Anyone rate Contentboss??

[tomj]

Tweet

Hey All,

So I found this today on a4u.

http://www.contentboss.com/default.php

I'm aware the member contentboss runs this service and posts here.

How good is it as a product and service?

The article examples look good, read good but really, do they always spit out quality reworded articles? Its pretty cheap so worth a punt but I dont want to waste my time!

I mean theres what you could call "proper" services like adfero but they charge a ton and essentially just re-write existing news.

Appreciate anyones feedback or alternatives!

Tom

[seo-wizard]

I would write a word of warning about the 'proper' service like Adfero. Direct News which is Adfero's news writing service for the internet is vastly overpriced and doesnt actually add any benefit.

We used their service at our company and found no noticable improvement on our website stats and for the price and high integration costs, it is just not worth it.

There contract terms are quite severe if I remember rightly, although that's not my area, (SEO is my bag!)

High cost for no return.

Find another solution.

:td

[tomj]

Ok thanks for the heads up on adfero. I have experienced their sales tactics first hand and decided to stay clear.

However, back on track with contentboss, I've been "wrangling" articles on it this AM and its spat out some interesting results.

I've not toyed with all the options yet but certainly so far its really no good for spinning news articles that contain quotes and company names like nationwide lol .

However for spinning other types of articles its pretty decent I just need to fiddle more to get the best out of it.

I do tho think this of course a poor substitute for professionally written and researched content. This perhaps ticks the box for backfill fodder thats not totally duplicate if you want to beef a site out for launch and focus on the good stuff moving forward.....Hmmmm

[tomj]

Contentboss spun my last post above

Ok thanks for the heads up on adfero. I have experienced their sales strategies first hand and made a decision to stay clear. However, back on track with contentboss, I have been "wrangling" articles on it this AM and its spat out some fascinating results. I have not toyed with all of the options yet but definitely so far its actually no good for spinning stories articles that contain quotes and company names like across the nation lol. However for spinning other kinds of articles its pretty decent I just need to fiddle more to get the best out of it.


I do tho think this naturally a poor substitute for professionally written and analyzed content. This maybe ticks the box for backfill fodder thats not fully copy if you need to meat a site out for launch and target the good stuff moving forward.....Hmmmm.

[ContentBoss]

Contentboss spun my last post above

Ok thanks for the heads up on adfero. I have experienced their sales strategies first hand and made a decision to stay clear. However, back on track with contentboss, I have been "wrangling" articles on it this AM and its spat out some fascinating results. I have not toyed with all of the options yet but definitely so far its actually no good for spinning stories articles that contain quotes and company names like across the nation lol. However for spinning other kinds of articles its pretty decent I just need to fiddle more to get the best out of it.


I do tho think this naturally a poor substitute for professionally written and analyzed content. This maybe ticks the box for backfill fodder thats not fully copy if you need to meat a site out for launch and target the good stuff moving forward.....Hmmmm.

Hi.

I'm here to answer any questions you like.

While contentBoss is indeed a 'general purpose' wrangler, it is naturally geared towards working best on the kind of stuff our members use - eg articles. Basically, the system 'learns' as it gets more use. For example, the average mod rates across all content types have risen over 5% since the end of last year. While there is of course a theoretical maximum replace rate, we aren't close to it yet. Like a lot of the second generation tools out there, contentBoss is designed to continually improve.

You can also specify 'reserved words' you want to keep intact, so you could specify 'Nationwide Building Society,Northern Rock,Northern Crock etc for tech-specific cases.

The one overriding principle is - 'garbage in, garbage out'. You feed in sub-standard text, the boss isn't going to make it 'better'. For example, if you give it badly formatted text (like the old 'fixed column' articles), it won't do very well. If you don't have any punctuation in your text, it won't do very well. If your text is littered with typos... And so on.

As I said, I'm here to answer q's, and our support people are usually hot off the mark for any questions asked using the internal message system.

Cheers
ContentBoss

[tomj]

The one overriding principle is - 'garbage in, garbage out'. You feed in sub-standard text, the boss isn't going to make it 'better'. For example, if you give it badly formatted text (like the old 'fixed column' articles), it won't do very well. If you don't have any punctuation in your text, it won't do very well. If your text is littered with typos... And so on.

Oy, bloody cheek. Is u tryin to say I is pastin junk in2 ur toolz??

On a serious note, do you have any indicators as to what % difference you need for content to be viewed as "unique". Okay so 100% is the obvious answer but surely theres a minimum scrape by difference?

[ContentBoss]

Oy, bloody cheek. Is u tryin to say I is pastin junk in2 ur toolz??

On a serious note, do you have any indicators as to what % difference you need for content to be viewed as "unique". Okay so 100% is the obvious answer but surely theres a minimum scrape by difference?

:-)

Of course not Tom, I'm sure your English is better than my own!

Re the % changes required:- our own experiments (and those of the original beta-testers) indicated that if you get it to 65% - 70% unique, you are in the clear as far as the current algorithms are concerned. That will no doubt need to increase as search engines tighten up, which is one reason the system is constantly improving.

If you are creating multiple versions of the same piece of text with a view to dominating the serps for a selection of terms, you need to focus on the difference between variations, not the absolute distance from the original, as the one is more likely to trip the filter before the other.

CB

edit - forgot to mention, as you say, one of the main uses our members have is to populate blogs ('autoblogs') with unique content. If you want 'professionally written content', you have another option or 2. First, you can use the 'content wizard'. This allows you to 'build up' an article on any topic from scratch, by clicking a button. When you are happy with it, you can wrangle it to increase the uniqueness. It's similar to several 'standalone' products, but it uses a large db of quality content rather than just scraping google results etc.

Alternatively, you can search the 'PLR Warehouse'. This is several hundred thousand PLR articles on most topics, already spun and ready to use. The quality of these tends to be pretty good,and you can preview the summary before you select them.

bye.

[Brendon]

>> if you get it to 65% - 70% unique

Really? I'd have put the figure much lower. SEs dupe content filters just aren't very good. You have to think a bit about what they are looking for to get around them easily, but it's not a very high bar

[ContentBoss]

you can now generate jetspinner syntax automatically using contentBoss. Just go to Automatic Jet Spinner Software to rewrite your articles instantly, paste in your text, and one click later, wham. Hours of mental pain, avoided.

e.g.

Are you {looking out|searching|looking} for a diet{ plan|ing program| program} {which will|that may|that can} fit {simp|easi}ly in your {dail|everyda|day to da}y routine? Or you are {uninterested in|bored with|tired of} starving your body & spending {masses|lots|plenty} of hours in weight room {solely|simply|just} to lose {a couple of|two|2} pounds? Weight {loss|reduction} {seem|appear}s like a{n endless| never ending| never-ending} cycle snip