My understanding is google first looks at the location of the url to give ratings. An IP in the UK will get a higher rating for co.uk
We are moving all our sites to a uk server, .com .uk .de ect and set up a primary entry page that highlights the UK Mother Company but gives links to the satellight products globally.
Currently Sub1(.com) has all the ratings, "A Master" is coming into play and Sub1 will move to a UK server and keep the same .com name. So there will be no redirects from Sub1 to "A Master"
THE QUESTION IS.... The marketing people want to make Sub1(.com) and Sub2(.uk) content occupy the same domain with the same content except changing color to colour. Thats the way it is now and it sucks. How can I tell them you cant have 2 sites with the same content and make them understand!. Sorry little rant there Im frustrated. Right now they have Sub1(.com) & Sub2(.uk) as both .com names swinging from the same url.
Marketing people think they can build 3 sites on the same domain and give them different folders /uk/us/au and change color to colour and snap to blimy and everything is different while the content is exactly the same.
> How > can I tell them you cant have 2 sites with the same content and make > them understand!
Simple.
Tell them Craig said, "Thtupit idea!".
I am sure they will then immediately understand. :-()
Ok, so on to plan B. Have you tried explaining that bots don't care about colors and only look at the content, text, and images to a lesser extent and that if they see two pages with content very similar if not exactly the same, the search engine at best, will only list one in the SERPs or at worst, not index either one if they feel a "game" in operation or, the bot just has a bad hair day?
Bots don't know a /us/ from a /uk/ from a /funny-picture-I-took/.
/us/ could be "Us", you and I, /uk/ could be something someone says when they step in dog shit and /au/, there is a cellular phone provider here in Japan whose name is "Au" so what are the bots going to make of "you and I stepping in some dog shit while talking on our cell phones"?
Rant away! It is good to see one is not the only one having to deal with trying to convince people of things they really should have no opinion about.
On another note, I suppose telling them that their "opinions are like arm pits, everyone has a couple but they all stink!"
I'm thinking that won't work though as well as "Craig said it's thtupit!" but your mileage may vary. :-)
They are thinking to corner the market and have 3 or 4 chips in the game rather than one. Tell them it's an idiotic idea. And that's putting it mildly. Tell them other big companies have been stung by such stupid decisions, they wouldn't be first. They are 5-10 years behind with such shenanigans. Google is deadset against any such crap. There are already too many useless sites, too many duplicates of everything. They are cleaning up left, right and center. What gave them the idea it's a good idea?
But if they don't believe it, great, let them shoot themselevs in their feet. It will be sweet to say "I told you so" after that.
> My understanding is google first looks at the location of the url to > give ratings. An IP in the UK will get a higher rating for co.uk
> We are moving all our sites to a uk server, .com .uk .de ect and set > up a primary entry page that highlights the UK Mother Company but > gives links to the satellight products globally.
> Currently Sub1(.com) has all the ratings, "A Master" is coming into > play and Sub1 will move to a UK server and keep the same .com name. So > there will be no redirects from Sub1 to "A Master"
> THE QUESTION IS.... The marketing people want to make Sub1(.com) and > Sub2(.uk) content occupy the same domain with the same content except > changing color to colour. Thats the way it is now and it sucks. How > can I tell them you cant have 2 sites with the same content and make > them understand!. Sorry little rant there Im frustrated. Right now > they have Sub1(.com) & Sub2(.uk) as both .com names swinging from the > same url.
> Marketing people think they can build 3 sites on the same domain and > give them different folders /uk/us/au and change color to colour and > snap to blimy and everything is different while the content is exactly > the same.
webado wrote: > They are thinking to corner the market and have 3 or 4 chips in the > game rather than one. Tell them it's an idiotic idea. And that's > putting it mildly. > Tell them other big companies have been stung by such stupid > decisions, they wouldn't be first. They are 5-10 years behind with > such shenanigans. Google is deadset against any such crap. There are > already too many useless sites, too many duplicates of everything. > They are cleaning up left, right and center. What gave them the idea > it's a good idea?
> But if they don't believe it, great, let them shoot themselevs in > their feet. > It will be sweet to say "I told you so" after that.
I dont think its so much trying to corner the market with 3 or 4 chips because we are talking 3 or 4 products that are related and 3 or 4 products that have nothing to do with any of the other products. The unifying theme is this is "A Master" site "A, B & C" have a related product site "X, Y & Z" have a related product and Site "1, 2 & 3" Have a related product. So "A Master" is suppose to point to each of the sub realms.
Each of the sub realms should have there own domain in my opinion but there are those that say the sub relams Site(ABC) = 1 domain all similar content, Site(XYZ)=1 domain similar content.
While each domain has its own nitch realms ABC, XYZ have similar content skewed for specific countries and not much more... ie color and colour
> webado wrote: > > They are thinking to corner the market and have 3 or 4 chips in the > > game rather than one. Tell them it's an idiotic idea. And that's > > putting it mildly. > > Tell them other big companies have been stung by such stupid > > decisions, they wouldn't be first. They are 5-10 years behind with > > such shenanigans. Google is deadset against any such crap. There are > > already too many useless sites, too many duplicates of everything. > > They are cleaning up left, right and center. What gave them the idea > > it's a good idea?
> > But if they don't believe it, great, let them shoot themselevs in > > their feet. > > It will be sweet to say "I told you so" after that.
> I dont think its so much trying to corner the market with 3 or 4 chips > because we are talking 3 or 4 products that are related and 3 or 4 > products that have nothing to do with any of the other products. The > unifying theme is this is "A Master" site "A, B & C" have a related > product site "X, Y & Z" have a related product and Site "1, 2 & 3" > Have a related product. So "A Master" is suppose to point to each of > the sub realms.
> Each of the sub realms should have there own domain in my opinion but > there are those that say the sub relams Site(ABC) = 1 domain all > similar content, Site(XYZ)=1 domain similar content.
> While each domain has its own nitch realms ABC, XYZ have similar > content skewed for specific countries and not much more... ie color > and colour
cass problem is Im not in control, they dont even ask my opinion. I throw it out and its like yea earl says they gather all the resorces that they have turned over to building the new site and those resources say, WOW thanks earl for telling us this we need to take this into account. Then they neuter the new resources and say hit the deadline screw it it doesnt matter. We want the site up by this date we dont care if its right or not!
> > How > > can I tell them you cant have 2 sites with the same content and make > > them understand!
> Simple.
> Tell them Craig said, "Thtupit idea!".
> I am sure they will then immediately understand. :-()
> Ok, so on to plan B. Have you tried explaining that bots don't care > about colors and only look at the content, text, and images to a > lesser extent and that if they see two pages with content very similar > if not exactly the same, the search engine at best, will only list one > in the SERPs or at worst, not index either one if they feel a "game" > in operation or, the bot just has a bad hair day?
> Bots don't know a /us/ from a /uk/ from a /funny-picture-I-took/.
> /us/ could be "Us", you and I, /uk/ could be something someone says > when they step in dog shit and /au/, there is a cellular phone > provider here in Japan whose name is "Au" so what are the bots going > to make of "you and I stepping in some dog shit while talking on our > cell phones"?
> Rant away! It is good to see one is not the only one having to deal > with trying to convince people of things they really should have no > opinion about.
> On another note, I suppose telling them that their "opinions are like > arm pits, everyone has a couple but they all stink!"
> I'm thinking that won't work though as well as "Craig said it's > thtupit!" but your mileage may vary. :-)
Yea me too. Especially since there are new domains coming into play. There does look like someone there has a good handle on whats going on but// Always a but, if people dont listen to the new point guy on these issues whats the point.
Maybe I need to go back to school. A global company with offices around the world with 1 product would be easy. How would you do a global company world wide with mutiple products. Actually "A Master" site down to the lower sites is sounding good to me.
Could be worse, could be, "We limit what you can do but get it up by this date and it damn sure better be right!" :-()
But whatever, it's their nickel. Maybe if you are very lucky, they will remember what you said originally but more than like it will be, "Why didn't you mention this before???"
You know the drill, which is why you are probably here ranting. :-()
I don't know if we can actually help you or not but if there is anything we can actually do, like propose actual arguments, we can try but I think you know your situation better than anyone, although at the same time, we've likely all been there. :-(
> cass problem is Im not in control, they dont even ask my opinion. I > throw it out and its like yea earl says they gather all the resorces > that they have turned over to building the new site and those > resources say, WOW thanks earl for telling us this we need to take > this into account. Then they neuter the new resources and say hit the > deadline screw it it doesnt matter. We want the site up by this date > we dont care if its right or not!
> Priceless
> On Aug 16, 10:13 pm, cass-hacks wrote:
> > > How > > > can I tell them you cant have 2 sites with the same content and make > > > them understand!
> > Simple.
> > Tell them Craig said, "Thtupit idea!".
> > I am sure they will then immediately understand. :-()
> > Ok, so on to plan B. Have you tried explaining that bots don't care > > about colors and only look at the content, text, and images to a > > lesser extent and that if they see two pages with content very similar > > if not exactly the same, the search engine at best, will only list one > > in the SERPs or at worst, not index either one if they feel a "game" > > in operation or, the bot just has a bad hair day?
> > Bots don't know a /us/ from a /uk/ from a /funny-picture-I-took/.
> > /us/ could be "Us", you and I, /uk/ could be something someone says > > when they step in dog shit and /au/, there is a cellular phone > > provider here in Japan whose name is "Au" so what are the bots going > > to make of "you and I stepping in some dog shit while talking on our > > cell phones"?
> > Rant away! It is good to see one is not the only one having to deal > > with trying to convince people of things they really should have no > > opinion about.
> > On another note, I suppose telling them that their "opinions are like > > arm pits, everyone has a couple but they all stink!"
> > I'm thinking that won't work though as well as "Craig said it's > > thtupit!" but your mileage may vary. :-)
> Could be worse, could be, "We limit what you can do but get it up by > this date and it damn sure better be right!" :-()
> But whatever, it's their nickel. Maybe if you are very lucky, they > will remember what you said originally but more than like it will be, > "Why didn't you mention this before???"
A portal site for the master company and all the company-spcific blahblah, and separate domains or subdomains for each product. Now the country specific stuff it depends if it's at the level of the products or at the level of the master company. A shorter version of the master company blah blah on each satellite and links to the master portal.
is that similar to your idea or direct oppposite? LOL
> Yea me too. Especially since there are new domains coming into play. > There does look like someone there has a good handle on whats going on > but// Always a but, if people dont listen to the new point guy on > these issues whats the point.
> Maybe I need to go back to school. A global company with offices > around the world with 1 product would be easy. How would you do a > global company world wide with mutiple products. Actually "A Master" > site down to the lower sites is sounding good to me.
> A portal site for the master company and all the company-spcific > blahblah, and separate domains or subdomains for each product. > Now the country specific stuff it depends if it's at the level of the > products or at the level of the master company. > A shorter version of the master company blah blah on each satellite > and links to the master portal.
> is that similar to your idea or direct oppposite? LOL
> On Aug 17, 12:28 am, surf_doggie wrote:
> > On Aug 17, 12:02 am, webado wrote:
> > > Aaaarrgghhh...
> > > I'm confused ...
> > > On Aug 16, 11:59 pm, surf_doggie wrote:
> > Yea me too. Especially since there are new domains coming into play. > > There does look like someone there has a good handle on whats going on > > but// Always a but, if people dont listen to the new point guy on > > these issues whats the point.
> > Maybe I need to go back to school. A global company with offices > > around the world with 1 product would be easy. How would you do a > > global company world wide with mutiple products. Actually "A Master" > > site down to the lower sites is sounding good to me.- Hide quoted text -
I'd be inclined not to beat myself up about it - we've all had the vibe when it's clear they're going to listen to you nicely and then carry on and do it whichever way they had already decided. What do we know?
But, I'd have a paper trail as a fall-back for when it all goes wrong and you're proved right; maybe summarise, as I'm sure you have already have, what the pitfalls are, give examples of how other multinationals organise their sites. And surely there must be more than a colour scheme to differentiate between countries? Every country has a its own voice and use of language, and for a website to engage language and tone are crucial; think about spellings - I've got Firefox shouting at me about my use of "s" when it would like "z" and my preference for a "u" in colour. And don't forget the British habit of understatement, both in design and use of language - in more assertive cultures the message would be missed altogether. No, there are a stack of of subtleties that make a site belong to its target audience.
> Yea me too. Especially since there are new domains coming into play. > There does look like someone there has a good handle on whats going on > but// Always a but, if people dont listen to the new point guy on > these issues whats the point.
> Maybe I need to go back to school. A global company with offices > around the world with 1 product would be easy. How would you do a > global company world wide with mutiple products. Actually "A Master" > site down to the lower sites is sounding good to me.
