25 Comments

  1. Nick
    · Reply

    Ok let’s break things down. 12 posts for $497 – which makes it about $41/post, which by further calculations comes out to about $12 a word assuming each blog is 500 words.

    Alright, this is not my area of expertise, so let’e get the SEO gurus in here here.

    My understanding is the Google ideally is looking for 2000+ word posts, and these posts are one quarter of that.
    If people will just publish the posts, or don’t make enough changes to the text, isn’t Google going to mark the posts as duplicate content, or even worse, plagiarized content?

    So, if my assumptions are true, one has to expand the content of each post by 4 times !!!, and/or make enough changes to the text to the degree that he/she might as well write the whole thing themselves, and save the $497 …

    Again, someone with knowledge please correct me if I’m wrong… what am I missing?

    Report

  2. Mike Schinkel
    · Reply

    This seems like a cool idea. However, the first thing it made me think of is the duplicate content penalty on Google and other search engines. If Bridget were to sell a lot of these then her different customer’s sites might start looking like a content farm to Google, and possibly see them penalized.

    I wonder if Bridget has come up with an innovative solution to address this, because if so then she could really be on to something. Of course maybe this is not for helping to drive traffic but to provide visitors driven to their sites by other marketing to get their questions answered.

    But even if the latter, I would still be worried about the potential for a Google penalty unless Bridget can come up with a solution to address it. Maybe that will be version 2?

    Report

    • Martin
      · Reply

      “Anyone can tweak the copy to localize it or make it their own,” she said. https://wptavern.com/jump-start-a-years-worth-of-content-via-the-launch-with-words-plugin

      So you buy articles for $500 and have to change them. I’d rather invest the money in articles written for me specifically.

      Report

      • Bridget M Willard
        · Reply

        Hiya Martin,

        You don’t have to change them, but if you wanted to put your city in there or your motto, you can.

        Also, these articles are the same quality that my clients pay $175/each for. They aren’t boring, have a call to action, and outbound links. But if you can find someone to write 12 articles around 500 words for $500 dollars, definitely jump on that.

        My intent with building this product was to give Web Developers a value add for their client builds. And, I’d hope they’d mark up the cost to the end client.

        Report

    • Bridget M Willard
      · Reply

      Heya Mike.

      This is an excellent question and has been brought up quite a bit.

      Small, service-based businesses have a difficult time competing with the Franchise industry since Franchisees have the backing of a much larger brand that provides all of the marketing collateral — including their websites and their content.

      The Franchise Industry is a $767+ Billion industry (https://www.statista.com/topics/5048/franchising-in-the-us/). That’s a lot of firepower.

      So this product is based upon my experience working in the franchise industry. They live and breathe duplicate content.

      How so?

      Because it’s the Franchisor’s job to provide marketing collateral, they often hire PR firms to write articles that are syndicated to multisite website installs. The Franchisee has no ability to localize the content. It’s just on their website. That content is all duplicate content.

      Further, I spent a little over a year writing templated page content for roofermarketers.com. This agency exclusively builds websites for roofers. All of that content I have written would be considered duplicate content.

      And yet, they have increased the business of these roofing companies? How? Google ads, copy that informs and works, well-written text.

      With my blog post pack, these service-based companies also have things to share on social media — Twitter, Facebook, LinkedIn — as well as in their email marketing.

      People go to websites for two reasons: validation and discovery. Yes, once they found the local business, they want to be able to see if they know their stuff.

      The topics I’ve covered in this roofing pack also help serve as FAQ. This builds and internal library for the sales team to send to prospective clients.

      So, what’s worse than duplicate content? No content.

      Also, duplicate content isn’t a penalty.

      “While not technically a penalty, duplicate content can still sometimes impact search engine rankings. When there are multiple pieces of, as Google calls it, “appreciably similar” content in more than one location on the Internet, it can be difficult for search engines to decide which version is more relevant to a given search query.” Moz (https://moz.com/learn/seo/duplicate-content)

      Report

    • Kailee
      · Reply

      From reading the article, even though there is a mention of SEO I don’t think the point of the content packs is to rank in search results (and I really don’t see how a quick 500 word article could compete unless highly tweaked and aimed at a local audience). They sound more like a helpful customer service tool that will also add some bulk to a business’ website. What I’m curious about is if any of the “outbound links” in the post were sponsored (eg if a roofing supplier did or could pay to have a link added into the content packs…).

      Report

  3. Terence
    · Reply

    Is there a ‘duplicate content penalty’? This is a bit of a myth. While duplicate content can impact SEO and should be minimised, it isn’t something to lose sleep over. Google simply does not have a duplicate content penalty. They take the view: “Duplicate content on a site is not grounds for action on that site unless it appears that the intent of the duplicate content is to be deceptive and manipulate search engine results.” In fact, the latest version of Google’s Search Quality Evaluator Guidelines (December 2019) has this to say on Page 40: “We do not consider legitimately licensed or syndicated content to be “copied” In other words: content syndication has its place.

    Report

  4. Isabel
    · Reply

    Google recently (February 2021) confirmed that duplicate content could negatively affect your performance on organic Search. They also consider content that’s been modified slightly by manually rewriting it, as duplicate content. Source: https://youtu.be/7rFcGcZg9O4

    Report

  5. Patrick B
    · Reply

    The hard part about content for most people is figuring out what to write and overcoming the blank page, so most will never bother. If content packs help business owners or their partners get a jump start on solving that problem then I say go for it. A single article is a jumping-off point for a lot of content a business can produce, blog post, email newsletter, 3-4 social media posts, resources for clients and prospects ( even outside of search engine results ). Do that for a year’s worth of content. That’s valuable if someone is willing to put in the work now that the hard part has been taken care of.

    We all pay for convenience.

    Report

  6. Karie L Barrett
    · Reply

    Seems to me this is just PLR content (private label rights) packaged as something more “special.” Nothing innovative about that and there are tons of niche vendors who’ve been delivering this type of stock content product for a long time. Long-form, short-form, ebooks, videos, social – you can get it all with various types of licenses that allow you to address the issues around duplicate content. The price tag listed here is crazy high in comparison to other vendors.

    Report

    • Bridget M Willard
      · Reply

      Right. This is what the franchising industry uses quite often. Is there already a WordPress plugin for this? Maybe my product isn’t useful at all then.

      Report

    • Justin Tadlock
      · Reply

      I don’t think anyone’s really arguing that the idea of selling pre-packaged content is particularly innovative. What’s unique is the LWW side of it that makes it easy to upload that content directly into WordPress. I could be wrong, but I don’t think anyone’s done this with WP before, at least not that I know of offhand.

      As for pricing, you generally get what you pay for. If roofing businesses want to pick up that $9.99 resellable e-book or whatever, maybe it’ll work out. But, what they are purchasing here is the expertise in a specialized field. Whether the price tag is worth it, that is up to individual businesses to decide. In the WordPress ecosystem, whether it be software or content, creators far too often undervalue their products.

      Report

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.

%d bloggers like this: