Critique site content - teeth whitening product

One difference that caught my eye is that first testimonial image readers encounter.

In the draft written by the copywriter, the first testimonial image they run into is the mouth of middle-aged dude grimacing. Not to insult middle-aged men, but it's not a pleasant image, and likely not your target market. My visceral reaction was to not continue reading the page.

In the version you wrote, the first main image is a more pleasant mouth (a young lipsticked lady smiling), likely more representative of your target market.

There's also the fact that in your version, there's more copy "above the fold," and a different emphasis in the offer "above the fold." (Astonishing results... Safe and Painless... Whiter teeth or your money back..) Then it gets right down to the testimonials.

...whereas the copywriter's version seems to be just non-specific fluff above the fold. ("flawless smile you deserve" - advertising cliche... "without any irritation" - pain point should be more specific... "on the go formula" - should spell it out more... even the "11 shades" part is kinda meaningless... what does brightening my teeth 11 shades mean? It's hard to picture...

...So, all told, I think the copy the pro wrote is more "fluffy" with less "proof," more "ad-cheesy" and has that unpleasant image to boot... Whereas your version is more inviting, more specific and gets right down to the social proof.

The copywriter's version is "smoother" I guess, but I can see why your version would convert better. You might want to get someone to take your approach and make it a bit sleeker. Stuff like "Attractive rates" could be made less clunky.

Btw, the copywriter's version includes a contradiction -- " a non-peroxide solution (0,1%)". .1 percent peroxide isn't non-peroxide. Internet buyers are wary and skeptical, and would pick up on something like that.

btw Marco, I notice the "middle aged dude grimacing" from the copywriter's version is also named "marco." If that's you, no insult intended. It's just a bad pic.

In fact, the "marco" in the version you wrote (same testimonial, different pic) is a much more pleasant image.

Hi SplitTest,

Thank you for taking time to take a look on my site and give me your thoughts. While you described the differences between my version and the copywriter's version (which is helpfull, thank you for that), I am really more interested in how I can improve my version.

Maybe I should be more clear: For all the copywriters who think they can polish this rough diamond.... I encourage you to actually post here and proof yourself how good you are... how would you transform this poor copy no one gives a shit about into something that makes people want to whiten their teeth like a @#$%?

Check your website on Website Review - SEO Tool | WooRank.com you will get know whats problem with your website.

Are you asking why your copy (with the video) beat the copywriters?

If so, that's easy. The copywriter tried to explain the whole damn process. They oversold the "what it is and how it works" and undersold the "what it does for you."