@Kevin_Indig Personally - I find there are (should be!) more overlaps than stand-outs.
Things like UX are typically large-scope/site wide,
and should be done (to a degree) for any sized site,
as one small change has impact across the board.
The big differences tend to be...
>>>
@Kevin_Indig >>>
Tech debt
Frankensites
Politics/Personalities
Remits/lanes
Permission chains
Paperwork/Justification
Communication
Prioritisation
Volume/Quantity of edits
Real data analysis over simple charts
But ... usually - there are departments and teams.
Not 1 SEO doing it all
>>>
Aug 14 • 10 tweets • 2 min read
.
:: SEO is cheaper than Paid ? ::
This irks me a little - as it is a general assumption,
and often ignores the "cost" of SEO
(but at least he didn't say "free traffic" :D)
The "cost" of Paid is typically: 1) Initial outlay for media 2) Fairly consistent cost for presence 3) Initial cost of "pages"
The "cost" of SEO usually goes: 1) Initial cost for "pages" 2) Cost to optimise pages 3) Initial cost of "site" optimisation
>>>
Jul 21 • 30 tweets • 5 min read
.
:: Presentation and Perception matters! ::
This is why I'm "anti-blog".
The crux of the issue is how content is presented and perceived,
and a large part of this is based on information-architecture and navigation systems.
... then you have "unstable" and "inconsistent" navigation.
The internal links to that content changes over time,
and that doesn't just influence SEO,
it alters how users see things.
>>>
Jun 18 • 10 tweets • 3 min read
.
:: Crowded Content ::
In many cases, there are competitors for topic(s) you want to target
You have several options: 1) Find terms that aren't competed 2) Find terms that are weakly competed 3) Provide more value 4) Produce multiple inter-supporting pieces
: Non-competed :
This is often harder than it sounds.
It's also complicated by semantic-clustering.
(the "exact" phrase may not be competed, but there are likely umpteen variations that are!).
Further, in the vast majority of cases,
these will be (very!) low volume
>>>
Jun 17 • 6 tweets • 2 min read
.
:: ROI - You're doing it Wrong! ::
Not aimed at anyone specific,
but just been reminded of it...
1) You don't include costs 2) You don't factor in time (to implement/effect) 3) People push the %, but don't provide the "actuals"
Relative figures (grown by X%, gain by N%, return of Y%)
don't mean squat unless there is a real figure provided alongside (ideally, the initial/base figure - failing that, the final, and people can do the number crunching).
Why is it important?
>>>
Jun 17 • 8 tweets • 3 min read
...
Pray/Hope
4️⃣ ... it's for the right audience
5️⃣ ... it's something that contributes to your business goals
6️⃣ ... it's a relevant topic that aligns with your site
Simply copying is Not a good move
(nor is it a "strategy"!).
Most sites already have a load of content that ranks for a ton of irrelevant terms that do Nothing for the business!
Which means you're wasting resources
(at the least, time and effort, maybe money)
>>>
Jun 17 • 6 tweets • 2 min read
.
:: It's not about the AI ::
You will see the same sort of pattern whenever there is a mass ingestion of content,
and usually when it fails to get traction/acquire links,
often due to being low quality (inc. cookie-cutter/dupes)
1) New content is added 2) G discovers new content 3) G crawls new content 4) G indexes new content 5) G ranks the new content for X number of terms
>>>
May 11 • 9 tweets • 3 min read
.
:: Google - using NLP and LLMs ::
So, G have invested Millions into advancing their algorithms, developing cutting edge approaches to parsing content and identifying important information.
But …
… rather than using it for "Ranking"
… they chose to steal Traffic.
G simply cannot know if Bob bought the giant pink 18" floppy dragon pillow (yeah, some of you went there!), or is simply making it up.
(Note: they may be able to guess if Bob's full of shit though, due to 34K reviews in a week ;))
May 9 • 9 tweets • 2 min read
1/🧵
:: SEO by looking at the Rankings ::
Yes / No / Maybe.
The problems here are: 1) Correlation 2) Shallow observation 3) Copy cats 4) Many factors are small/tiny, and don't show any visible impact at the top of the SERPs for high-volume/high-value terms
Instead, there has been a significant shift to:
* what contributes to the businesses goal(s),
* what is readily achievable with the resources available,
* how to present needs/requirements to get them implemented,
* understanding of resource allocation
>>>
Jan 29 • 4 tweets • 1 min read
.
I'm torn on this one.
I deeply value experience, and invested time in learning.
But, as someone that was once young,
and often frustrated at the stupidity I saw in various roles,
I know that "age" is the wrong proxy-metric.
It's the inverse of "time served"
(another thing that always irritated me - the assumption that because someone has done the job for X years, they are good at it!).
Some people are smart, others sharp, others invested time/effort learning/research years ago.
>>>
Jan 29 • 4 tweets • 2 min read
.
:: Test - but prioritise based on Experience! ::
I'm a fan of the "test everything" concept,
but the reality is - most of us don't, and in many cases, you can't.
It's also costly.
So, same as with everything else,
you should Prioritise!
Though markets may differ,
industries respond differently,
audiences react in various ways ...
... there are "safer bets", and "more probable" performers.
We know this based on experience (and even prior tests).
So you go with those as your baseline!
>>>
Jan 27 • 4 tweets • 2 min read
.
:: Remember - Yandex is not Google ::
:: Yandex code "leaked", inc. Search ::
1) No idea if real/legitimate 2) Yandex is Not Google
1) What is a "conversion" 2) There are other goals
Conversions aren't always Direct/Immediate!
They also may be action (signup) rather than transaction (payment).
Or they could transfer (online to store visit/call)
As a channel, SEO can generate Awareness/Exposure, build Recognition/Trust,
and the content may be their for trust/perception/persuasion etc.,
rather than direct/immediate money.
You can literally see who has experience/knowledge in actual marketing,
and those that have only every dealt with digital,
and not bothered to learn/research anything else :(
TV, Radio, Print ... these didn't have "exact numbers".
And they sure as hell don't give insights into the number of exposures before conversion (if!).
And yet - they managed quite well for decades (and longer!), ...
>>>
Dec 6, 2022 • 18 tweets • 6 min read
.
Okay ... mt kids are ill, I'm ill, I'm exhausted,
and I stumble over this pile of steaming shit?
Yeah - no fucking gloves, as I just don't have the mental capacity to constrain myself!
5 subscribed
