For agencies that sell content
maintenance as a service
Refresh retainers are the hardest deliverable to keep consistent.
This is the system underneath them.
ORIGINAL
The meeting was very long and not useful to most people.
REFINED
The meeting ran overlong and added little value.
The refresh retainer: easy to sell, brutal to deliver profitably
Clients are asking for exactly this work. The margin is where it falls apart
The demand side has never been better — brands built huge libraries in the content-volume years, and those libraries are now losing results. Practitioners across the industry are watching budgets shift from net-new production toward rewrites. Clients will pay for maintenance.
The delivery side is the trap. A proper refresh — re-research, diagnosis, rewrite, QA — consumes senior hours comparable to a new article, but clients anchor refresh pricing below new-content pricing, because 'it's already written.' So every retainer becomes a choice: eat the margin doing it properly, or protect the margin doing it shallowly and watch the results — and the renewal — suffer.
And it compounds across accounts: each client means a different voice, a different ICP, a different stack of aging URLs, usually triaged by whichever strategist owns the account, by their own method. Consistency across clients is the deliverable — and it's exactly what manual delivery can't scale.
ONE SYSTEM, MANY CLIENTS
Per-client audits, briefs, and drafts —
in each client's voice, not a generic one
Every client site runs as its own scoped setup: its own GSC connection, its own crawled library, its own confirmed ICP, its own brand profile. Nothing bleeds between accounts.
A brand profile per client
Learned from each client's own published library and style guide, reviewed and corrected by your team. Client A's voice cannot leak into Client B's drafts — the profiles are separate by architecture.
Consistent triage across every account
The same audit logic — performance, ICP fit, brand standards, technical SEO — runs on every client library. Touch-up, rewrite, or retire, with reasoning: one methodology, defensible in every client meeting.
Diagnosis you can put in the deck
Every flag carries its reasoning and its data. The audit becomes your QBR material: here's what drifted, here's why, here's what we're fixing — before the client's traffic told them.
A brand profile per client
Learned from each client's own published library and style guide, reviewed and corrected by your team. Client A's voice cannot leak into Client B's drafts — the profiles are separate by architecture.
Consistent triage across every account
The same audit logic — performance, ICP fit, brand standards, technical SEO — runs on every client library. Touch-up, rewrite, or retire, with reasoning: one methodology, defensible in every client meeting.
Diagnosis you can put in the deck
Every flag carries its reasoning and its data. The audit becomes your QBR material: here's what drifted, here's why, here's what we're fixing — before the client's traffic told them.
YOUR JUDGEMENT IS THE MARGIN
Human review stays in your workflow.
The client sees your judgement, not raw output
Your clients aren't buying drafts — they're buying your standards applied to drafts. The system delivers work to your reviewers; nothing reaches a client site without your named approval.
Your review, structurally guaranteed
Every draft requires explicit approval before it can publish. There is no auto-publish setting — a strategist's sign-off is in the loop on every account, always.
Editing tools your team will actually use
Block-level feedback, version snapshots, diffs. Reviewers fix the passage that's off without re-rolling the draft — senior time spent on judgement, not on re-prompting.
Publishing on your terms
Direct publish to client Ghost or WordPress sites after approval — or hand the approved draft into whatever delivery flow the account requires.
Your review, structurally guaranteed
Every draft requires explicit approval before it can publish. There is no auto-publish setting — a strategist's sign-off is in the loop on every account, always.
Editing tools your team will actually use
Block-level feedback, version snapshots, diffs. Reviewers fix the passage that's off without re-rolling the draft — senior time spent on judgement, not on re-prompting.
Publishing on your terms
Direct publish to client Ghost or WordPress sites after approval — or hand the approved draft into whatever delivery flow the account requires.
Multi-client setups: let's design yours on a call
Honest note: our self-serve plan is built for one company and its library. Agencies are a different shape — we'd rather structure it right than force the wrong container
The standard plan is $249/month per organization, unlimited articles — priced for a single in-house team. An agency running eight client libraries through it isn't a use case we pretend fits neatly; it's a setup conversation about isolation, access, and economics that make sense at your account count.
What we can tell you now: client data separation is architectural (per-site scoping, per-site credentials, per-site brand profiles), and the review gate applies everywhere. What we'll work out together: the right structure and commercial shape for your roster. Bring your account count and your current refresh delivery cost to the call — that's the whole agenda.
What agencies ask us
The honest answers.
Bring us your hardest client library
Book a 30-minute call — a live audit on one real client account, and a straight conversation about structure and pricing for your roster.
✓ 30 minutes ✓ A real client library ✓ Straight answers on multi-client structure