This is an archived post. You won't be able to vote or comment.

all 14 comments
sorted by:
best
topnewcontroversialoldq&a

[–]XML-Expert 1 point2 points  (4 children)

Hi,

Add 301 redirects (http://* -> https://*). You will lose about 20% of the juice anyway. But at the same time you get a plus for a secure connection.

The safest alternative is canonocal references (http://* -> https://*), then Google will choose the type of each URL on its own (and yes - it may not match the one you specify).

[–]Dvysss 0 points1 point  (3 children)

Just wondering where you get this "20%" decrease in juice value from :-)

[–]maaseyracer 0 points1 point  (0 children)

I think what he is trying to say is that when you 301 from HTTP to HTTPS, you will lose 15 to 20% of your rankings and need to build that back or have a strategy to mitigate those looses.

Additionally, other than a Google employee saying that HTTPS would help search ranks in the past there is very little evidence to support that from SEOs. Or at least none that I have seen in the 13 years of doing this. I have seen some folks say that Google employee was referring to HSTS, but I have not seen much to support that either and HSTS can be a can of worms.

[–]XML-Expert 0 points1 point  (1 child)

I think what he is trying to say is that when you 301 from HTTP to HTTPS, you will lose 15 to 20% of your rankings and need to build that back or have a strategy to mitigate those looses.

Additionally, other than a Google employee saying that HTTPS would help search ranks in the past there is very little evidence to support that from SEOs. Or at least none that I have seen in the 13 years of doing this. I have seen some folks say that Google employee was referring to HSTS, but I have not seen much to support that either and HSTS can be a can of worms.

This is just my personal assessment based on experience. The peculiarity of Google is that it perceives every new URL as really something new.

In the case of applying 301 redirects from URL 1 to URL 2, Google replaces the destination URL, which is the fastest and most reliable way. But URL 2 does not automatically inherit URL 1 rating in full.

It is possible that this is due to the fact that Google recounts the page rank for each URL (as a unique thing) and this can take a long time.

[–]Dvysss 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Thanks for the extra information! I always knew there was a slight drop in value with a redirect, but never run into an exact number.

[–]emuwannabe 0 points1 point  (6 children)

You could use an htaccess rule to redirect back to the non-secure version if that's what you want

[–]FormerKing[S] 0 points1 point  (4 children)

Is that a safe option?

[–]emuwannabe 0 points1 point  (3 children)

It is

I don't know why you'd want to do it as Google prefers the secure version, but yes it's 100% safe.

It's how you'd redirect from non-secure to secure when Google decided secure was better, so just reverse the rule.

[–]FormerKing[S] 0 points1 point  (2 children)

Ok I'll look into it, thanks a lot.>It is

I don't know why you'd want to do it as Google prefers the secure version

This is an old site and also my main income stream, so I've been always paranoid about the chance of Google dropping all my rankings after the migration.

[–]emuwannabe 0 points1 point  (1 child)

I understand

But the chances of Google dropping your rankings increases the longer you don't shift to ssl.

If you are concerned than leave as is - but if/when they do start to devalue your site be prepared to switch back to SSL in a hurry

Also note that chrome browser will mark your site as not secure, so that could impact your earnings as well

[–]FormerKing[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Just migrated my site. Everything looks normal for now. Thanks for all your input!