88,000 clicks from Google per day, 3 months after launch

Summary

Main thesis. In SEO, size matters: all other things being equal, Google always gives preference to the larger site within a given niche. “Bigger” beats “smaller.”
A myth debunked. The claim that “SEO specialists build websites for people” is a myth. Websites are built for search engine crawlers. In some niches, a single button is all a user needs to convert.
How it works. A niche with a large volume of “unclaimed” traffic is selected, and thousands of similar pages are generated (content varies by ~20%, often automatically); through sheer volume and trust, the site pushes smaller competitors down in the search results.
Case Study #1 (2022). A website for soccer broadcasts in English and Spanish. Thousands of nearly identical pages covering top league matches, ~100 links in total, tens of thousands of visits per day, up to 200,000 weekly visitors.
Case Study #2 (2025). A new aggregator site (~100,000 → 1 million+ pages). In 4 months: 463,000 visits, 6.5 million impressions, 72% CTR. After 2 months and 27 days—88,000 clicks from Google per day. Zero backlinks, zero money spent—just time and resources.
Site structure. From bottom to top: product pages (low-tail) → categories/listings (mid-tail) → homepage (high-tail). Internal linking passes link equity from hundreds of thousands of low-tail pages upward.
Content. For low-tail topics, Google ranks AI-generated content just fine—it prioritizes intent fulfillment and behavioral factors over authorship. For mid-tail/high-tail queries and YMYL niches, expert, author-written content is essential.
Sandbox and indexing. The first month is the classic Google sandbox. After that, with a good indexer and Google’s help, there is steady growth.
Forecast. Once all one million pages are indexed, we expect approximately 100,000 visits from Google per day.

About Me and the Team

Hello, everyone. I’ve structured this presentation like a typical SEO nerd—so that it’s understandable to search engine bots. And to you, of course, as well. Because the myth that SEOs build websites for people is just that: a myth. Websites are built for search engine bots. In some niches, all it takes for a user to convert is a single button—so should they write something meaningful for you, or just optimize for the bot after all?

The case study we’ll be discussing: how a website generated 88,000 clicks from Google just three months after launch. Any SEO specialist knows that you usually start out in the “sandbox”—but here, organic traffic was already coming in daily after just one month.

Before founding SEO Dream Team, I worked as an employee for a long time. In 2018–2019, I was Head of SEO at the largest player in the CIS, and I had about 1.5 million pages indexed by Google and Yandex. That’s when I realized the key point: when you have such a large-scale website, you don’t have to worry about anything—any of your pages will shoot to the top in five minutes because you have enough trust and authority to outrank all the smaller sites. That experience ended up being extremely valuable to me later on.

In 2019, I moved to Europe, traveled extensively, worked remotely for international companies—and gained experience working with multilingual websites. I worked on a site with a two-letter domain and about 80 language versions. That’s where I learned how to work with flags, by the way.

Now, SEO Dream Team gets traffic from all over the world. The only places we don’t get traffic from are four countries: Afghanistan, Greenland, and two African countries where I’m not even sure there’s internet.

In 2020, after the start of the pandemic, clients began to drop off—many were cutting back on marketing expenses. We decided it was time to generate traffic for ourselves and sell it. That’s how SEO Dream Team came to be in December 2020: we turned down all client orders and started working exclusively for ourselves.

We’re known for our case studies in one niche—gaming. But we’re trying our hand at different niches: crypto, betting, and many others—and we’re successfully driving traffic there, too. Today, I’ll tell you about one of those sites.

The Theory: Bigger Always Beats Smaller

When we first entered the self-generated traffic niche, we needed a case study to test a theory: bigger always takes priority over smaller. If there are several sites on the same topic, Google will give preference to the larger one. Size matters, and in SEO, it matters a great deal. By the way, that’s why we love high-traffic sites.

Case Study #1: Soccer Broadcasts (2022)

We first tested this approach three years ago on a soccer broadcasts website. We analyzed the search results and realized there was a lot of unclaimed traffic for soccer match broadcasts. The site was in two languages—English and Spanish. It’s been somewhat neglected now, and we’ve moved on, but at the time (2022, the team’s second year), it worked perfectly.

Here’s what we did: we took soccer match schedules, varied them slightly, added to them—and “seeded” them effectively. The result was thousands of pages on a single topic. Take the Real Madrid vs. Barcelona match: it happens twice a season, plus cup matches and European competitions. The page’s URL stays the same and gains more and more authority and trust over the years.

That’s when I started wondering: what if we created content that differed by only 20%? We’re all told that Google loves unique, useful content. But we used a template where only 20% changed—and even that automatically: team names, match time, and venue. Essentially, the site consists of thousands of identical pages. At a typical conference, they’d say that’s a lie—but results speak for themselves.

We rolled out thousands of pages covering the top five European leagues. When a user goes to a match page, we tell them: you can watch for free, but on a bookmaker’s site after registering (any bookmaker offers this option). The user registers—and there you have your lead.

On sites like these, we generated tens of thousands of visits per day. A single top match (Real Madrid vs. Barcelona, “Arsenal” vs. “Tottenham”) generates around 10,000 clicks from Google in just a couple of hours. There are usually two match days a week, plus European cup games—and it’s easy to rack up ~200,000 visits in a week. The conversion rate for betting isn’t amazing, but you make up for it with volume. The pages rank at the top because the site is large and trustworthy; users click through and stay (they’re interested in these live streams)—which boosts the trust of the URL and the pages. Next time, that same match won’t be on the seventh page of search results, but on the fifth, then the third—and traffic keeps growing with every match.

We built just over 100 backlinks to this site—we spent almost nothing on link building. Essentially, the site cost us nothing but our own time.

The “Alice in Wonderland” Principle

There’s a line from “Alice in Wonderland” that perfectly describes SEO: you have to run as fast as you can just to stay in place, and to get anywhere, you have to run twice as fast. Even though SEO results take time, you have to run fast: stay in the flow and keep up with the times. These days, major Google updates come about every six months—everything is constantly changing, and you have to adapt. But you can’t forget about experimentation either.

There’s a lot of unclaimed traffic on the internet—it’s the oil of the 21st century. It’s just lying around; you need to capture it for your sites and sell it to affiliate networks and advertisers. It’s a gold mine. The main task is to find and capture the traffic, and then sell it.

Case Study #2: A New Aggregator (2025)

The site went live on April 3. In 4 months—463,000 visits, about 6.5 million impressions, and an average CTR of 72% (which is a very high figure for SEO). I won’t reveal the niche just yet—but it’s the same principle again: the more your site focuses on a single niche, the more traffic you’ll attract, and the higher Google will rank you.

How to Build a Site Like This

Let’s say you have tens of thousands of products (the folks at Nutra are especially familiar with this—they have hundreds of thousands of products, and each one is high-profile and frequently searched for).

Let’s gather the semantic data. Take the product name, enter it into the tool, and look at the long-tail keywords. Most often, the long-tail keywords are similar—which means you can create a semantic template: product name + long-tail keywords. This way, you get a semantic core for any product in the segment all at once.
Product Pages (Long-Tail Keywords). For each product, we create a page with a template-based title. The content is generated by artificial intelligence. It’s commonly believed that Google ranks AI-generated content poorly—that’s nonsense: low-frequency queries rank perfectly well. Google itself says that it doesn’t matter who created the content—what matters is that it’s useful and fulfills the user’s intent. If the user doesn’t leave the page immediately, Google considers it useful. (This applies to low-frequency topics; the situation is different for high-frequency ones.)
Categories and listings (mid-tail). We group products into categories. Competition is higher here, but hundreds of thousands of low-frequency pages link to these categories and pass weight to them—thanks to internal linking, you’ll outrank your competitors.
Homepage (High-Frequency). Categories link to the homepage, where high-frequency queries are gathered (10,000 or more, and usually 100,000–1 million impressions). If you’re building a link profile, start with the homepage, then categories, then products.
Service Pages and Schema.org Markup. Add service pages and Schema.org markup (FAQ, Organization, etc.). All of this is done almost automatically.

Growth Trends (via Google Search Console)

Launch date: April 3. At the time of launch, the site consisted of ~100,000 pages, each with content, images, and a set of markup elements. With that volume, you need a good indexer: thanks to the SEO community (the SEO Dream Team / Refchat chat, where people share their experiences), Google quickly indexed the site.

When the crawler first visited, the hosting couldn’t handle the large number of pages and scripts—the site went down. We moved to a more powerful server, updated and optimized the scripts, and restarted the crawler.

The first month (April 3–May 3) clearly showed Google’s sandbox effect: after indexing, the site shot to the top of the rankings, then the sandbox “dropped” it so Google could take a closer look. Traffic is low—we reached about 62 clicks per day. But it’s clear that Google views the site favorably: after an initial spike, there’s been steady growth. About 1,000 out of 100,000 pages were indexed—but the process is underway.

Second month—thanks to the indexing tool, there are now ~15,000 pages in the index, with a noticeable increase in impressions and clicks. We made some changes during this period: when you make changes, Google temporarily demotes the pages anyway until it reassesses their quality—and then growth resumes, sometimes sharply. By the end of the second month—1,300+ users per day from Google alone. The site is two months old.

In the third month, the site began to emerge from the sandbox; the hurdle was overcome. This is an ideal growth curve by today’s standards: if your site is growing like this, it means you’re doing everything right. Two months and 27 days after launch—6,890 clicks from search per day, or about 115,000 per month, with 1.7 million impressions. And during all this time, zero backlinks were built and zero money was spent—just time and resources.

DDoS Attacks, Complaints, and Workarounds

In July, we caught their attention: we took over the top rankings and search results for certain queries, which led to DDoS attacks, complaints, and so on. The graph shows a corresponding drop in traffic. But we were smart enough—we learned how to work around the complaints, and now we don’t care about them. This is a very useful lesson: if Google removes your main page from the search results, you can provide it with another page containing the same content, which will drive the same amount of traffic.

Outlook

The final graph shows the number of pages in the index. Currently, the site has just over 700,000 pages (it will soon exceed one million), but only ~205,000 have been indexed—and they’re already driving about 88,000 visits per day (currently, we’re consistently getting between 8,000 and 10,000 visits per day). Google doesn’t index very quickly, but we’re helping with our indexing tool; it sees that the pages are useful and that people are spending time on them—and we’re growing.

Once we reach 1 million pages, I estimate we’ll get around 100,000 visits from Google per day.

What’s important: conclusions

Google doesn’t care who wrote the content—you or AI. We ran many tests: texts I wrote myself were flagged by AI detectors as “100% generated.” These detectors don’t mean anything, and Google understands that. What matters is usefulness—that is, fulfilling the user’s intent: if the user didn’t leave immediately and didn’t return to the search results, you’ve met their need.
The more pages you have, the more traffic you’ll get, and the better your ranking will be. Google considers a large website to be more authoritative. A competitor who has spread a topic across many pages may rank higher—but if you have at least 100 products in a category, the trust you’ve built over time will eventually push you higher: Google will consider you an expert in the niche.

As an example of “unclaimed traffic”: some guys came to me and said there was a ton of unclaimed traffic—millions of users search for specific OnlyFans models every day. We gave them that opportunity—that’s the whole case study.

Answers to Questions

What’s the optimal content length? Currently, on average, between 1,000 and 3,000 characters without spaces.

Which indexing tool did you use? Not the Google Indexing API—we used a tool written by our SEO specialist from Refchat. We simply fed him all our sitemaps, and he crawled them.

How do you outrank aggregators in the top search results? Very easily—through expertise. Essentially, our site is a kind of aggregator in its own right. To outrank major aggregators (for example, those focused on games and brands), we build a site centered on a single game or product and create a large number of pages for it—we demonstrate niche expertise, and Google ranks us higher.

Should you learn SEO yourself or pay to get to the top? Ideally, it’s better to learn it yourself, but honestly—it’s better to pay those who have proven results and expertise. Learning SEO takes a lot of time, and in SEO, experience matters more than knowledge. You’ll spend more on your own experiments than you would on good professionals.

A site on a new domain or a dropped domain with backlinks? A new domain, no backlinks.

How do you generate content? We have our own ChatGPT-based solutions, but you can also use third-party services (for example, the service from our Ukrainian friends)—they generate a large number of pages and content in a short time and for a modest fee.

Expert authors vs. AI-generated content. AI-generated content works for low-competition (LC) queries. But as soon as you move into mid-tail and long-tail queries, you need unique, author-written content because Google looks at the author and their expertise: in the Schema markup, you specify the author, and Google checks their social media profiles to assess how much of an expert they are. Ideally, you need a human here. Of course, you could spend a lot of money training your own service to produce expert content—but cost-wise, it would end up being the same as hiring a copywriter.