Site Launching, not SEO Ready
-
Hi,
So, we have a site going up on Monday, that in many ways hasn't been gotten ready for search. The focus has been on functionality and UX rather than search, which is fair enough.
As a result, I have a big list of things for the developer to complete after launch (like sorting out duplicate pages and adding titles that aren't "undefined" etc.).
So, my question is whether it would be better to noindex the site until all the main things are sorted before essentially presenting search engines with the best version we can, or to have the site be indexed (duplicate pages and all) and sort these issues "live", as it were?
Would either method be advisable over the other, or are there any other solutions? I just want to ensure we start ranking as well as possible as quickly as possible and don't know which way to go.
Thanks so much!
-
It seems the general consensus is to launch the "good enough" site without blocking Google, and to fix the SEO issues as soon as possible.
However, I'd say that it really all depends on what those SEO issues are. For example, if you think you're going to be releasing thousands of non-canonical URLs into the SERPs without using any "fixes" it could be a long time before you get those out of the index once they're "fixed", especially on a new site with no deep external links. If waiting a couple of weeks before allowing the site to be indexed could save me from having to do thousands of individual redirects (as in those not handled easily by regular expressions), and could keep my site from launching with thousands of pages of thin and near duplicate content (why not start off in Google's good graces? Why start off on the wrong foot?) I would seriously consider blocking everything but the home page in the robots.txt file.
You would want the home page to be indexed no matter what because the launch will likely coincide with lots of press, advertising, etc... and people will be searching for your domain and/or brand. This would allow the "domain" to be indexed, which would take care of the date of indexation ranking factor discussed above (though in the grand scheme of things a few weeks is not going to matter), and would allow you to show up for a large proportion of searches (i.e. brand and navigational queries) since you would be unlikely to rank for many big non-brand searches out of the box anyway.
Then again, if you are just concerned with some small SEO issues, such as adding alt attributes or improving internal linking, I'd go ahead and launch.
-
The debate between UX and SEO has always been a pressing concern within the internet marketing community. While years ago these two factors were considered separate, as time passes the industry has realized that these two are not independent from one another but should work together.
That being said, I am always an advocate of launching a website as soon as it is ready. Of course this is only the case if all of the duplicate content, low-quality links and SEO black hat strategies have been removed. If any of these factors are present it can have a negative impact on site performance and where possible should be removed.
Like mentioned below, how long the website has been up can have an influence on ranking as well as other factors that you can be receiving credit for by not postponing the launch. In addition, SEO is a continuous effort that is never completely done, therefore I would recommend launching the website and then implementing your changes.
-
I would not "noindex" the site.
Because once you do that, google can visit less often and you might have to wait a while before the noindex is undone - especially for a new site with a very low page rank.
-
I thought this was an interesting question. I have a lot of admiration for one particular guy who knows a lot about launching a Website before it's perfect. His company's motto is "Doing is better than perfect."
He's Mark Zuckerberg.
Yeah. I'd launch it and then make gosh darn sure you follow up and clean up after the explosion.
-
Hi,
Unless the SEO issues you are talking about are very serious, I would rather let search engines index the website from the start, to gain time. History is a factor in SEO and, for a new website, it may take time to get noticed by SE.
I mean that Google gives a positive weight to the fact that a website has been out there for a longer time, compared with new website. Moreover, if you implement Google Analytics from the start, you can start optimizing having already some data (vs. having no data at all when you start optimizing).
The only strong case in which it is wrong to index a website is if you thing people should not see it, which does not seem to be your case.
SEO is a process and a game of adaptation.
Wish you good luck.
-
Since I'd guess you're only talking about a matter of days or a few weeks, I really don't think it matters, so I would lean towards getting it indexed as early as possible and dealing with the SEO once the site is "live".
-
Thanks guys, I appreciate it. I didn't even consider that Google would evaluate a site with a noindex, just not display it.
If that's the case, it seems it's best to rank lowly at first and then have the engines crawl when they will and notice the changes we implement over the coming weeks. As you say, it'd make no difference to how the site is viewed at the time we'd remove the noindex (unless the times between crawls were massive!), but that we'd lose out on potential traffic from ranking lowly.
-
I could be wrong in this, but I have always thought of no index as meaning "don't display". I have never actually tested it, but I would be willing to be that google crawls and rates your site even with a no index tag. The only difference being it is not displayed in the serp.
If I were you I would leave the no index tag out and just get things squared away after launch. In my opinion what will happen is when google keeps crawling it, they will see that the content has changed. Which will help you more in the long run than a no index tag. You might rank low at first, but through the SEO changes your ranking should go up. In my mind it is better to rank low at first then not to rank.
-
Hey Philip,
Hope you are well...
I would focus on getting the site up and ready and removing duplicate content etc, then have google index your site through GWT.
Hope this helps
Dave
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
-
Unsolved URL dynamic structure issue for new global site where I will redirect multiple well-working sites.
Dear all, We are working on a new platform called [https://www.piktalent.com](link url), were basically we aim to redirect many smaller sites we have with quite a lot of SEO traffic related to internships. Our previous sites are some like www.spain-internship.com, www.europe-internship.com and other similars we have (around 9). Our idea is to smoothly redirect a bit by a bit many of the sites to this new platform which is a custom made site in python and node, much more scalable and willing to develop app, etc etc etc...to become a bigger platform. For the new site, we decided to create 3 areas for the main content: piktalent.com/opportunities (all the vacancies) , piktalent.com/internships and piktalent.com/jobs so we can categorize the different types of pages and things we have and under opportunities we have all the vacancies. The problem comes with the site when we generate the diferent static landings and dynamic searches. We have static landing pages generated like www.piktalent.com/internships/madrid but dynamically it also generates www.piktalent.com/opportunities?search=madrid. Also, most of the searches will generate that type of urls, not following the structure of Domain name / type of vacancy/ city / name of the vacancy following the dynamic search structure. I have been thinking 2 potential solutions for this, either applying canonicals, or adding the suffix in webmasters as non index.... but... What do you think is the right approach for this? I am worried about potential duplicate content and conflicts between static content dynamic one. My CTO insists that the dynamic has to be like that but.... I am not 100% sure. Someone can provide input on this? Is there a way to block the dynamic urls generated? Someone with a similar experience? Regards,
Technical SEO | | Jose_jimenez0 -
I am working on a site with a .global TLD. What are the SEO implications?
In particular, I have a PA and DA score of 1 across all pages on the site - is this the cause?
Technical SEO | | Ronanmartin0 -
Launch of improved site
Hi, Just want to ask you guys if i have missed something in my planning. We have done a migration from Ithemes Exchange to woocommerce. The complete migration are done on our dev server. It has an exakt setup as our live one. My plan is to change our live version with a backup from our migrated and finished site from our dev site. All of our product links will be intact with accept from some that we have combined in to new ones, the ones that are changed has been redirected with a 301. Will this way of launching our site effect our ranking/seo in some way? Thankful for any thoughts about this one! // Jonas
Technical SEO | | knubbz0 -
Should i put an introduction on my site for better seo
Hi, my site is www.in2town.co.uk and we have been having serious problems with our site since our upgrade. Before the upgrade, our site was on the first page of google for many years and most of them we were in the top three, now however since the upgrade of our site we have had serious problems. The main keyword for our site was lifestyle magazine, but now after checking this keyword we are now on page 12, this has gone down over the past couple of days. we had an introduction and information about our magazine on the home page, trying to rank for the keyword lifestyle magazine, we were jumping from page nine to six to ten, we took the intro off as a developer said that we had done enough to rank well for the keyword without putting any text with the keyword on our site, but since taking it off, we have dropped down more in the rankings. I would love to hear from people on their thoughts on this and if we should put back the intro at the top or where they feel we should put it and should we put about the magazine at the bottom. I was always taught, if you want to rank well for a keyword then as well as doing all the linking, you also need to make sure you optimize the page with the keyword looking forward to hearing your thoughts on this
Technical SEO | | ClaireH-1848860 -
Will sitemap generated in Yoast for a combined wordpress/magento site map entire site ?
Hi For an ecommerce site thats been developed via a combination of wordpress and magento and has yoast installed, will the sitemap (& other yoast features) map (& apply to) the entire site or just wordpress aspects ? In other words does one need to do anything else to have a full sitemap for a combined magento/wordpress site or will Yoast cover it all ? This link seems to suggest should be fine but seeing if anyone else encountered this and had problems or if straightforward ? http://fishpig.co.uk/wordpress-integration/docs/plugins.html cheers dan
Technical SEO | | Dan-Lawrence0 -
301 redirecting old content from one site to updated content on a different site
I have a client with two websites. Here are some details, sorry I can't be more specific! Their older site -- specific to one product -- has a very high DA and about 75K visits per month, 80% of which comes from search engines. Their newer site -- focused generally on the brand -- is their top priority. The content here is much better. The vast majority of visits are from referrals (mainly social channels and an email newsletter) and direct traffic. Search traffic is relatively low though. I really want to boost search traffic to site #2. And I'd like to piggy back off some of the search traffic from site #1. Here's my question: If a particular article on site #1 (that ranks very well) needs to be updated, what's the risk/reward of updating the content on site #2 instead and 301 redirecting the original post to the newer post on site #2? Part 2: There are dozens of posts on site #1 that can be improved and updated. Is there an extra risk (or diminishing returns) associated with doing this across many posts? Hope this makes sense. Thanks for your help!
Technical SEO | | djreich0 -
Redirection Impact on SEO
Need help urgently. There is the situation [This is how is it working now]: 1. Have a global landing page [say when user types in www.mysite.com - takes user to the global landing page: [www.mysite.com/global/en.html]](http://www.mysite.com/global/en.html] ) 2. Users from this landing page can select a country on his/her choice and get redirected say: [www.mysite.com/us/en.html] Would like to change the functionality as below: 1. When user types in www.mysite.com 1a. Would find the location of the request based on GEO IP and if the request is coming from North America region then would redirect the users to: www.mysite.com/us/en.html 1b. If the request is from any other location/region then it would continue to work as it is currently working: take the user to the global landing page: www.mysite.com/global/en.html Would this change have any negative impact or not found by search engines from SEO perspective? If it does then what are the impacts and if does not then why not. If it does then what is the best possible way to address this request. Appriciate your help. Thanks, Koushik Roy
Technical SEO | | KoushikRoy0 -
Is there SEO value in having images referenced on other sites?
We use Amazon to host our assets (images, videos, PDFs, etc). These assets can be used across multiple sites we own and we reference them appropriately via our CMS. example asset URL: https://s3.amazonaws.com/lawgical/assets/data/539/original.png We have an infographic we recently distributed that is hosted on Amazon. Obviously we want any link value to go back to our primary URL where we laid out the infographic, however some of the infographic sites are just referencing the above source image URL. Are we losing SEO / link value by not have the infographic hosted on our domain? Do search engines count these image references as a "link"? For your reference... Infographic post: http://www.serve-now.com/articles/841/process-server-vs-sheriff-infographic Example infographic site usage: http://www.infographicsposters.com/law-infographics/which-is-better-process-server-or-sheriff
Technical SEO | | trentc0