Bring back the Subs - We all want to live in a Yellow Submarine

1. 53

   janderson99posted 8 years ago

   The month long experiment to sink the subs (subdomains) and revert to the 22 silos/folders under the main category names has clearly failed - with a loss of 20-25% of traffic! Please reverse this change. We liked our subs, we want them back! Subs worked! This experiment failed - no benefits for authors!
   
   

   replyreport
   1. 93

      Maffew Jamesposted 8 years agoin reply to this

      +1
      
      Unfortunately, once Google processes a 301 redirect, it can't simply be removed. Google will need to re-index everything again and there's no guarantee that rankings and traffic will return immediately. However, I would still like to see it reverted. I prefer my subdomain for many reasons, not the least of which is the assurance that all content in it is niche specific and of a quality I can control.

      replyreport
2. 60

   paradigmsearchposted 8 years ago

   It is with great restraint that I have not posted the relevant YouTube link.

   replyreport
3. 97

   EricDockettposted 8 years ago

   I've been trying not to be negative, but I'd much, much prefer to have my subdomains back as well. And not just because of the traffic loss (though that's a big reason too).
   
   Is it even possible to reverse it, though? Wouldn't that just cause another round of problems?

   replyreport
4. 96

   DrMark1961posted 8 years ago

   I am wondering: even if they did that, would we not have multiple redirects? Traffic would get even worse.

   replyreport
   1. 53

      janderson99posted 8 years agoin reply to this

      I would have thought that reversing this change would be relatively simple - remove all the 301's for the new structure, restore the directory structure from the server back-ups + some manual changes for new pages added in November. The Googlebot would not care as it is a reversion to an old state. Some churn expected, but I suspect the old traffic would return quickly. I suspect that Panda hates the new structure. Going back would reverse the penalties. There is no evidence that the traffic plunge is due to an incomplete process. Return of traffic with the new structure is a pipe dream IMO. Panda hates it and lowered rankings are the outcome in this nightmare. IMO

      replyreport
5. 60

   paradigmsearchposted 8 years ago

   With the latest Panda update mess and the holidays, this experiment must be allowed to run its course until at least the end of January.

   replyreport
   1. 53

      janderson99posted 8 years agoin reply to this

      I think the Nov 2015 Panda update, and algo update are myths - no evidence I can find.
      https://www.seroundtable.com/google-upd … 21225.html
      https://www.webmasterworld.com/google/4775925-2-30.htm
      
      The travel site ranking issue (http://www.theguardian.com/technology/2 … sor-search) is a red herring for HP - the mysterious HP search results raised previously, are most likely caused by the restructure IMO.

      replyreport
   2. 88

      Will Apseposted 8 years agoin reply to this

      I never thought I would say this...
      
      PDS is now the official voice of reason.
      
      Everybody else needs to stiffen that upper lip while the data accrues. Not that it is looking great, so far.

      replyreport
      1. 60

         paradigmsearchposted 8 years agoin reply to this

         

         replyreport
6. 69

   makingamarkposted 8 years ago

   I took my sub off to sail elsewhere(!) and am looking at a very steep upward incline on the traffic trend.
   
   I think the Google algorithm change does favour those who specialise - except maybe not if you are on a large site.
   
   Maybe those sitting and waiting for traffic to return could explore some of the other options while you wait. Along the lines of a try out for the back up plan. You never know you might find that traffic again!

   replyreport