Do 404s really 'lose' link juice?

[friendoffood]

It doesn't make sense to me that a 404 causes a loss in link juice, although that is what I've read.  What if you have a page that is legitimate -- think of a merchant oriented page where you sell an item for a given merchant --, and then the merchant closes his doors.  It makes little sense 5 years later to still have their merchant page so why would removing them from your site in any way hurt your site?  I could redirect forever but that makes little sense.  What makes sense to me is keeping the page for a while with an explanation and options for 'similar' products, and then eventually putting in a 404.  I would think the eventual dropping out of the index actually REDUCES the overall link juice (ie less pages), so there is no harm in using a 404 in this way.  It also is a way to avoid the site just getting bigger and bigger and having more and more 'bad' user experiences over time.

Am I looking at it wrong?

ps I've included this in 'link building' because it is related in a sense -- link 'paring'.

[Matt-Williamson]

404's can loose link juice and cause the most issues when a page that had lots of link pointing to it passing authority becomes a 404 page. As this page no longer exists the authority that was being passed to it from the links that were pointing at it will be lost when Google eventually de-indexes the page. You also must remember that this page is likely to be in Google Index and if people click on it and it is not found they are more likely to bounce from your site. You will also loose what terms this page was ranking for when it is eventually de-indexed as well. Redirecting this page to its new location or a similar/relevant page will help keep most of this authority that has been earnt helping with your ranking and keeping human visitors happy.

You also need to think of this from a crawl point of view - lots of 404s doesn't make your site very friendly as Googlebot is wasting time trying to crawl pages that don't exist. Ultimately making sure you don't have 404 pages and keep on top of redirecting these is important particularly if the page had authority. A great big hint to the importance is the fact that Google reports these crawl issues in Google Webmaster Tools in order for you to be able to monitor and fix them.

On a side note I have seen cases where sites have had a lot of 404s due to a significant change of URL structure and they haven't done any redirects - they have lost the majority of their organic rankings and traffic!

[friendoffood]

Matt, thanks.. Good points for sure.  My concern is that since something like 50% of new businesses close doors within 5 years, so the list of redirected urls will just keep getting bigger over time..Is that a concern?  I guess over time less people will link to the defunct businesses, but I will still have to track them..maybe at some point when the number of links to them is small it would make sense to then 404 them?  Of course, I'd still need to track which ones to 404, so i'm now wondering when 404 ever makes sense on prior legitimate pages..

Just to be clear -- redirecting does remove the old link from the index, right?

[CommT]

I may be being pedantic here but I think the correct status code should be 410 not 404 if the page has gone for good and you don't have a relevant place to redirect traffic to, as per the scenario described.

I believe if Google finds a 410 page, it'll be removed from the index but because 404 is 'file not found' the page may stay in the index, potentially giving bad user experience as outlined by Matt Williamson.

However, I would always redirect if you can - even if you just send traffic to the homepage, it's got to be a better user experience than sending them to a 404 page. I think anyway!

More info here: http://moz.com/learn/seo/http-status-codes

You mention a concern over too many redirects - I think this page may help eliminate your fears: http://www.stateofdigital.com/matt-cutts-there-is-no-limit-to-direct-301-redirects-there-is-on-chains/

Thanks,

Amelia

[friendoffood]

Thanks Amelia!