Signups increased by 60% after actually REMOVING the opt-in form

13 years ago

People are hip to the game. As soon as I hit a landing page with an optin list I know there's really only one thing happening on that page...someone is trying to get me to sign up for their list, so I almost immediately click off...no matter what. I guess I'm not the only one.

Your second page looks MUCH more authority, thanks for sharing your experience.

Thanks
1 reply

{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[2946042].message }}

Leahbutler

13 years ago

As soon as I hit a landing page with an optin list I know there's really only one thing happening on that page...someone is trying to get me to sign up for their list, so I almost immediately click off...no matter what.

Completely agree. It's not that you should not include the signup form anywhere on your site, it just should not be that outright. Offer people something interesting, catch their attention, and then try to sell.

Thanks

{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[2947670].message }}

The Copy Nazi

Banned 13 years ago

Which is why you need to test everything. But that opt-in was a bit in your face. Did they test a smaller box? As someone said in the comments on that site -

This is not a proper A/B test. There are too many uncontrolled variables.
All that you can say is that the second design resulted in 60% more conversions.
This you can take as an indication that the second design is more successful, you can in no way whatsoever conclude that it is because of the sign-up form.
It may be because of the sign-up form, it may be because of the different layout, it may be because of the big “100% free”, it may be because the people involved just happened to not like blue.
The only way to come to a proper conclusion is to run an A/B test on two designs for which the ONLY difference is the feature you’re investigating.

Thanks
1 reply

{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[2946075].message }}

GenerousBoy 13 years ago

Really good point. You can only make conclusions from split testing if you vary one, possibly two, of the web page's features. The webform on version one looks quite long, too - requesting, say, a single email might have been equally effective at improving sign-ups.
- Thanks
Signature

Nic Penrake is a Senior Copywriter & Online marketing mentor. For free training plus unique method for massively building your list, click the link: http://budurl.com/7DayMQTraining
{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[2952119].message }}

AdmiralGloom

13 years ago

Halerious and your site is looking alot better!

Thanks
1 reply

Signature

Are You Slowly Killing Your Business By NOT Hiring A Copywriter?

Email:dlektcopywriting@gmail.com

Phone: 507-593-9123

{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[2946092].message }}

Shaun OReilly 13 years ago

The removal of the opt-in form is not necessarily the
main reason for the change in response.

Why?

There are many other differences in the layout of the
page that could also account for the change in opt-in
rate.

For example, the second option has a more prominent
headline than the first layout. And, the first layout has
two columns versus only one column for the second
option.

To determine if the sign-up form was the real CAUSE
of the change in response, they'd have to do a purer
test where both pages have exactly the same layout
and content - and the ONLY difference is that one
has the form and the other one doesn't.

Dedicated to mutual success,

Shaun
- [ 8 ] Thanks
Signature

.
{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[2946115].message }}

WillR

13 years ago

I agree with the above poster. A test needs to be done where the page looks exactly the same and the call to action is in exactly the same place however one has a signup button and the other an optin form.

That would be more conclusive.

Thanks

Signature

.

âž¨ Here's How to Make Your First $177 Online
This Week Using the Piggyback Method...

.

{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[2946135].message }}

WillR

13 years ago

After another look, one thing that could also have lead to some large conversion difference is the fact that the first page has the words 'credit card required' in big letters at the top of the page. Yes, it does have the word 'no' before it however just seeing those words could be enough for some people.

If it's free, just say it's free. Don't mention the word 'credit cards' at all if you don't have to.

Thanks

Signature

.

âž¨ Here's How to Make Your First $177 Online
This Week Using the Piggyback Method...

.

{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[2946141].message }}

paraschopra

13 years ago

Hey Guys,

This is one of our case studies and I wrote it! Chris, thanks for sharing it with WarriorForum. I think why variation without signup form fared better is because of context. In original design you get a big, prominent form asking you to signup but you don't have any context or motivation to signup. The variation actually presents the offer first and then shows the signup form.

This is classic "squeeze page" technique and this case study proves that it works.

-Paras

Thanks
1 reply

{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[2946160].message }}

WillR

13 years ago

Originally Posted by paraschopra

I think why variation without signup form fared better is because of context. In original design you get a big, prominent form asking you to signup but you don't have any context or motivation to signup.

I disagree. This case study proves nothing.

There are FAR too many variables to draw any conclusions from that split test. Anyone who does a lot of split testing knows that the smallest things can make the biggest difference - changing the color of a headline, the font, the page background color, and the list goes on and on.

To test two completely different looking and worded pages against one another and to then draw a conclusion that it was only one of those many variables that made the big difference is not the way to split test.

I could say that it is the fact that the one page is single column layout and one is 2 column layout. I could say that it was because one page mentioned the words 'credit card' and one didn't. And with a test as inconclusive as this one, it's basically your word against mine.

[ 1 ] Thanks
2 replies

Signature

.

âž¨ Here's How to Make Your First $177 Online
This Week Using the Piggyback Method...

.

{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[2946213].message }}

paraschopra 13 years ago

Originally Posted by WillR

I disagree. This case study proves nothing.

I agree to a certain extent. But if you talk to businesses and corporations, due to time and resource constraints you cannot practically test every small element. What they rather prefer is to come up with a new landing page with a set of hypotheses (which is what they did here). What's important for companies is that the new design converts better. This also makes you confident to say that the original hypothesis (of not having a signup form in first page) led to increase in conversions.

But of course there are thousands of variables on the page and theoretically any one of them could have been the cause of better conversions.
- Thanks
{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[2946248].message }}
Chris Munch 13 years ago

Originally Posted by WillR

I disagree. This case study proves nothing.

I think it proves one thing - that making bigger and more imaginative changes to your landing page can make a huge difference. Often people focus just one one element like the title, when sometimes you need to make big structural changes too. I think the big takeaway is think outside the box a little bit as you never know what works.

Obviously, like you say, the actual cause of the change in this example is likely down to more than one factor (an important point to make indeed), and you can't say for sure whether or not having the form on the page made a difference, unless you split test that against that in isolation.
- Thanks
- 1 reply
Signature

How I DOUBLED a 7 figure business & drove 100,000 visitors to this forum - Click to See My LIVE Warrior Q&A

I rarely check my PMs here, if you need support, help or have a question please go to our support desk.
{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[2946478].message }}
- deertrail 13 years ago
  
  The OP was wise to split-test completely different LPs.
  
  When starting out, I like to test 2-3 completely different LP designs / layouts to find the winner, then start testing individual elements from that point forward.
  
  -Bryan
  
  Thanks
  
  Signature
  The FILTHY LIE that's keeping you from making the big money online in 2011 >> CLICK HERE
  
  {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[2946505].message }}

powerspike

13 years ago

One thing that might be helping as well.

is you replaced "no credit card required" with "no hosting, listing or final value fees"

personally when i see "no cc required", i usually add a "right now" after it. People do look for catches (remember - if it's to good to be true).

Putting the text no hosting listing of final value fees you are potentially removing a lot of the catches people will think their are.

IMO it's also a lot cleaner layout with the only option been signup and the signup button is right in the content, not to the side of (remember actions/ads in content get better ctr as well...)

Thanks

{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[2946190].message }}

Paul Barrs

13 years ago

[DELETED]

{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[2946229].message }}

paraschopra 13 years ago

Originally Posted by Paul Barrs

Chris,

Just out of curiosity - where did your "Sign up Now" button take them?

Paul

It takes them to this page: https://secure.vendio.com/ecommerce/...n/hosted_store
- Thanks
{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[2946254].message }}

sk8er431

13 years ago

with just a little modification it can change everything, that's what I learned in other form of marketing too

Thanks

{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[2946259].message }}

WillR

13 years ago

Hey Paras,

I'm not out to bag the split test. Any test that can give you a 60% push in conversions is great. But if it were me, I would want to know exactly what the main cause for that conversion increase was.

And it can be done using multivariate testing which I believe even Google Optimizer is capable of - as long as the site is getting some decent traffic, otherwise testing could take a while.

Anyway, please share more of them with us as you find them because I think they are a great way to get us all talking and sharing ideas about page design.

Thanks

Signature

.

âž¨ Here's How to Make Your First $177 Online
This Week Using the Piggyback Method...

.

{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[2946266].message }}

Tim Franklin

13 years ago

I am going to swim upstream here and say that indeed this is an indication that the change works, here, yes, everything could have a hand in how the user perceived the offer, however, you cannot deny the end result, in this case if you say that the study is not valid you are ignoring the 800 pound gorilla in the room,

the bottom line is what your after, and I think you achieved it, you could descend to try and split test it to death with what color works best or if you have right to left clarity or left to right clarity, the end result is one that you want, more action by your targeted group anytime you arrive at that goal no matter how you get there you have won a battle, Great share and thanks for that.

Thanks

Signature

Bitcoin | Crypto | Blockchain Secrets |

{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[2946391].message }}

jasonmorgan

13 years ago

People are hip to the game. As soon as I hit a landing page with an optin list I know there's really only one thing happening on that page...someone is trying to get me to sign up for their list, so I almost immediately click off...no matter what. I guess I'm not the only one.

+1 to this

I see the optin die-hards don't like and don't want to accept the results but a 60% increase in signups is huge.

Good job Paraschopra.

Thanks

Signature

I'm all about that bass.

{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[2946758].message }}

mclpro

13 years ago

Yeah, it's a strategy that I think some group deal websites should employ.

Thanks

Signature

Dan Verhaeghe
Marketing Specialist
McLoughlin Promotions
http://www.mcloughlin.ca/insights
http://www.twitter.com/mclpro

{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[2946884].message }}

Derek S

13 years ago

great stuff. I am also a big fan of split testing major redesigns and agree with most who believe that split tests should be laser targeted too (there is lots of time for that once you find a design that pulls in best)...

I think you would have seen significant results too, if you just took the opt-in on the left and moved it over to the right side of the page

Thanks
2 replies

Signature

--- Work Smart... Not Hard ---

{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[2946959].message }}

Bill Farnham 13 years ago

One other huge difference it appears is going from a landscape format to a portrait format.

Can you tell us what the original and the replacement format widths were (pixel wise)?

These two would show up dramatically different on some people's browsers.

~Bill
- Thanks
- 1 reply
Signature
{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[2947208].message }}
- paraschopra 13 years ago
  
  Originally Posted by Bill Farnham
  
  Can you tell us what the original and the replacement format widths were (pixel wise)?
  
  Hi Bill, I guess the variation design was narrower.
  
  Thanks
  
  {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[2947296].message }}
Chris Munch 13 years ago

Originally Posted by Derek S

I think you would have seen significant results too, if you just took the opt-in on the left and moved it over to the right side of the page

I'd agree with this, our eyes typically look to the upper left first, so we need something to draw us in, and a sign up box being the first thing we see is very off-putting.
- Thanks
Signature

How I DOUBLED a 7 figure business & drove 100,000 visitors to this forum - Click to See My LIVE Warrior Q&A

I rarely check my PMs here, if you need support, help or have a question please go to our support desk.
{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[2951789].message }}

Anonymous Affiliate

13 years ago

Too many changes in that landing page to draw a meaningful data on what actually triggered the improvements. For example: the header line is WAY more visible on the second version, plus the overall design is better too.

Thanks

{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[2947585].message }}

Jesus Perez

13 years ago

Good job, Paras. You tested a massive change that, in turn, paid off massively. I'm not a fan of split testing tiny changes. If you had tested these tiny changes, you would probably be at +/-5% by now. It could have taken you 2 years of lost revenue to reach 60%. Instead, you pulled it off with one split test.

Congrats! At the end of the day, it boils down to results. You clearly achieved them.

Thanks

Signature

{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[2951821].message }}

MichaelHiles

13 years ago

Of course, Facebook's home page is probably the most successful "landing page" ever (who can argue with 500,000,000 users?).

And it has the opt-in form right on the page like your first version. So I don't know what the distinction is other than whatever test you've got to do to find what works for your own market and audience.

Thanks
2 replies

Signature

10XTS... I got your digital strategy right here...

{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[2951904].message }}

Jill Carpenter 13 years ago

I agree more testing can be done as stated above - BUT -

Looking at that second page, there feels like there is a psychology going on. That optin is no so "in your face" and I can choose to go beyond the front door and look inside. I'm drawn a bit more to wanting to see what will happen behind that yellow button.

One extra click I suppose, but the full front page dedicated more to just information does draw me in to want to go.

And seeing what is seen on the second page, I get a sense there are current members of a secret society and I need to join them and have some koolaid too. lol

JMO

(back to eating my peanutbutter, bacon and honey sandwich)
- Thanks
- 2 replies
Signature

"May I have ten thousand marbles, please?"
{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[2951958].message }}
- theemperor 13 years ago
  
  Thanks for the OP and the replies. It is an interesting debate and has inspired me to try google a/b on bigger changes to see the effect . However 60% more conversions can often be seen on tiny changes such as moving a button or changing it's colour.
  
  Thanks
  
  Signature
  Learn to code faster, and remove the roadblocks. Get stuff done and shipped! PM me and I can help you with programming tutoring, specialising in Web and the following languages: Javascript ~ HTML ~ CSS ~ React ~ JQuery ~ Typescript ~ NodeJS ~ C#.
  
  {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[2952013].message }}
- ronr 13 years ago
  
  It's too easy to think you are an expert think you know why the 2nd page pulled better...because you already know the results.
  
  It would have been interesting to show the pages side by side and ask which people thought pulled better without telling them the actual results. I would bet a that large percentage would have picked the first page since that's what the standard now is for the optin pages.
  
  It's been proven over and over that only testing will prove which heading, offer, layout will give the best results. Someimes the results defy all logic and why big direct response companines are constantly testing. It's expensive for them to do this in print or mailings but they still do it.
  
  What's ironic is that it's so much easier and cheaper to test online but many of us get lazy and don't do it on a consistent basis. Myself included...
  
  Thanks
  
  {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[2952061].message }}

Frank Donovan

13 years ago

Originally Posted by MichaelHiles

Of course, Facebook's home page is probably the most successful "landing page" ever (who can argue with 500,000,000 users?).

And it has the opt-in form right on the page like your first version. So I don't know what the distinction is other than whatever test you've got to do to find what works for your own market and audience.

This is a key point, IMO.

Testing is all very well and certainly should be done, but one of the main factors to consider is where your visitors are coming from and whether they're arriving at your site "cold" or pre-targeted in some way.

In the Facebook example, I'd imagine a lot of visitors are hitting their home page with the express intention of signing up. A prominent opt-in form is going to work well in such a situation. If you've got to do a little convincing first, then it might not be so effective.

FWIW, whenever I use an opt-in form with more than one field (i.e. more than just a simple email request) I'll generally hide the form in the manner of the OP's second example. Apart from looking more aesthetically pleasing, I suspect a multi-field form might appear a bit daunting at first sight.

Frank

Thanks

Signature

{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[2952032].message }}

Janice Sperry

13 years ago

I wish you would have asked it as a question first. "Which page do you think got the most conversions?" It may have been interesting to see how people reasoned on it BEFORE you revealed the results. Anyway - I love the second page and that is a huge difference in conversions. Congrats and thanks for a good case study to remind us to keep testing and tweaking.

Thanks

{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[2952017].message }}

Jack Duncan

13 years ago

There is 1 and only 1 thing proven with this data:

Version B had 60% more optins than Version A.

That's it.

There are tons of differences between the two versions, and absolutely no way to know for sure (at least with the data that has been shared) what actually made the difference.

This is strong case study for the power of split testing...but not for removing your opt-in form...

Many times when split testing, you never really know what the exact factor (or interactions between factors) made the difference...the key is that a difference was made an you are constantly improving.

Thanks for sharing!

[ 1 ] Thanks
1 reply

Signature

[Breakthrough] 5Â¢ Buyer Traffic Source
(On Sale Today...)

{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[2952047].message }}

Kay King 13 years ago

Too many things changed - but I do think removing that overly long form had some effect. Why a password? And why confirm and confirm - type it once and be done with it. Too many confirmations and password confuses.

The change that struck me the most was from

100% Free....no credit card required (why does "free" need a percentage or mention of a credit card)

Free - no hosting, listing....(to me that says "free")

Good news is - the combination of changes worked!

kay
- Thanks
Signature

Saving one dog will not change the world - but the world changes forever for that one dog
***
Dear April: I don't want any trouble from you.
January was long, February was iffy, March was a freaking dumpster fire.
So sit down, be quiet, and don't touch anything.
{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[2952089].message }}

SPMassie

13 years ago

wow just goes to show you the power of testing

Thanks

{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[2952672].message }}

markowe

13 years ago

It's only/mostly in IM that people are 'wise' to optins. I would count that a major factor. Also this is no optin really, this is a full-blown signup so makes good sense to have them 'pre-opt in' in a sense, by actually clicking through from the LP, like a sort of initial commitment. Easy to be smart after the fact though, so well done!

Thanks

Signature

Who says you can't earn money as an eBay affiliate any more? My stats say otherwise

{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[3015691].message }}

Signups increased by 60% after actually REMOVING the opt-in form

Trending Topics

Boat and Jet Ski Rentals...... Door Hangers Effective?

Are billboards still effective in driving customers?

Let's dissect the genius behind Nike's 'Just Do It' slogan. What makes it so powerful and timeless?

A Very Strange Internet Problem

4 underutilised SEO research approaches to explore