These results may interest you.. I was shocked

51 replies
So I have a website that gets on average 3000 targeted visitors
per day from Google.

I decided to turn this site into a squeeze page to see if I could raise my
visitor value from building a list and hired a designer to create me a really
nice video squeeze page.

I mean this squeeze page looks the bomb. Graphically one of the nicest
I've ever seen. I only paid $600 for it.

So I loaded it up to the site and after about a week it got
21,341 unique visitors and an opt-in rate of 26.7%.

This surprised me, with the nicest squeeze page I've ever seen I was
expecting higher.

So I decided to try the reverse and spent 20 minutes creating a very
basic squeeze page in html. Just a very basic headline, few bullet points
little bit of copy and an opt-in form and loaded it to the site.

A week later (today), it has received 22,809 UV and an opt-in
rate of 61.5%!!!

WOW is all I can say.

A 20 minute crappy squeeze page beat a very nice professionally
built video squeeze page.

Just thought these results may interest some of you.

Has anyone else got any results that back this up?

Will
#interest #results
  • People love cheap looking web pages. Information is the key, not design
    Signature
    Competition Killer 2 Tier Link Pyramid - Boost your rankings overnight!
    High Quality EDU Backlinks
    - Recover your site from Google Sandbox and Panda.
    {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[2117293].message }}
    • Profile picture of the author scrofford
      Originally Posted by SyndicateMarketing View Post

      People love cheap looking web pages. Information is the key, not design
      I agree except for the word "cheap." Maybe it's just me but I hate the word "cheap"lol. But you are right, people like whatever the content the OP was offering. Simple looking usually beats out fluff especially when the niche and the content in the offer is good.
      {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[2117370].message }}
    • Profile picture of the author contactscape
      Originally Posted by SyndicateMarketing View Post

      People love cheap looking web pages. Information is the key, not design
      --


      I agree. Long sales pitches in juiced up Squeeze pages or long tedios-to-read squeeze pages almost always convert lower than simple, to-the-point, high-impact and creatively-worded ( catchy ) squeeze pages.

      I'm not at all surprised by the higher Optin rate with the simple squeeze page you put up. Many a time, pages with hard graphics and long texts can most definitely prove as a deterrant and reduce your optin rate. People may admire all the flashy stuff, but if they don't find what interests them in that 10 second window you have to capture their email address, they will most certainly walk away.
      Signature
      Angelina Troy's SEPCON Project
      Powerful Internet Marketing Tactics, Strategies & More..
      (enjoying 70,000+ of the Craziest Fans in the IM world! )

      {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[2118377].message }}
  • Profile picture of the author Alexa Smith
    Banned
    [DELETED]
    {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[2117305].message }}
    • Profile picture of the author mr2monster
      Originally Posted by Alexa Smith View Post

      Ah ... video. I couldn't understand it at all until I saw the word video. Suddenly it makes complete sense.



      Very little, here: two of my clients tried professionally made video squeeze pages and both have abandoned them.

      Video enthusiasts greatly underestimate the numbers of people who don't like video. Video squeeze pages can lose a lot of opt-ins, in my opinion. Others will disagree, however much evidence you produce - I guarantee it.


      Blanket statements like "video squeeze pages don't work" and "Video squeeze pages are the best" etc. are just plain uninformed.



      I've had success with both video and text based squeeze pages, and I've had major failures with both as well.

      Going back and looking at what has worked, and (more importantly) what didn't, I found a key ingredient that most people either don't know, or take for granted.

      It's all about MODALITY.

      IF a prospect is coming from a marketing campaign that has been based heavily around VIDEO, I've found that keeping them in a "video" mode is quite successful and switching them to a text based landing page generally drops conversions.

      HOWEVER, bringing someone in from a text based advertising campaign and trying to SWITCH them into "video" mode generally fails miserably, unless it's specifically pitched as "come check out this video" (as seen in the common gurus email marketing).


      It's all about setting up expectations. If you try and bring someone in from an article and they land on a video page that autoplays, you can pretty much bet that they're hitting the close/back button ASAP.... unless they're expecting (or even better, looking forward to) a video.

      Keep your marketing messages consistent in the modality in which they're delivered and you can see some huge opt-in rates on BOTH text based AND video based squeeze pages.
      {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[2118437].message }}
  • Profile picture of the author Raydal
    Originally Posted by Amitywill View Post


    A week later (today), it has received 22,809 UV and an opt-in
    rate of 61.5%!!!

    WOW is all I can say.

    A 20 minute crappy squeeze page beat a very nice professionally
    built video squeeze page.

    Just thought these results may interest some of you.

    Has anyone else got any results that back this up?

    Will

    First, thanks for sharing. This is sometimes a hard sell to clients
    but they often don't realize that "fancy designs" are often a
    distraction from the WORDS THAT DO THE SELLING.

    I often use Google as a perfect example of form meets
    function although they have recently changed their homepage
    to make it more complex. But the less distraction you have
    on your landing page the more likely the reader would take the
    desired action.

    Sad to say, there are few designers who understand DM principles.

    -Ray Edwards
    Signature
    The most powerful and concentrated copywriting training online today bar none! Autoresponder Writing Email SECRETS
    {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[2117317].message }}
  • Profile picture of the author LaunchGal
    I am a sucker for good design myself.....great copy wins!
    {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[2117328].message }}
    • Profile picture of the author Amitywill
      Originally Posted by Alexa Smith View Post

      Video squeeze pages can lose a lot of opt-ins, in my opinion. Others will disagree, however much evidence you produce - I guarantee it.
      I agree, it does make sense though because often times I'd rather
      read a well written article than watch a video. It's just easier in
      most cases.

      Originally Posted by Raydal View Post

      First, thanks for sharing. This is sometimes a hard sell to clients
      but they often don't realize that "fancy designs" are often a
      distraction from the WORDS THAT DO THE SELLING.

      I often use Google as a perfect example of form meets
      function although they have recently changed their homepage
      to make it more complex. But the less distraction you have
      on your landing page the more likely the reader would take the
      desired action.

      Sad to say, there are few designers who understand DM principles.

      -Ray Edwards
      Your welcome. You're right Google is a perfect example.

      If simple is good enough for Google then it's good enough for
      me lol.

      And in this case simple copy beats flashy video.

      Will
      {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[2117381].message }}
      • Profile picture of the author Vanquish
        People don't care about fancy graphics because they come onto your squeeze page looking for valuable information to advance their goals. The quicker you give them that and the quicker they realize the value they will get from the information the faster they will opt in.
        Signature
        Nothing to sell, only value to give and new knowledge to learn.
        {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[2117398].message }}
      • Profile picture of the author TimG
        I've always been a a person attracted to a nice set of graphics. I don't know why and suspect I always will be, so anytime a nice website design with a decent enough salesletter or opt-in page comes along I usually sign-up.

        On the flip side, I detest video or at least the way it is used by the current state of online marketers. As a result I almost always leave a page that is pure video.

        So much like Alexa stated - I was scratching my head on the conversion difference until you mentioned video was involved.

        Respectfully,
        Tim
        Signature
        Article Marketing Soldiers - The Best Selling Article Marketing Product On The Warrior Forum Is Now Looking For Affiliates! Make Over $25 Per Sale With This High Converting Product.

        Make More Money And Spend More Time With Your Family By Becoming A Scentsy Consultant - I Provide Personal Assistance And Help With Growing Your Business.
        {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[2117420].message }}
  • Profile picture of the author absbica
    Originally Posted by Amitywill View Post

    So I have a website that gets on average 3000 targeted visitors
    per day from Google.

    I decided to turn this site into a squeeze page to see if I could raise my
    visitor value from building a list and hired a designer to create me a really
    nice video squeeze page.

    I mean this squeeze page looks the bomb. Graphically one of the nicest
    I've ever seen. I only paid $600 for it.

    So I loaded it up to the site and after about a week it got
    21,341 unique visitors and an opt-in rate of 26.7%.

    This surprised me, with the nicest squeeze page I've ever seen I was
    expecting higher.

    So I decided to try the reverse and spent 20 minutes creating a very
    basic squeeze page in html. Just a very basic headline, few bullet points
    little bit of copy and an opt-in form and loaded it to the site.

    A week later (today), it has received 22,809 UV and an opt-in
    rate of 61.5%!!!

    WOW is all I can say.

    A 20 minute crappy squeeze page beat a very nice professionally
    built video squeeze page.

    Just thought these results may interest some of you.

    Has anyone else got any results that back this up?

    Will
    This doesn't surprise me. I am a professional web designer and make nice stuff, but the IM stuff I am involved with looks like crap..on purpose
    {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[2117341].message }}
  • Profile picture of the author MarkAse
    I agree with the video sentiments. I think it's smart, when possible, to offer both text and video alternatives. As an example, right now I'm listening to ITunes on my computer and wouldn't turn it off to listen to a video....and I do some IM myself...so how can we expect our average user to use it?
    Signature

    My current project, the Uncorked Ventures Wine Club. More coming soon, here.

    {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[2117342].message }}
    • Profile picture of the author Frank Donovan
      I can't quote any empirical evidence, but I suspect that people surfing at their office desks may be happy to read a sales page, but would be wary of playing a video and thus drawing attention to their activity.


      Frank
      Signature


      {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[2117366].message }}
      • Profile picture of the author ozduc
        Originally Posted by Frank Donovan View Post

        I can't quote any empirical evidence, but I suspect that people surfing at their office desks may be happy to read a sales page, but would be wary of playing a video and thus drawing attention to their activity.


        Frank
        I agree, I think this is one of the major factors in the results, especially if the video is an auto start.
        Another thing a lot of people overlook is the fact that not everyone is on a fast dsl connection. There are many people around the world still on dial up, so the video squeeze page probably doesn't even get a chance to load before those people will click the back button.
        {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[2119447].message }}
  • Profile picture of the author Amitywill
    Mark you're totally right about listening to music while surfing.

    I listen to music while I'm online and I rarely turn it off to watch
    a video on a website.

    And also like Frank says you're pretty much excluding the people
    that may be at work and can't watch the video even if they wanted
    to.

    Thinking about it now the only time I really watch videos is when I
    actively go to you tube and search for something.
    {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[2117403].message }}
  • Profile picture of the author Ben Roy
    I think that people are WAY jumping to conclusions here. You have two completely different pages, and you're assuming you know why one is more successful than the other. The truth is that even minor changes can make a major difference in opt-in rates.

    I highly suggest you check out this post: Anne Holland's Which Test Won - A/B Test & Multivariate Testing Education for Marketing Professionals

    It shows an actual split test with the exact same design, same buttons, same graphics, etc. Some copy changes make a 90%+ difference in conversion rate.

    The point is, if you really want to know WHY, you have to control all the factors but one and then test. Put up one page with video, one page without, but keep everything else as much the same as possible (same design and graphics, obv you'll need a bit more copy). Put up two different pages with video, but try different headlines. Etc, etc.

    You can't just assume that you know why one was better (expensive graphics vs simple). There are so many factors that go into it.
    {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[2117428].message }}
    • Profile picture of the author DeadGuy
      Ben is correct. There is an old saying, "One test is worth a thousand expert opinions".
      Signature

      You are making this work at home stuff way harder than it is. Ready for some sanity? Clear your head and start over.

      {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[2118113].message }}
    • Profile picture of the author Raydal
      Originally Posted by Ben Roy View Post

      I think that people are WAY jumping to conclusions here. You have two completely different pages, and you're assuming you know why one is more successful than the other. The truth is that even minor changes can make a major difference in opt-in rates.
      I don't get it. Two different pages gave different results then how
      can you account for their different results other than for their
      difference?

      One was fancy and the other was simple. The simple won.
      That's the only conclusion you can come to that the simple
      did better.

      Am I missing something?

      -Ray Edwards
      Signature
      The most powerful and concentrated copywriting training online today bar none! Autoresponder Writing Email SECRETS
      {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[2118138].message }}
      • Profile picture of the author JayXtreme
        Originally Posted by Raydal View Post

        I don't get it. Two different pages gave different results then how
        can you account for their different results other than for their
        difference?

        One was fancy and the other was simple. The simple won.
        That's the only conclusion you can come to that the simple
        did better.

        Am I missing something?

        -Ray Edwards
        C'mon Ray...

        You know it isn't that straight forward.

        The change from complex to simple isn't a direct swap. There are MANY things in difference between the two pages that could have affected the opt-in rate..

        A simply change colour in the opt-in submit button has increased my %ages before.. I wouldn't have know it was this if I wasn't tracking the changes and recording the results on an ongoing basis..
        Signature

        Bare Murkage.........

        {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[2118157].message }}
        • Profile picture of the author Raydal
          Originally Posted by JayXtreme View Post

          C'mon Ray...

          You know it isn't that straight forward.

          The change from complex to simple isn't a direct swap. There are MANY things in difference between the two pages that could have affected the opt-in rate..

          A simply change colour in the opt-in submit button has increased my %ages before.. I wouldn't have know it was this if I wasn't tracking the changes and recording the results on an ongoing basis..
          Ah, but you are missing an essential point.

          If you pitch A vs. B and B won then it's because B
          had something that A didn't have why it won.

          Are there other changes that could have affected the
          results? Yes. But a test was not made for them so
          we can only say FROM THIS TEST that the simple won
          over the complex.

          Of course other factors could make a difference, but
          they were not tested in this case.

          -Ray Edwards
          Signature
          The most powerful and concentrated copywriting training online today bar none! Autoresponder Writing Email SECRETS
          {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[2118759].message }}
      • Profile picture of the author Robert Puddy
        Originally Posted by Raydal View Post

        I don't get it. Two different pages gave different results then how
        can you account for their different results other than for their
        difference?

        One was fancy and the other was simple. The simple won.
        That's the only conclusion you can come to that the simple
        did better.

        Am I missing something?

        -Ray Edwards
        It could be that a minor change on the complex one could out perform the simpler one.

        By making such huge changes in one go you will never know you passed by a better result just by changing a word in the headline of the complex one
        {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[2118189].message }}
      • Profile picture of the author Ben Roy
        Originally Posted by Raydal View Post

        I don't get it. Two different pages gave different results then how
        can you account for their different results other than for their
        difference?

        One was fancy and the other was simple. The simple won.
        That's the only conclusion you can come to that the simple
        did better.

        Am I missing something?

        -Ray Edwards
        My point wasn't that the differences didn't make page B better than page A - that's true by definition (although, if you want to be REALLY picky the test isn't quite fair in that traffic was from different weeks rather than being split in real time).

        The point is that we don't know WHICH difference mattered. You're viewing it as simple vs fancy. Half the other people in the thread thing it was video vs text. The only answer we have is that THIS TEXT with THIS SIMPLE DESIGN was better than THAT VIDEO with THAT FANCY DESIGN. For all we know, we could put the same video on the simple page and get even better results.

        Or we could put the same text on the fancy graphics and get better results. Or it could be the color scheme. Or it could be the overall length. Or the load time. Or how big the button is. Or if the button is above the fold. Or how the call to action is worded. Or any of 50 other things.

        Is page B converting better? Yes, he said that. If it were my page, I would be testing 5 more variants to see if I could find out WHY, and to see if I could do even better.
        {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[2118962].message }}
  • Profile picture of the author JayXtreme
    Almost EVERY single basic squeeze page I have ever tested with, has beaten the graphics filled one...

    Having said that.

    There is MUCH more to this topic than meets the eye. This is not simply Video Vs. Text... it really isn't.

    The niche, the page elements, the colours, the content, the language, demographics... SO much to consider that to make any judgements based on this alone would be awfully naive of us all.

    Multi-variate testing is essential to really determine the good and bad points of any page with an M.D.A...

    Peace

    Jay

    p.s. Most Desired Action
    Signature

    Bare Murkage.........

    {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[2118135].message }}
  • Profile picture of the author cashcow
    Thanks for sharing that!

    I haven't don't have any specific data, but the plainest pages always seem to work best for me. I'm talking really plain with no graphics and hardly any words either - just a headline and some bullet points.

    I actually started using really plain pages once I heard Frank Kern say in one of his courses that those worked best ... turns out he was right!

    Lee
    Signature
    Gone Fishing
    {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[2118139].message }}
  • Profile picture of the author Nick Brighton
    I can also share the same sentiment as the OP.

    In that the simpler page, with less frills, and text instead of video, gets greater opt in rates than the original. (in my case, my video was doing just 10%, when the new text only page was reaching 20%). Sure it could be better, but it's a new project, a new niche and a lot of testing to be done yet.

    Despite what the guru flavour of the month is, video isn't always a proven, dead cert response booster.

    The importance of testing in your own backyard can never be played down.
    {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[2118193].message }}
  • Profile picture of the author Online Bliss
    Although plain pages verses eye candy
    seems to be in the majority here,
    My customers purchase the software & videos
    that have a shiny box over the plain box regardless
    of the value of the actual product. (similar price)

    I guess that's because they come with resell rights
    and they think that is what their customers will buy.

    If I am promoting someone's product and the graphics are lame
    I already know it was a mistake.

    That's Just my test results and my 2cents.
    Signature
    You've got it Made
    with the Guy in the Shades!
    {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[2118217].message }}
  • Profile picture of the author Naveed Peerzade
    This discussion for me is pointless unless you show both the versions.

    The graphics were one of the nicest you have seen, but thats not enough, as Ray said there are very few graphic designers who understand DM, just having fancy graphics are surely not going to help.

    But I can tell you that simple crappy squeeze page can be made better with a graphical touch without overdoing it helping visitor's eyeball move smoothly, read what you wanted them to read and without distraction.

    Remember one thing, Graphic doesn't sells, your copy sells... BUT "Graphic sells copy"


    .
    Signature

    .
    MinisiteExpert.com

    InstantProductEngine.com (Luanching Soon) .. Instantly Create Unique Profit-Pulling Products, In Less than 10 Minutes...Guaranteed!
    .

    {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[2118321].message }}
  • Profile picture of the author Craig McPherson
    Originally Posted by Amitywill View Post

    So I loaded it up to the site and after about a week it got
    21,341 unique visitors and an opt-in rate of 26.7%.
    results that back this up?

    I just wanna know how you did this.

    Signature
    {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[2118394].message }}
  • Profile picture of the author pianochris
    Well done and an interesting concept. If it attracts the attention and works stick with it.
    {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[2118429].message }}
  • Profile picture of the author cashcow
    It's all about MODALITY.
    Never thought about that but now that you mention it, it makes total sense.

    Like I said, the plain pages usually work best for me. I'm always sending traffic from articles no video. Plus, to take it a bit further, my niches aren't usually ones where people would be accustomed to seeing a lot of video on sites etc.. either.

    Lee
    Signature
    Gone Fishing
    {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[2118444].message }}
  • Profile picture of the author mr2monster
    I have a way of killing threads... haha..


    Going through my subscriptions, a VERY large percentage of the threads I post in die right after I post. hahaha.



    Service for hire: Thread Hitman - You want a thread squashed? I'll post in it... for a fee.
    {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[2118749].message }}
  • Profile picture of the author MichaelHiles
    I think that testing is the key. There are many markets that would completely reject a crappy looking website post haste.

    Business 2 Business corporate being one of them.
    {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[2118775].message }}
  • Profile picture of the author amdr114
    I'm a fan of the graphics personally, I find it more trustworthy as it appears more professional. However I have found through testing both that the average visitor prefers the plain look which chooses to get the information across before amazing them with flashy graphics.
    When I make my pages now I always want to make it look great as it is what apeals to me more but I know I will get better results with the plain look so I have to go against my preference and do that.
    {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[2119014].message }}
  • Profile picture of the author amdr114
    I'm a fan of the graphics personally, I find it more trustworthy as it appears more professional. However I have found through testing both that the average visitor prefers the plain look which chooses to get the information across before amazing them with flashy graphics.
    When I make my pages now I always want to make it look great as it is what apeals to me more but I know I will get better results with the plain look so I have to go against my preference and do that.
    {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[2119017].message }}
  • Profile picture of the author Biggy Fat
    Sometimes, presentation isn't everything.
    {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[2119142].message }}
  • Profile picture of the author lacraiger
    care to share your site?
    {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[2119147].message }}
  • Profile picture of the author williamrs
    I have had some similar experiences when working with PPC. The design is very important, no doubt about it, but having the right elements on the right places is the secret.


    William
    Signature
    Steal My Profit Strategy



    >> Download Now <<
    {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[2119171].message }}
  • Profile picture of the author Vexo
    Great experiment, this information can save you loads of money. Thanks
    Signature

    {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[2119187].message }}
  • Profile picture of the author Deepak Media
    Having a crappy squeeze page does not guarantee higher conversions. Each market is different. Testing is the key.

    Test.. Test.. Test.. Test.. Test.. Test.. Test.. Test.. Test..
    Signature
    Digital Marketing Author | Speaker | Consultant

    Read my Blog: DigitalDeepak.com

    @ Bangalore, India.
    {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[2119194].message }}
  • Profile picture of the author Harrison Ortega
    It is important to mention that this topic is misleading and actually can lead new warriors to believe that. This is not about the design but about the way the presentation was delivered.
    Product 1= Nice Site/ Content:Video.
    Product 2= Crap Site/Content: Text.

    How about you change the other way around and test it. Like:
    Product 1= Nice Site/Content: Text.
    Product 2= Crap Site/Content: Video.

    I think it is important to know if the results was based on the design or because of the content delivered.
    Signature
    NJ web design / NJ Web Designer. MY Wordpress portfolio. 10 years of HTML/CSS - 6 years developing professional Wordpress websites. Currently not available for services.
    {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[2119219].message }}
  • Profile picture of the author Shannon Herod
    Really it also comes down to what you are good at. I am a master at creating converting videos, but I am not as good with text. So, 9 times out of 10, when I make a video it will out pull text.

    The reason is not that video is better than text. The reason is I am better at video than at text.

    That is one aspect I think most people gloss over, but it is one of the most important things to consider.
    {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[2119248].message }}
  • Profile picture of the author DrGUID
    On a related theme, I was astonished that my best performing adsense page (earning about 10% of all my adsense income) was a rubbish 150 word page on a site I'd not even finished .
    Signature

    Love passive income? Make money on hubpages. Make money from ClickBank. Preserve your new wealth by investing in gold.

    {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[2119667].message }}
  • Profile picture of the author troy23
    It depends on the video. If it is short and to the point then it is fine. Most of these IM videos drone on and on with the same old crap about how we can make !5,000 a month by opting in. Obviously people are going to turn off.
    {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[2119723].message }}
  • Profile picture of the author Midas3 Consulting
    Originally Posted by Amitywill View Post

    So I have a website that gets on average 3000 targeted visitors
    per day from Google.

    I decided to turn this site into a squeeze page to see if I could raise my
    visitor value from building a list and hired a designer to create me a really
    nice video squeeze page.

    I mean this squeeze page looks the bomb. Graphically one of the nicest
    I've ever seen. I only paid $600 for it.

    So I loaded it up to the site and after about a week it got
    21,341 unique visitors and an opt-in rate of 26.7%.

    This surprised me, with the nicest squeeze page I've ever seen I was
    expecting higher.

    So I decided to try the reverse and spent 20 minutes creating a very
    basic squeeze page in html. Just a very basic headline, few bullet points
    little bit of copy and an opt-in form and loaded it to the site.

    A week later (today), it has received 22,809 UV and an opt-in
    rate of 61.5%!!!

    WOW is all I can say.

    A 20 minute crappy squeeze page beat a very nice professionally
    built video squeeze page.

    Just thought these results may interest some of you.

    Has anyone else got any results that back this up?

    Will
    Hi Will

    The problem is nobody can really offer you any results to
    back up your findings because there's a ton of variables
    untested in the equation.

    You may have an super duper whirly mega cool opt in
    but if the video message wasn't doing it's job, it would
    destroy the opt in rate.

    Switching to a simpler, zero graphic opt in versus
    the video opt in with uber graphics isn't an ideal method
    to determine which wins, video or text, your base line
    control becomes skewered.

    I've seen video opt ins where people just don't understand
    that video isn't some all powerful medium that somehow
    converts people at a better rate than text.

    Video done badly converts far worse than mediocre text.

    Each situation is different, people have different traffic
    sources and different niches and so many other factors
    that determine their outcome.

    If you send PPC traffic (high value) from say the
    antiques niche to a ghetto based opt in page you
    could well see dire results. Send them to a page
    which looks like quality and feels trusted, your opt
    in rate could increase and yet the latter was the
    more "graphic" based.

    People also often confuse high end graphics with
    fancy or distracting.

    Very good graphics and webdesign are a bit like
    well applied makeup.

    If it's done well, you shouldn't be able to see the makeup
    but it should make the site look like a million dollars.

    Trying to compare results (a) from one guy with results (b)
    from another guy is like apples and oranges at best.

    Glad to hear you owned your first test, shows the power
    of testing .
    {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[2119760].message }}
  • Profile picture of the author johnpetrov
    fancy designs" = distraction
    {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[2119764].message }}
  • Profile picture of the author stevecane
    Always test that is number 1 BUT remember that, like all marketing, you need to think about your potential customer. You'll never sell an expensive web-dsign tool with a crappy squeeze page but someone who's got chronic back-pain or is in the middle of a divorce doesn't want a fancy page, just info and fast. Being smart avoids lots of wasted time and marketing effort.

    Ste
    Signature
    Evening Wear Dresses - Bring Out Your Inner Princess

    Crystal Table Lamps - Transform Your Home

    Turbo Training - Get Bike Fit
    {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[2119773].message }}
  • Profile picture of the author Amitywill
    For the people like Ben Roy who are are saying there could be more to it etc.

    I agree with you to an extent. It wasn't meant to be a scientific test on a specific
    thing. It was me just saying "Hmm, I thought a nice video squeeze page would
    convert nicely, lets see how the visitors react to the most basic squeeze page
    I can come up with".

    Personally no matter how much split testing I do I don't think I'll be able to get
    the video squeeze page to convert at 60%+. I mean it's not impossible but I just
    don't see it happening.

    I might as well stay with the one that's getting the high conversion rate and then
    do split tests on it to see if I can get any better.

    That's just the way I do things when it comes to testing. I like to test completely
    different pages and then drill down and split test on the one that performs best
    right out of the gate.

    Will
    {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[2119819].message }}
  • Profile picture of the author ed2010
    Banned
    [DELETED]
    {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[2119834].message }}
    • Profile picture of the author Amitywill
      Originally Posted by ed2010 View Post

      Did you add more keywords and more contents besides the video on your site?
      No, it was simply a video and an opt-in form to the right of
      it.

      The whole test was just an experiment at the end of the day. Nothing
      scientific. I'm no expert in split testing but obviously if I were to do
      it on these squeeze pages I'd change the little things first to really
      find out what's working and what's not.

      Will
      {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[2119863].message }}
  • Profile picture of the author tribros
    Videos work very good specially on IM niche but on other niches plain squeeze page works great but yes you need to do a split test. It will reveal the unexpected results and yes many times.

    Anyway, "Amitywill" Is your ranking still holding on google? I also have a site that needs to be converted to squeeze page but I'm afraid that I will loose the rankings. I don't want to miss a google love. So, currently I'm building more n more links to the site to hopefully avoid that if it happens. Did you simply change the site to squeeze page or did something extra's?
    Signature
    >> ** Discover 1,000's of Unique and Quality PLR Articles, PLR Ebooks, Softwares, Audios, Videos and other Private Label Rights products... Choose from 1,000's of Topics and Categories... Get Instant Access!! Make a Quick PLR Search...** <<
    {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[2119919].message }}
    • Profile picture of the author Amitywill
      Originally Posted by tribros View Post

      Videos work very good specially on IM niche but on other niches plain squeeze page works great but yes you need to do a split test. It will reveal the unexpected results and yes many times.

      Anyway, "Amitywill" Is your ranking still holding on google? I also have a site that needs to be converted to squeeze page but I'm afraid that I will loose the rankings. I don't want to miss a google love. So, currently I'm building more n more links to the site to hopefully avoid that if it happens. Did you simply change the site to squeeze page or did something extra's?
      Well personally I took a risk. That site is 2-3 years old and has ranked
      number 1 for it's main keyword for a long time, it has a high PR and a lot
      of back links so I felt the ranking was very strong.

      In the past It was a pre-sell page and I'd made a ton of changes to it from split testing and it had never affected my rankings at all.

      So I just felt the ranking was strong and that I could get away with it.

      And if it had affected my ranking I felt I could easily switch back and
      reclaim my ranking. Turns out I was right but it was definitely a big
      risk to do something like that with a site getting that much traffic.

      Again it was a big risk but I have a bunch of other sites to fall back on.

      I don't recommend you make a change like this unless you feel you can
      risk losing your ranking.

      Or if you want to minimize the risk you could obviously use cloaking
      to test your site. That way it will have no effect on your rankings
      but you get to make as many changes as you want.

      And yes I've done this in the past but if in the unlikely event Google
      find out you're cloaking then your site will get sandboxed. So use at
      your own risk!

      Will
      {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[2119957].message }}

Trending Topics