Comparing the site structure/design of my live site to my new design
-
Hi SEOmoz team,
for the last few months I've been working on a new design for my website, the old, live design can be viewed at http://www.concerthotels.com - it is primarily focused on helping users find hotels close to concert venues throughout North America. The old structure was built in such a way that each concert venue had a number of different pages associated with it (all connected via tabs) - a page with information about the venue, a page with nearby hotels to the venue, a page of upcoming events, a page of venue reviews. An example of these pages can be seen at:
http://www.concerthotels.com/venue/madison-square-garden/304484
http://www.concerthotels.com/venue-hotels/madison-square-garden-hotels/304484
http://www.concerthotels.com/venue-events/madison-square-garden-events/304484
http://www.concerthotels.com/venue-reviews/madison-square-garden-reviews/304484
The /venue-hotels/ pages are the most important pages on my website - and there is one of these pages for each concert venue - they are the landing pages for about 90% of the traffic on the website.
I decided that having four pages for each venue was probably a poor design, since many of the pages ended up having little or no useful, unique content.
So my new design attempts to bring a lot of the venue information together into fewer pages. My new website redesign is temporarily situated at: (not currently launched to the public)
http://www.concerthotels.com/frontend
The equivalent pages for Madison Square Garden are now:
http://www.concerthotels.com/frontend/venue/madison-square-garden/304484
(the page above contains venue information, events and reviews)
and
http://www.concerthotels.com/frontend/venue-hotels/madison-square-garden-hotels/304484
I would really appreciate any feedback from you guys, based on what you think of the new site design compared to the old design from an SEO point of view. Of course, any feedback on site speed, easy of use etc compared to the old design would also be greatly appreciated.
My main fear is that when I launch the new design (the new URLs will be identical to the old ones), Google will take a dislike to it - I currently receive a large percentage of my traffic through Google organic search, so I don't want to launch a design that might damage that traffic. My gut instinct tells me that Google should prefer the new design - vastly reduced number of pages, each page now contains more unique content, and it's very much designed for users, so I'm hoping bounce rate, conversion etc will improve too. But my gut has been wrong in the past!
But I'd love to hear your thoughts, and thanks in advance for any feedback,
Cheers
Mike
-
Re: Sitemap - standard length of time is 30 days, or until you notice search engines have de-indexed the old URLs.
-
Hi Cyrus,
thanks for spending so much time looking through my site and comparing my new design with the old one - I really appreciate it. The feedback you've provided is great - I'm really happy that you like the new look and feel, and the points you've raised have certainly got me thinking.
1. I do agree, it is a little top heavy, and on the venue page the hotels are hidden beneath the fold, so you might be right that I notice a drop in conversion. I'll launch the site to a small number of visitors and collect some stats. It might not be a major issue, since the vast majority of users to the website actually land on the hotel listings page (as opposed to the general venue information page) - but I guess we'll find out
2. Mmmm, good point - I guess the only page I'm removing that Google might have thought contained high quality ranking signals would be my old venue reviews pages - they contain a lot of unique, customer reviews of the concert venue. So there is potential for weird things to happen - I'll monitor it closely.
I hadn't thought of how the website would look, or work, if Javascript/cookies were disabled, so thank you for highlighting this - I'll certainly look into this.
3. You definitely raise a worrying point here - I hadn't thought of it from a duplicate content view - I simply thought that it would be nice to show the user a sample of hotels from the general venue page, before prompting them to view the entire list. I don't know how I can change this - I guess reducing the number of hotels might help? That way, I'd be reducing the amount of duplicate content.
4. Good point, I'll read the article and put the changes in place.
5. Ah, I hadn't thought of that - I was just going to put a sitemap of the new URLs up - how long would I need to include the "old" URLs in the sitemap for?
Thanks again for all your advice!
Best wishes
Mike
-
Hi Mike,
Thanks for sharing your site. There's always a fear that any redesign or structural changes will be ill-received by Google, but we never know until we try, right?
1. Overall, I like the design, look and feel. My only possible criticism here is the layout feels a little top-heavy. With the old design I felt I could jump in and start browsing hotels right away. The new design encourages me to search first, with the hotel results somewhat hidden beneath the fold. This may have a negative effect on conversions/bounce rate - but again you won't really know until you test it.
2. Generally, I'm a fan of consolidating low-value pages, or tabbed content into a single URL. I've worked with sites that have done this and seen a modest boost in traffic. That said, it's not always roses. If Google sees high quality ranking signals on those pages, and they suddenly disappear to be redirected via consolidation, weird things can and do sometimes happen. Regardless, I'd say overall I'd recommend you continue down this course and give it a try.
- 301 redirects are in place and seem to work.
- My one small complaint is that the old content disappears if you have JavaScript disabled. (with a CSS class display=none) Not a huge deal as Google is getting better at indexing javascript dependent content, but I'm a crusty old sod who'd rather see a solution that degrades gracefully with javascript disabled, such as is found on our Moz profile pages:http://www.seomoz.org/users/profile/155620
3. The only other thing I'm midly concered by is that your landing page lists 5-6 hotels, and then the hotel page starts of by listing the same 5-6 hotels - which creates a bit of a duplicate content issue. The two pages are now very similar in content. Not sure off the top of my head how to address this, but it's something worth thinking about.
4. For your paginated hotel listings, be sure that your using proper pagination indexing techniques, such as rel="next".
5. When you make the switch, I'd keep a sitemap up of your "old" urls so that Google will crawl and "see" the redirect.
That's it! Overall, looks like you're headed in the right direction. Pay attention when you launch, and keep these issues in mind.
Hope this helps! Best of luck.
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
-
Responsive Site has "Not Found" Errors for mobile/ and m/ in Google Search Console
We have recently launched a new responsive website for a client and have noticed 2 "Not Found" errors within Google Search Console for /mobile and /m Both these URLs are not linked from anywhere within the site. However Google is reporting them as being linked from the homepage. This is not the first site we have seen in which Google has reported this error, however the other site was not a mobile friendly site. My thoughts are to 301 them back to the Homepage. Anybody else have any thoughts on this? or have recently received the same errors?
Web Design | | JustinTaylor881 -
Is WP okay for E commerce sites?
Do any of you out there use wordpress for an ecommerce site? I'm getting some mixed reviews on it (but it's the internet, so that's bound to happen). Is there any sort of site traffic or page limit that would make using wordpress a bad idea? Thanks, Ruben
Web Design | | KempRugeLawGroup1 -
Re-designing a homepage
Hi all, Of those who've done it or have valuable advice to impart, what are the things to look out for when re-designing a homepage? In the same breath, what are vital considerations and elements to include/features to bear in mind when 'prettying up' a primary landing page as a homepage essentially serves as? UX fundamentals? Thanks folks
Web Design | | Martin_S0 -
Major URL changes in new site launch
Hey Guys - we recently launched a new website for a client. Prior, all of their URLs were dynamic via an old-school Cold Fusion CMS. We basically had to rewrite 90% of the sites URLs (site is like 300 pages). The new URLs are SEO friendly and the on-page SEO is strong; but the page rank/authority is starting from scratch from these pages and placement has decreased more most of the new pages with competitive keywords. We set up all of the 301 redirects properly and are actively monitoring in Google Webmaster Tools. **Anything else I can do to lessen the pain and get these pages higher page rank/authority sooner rather than later?**Thanks for all of your help.
Web Design | | NobleStudios0 -
Changing Links that Show Up when I Google Brand (Site) Name
Hi SEOmoz Community, A quick question for you all. I've added an attachment for reference. When I google my brand name, say for example, Applied StemCell, I see six links as well below the description. Oddly though, these links seem to be chosen at random, or at least I'm not sure how Google decides on them. When I click on one of the links that is the company's name, Applied StemCell it brings me to a PDF document! Is there any way I can choose which ones to display there? Thanks! OF2oVVN.png
Web Design | | swzhai0 -
SEO tricks for a one page site with commented html content
Hi, I am building a website that is very similar to madebysofa.com : means it is one page site with entire content loaded (however are commented in html) and by clicking on sections it modify the DOM to make specific section visible. It is very interesting from UX point of view but as far as I know, since this way most of my content is always commented and hidden from crawlers, I will loose points regarding SEO. Is there any workaround you can recommend or you think sites like madebysofa.com are doomed to loose SEO points by nature? Best regards,
Web Design | | Ashkan10 -
International SEO issues for multiple sites
We currently have 3 websites: oursite.co.uk oursite.fr oursite.ch We also own Oursite.com, and that URL currently redirects to Oursite.fr. We are considering a complete site redesign and a possible merge of the 3 sites. Assumptions: ** the 3 sites currently receive organic search traffic to varying degrees
Web Design | | darkgreenguy
** Oursite.ch is almost identical to Oursite.fr in terms of the site content
** Our target market is NOT the USA for English-language searches. It is the UK. With a re-design, we see our options as follows: Merge the 3 sites and make Oursite.com the "main site" and then have subfolders as follows: /uk /fr /ch Keep the 3 sites as they are. We see Option 1 as the best in terms of saving time when updating the site, and saving money paid to the site developers (1 site vs 3 sites). We see Option 2 as the best in terms of ability of the site to rank, as well as confidence of searchers when seeing our site in the search results (in other words, a person searching in France would be more likely to buy and/or submit a form on our site if they saw Oursite.fr vs Oursite.com/fr). I guess we're looking for some suggestions/guidance here. Are we missing any big issues? Does anyone have experience with an issue such as this? Thank you in advance...
-Shawn0 -
Duplicate Content Problem on Our Site?
Hi, Having read the SEOMOZ guide and already worried about this previously, I have decided to look further into this. Our site is 4-5 years old, poorly built by a rouge firm so we have to stick with what we have for now. Were I think we might be getting punished is duplicate content across various pages. We have a Brands page, link at top of page. Here we are meant to enter each brand we stock and a little write up on that brands. What we then put in these write ups is used on each brands item page when we click a brand name on the left nav bar. Or when we click a Product Type (eg. Footwear) then click on a brand filter on the left. So this in theory is duplicate content. The SEO title and Meta Description for each brand is then used on the Brands Page and also on each page with the Brands Product on. As we have entered this brand info, you will notice that the page www.designerboutique-online.com/all-clothing/armani-jeans/ has the same brand description in the scroll box at the top as the page www.designerboutique-online.com/shirts/armani-jeans/ and all the other product type pages. The same SEO title and same Meta descriptions. Only the products change from each one. This then applies to each brand we have (at least 15) across about 8 pages. All with different URLs but the same text. Not sure how a 301 or rel: canonical would work for this, as each URL needs to point at specific pages (eg. shirts, shorts etc...). Some brands such as Creative Recreation and Cruyff only sell footwear, so technically I think??? We could 301 to the Footwear/ URL rather than having both all-clothing and footwear file paths? This surely must be down to the bad design? Could we be losing valulable rank and juice because of this issue? And how would I go about fixing it? I want a new site, but funds are tight. But if this issue is so big that only a new site would fix it, then maybe the money would need to come forward. What do people make of this? Cheers Will
Web Design | | YNWA0