Of course the unique IS better - but, in the light of that guys experiment - is it ALWAYS worthwhile with all our costly (in terms of time and/or money) spinning and article writing? :p
Here's what the above-mentioned Scott Henson said:
I've read a lot about having unique content and how it effects yourAnd what do YOU thing of all this?
search engine rankings that was one of the reasons I created
freearticlespinner.com - as a way to make unique content quickly.
I don't know why you decided to use my tool, but I suspect it's
because you want more traffic from the search engines, hey don't we
So I did an experiment a while back with two blogs.
Blog A had some else's articles reposted (with credit back to them
Blog B had 100% unique content on it - Remember that copyscape
Blog B gets 373% more traffic to it from the search engines.
But here's an interesting side note: Blog A the one with the
copied content on it still gets 17% of its traffic from search.
So what's the experiment tell me?
Unique content will get you more traffic from the search engines,
but if it's not 100% unique you will still get SOME search engine
Sometimes when you read about using unique content you might think
if it's not unique you won't get any search traffic. I've found
that to not be the case.
Just thought I'd share that little bit of info with you. Hopefully
it will give you a little bit of an idea how much having unique
content can help with your search traffic.