HTML Page Builder generates unbearable pain. Doesn't this affect SEO?

Question

Search Engine Optimization

Hello,
I have a question about builders. I have a clear opinion on this, I myself expressed it here somewhere not so long ago, in a not entirely, but similar question . But life forces you to make a decision.
At work, the management hired 3 people from the agency, the money was paid there, mom don't worry, and these people are teaching our girls from the OM department how to streamline the production of landing pages. In general, they have been sitting with us for almost a month, during which time they riveted a couple of pages. When I saw this, I was horrified. And that's why. I want to show on the example of one page, the second is similar.
So here is this page .
As you can see, this miracle was "created" by this builder. The fact that there is mess in the code, I assumed, is not so sure, but still. There, there are several classes and ids for each element, which is worth at least how the simplest list at the very top with check icons is implemented. The code jumps from top to bottom and back, I generally hardly understand how it all holds on and what it clings to. It drags a bunch of unnecessary css and js, although js is never used on this page at all.
Well, to hell with it with the code.
Farther. The validator shows 146 errors, the HTML5-outliner clearly demonstrates that the HTML structure of the site resembles some kind of surreal spaghetti. 7 H1 headings per page!
They've optimized the pictures. Those. the quality was reduced to indecent, while not a single title and not a single alt was registered in any of the pictures, and file names in general do not give a damn about everyone.
So, to my comments on all this, it was said that all this is nonsense and does not matter at all, but the important thing is that this page is ideally optimized for SEO, and using only this page to start in Adwords advertising and then in organic will increase conversion at least 5,462 euros per week. This page has already been added to Adwords, so let's see.
And you, they told me, if you don't like it, you can take and clean these pages. Like once such an esthete.
Well, specifically this page to turn over from scratch - well, an hour at the most. But now, after all, the plan is for our girls to rivet this shit at a conveyor speed, and I don’t smile at all at cleaning these Augean stables or doing by hand what 4 girls intend to do automatically.
In general, there are 2 questions - firstly, I don’t believe at all that there is something really good for SEO in all this, so I will be grateful to the SEOs for specific answers - what, where and why is it bad, or where what and why is it good, or at least it's not that bad.
And the second - maybe there is a builder somewhere, which, if not completely, then at least litters less in the code? What I've seen so far only makes me sad....

Answer 1

1) In light of the fact that traffic will be poured from ad networks directly to landing pages, there is no point in discussing SEO at all. You can send traffic even to a bmp picture, as long as there is an envelope - this is the goal of the business.
2) In organics, it's a completely different story, there are many factors that are constantly changing. And no matter how sad it may sound, the quality of the code is far from the most important factor. Any frank GS with a good link profile will easily bring down a site with a licked source code. Here, you need to know what exactly is working now and how the PSs react to it.
3) And if you have a geo-dependent, unpopular product / service, then in general you can assemble a semantic core and replace the girls with dorgen :) From the aesthetic side, of course, it’s worse, but on the other hand, savings on March 8th.
So, forget it, landings are riveting, traffic is coming, money is dripping, everything is ok :)

Answer 2

Good afternoon.
The logic is actually very simple. The use of redundant elements in the code (CSS tables, JS directly in html) "strain" the spiders, requiring a little more resources for you to "clean up". In addition, the site takes longer to load (it's not for nothing that Yandex and Google really want to see the speed of loading the site even on a poor connection via 3G - hence the Turbo pages). A site that is made as in your example will take longer to load, require more resources from spiders and at the same time not carry so much valuable information to be present in the issue with such shortcomings.
Bad - CSS - a separate file, JS - we also include the "body" in separate files.
It is better to transfer links and constructions in the form "//d9hhrg4mnvzow.cloudfront.net/" to your hosting because extra calls to cloudfront - even longer loading!
I don’t know builders, because I wasn’t puzzled - but it’s easier to use either Wordpress for landings (it’s not so difficult to make them on it!) Or just a static template and finish it with handles. Speed ​​is many times higher, reliability and safety!