What Does it Mean if There's No Seasonal Traffic Increase?

1. 68

   eugbugposted 2 years ago

   On Dengarden. My traffic is stagnated whereas it should be growing.
   Is it that traffic is actually continuing to drop steeply and this is being compensated for by an equal increase in views, and the result is that both cancel each other out, resulting in level views?
   This is traffic for a gardening guide that used to get nearly 1000 views per day in 2021. There's no point editing it because it's the site ranking that's pulling down views. It's still got an image in the featured snippet spot. All the other guides on Dengarden are stagnated too.
   
   

   replyreport
   1. 85

      SerenityHaloposted 2 years agoin reply to this

      It seems we’re stuck in the trenches. My traffic has been getting worse each month. So far 2023 is lousy.

      replyreport
   2. 67

      OldRosesposted 2 years agoin reply to this

      I have been unpleasantly surprised to see traffic stagnating on my Dengarden articles.  I write about gardening, so usually my traffic steadily increases in the spring, peaks in the summer, and falls in the autumn.  This year, I am not getting my usual spring increase in traffic.
      
      I do update my articles every year, so they all show a 2023 date that Google supposedly looks for.  Has that changed?
      
      This is affecting my Amazon earnings also because less traffic means fewer people purchasing from my Amazon links.

      replyreport
   3. 92

      alexadryposted 2 years agoin reply to this

      Have you looked at your top articles that were driving you the most traffic last year and evaluated whether competitors are now taking the top spots? If they just move our articles from the first or second spot to spot 4 or 5, that's already a substantial loss of traffic. If that's the case, it helps to look at these competitor articles and see what they have done to rank better.

      replyreport
      1. 68

         eugbugposted 2 years agoin reply to this

         It's hard to tell. Many of my guides are much more comprehensive and have more detail than those of competitors. Usually it's just that competitor's articles rank higher because their sites are high ranking, e.g. sites such as The Spruce, Wikihow, BobVilla and The Family Handyman.  I still have the 2nd or 3rd position or even a featured snippet of a photo, for the first few words from the titles of several guides, but as Paul Goodman suggested, I may have lost ranking for related keywords rather than the title.
         Often I think it's better to just write thin articles with little detail because that's what Google frequently puts in the featured snippet spot. For instance this is a plug wiring guide that has the top ranking spot and sometimes the featured snippet (featured snippets aren't always shown). It has no photos and not much detail. The only reason it ranks in top spot is because it's on our electricity network's website. Meanwhile my guide which is far superior is pushed down several places. I've taken this up multiple with Google and Danny Sulivan, but never get any feedback.
         
         
         
         
         

         replyreport
         1. 92

            alexadryposted 2 years agoin reply to this

            I hear you. It's tough when dealing with big websites. I have noticed that sometimes a catchy title featuring something extra can help make a difference.
            
            Like for instance, I had an article about puppies nipping, and a competitor rewrote it, renamed the names of some games I personally invented, added some fluff and made it longer and she outranked me.
            
            After this, I made mine longer too, but by adding two extra games (with another game invented by me) rather than fluff, so from 8 tips/games they became 10.
            
            After that, she added more games as well (this time she didn't even take the time change the name of my game), and then then I added a video and she made a video as well.
            
            It has been getting really ridiculous!
            
            In my last edit, I added in the title that a video was included too, and I think this has helped people land there more, and bypass hers which caused it to finally outrank hers.
            
            So I guess if one can add a video and advertise it in the title can help or make the title catchy promising a greater experience can help bypass competitors at times (if people don't stop at the first title).
            
            But of course, there are no guarantees, just sharing what helped in my case, but I am sure my competitor will come up with something to outrank me again.
            
            Sometimes adding the number of tips offered in the title or a step-by-step guide (with accompanying pictures mentioned in the title) or changing the title to have more keywords can help, but again no guarantees.
            
            I am not an SEO expert in any way, just have been experimenting on some stuff and keep tracking the results.

            replyreport
            1. 92

               alexadryposted 2 years agoin reply to this

               Some more food for thought is what these big companies may lack. What are their weak spots?
               
               Many hire writers so they just pay for the content and it's a done deal. I don't think they can change the content much unless they rehire the original writer to add more content.
               
               This means we have the advantage of updating our articles and adding relevant content from time to time like videos, tables, pictures etc. or we can add the latest research if a study comes out.
               
               Another thing is that  they can't provide ongoing support. Hopefully, we'll have comments back on all niche sites so that we can keep on doing that.
               Not many websites are able to provide this level of support.
               
               This can help build trust as we stand behind what we write rather than a random fellow who wrote something, got paid and is gone for good. Zero support whatsoever.
               
               Finally, we have the option to add to our profiles our credentials/expertise in certain topics. Many websites hire general writers just to produce content. They often lack a bio with some necessary credentials/expertise to write on a given topic.
               
               Now, with the Spruce, this is a big competitor because if I recall well, it was formerly About.com. Back then, they were hiring "guides" to write for them, and to apply you had to submit a curriculum and copies of any diplomas, certificates, degrees, and they would verify with the organizations releasing them.
               
               I am pretty sure they still follow these requirements and this makes the company stand out in means of establishing trust. 
               
               Wikihow used to hire writers with little or no credentials/expertise, but lately have created co-authored articles which I guess are approved by experts. I think their strongest asset is the graphics that accompany every step which helps visual learners.
               
               However, as with The Spruce, their weak spot is that they don't offer ongoing support that we can offer by replying to our readers' comments and they are likely limited in editing/updating the content they pay for.

               replyreport
2. 68

   eugbugposted 2 years ago

   Here's another guide and its traffic over 11 years. Evergreen articles don't seem to work anymore. That's why I was thinking about republishing. Google seems to just dump guides from SERPs if they're old. This one had a featured snippet for years.
   
   
   

   replyreport
   1. 86

      jansharesposted 2 years agoin reply to this

      As our old friend paradigm would say, "we're doomed." Miss that guy.

      replyreport
3. 68

   eugbugposted 2 years ago

   Thanks Adrienne, those are interesting insights and food for thought (maybe enough to create an article on the subject? )

   replyreport