How are Server side redirects perceived compared to direct links (on a Directory site)
-
Hi,
Im creating some listings for a client on a relevant b2b directory (a good quality directory)
I asked if the links are 'followed' or no 'followed' and they said they are 'server side redirects' so no direct links.
Does anyone know how these are likely to be perceived by Google ?
All BEst
Dan
-
Hi Dirk
I sure did and thank you both for your help
All Best
Dan
-
Hi Dan,
You already got an excellent reply to this question from Andy
Dirk
-
No worries Dan
-Andy
-
Great thanks for confirming that Andy !
Many Thanks
Dan
-
For this type of link, yes, that can be a little risky as it's a full page redirect (probably seen as a 301) rather than a textual link.
If it does turn out to be nofollowed (I would need to see the link to confirm) then it's a little different as link juice doesn't flow and that then satisfies Google, but I would err on the side of caution. Unless there is a good reason to pay for a premium link (more traffic, etc), then I wouldn't really bother.
-Andy
-
Cool thanks for confirming that Andy!
They also offer a premium listing so i presume those ones may be perceived as paid links and potentially be risky if done the same way ?
All Best
Dan
-
Thanks Dirk
If so then that should be fine for an unpaid listing but they also offer a premium listing so i presume those ones may be perceived as paid links and potentially be risky ?
All BEst
Dan
-
Dirk is correct - these are seen as a 'followed' link.
I have read conflicting reports on how these are viewed from an SEO perspective, but I think that the general feeling is "don't worry" as it is a one off, it's a niche directory and is just going to form a part of your overall link profile. If every link was the same from the same type of site and followed the same format, then Google might see something unnatural.
Don't sweat it
-Andy
-
If I understand it well it will be something like directory.com/listing.htm links to directory.com/companypage which is then redirected to www.company.com (so users actually never see directory.com/companypage).
I guess this type of link will be considered as a "follow" type link as server side redirects pass link juice to the destination (unless they block directory.com/companypage for indexing with their robots.txt and/or they put a nofollow on all the links to directory.com/companypage)
Dirk
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
-
Our site recently switched from http to https. Do I still need to setup a redirect for the incoming links pointing to http?
Our site recently switched from http to https. If you type in the http://www.websitename.com then it will automatically go to https://www.websitename.com ... my question is... do I still need to create a redirect in the htaccess file to ensure we don't lose all the links currently pointing to the http version of the website?
Technical SEO | | ninel_P0 -
How do I direct users to site page when they search vanity URL?
My company runs a contest via a landing page on our website. The full URL to the landing page is rather long so we have a vanity URL that we use for advertising purposes. I have a 301 on the vanity URL to the landing page URL so people visiting it directly end up where they should just fine. But if a user goes to Google and types the vanity URL into the search bar, the landing page is nowhere to be found in the results. What do I need to do to get the landing page to show in results when people search the vanity URL?
Technical SEO | | jarjarjarvis0 -
Will adding a mini directory to our blog with lots of outgoing no follow links harm our authority and context
We are an adventure travel tour company, who run hiking, kayaking, biking adventures in several countries. We have a travel tour operator website with a blog in a sub folder of the site. We want to add a section/category in the blog itself with a hiking club mini directory, that lists all hiking clubs in 1 or 2 specific countries. The reason we want to do this is because the people searching online for these clubs are our target market and potential clients. We hope to rank for some of these searches, and encourage interest in our blog/website in the process. We also want the potential to build relationships with these clubs. The question I want to ask is: if we add say 100 to 200 listings, and make all outgoing links no follow, will this harm our page authority, reputation with SE's or pose any other risk for our site. The other question is, do you think that this will dilute the context of our content - as its slightly different in context to the rest of our site content. Are we better to set up a separate site for this purpose.
Technical SEO | | activenz1 -
Removing links from another site
Hello, Some site that I have never been able to access as it is always down has over 3,000 links to my website. They disappeared the other week and our search queries dramatically improved but now they are back again in Google Webmaster and we have dropped again.I have contacted the site owner and got no response and I have also put in a removal form (though I am not sure this fits for that) and asked Google to remove as they have been duplicating our content also. It was in my pending section but has now disappeared.This links are really damaging our search and the site isnt even there. Do I have to list all 3,000 links in the link removal to Google or is there another way I can go about telling them the issue.Appreciate any help on this
Technical SEO | | luwhosjack0 -
Can I reduce link count by no following links?
Hi, A large number of my pages contain over 100 links. This is due to a large drop down navigation which is on every page. To reduce my link count could I just no follow these navigation links or would I have to remove the navigation completely?
Technical SEO | | moesian0 -
Mini site links?
Can anyone point me to information about the "mini" site links on the Google search results or tell me how to get them set up? These aren't the full site links that show 3 by 3 under the first listing but small text links that appear for certain results. (See attached image for reference.) Are these something that can controlled/requested? NAj6E.png
Technical SEO | | DVanSchepen0 -
Is it possibly to use anything besides a 302 re-direct when your doing a re-direct for someone to login?
Hopefully this makes sense. So I am working on a site that uses a 302 re-direct for logins. As in it goes from a profile page to the login via a re-direct, most of the time I see sites use this as a meta refresh, but in this case I wasn't sure. Obviously when I run a crawl diagnostic I'm getting a lot of errors as in over 100. Now I know there is no link juice with this, but I was just wondering what other people thought on using 302's for logins? Thanks
Technical SEO | | kateG12980 -
Is a 302 redirect the correct redirect from a root URL to a detail page?
Hi guys The widely followed SEO best practice is that 301 redirects should be used instead of 302 redirects when it is a permanent redirect that is required. Matt Cutts said last year that 302 redirects should "only" be used for temporary redirects. http://www.seomoz.org/blog/whiteboard-interview-googles-matt-cutts-on-redirects-trust-more For a site that I am looking at the SEO Moz Crawll Diagnostics tool lists as an issue that the URL / redirects to www.abc.com/Pages/default.aspx with a 302 redirect. On further searching I found that on a Google Support forum (http://www.google.com/support/forum/p/Webmasters/thread?tid=276539078ba67f48&hl=en) that a Google Employee had said "For what it's worth, a 302 redirect is the correct redirect from a root URL to a detail page (such as from "/" to "/sites/bursa/"). This is one of the few situations where a 302 redirect is preferred over a 301 redirect." Can anyone confirm if it is the case that "a 302 redirect is the correct redirect from a root URL to a detail page"? And if so why as I haven't found an explanation. If it is the correct best practice then should redirects of this nature be removed from displaying as issues in the SEO Moz Crawll Diagnostics tool Thanks for your help
Technical SEO | | CPU0