Here are the ranking patterns for the pages in the above Tweet.
It's easy to see why the First Capital Business Finance page lost some rankings... just look at what's on the page...
Same for the Trucker's Report page... Up top nothing too helpful...
Under the fold... some really not great content at all followed by a thin list....
Now the Lending Tree page is where this gets fun... because it's REALLY good but lost rankings.
Starts off with some nice overview content...
Then some nice info on where to get a loan from...
A nice FAQ... you get the point. It's a solid page... why would it lose rankings?
Let's look at the Fundera page that saw gains. It does a lot of what the Lending Tree pages does... but a bit more.
It goes some really nice details that speak very specifically to the target audience... truckers/business owners looking for a loan.
The Fundera page is really a classic example of being that much better than the good content that already ranks on the SERP.
It has that added value that differentiates.
Now take the Fast Capital page, which also saw gains...
Same as the Fundera page... deep details about the nature of the industry...
Again. This type of info is missing from the Lending Tree page
The Fast Capital page is just full of nuance and details all the way through...
One of the elements that caught my eye was a graphic the page starts off with... it really helps the reader understand not just how to get a loan or where to get a loan but helps the reader get a grasp on the trucking industry from a financial POV. It helps give context.
What I think you have with the 2 pages that saw gains is that they both really speak to the user.
They both empathize with the user.
They don't just tell you what to do but help the user understand the larger picture.
In other words, if I'm looking for a trucking loan... what does that say about me? It says I'm looking to get into the trucking business.
The Lending Tree page ignores that. It solely focuses on getting the loan per se... not getting into the business.
In contrast, the Fundera and Fast Captial pages pay attention to who the user is, not just what their immediate wants are.
As such, it offers contextual information via a targeted level of detail, depth, & nuance.
Simply, they speak to the USER & not the user's TASK.
• • •
Missing some Tweet in this thread? You can try to
force a refresh
I don’t know if it’s me or if it’s something happening more often these days in general, but I’ve seen more & more of my pages on the SEO Rant site being crawled but not indexed.
So I made some changes. Lo & behold the pages are now indexed
Here’s what I found fixed my issues
To start, the pages not indexed suffered from a problem:
The topics I cover can sometimes be super-niche. Take an interview I did with @DasfNYC
- We talked about learning SEO by building off what other SEOs have done in the past. Really niche.
So my theory was - Google didn’t index the page because it didn’t think these pages had any value because it couldn’t determine the specific meaning of the page in a pointed manner.
There are 3 parties that push the search engine ecosystem:
1. Google (duh) 2. Content creators/SEOs 3. Content consumers
I think there's a breakdown in the system causing an issue, & I don't think it's Google 😲🧵
Change to the ecosystem fundamentally requires all 3 to be in symbiosis. Currently, I think 2 out of 3 are and that’s why you see the discrepancy between what Google can do algorithmically & how people feel about the results.
What do I mean?
Content creation doesn’t happen in a bubble. There’s a latent incentive structure built into it.
That incentive cycle depends on each of the parties involved in the ecosystem.
I really like tools like @AlsoAsked (or @semrush's topic research tool is a personal fave as well) bec they give you the info you couldn't get without a tool but at the same time put you in a position to use the ol' noggin a bit.
Here's an example of what I mean 🧵
For the KW "Is a floral business profitable" you could take the 4 questions & write a post about each or plop em into an FAQ or a whole buncha diff things.
Or, you could profile what those questions mean - as in - what is the intent of a person who would ask such a question?
Take Q1 - What do florists do with unsold flowers?
Again, you could research & answer that question or you could create a HEAP of content around the deeper Q here:
🔥How do you keep profits up when so much inventory goes to waste (since flowers don't last forever)?
If you want to do away with the out-of-the-box markup we create on these kinds of pages for a SPECIFIC page you can just click to remove the markup.
Again, you can now EITHER bulk create/edit markup at the PAGE TYPE level (via our SEO Patterns Tool - see image)
OR
Custom set whatever markups you want for a SPECIFIC page (talking about dynamic pages such as blogs, products, etc. -static pages have been like this for a bit)
As SEOs we're almost conditioned to think that people search for something - they get the answer and they're on their way.
Not so fast... 🧵
Questions that are satisfied with a linear answer are a very limited subset of what's considered the acquisition of knowledge.
That's not how knowledge is constructed, generally.
Not to go all Piaget on you, but people create schemes. We need multiple pieces of content from multiple vantage points dealing with multiple topics and subtopics to have a sense of familiarity with something - to create a scheme.