Naming!

It sometimes depends on the offer and the medium (and if it's for someone else, it depends on the temperament of that client), but as a general rule I find it's wise to start at the beginning.

If we're running online ads (PPC, social media, targeted blogs or media outlets) and assuming we know our target market from our 'due diligence' research, the first thing I need to see is a decent click-through rate.

So I like to test different ads until the numbers start topping out.

Of course we can always test more ads and different mediums, but at some point we need to move on to the next conversion. So when the numbers from the lead generating ads look pretty good, we move on.


If we're sending people to a sales page...

Once we're getting a good CTR, ***from the right targeted audience*** then we can test the stickiness of our landing page...

*** I'm sure you aready know this, Art, but I had to emphasise this point for anyone reading this who isn't aware of how important it is to know your market. I still see far too many people who only have a vague, generalized, kinda targeted idea of who they think their ideal customer might be. And then they wonder why their conversion rate is so dismal***

If we get too many targeted people bouncing after only 2 or 3 seconds, then I want to know why.

Is our page loading OK?

If yes, then it's probably our headline that's causing the friction (aka breaking the flow) and that's the first thing I want to test.
Makes no sense to test the Call To Action if nobody's making it past the headline.

If people are bouncing after 15 or 20 seconds then the headline is probably OK and our opening lede could be causing the friction. And that's the next thing to test

And so on down the line. I've worked with a few people who used heatmaps on the webpage. And between that, and time on page, we can usually get a pretty decent idea of where folks are dropping off.


Sometimes it's not about a lack of conversions, but it's about testing things to try and beat the control.


One neat test we ran with a client who owns a membership site, in the self development arena, was we created a transition landing page.

It gave people 4 topics they could choose from, to pick their most pressing issue at the moment.

Money - Health - Relationships - Motivation.

When they clicked one it brought them to a full (secondary) landing page that was all about that one issue, and how our program could help them with it.

It was a simple idea I thought of, based on the concept of micro-commitments (if we get someone to take part in the sale by moving forward with their own decisive actions, they're more likely to continue moving forward).

Plus it was more personalized. When they landed on the second page is was all about the one thing they chose instead of generalized self-improvement.

It was a neat test and when the numbers came in it wasn't a grand slam by any means, but it did make a few sales and it got a whole lot more sign ups for the email marketing campaigns. So it wasn't a total flop either.

To wrap up this slightly long winded reply... There's so many different things that can be tested and tweaked. It really depends on where you're at, where the friction in the sales process is presenting itself, and your (or your clients) tolerance for trying new things that have a high likelihood of success.


Hard to give a generalized number. It really depends.
But I usually like to have at least 1000 sets of eyeballs see the piece before making any judgements about the numbers. (maybe more, maybe less, until a pattern emerges).

Cool. : ) Thanks for the share.

[Added=] I also think that "curiosity" can be a great motivator. For example I love the Book Title: "Secrets Of The Millionaire Mind". (Great book also by the way.)