Searchenginegenie.com

If a site seems to 'work' - the visitors (mostly new) appear happy with the content/structure etc, and the search engines are happy to rank it - is there any value in making small, regular changes to the content to make it appear 'fresher' to the engines, even if this does nothing for the visitor ?

I've read that fairly static sites may get crawled less frequently but so what ?

I tend to the view that 'if it ain't broke don't fix it' - unless you can make the visitor experience more worthwhile. On the other hand, algorithms don't have feelings.
_________________

I think you've got the right idea.

The search engines won't keep crawling your site as often if there's nothing new to index, but your pages will continue to rank about the same until something better (not just "newer") appears. Or until they re-jig the algo! I have one home page that has been bolted to the top of its main SERP for 4 years - even though I've never changed my story on it and there are many new competitive sites.

Changes to improve customer experience make sense - but I figure that's the only reason to change!

_______________

If you are just thinking Search engines then you are fine with your crawling. But imagine visitors they tend to visit your site if you have quality fresh and interesting information.

no one wants to visit sites which are totally static. Even product sites attact repeat visitors only if they have attractive new products.

But it's true that crawlers dont crawl static pages too often as much as they crawl dynamic pages... It's better to do some changes at equal intervals of time, not too short and not too long intervals.

Actually seo is a good work but when we do regularly it feels like boring.

Actually search engine do like new content . The more content u add, the more they like it.



Thanks.
Infilon Technologies