So I was researching the financial planning niche and found this site advisory HQ. It only came into existence some 8-12 months ago and already has 700+ pages indexed in google. According to majestic it has around 200 unique root linking domains. But the traffic growth is phenomenal as can be seen on semrush and it ranks for some tough keywords for a 12 month old site. Obviously they are doing some crazy linkbuilding. But i find it interesting that Google is still so easy to game even in 2016. For eg. this website is no match for investopedia and yet ranks above it for many lucrative keywords. It has no author names/profiles and the about us page raises more questions than it answers. However, this website does help bury some SEO myths. 1) social media affects SEO The site has little to know social media activity. For such a high traffic site you would expect their social media pages to have at least a few thousand likes/followers. Hardly any article on their site has been shared on social media. 2) better content equals higher ranking This site must have some of the most boring content I have ever seen and I like economics/finance. I have browsed several pages on this site and they all read like some kind of college essay rather than expert opinion/advice. No wonder they have no social shares or comments. At the same time it confirms some SEO myths 1) More indexed pages equals better ranking I have observed this first had on my own sites. The 100th page on any site is easier to rank then the 10th page and the 1000th page would be even easier to rank then the 100th page. News sites are the primary beneficiary of this loophole. 2) Topical relevance and siloing equals better ranking This site does a great job categorising content into categories and this helps create fake authority on the subject. A website with 10 articles on the same subject ranks higher for relevant keywords than a site with 1 article on the same subject all other factors being equal. Anyway the point is that this website doesn't add any value to the web and is still ranking very well in Google. It offers nothing original, authoritative or even interesting/controversial - aka the definition of "thin content". It doesn't deserve to rank on the first page - certainly not ahead of real world companies, genuine invest advice and valuable resources. I am not sure what their bounce rate is but if this site survives the next Panda update, Google should fire Mr. Panda and his entire team. But seriously, advisory hq is in real danger of being hit by panda. All the red flags are there imo.