Strategy for organic traffic in the future

[guggi2000]

Fact is that organic traffic from Google is declining. It is difficult times for old school SEO and online marketers, but there will be opportunities. Unfortunately most threads in this forum focus on the past or present instead of on the future.

In this thread, please do NOT:
- Discuss the beautiful old days we all made money from free traffic
- Complain about Google and its practices
- Talk about spammy sites ahead of you

My questions:
1. How do we prepare?
2. How can we get more traffic without Google in a few years?
3. Will people use social search in a few years based on signals collected now?
4. What niches and types of websites will still maintain the organic strength in Search Engines?
5. Shall we shift to mobile apps instead of mobile web?
6. Shall we focus on offline marketing or PR instead of SEO?

[aristotle]

The first step is to create something of value. Then you can go to those questions in your list.

[piatkow]

I would put a lot more emphasis on 6. How many people search Google for comparison websites compared with those who go straight to the one they see advertised?

[webcentric]

Yes, to what aristotle said. It all has to start with value. That's what other websites will link to. That's what people will bookmark. Those two fundamental sources of traffic have never gone away and may become more valuable than ever. Building a loyal audience has always been valuable. The problem with search traffic is that you have to keep getting more of it. Regardless of where your traffic comes from, if you can convert a visitor into a returning visitor rather than just spitting them out the end of your monetization engine and calling it a good day, you'll benefit in the long run. In the end, you'll get many more opportunities to monetize that visitor in the future.

Also, I think it's helpful to look at your competition once and awhile in a way that makes you stop thinking of them as competition and gets you to thinking of them as peers. In that frame of mind, opportunities start to emerge. Linking is still an Internet fundamental. Don't let your fear of Google stop you from using the Internet the way it was intended to be used.

[EditorialGuy]

To borrow a line from Google, "Build sites for users, not for search engines." In other words, create enough intrinsic value for users that search engines will want to link to you.

Also, don't assume that organic traffic from Google is declining.

[guggi2000]

@aristotle Of course, having something of value is a precondition. And I am happy you did not use the wording "good content".

@webcentric I don't look at competition as peers (yet). However, we started to cooperate with websites with complementary products. It is like starting from Zero again. In addition we would like to see more "recommendation widgets" outside the news and entertainment industry. I am sure it will come one day.

[webcentric]

Edited: Added quote.

Also, don't assume that organic traffic from Google is declining.

Just like the word "economy," the term "traffic from Google" doesn't mean much to me when you use it globally. Individual site owners ARE experiencing a decline in traffic (while others may not be) and that's the "economy" they're/I'm concerned with. That's also why niches and industries need to be considered with some degree of separation in a discussion like this. The environment just isn't the same for everyone.

Whether you're talking about getting traffic from the SERPs or from direct mailing, or from social media, there are a great many industry-specific conditions that must be considered. Amazon doesn't just have a great search presence, they advertise all over the place (including on many websites run by people who frequent these forums). Still, I can't compare their strategy to what I need to do. For the most part, we don't compete. I can learn from their strategy but I still have to mold my own unique value proposition, identify my target audience, learn how to communicate in a way that my target audience connects with, etc. Amazon doesn't dominate the search phrases I consider valuable to my business. Hardly ever see them there. Point is, at a bare minimum there are several distinct discussions in this area. E-commerce is of course the elephant in the room. Then there are areas such as specialty services, entertainment, information, etc. Each requires a different approach. Each offers distinct challenges. All can benefit from an effective marketing strategy but those strategies are all going to be different in some significant ways.

[netmeg]

I always start with the business model. (Even if it's not a business)

[seoskunk]

create enough intrinsic value for users that search engines will want to link to you.

Do you mean other people will want to link to you? This is the same old rhetoric where are users ment to link from? Facebook twiiter and tumblr? If so then surely social search is now more important than google. They have removed all other infrastructures for people to link.

[guggi2000]

social search is now more important than google

IMO, we are not there yet. All have failed in social search, social recommendations, etc... but it will arrive one day, hopefully soon.

[guggi2000]

Also, don't assume that organic traffic from Google is declining.

It does not matter if one got hit or not. Everyone needs an alternative and not to rely solely on Google traffic.

That's also why niches and industries need to be considered with some degree of separation in a discussion like this.

I would also separate by type of site. I.e. A site about the history of architecture may be hit while a site with architecture examples won't.

[glakes]

Also, don't assume that organic traffic from Google is declining.

I don't assume organic traffic is declining, but I have come to the conclusion that paid ads consume much more of the serps then they have at any point in the past. With that in mind, I find it impossible to believe anyone would have the audacity to suggest that organic traffic from Google is not declining. One would have to ignore basic logic to believe organic traffic from Google is not declining when Google is instead diverting that that traffic to paid ads. Most of us are not that ignorant.

Since it is blatantly obvious that less ad space devoted to organic search results is going to produce less organic traffic, the way to deal with this decline is simple. Either join adwords or put your effort and money into something else that will produce traffic. Sell products? Then list them at ebay and Amazon. Have really good information that Google does not like? Build a following on Facebook. There are alternatives out there, including paid advertising with the other search engines. Go out and find it because you have to be really good to not fall into Google's over priced adwords PPC trap.

[EditorialGuy]

With that in mind, I find it impossible to believe anyone would have the audacity to suggest that organic traffic from Google is not declining.

First of all, many SERPs have few ads or even no ads. (Not all search queries involve shopping.)

Second, as overall search volume grows, traffic from those searches is also going to grow.

Obviously, different site owners will experience different rates of growth or decline in their own organic search traffic.

[webcentric]

The OP requested that this not devolve as is

Complain about Google and its practices

I took the original question to be about thinking outside the Google box in a forward thinking fashion. Maybe it's more of a marketing discussion in general. All I feel certain of is that blathering about how Google is screwing up your gravy train is off topic in this thread. Milking Google for what's left may be a legitimate strategy for some and there do appear to be plenty of opportunities still available in the SERPs. For some though, something else has to happen, new approaches are necessary. Again, this isn't a one-size-fits-all conversation but it needs to get beyond complaining about some other company's business strategy.

[austtr]

...always start with the business model.

Absolutely correct. If your business model is dependent on getting revenues:

a) just from free traffic via organic search results.. or
b) from a market sector in which Google has an existing commercial interest (eg hotels, flights, shopping).. or
c) from a market sector in which Google is going have a commercial interest (eg real estate).. or
d) by being able to survive the world of punitive algo changes (eg.. Penguin)

then you need to think long and hard about investing heavily (time and money) into areas where small and medium sized enterprises have to contend with a playing field that is tilted very heavily against them. There are, and will always be, exceptions, but is your business model really, really one of them?

PS.... no, not a Google gripe, just a reminder that a commercial reality check should come before the new product, or upgraded existing product, ever sees the light of day.

[guggi2000]

I took the original question to be about thinking outside the Google box ...All I feel certain of is that blathering about how Google is screwing up your gravy train is off topic in this thread.

Thanks!

Social Search: Searching and finding things based on what your friends suggested.
In your opinion, is it worth preparing for that? Do you prepare for that? We don't yet.

To turn a visitor into a returning visitor is probably one of the most important things too, but I don't see it happen for 99% of the sites.

[toidi]

Niche, business model and value have all become minor points. In the future, if you want to be a darling in goog's eye, just raise 30-40 million in vc money and take over pretty much whatever vertical you want. Easy!

[RedBar]

Easy!

Certainly for the past few years that has been very true however will it remain this way?

[mrengine]

All I feel certain of is that blathering about how Google is screwing up your gravy train is off topic in this thread.

If there is a gravy train, Google is getting most of the gravy while the small mom and pops are being run over by the train. We live in a time when more small businesses are closing then are being created, which can be attributed to a consolidation of wealth. If anyone is riding a gravy train, it's Google - just look at their profits for evidence of that.

How Google maintains their gravy train may have something to do with their questionable business practices:

US Federal Trade Commission finds evidence of intentional search bias: [webmasterworld.com...]
EU alleges antitrust violations: [webmasterworld.com...]

Some justifiable complaints in these forums are just a symptom of what was and will likely be revealed in the past, current and future investigations involving Google's business practices. There's no question that search has and will change in the future, whether those changes are initiated by Google or government. If adapting to changes in how Google operates in the future is the purpose of this thread, then the complaints which are driving government investigations into Google's business practices may provide an indication of what forced changes may be coming down the road.

[samwest]

I always start with the business model. (Even if it's not a business)

Sorry, but I couldn't help but think of Ty Webb & Judge Smails... [youtube.com...]

Also, don't assume that organic traffic from Google is declining.

No need to assume, we have plenty of data to prove it.

Need organic traffic? Perhaps venture capital will ensure good listings. You can also go back to advertising the old fashioned way, handbills, press releases and magazines...or pound some pavement. I may be wrong, but I don't see SEO ever coming back. Online, mobile apps are the way to go. There was an article 5 years ago declaring "the web is dead" meaning mobile apps are quickly encroaching on "the web". Read it: [wired.com...]

This part of the opening paragraph tells it all "this new paradigm reflects the inevitable course of capitalism."

[EditorialGuy]

Also, don't assume that organic traffic from Google is declining.

No need to assume, we have plenty of data to prove it.

Yes, and some of us have data that shows the opposite.

As I said in another thread, the best strategy for attracting organic traffic from Google (or Bing, Yandex, etc.) is to offer something that the search engine doesn't. Instead of competing with "answer boxes" or the Knowledge Graph, complement or supplement it.

When linking for editorial reasons, most of us link to pages that offer more on a topic than we do (not just pages that duplicate ours). It makes sense for a search engine to do the same thing.

[webcentric]

To those who can't seem to say on point. This board is littered with threads where complaining about Google's business practices is front and center. This industry is in a state of flux. It's not a discussion about Google's attempt at taking over the Internet, it's a discussion about how we all can learn to survive in a future that very well may not include significant volumes of Google traffic as a mainstay.

[samwest]

@web - if you are referring to my comment then please clarify what about my response is off topic? It seems all I need to do is appear in a post and some members twist my comments into a bash on Google's policy. Nothing I am saying is a complaint and nothing has to do with anyone's policy. Just reality, like it or not...or hear what you want to hear....doesn't make one bit of difference to me. The point of my comment is that perhaps chasing organic results is NOT the way to go anymore. The OP wanted suggestions and I gave mine. We are all entitled to our opinions without censorship...right?

[webcentric]

@samwest Actually, no, I wasn't aiming at you. Suggestions are what the OP asked for. :)

The conversation needs context so it's sort of impossible to have it without discussing the nature of the beast to some degree. Still, to get productive, it helps to imagine (rightfully or not) what a world without organic traffic from Google might be like and how you'd survive in such a world. Arguing about whether Google traffic is declining or not is like a dog chasing its tail. From webmaster to webmaster, the story is different. Arguing about how Amazon dominates the e-commerce SERPs and the fairness of that is really just arguing about a symptom that some (but not all webmasters have experienced). If one doesn't feel they're getting a fair shake in the SERPs or believes that their traffic will dry up eventually, it's prudent to start working on plan B, C, D...if that isn't already in place. It's basically a conversation about diversification and exploration. It's about stepping forward into the unknown and daring to create your own future rather than letting some mega-corp create it for you.

I pretty much look at organic traffic as gravy these days. I refuse to rely on it. I'll take what I can get of it but it's been demoted in my marketing strategy to the position of a wildcard. Handy to have but there are only so many of them in the deck. Reliable, sustainable traffic sources are my obsession these days. I don't consider any SERP to fit that description any more.

[EditorialGuy]

The point of my comment is that perhaps chasing organic results is NOT the way to go anymore.

I'm not sure that chasing organic results ever was the way to go. Over the long haul, it's more productive to do your job and let the search engines do theirs.

As Aristotle said earlier in this thread, ""The first step is to create something of value." If you create a site with enough intrinsic value for users, you won't need to chase search results.

[rish3]

I'm not sure that chasing organic results ever was the way to go.

The ROI on that used to be pretty stunning, even with minimal effort...so I would have to disagree. It's more difficult now, but there are people that still make money this way.

Personally, I have diversified over the past few years such that organic traffic is helpful, but not needed to survive. That's just adjusting to my comfort level for business risk though. There are still plenty of people making money on organic search alone. I suspect they understand the risk.

It's not the only business endeavor with risk. Lots of people winning and losing in offline real estate as well.

[guggi2000]

Personally, I have diversified over the past few years such that organic traffic is helpful, but not needed to survive.

Can you elaborate? We tried too, but still rely on 60%-70% traffic from search.

[samwest]

The whole idea of making something of value to PEOPLE does make sense rather than trying to make something of value to the search engine. Eliminate the middle man by creating a valuable app that then sits on the mobile device of your audience. That way, you've beaten the engine. That might be easier said than done though. They still need to find your app. Some might say the caveat is that people would then need an app for every website and space is limited on your device. That's not necessarily true since everybody's tastes and interests are different.

Websites just seem outdated, whereas apps can bring data from thousands of pages up front. For example, if I ran an events site, I'd have an app where I could enter a city, time and flavor of event...poof, there ya go. If that app existed, I'd be on it! Maybe it does, but I haven't found it in the SEARCH engine yet. Hotels do it and likely many other business...I don't know...why? because I'm old school and have yet to embrace apps. I'm thinking maybe it's time.

[rish3]

Can you elaborate? We tried too, but still rely on 60%-70% traffic from search.

I used to make the majority of my revenue from two sources
a) Content/Informational sites and Adsense
b) A business that sold products, with buyers finding us via organic search, and the product fulfilled through a variety of third parties.

What we did was to turn "b" into a real, brick-and-mortar business, and drive more sales via traditional channels. Very traditional channels, like trade shows, magazines for the types of industries that buy the product, etc. We also identified the products that had the most margin potential and started to source, stock, and ship them ourselves vs having a third party do it. Other drivers too, like being the only affordable source for integrating these "widgets" with existing software.

We aren't making as much money as we did back when SEO was easy, but it pays the bills, and it's growing...albeit at single digit YoY percentages.

The 'a' part still makes money, though we haven't updated the sites at all. They used to make A LOT. They now make about 15-20% of what they used to, but OTOH, we invest almost zero. I'm surprised they haven't fallen off more. The 15-20% is pretty steady, no signs of fading.

[RedBar]

[off topic?]

because I'm old school and have yet to embrace apps.

I don't feel Apps are right for every widget site and do you know what used to annoy me more than anything, striking up an Android tablet and seeing so many Apps chewing-up bandwidth updating themselves when I'm not even going to use them!

Yep, I removed or disabled many of the useless freaking things yet they still try and take over my machines on a daily basis.

A quality, mobile responsive site does it for me every time.

[/off topic]