12 {{ upvoteCount | shortNum }}
12 {{ upvoteCount | shortNum }}

Blog vs Static site

by ryor
10 replies
Hey everyone,

I'm just about to throw myself into create a niche website. I just wondered what the advantages of writing a blog that is just a page that is continuously updated, over say a 20-30 page static site that just has some really good, always important information on it.

I think the blog will be better at attracting traffic because it is constantly updated right?

I mean, does it depend on the niche? For example... you might have 20-30 pages worth of solid info about writing a will for example... wouldn't that be more appropriate as a static website, rather than trying to dream up new (maybe less relevant) content all the time? Or is it all about keeping things updated and therefore blog is always the way to go?

Thank you for any replies!
#blog #site #static
  • Profile picture of the author Alexa Smith
    Banned
    Originally Posted by ryor View Post

    I think the blog will be better at attracting traffic because it is constantly updated right?
    No. It'll do better for SEO. That doesn't necessarily mean it'll attract more traffic.

    But it will rank better, typically - because it's continually updated, not "because it's a blog".

    Static sites can be made with blogging software, and blogs can be made with "static-site software" which can be pretty easily updatable, these days. There's virtually no difference between a "blog" and a "non-blog site", and what they're made from doesn't in itself determine how well/badly it will rank.

    Originally Posted by ryor View Post

    Or is it all about keeping things updated and therefore blog is always the way to go?
    If you want the site to rank well, and to get traffic by ranking well, updating regularly - whether it's technically a "blog" or not - is a good plan, yes.
    {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[4129754].message }}
  • Profile picture of the author ryor
    That's really helpful thank you.

    Imagine if you created your masterpiece website of 20-30 pages that you were really happy with - written about a subject that doesn't change very often. Is it common practise then to kind of "tinker" with it, even if you think the info doesn't need changing?

    Is it better to update to try and improve your ranking, even if you think you might be unnecessarily messing with your perfect little site?

    Thank you!
    {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[4130563].message }}
    • Profile picture of the author 36burrows
      Originally Posted by ryor View Post

      That's really helpful thank you.

      Imagine if you created your masterpiece website of 20-30 pages that you were really happy with - written about a subject that doesn't change very often. Is it common practise then to kind of "tinker" with it, even if you think the info doesn't need changing?

      Is it better to update to try and improve your ranking, even if you think you might be unnecessarily messing with your perfect little site?

      Thank you!
      Then just build backlinks to each of those 20-30 pages until they each get to page #1. Backlinks will help more than tinkering and little updates here and there
      Signature
      PPC Management Services
      {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[4130587].message }}
    • Profile picture of the author Alexa Smith
      Banned
      Originally Posted by ryor View Post

      Is it better to update to try and improve your ranking, even if you think you might be unnecessarily messing with your perfect little site?
      "Better" than what?

      It's probably better than not doing that. And it's almost certainly better than doing nothing at all. And in principle it isn't a bad thing to do (even if it does sometimes feel like a waste of time). But there may also be other ways of spending that time (such as off-page, rather than on-page SEO) which might be better. This will vary, according to the competitiveness of the keywords, what other people in the niche are up to, whether other keywords are easily targettable, and so on. It's not necessarily a question with a clear-cut answer, I think.
      {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[4130677].message }}
      • Profile picture of the author Michael Shook
        If you don't want to tinker with the pages you have already, you could add a blog to the site and write some additional posts with links to your existing pages.

        Or even posts about other websites that are similar in nature to yours.
        Signature


        {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[4130720].message }}
        • Profile picture of the author JNFerree
          Give these tools a once over before you go too far down the rabbit hole. Both of these tools I got on the WF and both will help you get out of the gate faster than without. One is free and one will set you back $47 smackers.

          SEOPressor will help you tend to your on-page optimization

          SocialMonkee will will with your off-page action (ie) backlinks.

          Search the WF and you can judge for yourself their value by the number of posts on each thread and the positive v. negative ratings, ramblings on each.

          Good Luck!
          Signature
          Social Shares is the Future of SEO • Social Content Marketing is the Fastest Technique to Generate Significant Social Shares and My DIY Content Marketing System works like a Charm so long as you properly Manage Your Social Media Presence
          {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[4130929].message }}
  • Profile picture of the author synergyxtr
    Static sites tend to be a bit quicker but for maintenance its a lot better to maintain your web properties in blogs.
    Signature

    Synergy Extreme. Your extreme virtual assistant provider.

    {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[4130944].message }}
  • Profile picture of the author lemmyxuz
    Always for blog as Google loves fresh content all the time. Just optimize your blog site by interlinking one content to the other. And as much as possible, concentrate on one niche if you can. Don't forget about relevant anchor text for every post.
    {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[4131160].message }}
    • Profile picture of the author JohnMcCabe
      Some people are taking the term 'static' way too seriously.

      Tell me, what's the difference between a 'static' website and a blog that never gets updated? I mean, besides the extra maintenance keeping the blog software updated and secure, and the overhead for maintaining a database.

      There's no rule or law that says you can never add content to a standard HTML-based site. People were doing that long before Wordpress took over the universe.

      As Alexa put it so eloquently, the power isn't in the blog platform, it's in the regular updates.

      My opinion? If you decide to build that 'perfect little site', just build a static site with html and save yourself the headaches of maintaining a CMS.
      {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[4131295].message }}
  • Profile picture of the author ryor
    Thanks everyone, makes much more sense now.

    Cheers!
    {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[4136648].message }}

Trending Topics