We relaunched a client's e-commerce website a few years ago and about 1,500 URLs ended up as "crawled - currently not indexed" in Google Search Console. It happened because every new category page got shipped with a global noindex tag in the frenzy of the final stages of the relaunch. As a result, the client's organic revenue fell by about 30%. I will admit that a bit of panic did set in at first, but we were able to jump in and fix it in time. We stripped the rogue tag and rolled out a new lean XML sitemap with priority pages only. We also built a new internal-link web that pointed to the affected categories and requested re-indexing (in batches to avoid crawl-budget shock). The pages eventually regained rankings in about six weeks and sales then began to bounce back. The lesson we learnt is that your staging-to-live checklists should be treated as sacred.
When I first started my business, I was very focused on getting content out quickly, rather than spending time on creating quality content. I wrote a tremendous volume of AI-generated SEO articles for clients (all B2B) in a very short period of time, and I believed that boosting the articles with internal linking and optimizing my website would make up for any shortcomings in the articles, quality-wise. This did increase the amount of digital traffic to our websites, but it did not convert into increased leads. Even though the content ranked well, it did not align with the challenge that our target audience was attempting to address. While I technically did match what our target audience was searching for, I had not built any trust with them. Per comments from the sales team, prospective customers viewed our content as being "generic," even though, by the metrics of Ahrefs, our articles looked good. Therefore, I ceased publishing content because I had the opportunity to interview the sales staff to learn about the challenges faced by prospective customers and what words they were using to describe the transactions, as well as examples that were received well during earlier calls. I utilized AI to generate outlines of the content and to clean up the final drafts of the articles, but the primary authorship remained with humans. Tracking rankings is not an accomplishment; tracking revenue is more important. Do not use AI or the need for speed as an excuse to publish subpar content.
I once blocked an entire subdirectory in robots.txt during a site migration and killed 40% of our organic traffic in three weeks. We caught it during a routine crawl audit, but the damage was already done.... Recovery took us 2 months even after we fixed the file and resubmitted the sitemap. Everyone makes technical errors - the lesson was that I had no process to catch it before it shipped. So now I run a staged deployment checklist that includes a crawl simulation on staging, a manual robots.txt review by two people, and a post-launch monitor that alerts me if indexed page counts drop more than 5% week over week. I also keep a rollback-ready version of every configuration file we touch. My recommendation is to treat robots.txt and canonical tags like you treat database migrations. One wrong line can erase months of work, so you should always build a review gate.
One SEO mistake that taught me a hard lesson was relying too heavily on keyword difficulty scores from tools. Early on, I targeted keywords labeled "easy," only to find page one dominated by high-authority brands that perfectly matched user intent. Rankings stalled, and a lot of time was wasted. I fixed this by making SERP review mandatory before creating content. Now I check who ranks, their Domain Rating, traffic, backlink depth, and how well they answer the query. In many cases, that shift helped pages rank within 60 days because we focused on keywords where competitors had thin content and fewer than 10 referring domains. My advice is simple. Treat keyword difficulty as a directional signal, not a decision-maker. Always validate the SERP manually. If you can realistically beat what's ranking, that's the opportunity worth pursuing.
Early on, I made the error of neglecting internal links while chasing external backlinks. I used to assume that authority came only from external sources. At the time, I would publish great content and move on to outreach, which leaves new pages un-integrated into the site's structure. This created a growing number of orphan or poorly connected pages that Google could index, but couldn't crawl, analyze, and rank consistently. We rectified this by embracing a streamlined hub-and-spoke model. We evaluated the site for high-performing authoritative pages and linked them to relevant new pages, both topically and chronologically, to redistribute link equity and reinforce contextual relevance. Furthermore, we instituted a publishing rule that every new page has to be contextually linked to multiple relevant pages and has to have significant inbound and outbound links at launch. I recommend applying the same level of thought and strategy to internal linking as you would to external linking. Internal links guide crawler behavior, outline the interrelationships of the content, and indicate to the algorithm the hierarchy and importance of the content. Overlooking internal links means you are leaving one of the best, most efficient, and high ROI levers in SEO untouched.
One of the biggest SEO mistakes I made was focusing too much on publishing content quickly without first fixing the technical foundation of a website. We once pushed a large batch of blog and service pages for a client, but traffic barely moved because the site had indexing issues, slow load times, and weak internal linking. Even good content could not perform when Google could not properly crawl or trust the site. We fixed it by running a full technical audit, cleaning up duplicate pages, improving site speed, fixing broken links, and restructuring how important pages were connected. Once that was done, the same content started ranking and traffic grew steadily. The lesson was that SEO only works when the foundation is solid. I always recommend fixing technical and site structure problems before scaling content, because otherwise you are just amplifying what is already broken.
I wrote too much content, and ended up with irrelevant content. I run a blog about Lisbon, Portugal, and I had written a lot of great content, the blog was growing, but then I hit a wall and started writing "best X" articles, and a lot of them, and this started hurting me. It was clear that Google saw this as thin, easy-to-duplicate content, especially if you don't add a personal edge to each piece. I then deleted all of these and significantly reduced my content, which actually made my traffic start growing again. Likely because Google started scoring my overall website content score higher.
Hello eAskMe Team, Okay, so here's a little SEO lesson I learned the painful way. Years ago, I worked with this multi-location firm. We were in a rush, so we cranked out location pages with almost identical content, just changing the city name. And yeah, it actually worked for about three months. But then Google updated the algorithm, and traffic nosedived. They went from pulling in 180 leads a month to struggling to break 60. Had to go back and do it right. We rebuilt every page from the ground up and made it hyper-local. Showed who worked in that office, pulled in actual reviews from people in that city, talked about real cases, and even gave directions from local landmarks. It was a pain, but six months later not only were they ranking again, but their conversion rate doubled. Because people actually felt like the content was for them. Since then, I keep saying the same thing over and over. If your content doesn't feel like it was written for a real person in a real place, it's not worth publishing. Templated junk won't cut it anymore with Google or with people. Sasha Berson Co-Founder and Chief Growth Executive at Grow Law 501 E Las Olas Blvd, Suite 300, Fort Lauderdale, FL 33301 About expert: https://growlaw.co/sasha-berson Website: https://growlaw.co/ LinkedIn: https://www.linkedin.com/in/aleksanderberson Headshot: https://drive.google.com/file/d/1OqLe3z_NEwnUVViCaSozIOGGHdZUVbnq/view?usp=sharing
I used to just copy what my competitors were ranking for. Sure, I got some traffic, but I was always one step behind. Now I look for the specific questions people are searching for that nobody is answering. That's what actually works. My advice is to stop chasing the crowd and find those gaps for yourself. It's a much better way to grow.
I once went too far with anchor text optimization. The rankings jumped up fast, but then Google caught on and our organic growth flatlined. Working with national brands since then showed me that natural, relevant links are what actually last. My advice? Be genuine with your linking. Focus on context over keywords to avoid penalties.
I believe that in past years I neglected my SEO strategy, partly due to the success I achieved on other platforms when it came to converting clients. It wasn't until about a year ago that I started giving it the importance it truly deserves again. In recent times, SEO has become more important than ever, and there are significant opportunities to be found. First of all, many people have stopped investing in it after the latest Google updates, which penalized many small businesses that were not engaging in any bad practices. Secondly, this has impacted many agencies that were doing good work but, after traffic drops, ended up losing clients. If we add to this the fact that SEO is not "trendy" right now, we find a large number of empty spaces waiting to be filled. On the other hand, artificial intelligence and LLMs are fed by search engines. So the way to appear in them is, once again, SEO. As if that weren't enough, just look into the most disruptive brands and I can assure you that the most successful ones all have a strong SEO strategy. It doesn't matter if they are better known for their social media presence or for viral videos—those that perform best have an SEO strategy behind them. For these reasons, I have launched several websites and am collaborating with other media outlets to strengthen my presence in organic search.
I started a global branding and digital marketing firm 24 years ago. It is a common mistake to believe that SEO is a one-time activity/set it and forget it. Search engines are constantly updating their algorithms/keywords and evolving so SEO needs to be an ongoing commitment for content to stay on top/page 1. Search engines will continue to find/serve up websites that contain the best content/information to meet its users' needs so make it an ongoing priority. Google updates algorithms regularly to make sure sites aren't tricking audiences with their process to move up the ranks unfairly. One big danger is making a lot of small SEO changes to your site. Although it's smart to update your site with fresh content you have to be careful it doesn't look suspicious/get penalized by the search engines. It's also a danger/rookie mistake if you discontinue a product/service do not delete the page from your site. Once the page is deleted both the URL and the keyword for which it was ranked will disappear. Don't risk losing your ranking if you delete a product/service, simply add a message for visitors to your site to redirect them to the relevant page. You work hard to get your strong rankings so don't let that effort go to waste unnecessarily/by accident. It is important to conduct thorough SEO audits to uncover any technical SEO issues including broken links, good internal and external links show both users and search crawlers that you have high quality content. Over time with content changes links can break which creates a poor user experience and reflects lower quality content, a factor that can affect page ranking. SEO is a great strategy to increase your visibility, awareness, credibility and rankings online.
I'm with Gotham Artists, a boutique speaker bureau, and the SEO mistake that probably cost us the most time and money early on was getting obsessed with high volume keywords instead of actually thinking about search intent. The Mistake: I went hard after broad terms like "motivational speakers" because the search volume looked incredible—like thousands of searches every month. We eventually ranked pretty well for it, traffic started coming in, and I felt like I was crushing SEO.Except almost none of that traffic actually converted. When I finally looked at what these visitors were doing, most of them were students doing research projects, people just browsing for inspiration, or folks looking for free content. Not a single company with an actual budget trying to book a speaker for their event.Meanwhile, we were barely showing up for searches like "keynote speaker for healthcare conference" or "innovation speaker for tech summit"—way lower volume, but those were the people actually trying to book speakers with real budgets and timelines. What I Learned: Traffic by itself is basically a vanity metric if it's the wrong traffic. A hundred people searching "book keynote speaker for annual sales kickoff" are worth way more than ten thousand people searching generic stuff. Search intent is everything. How I Fixed It: I completely flipped the strategy. Instead of chasing volume, I started looking at what actual buyers were searching for. I went through our inquiry forms to see what phrases people used, listened to how prospects described what they needed on calls, looked at the specific types of events and industries we actually served. Then I built content around those long-tail, high-intent searches. Things like "how to choose a speaker for a virtual leadership conference" or "typical speaker fees for corporate events." The search volume looked tiny compared to what I'd been targeting before, but the traffic that did come was actually qualified. Traffic went down overall, but leads and actual conversions went up, which is obviously what actually matters. What I'd Recommend: Don't get seduced by big search volume numbers. Before you invest time optimizing for any keyword, ask yourself: if someone searching this lands on my site, are they actually a potential customer, or are they just... someone who typed some words into Google? If they're not in your target market, the ranking is worthless. Good SEO isn't about more traffic—it's about the right traffic.
Keywords must be backed with intent and alignment. During the first months of EVhype, I managed to publish dozens of EV-related pages. They were great in tools, but they didn't match the search intent. Thus, they prompted users to abandon the pages. We had lots of visitors, but repeat visits were absent, and bounce rates were above 75%. Deleting non-performing pages didn't seem like a productive step to many. Consolidating content and optimizing the pages to new, specific, user-generated questions, such as the costs of charging an EV, the home installation steps, or the calculations of range anxiety, helped the pages perform better. In a brief period, we reduced the number of indexed pages by 40% and more than doubled the number of visits attributed to organic search. Moreover, people started staying longer on the new pages. I would say step aside from the volume trap. It doesn't matter if you rank for 10,000 keywords and none of them are the right ones.
I treated SEO as a traffic problem, not a revenue problem. I chased keywords with decent volume that I thought fit the niche, but I didn't stop to ask: "Is this person close to buying, or just browsing?" We ranked for a lot of top-funnel terms, sessions went up, but pipeline and sales-qualified leads didn't. It looked good in analytics, but it didn't help cashflow. To fix it, I rebuilt the whole strategy around buying intent. I spoke with sales and founders, pulled the last few dozen closed-won deals, and asked: what problem were these buyers trying to solve, what did they search, and what service did they end up buying? From that, I picked keywords that matched those problems and the offers we wanted to sell, even when the search volume was much lower. Then I reworked the pages to match that intent. Clear "who this is for", clear outcomes, proof (case studies, reviews), and one strong next step like booking a consult or requesting a quote. I also changed reporting so SEO success was judged on leads, opps, and revenue from the CRM, not just rankings and clicks. What I'd recommend others avoid: don't let keyword tools drive your strategy. Volume and "low difficulty" are just guardrails. Start with: which buyers do you want more of, what's happening in their world when they start searching, and what words do they use? Build your SEO around that, then check the tools to see what's realistic, not the other way round.
In my early days, I made a major error by being overly focused on raw search volume and neglecting the actual user's intent. I was so taken with the idea of getting to the top of Google for a keyword, I did not address whether or not that audience really cared about our offer. We eventually obtained a large amount of traffic from large keywords; however, we also received a very high bounce rate because the content did not solve the specific problem of the visitor. I ended up doing a complete content audit and revamping our overall strategy to focus on high-intent keyword 'clusters' that prioritize user experience versus vanity metrics. I would advise others to never allow the high volume to blind them to the true quality of the traffic. If you are not actually answering the user's true "why," you will pay for a high ranking, which will never grow your business.
After surviving in SEO for the last 10 years, I've seen the industry shift from keyword stuffing and exact-match domains to the complex, intent-driven ecosystem we have today. If I had to pin down one mistake that truly changed how I approach the craft, it was prioritizing search volume over user intent. Here is the expensive lesson My Mistake: Chasing the "Big Number" Six years ago, I was leading a campaign for a B2B SaaS client. I identified a high-volume keyword—"free project management tools"—that was getting 50k+ searches a month. I poured resources into a 3,000-word skyscraper guide, built high-authority backlinks, and got the top three ranking. The traffic exploded. Our GSC graphs looked like a rocket ship. I was ready to take a victory lap, but then I looked at the conversion data. The CTC rate was near zero. I had attracted thousands of students and freelancers looking for freebies, while my client was a high-end enterprise solution starting at $5,000 a month. I brought the wrong crowd to the party. How I Fixed It The fix wasn't about deleting the content, but about pivoting the funnel. I realized that high volume often equals low intent in the B2B world. Intent Mapping: I re-evaluated our keyword list, categorizing every term by "Informational," "Navigational," or "Transactional" intent. Pruning and Redirecting: We stopped trying to rank for broad "free" terms. Instead, we shifted focus to "long-tail" keywords like "enterprise project management software for construction." Content Refinement: I updated the high-traffic post to include a "Comparison Tool" that guided the right users toward our paid solution and explicitly stated who our product wasn't for. The Lesson: Traffic is a Vanity Metric If you are managing SEO today, my biggest recommendation is to stop treating traffic as your North Star. High traffic feels good in a monthly report, but it doesn't pay the bills. My Recommendation: The "Volume Trap": Never pick a keyword based on the "Volume" from Ahrefs or Semrush alone. Always look at the SERP to see what is already ranking. If the top 10 results are all "top 10 free apps" and you are selling a "premium paid service," you will never convert that traffic. Ignoring the Bounce Rate: If your traffic is high but users leave within 10 seconds, Google will eventually realize your content doesn't satisfy the user's "Why." Today, I'd much rather have 1000 visitors who are ready to buy than 10,000 visitors who are just browsing.
I used to think backlinks were the only thing that mattered. I spent months chasing guest posts for a client site. We got some solid links, but the traffic just sat there. I was confused and frustrated. Then I finally looked at the site structure. It was a total mess. We had orphaned pages everywhere, and our best articles were buried five clicks deep. Google couldn't find the good stuff, so it didn't rank it. I paused the outreach and spent a week fixing internal links. I made sure every important page linked back to the homepage or a main category. Traffic jumped 30% the next month. Don't ignore your own site structure while you chase links from other people. It is the easiest win you have, and you control it completely.
I used to think targeting broad terms like "selling online" was the way to go. Big mistake. We got traffic, but nobody signed up. They were looking for general advice, not a tool to manage their inventory. I realized we needed to get specific. We shifted our strategy to focus on what our users actually do, like "cross listing from Poshmark to eBay" or "bulk listing software." The volume was lower, but the intent was high. People landing on those pages actually wanted our product. We fixed it by rewriting our core pages to match these specific tasks. Now we rank for terms that drive actual revenue. My advice is to stop chasing high volume vanity metrics. Go for keywords that show someone is ready to use your solution.
Trying to increase coverage before understanding intent mapping to downstream behaviour was a costly lesson in SEO for me. We thought we were creating more opportunity by having more coverage but what we were actually doing was fragmenting journeys, annoying users and spreading conversions thin across the site. The solution was merging pages, strengthening our internal linking logic, and organising content around a single purposeful next action per stage of the user journey. Don't fall into the trap in automotive and claims of treating SEO as a publishing exercise vs a product decision - every page you publish either furthers or dilutes decision making.