What if my site isn't ready for Mobile Armageddon by April 21st??
-
Hello Moz Experts,
I am fighting for one of our sites to be mobile optimized, but the fight is taking longer than anticipated (need approval from higher ups). What happens if my site is not ready by April 21st? Will it take long to recover, like Penguin? Or, will the recovery be fairly quick?
Say I release a mobile version of my site a week later. Then Google will have to reindex it and rank me again. How long will that take before I regain my traffic?
Thanks,
-
I, like Cocoonfxmedia, would like to think that given Google has to be aware that not everyone will be able to remedy their situation quickly, they'll go easy at first and ramp up penalties over time.
That said, I don't think anyone outside of Google knows the answer to your question. You're smart to push. I recommend you baseline traffic, conversions and rankings now, before the change, so you can use that push even harder should a negative impact be felt and you need evidence to support your request for approval.
-
I think Google is right to do this but for many businesses the cost to convert sites and possibly redesigns will mean it will take years for people to catch up. I just hope that Google don't start penalising sites straight away.
-
Google has said this change will run real-time, as far as I understand. So while being ready for April 21st is the best option, if you're ready the 23rd it shouldn't take you long to take advantage. Most people will NOT be ready by the 21st, especially those who don't do SEO, used to but stopped or have dodgy providers who aren't keeping up on it.
My advice to you & all of our clients is the same - mobile is the future and ignoring that is business suicide. Get mobile-ready as soon as possible and keep improving your mobile presence. You'll be much better for it in the long run.
As far as "recovery times" - well, I would think along the lines of what Google already is like. If you do a homepage title change it'll reindex in a day or two usually. If you change your contact page maybe a few more days. And if you change text on some old blog post, you may have to ping it directly or it may never get crawled.
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
-
Why isn't the canonical tag on my client's Magento site working?
The reason for this mights be obvious to the right observer, but somehow I'm not able to spot the reason why. The situation:
Intermediate & Advanced SEO | | Inevo
I'm doing an SEO-audit for a client. When I'm checking if the rel=canonical tag is in place correctly, it seems like it: view-source:http://quickplay.no/fotball-mal.html?limit=15) (line nr 15) Anyone seing something wrong with this canonical? When I perform a site:http://quickplay.no/ search, I find that there's many url's indexed that ought to have been picked up by the canonical-tag: (see picture) ..this for example view-source:http://quickplay.no/fotball-mal.html?limit=15 I really can't see why this page is getting indexed, when the canonical-tag is in place. Anybody who can? Sincerely 🙂 GMdWg0K0 -
Old site penalised, we moved: Shall we cut loose from the old site. It's curently 301 to new site.
Hi, We had a site with many bad links pointing to it (.co.uk). It was knocked from the SERPS. We tried to manually ask webmasters to remove links.Then submitted a Disavow and a recon request. We have since moved the site to a new URL (.com) about a year ago. As the company needed it's customer to find them still. We 301 redirected the .co.uk to the .com There are still lots of bad links pointing to the .co.uk. The questions are: #1 Do we stop the 301 redirect from .co.uk to .com now? The .co.uk is not showing in the rankings. We could have a basic holding page on the .co.uk with 'we have moved' (No link). Or just switch it off. #2 If we keep the .co.uk 301 to the .com, shall we upload disavow to .com webmasters tools or .co.uk webmasters tools. I ask this because someone else had uploaded the .co.uk's disavow list of spam links to the .com webmasters tools. Is this bad? Thanks in advance for any advise or insight!
Intermediate & Advanced SEO | | SolveWebMedia0 -
URL Errors in webmaster tools to pages that don't exist?
Hello, for sometime now we have URLs showing up in Google webmaster saying these are 404 errors but don't exist on our website.......but also never have? Heres an example cosmetic-dentistry/28yearold-southport-dentist-wins-best-young-dentist-award/801530293 The root being this goo.gl/vi4N4F Really confused about this? We have recently made our website wordpress? Thanks Ade
Intermediate & Advanced SEO | | popcreativeltd0 -
Troubled QA Platform - Site Map vs Site Structure
I'm running a Q&A forum that was built prioritizing UX over SEO. This decision has cause a bit of a headache as we're 6 months into the project with 2278 Q&A pages with extremely minimal traffic coming from search engines. The structure has the following hiccups: A. The category navigation from the main Q&A page is entirely javascript and only navigable by users. B. We identify Google bots and send them to another version of the Q&A platform w/o javascript. Category links don't exist in this google bot version of the main Q&A page. On this Google version of the main Q&A page, the Pinterest-like tiles displaying individual Q&As are capped at 10. This means that the only way google bot can identify link juice being passed down to individual QAs (after we've directed them to this page) is through 10 random Q&As. C. All 2278 of the QAs are currently indexed in search. They are just indexed very very poorly in SERPs. My personal assumption, is that Google can't pass link juice to any of the Q&As (poor SERP) but registers them from the site map so it gets included in Google's index. My dilemma has me struggling between two different decisions: 1. Update the navigation in the header to remove the javascript and fundamentally change the look and feel of the Q&A platform. This will allow Google bot to navigate through Expert category links to pass link juice to all Q&As. or 2. Update the redirected main Q&A page to include hard coded category links with 100s of hard coded Q&As under each category page. Make it similar, ugly, flat and efficient for the crawling bots. Any suggestions would be greatly appreciated. I need to find a solution as soon as possible.
Intermediate & Advanced SEO | | TQContent0 -
Impact of simplifying website and removing 80% of site's content
We're thinking of simplifying our website which has grown to a very large size by removing all the content which hardly ever gets visited. The plan is to remove this content / make changes over time in small chunks so that we can monitor the impact on SEO. My gut feeling is that this is okay if we make sure to redirect old pages and make sure that the pages we remove aren't getting any traffic. From my research online it seems that more content is not necessarily a good thing if that content is ineffective and that simplifying a site can improve conversions and usability. Could I get people's thoughts on this please? Are there are risks that we should look out for or any alternatives to this approach? At the moment I'm struggling to combine the needs of SEO with making the website more effective.
Intermediate & Advanced SEO | | RG_SEO0 -
%20 Rewrite in CMS doesn't get picked up by Search Engiens
Hi Mozzers I have a little issue on a rewrite that was implemented on a CMS. The CMS was built for my client without the option to put custom slugs in. So it takes the title of a post or page and uses it as a URL, the site was launched with a rewrite so that any space in the title is replaced with a - and that is the permanent URL for that post/page. This morning when I was busy doing my checkup on the site I found that the URLs are being indexed as %20 and not - however, if you navigate through the site the URLs are displaying correctly. How is it that search engines pick this up as a space in the slug if it has clearly been set as a - anyone had this issue before? Its causing duplicate content issues on the site because both ways display the same post/page. Cheers, Chris Captivate.
Intermediate & Advanced SEO | | DROIDSTERS0 -
PDF on financial site that duplicates ~50% of site content
I have a financial advisor client who has a downloadable PDF on his site that contains about 9 pages of good info. Problem is much of the content can also be found on individual pages of his site. Is it best to noindex/follow the pdf? It would be great to let the few pages of original content be crawlable, but I'm concerned about the duplicate content aspect. Thanks --
Intermediate & Advanced SEO | | 540SEO0 -
In mobile searches, does Google recognize HTML5 sites as mobile sites?
Does Google recognize HTML5 sites using responsive design as mobile sites? I know that for mobile searches, Google promotes results on mobile sites. I'm trying to determine if my site, created in HTML5 with responsive design falls into that category. Any insights on the topic would be very helpful.
Intermediate & Advanced SEO | | BostonWright0