<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
		>
<channel>
	<title>Comments on: Day 82 &#8211; 20 Articles Outsourced</title>
	<atom:link href="http://mikeiser.com/day-82-20-articles-outsourced/feed" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://mikeiser.com/day-82-20-articles-outsourced</link>
	<description>Follow Along On My IM Journey…</description>
	<lastBuildDate>Mon, 06 Feb 2012 14:35:24 -0500</lastBuildDate>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=2.9.2</generator>
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
		<item>
		<title>By: Mikeman</title>
		<link>http://mikeiser.com/day-82-20-articles-outsourced/comment-page-1#comment-735</link>
		<dc:creator>Mikeman</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Mon, 27 Jul 2009 16:33:56 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://mikeiser.com/?p=302#comment-735</guid>
		<description>As far as grammar is concerned, the writing has always come back sounding like it was written by a native.  This coupled with their 36 hour turnaround time(it&#039;s often less than 24h) and the price is why I like them so much...it&#039;s hard to find an outsourcing company which yields content that is grammatically correct consistently.

The only downfall I found was that at times they didn&#039;t put the kw in the article or the re-write was 300 odd words rather than 450+ but then no outsourcing company is perfect.

However, if you&#039;re serious about outsourcing (which you need to become eventually in this business) and you put down a large amount of money, they also give you an account manager to assure quality...they will review everything that is sent to you to make sure it is up to par.  They even zip up all the work and e-mail it to you.

If you&#039;re going to outsource, go all out...it&#039;s pointless outsourcing small amounts here and there...it is MUCH better to do all the work yourself and build up your WORK ETHIC.

It&#039;s only when you can put down significant chunks like $500+ that you should be seriously considering outsourcing as a way to expand your business.

-Mike</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>As far as grammar is concerned, the writing has always come back sounding like it was written by a native.  This coupled with their 36 hour turnaround time(it&#8217;s often less than 24h) and the price is why I like them so much&#8230;it&#8217;s hard to find an outsourcing company which yields content that is grammatically correct consistently.</p>
<p>The only downfall I found was that at times they didn&#8217;t put the kw in the article or the re-write was 300 odd words rather than 450+ but then no outsourcing company is perfect.</p>
<p>However, if you&#8217;re serious about outsourcing (which you need to become eventually in this business) and you put down a large amount of money, they also give you an account manager to assure quality&#8230;they will review everything that is sent to you to make sure it is up to par.  They even zip up all the work and e-mail it to you.</p>
<p>If you&#8217;re going to outsource, go all out&#8230;it&#8217;s pointless outsourcing small amounts here and there&#8230;it is MUCH better to do all the work yourself and build up your WORK ETHIC.</p>
<p>It&#8217;s only when you can put down significant chunks like $500+ that you should be seriously considering outsourcing as a way to expand your business.</p>
<p>-Mike</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Carrie</title>
		<link>http://mikeiser.com/day-82-20-articles-outsourced/comment-page-1#comment-734</link>
		<dc:creator>Carrie</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Mon, 27 Jul 2009 12:17:32 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://mikeiser.com/?p=302#comment-734</guid>
		<description>I have found it hit or miss at Human rewriter, but overall you can&#039;t beat the price. I wish they would allow us to rate the rewrites so the lower quality rewriters could be encouraged to do better.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>I have found it hit or miss at Human rewriter, but overall you can&#8217;t beat the price. I wish they would allow us to rate the rewrites so the lower quality rewriters could be encouraged to do better.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Debbie</title>
		<link>http://mikeiser.com/day-82-20-articles-outsourced/comment-page-1#comment-733</link>
		<dc:creator>Debbie</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Sun, 26 Jul 2009 23:02:36 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://mikeiser.com/?p=302#comment-733</guid>
		<description>Mike,

Thanks. I think I may have had a poor writer because when I wrote to support they were very apologetic and said they&#039;d be speaking to the writer about the job. I&#039;ll see how another person there does for next articles. Looks forward to seeing your end of the month summary coming up in a few days.

Debbie</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Mike,</p>
<p>Thanks. I think I may have had a poor writer because when I wrote to support they were very apologetic and said they&#8217;d be speaking to the writer about the job. I&#8217;ll see how another person there does for next articles. Looks forward to seeing your end of the month summary coming up in a few days.</p>
<p>Debbie</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Mikeman</title>
		<link>http://mikeiser.com/day-82-20-articles-outsourced/comment-page-1#comment-732</link>
		<dc:creator>Mikeman</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Sun, 26 Jul 2009 16:18:40 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://mikeiser.com/?p=302#comment-732</guid>
		<description>&lt;a href=&quot;#comment-973&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow&quot;&gt;@Debbie&lt;/a&gt;

Debbie, It&#039;s nowhere near close to the original... Every one of the 50 articles that I&#039;ve got back so far are around 55-60% unique according to DupeCop, you are not going to find better than that as far as re-writes are concerned.

If you want your re-writes to flow better, you need to provide them with better quality articles.

If you want something that isn&#039;t similar in any way to the original then you should not be looking at re-writes, you&#039;re going to have to pay more and get things written from scratch.

-Mike</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p><a href="#comment-973" rel="nofollow">@Debbie</a></p>
<p>Debbie, It&#8217;s nowhere near close to the original&#8230; Every one of the 50 articles that I&#8217;ve got back so far are around 55-60% unique according to DupeCop, you are not going to find better than that as far as re-writes are concerned.</p>
<p>If you want your re-writes to flow better, you need to provide them with better quality articles.</p>
<p>If you want something that isn&#8217;t similar in any way to the original then you should not be looking at re-writes, you&#8217;re going to have to pay more and get things written from scratch.</p>
<p>-Mike</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Debbie</title>
		<link>http://mikeiser.com/day-82-20-articles-outsourced/comment-page-1#comment-731</link>
		<dc:creator>Debbie</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Sun, 26 Jul 2009 13:14:16 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://mikeiser.com/?p=302#comment-731</guid>
		<description>Mike,

I just tried human rewriter and found it very close to the original. Do you know if they also will change the structure of the whole article and not just do it sentence by sentence? I am wondering how to improve the quality so it flows better. I know you are pleased with the service. It looks like the snipers are still going strong in revenue which is great.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Mike,</p>
<p>I just tried human rewriter and found it very close to the original. Do you know if they also will change the structure of the whole article and not just do it sentence by sentence? I am wondering how to improve the quality so it flows better. I know you are pleased with the service. It looks like the snipers are still going strong in revenue which is great.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
</channel>
</rss>

