You can expect the alternative page to become irrelevant faster than any other content. Competitors adjust their offers, deliver the features you said they were missing, and change the name of the plans you used for comparison. A page that was accurate in March can be a liability in September.
Tone is also a risk. Readers are quick to suspect the motive behind a party writing a page about a product and pay from month to month to an unfairly critical review of the product being charged.
This page is won by conceding something. An audience is more likely to believe the argument as a whole if you state where you admit the other tool is stronger. This means you are not selling. Only then can you specify where you are stronger in the argument and decide what the real threat is.
Models learn to explain competitor pricing and features in the past tense, resulting in comparison pages as if competitors were still selling products the same as when the model was trained. Of all the content mistakes that get companies sued rather than resulting in a ranking penalty, publishing outdated information about other companies is the most common mistake.
If there is a free tier, the writer creates an account, documents the competitor’s pricing, and captures screenshots of what is claimed, along with the date off of which the screenshot was made. We consider review sites to be opinions, and do not cite them. We do not include claims that we cannot source.
An alternative page pulls hard toward the competitor’s framing, since you are arguing on ground they chose. We protect against this by describing our reasons for switching from our own positioning first, prior to evaluating their strongest claim against our reasons. If these reasons hold, the likely answer is this competitor is worthy of focusing on.
One rate, whatever the format: $10 per 100 words. You are paying for the writer’s time and judgement, so the price scales with the words rather than with a package tier.
| Typical competitor-alternative page | Words | Writing | Fee (1%) | You pay |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Focused alternative page | 900 | $90 | $0.90 | $90.90 |
| Full comparison page | 1,500 | $150 | $1.50 | $151.50 |
| Comparison hub page | 2,400 | $240 | $2.40 | $242.40 |
The writer receives 100% of the writing price. Our 1% fee is added on top of it, and 0.5% is donated to tree planting. Full pricing breakdown.
Ask on the contact page and a person will answer, usually the same working day. For a live order, reply to your confirmation email and it reaches whoever is handling it.
Yes. Send two or three pieces you like the sound of, or your style guide. Matching an established voice is ordinary work for a writer and close to impossible for a model that has never read your back catalogue.
We write what we can verify and what is relevant. We do not write insinuation. If there is a documented limitation on their website or within their product that we can verify, we will note this with a source. Something that is a sales call rumor will not make it in.
Quarterly, and after you inform us of a competitor’s price change, we will send a source page for each claim. This will allow your team to verify our claim without an additional work order. It is cheaper for us to correct a table than it is for us to do the work of redrafting the argument.
Completely. Copyright transfers to you on delivery, with no attribution requirement and no licence back to us. Nothing written for you is resold, repurposed or republished.
Reviews from completed, paid orders in this category.
I’ve written and purchased a lot of feature copy, and most of it is vibes instead of verbs, which is a huge loss. This was not the case. It clearly stated what a feature did and what the change was in the system. It got our sales team reading it on the phone.
The customer we used in this example sent us a nice email saying it was the least stressful case study she’s had to do. This has never happened to us. I have to say the article is awesome, too. The customer liked the interview, but what I will remember is the process.
They requested access to our staging endpoint with read access and used it too. The auth section of your docs shows us the 409 error we return for duplicate idempotency keys. That error is not documented anywhere in our old docs. Contract documentation has never come back and educated me about my API before.
We do not ask you to take the no-AI promise on trust. Each draft is run through these platforms and the reports are attached to your delivery email.
Originality.aiAI detection + plagiarism
GPTZeroAI detection
TurnitinAI detection + similarity
CopyleaksAI detection + plagiarism
Winston AIAI detection
ZeroGPTAI detection
SaplingAI detection
Content at ScaleAI detection
Send the brief, get a human draft back within 3 days. No account, no subscription, no AI.
$10 per 100 words · all of it to the writer · 0.5% to trees