Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

What I’ve learned about SEO (2018)

salon.thefamily.co

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

21–30 of 45 posts

Re: What I’ve learned about SEO (2018)

#21

Post by joegahona »

emerongi wrote: post #6

The real SEO is getting backlinks. They dominate every other aspect. Getting a high rank through "natural" SEO is really hard. I know someone who makes $12MM/year from high-ranking websites in extremely competitive keywords... and it's all about peddling links, really. The first page of results rarely has any correlation with quality (of information/product) and more than likely the correlation is actually negative.…

> I know someone who makes $12MM/year from high-ranking websites in extremely competitive keywords... and it's all about peddling links, really.

I am curious what you mean by "peddling links"?

> The first page of results rarely has any correlation with quality (of information/product) and more than likely the correlation is actually negative.

Isn't the first page of results supposed to be more about relevance than quality?

Re: What I’ve learned about SEO (2018)

#22

Post by ALittleLight »

seibelj wrote: post #8

Use keyword search tool to find searches that have no high quality results. Then write a blog post for that topic and post the link casually on Reddit comments, twitter, etc. then wait a few weeks and it will be the #1 result. I have used this strategy for several years, it basically comes down to writing quality content on topics that don’t have any content.

What search tool do you use to find search keywords?

Re: What I’ve learned about SEO (2018)

#23

Post by ALittleLight »

alexis_fr wrote: post #3

> I must warn you: blog topics will seem really boring. That’s normal. You’re writing for Google, not really to bring lots of value to users. (But don’t worry, they only look at the pictures ) It always makes me sad that the sad state of the web is imposed by an artificial decision. Good article, very different from past years where repeating a keyword was useful.

I was confused by that part and by rule 7.

"Rule #7: There is no secret. Craft amazingly good content."

So... Craft amazingly good content by hiring a freelancer on fiverr to write boring top ten blog posts that aren't intended to be read by anybody but Google?

On the one hand, I appreciate the author sharing strategies and ideas. On the other hand, this feels a lot like polluting cyberspace. By ranking your blogspam to drive sales on your dropshipping platform, or whatever, you're pushing actual good content off the first page of search results and into ignominy. It helps explain a general feeling I've had lately about the web getting worse and more generic.

Re: What I’ve learned about SEO (2018)

#24

Post by jotm »

I would add: only use SEO for actual, useful services, content or products.

Don't trash the already bad SERPs with more junk (eg regurgitated articles written for £3, surrounded by ads and popups). That's just being a c__t

Re: What I’ve learned about SEO (2018)

#25

Post by ceejayoz »

emerongi wrote: post #18
IAmGraydon wrote: post #15

Earlier quoted context omitted.

>I know someone who makes $12MM/year from high-ranking websites in extremely competitive keywords... and it's all about peddling links, really. How are these sites monetized?

A combination of ads and referral links. Ads are not Google Ads (or similar), but sold directly, no middle-man. The business very starkly displays a core truth: if you really know how to do SEO, you will run your own websites instead of selling "SEO services".

I get a little joy out of replying to "first page of Google, guaranteed!" email spam asking why they're not on the first page for "SEO".

Re: What I’ve learned about SEO (2018)

#26

Post by petra »

joegahona wrote: post #19
petra wrote: post #16

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Searches/topics that don't have any content , usually have very low traffic. So what's the point ?

That would be true if the number of topics in the world were constant, but new topics materialize all the time, and the popularity varies on old topics. Articles get old/outdated and are fertile ground for new articles with updated information, etc.

That might be true to rapidly changing fields.

But most businesses work in slowly changing fields.

Re: What I’ve learned about SEO (2018)

#27

Post by seriocomic »

I'm actually surprised that this article made the homepage and has received the upvotes it has on this (typically SEO sceptical) HN forum.

Probably less than 30% of the article would be considered "effective" (e.g. the advice is specific to, and likely to materially increase SEO performance) and the rest is either unsubstantiated (semantic tags and image compression leading to SEO ranking improvements) or unrelated to actual SEO (404 pages and other "engagement" advice).

There are much better articles that break down the basics, ignore the "SEO" parroting and that are substantiated by real data (based on test and trial).

Re: What I’ve learned about SEO (2018)

#28

Post by shostack »

emerongi wrote: post #6

The real SEO is getting backlinks. They dominate every other aspect. Getting a high rank through "natural" SEO is really hard. I know someone who makes $12MM/year from high-ranking websites in extremely competitive keywords... and it's all about peddling links, really. The first page of results rarely has any correlation with quality (of information/product) and more than likely the correlation is actually negative.…

Sites like these are inherently fragile if they derive the majority of their revenue by trying to game SEO. Not saying there is no opportunity there, but being one algorithm update away from second page results or worse means your business has a lot of risk associated with it.

Does your friend have any other channels working profitably?

Re: What I’ve learned about SEO (2018)

#29

Post by dazc »

petra wrote: post #16
seibelj wrote: post #8

Use keyword search tool to find searches that have no high quality results. Then write a blog post for that topic and post the link casually on Reddit comments, twitter, etc. then wait a few weeks and it will be the #1 result. I have used this strategy for several years, it basically comes down to writing quality content on topics that don’t have any content.

Searches/topics that don't have any content , usually have very low traffic. So what's the point ?

You don't necessarily have to get a lot of traffic in order to generate revenue. There are potentially profitable niches that are not monetized at all.

Re: What I’ve learned about SEO (2018)

#30

Post by anon1m0us »

shostack wrote: post #28
emerongi wrote: post #6

The real SEO is getting backlinks. They dominate every other aspect. Getting a high rank through "natural" SEO is really hard. I know someone who makes $12MM/year from high-ranking websites in extremely competitive keywords... and it's all about peddling links, really. The first page of results rarely has any correlation with quality (of information/product) and more than likely the correlation is actually negative.…

Sites like these are inherently fragile if they derive the majority of their revenue by trying to game SEO. Not saying there is no opportunity there, but being one algorithm update away from second page results or worse means your business has a lot of risk associated with it. Does your friend have any other channels working profitably?

Most people would think f u money after a year of gaming the system to be a good direction to have taken.
Post reply on HN