4 myths about conversion optimization

We like to debunk various myths that have long been rooted in Internet marketing. We already wrote about the most important SEO myth - the uniqueness of the content, we wrote about the myths in content marketing, we wrote about the myths of selling texts and the myths about the landing pages. It's time to go through the conversion.

Myth # 1: About the falsity of absolute conversion numbers

Ready? Well, then let's go!

There was a massive demand for SEO services, then the context market began to grow rapidly. And - oh, a miracle! - we waited for the fact that business owners finally began to think about the real tasks of Internet marketing - lead generation and, consequently, increasing conversion. And right now, while you are reading this article, two businessmen are sitting and talking somewhere.

- What is your landing conversion? - asks one.

- 3%, - answers another.

“Well, you are a loser,” laughs first, “I have 30%.”

And proudly smiles as Cheshire cat.

Real dialogue? It could take place in reality? Ta-a-a-ak, for the time being, set aside reading this article to one side and answer the question: could this dialogue take place in reality?

Now let's take a closer look at this situation. Very often the information that a conversion of 30% is better than a conversion of 3% is given to us as a given. This one Cheshire cat shows off, right? He is sure that he has everything in a bundle. And in fact, the true loshara here he, and not his opponent. And that's why.

Let's analyze this example. Two absolutely identical landing pages. Traffic is flowed to one by transactional requests, to the other by the widest possible semantics. What are the results? And what conclusions will we come to? First, of course, we find that the final conversion will be higher for the landing page, which receives traffic on conversion queries. Suppose it has a conversion of 30%, while the second landing has only 3%.

But we will also see that, according to conversion inquiries, we can receive only small volumes of traffic - 10 conversions per day, and, accordingly, 3 leads per day. And on the second landing page, which receives traffic on a broad semantics, 300 transitions per day, and at a conversion of 3% - 9 leads.

By itself, the phrase “My conversion is 37%” does not matter, because traffic volumes are not clear. Usually the conversion drops with increasing traffic volumes. Increasing the reach of the audience, as a rule, does not pass without losing the quality of this coverage. Nevertheless, it is obvious that 9 leads are better than 3. At the same time, there is one more thing: traffic on conversion inquiries - yes, it generates more leads, but that’s why it is more expensive in most cases. The cost of each lead, as a rule, transactional queries above.

Conclusion: The final conversion figure in itself means nothing if we consider it without the amount of traffic received and the cost of this traffic. A landing conversion of 30% is no better than a conversion on another landing page of 3%. In order to understand what is “better,” you need to have information about the volume of traffic and its cost.

Go ahead.

Myth number 2: false generalizations obtained as a result of the experiment

I will not paint for a long time, here is an example for you. One familiar context specialist recently sent the following message to Skype:

"By the way, in practice, using the example of 3 different forms, I proved that reducing the form fields to 2 (Name and Phone) increases the conversion by several times. The analysis was carried out using the data from the Metric (Behavior - Analytics of forms), Analytics Experiment and counting letters from the forms. And what is most surprising is that most of the applications were sent from YAN campaigns. I used to cut off inefficient sites with a low CTR — Yandex and Mailru’s mail clients fell into this list, and then decided to experiment — I did not ban them. Yes, the CTR campaign fell sharply, but the count for wok has increased dramatically ".

The man made two false conclusions at once:

  • two form fields are better than three or more forms;
  • YAN generates more leads than search ads.

We observe this phenomenon quite often - the desire to draw general conclusions without waiting for receiving full information about the subject being studied. And any A / B testing has a limitation in the form of time and traffic volume. In other words, A / B testing is an assumption with a greater or lesser degree of probability. In a situation of constant data limitation, hypotheses based on empirical experience, obtained in one experiment, are put forward. Such conclusions can be heard very often: red buttons are better than green ones, social buttons increase conversion, the page should be fully accessible without scrolling, etc.

The correct conclusions that can be made based on the results of this experiment:

  • In this topic, on this landing, with given volumes of traffic, with given characteristics of traffic, the filled form of two fields gives a higher conversion than forms with a large number of fields (but everything can be different if at least one of the announced parameters changes).

And the same with YAN:

  • In this topic, on this landing, with given volumes of traffic, given given characteristics of traffic, YAN gives more leads than ads on search (but everything can be different if at least one of the announced parameters changes).

As for the length of the form, there is another nuance. It seems to me (again, this is our subjective experience, and we do not make generalizations from this, realizing that any new experience can turn our idea upside down), short forms often give more leads than long ones, but customers give long forms.

Myth number 3: the "correct" landing gives a higher conversion than the wrong

Well, here it is necessary to briefly explain what a “correct” landing page is. There is an opinion that a good conversion landing page should contain:

  • catchy header with USP;
  • dexryptor;
  • description of the problem;
  • offer (the essence of your offer);
  • selling triggers;
  • countdown timer;
  • social evidence.

etc. The number of these points depends on the ratio of theory to practice.

So here. Conversion on the "correct" landing page can be several times worse than on the wrong one. The design of the landing page itself affects the total figures for the conversion no more than the volume and quality of the traffic that we land on the landing page. But even with the same amount and quality of traffic, the “correct” landing page can play a normal page with a form from one field and a description of the benefits that the user receives.

"Correct" landing pages, as a rule (but this is not an axiom!), Give a better conversion in case they are the first or only point of contact with your audience. If you sell long a service or product, the choice of which is carried out for a sufficiently long period of time, then the “right” landing has no advantage over the wrong one.

Myth 4: Conversion is the only measure of success.

But this myth is in fact one of the most vicious and harmful. What do we mean by conversion? We consider the ratio of total traffic to the number of final targeted actions. And what are the targeted actions? Well, as a rule: subscribe to a newsletter, order through a form, order a callback, call a measurer, receive an application for a mortgage, download a trial version of a certain program, etc. And in most cases, the measurement of the conversion of the target action all ends. That is, we need an application, and the receipt of this application is put at the forefront. But is a large number of applications a direct confirmation of the success of a business? Probably, a successful business should, above all, increase revenue and its profitability, and not the number of applications. High conversion costs nothing if revenues and profits do not increase after that.

Watch the video: Myths about conversion rate optimization. Conversion Optimization. ISBM (October 2019).

Leave Your Comment