Do Micro Niche Sites Still Work?

iulipwnz said:

@Nargil I just found where i read about this. Hope I won't get a warning for this. If I am not allowed to post this link, please someone tell me to remove it. https://backlinko.com/google-rankbrain-seo
Please check "Ignore Long Tail Keywords (They’re Obsolete)" part.

I quote "
Long tail keywords are dead.

(There, I said it)

Back in the day, it made sense to create hundreds of different pages… each one optimized around a different keyword.

For example, you’d create one page optimized for “best keyword research tool”. And another optimized for “best tool for keyword research”.

And old Google would rank each of them for their respective long tail keywords.
Today, RankBrain understands that these terms are basically the same thing. So they show nearly identical search results.
In short, optimizing for long tail keywords doesn’t make sense anymore."

Click to expand...

That's what @Nargil said in his first post. Don't bother trying to rank for a single longtail because Google doesn't work like that anymore.
If you Google 10 variations of a longtail you'll get the same top ten on Google, as it understands that they all mean the same thing.

In the past, I could rank for a big blue widget, but not for the biggest blue widget, but now Google connects the two

Still confused. So now you should target medium keywords and lots of content with them ?

In the past, I could rank for a big blue widget, but not for the biggest blue widget, but now Google connects the two

Click to expand...

Well, mostly the other way around. Not for "blue widget", but for "best blue widget ever". That was a common tactic. Nowadays... it doesn't really work like that. No matter what variation of "blue widget" you google (also depends how broad the niche is of course), the top 10 will be, give or take, the same.

Now exact match anchor terms are bad news, would you recommend going back to exact match domains and using them like a brand?

Then if backlinks are mostly URL and brand etc, surely that helps?

Poker Rakeback Mafia said:

Now exact match anchor terms are bad news, would you recommend going back to exact match domains and using them like a brand?

Then if backlinks are mostly URL and brand etc, surely that helps?

Click to expand...

Forget EMD/PMD. Why are you still stuck in 2010?

Looking for any edge that I can find

Poker Rakeback Mafia said:

Looking for any edge that I can find

Click to expand...

That edge might have worked in 2010, not today. EMD/PMD doesn't bring any benefit anymore. Quite the opposite, it's easier to get overoptimized, especially if you are targetting just a small bunch of keywords.

Brand niche sites with lots of smaller linked pages on sub topics work well. They cost a hell of a lot less in hosting as well (one site for all "lawn mowers" in a range rather than a sniper site for each individual mower)
It isn't that hard.

Poker Rakeback Mafia said:

eBay I guess?

Click to expand...

Not great anymore :/

@Nargil what's your opinion about 10beast? Thin amazon affiliate site. Rank high with great revenue.

Do Niche Sites Still Work in 2017? ... It used to be possible to make tons of money from them because with such a specialized, highly-targeted site you'd easily get to the top of Google when people looked for info about that niche. A micro-niche site is even more specific.

phoenix9 said:

@Nargil what's your opinion about 10beast? Thin amazon affiliate site. Rank high with great revenue.

Click to expand...

I am not a fan of multiniche sites. This is an example of heavily offsite SEOed site, so pretty much the exact opposite of what I have been suggesting here yesterday.

phoenix9 said:

@Nargil what's your opinion about 10beast? Thin amazon affiliate site. Rank high with great revenue.

Click to expand...

It was a good site, great seo, sold for a huge amount.
New owners then saw it drop in rankings, so Luqman went and salvaged it for them.

For a kid studying at Manchester, he did very well for himself.
Keep in mind though he was a freelancer and great at seo before he started on 10beast as a project.

So the question that arises for me from this thread is this.

I could build a 100 page site at $5 per page on average, totaling $500, and that should rank with very little off-site right?

Or I could build a 5 page site and spend the $500 on 100 PBN links at $5 each.

Which one is likely to rank higher?

Poker Rakeback Mafia said:

So the question that arises for me from this thread is this.

I could build a 100 page site at $5 per page on average, totaling $500, and that should rank with very little off-site right?

Or I could build a 5 page site and spend the $500 on 100 PBN links at $5 each.

Which one is likely to rank higher?

Click to expand...

That will be some amazing quality links for that price. Especially when $500 budget gets you maybe 2 good PBN domains by itself. So do the maths.

Also, content for $5 a piece will be a total crap.

For me, I've found that writing content that is authoritative has a significant impact on how ranking. Certainly dropping one keyword to rank for doesn't typically do much. But, I've found that you don't always need a pile of content to rank well.

As other folks mentioned, there are a lot of factors.

I spend quite a bit of time doing keyword research and competitor analysis - what are they ranking for? What kind of links are they using etc.

I have several smaller sites (4-5 posts) that rank well and in many cases they rank better for keywords related to the subjects than my larger (100ish post) sites.

My view is that Google ranks content / posts / pages, not necessarily the "entire" website itself (in general)

I could be wrong but that's how things seem to work for my sites.

If I do poor research: keyword, onpage, links, content length and depth, accuracy of content and so forth, I have issues ranking - even for easy keywords.

Start with thorough research, look for keywords related to the subject you wan't to drive traffic to and the keyword difficulty, both from a front page SERP view to tools. See what your competitors are doing and how they do it and do it better - it helps a lot.

That will go a long way to ranking easier.

It's not foolproof - sometimes other websites with more authority and links are harder to overcome even though they have poor content. But GREAT content far outweighs "poor or evengood content" when it comes to working for your ranks and should make your life easier.

I take days to write content. I don't post it until I am relatively certain that piece can compete. Take your time with content, its what your website is based on afterall and what makes money in the end.

Good luck!

Thanks, @Signal512

Do you generally write long content (5,000-word pages) and do you worry about keyword density, or do you just keep it natural?

It depends on whether or not the content needs to be that long. I write it as naturally as possible and keep the main keywords to just a couple. I have 5k and 1.2k articles that rank well.

The 1.2k articles sometimes out rank longer ones. It just happens to be really to the point and accurate. I’ve found that the length of content doesn’t necessarily mean it’s more accurate and authoritative than some long winded rambling bit.

In general though I write 3k or more and at least as long as or slightly longer than the top ranking content.

Nargil said:

That edge might have worked in 2010, not today. EMD/PMD doesn't bring any benefit anymore. Quite the opposite, it's easier to get overoptimized, especially if you are targetting just a small bunch of keywords.

Click to expand...

lol... simple not true, it brings a small benefit, very small benefit. But I agree, you can over optimise if you are a newbie.

OP you could easily create a site for 500$. You could build a pbn for 200$, 150 on domains/hosting/theme, write your own content and focus on one medium sized keyword.

Then you'll still have 150 left for pbn content, some social sigs for moneys site, some diversity packages, etc.

Takes hard work though, not just throwing money at things.

Nope