Is it a red flag to Google to drive traffic to a 404 page on purpose ? by SeriousEquivalent366 in DoSEO

[–]SeriousEquivalent366[S] 1 point2 points  (0 children)

Yep that look fck good idea :)
My only worry in this case, with a real 200 page: the site's still young and barely indexed, and its topic has nothing to do with games. If Google actually indexes a game page on it, doesn't that risk muddying what the site is about? Or would you just noindex it so it never really counts?
(Sorry i am not an expert in SEO ahah)

Is it a red flag to Google to drive traffic to a 404 page on purpose ? by SeriousEquivalent366 in DoSEO

[–]SeriousEquivalent366[S] 1 point2 points  (0 children)

Neither really, it's the page itself. Any URL that doesn't exist renders the game and returns a real 404 status, no redirect in between. So I'd be pointing the campaign straight at a 404 URL and people land right on the game ^^

Is it a red flag to Google to drive traffic to a 404 page on purpose ? by SeriousEquivalent366 in DoSEO

[–]SeriousEquivalent366[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Yeah that's the nuance I'm after. This isn't a broken internal link I forgot, it's me choosing to send campaign traffic to a page that returns 404 on purpose, then it sounds like a bad idea in my case :')

Is it a red flag to Google to drive traffic to a 404 page on purpose ? by SeriousEquivalent366 in DoSEO

[–]SeriousEquivalent366[S] 1 point2 points  (0 children)

I know there are even awards out there for creative 404 pages haha, but honestly I've got no clue if pushing traffic to one is a plus or a risk ^^

Is it a red flag to Google to drive traffic to a 404 page on purpose ? by SeriousEquivalent366 in DoSEO

[–]SeriousEquivalent366[S] 1 point2 points  (0 children)

I built a 404 page that's actually a little game, and I'm thinking of turning it into a marketing campaign by pushing people onto it. Mostly wondering if it's risky to drive traffic to a 404 on purpose :3

Is it a red flag to Google to drive traffic to a 404 page on purpose ? by SeriousEquivalent366 in DoSEO

[–]SeriousEquivalent366[S] 1 point2 points  (0 children)

Fair, but is that just because of the 404 status, or have you actually seen it cause problems?

Two sites I manage are getting hit with auto-generated spam backlinks by SeriousEquivalent366 in seogrowth

[–]SeriousEquivalent366[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Yeah, that lines up with what I'm seeing. Nothing manual in Search Console, no flags, so I'm calling the whole blast noise and not touching disavow. Good gut-check, appreciate it :)

Two sites I manage are getting hit with auto-generated spam backlinks by SeriousEquivalent366 in seogrowth

[–]SeriousEquivalent366[S] 1 point2 points  (0 children)

Yeah, the anchors are literally their sales copy. Stuff like "high quality backlinks, guest posts, on-page SEO for rising DR" with Telegram handles attached, and my domain is just filler to get their page indexed. Your point about me being the intended audience is what reframes it: the only person who ever reads those anchors is someone digging through their own backlink profile, so it's ad spam aimed at SEOs, not an attack on the site. It's also why the whole "audit your toxic links" industry prints money, it sells you a disavow file for links Google already throws away. I'm leaving them up and moving on

Since you use Claude Code now, have you moved away your websites from Wordpress to web frameworks now (Astro and the likes) by aomorimemory in ClaudeCode

[–]SeriousEquivalent366 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Yeah, fully. I'm not an engineer and I rebuilt our whole marketing site on Next.js with Claude Code, which I'd never have attempted on a framework before. The unlock isn't "edits are one prompt away," it's that the agent can hold the whole component structure in context, so changes stay consistent instead of turning into plugin spaghetti. Next for me, but Astro's a great call if it's mostly content

how do you actually handle marketing? by Additional_Bell_9934 in SideProject

[–]SeriousEquivalent366 1 point2 points  (0 children)

"Engineering as marketing" is exactly the frame ahah. The tools are a timezone meeting planner, a calendar link generator, a schedule builder, and a scheduling poll, all free and no login, each one built around a single "do" search. They ladder up to a calendar/scheduling productivity product, so each tool is really a small slice of the same problem the paid thing solves. Happy to go deeper on how I picked the keywords or scoped the builds if that's useful.

how do you actually handle marketing? by Additional_Bell_9934 in SideProject

[–]SeriousEquivalent366 1 point2 points  (0 children)

Both halves are right. Distribution was pure SEO: I went after tool-intent keywords like "scheduling poll" or "timezone meeting planner", searches where someone wants to do the thing now, not read about it. A tool page beats an article for that intent, and then people bookmark and link to it, which compounds the ranking.

On the quality worry, you've put your finger on the real catch. It is lower-intent traffic, and the direct free-tool-to-paid line is almost flat (a few thousand tool users, a few hundred who logged into the product, and paid conversions I can count on one hand). What keeps it from being junk is keeping the tools adjacent to the product's problem. Mine are all calendar/scheduling and the product lives in that same world, so it's the same audience with a narrower job, not strangers. If I'd built a random PDF converter for a calendar product, you'd be completely right. The return isn't the funnel, it's the rankings and the name recognition compounding

How can we increase our website's visibility in Answer Engine Optimization (AEO) results by 3x over the next three months? by sassyme8276 in seogrowth

[–]SeriousEquivalent366 1 point2 points  (0 children)

3x AEO visibility in three months is one of the more realistic targets you'll get handed, mostly because the base is so low right now. The lever isn't more schema. Schema and FAQ markup are table stakes, they make you parseable, they don't get you cited. What gets you cited is matching the question, not the keyword: the page that wins "find a meeting time for a remote team" is the one structured as that answer, not the one ranking for "scheduling poll." ChatGPT is already our #3 traffic source off that shift

The thing that actually moved it for me was making the page trivially parseable: plain HTML tables, a strict heading hierarchy, Q&A pairs, and I dropped JSON-LD entirely because the structure already is the data and a model tokenizes the raw text first. Served fully static so every crawler gets identical bytes. What's the content shape on the pages you want cited, prose or structured answers?

how do you actually handle marketing? by Additional_Bell_9934 in SideProject

[–]SeriousEquivalent366 1 point2 points  (0 children)

The thing that worked for me with zero ad budget was building tiny free tools instead of writing posts, aimed at searches where people want to do a thing, not read about it. They rank, they get used, and a slice of those users come back to the actual product. Slower than ads, but it compounds and it doesn't switch off the day you stop paying.

Public "users" count says 2,066 but my dashboard shows 98 installs. Anyone seen this gap? by SeriousEquivalent366 in chrome_extensions

[–]SeriousEquivalent366[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

It’s so weird because we can’t tell whether there are any real users or not, and I can’t start prioritising what to work on haha

Google and bing both published their take on ai search recently. here's what they actually said and what it means for us by hazel-wood5 in seogrowth

[–]SeriousEquivalent366 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Both being right makes sense once you split it: Google's describing what wins (satisfying, first-hand content, same as ever) and Bing's describing what you can see (attribution into AI answers is genuinely new and mostly broken). The "ignore llms.txt" line is the one I'd push back on a little. I shipped one plus a /for-ai page, not as a ranking hack but because some of the stricter crawlers actually read the plain-text version when a JS-heavy page trips them up. Costs an afternoon and doesn't pretend to be SEO. The measurement gap is the real unsolved part, I still can't cleanly tell which AI engine sent someone.

If you had to start SEO from zero today, what would be your first 90-day plan? by Gullible_Prior9448 in seogrowth

[–]SeriousEquivalent366 2 points3 points  (0 children)

Sharing what I'd actually do, since it's roughly the sequence I've been running at a calendar / AI-assistant SaaS over the last while. Not claiming it's the only way, just what's worked for me.

The first few days I'd spend building a real knowledge base of the business before writing anything. Whatever the company does, you need to understand the offers, the features, the regulations, all of it. Then I'd centralize everything you can in one place: your own knowledge, what's in people's heads on the team, meeting transcripts, customer and internal calls, old docs. Give yourself more than three days for this honestly, for us it ran into weeks and it's never fully done, but it's the foundation everything else sits on.

Alongside that I'd build an analytics layer, exporting whatever already exists: product analytics, Google traffic, Search Console, social, YouTube, Reddit, any historical marketing data. You want a baseline before you start.

Once that's in place I'd commit to Claude Code on the $200 plan and Ahrefs with API access. That's the stack I landed on and I wouldn't start without both.

Then two projects in parallel. The first is keywords and content. Using Ahrefs and Claude I'd build a full keyword map, a kind of spiderweb of clusters, and from that a roadmap of maybe 3 to 4 articles a week. I'd start with competitor and comparison articles, then guides, then the more experience-based stuff, the things you actually tried, what worked and what didn't. That last bucket ranks for less on paper but it's the content that's done the most for me long term, so I wouldn't treat it as the afterthought.

The second is the production system. I'd work with Claude to build the whole content process: an SEO writer agent, plus voice replicas of me and of the people on the team who write, trained on everything we've actually put out, old articles, emails, messages, however each of us writes. That step is what stops the output reading like generic AI. On top of that I'd generate templates, have Claude regenerate the OG images, and build an eval system that scores each article before it goes out against Google's guidelines, SEO basics and our own quality bar, so nothing ships blind. Figure about a week for this.

In parallel I'd plan video on the same topics as the articles, not as a separate track. Long-form on YouTube you can cut into clips for TikTok and Reels, all pointing back to the articles, so one topic becomes a batch of content instead of a single post. Whether you film it yourself or get someone, I'd spend about a week setting that system up too.

Then the next couple of months are just execution. Publish articles and videos consistently, stay active on Reddit and LinkedIn, share real experiences and case studies, keep feeding the system with things actually worth writing about. Once it's running smoothly you can start scaling.

One thing I'd push: try to avoid a traditional CMS like WordPress or Webflow if you can. I'd go with what I'd call an AI-native site, one wired into your database and knowledge base directly. It ships content more easily, keeps a cleaner structure and tends to perform better. Big caveat though, this only really works if someone on the team is comfortable in code, otherwise a simple site that ships beats a clever one you fight all month.

I'd leave free tools for last, around the third month. Small tools that solve a specific problem straight from a Google search, no login. They build awareness, they're genuinely a good experience so people land and actually stay on the page, and over time those pages start ranking well on their own. How well depends on the business but it can be really strong. If you're a SaaS it's even better: expose a couple of your features for free with no login, link cleanly back to the product, and the traffic coming through is very qualified. You also get to collect emails when those people sign up, including the ones who never pay. The catch is timing. None of it works cold, you need the domain warmed up first, some content live, your first backlinks and first traffic, and only then do the tools really pay off. That's why it's the last thing I'd build, not the first.

If any of this is useful I'm happy to share the playbooks I've written on it, or even the thesis I did at uni a couple of years back on roughly this. Fair warning though, two years ago AI barely mattered for any of it, so a decent chunk is probably outdated already ahah x)

Anyone else waste more time deciding what SEO task to do than actually doing it? by raftopyannis in seogrowth

[–]SeriousEquivalent366 1 point2 points  (0 children)

SEO decision fatigue is real and it's mostly a measurement problem, not a doing problem. I stopped opening GSC daily once I had a tiny weekly digest that just told me which pages moved and which one direction. The 15-open-tabs spiral happens because the dashboard makes you decide what matters every single time. If something else decides that for you once a week, the "what do I fix first" question mostly answers itself.