Reply To: Can someone help me understand if informational SEO still makes sense now?

From experience, yeah, I think it still makes sense, but only if you’re not relying on the old “rank #1, get easy clicks” game. That stuff’s been getting hollowed out for a while now. I’ve had pages sit in top spots and the CTR just kinda dies because Google shoves an answer box, PAA, video, whatever right in front of it. Feels like you’re doing the work and Google’s cashing the check. What I’ve been seeing is informational content only really matters if it does one of these: – brings in people who might actually buy later – feeds a topic cluster instead of being a dead-end page – gets linked/mentioned because it’s genuinely useful – supports internal paths into money pages If it’s just “what is X” or “how does Y work” with no angle beyond traffic, I’d be pretty skeptical. That model feels cooked unless you’ve got stupid scale or super cheap content. For me the better play has been tightening up informational stuff around actual buyer intent. Less random blog spam, more pages that answer the question and then naturally push people toward the product/service. Otherwise yeah, you’re basically writing for Google’s UI now, which is a joke. And honestly, a lot of people still haven’t adjusted. They keep pumping out generic posts like it’s 2019 and then act shocked when impressions don’t turn into clicks. Not much mystery there.