My Volume Content Strategy

So... time for an update.

I will not use my usual SEMRush screen grab as since they updated their databases it looks like the site is total meltdown.

Quite the opposite.

It is extremely annoying that they messed with their data though as it was really useful to me to spot trends, emerging kw opportunities and to keep an eye on competition. Now their is no baseline and it makes it much less useful to me.

Anyway the update....

After almost selling the website a couple of months ago I realised that now is not the right time to exit.

Much of my volume content is still maturing and year on year the site is up +43% on last year, which in itself was a record year. I will hold for the remainder of this year and relist for sale in Q4 of this year as it feels like a better time to start the sales process.

By holding and on the continued growth trajectory that the website is on I now expect to list for multi seven figures. A few months back it was single 7 seven figures.

That should give you an idea of the actual growth of the site since my last update on this thread.

I really cannot go into too much detail but in spite of all the recent update carnage and AI related fear the website continues to responde extremely well to the addition of high quality content, at scale.

I am still doing around 10-30k words per week at present and have been for the last three months after taking a short break whilst I considered selling.

I expect to wind this volume down closer to the time of the sale to max out valuation on listing and to keep the site in what I refer to maintenance mode as it moves through the sales process on the brokerage.

Questions?
 
MrMedia said:
I will not use my usual SEMRush screen grab as since they updated their databases it looks like the site is total meltdown.

Quite the opposite.

It is extremely annoying that they messed with their data though as it was really useful to me to spot trends, emerging kw opportunities and to keep an eye on competition. Now their is no baseline and it makes it much less useful to me.
Click to expand...
Totally agree on SEMRush data...it's a mess.

I saw a major recovery in the March update and now seeing record traffic but SEMRush visibility has fallen off a cliff.

It's quite telling that so many sites have steady or increased page one keywords but huge drops in visibility. One of many examples from a site I monitor:

eRWuVV2.png

[mod edit: don't link to images - embed them please]

I did wonder if this false perception might have caused some of the doom and gloom I'd read on here recently.

Seeing as Ahrefs data is also a mess I find page one keywords is the only near indication that's left of competitor performance.

Anyway, congrats on your progress.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
tomo8900 said:
Totally agree on SEMRush data...it's a mess.

I saw a major recovery in the March update and now seeing record traffic but SEMRush visibility has fallen off a cliff.

It's quite telling that so many sites have steady or increased page one keywords but huge drops in visibility. One of many examples from a site I monitor:

https://imgur.com/a/UjDBfTN

I did wonder if this false perception might have caused some of the doom and gloom I'd read on here recently.

Seeing as Ahrefs data is also a mess I find page one keywords is the only near indication that's left of competitor performance.

Anyway, congrats on your progress.
Click to expand...
Yes I suspect it has fed into the doom loop.

I also think - if I was selling the site now some buyers would be majorly put off by looking at SEMRush data when the reality is totally different. Buyers can be extremely easy to panic.

DanielS said:
What's the plan after selling? Ever thought about starting a new website on a completely fresh domain?
Click to expand...
7 figures into the SPX and the rest into property and maybe buying a new site if one catches my eye.

All of my sites bar this one have been on fresh domains.
 
Woah, just to confirm, you expect to sell for over $10 million now? Nice!
 
MrMedia said:
It is extremely annoying that they messed with their data though as it was really useful to me to spot trends, emerging kw opportunities and to keep an eye on competition. Now their is no baseline and it makes it much less useful to me.
Click to expand...

SEMRush was never accurate. Ahrefs has a much larger database to pull from and they crawl way many more sites that SEMRush. They also update much more often. Just want to put that out there.

That being said, no third party tool is going to be as accurate as GA or GSC obviously (or other tracking tools you have setup on your website). I know you know that already - just saying this incase someone on here is deciding whether to use SEMRush or Ahrefs (just go with Ahrefs and save yourself the trouble).

@MrMedia Good luck with your website, not that you need it ;-)
 
Congrats! That would be a hell of a sale.

It was this thread that motivated me, and I was doing nicely for a while with the volume content strategy until the recent updates.

What do you think of all this EEAT stuff? Does your site have very strong EEAT, and you think it is the reason why you have been able to sail through these updates?
 
MrMedia said:
So... time for an update.

I will not use my usual SEMRush screen grab as since they updated their databases it looks like the site is total meltdown.

Quite the opposite.

It is extremely annoying that they messed with their data though as it was really useful to me to spot trends, emerging kw opportunities and to keep an eye on competition. Now their is no baseline and it makes it much less useful to me.

Anyway the update....

After almost selling the website a couple of months ago I realised that now is not the right time to exit.

Much of my volume content is still maturing and year on year the site is up +43% on last year, which in itself was a record year. I will hold for the remainder of this year and relist for sale in Q4 of this year as it feels like a better time to start the sales process.

By holding and on the continued growth trajectory that the website is on I now expect to list for multi seven figures. A few months back it was single 7 seven figures.

That should give you an idea of the actual growth of the site since my last update on this thread.

I really cannot go into too much detail but in spite of all the recent update carnage and AI related fear the website continues to responde extremely well to the addition of high quality content, at scale.

I am still doing around 10-30k words per week at present and have been for the last three months after taking a short break whilst I considered selling.

I expect to wind this volume down closer to the time of the sale to max out valuation on listing and to keep the site in what I refer to maintenance mode as it moves through the sales process on the brokerage.

Questions?
Click to expand...
Great to hear, thanks for the update.

Regarding potential buyers being scared off, I'd be more concerned about crossing from 2023 to 2024 without having sold the site yet. Seeing income in the month of January drop is a big turn off for many buyers, even though we all know it's going to happen. Doubt creeps in, "What if it doesn't go back up?"

I've been there as a buyer, as has a friend.

Also it's harder to pass an inspection period if there's lower revenue numbers during inspection, and if it fails (even though the site is still growing) it leaves the buyer contractually able to walk away. Or they could renegotiate the asking price and be in a strong position (unless you're willing to start the looking for a buyer / buying process again - often meaning reversing the transfer too).

Also, I feel the death of 3rd party cookies talk will start again in the new year. More businesses will be hesitant to buy content sites until they see how theat pans out.

Just thinking out loud. Either way I hope you achieve what you want with the site.
 
MrMedia said:
Questions?
Click to expand...

Great to hear. That's some incredible growth, long may it continue!

Few questions if you don't mind sharing:
1. How much of the site is 'non long-tail' content? As in, pillar/core content for users. Content that isn't just made to pull in search traffic (aka People First Content). Have you done any work growing the brand identity, or did it have enough pre-purchase that you've just gone after every keyword in existence?
2. How's your EEAT - using real authors? Doing much in the way of backlink building?
3. That's gotta be like 3,000+ posts by now... do you have a system for updating old content? Are you concerned with old content falling off?

Asking as I'm busting my ass on improving all these on our site that's been hit. Google slap could be due to all the above, but maybe we just didn't have the authority profile to justify 1,000+ posts (vs the great authority your site already had at purchase, if I remember correctly)
 
MinstrelJunkie said:
Great to hear. That's some incredible growth, long may it continue!

Few questions if you don't mind sharing:
1. How much of the site is 'non long-tail' content? As in, pillar/core content for users. Content that isn't just made to pull in search traffic (aka People First Content). Have you done any work growing the brand identity, or did it have enough pre-purchase that you've just gone after every keyword in existence?
2. How's your EEAT - using real authors? Doing much in the way of backlink building?
3. That's gotta be like 3,000+ posts by now... do you have a system for updating old content? Are you concerned with old content falling off?

Asking as I'm busting my ass on improving all these on our site that's been hit. Google slap could be due to all the above, but maybe we just didn't have the authority profile to justify 1,000+ posts (vs the great authority your site already had at purchase, if I remember correctly)
Click to expand...
Thanks dude.

  1. All my content is designed for pulling search traffic. I do not focus on brand building type articles or content. The previous owner did this so I guess I am getting a slight boost from that history but I suspect it is minimal. I had a great laugh the other day when one woman posted on the brand fb page how cheap and tacky the site had become. Little did she know that it now makes 400% more than when it was a pretty brand focussed site.
  2. EEAT is non existent. I use profile pics from Pixabay for fake authors LOL. No link building as the links come in naturally from mega brands. Site is DR 70+
  3. Yes closing in on that number. I basically circle back every 6 months looking at kws at 4-20 and if they have enough volume I will update them all with 500 words and a few images. Drop off is a concern as I believe freshness is MAJOR ranking factor that in my humble opinion deserves more focus that creating a LinkedIn profile or some BS to "boost" EAT.
Hope you are seeing some improvements?
 
MrMedia said:
Thanks dude.

  1. All my content is designed for pulling search traffic. I do not focus on brand building type articles or content. The previous owner did this so I guess I am getting a slight boost from that history but I suspect it is minimal. I had a great laugh the other day when one woman posted on the brand fb page how cheap and tacky the site had become. Little did she know that it now makes 400% more than when it was a pretty brand focussed site.
  2. EEAT is non existent. I use profile pics from Pixabay for fake authors LOL. No link building as the links come in naturally from mega brands. Site is DR 70+
  3. Yes closing in on that number. I basically circle back every 6 months looking at kws at 4-20 and if they have enough volume I will update them all with 500 words and a few images. Drop off is a concern as I believe freshness is MAJOR ranking factor that in my humble opinion deserves more focus that creating a LinkedIn profile or some BS to "boost" EAT.
Hope you are seeing some improvements?
Click to expand...
Glad to get a reality check that EEAT isn't some pentagon-level system to crack haha. Thanks for the answers, appreciate it. Been toying with making an alias for a couple weeks. Going a bit mad trying to find someone who a) really knows my technical niche b) is a decent writer c) exists online d) available and e) not ultra expensive has been a real white whale.

Do at least have real experts on board, they're just not writers. So doing calls with them to create video/audio clips to embed on lots of troubleshooting topics. Can use that + the experts reviewing content to make sure our general writers are technically on point.

We're up maybe 5% in the last month which is good, but probably seasonal. Been doing so, so many changes, but think I was too late to get rewarded in the March Core Update. Still working through a to-do list of major improvements, and once done the site will go into maintenance mode until we sell in 2024 (for better or for worse).

On the other hand, the fresh domain I started last year and frontloaded with 500 good articles is blowing up, so that's nice at least! Getting it on Mediavine this week. Between that and another site I'm going all in on in future, hope still remains
 
MrMedia said:
EEAT is non existent. I use profile pics from Pixabay for fake authors LOL. No link building as the links come in naturally from mega brands. Site is DR 70+
Click to expand...
Very interesting, especially after the last round of updates...

So the massive amount of both quality volume AND consistency/freshness is really trumping anything else signal wise for G...

And the same is what attracts all the high power links which you then don't have to chase, build, or buy...

How much, if any, are you leveraging schema?
 
googlealchemist said:
Very interesting, especially after the last round of updates...

So the massive amount of both quality volume AND consistency/freshness is really trumping anything else signal wise for G...

And the same is what attracts all the high power links which you then don't have to chase, build, or buy...

How much, if any, are you leveraging schema?
Click to expand...
Basic usage of schema - article, date published etc
 
MrMedia said:
Thanks dude.

  1. All my content is designed for pulling search traffic. I do not focus on brand building type articles or content. The previous owner did this so I guess I am getting a slight boost from that history but I suspect it is minimal. I had a great laugh the other day when one woman posted on the brand fb page how cheap and tacky the site had become. Little did she know that it now makes 400% more than when it was a pretty brand focussed site.
  2. EEAT is non existent. I use profile pics from Pixabay for fake authors LOL. No link building as the links come in naturally from mega brands. Site is DR 70+
  3. Yes closing in on that number. I basically circle back every 6 months looking at kws at 4-20 and if they have enough volume I will update them all with 500 words and a few images. Drop off is a concern as I believe freshness is MAJOR ranking factor that in my humble opinion deserves more focus that creating a LinkedIn profile or some BS to "boost" EAT.
Hope you are seeing some improvements?
Click to expand...
Hello. This post was insightful. Thanks for expanding on freshness.

Let's say you want to update but keep the same images. Would updating the 500 words and changing a youtube embed or social embeds have a similar impact as changing 500 words + images?

If you're hoping to slowly overtake an older website for a keyword, would you update more frequently than 6 months? Or does the impact start to diminish as you update more frequently than the 6-month mark where at that point it's more important to focus on volume with quality? Anyways, awesome progress -
 
Éowyn said:
Hello. This post was insightful. Thanks for expanding on freshness.

Let's say you want to update but keep the same images. Would updating the 500 words and changing a youtube embed or social embeds have a similar impact as changing 500 words + images?

If you're hoping to slowly overtake an older website for a keyword, would you update more frequently than 6 months? Or does the impact start to diminish as you update more frequently than the 6-month mark where at that point it's more important to focus on volume with quality? Anyways, awesome progress -
Click to expand...
Thanks.

No idea tbh. I stick to adding text based and image based content as an update methodology. I tend to do it every six months as it falls nicely within my workflow - there is no external reason as to why I choose 6 months.
 
Hey @MrMedia, when you say you circle back to your content, could you share how you do that? You have sites with a lot of content, so I imagine you need to have methodology and spreadsheets that allow you to see performance and rankings over time? I pull rankings into my spreadsheet with GSC and other stuff as well. I don't have a specific routine for checking 6 month old content etc, so that's why I ask.
 
bernard said:
Hey @MrMedia, when you say you circle back to your content, could you share how you do that? You have sites with a lot of content, so I imagine you need to have methodology and spreadsheets that allow you to see performance and rankings over time? I pull rankings into my spreadsheet with GSC and other stuff as well. I don't have a specific routine for checking 6 month old content etc, so that's why I ask.
Click to expand...
I look at all those in positions 4-20, sort by volume of potential traffic and then work through in that order
 
MrMedia said:
I look at all those in positions 4-20, sort by volume of potential traffic and then work through in that order
Click to expand...
I find this part of the content update very interesting. I've always thought it's important, both for Google and for users to see "fresh" content.

But when it comes to updating content on large sites I find it complicated and I like your simple way of looking at it.

You look for URLs that have average position 4-10 right?
Because I imagine that looking for keywords in average position 4-10 would be a real madness (you would have hundreds of very similar keywords, keywords that are positioned with the same URL, etc...).
 
cepen said:
I find this part of the content update very interesting. I've always thought it's important, both for Google and for users to see "fresh" content.

But when it comes to updating content on large sites I find it complicated and I like your simple way of looking at it.

You look for URLs that have average position 4-10 right?
Because I imagine that looking for keywords in average position 4-10 would be a real madness (you would have hundreds of very similar keywords, keywords that are positioned with the same URL, etc...).
Click to expand...
Kws. Sort by volume. De dupe repeat urls
 
MrMedia said:
So... time for an update.
Click to expand...
Thanks for the update, just seeing it.
That's very encouraging to know that it's not all doom and gloom with content sites currently.

MrMedia said:
Much of my volume content is still maturing and year on year the site is up +43% on last year, which in itself was a record year.
Click to expand...
Is this in terms of revenue or traffic?
I'm assuming you mean revenue since you say your traffic data has been messed up by Semrush update.
 
Your progress is amazing. I'm trying to model success here, and I'm setting up the content and have tens of thousands of keywords to work with. My question is on cannibalization and interlinking. Could you please offer some advice on how to approach this and start cranking out the content like crazy, while hopefully avoiding cannibalization? As well, are you creating silos to interlink or just linking as appropriate? I'm hitting some serious "paralysis by analysis" so any help is greatly appreciated!
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back