Live data from Hacker News

How we increased landing page conversion from 5% to 55%

quicksprints.com

21–30 of 34 posts

Re: How we increased landing page conversion from 5% to 55%

#22

I find a couple of the conclusions of this article very misleading. A couple of the lesson are great, but I feel the need to point out a few conclusions that are not quite spot-on: 1. Random photos are better than screenshots Everything is better than straight screenshots. You didn't show what you were using before, but at a dismal 5% conversion I am guessing it was straight screenshots that weren't "posed" on a devi…

Great feedback, Joel.

1.)“ You didn't show what you were using before, but at a dismal 5% conversion I am guessing it was straight screenshots that weren't "posed" on a device or anything?“

I looked hard for a screenshot of our original landing page but couldn’t dig one up. The screenshots were of the parts of our site that were resonating the most with our most engaged users, and we got good feedback on both the screenshots themselves and the visual design. However, we found that the additional complexity for our average user in having to parse and understand a bunch of screenshots is not as effective as a sports-related photo with a simple, powerful tagline and explanation.

“I don't think I would call a football and baseball image "random" on a sports site, though.”

You’re right, random wasn’t the right word. We meant that we didn’t experiment much with the photo itself or ask for feedback from a wide list of sources.

2.)“Your original headline was a classic mistake.” We are not just talking about taglines or even comparing the two taglines we showed here. In fact, “A Social Network for Sports Fans” is almost as vague as “Follow Sports Together”. We experimented with a lot of other options for messaging and many which were more detailed and clear (3 bullet points on the key benefits of the site, for instance).

In these experiments, we consistently, we found that simple but curiosity-inciting messaging works better than more detailed and clearer messaging.

4.) This lesson is obvious to us now, but was not obvious from the start. By sharing our results we are hoping that others will avoid our mistakes, even the ones that may be obvious to you.

5.) That sounds like a cool study. I'd love to read about it even you can find the link.

6.) Thanks!

Re: How we increased landing page conversion from 5% to 55%

#23

Cool stuff! Semi-vague messaging working better for you goes against any intuition I ever had about landing page conversion

You can do many things to spark curiosity in visitors to a landing page. Some may grant you a few extra minutes to follow their curiosity... but then what? Most of them will get an answer to their questions and then stop using the service. We see this on checkout flows where people will put something in their cart because they are simply curious about shipping costs and taxes. Then the site owners wonder why there is…

(I'm a co-founder at Sidelines.) LanceJones, you're exactly right: A key lesson from our landing page experiment is that vague messaging incites curiosity in users, and curiosity can be a powerful motivator to get users to spend an extra few minutes to sign up for a service. This same user may have decided to bounce off the landing page if it went into the details of the value proposition (this is what we did with the initial versions of Sidelines' landing page), so the vague messaging has a better chance of getting the user through the door. However, whether or not the site is able to keep the user engaged post-signup depends on a number of different factors: The engagement numbers for sidelines have consistently gone up as we keep optimizing our sign up flow once the user logs in, the first run experience of the product, the welcome email, email/FB notifications, newsletters, etc.

Re: How we increased landing page conversion from 5% to 55%

#25
OK, this question is coming from someone who works in marketing as his full time job.

So you're saying providing details is bad and vagueness is good. Vagueness "incites curiosity" which increases signups.

Not sure if I like that. Feels a bit unethical. You are intentionally holding back information for the sole reason of increasing signups. If you showed the product, or listed the features, or provided more details, signups goes down? That's a sign you need to improve your product.

Re: How we increased landing page conversion from 5% to 55%

#26

OK, this question is coming from someone who works in marketing as his full time job. So you're saying providing details is bad and vagueness is good. Vagueness "incites curiosity" which increases signups. Not sure if I like that. Feels a bit unethical. You are intentionally holding back information for the sole reason of increasing signups. If you showed the product, or listed the features, or provided more details,…

We're seeing more signups, more engagement, and more activity. Not sure how that is a bad thing?

"So you're saying providing details is bad and vagueness is good. Vagueness "incites curiosity" which increases signups."

Not really, we're saying that for certain kinds of free consumer apps, curiosity can be a very strong motivator for someone to try a product. (This kind of tactic would never work for a paid product for instance or a product targeted at business users.)

Vagueness doesn't necessarily incite curiosity, but asking first time users to parse detailed messaging often kills it prematurely, and you've got to find the right balance that optimizes conversion. This is what worked well for us.

Finally, there are many other tactics that we're successfully using to turn the users who just signed up into active, engaged users and they are mentioned elsewhere on this thread.

Re: How we increased landing page conversion from 5% to 55%

#27

I find a couple of the conclusions of this article very misleading. A couple of the lesson are great, but I feel the need to point out a few conclusions that are not quite spot-on: 1. Random photos are better than screenshots Everything is better than straight screenshots. You didn't show what you were using before, but at a dismal 5% conversion I am guessing it was straight screenshots that weren't "posed" on a devi…

Great feedback, Joel. 1.)“ You didn't show what you were using before, but at a dismal 5% conversion I am guessing it was straight screenshots that weren't "posed" on a device or anything?“ I looked hard for a screenshot of our original landing page but couldn’t dig one up. The screenshots were of the parts of our site that were resonating the most with our most engaged users, and we got good feedback on both the scr…

>... people were willing to pay for an a set of partially broken dishes if they were compared to an incomplete set than if they were sold alone...

I think this is similar to what is described by Dan Ariely in his book, Predictably Irrational, as the Decoy Effect. Relevant excerpt from Wikipedia [1]:

"People not only compare things, but also compare things that are easily comparable. For example, if given the following options for a honeymoon - Paris (with free breakfast), Rome (with free breakfast), and Rome (no breakfast included), most people would probably choose Rome with the free breakfast. The rationale is that it is easier to compare the two options for Rome than it is to compare Paris and Rome. Ariely also explains the role of the decoy effect (or asymmetric dominance effect) in the decision process. The decoy effect is the phenomenon whereby consumers will tend to have a specific change in preference between two options when also presented with a third option that is asymmetrically dominated. This effect is the "secret agent" in many decisions."

In your case the third choice - email - is the decoy or secret agent - making the other two options more attractive for ease of use.

[1] : http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Predictably_Irrational Edit: Wikipedia link

Re: How we increased landing page conversion from 5% to 55%

#29
post #28

What are some good tools to measure the kind of stuff they report? Demographics and invitations Whose invitations are more accepted And so forth

We are not using anything fancy, it's just Google Analytics, redis and postgres. If we send anything out to the world (email, link to partners, open graph action) we tag it either with a google analytics campaign or a unique identifier so we can trace it back to our database. Every 12 hours, using a bunch of SQL commands + API calls we get a report in the mail.
Post reply on HN