Anyone who is married knows that the queen really runs things. The king is a joke behind closed doors. Links determine your rankings. Updating content on a stale site will do nothing for your rankings, unless you have some insane content that people are going crazy over and dying to link to, but in reality it's not easy getting people to link to you automatically - my sites are boring, maybe if i had an Antonella Barba nude pics theme, content would be king, but 99% of us don't have sites like that.
I believe that content is not the king though it should be! A great content with limited link building, would be les successful than a low quality content (not copy paste) with a good link promotion.
You need to have content and quality links to rank well in SERP. But it doesn't mean that if you already have a content and links that would be your success. The content and the page itself must be optimized well and the links must be a quality links.
Without links, you're not going to get far. However, even if you have many links, without good content, users are not coming back. What do you want them to read without content?
It depends on the industry. For my company, it's a service - not much changes, the site explains all of the benefits of the service and people who visit sign up of they like what they read. They use the service offline and really dont need to come back to the site unless they need technical info or something. I do try and come up with more content for the search engines but it's obviously fluff - it's like pulling teeth to try and come up with new stuff to say and it gets thrown in a section called newsletters. lol
Content is not king, when I get off work I will tell you why. Sites runned by the user is now king, aka web 2.0.
I think that this debate is all too often approached in simplistic terms. I believe that it largely depends on what type of content is meant buy simply "content." For instance, there are a multitude of examples of sites with minimal or no content, from the perspective of the search engines (Flash-based sites, etc), that still achieve remarkable rankings for very competitive terms. Their visibility was driven entirely by compelling, unique content---not accessible by search engines---and resulted in large numbers of highly relevant inbound links. In that instance, content is indeed king. But, it's a means to an end. At the end of the day, barring very valuable content, or a very strong brand , there is no doubt that links have dethroned "content" to seize the crown.
Agreed. I am a bum when it comes to updating my site yet Google still seems to like me. My 'content' is the work that I do behind my site...my business. I deliver a service that is appreciated by my clients and word (therefore links) gets around. You need to have something of value for others, whether that be great content in the purist sense or whether that be a great product or service that really meets a need. Links rule but you can't get links unless you have great 'content'.
I can say that content is the heart of the web links you can't achive SE rank. So i can say both are important. Thanks W.S
- links to get high page rank. - anchor text and links to rank well and to get traffic. - content to convert traffic to buyers or readers. The Big three "content, links and content" every one is king for his specific arena.