Is this a Correct Time to Use 302 Redirects?
-
Hi Mozzers!
We are going through a rebranding process, and as of this morning we have 3 domains, all with identical content.
For example (not real domain names):
www.fantastic.com
www.fantasticfireworks.com
www.fireworks.comWe are using 3 domains to ease the rebranding transition.
We currently only want people to visit 'www.fantastic.com,' and if they visit the other 2 domains we want them redirected.
Since we will be using these other domains eventually, should we use 302 redirects instead of 301s? The other domains are new and do not have any domain authority or sites linking in, so we do not need to worry about link juice.
Does it really matter what type of redirect we use?
Thanks!
-
I'm with Highland on this one. Once your new sites are up and running submit them via GWT to ensure that they get found.
301 for now.
-
Shouldn't have any negative effects. If you want to make the sites live I would create the sites and then link to them. The spiders should do the rest.
-
Hmm, that was my first instinct, but I don't want to hinder the new sites in any way when we use them later.
Would using a 301 redirect now have any negative effect after we delete it and want to use the domain?
-
I would still 301 the domains. 302s are a dubious use because the HTTP standard lists them as "temporary" (which means... what?). A 301 is considered permanent. All the use cases for 302s as a SEO tool (i.e. localized subdomains) seems to have fallen by the wayside as Google now only indexes the target site, not the 302.
It's likely that Google now treats 302 like 301 for indexation purposes (a 302 is not a real page anyways). There were serious problems years ago (see 302 hijacking) when they didn't. I wouldn't take any chances, however, and I would use a 301, which is well known to work.
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
-
Redirects Being Removed...
Hi We have a team in France who deal with the backend of the site, only problem is it's not always SEO friendly. I have lots of 404's showing in webmaster tools and I know some of them have previously had redirects. If we update a URL on the site, any links pointing to it on the website are updated straight away to point to the most up to date URL - so the user doesn't have to go through a redirect. However, the team would see this as the redirect not being 'used' after about 30 days and remove it from the database - so this URL no longer has any redirects pointing to it. My question is, surely this is bad for SEO? However I'm a little unsure as they aren't actually going through the redirect. But somewhere in cyber space the authority of this page must drop? Any advice is welcome 🙂
Intermediate & Advanced SEO | | BeckyKey0 -
Is this correct?
I noticed Moz using the following for its homepage Is this best practice though? The reason I ask is that, I use and I've been reading this page by Google http://googlewebmastercentral.blogspot.co.uk/2013/04/5-common-mistakes-with-relcanonical.html 5 common mistakes with rel=canonical Mistake 2: Absolute URLs mistakenly written as relative URLs
Intermediate & Advanced SEO | | Bio-RadAbsThe tag, like many HTML tags, accepts both relative and absolute URLs. Relative URLs include a path “relative” to the current page. For example, “images/cupcake.png” means “from the current directory go to the “images” subdirectory, then to cupcake.png.” Absolute URLs specify the full path—including the scheme like http://. Specifying (a relative URL since there’s no “http://”) implies that the desired canonical URL is http://example.com/example.com/cupcake.html even though that is almost certainly not what was intended. In these cases, our algorithms may ignore the specified rel=canonical. Ultimately this means that whatever you had hoped to accomplish with this rel=canonical will not come to fruition.
0 -
Redirecting old mobile site
Hi All, Trying to figure out the best option here. I have a website that used to utilize a separate mobile site (m.xyz.com) but now utilizes responsive design. What is the best way to deal with that old mobile site? De-index? 301 redirect back to the main site in the rare case someone finds the m. site somewhere? THanks! Ricky
Intermediate & Advanced SEO | | RickyShockley0 -
Redirect ot new domain
Hello, Can someone give me advice on this specific situation: For now we have a website www.website.com/ Because of some specific business situation we want to move to .ca version but also we want to keep website.com - for U.S customers. Here's how I imagined to do this: 301 Redirect from www.website.com to website.ca. Because at this time website.com redirects to www.website.com I would remove the redirect and just keep it like website.com (so this will be new domain). Is this is the right solution? Regards, Nenad
Intermediate & Advanced SEO | | Uniline0 -
Is it a problem to use a 301 redirect to a 404 error page, instead of serving directly a 404 page?
We are building URLs dynamically with apache rewrite.
Intermediate & Advanced SEO | | lcourse
When we detect that an URL is matching some valid patterns, we serve a script which then may detect that the combination of parameters in the URL does not exist. If this happens we produce a 301 redirect to another URL which serves a 404 error page, So my doubt is the following: Do I have to worry about not serving directly an 404, but redirecting (301) to a 404 page? Will this lead to the erroneous original URL staying longer in the google index than if I would serve directly a 404? Some context. It is a site with about 200.000 web pages and we have currently 90.000 404 errors reported in webmaster tools (even though only 600 detected last month).0 -
Danger in using utm_source and utm_medium to track tens of thousands of cross domain redirects
We just merged with another company and are redirecting their domains (competitive/similar content) to our own. We'll have several domains, redirecting (301) several hundred thousand URL's to our domain (not all the same page, very unique mappings). Will adding utm_source, et al parameters to the URL's have a negative impact on how google transfers value to the pages based on the redirect authority passed? Any points of view? We have a self referencing canonical, but given that we have 90 million pages on the current domain (and climbing), seems like cleanest approach would be to not use redirects. Thanks, Jeff
Intermediate & Advanced SEO | | jrjames830 -
Drupal Alinks is this good to use?
Hi, https://drupal.org/project/alinks We have 1,000's of Soft links created like this in 1,000's of pages Each page 1 to 2 links that are soft links would this be fine? SEO would this be good or should we remove it Thanks
Intermediate & Advanced SEO | | mtthompsons0