301ing Pages & Moving Content To Many Other Domains
-
Recently started working with a large site that, for reasons way beyond organic search, wants to forward internal pages to a variety of external sites.
Some of these external sites that would receive the content from the old site are owned, admin'd and/or hosted by the old site, most are not. All of the sites receiving content would be a better topic fit for that content than the original site. The process is not all at once, but gradual over time. No internal links on the old site to the old page or the new site/url would exist post content move and 301ing. The forwarding is mostly to help Google realize the host site of this content is not hosting duplicate content, but is the one true copy. Also, to pick up external links to the old pages for the new host site.
It's a little like domain name change, but not really since the old site will continue to exist and the new sites are a variety of new/previously existing sites that may or may not share ownership/admin etc.
In most cases, we won't be able to change any external link pointing to the original site and will just be 301ing the old url to the contents new home on another site.
Since this is pretty unusual (like I wouldn't get up in the morning and choose to do this for the heck of it), here are my three questions:
-
Is there any organic search risk to the old site or the sites receiving the old content/301 in this maneuver?
-
Will the new sites pick up the link equity benefit on pages that had third party/followed links continuing to point to the old site but resolving via the 301 to this totally different domain?
-
Any other considerations?
Thanks! Best... Mike
-
-
This is a great metaphor:
"Finally, will moving all of this content damage Site A? Yes. This is cutting out body parts similar to arms and organs. When this content leaves the traffic flow into Site A will drop. The number of linking domains and pages will drop. The offer of this content to entertain existing visitors will be gone. The size of that loss will determine the impact. Rankings of remaining content might fall if the loss is great. If arms and legs or heart or brain are extracted then expect Site A to suffer. But if lesser things are lost then the damage will be lower but some damage will happen. Search engines and visitors will all notice. Enthusiastic visitors will find the content in its new home and they might move with it."
Will definitely be using this for future explanations!
-
Yes, thanks Dana!
Best... Mike
-
Hi Mike,
EGOL's answer is a good one. You should mark it so (hint, hint, nudge,nudge, know what I mean?)
Cheers,
Dana
-
Hi Egol,
Once again I am acquainted with why you are objectively ranked #1 in the Moz community. That was encyclopedic!
Yes, I should have mentioned that I understand site A losing externally linked content would hurt site A.
What I was really getting at, which you answered, is that it's no search crime against humanity to effectively part-out a site. It's not viewed by Google as "what the heck are you doing?" ... for all concerned.
Thank you for the insight.
Best... Mike
-
Will this help the sites that receive the content? Yes. They will acquire content that they can display to their visitors. That content should appear in the search engines and pull in traffic. The 301s will redirect links that might help rankings and deliver click-through traffic.
Will the content rank in the search engines as well on the new sites as it did on the old sites? Maybe better, maybe worse, probably not the same. When you move content from Site A to Site B, that content loses the domain authority that it enjoyed on Site A. If Site A is powerful, authoritative and topically relevant to the moved content and Site B is not, then lower rankings in the search engines for the content on Site B would be expected. If Site B is more powerful, authoritative and topically relevant then rankings might be higher there, Maybe. No guarantees.
The value of the redirected links is questionable. The links into the content on Site A that will be redirected. If they duplicate the domains or pages of the links already hitting Site B then the lift that they will give to Site B will be minimal. However, if they are all uniquely new to Site B then their lift should be positive.
Finally, will moving all of this content damage Site A? Yes. This is cutting out body parts similar to arms and organs. When this content leaves the traffic flow into Site A will drop. The number of linking domains and pages will drop. The offer of this content to entertain existing visitors will be gone. The size of that loss will determine the impact. Rankings of remaining content might fall if the loss is great. If arms and legs or heart or brain are extracted then expect Site A to suffer. But if lesser things are lost then the damage will be lower but some damage will happen. Search engines and visitors will all notice. Enthusiastic visitors will find the content in its new home and they might move with it.
Content moves from one site to another happen often. Sometimes the content is moved for strategic purposes, sometimes tactical purposes, sometimes it is sold for a nice price. There are many reasons. The alternative to the 301 is the rel=canonical. Each has its advantages, risks and shortcomings. The rel=canonical allows Site A to continue to use the content but any ranking value supposedly transfers to Site B. How much? Only the search engines know how they process that. My experience with rel=canonical is that it is valuable to consolidate the power of content that appears in multiple places on a single site. I don't see it sending a lot of value from one domain to another. Just an observation. I don't know of anyone who has written the results of carefully controlled experiments.
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
-
SEO implications of moving fra a sub-folder to a root domain
I am considering a restructure of my site, and was hoping for some input on SEO implications which I am having some issues getting clarity in. (I will be using sample domains/urls because of language reasons, not an english site), Thinking about moving a site (all content) from example.com/parenting -> parenting.com. This is to have a site fully devoted to this theme, and more easily monitor and improve SEO performance on this content alone. Today all stats on external links, DA etc is related to the root domain, and not just this sub-department. Plus it would be a better brand-experience of the content and site. Other info/issues: -The domain parenting.com (used as example) is currently redirected to example.com/parenting. So I would have to reverse that redirect, and would also redirect all articles to the new site. The current domain example.com has a high DA (67), but the new domain parenting.com has a much lower DA (24). Question: Would the parenting.com domain improve it's DA when not redirected and the sub-folder on the high-DA domain is redirected here instead? Would it severly hurt SEO traffic to make this change, and if so is there a strategy to make the move with as little loss in traffic as possible? How much value is in having a stand-alone domain, which also is one of the most important keywords for this theme? My doubt comes mostly from moving from a domain with high DA to a domain with much lower DA, and I am not sure about how removing the redirect would change that, or if placing a new redirect from the subfolder on the current site would help improve it. Would some DA flow over with a 301 redirect? Thanks for any advice or hints to other documentation that might be of interest for this scenario 🙂
Intermediate & Advanced SEO | | Magne_Vidnes0 -
Can anyone tell me why this page has content wider than screen?
I am getting that error on my product pages. This link is in the errors http://www.wolfautomation.com/drive-accessory-safety-sto-module-i500 but when I look at it on mobile it is fine.
Intermediate & Advanced SEO | | Tylerj0 -
How to create AMP Pages for product website?
How to create AMP Pages for product website? I mean we can create it easily when we have wordpress through plugin, what about when we have millions of pages, It would be too tedious to create amp version of every page. So, is there any alternative way to create amp version?
Intermediate & Advanced SEO | | sachin.kaushik0 -
Duplicate Content for Deep Pages
Hey guys, For deep, deep pages on a website, does duplicate content matter? The pages I'm talk about are image pages associated with products and will never rank in Google which doesn't concern me. What I'm interested to know though is whether the duplicate content would have an overall effect on the site as a whole? Thanks in advance Paul
Intermediate & Advanced SEO | | kevinliao1 -
Best Practices for Moving a Sub-Domain to a Sub-Folder
One of my clients is moving their subdomain to a subfolder on their main domain. (ie. blog.example.com to example.com/blog) I just wanted to get everyone's thoughts on some best practices for things we should be doing/looking for when making this move.? ie WMT, .htaccess, 301s etc? Thanks.
Intermediate & Advanced SEO | | DarinPirkey0 -
Urgent Site Migration Help: 301 redirect from legacy to new if legacy pages are NOT indexed but have links and domain/page authority of 50+?
Sorry for the long title, but that's the whole question. Notes: New site is on same domain but URLs will change because URL structure was horrible Old site has awful SEO. Like real bad. Canonical tags point to dev. subdomain (which is still accessible and has robots.txt, so the end result is old site IS NOT INDEXED by Google) Old site has links and domain/page authority north of 50. I suspect some shady links but there have to be good links as well My guess is that since that are likely incoming links that are legitimate, I should still attempt to use 301s to the versions of the pages on the new site (note: the content on the new site will be different, but in general it'll be about the same thing as the old page, just much improved and more relevant). So yeah, I guess that's it. Even thought the old site's pages are not indexed, if the new site is set up properly, the 301s won't pass along the 'non-indexed' status, correct? Thanks in advance for any quick answers!
Intermediate & Advanced SEO | | JDMcNamara0 -
Canonical VS Rel=Next & Rel=Prev for Paginated Pages
I run an ecommerce site that paginates product pages within Categories/Sub-Categories. Currently, products are not displayed in multiple categories but this will most likely happen as time goes on (in Clearance and Manufacturer Categories). I am unclear as to the proper implementation of Canonical tags and Rel=Next & Rel=Prev tags on paginated pages. I do not have a View All page to use as the Canonical URL so that is not an option. I want to avoid duplicate content issues down the road when products are displayed in multiple categories of the site and have Search Engines index paginated pages. My question is, should I use the Rel=Next & Rel=Prev tags on paginated pages as well as using Page One as the Canonical URL? Also, should I implement the Canonical tag on pages that are not yet paginated (only one page)?
Intermediate & Advanced SEO | | mj7750 -
Help With Preferred Domain Settings, 301 and Duplicate Content
I've seen some good threads developed on this topic in the Q&A archives, but feel this topic deserves a fresh perspective as many of the discussion were almost 4 years old. My webmaster tools preferred domain setting is currently non www. I didn't set the preferred domain this way, it was like this when I first started using WM tools. However, I have built the majority of my links with the www, which I've always viewed as part of the web address. When I put my site into an SEO Moz campaign it recognized the www version as a subdomain which I thought was strange, but now I realize it's due to the www vs. non www preferred domain distinction. A look at site:mysite.com shows that Google is indexing both the www and non www version of the site. My site appears healthy in terms of traffic, but my sense is that a few technical SEO items are holding me back from a breakthrough. QUESTION to the SEOmoz community: What the hell should I do? Change the preferred domain settings? 301 redirect from non www domain to the www domain? Google suggests this: "Once you've set your preferred domain, you may want to use a 301 redirect to redirect traffic from your non-preferred domain, so that other search engines and visitors know which version you prefer." Any insight would be greatly appreciated.
Intermediate & Advanced SEO | | JSOC1