Domain migration strategy
-
Imagine you have a large site on an aged and authoritative domain.
For commercial reasons the site has to be moved to a new domain, and in the process is going to be revamped significantly. Not an ideal starting scenario obviously to be biting off so much all at once, but unavoidable.
The plan is to run the new site in beta for about 4 weeks, giving users the opportunity to play with it and provide feedback. After that there will be a hard cut over with all URLs permanently redirected to the new domain.
The hard cut over is necessary due to business continuity reasons, and real complexity in trying to maintain complex UI and client reporting over multiple domains. Of course we'll endeavour to mitigate the impact of the change by telling G about the change in WMC and ensuring we monitor crawl errors etc etc.
My question is whether we should allow the new site to be indexed during the beta period?
My gut feeling is yes for the following reasons:
-
It's only 4 weeks and until such time as we start redirecting the old site the new domain won't have much whuffie so there's next to no chance the site will ranking for anything much.
-
Give Googlebot a headstart on indexing a lot of URLs so they won't all be new when we cut over the redirects
Is that sound reasoning? Is the duplication during that 4 week beta period likely to have some negative impact that I am underestimating?
-
-
I wouldn't sweat it. We left up www.bulwarkpest.com for several months while moving to www.bulwarkpestcontrol.com .... I know that there is some risk in it. But I think Google is pretty understanding of site migrations. Of course I am just a small pest control guy so they may not have ever noticed. Sooo.. take that with a grain of salt.
It's does make it easier to have the other site live so that you can redirect on a per page base and know that it's working. I would rather make sure the redirects are correct and working prior to moving the entire site over. But be warned.. site redirects may not always give you the same authority... research the online Yellow Pages.
-
My opinion of risk goes up much higher if this is a directory vs a site with original content articles.
-
Hi Aran, thanks for your response.
My thinking has also evolved a bit and I'm now thinking we ought to exclude the new site until we're ready to cut over as @EGOL suggested.
The critical info I didn't mention before was that there is important client ROI and reporting reasons that we need to ensure that the current site continues to perform right up until the cut over, at which point the 301s will be implemented. The cross domain canonical would address the dupliaction, but would also start to depreciate the current pages prematurely.
The thing that I was underestimating before was the negative impression that the new domain would give Google when it suddenly appeared with 1M+ pages of duplicate content plus no real link profile of its own (until we implement the 301s)...all the hallmarks of a scraper.
Better I think to avoid this by excluding the beta until we cut over, and make sure we prep well for that.
-
Agreed, though Charles could use canonical tags to tell Google that the new pages are authoritative. This may take a while to be indexed, but should prevent any detrimental effects with duplicate content.
-
Thanks very much for your thoughts. The root of my uncertainty is indeed the way Google in particular is viewing duplciated content today.
What if I told you that the site was a business directory and that the new site would be a big improvement in terms of on page optimization? By which I mean new/different (and much better) page titles and improved internal linking. I mention this only because the new site won't a direct replicar of the old one. Make a difference?
-
I have no factual data on this... just going with my gut....
Based upon how Google is acting these days I would not take chances with having two copies of the same site in the SERPs for an entire month. I would not want to see any pages on the new site filtered for being duplicates.
Most people don't get a new site indexed and those redirected domains normally go fairly well. So, I would be pleased with that and not take chances.
Safety might be better than going for some unknown gain.
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
-
Site Migration and Traffic Help!
Hi Moz, I recently migrated my website with the help of an SEO company using 301 redirects. The reason for the move was to change our CMS from .aspx to Drupal/Wordpress. The homepage (www.shiftins.com) and the blog (www.shiftins.com/blog) were the only two pages that kept the same url. Everything else was redirected. It's been about two months since the redirects were completed and traffic has dropped off about 90%. I'm starting to worry that something was not done properly and my traffic may never return. The process for the redirects seem correct when I checked the work the SEO company did. All pages were duplicated, redirected to individual pages, then the old pages were de-indexed. Are there any insights the community can provide? Please help!
Intermediate & Advanced SEO | | shictins1 -
Sub-Domain or Folder. Which is better for SEO.?
Hey all. I just need clarification that which one is better to use for big property or travel portal. Check below example: I have a website which runs for multiple location like india, uk, canada, uae. For every location the content is different. So my question is that for better SEO results should i use india.xyz.com or **xyz.com/india/ **. One more example **canada.xyz.com **or xyz.com/canada/ Can anyone please suggest which one is better. Thanks in advance.
Intermediate & Advanced SEO | | PFX1110 -
Parked Domain question
Hi, If a domain has been parked for more than 12 years, and has never been used for a project so far, does this has an impact on SEO or its like having a fresh new domain? Sebi
Intermediate & Advanced SEO | | TheHecksler0 -
Is it safe to 301 redirect old domain to new domain after a manual unnatural links penalty?
I have recently taken on a client that has been manually penalised for spammy link building by two previous SEOs. Having just read this excellent discussion, http://www.seomoz.org/blog/lifting-a-manual-penalty-given-by-google-personal-experience I am weighing up the odds of whether it's better to cut losses and recommend moving domains. I had thought under these circumstances it was important not to 301 the old domain to the new domain but the author (Lewis Sellers) comments on 3/4/13 that he is aware of forwards having been implemented without transferring the penalty to the new domain. http://www.seomoz.org/blog/lifting-a-manual-penalty-given-by-google-personal-experience#jtc216689 Is it safe to 301? What's the latest thinking?
Intermediate & Advanced SEO | | Ewan.Kennedy0 -
Sub Domain or New Domain?
Hi All, We have a client that has a business with three different services. 2 of these services compliment each other in a really obvious way, but the 3rd, while related is not such a obvious complimentary service. For this reason, service 3 kind of weakens the content of the website SEO wise for the two main services. Also, internally at the business it is run by an entirely different team so it feels culturally somewhat different. So, the client wants to pull all the content about service 3 and put it on a different website. Which would you chose as a domain for this new site: service3.existingdomain.co.uk or www.service3+brandname.co.uk
Intermediate & Advanced SEO | | NoisyLittleMonkey0 -
Stability in the rankings - Domain mapping
Tues domain mapping of multiple (more than 180) urls to a single address can harm rankeamento these urls? I have the following scenario… Mapping domain addresses: www.meusitecidade01.com www.meusitecidade02.com www.meusitecidade03.com ... www.meusitecidade181.com to: www.meusite.com where I have a index.php page which will assemble according to the url mapped. This could be hurting my SEO in any way? There has been a lot of stability in the rankings (not google dance) some of these urls for some keywords and unique pecularidade see that, relative to other site, is the above scenario.
Intermediate & Advanced SEO | | eder.machado0 -
What would be the best domain choice?
Hello I got a website www.keywordCA.com and I'm ranking #1 spot on "keyword" but what I notice if you have the exact match you get more site links and etc. Like this keyword that match with my domain name "keyword CA" The ideal name will be www.keyword.com but is taken and the owner don't want to sell the domain (at least he is not using it, is just parked) and I also got the domain www.keyword.net Do you think www.keyword.net will be much better than KeywordCA.com in order to get more exposure and google will generate more site links?
Intermediate & Advanced SEO | | jpgprinting0