Mountain View, California–The head of combating webspam at Google, Matt Cutts, recently answered a question pertaining to small sites versus popular sites. “How can smaller sites with superior content ever rank over sites with superior traffic? It’s a vicious circle: A regional or national brick-and-mortar brand has higher traffic, leads to a higher rank, which leads to higher traffic, ad infinitum,” writes Dan.
Cutts begins his answer by stating the premise of the question is flawed, explaining that large sites don’t automatically rank well in search results. Elaborating on that point, Cutts points out that smaller sites are more agile and typically are able to produce more content of value than “larger, lumbering” sites.
How Smaller Sites can Outperform Large Ones
Further expanding on the point that smaller sites are able to respond more quickly and turn out high quality content at a better pace, Cutts says that this is precisely how smaller sites become larger ones and gain increased traffic. Examples given by the distinguished software engineer are such properties as Facebook, Instagram, and even Google. Because these platforms focused heavily on user experience, and provided real value to visitors, they became popular.
Cutts states that whatever industry a site is related to, if it is producing high quality material and catering to the wants and needs of consumers, it will, over time, outperform incumbents. He acknowledges the fact that one person sites will have to work hard taking on sites with hundreds of people but can be done by concentrating on one niche.
Once a site becomes an authoritative source on a particular subject it can then begin to build-out and branch to become larger. Cutts goes on to state that the internet is a level playing field because there’s wide availability of free apps and unfettered access to various websites and by producing superior content, can capitalize on that dynamic.
See the video below for his answer: