Part 1 ended like this — 2,089 URLs declared; whether anyone actually arrives is still unknown. Weeks passed. We opened the report.
Three
| URLs declared | Actually indexed | |
|---|---|---|
| The stock site | 2,091 | 3 |
| This site (appjip) | ~30 | 30 |
Same person, same method, same weeks. One at 0.1%, one at nearly 100%. Not the count — the substance of a single page decided it.
"Discovered – currently not indexed"
That was Google's label, on 2,088 of them.
As a restaurant: Part 1 was never handing over the menu. This time the menu arrived, the kitchen was inspected, and the verdict was "we don't need to serve this."
2,088 of them were passed over.
Everything Part 1 cheerfully added came right back
Per-ticker pages were never a winnable fight
A search for something like "Samsung Electronics stock price" is owned by brokerages and financial papers on page one. There is no gap for us ticker by ticker. Two thousand pages would not have changed that.
So we did the opposite — we cut
| Before | After | |
|---|---|---|
| Ticker pages | 2,084 | 150 (majors only) |
| Analysis posts | 0 | 17 |
| Total | 2,091 | 172 |
Thin pages in bulk drag the whole site's rating down. That is the same reason this site was rejected eight times by AdSense. We knew, and stepped in it again.
Instead, we put nameplates on the good writing
That site already had solid pieces — daily market wrap-ups, a company of the week, explanations of sudden moves. But they all lived inside one address, expanding and collapsing, so no search engine could see them individually.
The result is still unknown
Search moves in weeks. Whether this was the right fix shows up when the index count is recounted at the end of September. Up from three means it worked; unchanged means the cause is somewhere else again. It gets written here either way.
One thing is certain. Making a lot and being found have nothing to do with each other.