This isn't entirely true. Do you think someone's name shouldn't get way more search traffic than a long tail including the name? Now go try to compete with Andre's Instagram, Youtube channel with 1M subs, Linked In profile, Facebook page, and personal website to crack the top 5 for "Andrei Jikhn"?
Two things we know:
- We aren't getting search traffic for the long tails including
"influencer", and "personal finance" - We're getting traffic for the term "Andrei Jikhn portfolio"
One thing that I know:
- The #1 position on Google for a search term drives 10x the traffic as the #3 position.
Posted Using LeoFinance Beta
Why would you put effort in P3-5 for a query with on average less than 15 daily searches, if you already rank for it in those positions? Consolidate that ranking, try expanding your reach.
Don't do futile long tail sweatshop work. If the "opportunity isn't measured against search trends, the opportunity maybe just is not as big an opportunity as it has been made out so far (without anyone checking the search trends).
But maybe there's more in it than just that exact term. Go after it. What is he most known for? His YouTube.
When Google gives you the information that a unoptimized shitpost can rank #3 for a search term that drives LEO Finance more traffic than any other search term. You put in the work to get the #1 spot.
Posted Using LeoFinance Beta
There’s a problem here. The marketing agency made a claim and no one verified that.
The data exists tho, that post is driving 0 traffic (zero, nill, noppes, nada, zilch): https://simpleanalytics.com/leofinance.io/@schubes/lsmjyfnd?period=month&count=3
Ten times number of clicks for Pe is 10x0. At best 5 per month.
What that tool does is surface the highest ranked posts, but contrarily to webmasters console, it does not also match the posts against actual traffic/search clicks.
I know, I know... the game is about getting a base of thousands posts driving five clicks daily and then the social game and actual posts, as well as evergreen posts, on top of that.
But the fact is... no one validated the claim whether that post drives traffic. It doesn’t.
You don’t write to rank for topics which have less than 100 daily in trends.
I don’t think this needs further discussion. The data is out there and we should analyse more (DYOR) rather than just swallow claims.
Posted Using LeoFinance Beta
I'm honestly not even sure what you are arguing at this point. Simple analytics doesn't provide keyword data. Yes we are relying shitty data provided to us by a shady SEO company trying to sell us a service, but the keyword data they showed Khal looked hard to falsify. Yes Google trends provides a tiny bit of data, but the most accurate data is going to be your actual websites performance in Google. Google handed us a term that is driving more traffic than any other term to LEO Finance, and we have the opportunity to 10x that traffic source.
Posted Using LeoFinance Beta
Dude, I know you have an innate need to constantly debate me but, and I’m sorry to say it, your knowledge displayed in all the time we’ve encountered each other is at best of imposter level.
I’m showing you that query has driven zero traffic in last three months. I’ve also shown you previously the search trends for the query (less than 15 daily).
And here you are arguing that people should “put in the work” to rank higher for a query which doesn’t drive any traffic.
Yes, your words are correct... I have no clue what you are trying to argue. But I know it’s a load of bollocks and your stubbornness will never allow you to actually once agree with me. Even not when the da is right there in your face.
Level up. Let me know when you have. Your knowledge is not even remotely close to the one I have acquired during my online years. Imposter at best.
It isn't because you rank for a term that people also give a shit about that query and search for it.
Hey bro. I think we're just miscommunicating in the comments. I hope all is well with you. My point of this post wasn't stressing the importance of ranking for any specific keyword, it was just a post outlining some SEO theory. I got a lot of comments on this post, and I should have spent more energy making sure I communicated better with you.
Posted Using LeoFinance Beta
Also what we don't want to do is consolidate the link juice onto the old unoptimized post. All link building efforts should go towards the article I linked near the top of this post. Rolland already wrote a 2nd partially spun article and posted it an hour after I published this, which people are accidentally building links to. Hopefully Rolland can point the link juice in his newer articles to the money post in the end. Sounds like he is going to make new video which his is going to embed into the money post linked in this article.
Posted Using LeoFinance Beta