3 Landing Page Myths Debunked

Download 3 Landing Page Myths Debunked

Post on 18-Oct-2014

2.758 views

Category:

Technology

3 download

Embed Size (px)

DESCRIPTION

Presentation from "Mythbusting PPC Urban Legends" at SMX Advanced 2009 focusing on 3 landing page myths: 1) landing pages as single pages 2) Flash is bad 3) MVT is better than A/B testing -- all not true.

TRANSCRIPT

<p>Slide 1</p> <p>Mythbusting PPC Urban Legends: Landing PagesSMX Advanced 2009Scott BrinkerPresident &amp; CTOion interactive, inc.</p> <p>sbrinker@ioninteractive.comTwitter: @chiefmartec</p> <p>What is the typical conversion rate of a PPC ad</p> <p>Sorry, trick question.</p> <p>The conversion happens after the click.</p> <p>In converting respondents, PPC ads and landing pages are symbiotically linked.</p> <p>Myth #1:A landing page is a single page.(Only the green M&amp;Ms make you horny.)</p> <p>Think of a landing page as a bridge between ad and conversion.adconversion(continuity gap)</p> <p>Sometimes the conceptual distance isnt that far, and a single leap is enough to get people across.</p> <p>Other times, you have a little farther to go.</p> <p>Just dont use a short bridge for a long distance.(Unless your respondents are willing to do a lot of work.)Sometimes a single landing page is just right.</p> <p>8.12% conversion11.4% conversion</p> <p>9.23% conversion</p> <p>Other times a 2 or 3 page path is better.</p> <p>13So again, we promoted this trade segmentation to a one-click choice on page one.Now someone landing can choose whats relevant to them right up-front.No form to fill out, just one click to self-segment.</p> <p>segmentsimple14Now we go to page two, the same basic layout used by the control.But the content/offer is now tailored to the segment: And the conversion form is simpler. One less drop-down for people to wade through.</p> <p>When is a path better than a page?</p> <p>3 scenarios.</p> <p>#1.When you want to segment respondents.</p> <p>18</p> <p>#2. When you want to ease someone into a process.</p> <p>#3.When multiple steps actually builds engagement. </p> <p>30What about a 14-page path? 14 pages, youve got to be kidding!</p> <p>31Bronto Software is an email marketing company that ran a campaign to drive respondents to an Email Marketing IQ Test.Page one, the landing page, introduces the quiz</p> <p>32And then the next 9 pages ask questions, one question per page, about email marketing best practices.</p> <p>33Finally, on page 11, it asks them to convert.Any guesses on how this performed?</p> <p>Dont think of a landing page.</p> <p>Think of a post-click marketing experience.</p> <p>Myth #2:Flash on landing pages is evil.(Vampires existeven without a law degree.)</p> <p>That is a bad example of Flash on a landing page. Loading delay Lengthy animation Design over clarity Expensive* Unless youre a firm that produces expensive, highly animated, design-heavy Flash web sites.*</p> <p>The problem is not that people dont have Flash.99.1%</p> <p>This is a Flash object. 43K in size (loads &lt; 1 sec) Writing is text, not image Google can index text Images load asynchronously Sharp text rendering All text/images configurable</p> <p>http://googlewebmastercentral.blogspot.com/2008/06/improved-flash-indexing.html</p> <p>This is a Flash object. 5K in size (loads &lt; 1 sec) Most of page is HTML text Interactive image browser Images load asynchronously Engagement without refresh All images configurable</p> <p>Why climb the Flash mountain? Higher conversion rate Better branding Easier engagement Creative differentiation</p> <p>Economy of Flash is achieved through variable parameters.Designer creates once. Marketer uses many times.</p> <p>Myth #3:Multivariate Testing (MVT) is better than A/B testing.(Oooh, sacred cow.)</p> <p>MVT isnt better than A/B testing. Each has pros and cons.</p> <p>But MVT hashad better PR. Time to balance the scales.</p> <p>A/B TestingMultivariate Testing Requires more traffic Can test more combinations Variations of fixed elements Need independent elements Harder to visualize tests Risks of bad combinations Usually limited to a page Often harder to set up Requires less traffic Tests fewer variations Apples-and-oranges tests Dependent elements okay Easy to visualize tests No risk of bad combinations Can test multi-page paths Often easier to set up </p> <p>8.12% conversion11.4% conversion</p> <p>9.23% conversion</p> <p>This kind of test cant be done with MVT.</p> <p>Think big.</p> <p>Test small (and safe).</p> <p>6 headlines + 5 subheads +4 images +3 copy blocks +2 calls to action =720 combosRussian roulette caveat: how many disastrous combinations lurk in the shadows?</p> <p>Uh, oops.Combination #593 is bad.</p> <p>The point of busting the MVT myth: marketing &gt; mathChoose the right tool for the right job.</p> <p>Thank YouInterested in more about post-click marketing and strategic landing pages?</p> <p>BOOKHonest Seduction: Using Post-Click Marketing to Turn Landing Pages into Game ChangersAvailable on Amazon.com</p> <p>BLOGhttp://www.postclickmarketing.com64</p>