Google Algorithm Updates - 2024 Ongoing Discussion

[Smith]

Below the home page, it should be only services/products/about/contact/etc linking across to one another. Never link downwards to any seo posts from here.

This is the first time I've heard anyone say this.

Do you have any other strict rules that would reflect without a shred of doubt that "this is not a content site?"

And when it comes to this...

Bury all of the seo blog posts down to the 3rd level. Wild wild west at this level.

Would you effectively have two sections of the website (e.g. section 1: corporate and section 2: blog) that never interlink besides the footer and header? Or are you suggesting something else?

I will be testing that out once I get back into this...

This is exactly what I'm doing now. I have a brand, a set of products/services, active socials, and every piece of content on the site is within the niche. The site has a tight structure, is 100% human-written (who cares), and doesn't have a single ad or affiliate link. But I don't have a GMB because it's an online-only biz and G isn't interested. And I'm in the process of cleaning up my backlink profile following Grind's suggested approach, fingers are crossed that it helps move the needle.

 

[JOoa0ky]

@Smith I believe strict internal linking is well known and I do recall it being discussed quite a few times on here sporadically through the various posts. The whole hub and spoke model for internal linking structure.

Typically most home pages will link out to the money pillar pages.

• All supporting posts link up to the money pillar hub.
• All supporting posts can link across to each other.

That tells G, here are the most important pages for what this site is about but of course that screams info content site. Just look at healthline or WebMD etc...

---

However, now with the current algorithms you will get slapped six ways to Sunday if you structure your site that way.

It makes sense if you think it from a Headings Hierarchy.
H1 - Homepage
H2 - Products/Services/About/Contact/etc
H3 - Hardcore SEO'd blog posts.

Remember, important content should be 1 or 2 clicks away. So stuff you don't want emphasized bury it 6 feet deep. I mean yeah those money pages we do want emphasized but it's currently being rewarded with a massive penalty.

So, move the pillars down to H3 and move the supporting posts down to H4. Clear all H1 and H2 level free of ADs.

Essentially that will be precisely how all service/product SMB layout their site. Unfortunately, I think this may be the only way to survive.

 

[Smith]

The whole hub and spoke model for internal linking structure.

Yes agreed, this "strict linking structure" has 100% been discussed. It's how I structure my sites without fail. And yes, in the current algo environment, I've been slapped "six ways to Sunday".

But I don't recall the approach you've suggested (burying content deep and prioritizing corporate pages) being covered before, which is why I'm digging a bit more.

You explained it as a "Headings Hierarchy" but I'm wondering if that is how it would actually work in practice or is this just an example?

In other words, would you still include your money pages on the home page as H3s? Or is that just an example and you wouldn't link to the money pages from the homepage at all?

Thanks again for sharing your thoughts/insights on this - finding it really interesting!

 

[MinstrelJunkie]

Is the site hierarchy well established to reflect without a shred of doubt that "this is not a content site?"

Below the home page, it should be only services/products/about/contact/etc linking across to one another. Never link downwards to any seo posts from here. Of course, no ads at this level.

Bury all of the seo blog posts down to the 3rd level. Wild wild west at this level.

Great idea with burying SEO posts. Will consider this for our lead gen site which has great local business signals. Previously the site had the classic SEO tactics like trying to link to all top SEO articles from the home page, and within the menu, etc. Big no bueno.

Will report back if we implement. Cheers

If you don't mind sharing, how many SEO pages vs local biz style pages do you have? As in, are we talking 100-200 SEO articles buried beneath service pages etc, or 1000-2000+?

 

[JOoa0ky]

@Smith Local SEO is a completely different beast from ranking info content SEO. But yes, this has never been discussed because it doesn't make financial sense to hide your highest trafficked pages. However with the direction these algorithms are going... I think avoiding a penalty takes priority. Some traffic is better than no traffic.

Fake it till you make it right? You slowly inch your way to becoming a legitimate biz...
If you can't, at least try to make it look as close to one as possible.

@MinstrelJunkie 700+ seo articles and will continue to proceed.

I guess at this point I'm basically testing the threshold between strict site structure vs how many articles (1k? 5k? 10k?) before G change its mind about what this site is about.

Does a H6 ever become more important than the H1 for an article? I mean based on current experience, a lot of times its easier to get the H6 to rank by making a separate article with it as the H1.


As of the moment, I think if you're going to go into the energy drink niche you should buy a bodega or find a way to latch onto one and then milk the blog to the max. Kind of like how McDonalds is in the real estate biz and not the hamburger...

 

[Smith]

Fake it till you make it right?

lol I guess... but who is faking it?

I have a legit business with legit services and legit paying customers. Zero ads, zero affiliates, just topical content designed to serve the target customer that relates back to the paid services being offered.

Does a H6 ever become more important than the H1 for an article?

The only thing I'm still not understanding is what you mean by H3 through H6? Are you actually talking about headers e.g. <h2> <h3> <h4> and so on? Or are you just using that as an example?

 

[CCarter]

Link Whisper or similar automatic interlinking tools and survive either this update or the HCU in August?

Not that I've seen. I've told everyone to remove those plugins and go back and fix their internal anchors with natural as best as possible. The second I heard you say Link Whisper and Link Boss, it dawned on me and took a week of my life diving into over a dozen sites to see - everyone is dead that used them.

And now I fear people aren't realizing these LSI and automated Wordpress anchoring internal link plugins are toxic. This lesson is getting lost in the noise once again.

Reality is, people should probably listen to the person showing recoveries:

https://twitter.com/x/status/1775170334851039485

But that's just me, cause I like winning.

I hope no one is using them still... **looks around**

I also hope no one is creating a new WordPress plugin that does the exact same thing as Link Whisper... on this forum, with a follow along journal lab thread... that would make things - a bit uncomfortable.

He/she/they/it would need to show rankings increases to prove the internal link anchor theory incorrect. I probably shouldn't post this reply - things might be a bit tense.

 

[Darth]

@CCarter are you referring to someone who uses LW and simply does a "select all" on the suggested links and accepts them? I don't see what's wrong if you manually review and edit its suggestions. I get it to add maybe 1 in 10 that it suggests after editing.

 

[CCarter]

@CCarter are you referring to someone who uses LW and simply does a "select all" on the suggested links and accepts them? I don't see what's wrong if you manually review and edit its suggestions. I get it to add maybe 1 in 10 that it suggests after editing.

Let's put it this way, I don't think a lot of people are aware there was a massive update in late 2022 that dealt with internal anchor texts specifically.

It was then accelerated/dialed up with these last rounds of updates.

So if this is news to people, which I believe it is, than they are over-optimized cause of internal links.

Same scenario with these scrapper sites and spammy websites that send and get zero traffic, there are gurus running around saying they don't matter and Google ignored them. That's incorrect.

Notice how @Ryuzaki has a running disavow link list and every update those disavowed links are taken into consideration. But gurus say not to bother - again incorrect.

Same with Nofollow, Google doesn't take their power to your site into consideration, but they DO count and consider the anchor text that nofollow link used to point to you. So if you aren't disavowing, aren't aware of the nofollow anchors count, aren't aware of the internal links over-optimization - you then install one of these tool and do a 6 to 10 out of 10 of their recommendations instead of your 1 out of 10, then you are dying like everyone else.

It's always those small details that are reveal that allow you to connect the other dots. That part about Nofollow links' anchors text counting towards you - is a piece. That should send alarm bells to ANYONE with backlinks. If that's true, then all those scraper/spammy sites with zero traffic pointing towards your site, or your images, are over-optimizing your backlink profile and need to be disavowed. But gurus tell you not to disavow.

Then take into consideration websites that get zero traffic are toxic and getting backlinks from them is poison, regardless of dofollow or nofollow - there is no direct traffic benefit, and if Google only cares about domains with traffic, then there is no SEO benefit - they should be disavowed and removed. But gurus tell you not to disavow.

A long time ago I used to believe you shouldn't use the disavow tool - until you need to recover. BUT I saw the results of cleaning up backlinks from hit sites - over and over and realized it needs to be a continuous thing like getting a checkup once a or twice a year.

But here is what's really killing me, people are saying everyone got hit, but everyone didn't get hit. The people that didn't get hit aren't saying anything, so the noise makes it seem like everyone did. In fact those assholes are running around purchasing websites of people that got hit with HCU updates for pennies on the dollar like John D. Rockefeller did. Robber baron shit. And I'm just sitting here watching this from the back of the room - and shaking my head.

Alot of those people hurting have these automated interlinking tools installed. They also don't run weekly/monthly disavows to clean up their backlinks. They also listen to gurus. They also believe "helpful content" is some Google sprinkled magic about A.I. analysis of websites or whatever. It's about backlinks and anchor text ratio - as it always has been since the dawn of PageRank.

And it's easy to prove right or wrong. Find a page that has been hit - look at the internal links pointing to that page - if they are exact or partial matches, remove them or turn them into natural phrases. See what happens - you have nothing to lose.

Then go and find all backlinks to that page and find the URLs from websites with zero traffic - disvow those backlinks, again you have nothing to lose since the page is decimated anyways. Also find backlinks that use keywords that the page is targeting - since some of these scrapers are backlinking to image files instead of the page. Disavow those - too. After 96 hours, send that disavow list, the bad links, through indexers/crawlers or even scrapebox so Google recrawls the URLs. See what happens to that page in 10-14 days.

If that page starts to recover you found your problem. This recovery method is all @Grind's method that he's been using to recover sites and he's been explaining on here and on twitter - shouting into the void, cause the gurus on XSEO are out of their minds.

Honestly this SEO shit is a bunch of nonsense. I'm not allowed to talk about this, or reveal that, or show this, people get really mad when I reveal stuff. You guys should have seen how mad they were when I revealed this with a service in the marketplace:

They were trying to knock at my door at night. Lucky I live in a very very tall building with lots of floor level security.

But then I'm useless on the side lines keeping my mouth shut doesn't help anyone. Maybe it's the alcohol leaving my body, or that I'm no longer in the mainstream SEO game - fuck it. I'm going to show you guys some crazy negative SEO shit going on "THEY" don't want reveal.

Also - a blackhat should be able to put it together, ALL those scraper/spammy sites - why do they exist? Why would anyone keep renewing them?

You have to think like a TRUE blackhatter -the true negative SEO dark web masters. It's to make money, but the other way.

Those toxic domains that have been spammed to death - they are negative SEO nuclear rods. The TRUE blackhats are using them to tank websites on-command. They also have techniques like using click farms with residential IPs to flood websites with garbage traffic tanking them in the SERPs cause of bad click-thru rates.

If your competitor wants to tank your site they can easily. Especially if you guys don't disavow. But also I'm going to show you guys examples of how they are doing it without leaving a trace, except maybe in your analytics - that you need to deep dive for.

Hold on someone's knocking on my door...

 

[Éowyn]

Thank you for this. It's clearer now. Buso might not be mainstream, but like Smith said, it's a special place.

 

[Zoro]

Let's put it this way, I don't think a lot of people are aware there was a massive update in late 2022 that dealt with internal anchor texts specifically.

It was then accelerated/dialed up with these last rounds of updates.

So if this is news to people, which I believe it is, than they are over-optimized cause of internal links.

Same scenario with these scrapper sites and spammy websites that send and get zero traffic, there are gurus running around saying they don't matter and Google ignored them. That's incorrect.

Notice how @Ryuzaki has a running disavow link and every update those disavowed links are taken into consideration. But gurus say not to bother - again incorrect.

Same with Nofollow, Google doesn't take their power to your site into consideration, but they DO count and consider the anchor text that nofollow link used to point to you. So if you aren't disavowing, aren't aware of the nofollow anchors count, aren't aware of the internal links over-optimization - you then install one of these tool and do a 6 to 10 out of 10, then you are dying like everyone else.

It's always those small details that are reveal that allow you to connect the other dots. That part about Nofollow links' anchors text counting towards you - is a piece. That should send alarm bells to ANYONE with backlinks. If that's true, then all those scraper/spammy sites with zero traffic pointing towards your site, or your images, are over-optimizing your backlink profile and need to be disavowed. But gurus tell you not to disavow.

Then take into consideration websites that get zero traffic are toxic and getting backlinks from them is poison, regardless of dofollow or nofollow - there is no direct traffic benefit, and if Google only cares about domains with traffic, then there is no SEO benefit - they should be disavowed and removed. But gurus tell you not to disavow.

A long time ago I used to believe you shouldn't use the disavow tool - until you need to recover. BUT I saw the results of cleaning up backlinks from hit sites - over and over and realized it needs to be a continuous thing like getting a checkup once a or twice a year.

But here is what's really killing me, people are saying everyone got hit, but everyone didn't get hit. The people that didn't get hit aren't saying anything, so the noise makes it seem like everyone did. In fact those assholes are running around purchasing websites of people that got hit with HCU updates for pennies on the dollar like John D. Rockefeller did. Robber baron shit. And I'm just sitting here watching this from the back of the room - and shaking my head.

Alot of those people hurting have these automated interlinking tools installed. They also don't run weekly/monthly disavows to clean up their backlinks. They also listen to gurus. They also believe "helpful content" is some Google sprinkled magic about A.I. analysis of websites or whatever. It's about backlinks and anchor text ratio - as it always has been since the dawn of PageRank.

And it's easy to prove right or wrong. Find a page that has been hit - look at the internal links pointing to that page - if they are exact or partial matches, remove them or turn them into natural phrases. See what happens - you have nothing to lose.

Then go and find all backlinks to that page and find the URLs from websites with zero traffic - disvow those backlinks, again you have nothing to lose since the page is decimated anyways. Also find backlinks that use keywords that the page is targeting - since some of these scrapers are backlinking to image files instead of the page. Disavow those - too. After 96 hours, send that disavow link through indexers/crawlers or even scrapebox so Google recrawls the URLs. See what happens to that page in 10-14 days.

If that page starts to recover you found your problem. This recovery method is all @Grind's method that he's been using to recover sites and he's been explaining on here and on twitter - shouting into the void, cause the gurus on XSEO are out of their minds.

Honestly this SEO shit is a bunch of nonsense. I'm not allowed to talk about this, or reveal that, or show this, people get really mad when I reveal stuff. You guys should have seen how mad they were when I revealed this with a service in the marketplace:

They were trying to knock at my door at night. Lucky I live in a very very tall building with lots of floor level security.

But then I'm useless on the side lines keeping my mouth shut doesn't help anyone. Maybe it's the alcohol leaving my body, or that I'm no longer in the mainstream SEO game - fuck it. I'm going to show you guys some crazy negative SEO shit going on "THEY" don't want reveal.

Also - a blackhat should be able to put it together, ALL those scraper/spammy sites - why do they exist? Why would anyone keep renewing them?

You have to think like a TRUE blackhatter -the true negative SEO dark web masters. It's to make money, but the other way.

Those toxic domains that have been spammed to death - they are negative SEO nuclear rods. The TRUE blackhats are using them to tank websites on-command. They also have techniques like using click farms with residential IPs to flood websites with garbage traffic tanking them in the SERPs cause of bad click-thru rates.

If your competitor wants to tank your site they can easily. Especially if you guys don't disavow. But also I'm going to show you guys examples of how they are doing it without leaving a trace, except maybe in your analytics - that you need to deep dive for.

Hold on someone's knocking on my door...

You are officially my Master now.
Anything you say now, I will listen!

Thank You. 4realz

 

[Darth]

Same scenario with these scrapper sites and spammy websites that send and get zero traffic, there are gurus running around saying they don't matter and Google ignored them. That's incorrect.

Isn't any half decent site that has been ranking for a period (say 5 years +) going to have a TON of those scraper links?

 

[Trump]

Isn't any half decent site that has been ranking for a period (say 5 years +) going to have a TON of those scraper links?

Yeah. Loads of 'em. The bigger the website - the more of those links they have. From what I've seen, it doesn't matter if you disavow them or not. I have seen no indications that Google would care about them in the slightest.

P.S The "traffic leak" spam in this thread is starting to get a bit silly. It's quite obvious that the same person is writing under several accounts to promote..

 

[CCarter]

Isn't any half decent site that has been ranking for a period (say 5 years +) going to have a TON of those scraper links?

Yeah, that's the same argument the gurus say on twitter. There is no harm in disavowing them then getting the disavowed links indexed to get them removed. Or just do nothing, and sell your site to the HCU clean up crew.

P.S The "traffic leak" spam in this thread is starting to get a bit silly. It's quite obvious that the same person is writing under several accounts to promote..

Be more specific in who you are referring to, we'll handle them. Unless you think me and grindstone are the same person... that'd be worlds colliding. Mind-blowing at a level since most of us know these 2 people existed separately since 2007.

 

[bernard]

I personally don't believe in the theory that there's one simple thing that can fix a site that gets algorithmically.

What's needed for one site might not be the same as for the other day. It's all flags and correlations. I believe that @Ryuzaki had the right idea with the "Kitchen Sink" method, but I also think Google intends for carnage and bloodbath.

I've been around for 10 years now, actually more and Google does this kind of thing, mowing the lawn, from time to time. Too many people who were not SEOs but side hustle types got into it. Google can deal with SEOs, but not if "cheating" google becomes a popular hobby with the mainstream.

Perhaps fixing this one thing will work, but even so, that will have gotten rid of all the people who simply give up.

 

[CCarter]

I believe that @Ryuzaki had the right idea with the "Kitchen Sink" method, but I also think Google intends for carnage and bloodbath.

Maybe, but lets talk about @Ryuzaki's Kitchen Sink, here is a direct quote:

I've seen and recovered a penalty from this with 100% links to image files. Yes, an algorithmic penalty for web 2.0 links to image files (not posts).

He wrote this 3 years ago. He states to disavow these links and has a running disavow schedule.

Obviously a lot of people aren't doing that. So if they aren't doing that, they are also aren't doing a lot of other SEO basics. Same situation for the people that don't bother reading the Digital Strategy Crash Course - they waste months spinning their wheels.

The exact same method of disavowing in the kitchen sink is being used by other top SEOs to recover sites during this update. If they had been doing all the stuff in the Kitchen Sink method and other advice they won't be getting decimated.

Yet here we are...

The solutions I'm pointing to have been mentioned in the past and praised here. @Ryuzaki waits for the recover during a core update when they reconsider disavows, @Grind uses indexers to force Google to consider the disavows now.

People have nothing to lose if their pages are already decimated by disavowing toxic URLs from domains with no traffic.

Perhaps fixing this one thing will work, but even so, that will have gotten rid of all the people who simply give up.

We all lose if the SEO community gets smaller. Experts leaves, knowledge leaves, curious people leave - who would have been future leaders, and when stuff like Negative SEO attacks happen no one will know where to turn to. Places like BuSo get smaller. I don't know what the solution overall to that is, maybe I'm just talking into the void of space like grind is over at XSEO twitter crowd.

 

[Smith]

People have nothing to lose if their pages are already decimated by disavowing toxic URLs from domains with no traffic.

This is where I'm at...

I have many thousands of links from sites that are either "toxic", non-existent, or legit spam. Why wouldn't I disavow them and see if it helps my rankings?

The only "danger" with this strategy is if people think it's a silver bullet and don't try anything else in the meantime... yea it would be great if this one thing fixes all my problems, but it's unlikely.

I'm personally moving forward with multiple initiatives because I don't know where the wins will come from. I'm not a gypsy and I don't have a crystal ball. But I figure if I just do all the things, and I do them well, I won't need a crystal ball. I'll be so undeniable in my niche that everyone will have to come to me for their answers, including Google.

So right now I'm executing...

1. Recovery attempt following Grinds instructions
2. Full updates to content that has been pushed down (but not out) of the rankings
3. Site-wide review/update of internal links (remove exact match and go natural)
4. Increasing content distribution across FB, X, Linkedin
5. Traffic leaking via Reddit and 3rd party forums
6. Increasing short-form video output across TikTok, Insta, Shorts, FB
7. Stepping up YouTube quality and output
8. Increasing email distribution
9. Reviewing/updating EEAT and other "important" signals
10. Digging into other potential causes (e.g. thousands of spam links that lead nowhere)

All that to say I don't know what is causing my drop in rankings... but if someone who has been in the game for a while suggests that a tactic/strategy might work, I'm not going to ignore it. And if the downside to executing that tactic/strategy is negligible, why wouldn't I try it?

Plus... trying something new sure beats following the same advice from the same SEO guru squad who are still selling the same outdated courses they created in 2018 and are pushing through their SEO YouTube channels. Or is that just me?

 

[Grind]

Maybe, but lets talk about @Ryuzaki's Kitchen Sink, here is a direct quote:



He wrote this 3 years ago. He states to disavow these links and has a running disavow schedule.

Damn, ahead of his time. Tips cap fedoraingly.

In fact those assholes are running around purchasing websites of people that got hit with HCU updates for pennies on the dollar like John D. Rockefeller did. Robber baron shit. And I'm just sitting here watching this from the back of the room - and shaking my head.

*Trying to buy them for pennies on the dollar.

The problem is, and no offense intended but obviously it will be taken, these made for Ezoic sites are absolute trash pits.

I've been DM'd about 20 since I said I was buying them publicly but most of them have no other route to monetization than display and that model is cheeks.

Unless you think me and grindstone are the same person... that'd be worlds colliding. Mind-blowing at a level since most of us know these 2 people existed separately since 2007.

You're much more handsome than I am.

 

[BakerStreet]

This is where I'm at...

I have many thousands of links from sites that are either "toxic", non-existent, or legit spam. Why wouldn't I disavow them and see if it helps my rankings?

The only "danger" with this strategy is if people think it's a silver bullet and don't try anything else in the meantime... yea it would be great if this one thing fixes all my problems, but it's unlikely.

I'm personally moving forward with multiple initiatives because I don't know where the wins will come from. I'm not a gypsy and I don't have a crystal ball. But I figure if I just do all the things, and I do them well, I won't need a crystal ball. I'll be so undeniable in my niche that everyone will have to come to me for their answers, including Google.

So right now I'm executing...

1. Recovery attempt following Grinds instructions
2. Full updates to content that has been pushed down (but not out) of the rankings
3. Site-wide review/update of internal links (remove exact match and go natural)
4. Increasing content distribution across FB, X, Linkedin
5. Traffic leaking via Reddit and 3rd party forums
6. Increasing short-form video output across TikTok, Insta, Shorts, FB
7. Stepping up YouTube quality and output
8. Increasing email distribution
9. Reviewing/updating EEAT and other "important" signals
10. Digging into other potential causes (e.g. thousands of spam links that lead nowhere)

All that to say I don't know what is causing my drop in rankings... but if someone who has been in the game for a while suggests that a tactic/strategy might work, I'm not going to ignore it. And if the downside to executing that tactic/strategy is negligible, why wouldn't I try it?

Plus... trying something new sure beats following the same advice from the same SEO guru squad who are still selling the same outdated courses they created in 2018 and are pushing through their SEO YouTube channels. Or is that just me?

I'm on the same boat as you but the down side to trying new things is that you could make an expensive failure even more expensive.

 

[secretagentdad]

Hold on someone's knocking on my door...

Stay safe big dog.
You joke, but auto complete lets you intercept the user before they even make it to the serp.
That aint no joke, that's shaping society and making peoples minds your bitch.

Next time you make something earth shattering ask me for ideas on what to do with it.
I promise I can come up with something better than make a bst on a gay web master memorial forum.

 

[Darth]

Is getting these toxic link links to disavow as simple as doing a report export from semrush or something more nuanced?

 

[Smith]

Is getting these toxic link links to disavow as simple as doing a report export from semrush or something more nuanced?

See @Grind's comments in the current links thread where he talks about SEM and other tools.

 

[BakerStreet]

I'm out. I've put in 60,000 USD in to this new site in the last 12 months and lost 51,000 USD. Sure, let's keep the hope up that there's a way to recover from this new AI powered algo update but I'm going to follow the advice of a friend of mine, who has been in business for 20 years. He told me to just go as lean as possible to survive. That's what I'm doing. Content marketing goes from 6 people to 2 and they go from writing blog posts to just PDPs. Fulfilment goes from 3 people to 1. Product goes from 3 people to 2. We'll be cash flow neutral with these cuts. Then we coast until we get gov approval.

If my site somehow bounces back in the SERPS, sure, I'll scale content. Until then, it's dead to me.

 

[Smith]

I'm out. I've put in 60,000 USD in to this new site in the last 12 months and lost 51,000 USD. Sure, let's keep the hope up that there's a way to recover from this new AI powered algo update but I'm going to follow the advice of a friend of mine, who has been in business for 20 years. He told me to just go as lean as possible to survive. That's what I'm doing. Content marketing goes from 6 people to 2 and they go from writing blog posts to just PDPs. Fulfilment goes from 3 people to 1. Product goes from 3 people to 2. We'll be cash flow neutral with these cuts. Then we coast until we get gov approval.

If my site somehow bounces back in the SERPS, sure, I'll scale content. Until then, it's dead to me.

You're still developing your product, fulfilling orders, and moving forward... the only pivot seems to be toward different customer acquisition channels. Sounds like a smart play.

I'm personally guilty of sticking with strategies long after their shelf life has expired. SEO is a great example. I'm sure I'm not alone in this...

It's human nature to desire easy wins, to resist change, and to hope that our problems get fixed without us lifting a finger... it's a big reason why people pray.

And, this whole "resistance to change" disease is why 99.999% of the world is poor, hungry for purpose, and desperate for handouts. It's "easier" than taking action, adapting, pivoting.

It takes a special kind of chaos to wake up a person and shock them into the reality that help is not coming and they need to adapt if they want to survive and eventually thrive... hitting rock bottom can be one hell of a trampoline if you're mentally and emotionally strong enough.

Anyways.... here's something a bit more tactical for you @BakerStreet... You've probably already thought of this, but just in case:

What about spinning up mask sites to run PPC ads for your particular service and then funneling that traffic to your actual business?

Basically, create "affiliates" for your business, run PPC through those affiliates as throw-away sites, and just skip the whole gov approval issue?

Depending on your country, you could also just set up your domains, PPC accounts, etc, in another country... or just strike affiliate deals with actual affiliates.

Your business can't help it if other businesses/sites decide to generously send traffic your way!

 

[BakerStreet]

You're still developing your product, fulfilling orders, and moving forward... the only pivot seems to be toward different customer acquisition channels. Sounds like a smart play.

I'm personally guilty of sticking with strategies long after their shelf life has expired. SEO is a great example. I'm sure I'm not alone in this...

It's human nature to desire easy wins, to resist change, and to hope that our problems get fixed without us lifting a finger... it's a big reason why people pray.

And, this whole "resistance to change" disease is why 99.999% of the world is poor, hungry for purpose, and desperate for handouts. It's "easier" than taking action, adapting, pivoting.

It takes a special kind of chaos to wake up a person and shock them into the reality that help is not coming and they need to adapt if they want to survive and eventually thrive... hitting rock bottom can be one hell of a trampoline if you're mentally and emotionally strong enough.

Anyways.... here's something a bit more tactical for you @BakerStreet... You've probably already thought of this, but just in case:

What about spinning up mask sites to run PPC ads for your particular service and then funneling that traffic to your actual business?

Basically, create "affiliates" for your business, run PPC through those affiliates as throw-away sites, and just skip the whole gov approval issue?

Depending on your country, you could also just set up your domains, PPC accounts, etc, in another country... or just strike affiliate deals with actual affiliates.

Your business can't help it if other businesses/sites decide to generously send traffic your way!

You're right. We are still moving forward. We are still adding 1 new product/week as well as the PDP for that product and fulfiling orders according to the SLA. We are just giving up on content marketing and SEO. Leaders in my industry went from 3,000,000 visitors/month to 300,000 visitors/month. I spent $60,000 to get to 30,000 visitors/month and $2,000 in gross profit/month. If the ratio is the same, I'd need $600,000 to reach 300,000 visitors/month and that'd only bring in 22,000 USD/month of gross profit.

It's not worth it anymore.

And yes, no one's going to help a business down on it's knees. Only when you're on the up and up would people be willing to invest and buy you out. But then, you don't need their money.

The funny thing is, once I get approval, I'm set. We're just waiting on regulatory approval.

Two other competitors do the affiliates route. The one that goes with webmaster affiliates doesn't get that much traffic. The guy who's VC-backed and ISO 1009 certified has affiliate agreements with airlines, Airbnb, etc., so they took the b2b affiliate space. I'm also not set up to do affiliates right now in my backend and don't want to spend any money fixing it. It's a good idea though.

Also, about the resistance to change thing, sometimes it's good to be persistent and double down; but, here, I really don't see land. The situation has gotten worst and worst and worst with every update and the future looks bleak. This is rock bottom for me as an SEO and content marketer but, only through a break down can you re-build yourself better