.d53b12e5.png&w=3840&q=75 "Trivas.ai")
by Trivas.aiWe're pulling the /royal-canin page down from a standalone URL and folding it into our case studies hub. Here's the reasoning, and what happens to the content that's actually worth keeping.
The numbers are blunt. Over the last three months, /royal-canin pulled in fewer than 10 impressions and exactly zero clicks. Not a slow month. Not a seasonal dip. Three months of basically nobody seeing it, and nobody clicking when they did.
This isn't a borderline call where we're weighing modest traffic against upkeep cost. A page performing this poorly isn't neutral filler sitting quietly in the background. It actively drags down sitewide quality signals: thin engagement, no inbound interest, and crawlers spending time on a URL that gives search engines no reason to trust the rest of the site more.
So the decision comes down to two options. Consolidate the page into a stronger pillar with a 301 redirect, or noindex it if there's nothing underneath worth preserving. No third path where it just stays as-is.
Nobody searches "Royal Canin Trivas." That query doesn't exist in any meaningful volume, and it never will. A single-customer brand page built around a brand name plus our product name is a page built for a search intent nobody has.
Beyond that, this page had no internal links pointing to it. Not from the blog, not from the homepage, not from any product page. It launched orphaned and stayed that way. Search engines discover and rank pages partly through the web of links around them, and /royal-canin never had one.
Compare that to how a consolidated hub works. A page like /resources/case-studies aggregates relevance signals from every customer story it holds. Each entry supports the others. Isolated single-customer pages compete with nothing, which sounds like an advantage until you realize it means they're also found by nobody. There's no rising tide. There's just one quiet page, alone, indefinitely.
The plan isn't to delete Royal Canin's story. It's to relocate it somewhere it can actually be found.
Step one: pull out anything from the Royal Canin page that's genuinely unique, specific metrics, workflow details, the actual shape of how they used the dashboards, and fold that into the case studies hub as one entry among several. If there's a real number or a specific before/after detail, that's what earns its place in the pillar.
Step two: set up a 301 redirect from /royal-canin straight to /resources/case-studies. Any link equity the old URL built up over time doesn't just evaporate, it gets passed forward instead of wasted on a dead page.
Step three, and this one matters: we don't copy over the generic boilerplate. Standard descriptions of what Trivas does, the usual platform overview, that stuff already lives elsewhere on the site. Migrating it again just duplicates content that's already ranking somewhere else. Only the parts specific to Royal Canin's actual story make the move.
Here's the test before any of that consolidation work happens: does the Royal Canin page actually have a unique data point or angle that the case studies pillar doesn't already cover?
If the honest answer is no, if it's just another version of "here's a dashboard, here's a happy customer" with no metric or detail that isn't already represented by another case study, then a 301 is the wrong move. Redirecting thin content into a strong pillar doesn't strengthen the pillar. It just imports the thinness.
In that scenario, the cleaner call is noindex. Strip out any remaining internal references pointing to it, let the page exist quietly without asking search engines to index it, and don't force a merge that adds nothing. A redirect should earn its place by adding real information to the destination page, not just by existing.
Royal Canin isn't a one-off decision. It's part of a wider audit flagging zero-click, low-impression pages across the site as liabilities rather than harmless background noise.
Every page like this one costs something. Crawl budget gets spent on URLs nobody's searching for. Internal link equity gets diluted across pages that don't convert it into anything. Consolidating or removing them concentrates both of those resources on pages that actually have demand behind them, pages where real people are searching and real traffic is possible.
Royal Canin is one of several customer and brand pages going through this same evaluation right now. Each one gets judged on the same question: does this page earn its own URL, or does it belong folded inside a pillar where it adds to something bigger instead of standing alone and invisible?
If you're looking for how Royal Canin uses Trivas, that content now lives at the case studies hub, alongside the rest of our customer stories in one place instead of scattered across standalone URLs that search engines never found anyway.
If you're an ecommerce team sizing up Trivas against what you're already using, the hub is a better starting point than any single brand page would've been. You get workflows across different store types and platforms in one spot, not one isolated story with no context around it.
And if you'd rather see the dashboards yourself instead of reading about someone else's, start a trial and pull up your own numbers. It beats reading about it secondhand.
explore more insights
3 min read
3 min read
3 min read