Hundreds of thousands of 404's on expired listings - issue.
-
Hey guys,
We have a conundrum, with a large E-Commerce site we operate. Classified listings older than 45 days are throwing up 404's - hundreds of thousands, maybe millions. Note that Webmaster Tools peaks at 100,000.
Many of these listings receive links.
Classified listings that are less than 45 days show other possible products to buy based on an algorithm.
It is not possible for Google to crawl expired listings pages from within our site. They are indexed because they were crawled before they expired, which means that many of them show in search results.
-> My thought at this stage, for usability reasons, is to replace the 404's with content - other product suggestions, and add a meta noindex in order to help our crawl equity, and get the pages we really want to be indexed prioritised.
-> Another consideration is to 301 from each expired listing to the category heirarchy to pass possible link juice. But we feel that as many of these listings are findable in Google, it is not a great user experience.
-> Or, shall we just leave them as 404's? : google sort of says it's ok
Very curious on your opinions, and how you would handle this.
Cheers,
Croozie.
P.S I have read other Q & A's regarding this, but given our large volumes and situation, thought it was worth asking as I'm not satisfied that solutions offered would match our needs.
-
Wow! Thanks Ryan.
I'm sure it won't surprise you to know that I'm always reading eagerly when I see you respond to a question as well.
-
Thanks Ian, good to know
Again, good confirmation.
-
Hi Sha,
Spot on. Yes that was my original thinking, then I switched to the school of 200's with meta index's. But having you guys confirming this, makes me realise that doing 301's to the parent category is most certainly the way to go.
Permanently redirecting will have the added benefit of effectively 'de-indexing' the original classified's and of course throwing a ton of link juice over to the category levels.
What a wonderful, helpful community!
Many thanks,
Croozie.
-
Sha, your responses continuously offer outstanding actionable items which offer so much value. I love them so much as they offer such great ideas and demonstrate a lot of experience.
-
Hi Croozie,
Awesome work once again from Ryan!
Since your question feels like a request for suggestions on "how" to create a solution, just wanted to add the following.
When you say "classified listings" I hear "once off, here for a while, gone in 45 days content".
If that is the case, then no individual expired listing will ever be matched identically with another (unless it happens to be a complete duplicate of the original listing).
This would mean that it would certainly be relevant to send any expired listing to a higher order category page. If your site structure is such that you have a clear heirarchy, then this is very easy to do.
For example:
If your listing URL were something like http://www.mysite.com/listings/home/furniture/couches/couch-i-hate.php, then you can use URL rewrites to strip out the file name and 301 the listing to http://www.mysite.com/listings/home/furniture/couches/, which in most cases will offer a perfectly suitable alternative for the user.
There is another alternative you could consider if you have a search program built in - you could send the traffic to a relevant search. In the above example, mysite.com/search.php?s=couch.
Hope that helps,
Sha
-
We are now doing something similar with our site. We have several thousand products that have been discontinued and didn't think about how much link juice we were throwing away until we got Panda pounded. It's amazing how many things you find to fix when times get tough.
We started with our most popular discontinued products and are 301 redirecting them to either a new equivalent or the main category if no exact match can be found.
We are also going to be reusing the same product pages for annual products instead of creating new pages each year. Why waste all that link juice from past years?
-
If you perform a redirect, I recommend you offer a 301 header response, not a 200. The 301 response will let Google and others know the URL should be updated in their database. Google would then offer the new URL in search results. Additionally any link value can be properly forwarded to the new page.
-
Thanks Ryan,
Massive response! Awesome!
It's interesting that you talk a lot about the 301's.
Are you suggesting this would be far more preferable than simply producing a 200 status code page, listing product choices based on an algorithm - which we currently offer our customers for listings expired less than 45 days?
I suppose, to clarify, I'm worried that if we were to do that (produce 200 status code pages), then crawl equity would be reduced for Google, that we would be wasting a lot of their bandwidth on 200 status pages, when they could be better off crawling and indexing more recent pages.
Whereas with 301's to relevant products as you suggest, we solve that issue.
BTW, our 404 pages offer the usual navigation and search options.
Cheers,
Croozie.
-
Hi Croozie.
The challenge with your site is the volume of pages. Most large sites with 100k+ pages have huge SEO opportunities. Ideally you need a team which can manually review every page of your site to ensure it is optimized correctly. Such a team would be a large expense which many site owners choose to avoid. The problem is your site quality and SEO are negatively impacted.
Whenever a page is removed from your site or otherwise becomes unavailable, a plan should be in place PRIOR to removing the page. The plan should address the simple question: how will we handle traffic to the page whether it is from a search engine or a person who bookmarked the page or a link. The suggested answer is the same whether your site has 10 pages or a million pages:
- if the product is being replaced with a very similar product, or you have a very similar product, then you can choose to 301 the page to the new product. If the product is truly similar, then the 301 redirect is a win for everyone.
Example A: You offer a Casio watch model X1000. You stop carrying this watch and replace it with Casio watch model X1001. It is the same watch design but the new model has a slight variation such as a larger dial. Most users who were interested in the old page would be interested in the new page.
Example B: You offered the 2011 version of the Miami Dolphins T-shirt. It is now 2012 and you have the 2012 version of the shirt which is a different design. You can use a 301 to direct users to the latest design. Some users may be unhappy and want the old design, but it is still probably the right call for most users.
Example
You discontinue the Casio X1000 and do not have a very close replacement. You could 301 the page to the Casio category page, or you could let it 404.
The best thing to do in each case is to put on your user hat and ask yourself what would be the most helpful thing you can do to assist a person seeking the old content. There is absolutely nothing wrong with allowing a page to 404. It is a natural part of the internet.
One last point. Be sure your 404 page is optimized, especially considering how many 404s you present. The page should have the normal site navigation along with a search function. Help users find the content they seek.
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
-
International Targeting | Language > 'fa-ir' - no return tags
I see this error in search console :International Targeting | Language > 'fa-ir' - no return tagsURLs for your site and alternate URLs in 'fa-ir' that do not have return tags.and it is really increasingi do not know what is the problem and what I have done wrong? Originating URL Crawl date Alternate URL 1 /abadan/%D8%A2%D8%A8%D8%A7%D8%AF%D8%A7%D9%86/browse/vehicles/?place=8,541&v01=0,1&saveLoc=1
Intermediate & Advanced SEO | | divar11/16/16 http://divar.ir/
0 -
Community Discussion: Are You Optimizing Your Brand's Content for Featured Snippets?
My latest post on the Moz Blog, Featured Snippets: A Dead-Simple Tactic for Making, explores how to keep Featured Snippets once you have them. I'm curious to know how many brands are actively working to get in the answer box, and for those who are, what's been the results?
Intermediate & Advanced SEO | | ronell-smith2 -
Post migration issues - #11 + configuration issue
Hello Moz community. I'm keen to find out your experiences on the following: Have you ever experienced a migration whereby a large % of keywords are stuck in position #11 - post migration? The keywords do not move up or down (whilst competitors jump from 13 to 9 and vice versa) over a three month period. Please see the % difference in the attached e-mail. (sample 1,000 keyword terms) Question: Has anyone ever experienced this type of phenomenon before? If so - what was the root cause of this and did this happen post migration? What solution did you use to rectify this? Have you ever seen a cross-indexing issue between two domains (each domain serves a different purpose) post migration, which impacts the performance of the main brand domain? I will explain a little further - say you have www.example.com (brand site) and www.example-help.com (customer service site) and the day the brand website is migrated (same domain - just different file structure), www.example-help.com points to the same server that www.example.com is on (with a different file structure) and starts to inherit the legacy file structure. For example, the following is implemented on migration day: I will explain a little further - say you have www.example.com (brand site) and www.example-help.com (customer service site) and the day the brand website is migrated (same domain - just different file structure), www.example-help.com points to the same server that www.example.com is on (with a different file structure) and starts to inherit the legacy file structure. For example, the following is implemented on migration day: For example, the following is implemented on migration day: www.example.com/fr/widgets-purple => 301s to www.example.com/fr/widgets/purple But www.example-help.com now points to the same server where the customer service content is now hosted. So although the following is rendered: So although the following is rendered correctly: www.example-help.com/how-can-we-help We also have the following indexed in Google.fr - competing for the same keyword terms and the main brand website has dropped in rankings: www.example-help.com/fr/widgets-purple [legacy content from main brand website] Even when legacy content is 301 redirected from www.example-help.com to www.example.com, the authority isn't passed across and we now have www.example.com (as per Q1) a lot lower in Google than pre-migration. Question: Have you ever experienced a cross-indexing issue like above whereby Google potentially isn't passing authority across from legacy to the new setup? I'm very keen to hear your experiences on these two subjects and whether you have had similar problems on some of your domains. E0hbb
Intermediate & Advanced SEO | | SMVSEO0 -
Website with only a portion being 'mobile friendly' -- what to tell Google?
I have a website for desktop that does a lot of things, and have converted part of it do show pages in a mobile friendly format based on the users device. Not responsive design, but actual diff code with different formatting by mobile vs desktop--but each still share the same page url name. Google allows this approach. The mobile-friendly part of the site is not as extensive as desktop, so there are pages that apply to the desktop but not for mobile. So the functionality is limited some for mobile devices, and therefore some pages should only be indexed for desktop users. How should that page be handled for Google crawlers? If it is given a 404 not found for their mobile bot will Google properly still crawl it for the desktop, or will Google see that the url was flagged as 'not found' and not crawl it for the desktop? I asked a similar question yest, but it was not stated clearly. Thanks,Ted
Intermediate & Advanced SEO | | friendoffood0 -
How is Google's algorithm evolving in terms of DA vs PA value?
how is Google evolving in terms of value for DA vs PA? Is having a link from a DA 75 + PA 25 better than having a link from a DA 50 + PA 50, assuming such 2 websites are otherwise identical? I have a couple of .EDU backlinks where DA is around 80, though PA 1. Would be DA 40 with a PA 40 be more valuable? I hear Google is placing increasing value on the domain and less on the page authority.
Intermediate & Advanced SEO | | knielsen
Any insight appreciated thank you0 -
Wordpress.com content feeding into site's subdomain, who gets SEO credit?
I have a client who had created a Wordpress.com (not Wordpress.org) blog, and feeds blog posts into a subdomain blog.client-site.com. My understanding was that in terms of SEO, Wordpress.com would still get the credit for these posts, and not the client, but I'm seeing conflicting information. All of the posts are set with permalinks on the client's site, such as blog.client-site.com/name-of-post, and when I run a Google site:search query, all of those individual posts appear in the Google search listings for the client's domain. Also, I've run a marketing.grader.com report, and these same results are seen. Looking at the source code on the page, however, I see this information which leads me to believe the content is being credited to, and fed in from, Wordpress.com ('client name' altered for privacy): href="http://client-name.files.wordpress.com/2012/08/could_you_survive_a_computer_disaster.jpeg">class="alignleft size-thumbnail wp-image-2050" title="Could_you_survive_a_computer_disaster" src="http://client-name.files.wordpress.com/2012/08/could_you_survive_a_computer_disaster.jpeg?w=150&h=143" I'm looking to provide a recommendation to the client on whether they are ok to continue moving forward with this current setup, or whether we should port the blog posts over to a subfolder on their primary domain www.client-site.com/blog and use Wordpress.org functionality, for proper SEO. Any advice?? Thank you!
Intermediate & Advanced SEO | | grapevinemktg0 -
Include Cross Domain Canonical URL's in Sitemap - Yes or No?
I have several sites that have cross domain canonical tags setup on similar pages. I am unsure if these pages that are canonicalized to a different domain should be included in the sitemap. My first thought is no, because I should only include pages in the sitemap that I want indexed. On the other hand, if I include ALL pages on my site in the sitemap, once Google gets to a page that has a cross domain canonical tag, I'm assuming it will just note that and determine if the canonicalized page is the better version. I have yet to see any errors in GWT about this. I have seen errors where I included a 301 redirect in my sitemap file. I suspect its ok, but to me, it seems that Google would rather not find these URL's in a sitemap, have to crawl them time and time again to determine if they are the best page, even though I'm indicating that this page has a similar page that I'd rather have indexed.
Intermediate & Advanced SEO | | WEB-IRS0 -
To subnav or NOT to subnav... that's my question.... :)
We are working on a new website that is golf related and wondering about whether or not we should set up a subnavigation dropdown menu from the main menu. For example: GOLF PACKAGES
Intermediate & Advanced SEO | | JamesO
>> 2 Round Packages
>> 3 Round Packages
>> 4 Round Packages
>> 5 Round Packages GOLF COURSES
>> North End Courses
>> Central Courses
>> South End Courses This would actually be very beneficial to our users from a usability standpoint, BUT what about from an SEO standpoint? Is diverting all the link juice to these inner pages from the main site navigation harmful? Should we just create a page for GOLF PACKAGES and break it down on that page?0