URL redirect question
-
Hi all,
Just wondering whether anybody has experience of CMSs that do a double redirect and what affect that has on rankings.
here's the example
/page.htm is 301 redirected to /page.html which is 301 redirected to /page
As Google has stated that 301 redirects pass on benefits to the new page, would a double redirect do the same?
Looking forward to hearing your views.
-
15% is in the original algorithm, it may have changed but I doubt if much, if you read the algorithm its a pretty well thought out figure of decay.
I have seen the video and it is not very clear at all, maybe on purpose.
What he says is that a 301 loses as much PR as a link, I agree. all requests lose 15%,
You can't have a 301 without first going though a link. I think where people are getting confused is they think a 301 replaces a link request, it dose not, it is an extra request.
If you read the comments of the video and much discussion around the web you will see what I mean.
-
hmm, is there a source for the 15% statement? I never found anything clear about it, but here matt cutts seems to say that the pagerank dilution is a myth: http://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=player_embedded&v=Filv4pP-1nw
-
That's not what Google said, they said that a 301 redirect loses as much as a link, from the original algorithm that was 15%
so you have link to page.htm you loose 15%
it is then redirected to page.html, loose 15% of what left
it is then 301 redirected to page again loose 15% of what is left.
You are making 3 requests each loses 15%
With Bing they will only pass link juice though 1 redirect
http://thatsit.com.au/seo/reports/violation/the-redirection-response-results-in-another-redirection
-
I look at it like this -
1. Redirects are an overhead and mass redirects with redirects are inefficient.
2. Absolute pure link value is not passed on so further redirects have a little more clouding effect.
3. Bad housekeeping. Imagine the root htaccess has a redirect to a URL that is redirected in a sub-directory. It starts to be rather messy.
-
ah okay, then i wouldn't worry about it too much. two 301s is definitely no problem.
-
Thanks Philipp, we haven't done it by choice - it is a CMS quirk unfortunately.
-
two redirects are no problem, though you could redirect both these pages to the final /page instead of going through the intermediary /page.html
here is matt cutts about how many 301 you can chain together: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=r1lVPrYoBkA
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
-
What to do with existing URL when replatforming and new URL is the same?
We are changing CMS from WordPress to Uberflip. If there is a URL that remains the same I believe we should not create a redirect. However, what happens to the old page? Should it be deleted?
Technical SEO | | maland0 -
Is 301 redirect the only way when using Vanity URLs?
We have been using vanity urls for some of our pages. Mostly the pages that have a vanity URL have a long URL length. But now the problem is, the vanity URL is getting displayed on the search engine when the particular keyword related to the page is entered. I checked the google search console, the vanity URL is indexed and the original URL remains unindexed. What should I do? Is adding 301 redirect to the vanity URLs are solution? Since some of vanity URLs are not redirecting to the original. Some of the original pages are not getting traffic. Also, can using canonical tag help?
Technical SEO | | tejasbansode0 -
Just saw a competitor jump in rank by double digits, questioning my url structure choice now.
Currently I have for our big keyword oursite.com/big-keyword/ and clicking on a material type will be oursite.com/big-keyword/material-type/ Our competition has **theirsite.com/big-keyword/ **and when you click on their material type **theirsite.com/material-type-big-keyword/ ** The also have 20 some pages, while we have around 652 as a eCommerce site as well, not sure why they jumped so high in rankings, while their backlink structure is so small still and they have a DA half of ours. I'm in the middle of a site redesign and very close to restructuring the urls the way they have it, since it really seems to have worked well. How do you feel about that?
Technical SEO | | Deacyde0 -
Removed URLs
Hi all, We have recently removed 200+ articles from our blog. However, those links are still being shown on Google weeks after their removal. In there a way to speed up the process? What effect will this have on our SEO ranking?
Technical SEO | | businessowner0 -
Canonical Expert question!
Hello, I am looking for some help here with an estate agent property web site. I recently finished the MoZ crawling report and noticed that MoZ sees some pages as duplicate, mainly from pages which list properties as page 1,2,3 etc. Here is an example: http://www.xxxxxxxxx.com/property-for-rent/london/houses?page=2
Technical SEO | | artdivision
http://www.xxxxxxxxx.com/property-for-rent/london/houses?page=3 etc etc Now I know that the best practise says I should set a canonical url to this page:
http://www.xxxxxxxxx.com/property-for-rent/london/houses?page=all but here is where my problem is. http://www.xxxxxxxxx.com/property-for-rent/london/houses?page=1 contains good written content (around 750 words) before the listed properties are displayed while the "page=all" page do not have that content, only the properties listed. Also http://www.xxxxxxxxx.com/property-for-rent/london/houses?page=1 is similar with the originally designed landing page http://www.xxxxxxxxx.com/property-for-rent/london/houses I would like yoru advise as to what is the best way to can url this and sort the problem. My original thoughts were to can=url to this page http://www.xxxxxxxxx.com/property-for-rent/london/houses instead of the "page=all" version but your opinion will be highly appreciated.0 -
Rel Canonical question
Hi: I got a report indication 17 rel canonical notices. What does this mean in simple language and how do i go about fixing things?
Technical SEO | | Shaaps0 -
Is this dangerous (a content question)
Hi I am building a new shop with unique products but I also want to offer tips and articles on the same topic as the products (fishing). I think if was to add the articles and advice one piece at a time it would look very empty and give little reason to come back very often. The plan, therefore, is to launch the site pulling articles from a number of article websites - with the site's permission. Obviously this would be 100% duplicate content but it would make the user experience much better and offer added value to my site as people are likely to keep returning even when not in the mood to purchase anything; it also offers the potential for people to email links to friends etc. note: over time we will be adding more unique content and slowly turning off the pulled articled. Anyway, from an seo point of view I know the duplicate content would harm the site but if I was to tell google not to index the directory and block it from even crawling the directory would it still know there is duplicate content on the site and apply the penalty to the non duplicate pages? I'm guessing no but always worth a second opinion. Thanks Carl
Technical SEO | | Grumpy_Carl0