How long will the 301 ranking swap-over take?
-
Hi all,
I'm about to hit the crunch button and finalise the 301 setup for our website to redirect all traffic, and our old very nice ranking, to our new website. My only question is, how long will the ranking take to move to the new site?
Once the 301 is in place what happens when someone searches my keywords? Currently when you search our preferred keywords we rank 1 and 2 depending on the wording. Once I've made the 301 happen, will you see the old site in Google rankings until they re-index it or will it swap straight away to the new site with its continued high rank (from the link juice) or will I have a blackspot period where I don't rank at all? I cannot afford to have a period of time, at this time of year, that I don't rank 1 or 2 - if this is even a vague possibility I might have to consider postponing my 301 till a less important time of year.
Thanks for your help,
Anthony
-
Hey,
I had immense trouble with GWT because it wouldn't accept my domain name (.vic.edu.au) and kept coming up with the error 'not a root level domain) even though it was the correct domain. I checked with their bug tracker and several people with obscure domain names had the same problem. It will let me submit the site and use most GWT tools but not the change of address tool and a couple of others - any thoughts on how to make GWT re-index my site faster anyway?
Thanks,
Anthony
-
I have to agree with Todd here. After you've made the switch be sure to login to GWT to make sure that they know about it.
It wouldn't hurt either to submit the new URL to the SE's as well!
Cheers!
-
My Past experience finds that rel canonical will transfer faster. than a 301
put two sites online.
Site A add rel canonical from page to page, this will help you in the transition faster.
-
Using the Google webmaster tools site change of address helps. Find it in the GWT Site configuration > change of address area.
Used with 301 redirection, the change usually takes place in about 2-3 weeks, depending on the authority of the domain.
-
Thanks EGOL,
Know any tools that I could use to do a direct analysis of the sites' ranking / SEO status immediately before and immediately after the 301 has taken place? I know that SEOmoz toolset is good for this but it only crawls every week (or whatever) - I would like to see the differences between the two domains immediately if possible as soon as the DNS change has taken affect (so within 24 hours probably).
Thanks,
Anthony
-
Just saying what I would do here... not giving advice...
I would do the 301. In my experience the homepage usually 301s quickly and correctly. Its the interior pages that might lag. (You said that the homepage is really the only important page for this site.)
If you don't want to take a chance then take the new site down to avoid dupe content and put it back up after your important ranking season is over - then do the 301.
-
Hi Wissam,
The site is moving to a new domain but the content is identical.
Thanks for your reply.
Anthony
-
Hi EGOL.
Thanks for your reply.
In regards to this particular situation the old site has a pagerank of 5 also and the new domain obviously 1 as it is new.
I really only need the front page of the site to keep its rank.
One big problem that I could have is that I have setup everything ready for the 301 (I only need to change the DNS on the old site to point to the new server) - so i now have 2 websites running with exact duplicate content (they're identical apart from domain name). I cannot now take the new site offline as it is being used extensively - so I need the old site for its rank and the new site for its function - which is worse - possibly dropping rank for a few weeks between Google crawls or having duplicate content for several weeks till we can do the 301?
I suppose I could 301 the new domain to the old domain, leave it for a couple of months until the important ranking season is over then swap and 301 the old domain to the new domain... or would that be too confusing for Google and SEO rankings?
Lastly a bit more technical info that might help:
There is actually two old sites both identical (mirrored because they thought it would be good for SEO not knowing about duplicate content problems). The two old sites are both .com.au sites. The new domain which I want to 301 both sites too is a .vic.edu.au site which is an obscure domain name related to the education department in Victoria, Australia - I have been told that government and education domain names tend to have better chances with SEO, but I wonder if such an obscure domain extension might hurt my chances?
Any thoughts?
Thanks,
Anthony
-
The more powerful your site the faster things happen, so it is not possible to give you an exact amount of time.
In the past 18 months I have 301ed two sites and two subdomains. These were all PR5 and within 48 hours some of the new URLs of the most important pages began replacing the old URLs in their exact position in the SERPs. Some of the less important pages and PDF documents required several days to switch.
A couple folders of pages had some difficulty and were in and out of the SERPs for a couple weeks. These were retail pages and we lost some sales.
Within 30 days everything was back to normal. The websites that were 301ed performed as usual but the subdomains that were redirected to a folder in the root had large ranking gains.
-
Hi Anthony,
Are we talking 2 different domain names?
are the content from site a to site b are the same ?
Usually crawlers when they come to your website and notice the 301 they will keep visiting your site and they will swap the urls.
If you are moving to a different domain, you might see some drop in rankings due to the new domain low authority and it takes time for the main authority to move from one domain to another.
the higher the authority of site A the higher this will be a faster transition with out any interruption in rankings..
so in a summary if you are moving from a domain to a new domain, or the new site have some changes in content, i would wait till after the holidays(if you benefit from the holidays)
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
-
Core Web Vitals hit Mobile Rankings
Hey all, Ever since Google announced "Core Web Vitals" are mobile rankings have nose-dived. At first, I thought it was optimisation changes to the page titles we had made which might still be part of the issue. However, Desktop rankings actuallyy increased for the same pages where mobile decreased. There is the plan to introduce a new ranking signal into the Google algorithm called the "core web vitals: and this was discussed around late May. even though it's supposed to get fully indexed into a ranking signal later this year or early next; I think Google continuously test and release this items before any official release. If you weren't aware, there is a section in Google Webmaster Tools related to "core web visits", which looks at:1. Loading2. Interactivity3. Visual StabilityThis overlays some of the other basic requirements of a good website and mobile experience. Taking a look at our Google Search Console, it appears to be the following:1. Mobile- 1,006 poor URLs, 100URLs need improvement and 475 good URLs.2. desktop- 0 poor URLs, 379 need improvements and 1,200 good URLsSOURCE: https://search.google.com/search-console/core-web-vitals?resource_id=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.griffith.ie%2FIn the report, we can see two distinct issues with the mobile pages:CLS Issue: more than 0.25 (mobile)- 1,006 casesLCP issue: longer than 4secs (mobile) - 348 case_CLS (Cumulative Layout Shift)This is a developer issue, and needs fixing. It's basically when a mobile screen jumps for the user. It is explained in this article: https://web.dev/cls/Seems to be an issue with all pages. **LCP (Largest Contentful Paint)_**Again, another developer fix that needs to be implemented. It's connected to page speed, and can be viewed here: https://web.dev/lcp/Looking at GCS, it looks like the blog content is mostly to blame.It's worth fixing these issues and again looking at the other items on page speed score tests:1. Leverage browser caching- https://gtmetrix.com/reports/griffith.ie/rBtvUC0F2. https://developers.google.com/speed/pagespeed/insights/?url=griffith.ie- mobile score for home page is 16/100, https://www.griffith.ie/people/thamil-venthan-ananthavinayagan is 15/100I think here is the biggest indicator of the issue at hand. Has anybody else noticed their mobile rankings go down and desktop stay the same of increase.Kind regards,
Web Design | | robhough909
Rob0 -
Will Google Judge Duplicate Content on Responsive Pages to be Keyword Spamming?
I have a website for my small business, and hope to improve the search results position for 5 landing pages. I recently modified my website to make it responsive (mobile friendly). I was not able to use Bootstrap; the layout of the pages is a bit unusual and doesn't lend itself to the options Bootstrap provides. Each landing page has 3 main div's - one for desktop, one for tablet, one for phone.
Web Design | | CurtisB
The text content displayed in each div is the same. Only one of the 3 div’s is visible; the user’s screen width determines which div is visible. When I wrote the HTML for the page, I didn't want each div to have identical text. I worried that
when Google indexed the page it would see the same text 3 times, and would conclude that keyword spamming was occurring. So I put the text in just one div. And when the page loads jQuery copies the text from the first div to the other two div's. But now I've learned that when Google indexes a page it looks at both the page that is served AND the page that is rendered. And in my case the page that is rendered - after it loads and the jQuery code is executed – contains duplicate text content in three div's. So perhaps my approach - having the served page contain just one div with text content – fails to help, because Google examines the rendered page, which has duplicate text content in three div's. Here is the layout of one landing page, as served by the server. 1000 words of text goes here. No text. jQuery will copy the text from div id="desktop" into here. No text. jQuery will copy the text from div id="desktop" into here. ===================================================================================== My question is: Will Google conclude that keyword spamming is occurring because of the duplicate content the rendered page contains, or will it realize that only one of the div's is visible at a time, and the duplicate content is there only to achieve a responsive design? Thank you!0 -
I want to create a 301 redirect on a WordPress site, nothing's working...
Hello all, I'm hoping someone out there can give me a hand with this. I'm trying to modify my .htaccess file so that the site will go from maxcarnagemusic.com to www.maxcarnagemusic.com and also, so viewers will be redirected to www.maxcarnagemusic.com/home when they try to access the site. I've tried a few different things, including adding the 301 redirect plugin for Wordpress, but nothing seems to work. Can someone out there show/tell me how to create an htaccess file that will execute as much. I apologize in advance, my Apache experience is very, very limited. Thank you all in advance!
Web Design | | maxcarnage0 -
Google text-only vs rendered (index and ranking)
Hello, can someone please help answer a question about missing elements from Google's text-only cached version.
Web Design | | cpawsgo
When using JavaScript to display an element which is initially styled with display:none, does Google index (and most importantly properly rank) the elements contents? Using Google's "cache:" prefix followed by our pages url we can see the rendered cached page. The contents of the element in question are viewable and you can read the information inside. However, if you click the "Text-only version" link on the top-right of Google’s cached page, the element is missing and cannot be seen. The reason for this is because the element is initially styled with display:none and then JavaScript is used to display the text once some logic is applied. Doing a long-tail Google search for a few sentences from inside the element does find the page in the results, but I am not certain that is it being cached and ranked optimally... would updating the logic so that all the contents are not made visible by JavaScript improve our ranking or can we assume that since Google does return the page in its results that everything is proper? Thank you!0 -
301 htaccess redirect or 301 HTTP DNS Redirect
Hi, I was wondering which you would recommend for a 301 redirect. Should we do a 301 redirect from .htacess or should we do a HTTP DNS 301 redirect. The HTTP redirect, does a redirect from the DNS Provider and doesn't require that we keep hosting the site while the htacess redirect still requires hosting. Thanks!
Web Design | | MattJD0 -
Does a loading homepage animation effect rankings?
Our website ( panphoenix dot com) has a Javascript animation when you load it for the first time which takes just over 2 seconds to load. Does having this animation effect rankings negatively? Would appreciate your thoughts!Thanks Rob
Web Design | | roberthseo0 -
Infinite Scrolling & "Long Scrolling" same or different??
Can anyone please confirm for me the difference if any, between site design that incorporates Long Scrolling and Infinite Scroll? I was told (by an unnamed source) these were different designs and that "long scrolling" is better for SEO . However, in all my research I am unable to prove there is any difference between the two. I understand Infinite scroll may include Ajax, but does that mean Long Scrolling does not? If anyone has any references or can supply any further education here, I'd appreciate it! Thanks!
Web Design | | ACNINTERACTIVE0 -
Best Way To Have HD Videos On Site That Will Work On Mobile Devices
Hi, I hope someone can help me with this. I am working on a site for a client who works at a video production company. They want to have a fair few HD videos on there site but also for the site and videos to be viewable on mobile devices. I have got a responsive wordpress theme and the site is beginning to take shape. I am wondering however how I can best get the videos to display on mobile devices while maintaining a good load speed. Until now I have been using amazon S3 which stores and feeds the videos and I use Easyvideoplayer to embed the videos. The problem is they do not appear to show up from mobile devices when using wordpress. can anyone suggest the best way for me to still feed the videos from S3 but get them to display on mobile devices. oh, they are private videos so they cannot be placed on youtube.
Web Design | | jensonseo0