SP Screens — July 2026
Content schedule and discussion notes
Content schedule
Priority content queue
Ranked by commercial intent, AI overview gap, and current page state. New builds fill genuine URL gaps. Rewrites recover empty or sub-standard pages. All posts target 2,000 words minimum, Key Takeaways at top, FAQ at bottom.
| # | Type | URL | Current state | AI overview status | Strategic opportunity |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | New build |
Doesn't exist yet /blog/how-much-do-security-screen-windows-cost/ |
No article exists. Product page at /security-screen-windows/ exists but covers no pricing.
|
Weak citation Currently cited as supplementary "additional cost factors" only. Prowler Proof holds primary position. | Completes the pricing trilogy (security doors done, fly screens done). Approved pricing in KB. Xceed vs SecureView window differentiation is the upsell story. Structured well enough to displace Prowler Proof as primary cited source. |
| 2 | Rewrite |
/blog/what-should-you-look-for-when-buying-a-security-screen-door/
2017 origin, last touched Oct 2024
|
Empty infographic page. No body text accessible. No structured content at all despite the URL existing. | Not appearing Critical gap in the consideration journey. This is the query buyers ask before they book. | Highest-intent mid-funnel query on the list. Buyers are actively deciding. AS 5039, 316 SS, 3-point locking, warranty tiers are all KB-ready proof points that no competitor is using to answer this clearly. |
| 3 | Rewrite |
/blog/what-are-security-screens-made-of/
2019 origin, last touched Nov 2024
|
Empty infographic page. No body text. Core product education topic sitting on a blank page. | No coverage Old URL with no retrievable content. Nothing to cite. | Revive and restructure. Material comparison (316 SS vs 304 SS vs perforated aluminium) is the spec-level content AI engines pull when answering product questions. Salt spray test data, cyclone rating, and 1,000-hour neutral salt spray improve citability significantly. |
| 4 | Consolidate |
/blog/security-screens-are-they-worth-the-investment/
Merge with:
/blog/security-screens-as-an-investment/
|
Two separate posts on the same topic. 671 words + 818 words. Both 2019. Pre-KB. CommandeX named repeatedly in one (over-promoted). No Key Takeaways, no FAQ, no approved product names throughout. | Not assessed Two thin competing pages split authority. Neither strong enough to rank or be cited. | Merge into one definitive 2026 page. Lead with Trustpilot social proof — real buyer language supports LLM citation far better than generic "worth it" arguments. Important given review volume is lower than ideal: authentic customer voices carry weight here. |
| 5 | New build |
Doesn't exist yet /blog/how-long-do-security-screens-last/ |
No article exists. The warranty registration post exists but covers administration, not lifespan buying guidance. | Not appearing No one from SP Screens shows for this query at all. | Exact warranty figures (5-7yr Xceed / 11-15yr SecureView / 20yr Saltwater) are highly citable. No competitor owns this answer cleanly. A structured article with a warranty comparison table is enough to take position. Strong upsell path from Xceed to SecureView built naturally into the lifespan narrative. |
| 6 |
/blog/security-screens-vs-fly-screens/
Nov 2025 — 737 words
|
737 words against a 2,000-word minimum. Has the right structure (comparison table, FAQ headings, SecureView and Saltwater named). Pricing inconsistency: cites $450 for security screen windows, which is not in approved KB pricing. | Partial recovery Position exists in AIO but content is too thin to hold or improve it. | Expand to 2,000+ words, fix pricing, add Key Takeaways and FAQ schema. Pull Trustpilot quotes from customers who upgraded from fly screens to security screens — this bridges the social proof gap directly in the comparison context where buyers are making the decision. |
Discussion notes
Items to raise with Peta
Two areas outside the content schedule worth discussing at the next meeting. Neither requires immediate action — both are discovery conversations to confirm opportunity before recommending next steps.
YouTube access
YouTube channel optimisation
A high proportion of AI overviews in the home improvement and security category surface YouTube video results alongside or instead of web pages. This creates a visibility channel most competitors are not optimising for.
- What we need: Read access to the SP Screens YouTube account to audit current content, titles, descriptions, and chapter markers.
- What we are looking for: Are existing videos optimised for the queries we are targeting? Are transcripts structured? Are chapters marked to help AI engines extract answers?
- Opportunity: If the channel is active but unoptimised, updating existing videos costs nothing. If the channel is inactive, a lightweight video strategy (even screen-recorded explainers) could capture AI overview placements that written content cannot.
Review strategy
Review consolidation and on-site integration
SP Screens currently collects reviews across three platforms: Product Review, Trustpilot, and Google. Review volume across all three is lower than ideal, and there is no review rating schema integrated into the website.
- Platform ownership: Confirm whether SP Screens owns the Trustpilot account directly. If so, the Trustpilot widget can be embedded on product and location pages to surface the aggregate rating inline, which also feeds AggregateRating schema.
- On-site conversion: The testimonials page exists but does not serve conversion the way embedded, product-level social proof does. Review widgets on security door and security screen product pages reduce purchase hesitation at the point of decision.
- Volume strategy: With three platforms splitting volume, no single source looks compelling. A recommendation: direct post-install review requests to one primary platform (Trustpilot or Google) to concentrate social proof faster.
- Content tie-in: For the "are security screens worth it" consolidation piece, authentic Trustpilot quotes are the differentiator. The sooner review volume grows, the stronger that page becomes for both conversion and AI citation.