Welcome to the Q&A Forum

We all know that some of the link juice dies with 301's but I suspect that with a 302 you would keep the link juice.

To potentially simplify my question down: Is doing a 301 redirect of all the brand-specific minisites (like suzukitiresensors.com) to www.tire-sensors.com the most beneficial thing I can do to not lose rank and traffic, but also to simplify our sites down to 1 URL?

Hi Joe, Thanks for your reply. It's certainly been an interesting couple of years, the fact is we've only really been able to sustain it thanks to the fact that I think our content and offering to the visitors of our site is that strong. The internal linking structure of the site is something we have been thinking to look at. The problem from our perspective is we think all the links we provide on the page are of value and use to a website visitor. With this in mind, we are not overly keen on removing any of them from the page, so what else is available to us to do, in order to make it easier for search engines? Thanks Neil

Thanks for that Yumi. Although some product pages are slightly different, I still think they're too similar to be called 'unique'.

It doesnt make sense, ... if they have exactly the same content you can easily use rel=canonical to point to the source , that way we can eliminate the 'duplicate content' issues . disallow Google mobile bot to crawl the mobile site would cause you to lose a lot of link juices if your mobile pages is extremely famous ...

Doing this could help you in the short-run, but the old domains will lose all their links eventually, so I wouldn't count on it as a long-term strategy.

I've heard of black-hats linking to competitors using adult websites and terms to catch their competitors in the safe search filters. I'm not sure that's what is happening here, but I'd keep an eye on it. Have you seen any drop in organic since you started noticing these links?

Recently had the same issue and we went with not indexing them. Two issues mainly - the duplicate content issue (same results being attributed to author, posts, categories etc - which i don't believe is too much of a problem. The other one though was the general titles being attribute to the results were pretty average. We tested both indexing of and excluding and didnt see any increase in traffic with them, so went with the exclude option. Hope it helps. Good luck.

I agree with your SEO that text contained at the top of the article is given more weight then text at the bottom of an article. It is really difficult to provide any estimates on how much more weight. If Google would allow us to look at their algorithms, we would be able to provide a specific answer. Since that is not the case, we are left to making our best guesses using experience and related knowledge as a guide. We know that keywords in a title have more weight when they are earlier in the title. We know it makes sense from a user experience perspective to offer your best, most relevant content upfront rather then buried at the bottom of an article. I would build upon that logic and my experience to suggest that relevant text be provided at the top of the page (all things being equal).

If I thought that there was any penalty or bad odor on the old site I would not risk it. However I would reuse content and try to get the URLs changed on existing valuable links. Just an opinion.

Hi thanks for this a great sugestion