I don't work in B2C. I do find writing in YMYL tempting because I love the topic but in the end we have to focus somewhere. I do not produce developer marketing because I long ago realised I don't like coding, so I'm not really positioned to produce content for developers.

Sometimes I encounter highly technical topics where the learning curve is too steep and it's not realistic to hire me as a writer. But even then I can help from an editing perspective, organising SME content and turning the deliverable into something less dry and more compelling.

Learning is fun - for me anyway - but yes, it's a process. I think in the main it comes down to breaking things down into smaller chunks - and just making a start, somewhere. Eventually I've assembled enough building blocks to get a good picture of where you're at in your vertical. SME interviews can be invaluable too.

That's not necessarily a bad thing. But, first: experienced writers are quick studies. We tackle new topics with aplomb, with a structured approach that quickly secures us a solid grasp of your field - while, crucially, never overestimating where we are in the learning journey.

I always scope things out before we start, and there ARE niches that are too technical in which case I won't accept to brief.

Another point: there is always some commonality in how and why companies buy technology - and often the desired outcomes are the same, irrespective of the vertical. So, given my deep experience, I start off with solid "scaffolding" that supports quick learning. Vs, let's say, a B2B law writer moving into cybersecurity.

And no, it's not a bad thing because industry insiders, SMEs, often have ingrained views about the value of what they do - and my external, learned viewpoint can help you break through the groupthink with a fresh perspective that sits closer to the way your ICP views the topic.

It's worthy of a long form blog really, and Dr. Ethan Mollick once made, I think, the most valuable characterisation of AI, in saying that AI capabilities have a "jagged frontier". Where and when AI works is very personal and we all find our way around it.

That said I don't consider AI a good option for producing content. There are instances where AI writing is passable, e.g. an FAQ section, and you could arguably get a workable first draft… but good writers type pretty quickly and on balance short-circuiting the creative process simply to shave 20% off the time required to produce content isn't worth the trade-off.

I'm strongly against AI for ideating. To produce compelling content we must rely on human ideation; that backwards and forwards that lead to a spark of ideas just as you comfortably plop down on the couch. You just can't build on bad or uninspiring ideas: provide a flat brief on a topic discussed to death and even the best writer can't make much of it.

For some prep work (including research) AI can do wonders, I find Perplexity a godsend. AI is useful for vibe checking too, it's often wrong but it can identify things you missed. It works for cursory analysis too, if you just want to shine a quick light on something. It does not work for deep analysis.

So despite some companies building pretty good automated content workflows, I don't find that AI works well for the really narrow, niche verticals my clients are in.

I've always loved explaining new technology to friends and co-workers and exercising my persuasive powers to get the C-suite to buy the tech that our business needs. And conviction. It's always gratifying to see the pin finally drop on a complex topic.

The day-to-day of IT management eventually became somewhat routine. I started writing a couple of blog articles for a client on Upwork (I retained that client for 8 years), and it just snowballed from there as clients gradually hired me for more advanced tasks.

In some ways the end, decision-making goal remains the same: why does a business need a particular toolbox, what are the risks of inaction - and why is a particular vendor's offer the best choice.

I am, in principle, here to help you achieve your go to market objectives - in the main, that's best achieved if the content is bylined to your SMEs . So yes, happy to ghostwrite for you. That said I'm more than happy to take a byline when it's offered.

I aim for minimal friction, maximum outcomes. So, high-impact content while consuming as little of your and your SME's time as possible. I don't need hand-holding but will always check in with you. Depending on your workload I can execute autonomously - or we can work closely together.

Once we align on the brief and target outcomes, I work mostly asynchronously using standard tools like Google Docs, Notion, or Slack. Give me access to your documentation, point me toward an SME for a brief interview if needed, and I’ll take it from there.

Item descriptionI know your engineers/executives are extremely busy so I always go in respecting their time. That means coming prepared: I don't show up asking 101 background questions. Instead, I come up with insightful questions that extract their unique perspective, usually in a crisp, 30-minute conversation.

Two rounds of revisions are included in any fixed-price project, provided the original brief hasn't fundamentally shifted midway, which can happen. Because I scope thoroughly upfront and share outlines for longer assets before writing, revisions are usually minor fine-tuning rather and rarely a big overhaul.

Yes, but bearing in mind I'm not a graphics designer. For day-to-day posts I'm happy to publish it on your CMS including formatting and stock images.

When producing copy, I always wireframe (if not provided) so you can understand the flow of the page, and to guide your designer.

You do. Upon full payment of the invoice, 100% of the copyright and intellectual property rights transfer to you.

First let's look at the alternatives. AI produces content that trends to the median, requires heavy editing to remove AI tells. An inexperienced writer produces content with less impact, and brings the risk that you spend endless time revising it. Bear in mind that the typing exercise, which many people view as "writing", is only 25% of the service, what sits around it matters more.

Thinking about returns: SEO returns isn't what it was 5 years ago, and we don't quite know where we are with GEO yet. I think, for companies selling into long buying cycles, SEO was only ever a fraction of the value of the content anyway.

Buying committees still do due diligence, and they don't do it with your BDRs - they read your website. If you're in a position where you have nothing interesting to say… well, your competitors with something interesting to say will have an advantage.

Also: well-produced, impactful content is not an expense, it's an asset. It works for years, it can be refreshed and polished up and given another go. Five years or more given timely refreshes. Done right content can be a money-making asset that continues to deliver. Your BDR, your ad spend - that's an expense: when the money stops, the progress stops.