Effect of HTTPS on ranking and visitors

[Darren_Ssc]

My experience of such scripts is that they do some of the job but a lot of stuff still needs to be tidied up afterwards - page by page.

But, if you're volunteering...

 

[Darkterror]

Unless it's some e-commerce website I would stay on HTTP. Yours is so it's good, but rebuild everything from scratch probably. At least those redirects. What are the full picture of your clients ? Who they are ? Maybe they love that old design, but today being mobile friendly is a must.

 

[jackanderson]

Thanks, Justin Aldridge I agree with your statement I think you have complete knowledge about redirects thanks for describing.

 

[Justin Smith]

Unless it's some e-commerce website I would stay on HTTP. Yours is so it's good, but rebuild everything from scratch probably. At least those redirects. What are the full picture of your clients ? Who they are ? Maybe they love that old design, but today being mobile friendly is a must.

I`m know for a fact most of our customers like the site the way it is, and I`d have thought most visitors (i.e. those just reading it for the info) do as well, remember it`s narrow enough to be read on a mobile in landscape mode. BUT, Google are down ranking it and that`s what`s costing us. As an example we used to be on the first page, usually in the top three, for the term "TV Aerials", anywhere in the country, even on a "clean computer". Now we`re often not even on the first page in Sheffield. Evidence from our customers and visitors (in the past) would indicate that`s a flaw in Google`s search algorithm, but, unfortunately we have to work with what they, Google, want.

What concerns me is we`ve a lot of links onto my site, not just onto the site, but individual pages and actual anchors on those pages. Am I right that unless the site/page/anchor addresses are all exactly the same (with the Wordpress site) then those links won`t work any more ?

 

[Justin Smith]

I don`t know if I`m worrying unnecessarily here, but Google does not appear to have crawled any page on my site since the 31st March. It used to crawl it, certainly the most popular pages, every few days to every week.
Has anyone any ideas ?

 

[fisicx]

I`m know for a fact most of our customers like the site the way it is

But you aren't pitch to current customers - it's new business you are targeting.

IAm I right that unless the site/page/anchor addresses are all exactly the same (with the Wordpress site) then those links won`t work any more ?

They will work if the site is properly migrated.

Google is hammering your site because it's not responsive and not https. It's not longer indexing the site because it feels you no longer add value.

Your ranking is also dropping because your competitors are doing a better job of it than you.

If you want to regain your ranking you need to bite the bullet an invest in updating the site. It's not going to be cheap though.

 

[Justin Smith]

But you aren't pitch to current customers - it's new business you are targeting.

They will work if the site is properly migrated.

Google is hammering your site because it's not responsive and not https. It's not longer indexing the site because it feels you no longer add value.

Thanks for your advice on the links.

On the other, the site is now HTTPS.

 

[Darren_Ssc]

Evidence from our customers and visitors (in the past) would indicate that`s a flaw in Google`s search algorithm, but, unfortunately we have to work with what they, Google, want.

One of my clients is a furniture retailer Justin, the majority of sales are coming from mobile.

Often, it is people browsing on a mobile/tablet and coming back via a PC a couple of weeks later to order. There are also a fair number of purely mobile transactions.

It isn't a flaw, it's how things are now.

And yeah, keep the links the same if you can.

 

[Justin Smith]

I don`t know if I`m worrying unnecessarily here, but Google does not appear to have crawled any page on my site since the 31st March. It used to crawl it, certainly the most popular pages, every few days to every week.
Has anyone any ideas ?

I was just checking and Google hasn`t crawled various Wikipedia pages (for similar stuff to my website) the the last 2 or 3 weeks !

 

[Darren_Ssc]

I was just checking and Google hasn`t crawled various Wikipedia pages (for similar stuff to my website) the the last 2 or 3 weeks !

If you are looking at the webcache results that isn't a true picture of how often google are crawling your site.

You are obsessing over stuff when you should have your sleeves rolled up and be heavy-duty copy/pasting to your new site. I could have done 10 pages while you've been posting here!

 

[Justin Smith]

If you are looking at the webcache results that isn't a true picture of how often google are crawling your site.

You are obsessing over stuff when you should have your sleeves rolled up and be heavy-duty copy/pasting to your new site. I could have done 10 pages while you've been posting here!

You`re right, I am obsessing about stuff, in fact I`d say panicking would be a fair description !

I am planning to migrate my site onto Wordpress but that will take weeks or even months. But even that is problematic, as I understand it all the inbound links to my site (of which there were loads, assuming they`re still relevant folloowing the HTTP to HTTPS move....) may stop working if the page and anchor urls are different from what they were in Webplus.

 

[Darren_Ssc]

Well, as already said, you can have the links be exactly the same or you can modify and do redirects from one to the other - it isn't a big issue.

My methodology for recovering a site is to replicate the links exactly (wherever possible), regardless if they are an ideal format or not.

Converting to pretty links can be done later down the line, recovery of the existing site takes precedence. 100 most important pages first (a.s.a.p) and the rest at leisure. This can be done in a couple of weeks easily, even while working 10 hours a day on other stuff.

The design of the site, colours, fonts and all that stuff is of no consideration at this stage.

 

[justinaldridge]

as I understand it all the inbound links to my site (of which there were loads, assuming they`re still relevant folloowing the HTTP to HTTPS move....) may stop working if the page and anchor urls are different from what they were in Webplus.

No. As long as you 301 redirect the old URLs to the new URLs then you will preserve what you have now, even changing URLs.

However, what you need to focus on too is site structure and crawl paths. Changing those can impact ranking.

To be honest though, you are losing traffic and rankings. Any shift to a better, newer and responsive website can only help!

 

[Justin Smith]

I don`t know if I`m worrying unnecessarily here, but Google does not appear to have crawled any page on my site since the 31st March. It used to crawl it, certainly the most popular pages, every few days to every week.
Has anyone any ideas ?

Something weird is happening with Google. As I said in the above post my pages (the popular ones anyway) used to be crawled every few days to every week by Google, but I`ve not been able to find one (using the date of the cache) that`s been crawled since late March/ early April.
But here`s the thing, I was checking again the Google cached pages for a load of other popular sites (e.g. Wikipedia, Digital Spy Forums and this site) and none of them have yet had a cached page date after the 1st April either.
I know Darren said the cached page wasn`t a true picture of how often Google are crawling sites, but the up to date cached page has definitely changed about 3 or 4 weeks ago.
I`m just relieved it isn`t just applying to my site !

 

[justinaldridge]

John Mueller from Google was saying on Twitter the other day that you can't pay too much attention to the cached dates. They aren't always correct.

However, Google is doing some very odd stuff at the moment. They can be very slow to reindex pages and we did a domain changeover for a client 3 months ago and Google still shows the old domain in the results!

Very odd behaviour.

It's one of those "hang on tight" moments!

 

[UKSBD]

I was checking again the Google cached pages for a load of other popular sites (e.g. Wikipedia, Digital Spy Forums and this site) and none of them have yet had a cached page date after the 1st April either.

I'm seeing this with a number of sites - 31st March Cache dates.

I set a test up though, added a new short phrase to a page then searched for the phrase.

The page is returned by Google as expected even though the phrase isn't on the page when you look at the cached version

I forgot to make a note of when I added the phrase :-( it was within the last 7 days though.

 

[Darren_Ssc]

John Mueller from Google was saying on Twitter the other day ....

"Uhh, yeah, I think there was some kind of problem with something but it didn't affect too many sites (maybe 10%, or something like that?) but, yeah, I'm no too worried. The team are working on a fix which we expect to roll out sometime, exactly when I couldn't say, not in the next few hours for certain but not years either, sometime in between these dates, for sure.

Anyway, we've made a few more improvements to the search console like a deeper shade of red for the warnings graph and lighter grey for 404's. I know a lot of the data hasn't refreshed for nearly a month now but I'm not too worried about that either, the team are working on a fix, blah, blah...

Hope you enjoy!"

 

[Justin Smith]

"Uhh, yeah, I think there was some kind of problem with something but it didn't affect too many sites (maybe 10%, or something like that?) but, yeah, I'm no too worried. The team are working on a fix which we expect to roll out sometime, exactly when I couldn't say, not in the next few hours for certain but not years either, sometime in between these dates, for sure.

Anyway, we've made a few more improvements to the search console like a deeper shade of red for the warnings graph and lighter grey for 404's. I know a lot of the data hasn't refreshed for nearly a month now but I'm not too worried about that either, the team are working on a fix, blah, blah...

Hope you enjoy!"

Satirical and amusing, I think we can all agree.

 

[Justin Smith]

I'm seeing this with a number of sites - 31st March Cache dates.

I set a test up though, added a new short phrase to a page then searched for the phrase.

The page is returned by Google as expected even though the phrase isn't on the page when you look at the cached version

I forgot to make a note of when I added the phrase :-( it was within the last 7 days though.

I`ve been doing some more research on this.
I investigated Google`s latest cached page for UK Business Forums (as an example, others are the same), it`s the 10th April.
However, if you then search for a question posted after the 10th April it`s found on Google, but the cached page come up Error 404 (Not found)!!!

Furthermore, I checked Google`s cached page for one of our more popular pages just a few days ago, and it was dated late March. Google now has a cached page (for that same page) dated the 8th April, i.e. that 8th April cached page wasn`t available for 2 or 3 weeks after it was done ? ! ?

Strange or what ?

 

[Justin Smith]

Wow, that's an old site you have there...and you are using a Serif product to create the site. That's how I built my first website 20 years ago

HTTPS helps a little but the fact that your site is not responsive is probably the main reason it's losing positions.

You say it's a large site but Google has only indexed about 170 pages:

https://www.google.co.uk/search?q=site:aerialsandtv.com&hl=en&gl=gb

However, the main issue you have with your changeover to HTTPS is that you are using a 302 redirect and not a 301 to go from http to https. A 302 is a temporary redirect and does not pass any ranking benefit across.

You need to change ALL the redirects to 301 to recover your rankings.

You can test the redirects here and see the header response:

https://www.webconfs.com/http-header-check.php

Just put in the http URL and you'll see it's a 302 redirect. It needs to return a 301.

After a truly massive amount of work I have transferred the whole site to a Wordpress platform, https://www.aerialsandtv.com , but the hits have actually gone down over the same week last year (Xmas is a strange week though).
The chap helping me with the Wordpress site told me that ranking and hits might go down immediately after the launch of the new site, but how long should that apply for, and, if the redirects are den right, should it actually happen ?

Lastly, is it possible to have redirects to an anchor on a page, i.e. not just to a new page ?

 

[fisicx]

That’s a real piece of string question. Ranking may recover in a few days or it may never recover.

You can’t redirect to an anchor.

A quick check of the page speed shows you only score 48/100. One of the main reasons for the low score is the poor site construction. Google likes fast pages.

 

[Justin Smith]

That's an interesting one because I was advised to put big images (as in bigger than on the old site) on there which increases download time ?
As regards page length, the pages are much shorter then the old site, I split most of them up into two or three pages, some into four, so if page length > download time is a factor that should increase ranking not the other way around, surely ?
How can it be poor site construction it`s a Wordpress site

 

[fisicx]

That's an interesting one because I was advised to put big images (as in bigger than on the old site) on there which increases download time ?

If the images are optimised then there isn't a problem.

TAs regards page length, the pages are much shorter then the old site, I split most of them up into two or three pages, some into four,

Oops. Bad move. Google likes long pages - splitting them up may well have lost the bit Google liked. The pages should ideally be exactly the same as the old site.

How can it be poor site construction it`s a Wordpress site

The site configuration can really slow things down. If you run a speed test on your site you will see a long list of resources the site needs to load. Google calls them blocking resources and may penalize you for this. For example, there are 9 font calls. And the theme is very resource hungry (and expensive). Choosing a different (non-bootstrap) theme will speed things up a lot.

 

[Justin Smith]

Oops. Bad move. Google likes long pages - splitting them up may well have lost the bit Google liked. The pages should ideally be exactly the same as the old site.

Page length, that's a subject all to itself......
Ironically I'm usually the one arguing in favour of longer pages*, it's ironic because it's Website designers who are usually critical of them !

* so long as there are loads of jump links to subjects part way down the page. But jump links must be to anchors, which, I'm told, most sites don't even use.

 

[fisicx]

The point was you have split up the page. Google looks at the original page and follows the redirect to the new page and sees they are different. If you want to keep your ranking they need to be the same.

Jump links can be helpful but also a hindrance - if they break up the information flow then the UX is poor and Google can penalise you.

There are loads of things on your site that could be improved to help your ranking and subsequesnt conversions. A website review may be of use. The very first question I'd ask is: what is the purpose of the site?

 

[Justin Smith]

The point was you have split up the page. Google looks at the original page and follows the redirect to the new page and sees they are different. If you want to keep your ranking they need to be the same.

Jump links can be helpful but also a hindrance - if they break up the information flow then the UX is poor and Google can penalise you.

There are loads of things on your site that could be improved to help your ranking and subsequesnt conversions. A website review may be of use. The very first question I'd ask is: what is the purpose of the site?

The site did need redrafting, and even I admit some of the pages were arguably too long. If we have to take a short term hit to ranking that's just a necessary evil. The only question is how quickly ranking will return, in fact more than return. If it doesn't end up significantly higher then before the massive amount of work it's taken to transfer the site over to Wordpress will have been wasted.
Interestingly, every person who knows anything about SEO and websites all said the same thing, and it's very rare for such people to be consistent in their advice / opinion. They all said making your site mobile friendly will significantly increase its ranking, well have to see if they were right !

The purpose of the site is information and, as an aside, to educate people that not all aerial installation stuff is the same, quality or performance wise. It is an information site with a shop bolted on, not the other way around.

I don't really understand how having long pages or jump links can break up the flow of information, Surely long pages do the opposite, as for jump links people can use them or not, its' up to them.

 

[fisicx]

They all said making your site mobile friendly will significantly increase its ranking, well have to see if they were right !

It will increase your ranking for mobile searches - won't affect desktop searches.

If it's an information site you need to restructure the homepage - make the KB more accessible. At the moment everything is hidden away in the menu - which on a phone isn't even visible.

Get a website review and will hopefully get some ideas about what to do next.

As to when ranking will return (if ever) - it's a guessing game. If done properly a site migration shouldn't affect ranking. I suspect the new site isn't as Google friendly as the old - mainly because of the chosen theme, plugins and configuration. And a slow server (it's a cruddy 1and1 server you share with 2700 other websites).

 

[Justin Smith]

It will increase your ranking for mobile searches - won't affect desktop searches.

Are you sure that's the case ? When all this Google Mobile friendly down ranking stuff came out I asked the obvious question as to why it should affect desk top search ranking and was told Google will not be using different rankings for different device types. In fact there's a particular aerial's website which has recently been ranking higher than mine despite being (content wise) far below it in every way and it cannot possibly have had any where near as many inbound links, yet, for Google searches on my desktop it was ranked higher

 

[fisicx]

There are hundreds of ranking signals. It's quite possible they just tick more of google's boxes that you. They may have one astounding inbound link that bumps them up. Or reviews that give them credibility. Or longevity. Or succinct, well written articles. Or better page titles (yours are awful), Or a faster server.

PS: Change hosts. Escape the dreadful shared reseller hosting you are using. And scrub their link from your footer. Unless they are paying you for the free advertising.

 

[Justin Smith]

There are hundreds of ranking signals. It's quite possible they just tick more of google's boxes that you. They may have one astounding inbound link that bumps them up. Or reviews that give them credibility. Or longevity. Or succinct, well written articles. Or better page titles (yours are awful), Or a faster server.

I thought Google was supposed to rank content above everything ?
My site's been going a lot longer (2005) than the other one (2012).
How well written ? That's subjective, and obviously I'm biased, but my readers aren't, and they all say they love it.
I'd be amazed if they have any astounding inbound links.
Reviews ? Well we get 5 stars for nearly all our Google reviews, in fact we're disappointed when we get the odd 4 star one.

It'll be interesting to see what happens, ranking-wise, over the next few months.

 

[UKSBD]

Out of interest, do many people buy aerials and fit them themselves?

 

[fisicx]

I thought Google was supposed to rank content above everything ?

The right content within a properly structured site with good internal linking and supported by all the other ranking signals.

So yes, to an extent content is king. But the environment is as important.

 

[fisicx]

Reviews ? Well we get 5 stars for nearly all our Google reviews, in fact we're disappointed when we get the odd 4 star one.

Is that for your products, the B&M shop or the KB? If the former then the reviews won’t necessarily help rank the articles (which is what you said you were targeting).

 

[Justin Smith]

Out of interest, do many people buy aerials and fit them themselves?

Not as many as they used to, that is undeniable..... In fact there used to be 4 or 5 specialist aerial online retailers (tvaerials.com, satcure, aerialshack and ourselves) and they've all gone apart from us. And we're trying to get into stuff other than aerials, mainly mounting hardware etc
Don't get me wrong there are still loads of people on E bay etc (plus Screwfix and that lot) selling aerials, but it's all flimsy budget stuff, and, to be frank, I don't understand how they make any money selling.

 

[UKSBD]

Not as many as they used to, that is undeniable..... In fact there used to be 4 or 5 specialist aerial online retailers (tvaerials.com, satcure, aerialshack and ourselves) and they've all gone apart from us. And we're trying to get into stuff other than aerials, mainly mounting hardware etc

What's the actual main purpose of the website then?

Is it for selling aerials/fittings etc. to the public

Is it for selling aerials/fittings etc. to the trade

Do you supply and fit aerials?

I see lots of information but is it for other installers or the public?

You talk about traffic to the site, but why do you need the traffic, is it just for vanity purposes?

 

[Justin Smith]

What's the actual main purpose of the website then?

Is it for selling aerials/fittings etc. to the public

Is it for selling aerials/fittings etc. to the trade

Do you supply and fit aerials?

I see lots of information but is it for other installers or the public?

You talk about traffic to the site, but why do you need the traffic, is it just for vanity purposes?

The website was originally started to educate people (specifically in the Sheffield area) that not all aerial installations are the same. We were sick of punters thinking they were getting a better price for an aerial installation off Joe Bloggs down the road when that was because it wasn't the same job and it wasn't using the same quality of components. However, the number of visitors was far higher than expected and from all over the country, and it kept growing. Most significantly readers were asking us if we sold this decent quality gear we were educating them about. To cut a long story short we just sell aerials and installation products now.
The website is an information site which gets huge numbers of visitors a small proportion of whom buy something, there is a direct relationship between number of visitors and sales, thus it's rather more than "vanity" to get higher numbers on the site. That said when anyone puts as much effort into a website as I have (or even 10% of the effort I have) they obviously, and quite reasonably, want as many people to read their words of wisdom as possible. I wouldn't call that vanity.

 

[fisicx]

That said when anyone puts as much effort into a website as I have (or even 10% of the effort I have) they obviously, and quite reasonably, want as many people to read their words of wisdom as possible. I wouldn't call that vanity.

The words 'vanity' in regards a website usually means it's a project without financial benefit. It's something you did because you wanted to not because you saw a profit in it.

I don't think you will get back the traffic you had before you updated the site. Ranking is unlikely to recover without considerable work on the site and associated SEO.

Whoever it was helped you with the transition has made a number of fundamental errors that need fixing.

If the focus is the KB backed up with the products there are lots of ways to improve conversions.

As I said before, get a website review. I've just looked at this page: https://www.aerialsandtv.com/knowledge/aerials/loft-aerials and within seconds I spotted dozens of issues.

 

[Jason Potterfield]

Google now uses HTTPS as a ranking signal. Data analysis has shown that HTTPS websites have a higher advantage of ranking over HTTP links.
Also this isn’t only about improving your site rankings. It is also about providing security to your users and gaining their trust.