install?

High high PA and lower DA is simply because the DA is an average of each page's PA (at least that's how I understand it).  It may not be quite that simple with certain page's weighing more in the average but I believe that is the simplest way to look at it.

In my personal market it is very hard, if not impossible to get links to any page other than the home page so I use very thought out internal linking structures to spread authority throughout the website.  However, I do not believe I have ever seen a website who's Home Page Authority was not considerably higher than the over all DA - for instance, the site I am working on right now has a DA of 59 and a PA (on the home page) of 65 while the PA of one of the internal pages is 43...

Question - when you took them over did you get all three websites?

paragonbuildinggroup.com/, paragonroofinggroup.com and paragonpaintinggroup.com

There is some pretty bad duplicate content between the building group site and the roofing group site and with the sites interlinking as they do, I would say Google noticed pretty quick.

I know you are limited as to what can be done but I would say explain to your client that each website needs to have content relevant only to what that particular website is offering - no duplicate content.  If the building website wants to touch on roofing then link to the other website - that is fine.  Honestly, I would personally rather see all of this put together on one website with different sections for the different services - then the other domain names could just 301 to the relevant sections of the mother website.  Also - links.  the building group website needs them badly.  As far as what happened - there is no way to be 100% sure but I am guessing an algorithmic penalty - the way the three websites (that I found, there could be more) are set up could certainly look like an attempt to manipulate search results to the algorithms.  Honestly... it probably was an attempt to manipulate search results, an attempt by the last vendor.  Not a penalty for the duplicate content, mind you - but the duplicate content and interlinking etc... were probably signals that all added up to "hey, these websites are not following guide lines"  this was just a quick look though - I could be wrong.

Although I am certainly not saying that your proposed method is 'wrong' in the slightest... I would be more inclined to take advantage of the year's worth of authority on your old domain.

Surfboards and Paddle boards are certainly similar enough - it isn't like you are branching out in to game systems or lawn mowers.

I would create a paddle board section on the current website and optimize that section for the paddle board terms.

That is just me, though.  I see no issue with your proposed method except for having a new domain with no links and no time under its belt.

Cheers.

Without an in-depth look into your analytics the information you have provided leads me to believe the following is occurring since you specifically mention that you are not running any ppc ads.  When Google Analytics is reporting on source/medium the value that is shown direct / none of course refers to any visit that has been tracking that they could not identify a referring domain that started the visit.  There are numerous reasons as to why a referring domain can be lost for a visitor

1.Somebody really did type in the address or used a bookmark to get to your page

2.They clicked on a link in an email from a non web based email clients (typically Outlook, Eudora, Thunderbird, etc.)

3.The link was in a document

4.The link originates at a secure (https:) page and your page is not secure (http)

5.Spiders and bots were working from a list of URLs from a previous crawl (this one mostly applies to server logs, rarely to JavaScript based tracking)

6.Spiders and bots may be programmed to suppress the referrer information (this one mostly applies to server logs, rarely to JavaScript based tracking)

7.The visitor is using IE and the link to your site was in Javascript.  Javascript links to your site include those that open your site in a new browser window, or any kind of javascript redirect.  Many banners’ links are programmed this way.

8.The visitor is using IE and the link to your site is from within a Flash application (there are a lot of ways to do this in Flash so there may be exceptions I would always recommend adding a Ad Campaign tracking variable to any CTA)

9.Your landing page redirects to another page via a 301 permanent server-side redirect

10.The link was on an intranet or some other web site behind a proxy or corporate gateway that was set up to strip referrers from requests

11.The visitor has made changes to their browser that suppresses the referrer information

12.Another site has put your page content into an iFrame and coded the frame to suppress the referrer, in order to make it difficult for you to find out who is framing your content

I think you would be fine to change it so you have the correct spelling - just be sure to 301 redirect the old file name to the new file name after to change it.

Hello Shelly, I have never seen anything that lead me to believe that secure pages receive more inherent trust just because they are secure. A couple of years ago Matt Cutts was asked a similar question (SEL or SEJ... my memory is failing me on where I read it) and his answer alluded to the fact that they are treated the same, just pick one and stick with it. Besides that, I can’t remember the last time I noticed a secure page ranking high in the SERPs at all, if ever… admittedly, I am sure there are far less secure pages… Anyway, I do not believe a secure page receives more initial trust just because it is secure.

My two cents,

Vizergy

We have completed redesigns like what you have described (in your responses as well as your original post) and for one in particular - even with far better optimization in place after the redesign we had some rankings drop for a couple of weeks before rankings not only returned but improved over what they had been.  It was like the redesign was so drastic that Google pushed us back just to see what was going on - although I chalked it up to being the amount of time it probably took for all of the redirects to be recognized...

OSE doesn't operate in real time unless I am very much mistaken.  I believe it crawls and updates every week... or maybe month... so you could have had those links when they last crawled but have since lost them.  Or... I am wrong.. and if I am wrong I have no doubt that I will be corrected

Would it be possible to just add the new property to the old page without removing the old property?  Just add the new one above?

Sorry if this sounds stupid but the old page will already have trust etc...

I'm sorry if I am giving bad news but 'some good links' just doesn't mean much.  What do your competitors have?  How relevant is your content?  There is just a lot more to it than links.....  give some more info and we can all look in to it.

If, as Collin says, you are not in to deep you could change them and 301 the old to the new and then going forward you could just use the new format.