SEO and performance

What we do not promise

No ranking guarantees. Nobody controls search results, and anyone quoting you a position for a keyword is either guessing or selling something that will not survive the next update. What can be controlled is whether your pages can be crawled, understood, loaded quickly and matched to what people actually search for. That is the work we do, and it is measurable.

The honest framing is that technical SEO removes the reasons a page cannot rank. Whether it then ranks depends on the competition and on whether the page deserves to.

The audit, and what comes out of it

We start with a crawl of the whole site and a read of Search Console and server log data where they are available. What surfaces is usually unglamorous: pages returning the wrong status code, duplicate URLs created by filters, canonical tags pointing at the wrong place, a robots rule left over from a staging site, pagination that hides half the catalogue.

The output is one prioritised list, each item marked with effort and expected effect, not a sixty-page PDF. Items a developer can ship in an hour that unblock crawling come first.

Core Web Vitals is an engineering problem

Largest Contentful Paint, Interaction to Next Paint and Cumulative Layout Shift are not settings you switch on. They come out of decisions already baked into the page: how the hero image is loaded, how many scripts run before the page becomes interactive, whether fonts swap in late and shove the text down, whether embed and ad slots reserve their space.

We measure on field data rather than a single lab score, because a perfect score on a fast desktop connection says little about a mid-range Android phone on mobile data. Then we fix a specific cause, re-measure, and keep the changes that held.

Making pages describe themselves

Structured data states what a page is instead of leaving it to inference: an organisation, a service, a product, a set of questions and answers, a breadcrumb trail. Done properly it also makes the site legible to whatever reads pages next, which increasingly is not a person.

We mark up what is genuinely on the page and nothing else. Structured data describing content a visitor cannot see is a penalty waiting to happen, not a shortcut.

Architecture before volume

Before anyone writes an article the site needs a shape: which page owns which topic, how those pages link to each other, and how a visitor gets from a broad query to the specific page that answers it. Without that, adding content produces pages competing with each other for the same query.

We group real search queries into topics, assign one page as the owner of each, and only then discuss what to write. On a bilingual site this includes getting hreflang right so the Turkish and English versions are not read as duplicates.

How the work runs and what you see

Week one is the baseline: crawl, Search Console and analytics access, current field vitals and current positions recorded so there is something to compare against later.

Weeks two and three are the blocking technical fixes: crawlability, status codes, canonicals, sitemaps and indexing rules.

Then performance work against that baseline, one cause at a time, with before-and-after numbers for each change.

Then structured data and content architecture, delivered as a page plan your team or ours can write against.

Monthly after that: a short report with impressions, clicks, positions and field vitals, what changed and what we recommend next. When a change moved nothing, the report says so.