Content or links: which would you fix first on a struggling site?

sharifawan

sharifawan

Elite Member
Jr. VIP
Joined
Apr 30, 2009
Messages
1,833
Reaction score
116
The site has both problems. Content is thin and dated, most pages haven't been touched in two years. The backlink profile is weak: a handful of directory links and nothing else.

Budget for one this quarter. Which do you start with?

I'd go content first, mostly because links pointing at pages nobody wants to read seem like a waste of the links. But I've watched people do it the other way and get results, so I'm not confident.

Which way do you go?
 
Advertise on BHW
Went through the opposite case: content was already solid (structured, decent word count, proper schema) but backlink profile was zero. Rankings stayed completely flat despite the content being 'ready.'


My takeaway: content quality decides whether Google can rank you well, but with zero backlinks you're just not in the competition at all — doesn't matter how good the pages are. If your content is 'thin and dated' though, I'd actually fix that first since links to weak pages won't hold long-term anyway. Your instinct on content-first seems right for this specific case.
 
links pointing at thin dated content waste the equity even when they land. fix the content so there’s actually something worth ranking.
 
I’d probably start by fixing the pages that are thin or outdated, especially the ones that already have some potential to rank. There’s not much benefit in sending links to a page that doesn’t properly satisfy the search intent. Once the important pages are in a stronger position, I’d look at building a small number of relevant links rather than trying to scale backlinks immediately.
 
start with content especially if the pages are thin and outdated Stronger content gives you a better foundation first then you can build relevant links toward pages that are actually worth ranking.
 
The counter-case posted above is the useful part of this thread, because it shows the order isn't universal. Which one you start with isn't a preference, it's a measurement you already hold. Pull impressions for the exact pages you'd be fixing. If they already collect impressions and sit low, the site is in the candidate set and better content can move them. If impressions are near zero on the queries you want, the site isn't being considered at all, and rewriting text won't create eligibility that was never there.

That's the real split, because the two fail at different stages. Links mostly decide whether you're allowed to compete for a query. Content mostly decides which query you're allowed to compete for, and whether the click stays once it lands. Thin pages with impressions are a content quarter. Solid pages with no impressions are a links quarter.

Best,
Floqal
 
floqal said:
The counter-case posted above is the useful part of this thread, because it shows the order isn't universal. Which one you start with isn't a preference, it's a measurement you already hold. Pull impressions for the exact pages you'd be fixing. If they already collect impressions and sit low, the site is in the candidate set and better content can move them. If impressions are near zero on the queries you want, the site isn't being considered at all, and rewriting text won't create eligibility that was never there.

That's the real split, because the two fail at different stages. Links mostly decide whether you're allowed to compete for a query. Content mostly decides which query you're allowed to compete for, and whether the click stays once it lands. Thin pages with impressions are a content quarter. Solid pages with no impressions are a links quarter.

Best,
Floqal
Click to expand...

@floqal that's the answer I was missing. I asked it as a preference question, and it isn't one.

One wrinkle on the impressions test, though. Impressions are per query, not per page. A page can be collecting them on long-tail terms nobody buys from while sitting at zero for the term you actually want, so a page-level number can look healthy and be made entirely of queries you don't care about.

Worth filtering to the specific queries before reading it as eligibility. Money term collecting impressions and ranking low is a content quarter. A money term showing nothing while the page total looks fine is still a links quarter.

Which makes it even less of a preference than you put it.
 
I would solve the content first. Content matters a lot comparing to things out of our control.

Then focus on links. And don't just spam it with random poor links please.
 
I would go content first. If the pages are thin and outdated, backlinks won't have much to support. I would fix the strongest pages first, then build links to them.
 
Advertise on BHW
You must log in or register to reply here.
Sign up now!

Main Menu

Home Main Forum List Black Hat SEO White Hat SEO BHW Newbie Guide Blogging Black Hat Tools Social Media Downloads

Marketplace

Account Selling Content / Copywriting EBooks / Methods Hosting Misc Proxies For Sale SEO - Link building SEO - Packages Social Media Social Media - Panels Web Design More

Making Money

Affiliate Programs Hire a Freelancer IM Journeys Making Money Pay Per Click Site Flipping Want to Buy

BlackHat World

Dispute Resolution Forum Suggestions & Feedback Introductions Lounge
Back
Top