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
-
Links in Webmaster Tools that aren't really linking to us
I've noticed that there is a domain in WMT that Google says is linking to our domain from 173 different pages, but it actually isn't linking to us at all on ANY of those pages. The site is a business directory that seems to be automatically scraping business listings and adding them to hundreds of different categories. Low quality crap that I've disavowed just in case. I have hand checked a bunch of the pages that WMT is reporting with links to us by viewing source, but there's no links to us. I've also used crawlers to check for links, but they turn up nothing. The pages do, however, mention our brand name. I find this very odd that Google would report links to our site when there isn't actually links to our site. Has anyone else ever noticed something like this?
Technical SEO | | Philip-DiPatrizio0 -
Linking shallow sites to flagship sites
We have hundreds of domains that we are either doing nothing with, or they are very shallow. We do not have the time to build enough quality content on them since they are ancillary to our flagship sites that are already in need of attention and good content. My question is...should we redirect them to the flagship site? If yes, is it ok to do this from root domain to root domain or should we link the root domain to a matching/similar page (gymfranchises.com to http://www.franchisesolutions.com/health_services_franchise_opportunities.cfm)? Or should we do something different altogether? Since we have many to redirect (if this is the route we go), should we redirect gradually?
Technical SEO | | franchisesolutions0 -
Can the Hosting location of image files have a negative effect if on the developers own media server rather than on client site server ?
Hi Can the Hosting location of image files have a negative effect if on the developers own media server as opposed to on the actual websites server ? In the case i'm looking at the image files are hosted on a totally separate server (a media subdomain of the developers site server) from the subject sites dedicated server. Will engines still attribute the properties of files hosted in this manner to the main website (such as file name or should they really be on the subject sites server own media folder ? Cheers Dan
Technical SEO | | Dan-Lawrence0 -
How to redirect my .com/blog to my server folder /blog ?
Hello SEO Moz ! Always hard to post something serious for the 04.01 but anyway let's try ! I'm releasing Joomla websites website.com, website.com/fr, website.com/es and so on. Usually i have the following folders on my server [ROOT]/com [ROOT]/com/fr [ROOT]/com/es However I would like to get the following now (for back up and security purpose). [ROOT]/com [ROOT]/es [ROOT]/fr So now what can I do (I gues .htaccess) to open the folder [ROOT]/es when people clic on website.com/es ? It sounds stupid but I really don't know. I found this on internet but did not answer my needs. .htaccess RewriteEngine On
Technical SEO | | AymanH
RewriteCond %{REQUEST_URI} !(^/fr/.) [NC]
RewriteRule ^(.)$ /sites/fr/$1 [L,R=301] Tks a lot ! Florian0 -
Can I turn off Google site links?
I thought at one time I had turned off the option to have Google sitelinks. I did this so that each of our pages that had a strong presence would occupy a unique slot on the first and second page of Google. This was important to us as we were battling some reputation management issues and trying to push out negative listings from the front page. Recently I noticed sitelinks were back up and when going into Google Webmaster Tools, I could figure out how to opt out of them. Any suggestions?
Technical SEO | | BRConsulting0 -
Do search engines treat 307 redirects differently from 302 redirects?
We will need to send our users to an alternate version of our homepage for a few hours for a certain event. The SEO task at hand is to minimize the chance of the special homepage getting crawled and cached in the search engines in place of our normal homepage. (This has happened in the past so the concern is not imaginary.) Among other options, 302 and 307 redirects are being discussed. IE, redirecting www.domain.com to www.domain.com/specialpage. Having used 302s and 301s in the past, I am well aware of how search engines treat them. A 302 effectively says "Hey, Google! Please get rid of the old content on www.domain.com and replace it with the content on /specialpage!" Which is exactly what we don't want. My question is: do the search engines handle 307s any differently? I am hearing that the 307 does NOT result in the content of the second page being cached with the first URL. But I don't see that in the definition below (from w3.org). Then again, why differentiate it from the 302? 307 Temporary Redirect The requested resource resides temporarily under a different URI. Since the redirection MAY be altered on occasion, the client SHOULD continue to use the Request-URI for future requests. This response is only cacheable if indicated by a Cache-Control or Expires header field. The temporary URI SHOULD be given by the Location field in the response. Unless the request method was HEAD, the entity of the response SHOULD contain a short hypertext note with a hyperlink to the new URI(s) , since many pre-HTTP/1.1 user agents do not understand the 307 status. Therefore, the note SHOULD contain the information necessary for a user to repeat the original request on the new URI. If the 307 status code is received in response to a request other than GET or HEAD, the user agent MUST NOT automatically redirect the request unless it can be confirmed by the user, since this might change the conditions under which the request was issued.
Technical SEO | | CarsProduction0 -
How do you find bad links to your site?
My website has around 900 incoming links and I have a Google 50 penalty that is sitewide. I have been doing research and from what I can see is that the 50 penalty is usually associated with scetchy links. The penalty started last year. I had about 40 related domains to my main site and each had a simple one page site with a link to the main site. (I know I screwed up) I cleaned up all of those links by removing them. The single page site still exist, but they have no links and several of them still rank very well. I also had an outside SEO person that bought a few links. I came clean with Google and told them everything. I gave them all of my sites and that the SEO person had bought links. I gave them full disclosure and removed everything. I have one site that I can't get the link removed from. I have contacted them numerous times to remove the link and I get no response. I am curious if anyone has had a simular experience and how they corrected the situation. Another issue is that my site is "thin" because its an ecommerce affiliate site and full of affiliate links. I work in the costume market. I'm also afraid that I have other bad links pointing to my site. Dooes anyone know of a tool to identify bad links that Google may be penalizing me for at this time. Here is Google's latest denial of my reconsideration request. Dear site owner or webmaster of XXXXXXXXX.com. We received a request from a site owner to reconsider XXXXXXXX.com for compliance with Google's Webmaster Guidelines. We've reviewed your site and we believe that some or all of your pages still violate our quality guidelines. In order to preserve the quality of our search engine, pages from XXXXXXXXXX.com may not appear or may not rank as highly in Google's search results, or may otherwise be considered to be less trustworthy than sites which follow the quality guidelines. If you wish to be reconsidered again, please correct or remove all pages that are outside our quality guidelines. When such changes have been made, please visit https://www.google.com/webmasters/tools/reconsideration?hl=en and resubmit your site for reconsideration. If you have additional questions about how to resolve this issue, please see our Webmaster Help Forum for support. Sincerely, Google Search Quality
Technical SEO | | tadden0 -
Site links -> anchor text and blocking
1.Does anyone know where google pulls that anchor text for the organic site links? -- Is there a way to manipulate the anchor text of the sitelinks to get our more important pages to stick out more (capitalization, punctuation etc.) 2. If i block a few of my sitelinks from showing will goolge replace it with a new sitelink or will i be left with fewer? Thanks! Srs
Technical SEO | | Morris770