Http > https Switch Before Platform Migration?

[Sayers]

We are planning a series of large site migrations over the next 12-18 months, moving from one platform to another. It's likely the first will be completed by around Aug this year, with the process running until the back end of 2018.

The sites are currently on http, and the plan is to first of all migrate all sites to https in the next couple of months. The concern is that, due to the http>https 301 redirects that will be in place, are we putting ourselves at unnecessary risk by effectively carrying out 2 migrations in the space of a year (in terms of loss of potential authority caused by redirects)? Would we be better to wait, and implement https at point of platform migration instead?

Thoughts appreciated.

[benesmartin]

Hey Nicola,

I'll share my thought about this issue. However, I'm sure there are many approaches to that.

I would suggest to do firstly the HTTP -> HTTPS migration as far as it's one of the ranking factors according to Google - see the official Google blog here: https://webmasters.googleblog.com/2014/08/https-as-ranking-signal.html

You'll save the precious time, Google will see that you "upgraded" your website and that you keep pace with the trends. If you would start firstly with the platform migration, you would loose several months waiting for this to be done before starting HTTP -> HTTPS.

Hope you get my idea. Cheers, Martin

[iugac]

Hi Nicola! What are your reasons for splitting the migration? Is your site processing sensitive data? If yes, https is an ASAP problem for you since Chrome will already give your users some trouble when navigating your website. If not, I think you will be better of with a single migration. But again, could you give some details regarding your thoughts and reasoning about this? There could be multiple aspects that influence this decision.

[Sayers]

Thanks for the responses both.

The only reason we are splitting is because the new platform is still being completed (custom built), whereas we have spare development resource on the legacy platform. From that point of view, it would appear to make sense to complete the http>https migration now. Of course, the earlier we implement, the earlier we stand a chance of seeing a positive impact.

I am just slightly wary of the potential for ranking losses, based off migrating our URLs twice in one year. What would be your thoughts on this?

We do process sensitive data, but on those relevant pages we do already implement secure protocol. The above relates to site wide pages.

[iugac]

Do you have a list of all links pointing to the webpages you are trying to redirect on the new launch? If the structure of your website changes, I would use my remaining development time to minify the time you are going to invest in changing them. So 301 is good, but it is better if you can change the external and internal links that you can to point to the new pages. After that, do the 301s. The migration will take development changes but also a lot of link fixing. Although https is a ranking factor, I don't see it as an urgent move. It is your call but I would use the time to prepare a really good migration. Good luck!

[DonnaDuncan]

"The concern is that, due to the http>https 301 redirects that will be in place, are we putting ourselves at unnecessary risk by effectively carrying out 2 migrations in the space of a year (in terms of loss of potential authority caused by redirects)?"

In February 2016, Google’s John Mueller announced that SEO equity or PageRank will no longer be lost when a 301 or 302 redirect is used in conjunction with an HTTP to HTTPS migration. While some of us doubted this statement, Gary Illyes tweeted the same thing in July 2016 and Barry Schwartz at Search Engine Land confirmed it. There is no loss of authority caused by redirects when you implement HTTPS.

"Would we be better to wait, and implement https at point of platform migration instead?"

I think the approach you're taking (convert to https first) is a good one. It affords you better control and is a good use of available resources.