[HN Gopher] What I learnt roasting 200 landing pages ___________________________________________________________________ What I learnt roasting 200 landing pages Author : deadcoder0904 Score : 554 points Date : 2021-05-13 10:07 UTC (12 hours ago) (HTM) web link (blog.roastmylandingpage.com) (TXT) w3m dump (blog.roastmylandingpage.com) | orliesaurus wrote: | Shameless Plug: I also roasted stuff, in fact over 200 pages, in | public - on my YouTube channel: https://lf.gg/youtube/ | | This started as a side project during the pandemic, I was really | bored. | | I am not as good looking as Oliver and my English isn't as fluid | but I tried... | | P.S. If you have ANY suggestion on how to improve my YouTube | channel - could you share it? | fluidcruft wrote: | Am I the only one who really hates these opaque landing pages? | They all just look the same and you never know what the hell is | actually being sold. Like that popwork one he's glowing over in | the video. | | It's like you're walking down the street and bums keep handing | you shiny wrapped presents. At first they all look shiny and you | want to open it but then you've opened enough of them to know | they're probably full of shit. | | So I stop bothering opening them. No, I don't want to create an | account and give you my email so that you can spam me for months | merely to know what's inside the box. Frankly my next stop is | finding a video on YouTube of someone actually showing how to | use... whatever it is. Or people talking about using it in a | forum or something. | sosborn wrote: | My theory: the person in charge of a landing page doesn't want | people bouncing off the site from the page they control (don't | want the metrics to look bad!), so they tend to make it opaque | to encourage click throughs. It doesn't matter what the best | user experience is because they don't get measured on that. | They get measured on bounce rate. | hinkley wrote: | As a developer I've had to pound into people's heads that as | the company grows, very few things we have worked on rank as | 'special' for more than a little bit. | | You do the reader a favor if you get to the 'why do you care' | part immediately, because in fact it may turn out that they | don't. | | Documentation eventually turns into a data warehouse. There's | so much of it and you can't keep it straight, so some memorable | fraction of the time, going to a Wiki page or your bookmarks or | - god forbid - browser history. It's basically a fishing | expedition. You know that there's a thing that did X, but you | don't remember which thing it was (and code names make that | basically impossible), so you're just going to scan a bunch of | them until you find the right one. | | If every page is like those cooking recipes that are held | hostage by the life story of the creator, you're going to get | pretty grumpy. Landing pages remind me a lot of this, because | I've looked at twenty tools and I can't remember which one is | for Postgres backups and which one is for Javascript | minification. No, this one is for JSON. Next tab. | atatatat wrote: | > You do the reader a favor if you get to the 'why do you | care' part immediately, because in fact it may turn out that | they don't. | | Here's why the web is a mess: | | We've turned it over to Google, through search, and Google | penalizes sites' rankings in search results for having Chrome | users leave if they read the first line and realize the site | or service isn't for them. | | After all -- your site is less engaging than the site that | most users ended up on -- right?! | hinkley wrote: | Perverse incentives. | | Also I don't know about you, but when I'm researching | something I open a new window, and I middle click all the | reasonable looking links on the search page. | | My time with that tab open has nothing to do with that tab. | It's mostly to do with the tabs chronologically before | them, and whether I see something shiny that distracts me. | ollymeakings wrote: | You watched the video so you know at 1 minute in I say how | important it is to simply tell people what you actually do. | | I also advocate for plain language and showing the product not | just talking about it. | fluidcruft wrote: | Yeah, I saw that but still. It starts off with 1-on-1 | meetings with managers and employees but then I guess it's | actually just some scheduled survey like a weekly qualtrics | to /dev/null that admin pushes at us already or whatever. | Finally. That's what I got from that. | | I guess what I would say is that the pop.work* landing page | seems to want to sell itself as scratching an itch or solving | a problem, but doesn't tell us what that itch or problem is | or even show us how it solves it. It's just vague and no | details (which is a major red flag about a landing page for | me personally). | | *lots of alternate "popwork" out there and you don't even | link it or anything so I had to google text from the landing | page in the video to find what and where it even was or if | they'd completely pivoted to a different product | (popwork.com) | onlyfortoday2 wrote: | but still what? stop moaning LOL | mercwear wrote: | This post is giving me 2010-2015 CRO is everything vibes and the | landing page for the roast site is actually bad imho. | swsieber wrote: | > 95% of roasts were booked by male founders. | | I'd be really curious what the demographics are for founders. I'm | not in the SV area, and I'd love to know how representative (or | not) of the general founder population that is. | aosaigh wrote: | (Rant) What a snobby, begrudging comments section. Well done to | OP for writing a detailed summary of a succesful productised | service that they got off the ground as well as a solid list of | actionable tasks you can take to improve your own product. | | They've outlined how their clients have loved the service, it's | been financially successful and everyone is happy, yet all people | here do is complain about a) how this is the downfall of the | internet b) there's some technical or editorial minutiae of the | post itself they dislike c) how they could have done it better d) | what they're doing is just plain wrong or unimportant. | | If HN had its way, every product and service on the planet would | be devoid of marketing, sales or design and the only way you | could buy it was via the command line. Infuriating. | pkdpic_y9k wrote: | I definitely hear you but at this point its kind of why I come | to HN and why I tell my software students to do the same. I | think you're right that if a lot of these folks had their way | the only way to do anything on a computer would be through a | terminal interface, but when its not taking the form of an | inactionable rant that just feels like such a beautiful kind of | idealism to me and a valid / real perspective shared by a lot | of engineers. I too cant help myself from occasionally dreaming | of some alternate reality where GUIs were never invented and | all the problems of addictive online media were somehow | magically sidestepped. | | In any case even though I could have done without the repeated | revenue stats being thrown around I think its great this guy | made the extra effort to consolidate his observations and | conclusions as an open resource. What more can we all do as | members of this community? | | That said after reading the article and a lot of the comments I | did find myself wondering, if we stopped treating our users | like 12 year olds would they stop interacting with our sites | like 12 year olds? And is that even something we'd want? | jt2190 wrote: | > ... if we stopped treating our users like 12 year olds... | | This is _not_ what the OP is suggesting. He 's paraphrasing a | well-established usability guideline [1] to use text that has | a readability score of 5th grade or lower, _because people | are in a hurry and they don 't read text on the web, they | scan it._ Using more complex sentence structures in this | context only leads to misreadings and misunderstandings. | | [1] https://www.nngroup.com/articles/how-users-read-on-the- | web/ | chefchaouen wrote: | A dev in my department is doing a POC to demonstrate the | relationship between the quantifiable readability (albeit | in Japanese) of a company's securities filings and that | company's financial performance. That project, and the | nngroup link you kindly shared make me think readability is | a legitimately important consideration when designing a | landing page as the OP is suggesting. | lifeisstillgood wrote: | What's the (proposed) causal relationship there? | Companies with clear business models can write clear | notes to the Stock Exchnage, or companies that write | clearly to the exchnage can communicate to the market | (users investors) also clearly | | (I am assuming that no-one thinks that Japanese consumers | read security filings before making their weekly shop?) | solipsism wrote: | _like such a beautiful kind of idealism to me_ | | _dreaming of some alternate reality where GUIs were never | invented_ | | This is the ideal dream state you send your students to | absorb? A bunch of terminal-users obsessed with building | everything in the terminal? Why indoctrinate your students | into that? | | Note: Reading over the above I realize it sounds | antagonistic, probably because I formed everything as a | question. I don't mean it to be antagonistic. It's just me | not understanding where you're coming from. | | _if we stopped treating our users like 12 year olds would | they stop interacting with our sites like 12 year olds_ | | Yeah, maybe. But... I'm not sure if you want my dad to be | part of your idealized future, but if you do, the terminal is | not going to be the way to do it | | I'm all for finding ways to empower users, but how does that | lead to you getting off the train at no GUIs, instead of | _better_ GUIs? | JohnWhigham wrote: | Treating the masses like children is a habit that predates | the Internet. But it's not always bad. Pruning a landing | page's CTA to be as succinct as possible is necessary because | time is the universal currency, and we only have so much of | it to spend. | tyrust wrote: | > I too cant help myself from occasionally dreaming of some | alternate reality where GUIs were never invented and all the | problems of addictive online media were somehow magically | sidestepped. | | MUDs were before my time, but I have a friend that claims to | have spent hundreds of hours playing these text-based games. | | Addiction is a human issue and isn't limited to one form or | another. | yjftsjthsd-h wrote: | > If HN had its way, every product and service on the planet | would be devoid of marketing, sales or design and the only way | you could buy it was via the command line. | | ... Unironically, that would be amazing. Maybe an optional page | for pictures/screenshots, but otherwise I don't see a problem | with that if your audience is compatible. I mean, I don't | expect everyone to go that way, but if I never had to leave my | terminal I'd count it an improvement. | hathawsh wrote: | I agree; this looks like a great service. I don't understand | the objections. Thanks @ollymeakings! | msla wrote: | Maybe if more people knew the bizarre way "roast" was | apparently being used here, the comments would be better. | onlyfortoday2 wrote: | welcome to HN LOL | kwertyoowiyop wrote: | That's just because people on HN are FAR too smart to be | affected by mere APPEARANCES. | | /s | dang wrote: | " _Please don 't sneer, including at the rest of the | community._" https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html | kleer001 wrote: | > the only way you could buy it was via the command line | | Hahaha! Congrats, I actually chuckled. | | Technically though, I don't think there's anything that by | default is purchasable via CLI. But, yes, that's why it's | funny. | kbelder wrote: | Build a CLI interface to amazon. There's your million dollar | idea. | | amzn buy --ship fedex --address home "micro usb 6' cable" | kleer001 wrote: | Sounds good... | | The hooks for Amazon Dash are likely closed as it was | phased out a year after start. | | https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Amazon_Dash | | Though, it can be done through Alexa. | | There's this : | | https://github.com/MarQG/bamazon-cli | | But I have no idea what a bamazon database is. | | Personally I don't think I'd ever want to build a product | on top of a huge company's product. That way lies madness. | runiq wrote: | I mean... I'd use that. | pelagicAustral wrote: | Yes, please. | EricE wrote: | It really is amazing. He's helping people improve _landing | pages_. | | It's not how to generate spam, robocalls, improve your targeted | facebook ads or some other form of active marketing - it's | about making your passive marketing message more effective. | | I dunno why everyone assumes _all_ marketing is bad. Without | marketing how the heck would you ever learn about or even find | potentially useful products? As with all things moderation is | key and this guy is focusing on the most neutral kind of | marketing out there! | matheusmoreira wrote: | > I dunno why everyone assumes all marketing is bad. | | All marketing is inherently untrustworthy by virtue of | conflict of interest. The people trying to sell products have | every incentive to lie and mislead potential consumers. At | best you get language that emphasizes upsides while | downplaying downsides. | | There's a reason people search forums like reddit when they | need real product reviews: marketing simply cannot be | trusted. | | > Without marketing how the heck would you ever learn about | or even find potentially useful products? | | Word of mouth. | eropple wrote: | _> The people trying to sell products have every incentive | to lie and mislead potential consumers._ | | Absolutely not, unless your business model relies on single | sales. | | In functioning organizations with _actual products_ , | marketing and sales are advocacy functions for the customer | as much as they are revenue functions for the business. | They're how you know what to make and who to target. | antris wrote: | The point was that relying on marketing messages causes | the user having to research themselves what the product | is actually good at and what it isn't good at and wasting | time because the company isn't upfront the products | strengths and weaknesses. The product might be sufficient | in the end, but marketing will very rarely tell you what | the product is _actually_ sufficient at and what it is | not. | | The statement wasn't about whether the product is | actually good or not, though in extreme cases, yes, the | product is worthless while the marketing is all rainbows | and sunshine. But relying on marketing is bad for the | user in nearly every case, even if the product is good. | | And even if you are "one of the good guys", your users | won't know that. That's why you should verify from | independent sources, or do your own research. | | If marketing was really a reliable source of information, | reviews, samples, product trials etc. wouldn't be a | thing. | matheusmoreira wrote: | You say this but ISPs deliver only a fraction of the | bandwidth they advertise, SSD marketing doesn't mention | the fact you're not supposed write to it too much... Drug | marketing never mentions any side effects, food marketing | blatantly takes advantage of the public's ignorance... | | People should assume all marketing is incomplete or | untrustworthy information _at best_. | Xamayon wrote: | Word of mouth works, but can be very slow and still faces | the problem of getting those first users. Where did the | first person in the chain hear about it if not for | marketing or self promotion? At some point the word has to | reach someone who can actually spread it before anything | will happen. So many awesome products and services die | because they aren't flashy or cool enough to drive viral | word of mouth spread. | | I'm quite familiar with this, as my reverse image search | service SauceNAO has never done any kind of paid marketing. | It took years for users to spread the word to any | significant degree. Even now, nearly 13 years later, there | are many people who would benefit from it greatly who have | never even heard of us... | matheusmoreira wrote: | > Word of mouth works, but can be very slow | | Is slow growth not fine? I think organic growth is | healthier for society. All this explosive never ending | economic growth we see today seems pathological to me. | | > Where did the first person in the chain hear about it | if not for marketing or self promotion? | | Those first users are presumed to be close to the person | who made the product. People trust their friends. They'll | tell other people about it if they liked it. | | > my reverse image search service SauceNAO | | Thank you for making SauceNAO. I first saw it on image | boards, it's a well-integrated feature of those sites. | | I'm not sure if you have a business model so I can't tell | if advertising would present conflicts of interest. | kradeelav wrote: | This is off topic to the main post, but wanted to thank | you personally as somebody who's used saucenao pretty | consistently for the last ten years, being adjacent to a | lot of anime/game fandoms and even personally posting art | on pixiv regularly. Such a fantastic and easy little | tool. Can't even remember where I heard about it, which | in some ways speaks to how good the site is. | shanecleveland wrote: | I'd say that honest, thorough and helpful articles like | this as a function of marketing lead to word-of-mouth, | organic growth. | tshaddox wrote: | Marketing is no more inherently trustworthy than any other | form of communication. Of course it's important to have | some personal ability to detect deceit, and it's also | important to have systems in place to disincentivize | deceit. But the fact is that, when such systems are not in | place or are not sufficiently strong, of course there are | many cases where people are incentivized to lie with any | form of communication. | notriddle wrote: | Word of mouth is something you can optimize for. Multi- | level marketing schemes and social networks both do this. | | I would prefer companies to focus on landing page quality | than to start altering the product to turn customers into | salesfolks. | yjftsjthsd-h wrote: | > I dunno why everyone assumes all marketing is bad. | | Because 99% of marketing is bad. | tshaddox wrote: | Are you sure you're not just weighing that heavily based on | how frustrated you are by a given piece of marketing and | thus heavily over-counting the "bad" marketing and under- | counting the huge amount of marketing that doesn't stand | out and frustrate you? | atatatat wrote: | 99% of marketERS are bad. | | Only like...80% of marketing is bad. | z3t4 wrote: | > f HN had its way, every product and service on the planet | would be devoid of marketing, sales or design and the only way | you could buy it was via the command line | grep "features" | sort price | | Meanwhile the rest of the world make their purchase decision | based on emotions, social, and smell (we need a smell API in | web browsers), and prefer passively. | dang wrote: | Ah, the contrarian dynamic strikes again: | | (1) an initial wave of objections to the article; | | (2) a second wave of objections to the objections; | | (3) those get upvoted, so that | | (4) the most popular comment becomes the one about how the site | is so negative, all people do is complain, etc., producing | | (5) irony! | | https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=24215601 | | https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=25434665 | | https://hn.algolia.com/?dateRange=all&page=0&prefix=true&sor... | | If you study this phenomenon, it becomes clear that the | difference between (1) and (2) is not negativity, just timing. | And the upvotes of (3) are negative in the same way. Negativity | about negativity is not positive. It's idempotent. | | (Edit: I hope it's clear that I don't mean to pick on you or | anyone else personally! This is a systemic problem that we're | all part of--that's kind of the whole point actually.) | | If we want a solution to the ambient negativity that can | afflict HN threads--which we certainly do--we need to tackle it | a little more deeply. We all need to become aware of how the | same negativity that we perceive in others exists in ourselves, | and without cheap avoidances like "well, the others do it | worse". It always seems like others do it worse; everyone | experiences that. It is the chief way we avoid looking at | ourselves. | | If we admit that we're all just mirroring our own denied | negativity to each other, we can start taking steps to a | solution. Not that we'd never be negative any more--but maybe | we can get less mechanical in our responses if we learn | something about how the mechanism works _in ourselves_. | Denouncing it in others doesn 't work--that's how the problem | recreates itself: all this disowned negativity keeps | circulating through the system, when what's needed is for | people to work with it internally so that it can start to shift | a little. | | That's why the site guidelines now include this line: " _Please | don 't sneer, including at the rest of the community._" - as a | baby step in that direction. The HN community has been around | for long enough that I think we can take this as a task to work | on together. It would be a big step towards optimizing this | place for curiosity (https://hn.algolia.com/?dateRange=all&page | =0&prefix=true&sor...), which is what we're all here for. | | https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html | throwaway_kufu wrote: | The mmm.pages post yesterday was really refreshing positive, | until a comment floating to the top ranted about geocities | style/gifs being schizophrenic, nostalgia being toxic, and | real creativity = having the same cookie cutter modern web | design as everyone else (now that's irony). | | But based on your comment, you either: a) were inspired by | the post itself and decided to have a little fun roasting | this comment; or b) need to take a vacation. | [deleted] | kiddico wrote: | or c) dang just has their finger on the pulse and has seen | this every day for years. | daanlo wrote: | Small observation on this great comment :) | | I noticed on twitter that the culture (at least in my bubble) | valued ,,smartness" over empathy. In attempt to say something | ,,smart" it lead to many snarky responses. | | I also noticed this pattern in myself, which is why I stopped | replying to tweets. (It was easier for me to stop replying | than stopping to reply in a snarky way). | | For twitter I think this is not only a question of community, | but also a question of design (ui/ux). And how the ui/ux | shapes the community. | | If I ran HN, I would consider if there are any (small) UX | changes in the comment flow that could improve the ,,well, | actually"/contrarian metric. | jgwil2 wrote: | Do you have any ideas for how that could be done on HN? | What about Twitter UX in particular do you think leads to | that dynamic? | echlebek wrote: | Seems some debouncing is required :) | hawski wrote: | Sometimes I would like to see comments divided in two | sections: 1. discussion strictly about the contents of the | submission and 2. all the rest, which I would call meta. Meta | would be hidden by default and often would be a catch-all for | many types of negative comments in type of ("the page is | unreadable", "I hate marketing", "I don't know what this | is"). I know that many of my comments, like this one, would | go to the meta section, but sometimes when I think about it | like that I decide not to write a comment. Interesting thing | would be to divide karma and weigh content comments by | content karma and meta comments by meta karma. The problem | would be that a reply to a content comment could be meta, so | maybe every thread would have its own section? | ericb wrote: | That sounds amazing! | | That would get the content separated from the noise. I'd | love it. The problem with these meta topics is that they | are like the bike shed problem--emotionally driven, easy to | get sucked into, everyone has an opinion, but ultimately, a | distraction that takes away from the important stuff. | | Here's an implementation. We have _up_ and _down_ voting. | Let me vote these _sideways_. | | This would be a left arrow, which hides them for me-- | conceptually like kicking them off the screen--and if a | quorum develops past a threshold, by default for anyone | with "meta" turned off. | dang wrote: | One question is how would you categorize them. It could be | some combination of software, user input, and moderator | action, and there are problems with all three. | | I would use the word 'generic' rather than 'meta'. Generic | includes meta but also all other predictable themes, and a | subthread that goes off-topic isn't necessarily bad-- | whimsical tangents can be interesting when unpredictable, | as long as they're not done too often (at which point they | would become generic). | | We downweight generic subthreads and the current certainly | counts as that, but I haven't downweighted it in this case | because it seemed more important to communicate to the | community about this. | | https://hn.algolia.com/?dateRange=all&page=0&prefix=true&so | r... | jffry wrote: | Is your downweighting process driven by manual reading | through threads or are there signals that draw your | attention to potentially-downweight-worthy subthreads? | | edit: that is to say, I wouldn't expect user-driven | signals to automatically partition or downweight | subthreads, I was more curious if they are useful in | existing moderation actions and how they might | extrapolate. | 1vuio0pswjnm7 wrote: | "If HN had its way, every product and service on the planet | would be devoid of marketing, sales or design and the only way | you could buy it was via the command line." | | s/planet/www/ | | This is funny because I have always had a dream about ordering | from the command line, instead of fiddling with HTML forms in | web pages in graphical web browsers. Then we users could more | easily automate purchases. | | In the dream, order details are in the HTTP headers. There is a | standard that all sites would have to follow. | | HTTP headers can be unambiguous. Consider a proposal like the | DNT header. Instead of being able to manipulate a user into | giving "consent" via ever more "creative" web forms, popups, | etc., the question is standardardised as a binary one: yes or | no. The answer can be automated. | | Then I wake up. We remain stuck with HTML forms of infinite | variablity. | gnarbarian wrote: | This is one of the most negative player hating envious websites | ever. definitely not what you would expect from a community | ostensibly set up around trailblazing, high risk | entrepreneurship. | dang wrote: | The trouble is that comments like this manifest the exact | same negativity that they complain about. We're all busy | seeing it in _other_ people, which is what keeps the | negativity going. | chuckSu wrote: | HN comment section been toxic | serverholic wrote: | I've had to take breaks from HN just because of how | insufferable people are on here. | dang wrote: | The only way to address that is for us all to start seeing | the same insufferability in ourselves. That's why the site | guidelines now include " _Please don 't sneer, including at | the rest of the community._" -- as a tentative first step in | that direction. | | https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html | | Let's hope that HN is around for the rest of our lives | because it will probably take at least that long. | | Edit: I pinched this comment for a long explanation upthread: | https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=27145616 | [deleted] | chrisseaton wrote: | Doesn't roasting mean to unfairly and harshly criticise? Maybe | that's what people are reacting to. | Jasper_ wrote: | ... all we're doing is roasting their landing page. I thought | that would be on topic here. | duxup wrote: | I'll admit I felt a less than positive impulse from the title | of the article. | | Probably the 'roasting' part reminded me of bikeshedding / | every yokel with their own advice that occurs surrounding a | font or button color or something .... that's kinda a horrible | peeve for a lot of folks and came to mind for me. | | But the article and ideas seems sensible. | | Landing pages are hard, I think there's a lot of magic and | weird theory out there on them. I did enjoy how focused and | down to earth this article / his advice was. | | Anyone who felt similarly I suggest giving the article a read, | it's pretty good IMO. Probably not going to turn a landing page | into a customer magnet but nothing really does that and I think | the advice is good / I find it useful. | rorykoehler wrote: | I saw this in the wild (Twitter I think) before I saw it here | and ignored it because of the name. | duxup wrote: | I almost did here, for the reasons stated. | | I very much would have ignored it on Twitter ;) | | Glad I did not here. | steve76 wrote: | No one has any money. That's the big problem today. The people | who have it went far away, and turned their backs on everyone. | The best way to sell is to live there. Go there and live among | people and it's easy. But today everyone is poor. Nothing wrong | with being poor. Wealth today is about being opportune. | | You can commoditize people. Churn leads. The top of knowledge | is known by a few people in the world though. The authorities | who can speak truth to medical researchers or experimental | scientists can't be churned. So you are just wasting your time. | | You're going to sell. Sell what? Do business what? Work what? | $20 trillion economy. Much better for everyone to just jump | onboard. The world would be a better place if you could work | remotely running essential services without having to travel to | Africa or Asia as a corporate hostage just so some jerk in a | suit can buy a bigger yacht. | punkspider wrote: | Am I the only one that thinks a table of contents would be great | for this article? | | It starts off salesy and when this happens I tend to avoid | committing to it, so I think a table of contents would really | help a user decide if this is a good read for them or not. | axiosgunnar wrote: | This is literally a 4min read and the author divided it up | pretty nicely in parts and bullet points. | | Every bullet point is an interesting insight for itself, so you | could leave after reading half way and still make a net | intellectual profit. | | People are so overly critical these days, the guy is literally | giving away useful hard numbers and advice for free (some | exposure for himself). | | Oliver, please take HN comments with a grain if salt. :-) | People are very demanding here (which might be a good thing of | course) | transitus wrote: | @ollymeakings, the key point I would have loved to learn was how | effective your service was. So by implementing (some / all) of | your advice, how much did the conversion increase over next 3 | months or so? (with no additional marketing and other implausible | but desirable assumptions). You do mention "as I built evidence | of the roasts increasing conversion" but leave the evidence | hanging. Or perhaps I read the otherwise quite comprehensive | piece too hastily. Interesting stuff, thanks for sharing! | ollymeakings wrote: | Yes there is an issue with the client agreeing with me sharing | the data. It's something that is being addressed with new | clients. | | The main thing is to ensure you AB test. Lots of what's in the | post is proven, not just by my own experiments, but by | organisations like Unbounce who have global data across 1,000s | of pages. | | However the true key to improving your own loading page is to | grow and act on your own quantqual data. | ribs wrote: | As @transitus said, some quantitative statements about | results would be really helpful here. I hope you can get | some. Other than that, what you're saying is very convincing. | jojo_kelly wrote: | Love this, what a good idea. | | But, do you think you're undercharging at PS150 per roast? | JohnJamesRambo wrote: | Your site is cancer on my tiny iPhone SE screen. Banner thing, | little chat bubble of your face, pop-ups everywhere. Is it a | parody site? | ollymeakings wrote: | Is it a parody phone :) | JohnJamesRambo wrote: | No it's the best phone ever made. | another_kel wrote: | It's not since the iphone 12 mini was released | Gracana wrote: | You must reserve the good roasts for paying customers. | lifeisstillgood wrote: | This is a lot of real effort - one per workday for a year. I just | am trying to imagine what I could do similarly: | | - a code review from an OSS project per day? | | - a bug fix per day? | | - document something every day | | - add a line of code to an OSS project per day? | | Any ideas? | amelius wrote: | Instead of using this service, you can also post your project to | HN for the same result :) | rajasimon wrote: | Yeah! HN roast are indeed very good. I was launching my project | in HN and six hours later I have shutdown the project. Because | I got roasted. Left and right comments are shown it's not good | for either party ( Me and HN users ) | | Note: The project I have mentioned is targeted to HN users in | mind. | beejiu wrote: | Judging by all the 'I know better' comments that are posted in | this very post, you really couldn't. | skc wrote: | Except HN will probably bring your site down in the process. | I'm always in two minds about it even beyond the famously tough | crowd here. | rchaud wrote: | Hardly. HN will talk about how they could build the same thing | in a week, why enterprise pricing is "Call to discuss" only, or | complaining about the use of Google/Adobe Analytics. | egberts1 wrote: | Can I roast the roaster for not summarizing how he does the | roasting (unless he is not wanting more business)? #headduck | grenoire wrote: | Drink some Diet Coke and it shall all be revealed onto you. | josefresco wrote: | In the article he embeds a Tweet showing his first version vs his | 20th version. Then I went to the site, and what's live looks more | like the 1st version so I'm confused. | ollymeakings wrote: | Constantly testing! | josefresco wrote: | The cynical side of me thinks this is the problem with the | "landing page optimization" market. Measure, tweak, measure, | tweak (repeat 20x) and before you know it, you're back to | where you began! | | A couple years back, I read another article about landing | pages that warned against taking A/B testing logic to the | extreme, as it may lead you down the wrong path. | | My advice: Use your instincts/experience/feedback along with | raw data. | treerunner wrote: | This is how you architect a boring web. | rchaud wrote: | "Landing Page" tells you this is for SaaS products sales pages. | Of course it's boring. | | Although it would be interesting to see a parody of such sites, | such as the classic "Every Bootstrap website ever"[0] | | [0]: https://www.dagusa.com/ | JackPoach wrote: | Sorry to be pain in the butt, but this is largely irrelevant. | There are a lot of experts or 'experts' who analyze other people | mistakes. However, the real data for landing pages comes from | actual customers, not expert opinion, however good or bad it is. | Second, the #1 mistake for landing pages happens before the | landing page is even created. Namely figuring out what to offer, | how to offer it, how to stand out and how to make your goods or | services way better than competition. Make mistake at this stage | and no landing page will save you and analyzing landing page for | a bad product or a bad offer will only take you away from seeing | the real problem /*rant off. | | I see zero relevance in the post. The author may have learned | something, but I as a reader did not. Usual marketing bullshit. | ollymeakings wrote: | Hi, author here | | I shared what I learnt across the 200 pages I reviewed and my | focus is on landing page conversion. I am working on the | assumption there is some sort of product market fit. | | I also included techniques to generate insights - like exit | intent, review analytics and heatmaps, introducing a cycle of | testing - rather than just telling people what they should do. | | Finally, I don't look at naff tricks on the visitor. It's all | focused on proven concepts for relaying what makes your | business great. | | However if you can find anything in the list you feel is some | sort of bizarre manipulation or trick I'm happy to look again. | dhsysusbsjsi wrote: | I stopped reading when it said make the landing page focus on | one thing. No no no. I HATE pages where it's plastered with | "Sign up" but you have to search for the login button. | rchaud wrote: | A "landing page" is not necessarily the home page. It can | be a page that a Google/Bing ad points to, or one that | ranks high on search, that's specifically designed to talk | about the product and its features. | | If you are already a user of the product, chances are | you'll bookmark the login page, or have it appear in your | browser autocomplete. Worst case scenario, you'll go to the | homepage and click the login button on the top right. | EricE wrote: | >A "landing page" is not necessarily the home page. | | Excellent point. And a very powerful one too. It just | caused me to think about the content and structure of an | educational site I'm involved with in a VERY different | way. Thanks! | rchaud wrote: | You're welcome. | | The "landing page" is ultimately wherever you, the site | owner, want the user to land on. The reason a distinction | is drawn between a landing page and a home page is | because there can only be one home page. But there is no | limit to the number of landing pages you can create. | | - LP 1 for "Self-serve video course" users | | - LP 2 for "Live, Group based instruction" users | | And even there, LP1 could have Variant 1 and Variant 2, | which are randomly served to users as part of a split | test, to see which page converted better. You can use | tools like Unbounce or Optimizely to serve the pages to a | randomized audience. | admissionsguy wrote: | I often take the excessive focus on things like the landing | page, design details to be a sign of inexperience/immaturity on | the part of founders. Once you have a selling product, by all | means, do optimize at the margins. But at an early stage, it's | just a distraction. | ollymeakings wrote: | Really? I recently optimised a landing page for a client who | had PS100,000 weekly ad spend on Facebook and increased their | paid ROI by 40%. | | Trust me, it's a critical part of the conversion performance. | admissionsguy wrote: | Sounds like they had a selling product to begin with. | Optimisation has its place of course, but when the client | is a pre-revenue startup with uncertain business plan and a | scrappy budget, and they keep refining pixels on the | landing page, I feel bad for them. While another client | goes from zero to $20k MRR in two months with a $20 | Themeforest template and a Lorem ipsum text still there. | ollymeakings wrote: | Oh yeah, totally agree - multiple landing page iterations | for early stage pre-revenue is silly. | | I do cover user acquisition, methods of validation, when | to test, types of test, the culture of lean, and more in | the roast. | | One thing to note however with the buyer you describe - | they often make REALLY rudimentary mistakes. I've seen | people forget CTAs, links not working, totally confused | language (no idea what they do), missing key elements, | not written to buyer etc. | | Also missing great opportunities to showcase their | business more powerfully. For them it's PS149 and they | have another person look at it and give practical | feedback. | kackerd wrote: | I know that there is a lot of art behind these type of patterns | and getting people to sign up, etc. However whenever I see them | discussing techniques, they seem to ignore the fact that people | quickly learn to work around them. | | If I go to a new company's site, I'll quickly try and figure | out whether I can get the info I need without signing up to | anything I don't want. I'm used to weighing up giving my | personal details, signing up for emails etc. If your site seems | too spammy, intentionally opaque, or just yechy, I'll just | forget about it and move on. | | Change the patterns or the KPIs, and I'm sure that many of your | page visitors will change up too, especially the more savvy | ones. | JackPoach wrote: | Yep, this is exactly why infobiz one-pagers with extra long | text blocks that never ended started having the opposite | effect. It's like writing THIS IS A SCAM in bold letters. | 'Customer isn't a fool. She's your mother'(C) | kackerd wrote: | Yes. A lot of 'innovation' in marketing is just changing | things to eliminate design decisions which are associated | with scamminess and coming up with new ones which aren't | yet overused by the worst bottom-feeders and so seem | 'fresh'. | Mauricebranagh wrote: | Its actually interesting (bit on the spammy side) a lot of | sites get built by a developer who doesn't relay pay any | attention on to its intended function. | | And designing the right architecture for example do not stuff | all your sku's / PDP on one single page with just images, no | text and a page title of "Products" | | And a lot of businesses a page will have to serve multiple | requirements: a laser focused ppc landing page targeting one | term well that's a lot easier. | wombatmobile wrote: | This sounded interesting so I clicked on TFA. | | OMG it does that thing I can't stand in news publications of | repeating the same thing over and over! | | This is literally the first 8 lines of TFA: | | - - - | | What I learnt roasting 200 landing pages in 12 months | | 200 roasts, PS70,000 in revenue and 642 cans of Diet Coke later. | | What I learnt roasting 200 landing pages in 12 months | | 200 roasts, PS70,000 in revenue and 642 cans of Diet Coke later | | 200 roasts, PS70,000 in revenue and 642 cans of Diet Coke later | | 12 months of roasting landing pages | | Over the last twelve months I've roasted the landing pages of 200 | startups. | | - - - | | I get so annoyed when news articles do that, because they skimp | on writing abstract leaders by simply duplicating text from the | opening para. | | I don't know what else this article says because I stopped | reading and closed the tab. | ollymeakings wrote: | That is a quirk of Ghost, it took the summary text from the | blog homepage and inserted it into the post. I fixed it. | | I didn't purposefully use that phrase repeatedly. Thanks for | spotting. | travisjungroth wrote: | Your post got roasted! | ollymeakings wrote: | The roaster became the roastee | Infernal wrote: | My, how the spitroast has turned | [deleted] | Brendinooo wrote: | Interesting that you call this out. You're right! But I didn't | notice it at all. | | Maybe I just got used to this sort of pattern, or maybe this is | where being a skimmer actually benefits me... | augustk wrote: | TFA? | | https://blog.mitchjlee.com/2020/your-writing-style-is-costly | royletron wrote: | But I do want a Diet Coke. | willcipriano wrote: | The content is algorithm first, not human first. I too refrain | from consuming articles written for computers. | spicybright wrote: | It's pretty sad webpages now are written for search engines | to parse and only incidentally, for humans to read. | ollymeakings wrote: | It wasn't written for search. | | Nobody googles titles like 'what I learnt' | | The blog post shares every single insight I learnt | reviewing landing pages and running my business without any | SEO implemented at all. | virgil_disgr4ce wrote: | Ignore the haters. They don't have anything better to do. | It's a great article and I found it really useful! | xbar wrote: | Bookmarked, on the assumption that you were right. | | Did I miss the data that backs up your assertions that | the improvements were effective? | weird-eye-issue wrote: | This used to be the case but Google is getting much better | at understanding topics and how they relate to each other. | These days, writing good quality content that is | comprehensive is best for humans and Google. Sure there is | some gaming of the system but it's not like it used to be | WesolyKubeczek wrote: | It's way worse now. | devtul wrote: | Is this why recipes online are such a pain? | | "Want to check my roasted platypus recipe? Check out this | 1000 words tell on why I love roasting platypuses" | | Of course paired with an auto play video of unrelated | content. | virgil_disgr4ce wrote: | "I'll get to the recipe in a minute, but first let me tell | you about the time I dropped a penny into the Trevi | Fountain in Rome. You see, I had just broken up with my | first boyfriend and..." | | F%(*ing insufferable madness | joelkevinjones wrote: | Copyright. The recipe itself can't be copyrighted, but the | descriptive text around it can. This created a style in | print media that carried over into the online world. | xwdv wrote: | Online recipes are a pain because I find the vast majority | of them are written by women, who tend to meander with | their posts while men get straight to the point. | Sohcahtoa82 wrote: | Not sure I've ever seen such blatant, overt misogyny on | HN before. | frosted-flakes wrote: | That's not why. It's because you only see the ones that | do search engine optimization. | compiler-guy wrote: | Online recipes may or may not be written mostly by women, | but the style is a consequence of copyright law, not | biology or gender or even cultural norms around gender | roles. | xwdv wrote: | Regardless, I do not think it was worth a barrage of down | votes, as the majority of recipes are in fact written by | women. | servercobra wrote: | The first half of your original sentence is a fact, but | the second half is your opinion and likely what the | downvotes are about. | toomanyrichies wrote: | Citation? | burnished wrote: | statements of the form "X is bad because women whereas | men do good" are widely recognized as garbage. please | don't pretend the problem is you claiming that women are | the majority recipe-writer, that is clearly not the part | people feel the need to express their disagreement with. | xwdv wrote: | So you're telling me if I cut off the rest of my comment | at the comma it would suddenly be more acceptable? I | doubt it. | crysin wrote: | You made a sexist comment with no evidence. Reap what you | sow. | davidmurdoch wrote: | What is TFA? | jcims wrote: | The Fabulous Article | Minor49er wrote: | Similar to how RTFM stands for "Read The Fabulous Manual" | NikolaeVarius wrote: | Its Fucking | [deleted] | moshmosh wrote: | I've always understood the F in any of these to translate | to "fine" when in _ahem_ polite company. Same number of | characters. | | [EDIT] LOL wow that justification is wrong, forgot about | the 'ing'. Still, that's the word I've usually seen | subbed. | [deleted] | dmitshur wrote: | I didn't know what TFA was and my best guess was "the | full article". This makes me realize RTFM could also be | interpreted as read the full manual, which feels amusing. | marcosdumay wrote: | What, you never read all of the man pages on your Linux | distro? | macksd wrote: | I will now be reading "AF" as "as fabulous". | enumjorge wrote: | It stands for "The Fucking Article". | [deleted] | conradludgate wrote: | For a more sensible answer, I use "The Featured Article" | dalmo3 wrote: | TFA (thanks for answering). | echlebek wrote: | The fine article | blaser-waffle wrote: | The "Friendly" Article | virgil_disgr4ce wrote: | "Big... FRIENDLY Gun 9000" | ElectricMind wrote: | //I generated about PS20,000 in roast revenue, and another | PS50,000 of freelance marketing work from clients // | | This guy made this much money with a simple idea. And he hasn't | killed anyone. So even though I would never buy such service or | think it is worth something to buy , I don't want roast this guy | for earning money. All the best. | ollymeakings wrote: | Thank you! And every single client apart from one rated the | roast 5/5 so they liked it too. | swyx wrote: | my swipe file of landing page advice articles here: | https://github.com/sw-yx/launch-cheatsheet/blob/master/READM... | kaltuer wrote: | There are some technical terms that you need to explain, as not | all of the readers are well-versed on your industry. I'd also | like to roast your page, as it has no navigation page. | dnndev wrote: | Anyone know of a TLDR version? Top 10 on one page? Would love to | watch all 20 minute videos but just not at this time. | ollymeakings wrote: | My twitter thread covers 16 points and with visuals | | https://twitter.com/helloitsolly/status/1390310904563224581 | dnndev wrote: | Thank you! exactly what I was looking for | dnndev wrote: | Why the down votes? its a valid question... geesh... | earksiinni wrote: | Fantastic info, thank you, @ollymeakings! | | As you mentioned in the comments here, your article assumes that | the business already has product-market fit. Do you have advice | for people who are at the idea stage and are building landing | pages as a way of finding product-market fit? | | I've been building a landing page to test out a consumer-oriented | travel app idea before I build it. Ideally, I want to build a | community of users before creating the app and learn from them | what to build. Conversion at this point means signing up for an | email list, then I reach out with a personal email. Not fancy, | but it's a start. | | I see the landing page in my use case as a conversation starter: | "Sign up for this app! Actually, the app doesn't exist yet, but | I'd really like to build something like this for you. Does it | strike your interest?" Not in a bait-and-switch way. | | Thanks again! | | P.S.: I'm an engineer transitioning into entrepreneurship. | Learning that marketing is my chief responsibility--and what | marketing really means (way more than advertising)--has been an | eye-opener for me. Here are some other landing page resources | that I've found helpful: | | Rob Hope's Landing Page Hot Tips ebook: | https://gumroad.com/l/hottips/root | | Harry from Marketing's guide to landing pages: | https://marketingexamples.com/conversion/landing-page-guide | robinj6 wrote: | SEO has made the Internet so toxic. I can't stand wading through | data these days, it's written for bots. | Exuma wrote: | Very nice. One minor correction -- The emoji you used next to | "Processes I implemented" is unavailable on the latest OSX update | for some reason. I'm not even sure what emoji it is, but it looks | like stacked bars. | schleiss wrote: | > Focus your landing page on one conversion goal. | | How does this help with SEO? Won't your pages be too thin and | suffer in Google's eyes? I thought rich content is the way to go. | ravedave5 wrote: | "Nearly every founder was able to capture their product or | business USPs gracefully in the form, but only about 1 in 5 had | this language on their landing page." | | I cannot belive how many landing pages I go to for prodcuts and I | can't figure out what they actually do, or why to use them over | X. It's shocking. | duckmysick wrote: | This also applies to open source projects on GitHub. | Sohcahtoa82 wrote: | > I cannot belive how many landing pages I go to for prodcuts | and I can't figure out what they actually do | | You can do _anything_ at Zombocom. [0] | | I can't believe how many years this site has been around, and | it's still essentially the same site. The only change is that | it now uses JavaScript to animate the spinning circles rather | than Flash. | | [0] https://zombo.com/ | nocman wrote: | "The only limit -- is yourself!" -- after all these years, I | still _love_ that site. Still good for a laugh. | EricE wrote: | Indeed! The Curse of Knowledge strikes all the time if you | aren't on constant guard for it. | https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Curse_of_knowledge | nitwit005 wrote: | I tend to assume the issue is not that they can't explain | things, but they don't want to. Plenty of companies spend a | lot of money creating manuals to explain exactly how | everything works, and then hide them away so that potential | customers can't look at them. | | The most common reason seems to be a desire to force you to | talk to sales. | kleiba wrote: | This could, however, be a way to implement one of the | recommendations of this site: address the most niche audience | you can until you reach a critical mass of customers. If you | don't understand what the service/product is about, you're | probably not part of the target niche. | | That said, there's also just really bad web sites out there, no | doubt. | ollymeakings wrote: | Olly here, founder of roastmylandingpage.com | | Happy to answer any questions about the service or business not | covered in the blog. | | You can also see the post as tweets, with visual examples from | landing pages here: | https://twitter.com/helloitsolly/status/1390310904563224581 | rfwhyte wrote: | You talk exclusively in qualitative statements, but do you have | any quantitative data to back up any of things you are saying? | Its all well and good to say what you _think_ someone _should_ | do, but without actual data to back up these statements why | should I believe you? You 're just some random dude from the | internet, and just because you said something, does not make it | true. | | You say for example "Contrast your product with competitors and | the current way of doing things." but what data do you have to | substantiate that this is anything other than your / intuition | / opinion? What kind of conversion rate lift did you clients | see by implementing this particular tactic while controlling | other variables to ensure the integrity of the test? | | As someone who's spent a fair amount of time on CRO in the | past, I appreciate that most of what you're saying is | _probably_ right as it 's all broadly speaking conventional | wisdom in the CRO space, but it rings somewhat hollow without | actual data to back it up. I understand data sharing agreements | with clients can be difficult to arrange, but had you even | included data on how the tactics you're recommending had | impacted the conversion rate of your _own_ landing page you | could have at least had some proof in your pudding. | illnewsthat wrote: | I think including the example images in the original blog post | would have helped to convey your points better. | ollymeakings wrote: | Yep, this post wasn't 100% complete. Someone else posted it. | | No complaints here but going to add images in asap. | egypturnash wrote: | _reads this_ | | _ponders the front page of her art /comics site_ | | Social proof... social proof... oh hey I have a couple of glowing | quotes from Hugo winners for the cover of one of my comics, maybe | I should put those on the link to it on the front of my site, | too. Thanks, Landing Page Roast Guy. | | Maybe next I'll even edit the css so they're not in tiny low- | contrast type. Nah. Gotta stay humble. | GayforMoleman wrote: | The article has acronyms (USP, CTA,...) that the author never | cares to actually explain what they mean. I find that it's a | really opaque and hostile way to approach a subject and it mostly | makes me feel like the author wants to sound like he really knows | what he's talking about. He stretches simple points (Have a clear | mission statement/product description.) into longwinded | statements with unnecessarily complicated jargon. Really just | feels like I'm being pitched a service the whole time I'm | reading. | ollymeakings wrote: | Unique selling point and call to action. | | I will actually correct that as one of my insights is to remove | confusing acronyms to improve legibility. | | Sorry the rest didn't work for you. | peterthehacker wrote: | I've never heard of USPs before this article. Stopped reading | to google "USPs landing page" which returned links to | usps.com, the US mail carrier. | | CTA is pretty well known though. Regardless, explaining those | acronyms would improve clarity. | StavrosK wrote: | I wrote something that might help: | https://github.com/skorokithakis/expounder/ | TheCowboy wrote: | I don't know why you got downvoted because this is a good | idea. | | The only criticism I have is that usually the dotted | underline is associated with adwords on some sites. I don't | know if there's a better way to do it. Superscript question | marks at the end of the phrase? | moshmosh wrote: | There's a built-in HTML tag for this that traditionally | uses the dotted underline. Looks like it doesn't do that | on all browsers, though, these days, but it's a CSS tweak | to add it. Behavior also seems worse than it used to on | some browsers--safari makes you hover for a little to see | the expanded definition, while I recall clicking to see | it before, which is better. | | https://developer.mozilla.org/en- | US/docs/Web/HTML/Element/ab... | StavrosK wrote: | Hmm, I have an adblocker so I can't say I've seen that | pattern much, but you can easily change the display for | it with a few lines of CSS. | frabjoused wrote: | I feel like this useronboarding site | (https://www.useronboard.com/) is the right way to go about this. | It's informative, helpful but doesn't make the website its | tearing down feel wrong. | hungryforcodes wrote: | "Real pain PAS (pain - agitate - solve) is a common copywriting | technique used to increase conversion. Most landing pages touched | on the pain they were addressing, but only 1 in 15 agitated or | amplified the pain with emotional language and vivid imagery. The | ones that did this well created much more powerful landing pages | that moved me to explore the solution. | | Fix it: Agitate your visitor by painting a vivid picture of the | pain using emotional language, stories and visuals." | | How is this not a dark pattern? | pbhjpbhj wrote: | Not heard of PAS before but it's a stalwart of UK politics for | those in power presently. Bonus points if you actually cause | the pain, I guess. | spicybright wrote: | Reminds me of the "World's Best Cup of Coffee" scene from elf | | https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=CUPDRnUWeBA | abraae wrote: | That's just marketing 101, as used for centuries. | | A dark pattern would be luring them in further with something | like "the one thing you need to do to fix your conversion | rates", but with a link leading to a list of 10 things, with | that one thing at the end or even not there at all. | kwertyoowiyop wrote: | And number 6 was going to surprise me! (AVOID!) | ollymeakings wrote: | The user is feeling the pain, you are amplifying it. | | Yes it sound stupid but it's only about evoking a feeling the | visitor already has. | | Here's some examples - they are everywhere | | https://twitter.com/helloitsolly/status/1391668206755106816 | HumblyTossed wrote: | It should be. But I guess when the revenue of the entire | freaking planet depends on manipulation, people start to accept | it. | sneak wrote: | Dark patterns are: | | a) UI | | b) explicitly designed to mislead or confuse you into | conflating things | | This is simple persuasion, not deception. It's also not UI. | NikolaeVarius wrote: | Dark patterns are not "anything you don't like" | philtar wrote: | If this was a dark pattern then almost all of sales is a dark | pattern. | risyachka wrote: | Why would it be? | | There is nothing sinister in it. Probably 100% of people do the | same in every day conversations in one or another way without | even noticing. | michaelt wrote: | Well, a lot of beauty products sell themselves by making | people feel ugly, security products by making people feel | fearful, and so on. | | Some people find that perilously close to breaking someone's | window then charging them to fix it. | Sohcahtoa82 wrote: | > security products by making people feel fearful | | People _should_ be fearful. The lack of fear is allowing | people and corporations to get hacked everywhere. | | Though I work in cybersecurity (though not for a | cybersecurity company), so I may be a bit biased. | yodon wrote: | > How is this not a dark pattern? | | It's common for potential customers to have a need and a | problem but not understand their own need or problem. The | customer's lack of understanding of their problem doesn't mean | they don't need the product ("wow, I didn't realize I had | cancer/bad breath/incorrectly spelled words on my website - | thanks for helping me understand I need chemo/a toothbrush/a | spell-checker" or "I knew I couldn't spell but I didn't realize | it was making people leave my website without reading the | content, thank you for helping me understand I need a spell- | checker") so sales activities often involve helping the | customer recognize a problem as a problem and as a problem they | face. This is particularly common in enterprise sales where the | sales reps tend to function as expert consultants who have much | deeper understanding of the problem at hand than the | organization experiencing the problem, because of the scale and | complexity of the problems and the reality that each | organization ideally solves the problem in question at most | once but the sales reps are involved in helping dozens or | hundreds of companies identify and solve the problem. If you | want to call all sales activities "Dark Patterns" that's your | choice, but the word "sales" has served us well for hundreds of | years, as have "advertising," "marketing," and "branding." | eplanit wrote: | Is this what marketers tell themselves, that they're doing | good for the public? | subutai_khan wrote: | So what you are saying is every salesperson ever is a dark | pattern proponent? | AnIdiotOnTheNet wrote: | Yes? That's pretty much my experience. | onlyfortoday2 wrote: | LOL okay bruh | sethammons wrote: | Not all sales is the used car guy trying to pull a fast one | on you. Any decent sales experience is party A | understanding the needs of party B and providing a solution | that both parties accept. Good sales leads to both parties | being happy. I say thank you to the grocery clerk because I | want to give them money for food and they say thank you | because they want my money. I'm happy to be eating. | AnIdiotOnTheNet wrote: | The grocery clerk isn't trying to market anything to you, | they are merely handling a transaction. | Silhouette wrote: | And yet there is a good chance that almost everything | about your visit to that grocery store was steering you | to increase the amount you spend while there. On the | other hand, if the store didn't put things you might want | to buy out on display, no-one would be able to browse, | which a lot of people enjoy and/or find useful. So where | is the line between unfairly manipulative and simply | showing what you're offering and inviting someone to buy | it? | Dudeman112 wrote: | If they could, approximately all sales-y and marketing | people would be happy to make 7 billion people pay them | 20 quids for a pound of horseshit. | | So would I, the difference is they are regularly paid to | try and do it. | hungryforcodes wrote: | I've done sales engineering, and usually the way I closed deals | was by honestly finding solutions to client problems, not by | dramatizing them. | | Perhaps it's the use of the word "agitate" -- but it does seem | manipulative. | apuchitnis wrote: | Enjoyed reading this - some very actionable advice and honest | learnings too. | ollymeakings wrote: | Thanks! Glad you like it :) | Sohcahtoa82 wrote: | > Tools like Loom are amazing for recording video-in-video. But | when they fail mid-roast recording it's horrible. When it happens | 3 times in a row, you consider leaving your job, hiring a small | dependable car, packing up your possessions and moving to a | remote farm far away from everything and everyone you know. | | Any particular reason for choosing Loom over, say, OBS? I know | OBS is primarily for game streamers, but it would get the job | done just as well and might be more stable since it's incredibly | popular. | | Or why not record your screen and webcam separately, and then | edit the two together in post? | | Or am I misunderstanding the issue? | sigg3 wrote: | I, for one, really enjoyed reading your advice and mostly agree | with them. It's like that book "Don't make me think". | | I've had some of the most confusing times when a HN link points | to a landing page. I personally prefer getting a readme on | github. But some of them completely forget to describe what the | thing is/does/improves, too. | | I really dislike landing pages. But I also realize I'm probably | sitting on the porch shouting and waving my cane :) | tofukid wrote: | I wonder what the range in conversation change was for landing | page tweaks. I'm curious how much landing page tweaks in general | really matter. Do you see 50% changes in conversion by making | copy changes, or 5%? | haydenkshaw wrote: | Something really irks me about how this site is using the word | 'roast'. Feels like any of the following words, with relevant | dictionary definitions, would've been more intuitive: analyse, | improve, critique, assess, evaluate. | | Instead, let's take a slang word, re-define it's accepted meaning | by removing the interesting nuance of it's usage, and try and | piggyback of it's coolness. Not to my tastes. | ollymeakings wrote: | It generates word of mouth and share-ability but agree it's not | for everyone. | abanayev wrote: | Oliver, props on your business and thanks for the interesting | insights. I'm really disappointed in HN today though. | optymizer wrote: | Thanks for the write-up! I don't get all the negativity in this | thread. | | It's a well-written and detailed post, filled with actual | content. I liked that the author included the financial | information too. I wish you all the best! | bigtasty wrote: | Slightly off-topic, but I'm curious what your logo [1] is? Based | on the first iteration of your website, it used to be the chicken | drumstick emoji () or similar, but now it's a drumstick with | purple and pink? | | [1] https://uploads- | ssl.webflow.com/6059199ee613ee15184e8810/606... ___________________________________________________________________ (page generated 2021-05-13 23:00 UTC)