Thread by @darth_na

🧵
::: Size of site is not the same as Quality or Authority :::

There really does seem to be a confusion between:
* Shallow thinking
* Simple logic

As with "Longform Content", it's not Quantity,
it's what's contained and how it's structured.

Please Retweet
#SEO

Read More >>>

https://twitter.com/kurtlohmann/status/1448967491057766400

2/*

Now, Google will downplay this as hard/fast as they can, and there will be all sorts of semantic-slides.

Anyone that has done this for some time knows that in many cases - Big sites rank better
(be it hundreds of thousands of pages, a Brand, or both)

>>>

3/*

The problem is, that many people seem to jump to the conclusion that it's because they are a Brand-site, or a Mega-site.

There are in fact multiple reasons why this happens,
and not all Brand/Mega's dominate.
Smaller sites can win/rank against.

>>>

4/*

Links:
At the end of the day, Brands are more "linkable" - they are recognised, trusted, respected and often cited or referenced.

Mega sites, due to the volume of content, may get a large number of links too.

But It's not just Quantity of links...

>>>

5/*

Links (Cont.):
The Quality of the links (value, relevance etc.) is also a factor. You are more likely to see higher-value links to Brands than tiny/new/unknown sites.

Where the links go - the dispersal/spread - is also a factor. More pages may receive better spread.

>>>

6/*

Internal Links:
It's not just the Inbound links that may play a part.
It's in the Internal links too!

Though we've got CMS's all over the web now,
many aren't designed/deployed "optimally" in regards to internal links.
Look at how many Mega sites are structured/linked.

>>>

7/*

Internal Links (Cont.):
Many of the better Brand/Mega sites use several different types of internal links.

Not only are there "in-content" links,
there are often "blocks" that contain context and/or "non-contextual" links (related, recent, hot/trending etc.).

>>>

8/*

Age:
No - Age is Not a direct ranking factor!
But consider how many links these sites acquire, over time,
the spread of those links throughout the site over time.

There may also be redirects, merges, consolidations etc. to consider to!

>>>

9/*

Topicality (Relevance):
With all those pages, the chances are high that they've covered the same topics and terms multiple times.
And in many cases, these may be interlinked.

All of this helps G "understand"/associate terms with the content better.

>>>

10/*

Site (not just Pages):
Remember that some of the features that G bases rankings on are Not "page specific".
G may utilise aggregates and broader scores based on collections of pages, or the site as a whole.

Bigger site, potential for better averages?
(Or worse!)

>>>

11/*

Resources:
In many cases, Mega-sites and Brand-sites have multiple resource advantages.

Though they may encounter some negatives (delays in action etc.), they have money, skills and staff SMBs typically lack, thus fewer technical faults, or faster correction.

>>>

12/*

Perpetuation:

Psych > We are more likely to click on things we recognise and trust.

Links > If you rank at the top, you are more likely to be linked to.

This leads to a kind of self-fulfilling prophecy scenario, where those at the top can stay there.

>>>

13/*

Perpetuation (Cont.):
You also have to consider features/factors, and where G looks for insights.
Big sites (Brands/Megas) are often high traffic sites - ideal for observation and learning from (human or machine).
So it's possible the Big sites set the trends?

>>>

14/*

Robustness:
When there's an algo update, or G "twiddles a dial",
this can cause waves in the SERPs.

These waves may swamp smaller/weaker pages/sites,
but many Brands/Megas survive them due to sheer ranking value (this kind of ties in with Perpetuation).

>>>

15/*

So, we have

* Inbound Links
* Internal links
* Not Age (acquisition/comprehension)
* Relevance/Topicality
* Smoothed signals (Site+Pages)
* Resources (fewer tech issues etc.)
* Perpetuation
* Robustness

>>>

16/*

Note how it's all "normal" SEO stuff?

The same core fundamentals we've had for years are still present.

A 500K site and still rank badly,
if:
* it covered a separate topic per page
* didn't get links
* didn't interlink
* had low aggregate metrics

>>>

17/*

So though there are some advantages to being a recognised "Brand",
most aren't really "Direct SEO" ones.

It's how people respond to the brand,
how they link,
and how those sites are structured/optimised.

When you look at them that way, it allows you to see potential.