So what i realized is that i really only have issues with scrapebox when harvesting urls specifically for contact for submission whether that be from a custom footprint or just the default platforms. If i harvest urls using footprints looking for shopify stores or blog or literally anything that's not a contact form page the harvester works relatively fine.
That being said lately i've been trying to use scrapebox mainly for contact form submission but i saw a thread that mentioned GSA Contact Submitter and I saw your video on the website.
Would it be better to use gsa for finding and posting to contact forms or like harvest urls using scrapebox for keywords like "realtors new york"(as an example) and then put those in gsa to find and post to the forms?
Honestly just looking to better utilize contact form submission along side my cold email campaigns so if gsa is better than scrapebox for that i'll just get gsa. Just thought id ask your opinion on which would be better since i heard your voice in the video
I always use scrapebox for harvesting everything for multiple reasons. Not the least of which is its fast, efficient, easy and I can run unlimited instances of it so its not tying up anything program wise.
Even if I am using a different program that can get the data, I get the data with scrapebox, and bring that data into the other program and let the other program do whatever it is that Im not doing in scrapebox and focus there.
In the case of website contact, scrapebox has the ability to be trained on the vast majority of these forms and submit to them. The exception really is scrapebox does not do recaptcha and website contact does, but I don't do recaptcha anyways - however thats another story as to why.
Anyway, the benefit of website contact, primary that I see, is that it has all the platforms built in, so your buying time. Meaning look at all scrapebox can do, and yet website contact only does like .01% of what scrapebox can do, but it costs more then scrapebox, why?
The value in website contact is the time it would take to train scrapebox on all the various platforms that come by default with website contact. Website contact is focused on 1 thing, sending contact forms and to that end, it can submit to exponentially more forms out of the box, then scrapebox does, but costs more then scrapebox and does exponentially less then what scrapebox does.
So the value proposition is your paying for someones time who took the time to train website contact on all the various platforms. I can't say if thats worth it for you or not, thats up to you, but Im always a fan of buying time when its at a reasonable cost.
With scrapebox the intent of the developer was that users would train their own contact forms, and they built the platform to send and then some example forms to get users going.
Website contact also supports recaptcha, if thats something you want. It has a few other nice things, like importing a CSV, which I also never do, but I could see the value of that if you had that data and wanted to use it, if you used it well.
So in short, scrapebox, IMHO, can dance circles around the scraping inside of website contact and then you can still fire up another instance of scrapebox to do something else. Further I like the filtering in scrapebox for large lists (which I pretty much exclusively work with large/massive lists) better then website contact, as its quick and simple, however clearly your getting a benefit of time savings of training forms with website contact.
I certainly would never use just website contact, as I need to go faster then that, so really I say why choose? Ill use 10 tools if thats the best way to get to the end result. In this case I see them as complimentary tools, scrapebox is fast and simple, and lets you use unlimited instances, for what it does, scraping, filtering etc.. Website contact is pretrained on forms and thus can submit to more forms out of the box.
So thats my 2 cents.