Is High Quality Content Worth the Cost & Time Over Cheaper Low Quality Content for SEO & Marketing?

[TriForce]

Okay, so this is a really green question.

I've seen the phrase "we're not here to win pulitzers" banded about on BuSo but as I find myself trying to perfect my first piece of skyscraper content, I was just wondering this:

To a certain degree, is any content better than no content?

I'm not talking about using spun content or $1 per 100 word articles but content that is free of gramatical errors, makes sense but prehaps doesn't quite have the polish of a magazine article or the depth of a blog post by an industry pro.

I think this is the first time self doubt has come to visit me.

 

[CCarter]

To a certain degree, is any content better than no content?

You can always go back and edit or have an editor edit your content. You can’t gain back the time lost/wasted trying to perfect each piece. You think BuzzFeed is going through self-doubt on what they publish?

Realistically are scientist, doctors, or english majors going through your content looking for some minor error to call you out on? No, but even if they are thank them for the free edits and don’t think twice about them.

Really your problem is you are worried what people think about you or whether you are worthy of the next level. Stop thinking. If this is what is stopping you then you are too comfortable in life. You are not hungry. If you were starving you wouldn’t have time for doubts.

The best thing you can do is the right move, the 2nd best thing you can do is the wrong move. The worst thing you can do is nothing. Right now you are doing nothing.

At least with the wrong move you can correct course cause you have momentum. This is covered in the Mental Strength Day of the DSCC.

 

[MuffinS]

as I find myself trying to perfect my first piece of skyscraper content:

The definition of a skyscraper piece of content is to get it out there, and then keep building upon it at one level at a time (building upon article length, article quality and popularity). Why not take what you have, post it, let it index, get some age, and then apply improvements progressively? The best piece of content is worthless if it isn't indexed. As long as it is 80% ok... post it! Your first piece will always be the worst, but as long as it has OK high-quality traits (Menu, On page, Images, Outbound links to authority, over 2000 word count) then Google will appreciate it.

 

[stackcash]

The definition of a skyscraper piece of content is to get it out there, and then keep building upon it at one level at a time (building upon article length, article quality and popularity).

This is incorrect.

The "skyscraper" term was coined by Brian Dean of Backlinko and refers to building on the content already published on the topic. You take all the available content on the topic, combine it into a single piece of content (in your own words - no plagiarizing!), add more content to it, and make sure it's "better" than everything else currently available. You then take this piece of great content and reach out to all the websites that are currently linking to the websites competing for the same topic/keyword and ask them to link to your new, better, piece of content instead.

You always want to iterate any of your content in today's environment, yes... but, that is not unique to the skyscraper technique.

And, as far as posting less-than-stellar content at first and then going back to "fix it" later.... the answer is.... it depends.

A $1 per 100 writer on textbroker will give you some shitty ass content. But, it'll allow you to get the page up, get your slug right, get your headers right, index the page for your target keyword, and get the page aging.

The page is very unlikely to rank in the top 20 with this type of content unless its target keyword competition is uniquely low.

And, if you do happen to jump up into the top 10 with this low-quality content, you probably won't stay there for long. It's unlikely that visitors will have their needs met by the shitty content... which will lead to high bounce rates, low dwell time, and a low # of pages per visit...... all things that will send you back into the depths of nothingness.

I suppose there's a strategy where you can post up 50+ pages of shitty, low-cost content and wait to see which page(s) rank the best. Then, you can go back to the best performing pages and "update" them one by one. But, buying 50+ pages of shitty content in bulk is the same thing as just buying 2-3 pieces of really nice, high-quality content. I guess I just don't see the point of spinning my wheels. I'm just going to do it right the first time.

But, as @CCarter pointed out... you do need to stop thinking and start doing. You want to shoot for high-quality, but you should realize it's not going to be perfect. Just do your best, wait and see how it does, and then go back and make incremental improvements. At the end of the day, that's what all of us are doing anyway.