(Entry was posted by Scott Hendiso on this post in the Dumb SEO Questions community on Facebook, 06/18/2020).

Anyone willing to share their thoughts on content randomizer?

I`m trying to get the opinion of multiple SEO professionals before I share my own thoughts with them, and I`m hoping you`ll participate.After being asked to look at a website, I found they are happily using a WP plugin with a monthly fee called "Content Randomizer" - intellasoftplugins.com/seo-content-randomizer/ - which has given them well over 4000 landing pages, one for pretty much every city and town they could possibly serve.
Many of the blocks of content that are in use throughout the site are actually shared content, among multiple businesses / domains that are in their same service industry niche.
Anyone willing to share their thoughts on this?

This question begins at 00:01:37 into the clip. Did this video clip play correctly? Watch this question on YouTube commencing at 00:01:37

Share on Twitter

Share on Facebook

YOUR ANSWERS

Selected answers from the Dumb SEO Questions Facebook & G+ community.

David Matson: I Canâ€™t think of any way this creates a good user experience.
Chuck Price: No debate here - itâ€™s bad
Jennifer Denney: But let me see the data ðŸ˜‚
Doc Sheldon: Sounds to me like something that`s about as productive as letting a 3-legged cat chase a cockroach around the keyboard.
Dixon Jones: Is it working? Take it Off 100 of the pages (or 1000) and find out. Test. Many sites, like Zoopla, bring in geo-specific content from all over the place.
Jef Van Gool: Dixon Jones this is a good approach. Or if it is indexed you might remove it (partially) and make already good ranking content better and more unique to get even better rankings.
Scott Hendison: Dixon Jones "Working" in the sense of driving lots of traffic? Not really, IMO. Search Console shows their average ranking is aroound 35+ and they only get 0-5 clicks a day from search. They had over 4000 pages indexed, and around June 2 Google started moving some of them to "excluded" - Now hearly half the site - Of the 2100 recently excluded pages, over 90% show the listed reaon onkly as "Crawled - currently not indexed" - Good isdea for a test, though thank you ;)
Roger Montti: This is what`s going on there, Scott:

Local search algorithms are crap compared to the regular algorithm.

Content optimization software makers do "experiments" to show how their software will help you rank better, but they always do it in local search SERPs in low population cities.

They do that because it`s easier to rank.

So, circling back, local search SERPs tend to be easier to infiltrate and that`s where the spammers are at right now.

You can actually buy GMB listings in fake offices in cities you don`t have an actual presence in.
Paul Taubman: It depends on how random the content is. Also, is there value on the page that is relevant? Is it ranking in the search engines? Are the pages getting hit? So many questions before saying it is bad....
Andy McCabe: Thousands of "pages" getting a combined hit volume of what, FOUR a day? This can`t be good.
Scott Hendison: Andy McCabe a couple of days had 7 or 8 ;)
Michael Rayburn: As a whole random content plugins can rank. The problem is when the end-user arrives many times the content can be a turn-off. Remember we have to have google love the content and then the content needs to get the end-user to do something like call for service. Good question, not a fan.