If I Could Write 20 articles EVERYDAY

From what I have of her posts, there is every reason to indicate that her views are based on extensive testing and experience.

Wrong.

I do appreciate how very much you enjoy taking up a contrary position to whatever mine happens to be, Alex, but on this occasion you've slipped up, I'm afraid.

It is based on extensive testing. I have used both models of article marketing and indeed I switched from one to the other because when tested it produced so much more income for me, so much more reliably.

Wrong.

Unfortunately for me, I had to teach myself. All the guides/coursebooks/"information" I could find at the time (I didn't know Bill Platt then - my loss!) were teaching an entirely different method, the "rinse and repeat" model of article marketing, which does work out for some people, but only a very tiny proportion of those who try it. The fail-rate is high indeed. Which is why you regularly see quite a lot of people around here now saying how very glad they are to have switched instead to a "writing for syndication" model of article marketing.

There are enormous numbers of people doing it another way. Probably 99.5% of article marketers are doing it another way (until most of them drop out and either disappear or come back a year later to start a thread called "Article marketing doesn't work any more". I'm guessing the exact figure, but it's certainly absolutely huge. Those writing for syndication may be the highest earners, but we're undoubtedly in a tiny minority.

Far from assuming that it's "the only way", I'm well aware (as are so many others here) that it's a tiny minority way. The proportion of people trying it who achieve some success with it, however, seems to me to be way higher. That's opinion only, of course, but it's certainly interesting how many people who have tried both methods seem to share that opinion.

Anyone that gives you any kind of answer is guessing, pure and simple.

First off, "dating/weight loss" is not a market - it's two very large and diverse markets. Trying to cover both on 20 article per day is setting yourself up to fail. You need to hone in on very specific groups within those large markets.

Next, whether you can crank out 20 "quality" articles per day depends a lot on your definitions of both "quality" and "article." If you mean a couple of hundred words with a keyword in them and they pass Copyscape, yeah, you could probably put out 20 a day. Better plan on maintaining that pace for as long as you want to make anything happen, though. That kind of filler generally does not get syndicated, so you'll be on your own.

Last, how much you can expect to make will depend on factors outside of your control. Specifically, it will mainly depend on the ability of your landing pages to send pre-sold traffic to the vendor's sales page AND on the vendor's ability to convert those visits into sales.

Is it a good plan? On the surface, sure, if you can maintain it long enough to see meaningful results. But there's no way for anyone reading what you've posted here to give you any kind of meaningful answer...

Best to have both.

Oh, that some of those who have English as their first language would write as good as you do.

John.

You are indeed guessing.

How exactly have you come to this conclusion?

Article marketers extensively research niches, You think professionals in the industry have time to sit around writing articles on which they spend the day working?

There is nothing stopping anyone being interested in 10 niches, spending time researching them and successfully creating articles about them.

Nothing is left to chance. You approach the owners of these sites and form relationships with them, you guest post on their sites, they get useful relevant content for their sites and you create a good relationship which can lead to JV's and all sorts of things.

Alexa Smith who has posted here is probably the best example I know of this and her business model is not only very well thought out but highly successful and continues to grow. It is based on successfully syndicating articles, not leaving them on directories "hoping" people find them.

Either way, just because someone syndicates their articles doesn't mean they don't have the same backlinks from the article directories. All they've done is taken it to a totally different level that most people don't realise or think about doing.

No, I am a marketer. I am a promoter. I will research who is using syndicated articles within my niche and introduce myself. I will show them an example of my work and a link to my authors page within their niche.

Of course you can leave it to chance if you want. Or just play the lotto....

Who cares?

As long as they take some of my articles, and I get their high-PR context-relevant backlinks and some of their pre-targeted traffic, I'm delighted. It makes no difference to me how many articles they're getting that way or where the rest of their content comes from.

"Or so it seems" says a lot.

To be a very successful barrister, you need either to know a lot of law, or be very good on your feet in court. To get your work syndicated to sites like that you need either to be a genuine expert in the niche or to write something of interest and appropriate length about it with controversy, entertainment and provocation, with "laughs in all the right places" and write it so that when the owner of that site sees it his immediate reaction is "Wow, I want that one". It helps to know something about the niche to start with, obviously, but it's more important to be good on your stilettos in court.

Also: length matters. Clearly, nobody wants a 300-word article evidently written to promote something.

Enough for these purposes, yes - easily. However, there is, admittedly, a prevalent (even if ill-informed) suspicion that you can't, which is why it helps so much to use one pen-name per niche, and stick to it everywhere.

Yup ... you're certainly "just guessing".

That isn't how it works at all.

One builds up a network of contacts who want content. You have to follow up relentlessly and efficiently (it's easy, and it's the part of article marketing which has the most direct and immediate financial rewards for the effort put into it).

This is the part where the increasing residual income is, really. You need to find out where your work's been syndicated (very easily done), and from where, too (e.g. using the "punctuation trick" to enable later identifcation of the source at a glance). And contact those people offering them further work "not yet in EZA" (after publishing it and getting it indexed on your own site first, of course!). This involves no extra work. All you need to do, next time you write an article, is put it on your site and get it indexed, then send them a copy by email, resource-box included, of course, and then submit it to EZA/wherever. You just need a standard, pre-written email making the offer (very often accepted - it takes literally 10 seconds to "fill in the blank" and send it). This is how you can increase your sometimes-high-PR context-relevant backlinks and get someone else's pre-targeted traffic visiting your site.

Once someone has started syndicating your work, they'll take more. As long as you offer it, and don't depend on random factors.

It's good to think well beynd article directories, in article marketing. But, (paradoxically? No, not really) using some article directories is one of the ways to reach beyond article directories. As long as you don't "write for clicks", of course: that effectively limits the lifespan of your work.

I've been on this side of the street, too. I had sites where virtually all of the content was syndicated. When I got content from article directories, I tended to find writers in the niche whose writing I enjoyed and/or found particularly well-written and informative.

I would look for them first when looking for new content to post.

Then I would look for new writers to add to that list.

And as you noted, the writers on my short list generally put up longer articles that read like they were written by pros.

If you're focussing on writing x number of articles per day then you're focussing on the wrong area.

Heck, I did the same when I started out - in fact, I wrote over 300 articles in my first month. My results weren't great - I made money - but sheer brute force is not the way.

Listen to Alexa. She comes from the Bill Platt school of thought with regards to article marketing. Go directly to the publisher. In my experience this is the single best way to get traffic and rankings at the same time.

And take note that tracking is key here. You can't hit home runs every time, but you can damn well track everything to give yourself the best chance possible.

If you don't like the idea of going directly to the publisher, then you can make a lot of money by publishing your articles on ezinearticles.com and backlinking them to get them ranked.

It's not ideal though - you're building an asset you don't own. So I don't recommend this as a long term strategy.

Whichever strategy you take, make sure you don't write blindly. Track conversions so you know the exact articles that make sales, figure out why it works, learn and replicate.

And be warned, if you're a new article marketer, then expect a dip from your first x number of articles. The dip being a period of time where your results aren't what you expected. This doesn't mean article marketing doesn't work - it just means you haven't quite cracked it, yet.

See it through and make "bank"!