Phasing in new website on www2 domain - 301 plan
-
Hi,
I work for a large company and we're planning to phase in a new website. The idea is to develop key journeys on the new site and serve them on a www2 domain, removing them from the old website which is served on the www domain.
The reason for this is because the old website is over 2,000 pages, and the management want to see new, improved journeys sooner rather than later. So, rather than launching all new pages and journeys at the same time, which will take a long time to design and develop, key journeys will move across to the new site / design sooner and made available to visitors.
Whilst the overall journey might be a bit disjointed in parts (i.e. sending people from old to new site, and vice versa) I can't see a better way of doing it...
Once all new content is complete, 301s will be implemented from old content on www. to new content www2.
Once the phasing is complete, and all new content is in place on www2, 301s will be implemented to point everything back to www.
Does anybody see any problems with this approach? Or any ideas on how to better handle this situation?
Thanks Mozzers!
-
Excellent, thank you Chris.
I would prefer to keep the URL path the same, but to be honest the original URL path is a bit of a mess, so I'm taking this opportunity to clean it up.
Really appreciate your help on this!
-
Your proposed redirect strategy looks good. If possible, I would keep the same URL path on the www subdomain. That way, when you're finished, you could simply remove the 302 redirects.
1. I would keep the redirects in place until the new content on the www subdomain is live.
2. Personally, I would avoid using the canonical tag in this situation. Google treats this as a hint and not a directive. If your content is too different, Google might just ignore the canonical tag and index both versions. As well, if you use the canonical tag from the ww2 domain to www subdomain, Google will only view the www subdomain content quality. If your content/UX is better on the ww2 subdomain, you won't receive any of that SEO benefit during that time.
-
Hi Chris,
Thanks for getting back to me. That's sound advice, and it makes perfect sense. So, I will do the following:
302 redirect
from www.mydomain.com/old-version-of-page
to www2.mydomain.com/new-version-of-pageThen, once we are ready to publish the new content on to the main www domain, I will do the following because the new URL string will be slightly different from the original:
301 redirect
from www.mydomain.com/old-version-of-page to www.mydomain.com/new-version-of-pageDoes that make sense?
Just a couple of other questions, if that's okay:
- How long do you think the 302 redirects can stay in place? It may have to be there for 12 - 18 months, while we're developing the rest of the new site.
- I came across this article at the weekend, which suggests the following for the www2 temporary version of pages: (1) pointing a rel=canonical tag from the temporary pages to the main pages, and (2) using the meta robots content="noindex" tag to tell search engines not to index the temporary pages. Would you agree with this approach?
Thanks again!
-
Got it!
While I've been a pretty heavy advocate against them, this might be a situation where using 302 (temporary) redirects is the best option. The current plan will tell Google:
- The site is permanently moving the content to the ww2 subdomain
- The site is now permanently moving the content back to the www subdomain.
Instead by implementing 302 redirects gradually as the content goes live, you would send stronger signals that this is only a temporary move.
Let me know if you have any questions on this, would be happy to chat more: chris.long@gofishdigital.com
-
Hi Chris,
Thanks for replying, I really appreciate it.
In answer to your first question... we will be incrementally adding new content on the www2 subdomain, 301 redirecting from existing content on the www subdomain. This will be done gradually, over around 24 months, until all of the www content can be 301 redirected to www2 - and a full site is in place on the www2 subdomain. At this point, once everything is on the www2 subdomain, we will then do one final migration to move all new content on www2 back to the www domain, as we don't want our primary domain to be the www2 subdomain long-term.
The content will be similar, but more engaging and richer on the www2 subdomain. But, because 301s will be implemented incrementaly when the new content is launched on www2, there will no duplicate content across the subdomains.
The TLD will remain the same throughout this process.
I hope that answers your questions - let me know if you need any more clarity.
Thanks again!
-
So if I understand it correctly, you're going to be incrementally adding new pages on the ww2 subdomain while content still exists on the www subdomain. This will be done slowly until all of the www content can be 301 redirected to ww2?
If that's the case, there's a few other things that could be helpful to know:
- What's the expected timeline to get all of the new ww2 pages live?
- How similar will the ww2 content be to the www content?
- Is the TLD staying the same and only the subdomain changing?
Ideally, everything would be added to the production site and redirected all at once.
However, if that isn't an option I'd probably try to implement the redirects from www to ww2 incrementally as well. Otherwise, Google will be able to crawl/index content from both the www and ww2 subdomains, leading to duplicate content issues. I'd try to keep the website architecture fairly consistent between the two so preserve the UX/equity signals between the two subdomains.
It's tough to give insights without more information, so I'd be happy to chat more about this!
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
-
Is it worth keeping a decades-old domain that's merely 301 redirecting to the main domain?
Hi fellow Moz SEOs, We have a bigger client who we just did an SEO Site Audit for, and it was discovered that they have several domain names that are simply 301 redirecting to their main domain name. One of their domains in particular is decades old, and the client is asking if there is any value in keeping it (and the others), or simply leaving them as-is. Considering the domain age, does anyone have any recommendations? Much appreciated, Zack Barton
Intermediate & Advanced SEO | | Zack
Barton Interactive
(833) 442.6853 // office
(408) 910.7750 // mobile
https://bartoninteractive.com0 -
Cleaning up a Spammy Domain VS Starting Fresh with a New Domain
Hi- Can you give me your opinion please... if you look at murrayroofing.com and see the high SPAM score- and the fact that our domain has been put on some spammy sites over the years- Is it better and faster to place higher in google SERP if we create a fresh new domain? My theory is we will spin our wheels trying to get unlisted from alot of those spammy linking sites. And that it would be faster to see results using a fresh new domain rather than trying to clean up the current spammy doamin. Thanks in advance - You guys have been awesome!!
Intermediate & Advanced SEO | | murraycustomhomescom0 -
.Com version of my site is ranking better than .co.uk for my UK Website for branded search. 301 redirect mess
Dear Mozzers, I have an issue with my UK Website (short url is - http://goo.gl/dJ7IgD ) whereby when I type my company name in to google.co.uk search the .com version returns in Search as opposed to the .co.uk and from looking at open site explorer the page rank of the .com is higher than the .co.uk ?. Infact I cant even see the .co.uk homepage version but other pages from my site. The .com version is also 301'd to the .co.uk. From looking at Open Site Explorer, I have noticed that we have more links pointing to .com as opposed to .co.uk. Alot of these are from our own separate microsites which we closed down last year and I have noticed the IT company who closed them down for some reason 301'd them to the .com version of our site as opposed to the .co.uk but If I look in http://httpstatus.io/ (http status checker tool) to check one of these mircosites it shows - 301 - 302 - 200 status codes which to me looks wrong ?. I am wondering what it should read ... e.g should it just be a 301 to a 200 status code ?. My Website short url is - http://goo.gl/dJ7IgD and an example of some of 10 microsites we closed down last year which seems to be redirected to .com is http://goo.gl/BkcIjy and http://goo.gl/kogJ02 As these were redirected almost a year ago - it is okay if I now get them redirected to the .co.uk version of my site or what should I do ? They currently redirect to the home page but given that each of the microsites are based on an individual category of my main site , would it be better to 301 them to the relevant category on my site. My only concern is that , may cause to much internal linking and therefore I wont have enough links on my homepage ? How would you suggest I go about building up my .co.uk authority so it ranks betters than the .com- I am guessing this is obviously affecting my rankings and I am losing link juice with all this. Any advice greatly appreciated . thanks Pete
Intermediate & Advanced SEO | | PeteC120 -
Any issue? Redirect 100's of domains into one website's internal pages
Hi all, Imagine if you will I was the owner of many domains, say 100 demographically rich kwd domains & my plan was to redirect these into one website - each into a different relevant subfolder. e.g. www.dewsburytilers..com > www.brandname.com/dewsbury/tilers.html www.hammersmith-tilers.com > www.brandname.com/hammersmith/tilers.html www.tilers-horsforth.com > www.brandname.com/horsforth/tilers.html another hundred or so 301 redirects...the backlinks to these domains were slim but relevant (the majority of the domains do not have any backlinks at all - can anyone see a problem with this practice? If so, what would your recommendations be?
Intermediate & Advanced SEO | | Fergclaw0 -
If other websites implement our RSS feed sidewide on there website, can that hurt our own website?
Think about the switching anchors from the backlinks and the 100s of sidewide inlinks... I gues Google will understand that it's just a RSS feed right?
Intermediate & Advanced SEO | | Zanox0 -
How to conduct catch 301 redirects & have the separate 301 redirects for the key pages
Hi, We've currently done a site migration mapping and 301 redirecting only the sites key pages. However two GWT (Google Webmaster Tools) is picking a massive amount of 404 areas and there has been some drop in rankings. I want to mitigate the site from further decline, and hence thought about doing a catch 301 - that is 301 redirecting the remaining pages found on the old site back to the home page, with the future aim of going through each URL one by one to redirect them to the page which is most relevant. Two questions, (1) can I do a catch 301 and if so what is the process and requirements that I have to give to the developer? (2) How do you reduce the number of increasing 404 errors from a site, despite doing 301 redirects and updating links on external linking sites. Note: The server is apache and the site is hosted on Wordpress platform. Regards, Vahe
Intermediate & Advanced SEO | | Vahe.Arabian0 -
Website Consolidation To Sub Domains or Leave Stand Alone
For a real estate SEO client they have their corporate site and then for each of their communities (10 of them) each community has their own website domains. One of their team members met with another search agency who recommended they move (consolidate) all their community domains under the corporate site as a sub domain. For example let's say their main site was www.maincompany.com and one of their communities was www.localcompany.com the other firm recommended they move that existing site to become localcompany.maincompany.com and for the other 9 communities to do the exact same thing. They shared that it would really help the corporate site and each of the communities improve search rankings. I am struggling to see how this could be possible and was hoping to get some perspective as the client has asked me to come in and give my opinion if they should proceed with this consolidation. Google has indexed each of their community sites and each site gets a decent amount of search traffic and rankings. Due to that I can't see any benefit to doing this. Since each sub domain would be considered a different site than it essentially is what they already have today so it does not raise domain authority for the main company site. Since, each community has a very different brand there would be little reason to go the main company site. What I mean by that is if a user went to localcompany.maincompany.com site I thought that some may (at least out of curiosity) remove the sub-domain to see the maincompany.com site. The look and feel of each are so different it would potentially cause user confusion too. So my thoughts are this would be a negative for both the search engines and user. So I can share factual pros/cons with clients, do you have any thoughts to the pro's / con's of this approach to consolidate/move other existing sites under a sub domain of the main corporate site?
Intermediate & Advanced SEO | | jfeitlinger1 -
301 a strong but under-performing landing page to a new domain?
Hi guys, Our website have a very strong landing page (PA 80, more than 1,000 domains linking) but is currently not ranking at all as the targeted terms are dominated by exact match domains. We are thinking of redirecting this particular page to a new partial match domain targeting the same keywords. Is it a good move?
Intermediate & Advanced SEO | | sssrpm0