My interpretation on 2021 SEO.

I wish to see more of these kind of discussions in BHW. This is why we are all here for, read, and learn.

TheVigilante said:

That's a very contradictory statement but is that the case with all the niches out there?

Click to expand...

I think the answer to that is it's unknown, would be hard to judge. But I would assume it's rolled out to a vast majority of niches now, the one I'm in is very generic and NLP works like a charm with it. I'm also seeing better rankings on the content that's more unique than the competitors.

One thing I must note from my experience, one of my ex-writers had a passion for the niche, they knew this niche very in-depth. More so than the competitors, and they pumped out fantastic content, and I mean fantastic. But they would use analogies and fluff, and this content has not ranked well. It got stuck in page 2 around #12-#16.

I removed the fluff to make it more clear and concise, and the rankings improved greatly. Jumping to page 1. These were on both review/informational articles.

Google seems to dislike fluff and analogies from my experience.

So from everything I have seen and experienced, it seems content is becoming heavily weighted in SEO.

Kyle roof understands this, his lessons on on-page SEO relate strongly with this type of behaviour I'm seeing in the SERPS. Especially when he refers to virtual silos and content outlining. Not just that though, but tools such as SurferSEO are thriving.

As I understand it, the more weighted content becomes, the less weighted links become. And I think googles end game is to abolish the importance of links, because of how easily they can be manipulated, and of how little value it provides to users to spend £1000s on backlinks vs £1000s on content.

One case study I read showed penalized websites are becoming less and less frequent, because google doesn't need to focus on bad websites if their algorithms know what is and what isn't good content. It can simply just not show poor content, and then there is no need to penalize.

Mike Haskins said:

So, if any tool to measure progress is shit...what are people supposed to use to gauge the effectiveness of the work they put in? Traffic? If its shit...then why do mostly and only high DR sites rank...im just curious how you go about measuring the progress of sites..

Click to expand...

But DR and Traffic are not a metric that go hand in hand are they...

If you aint getting traffic you ain't getting views. So whatever the DR is it makes little difference does it?

I don't know why you would make a purchase decision or rate success on some metric that changes from tool to tool.. It's one of them things that has been long enough that enough people talk about it means it has to be "something real" no one wants to do anything "new" because there are more people than not stuck in the old ways doing the same old thing.

You see it every time a google update come along.

Progress of any site has to be growth no?

I just don't see what DR has to do with anything as a measurement of success

Here you go any old google:

All three are measures for the authority of a website based on its backlink profile. The reason why they are called differently is simple: they come from different tools:

• DA stands for Domain Authority and is a metric in Moz
• DR stands for Domain Rating and is a metric from Ahrefs
• TF stands for Trust Flow and is a metric from Majestic

Click to expand...

SO why is DR more important than DA. Or why is TF less important?

These tools gave out these stats no one else. It's a marketing thing. IF it was that much of a focus wouldn't DR be in every tool and more importantly in search console..

Kyle roof understands this, his lessons on on-page SEO relate strongly with this type of behaviour I'm seeing in the SERPS. Especially when he refers to virtual silos and content outlining. Not just that though, but tools such as SurferSEO are thriving.

Click to expand...

well it's funny that people are always chasing what's next/new but forget about what's already there.
what i mean by this is, if you look at some of the posts by Bill Slawski back in 2012, talks about some patents on how category page can help ranking, and search engine uses some supplement information for the category. You will soon notice that, it's the same, or nearly same concept of physical silos and virtual silos/content clusters.

some basic concepts are gold, and never changed.
but we lack of the experience and practices to fully understand them. I mean at that time, we see the technies about how category page ranks keywords that it does not have, but we fail to apply the same concept to content clusters.