3 replies to this topic

[ttw]

I have a client who is relaunching their website with a new CMS. Their new site structure will give them URLs that look like this:

www.mysite.com/content/en/us/products-services/product1.html

They say that their new CMS system allows them to skip a directory and display a URL that looks like this:

www.mysite.com/products-services/product1.html

As far as the search engines are concerned there is no problem with either URL but they are asking if the new option is better. I'm telling them it doesn't matter.

Any comments?

[torka]

I don't think it would matter, either, as long as they 301 the old URLs to the corresponding new ones.

The "standard" URL you gave doesn't look all that bad. The shorter one is, well, shorter -- which could constitute a non-SEO reason to favor it, assuming people might see or use the "bare" URLs on a regular basis -- but other than that I can't see a huge advantage (or disadvantage, for that matter) to it. I'd say they could go for whichever one they want without it making a lot of difference either way.

My adjusted for inflation.

--Torka

[Jill]

I can't remember where I saw it or if it was true, but I could have sworn I saw either a study or perhaps even MC saying that shorter URLs trumped longer ones, even ones that had no keywords...if they were shorter, they were better.

Take this for what it's worth, given that I can't remember the source. It stuck with me as credible, however, which is unusual.

[Michael Martinez]

Shorter URLs are more user-friendly, for sure. The search engines could have collected a ton of statistical data about the performance of shorter URLs versus longer URLs. Hence, any number of their algorithms *could* be looking at URL length as a "signal" in some sort of multiple correlation regression blah blah blah.

I typically advise people to use the shortest URLs possible for people's sake and not worry about search engines.

But they definitely want to make sure they are CONSISTENT and that they implement good redirect mapping.