No problem ;)

If you noticed I included a section explaining when a split test makes sense and you can tell that Booking.com fit it that criteria as they were already starting to grow a lot.

Considering something "optimized" is always going to be a struggle of almost perfectionism (even for myself and my own website haha).

I think you should always be critical of what would be better use of your time: optimizing vs getting more (targeted) traffic ;)

I think if you think small tweaks are all you have left that you need to consider how can you make your website specific to each persona you have on or even dig through which type of people could benefit from your product even outside of what your currently targeting.

Thanks, glad you liked it. This it's something I've noticed people need to come back too when they focus too much on conversions.

To answer your question that totally depends because in the end what you'll need is cash flow to maintain that reinvesting process and that's something (finances/management) I'm not an expert in :P

Thanks for chiming in here. I've been reading some of your others articles. I like the very practical style and results focus.

You're right, it's supposed to show up only near the end but i'm having problems getting it working :P

Even if it reveals at the end, it should still be dismissible. That kind of dark pattern gets me hitting the Reader button every time. And setting it to always go to Reader mode on such a site.

I don't know where it would be documented either as SaaS Landing pages usually require a different explanation as every niche needs a specific strategic!

I wrote another article about the ideal structure if you interested: https://www.cortes.design/post/how-to-make-a-conversion-driv...

You're right, there's no secret sauce but you need to be aware of the right strategies in the right context and that's the real goal of the article.

Let's face it people are looking for "secrets" so I used the article to steer them to the right direction.

Weird...It's : onroadmap.com

Thanks! I was looking everywhere without luck too

You do have a point but it depends on the case.

This would be a stupid idea in most cases but I mentioned CrazyEgg get's most of their traffic through content marketing.

This means their landing page is an article and when people see that headline the audience is already warm, it's totally different.

That's true but you can't get that data so I have to compile the examples that startups can apply in the right context to get them better results.

I understand that conversion data is hard to get... but it would put a real number to explain “best” or “better results”.

Now it’s a (nice) collection of pages the OP found eh... nice/interesting/attractive (and likely to convert well, since these are actually in use - insert “survivorship bias” here), but no real explanation for why these are measurably better than others.

Appreciate the effort though. Just questioning the wording like “best” and “better”.

I understand your point, it's definitely something to consider as I'm still trying to find ways to write the best or most actionable articles possible.

Thanks for feedback, cheers! :)

Just thought about this: could you ask the companies in your list how/why they ended up with these landing pages? What where the alternatives and smaller variations they tried? Tried for how long (or are they still optimizing)? Did they A/B test between alternatives and options? What did they measure, or tried to optimze for? What was their sample size, the outcome and their decisions? What was “best or better” for them, specifically?

That could be a very interesting follow-up to your analysis, also by providing data that sometimes “best” is an opinion or hunch, sometimes a choice or preference, sometimes a measurable result. Cheers!

Yep and I agree with some of your points.

The main point of that article was showing strategies that you can replicate for each scenario (social proof, intro, product explanation...)and I think you got that ;)

Yes. I did. I think we all did :) But we see these things __botched__ all the time.

The reason for that is too many still have it all wrong. They get the means right. "Look ma! My CTA is just like that article!!" But they miss the start, and the ends. That is: It's not about them, it's about me.

The article is about tools. That's great. But unless you understand and embrace why you're using them, you're going to get it wrong. Again, plenty are still getting it wrong.

Put another way, a fancy new IDE or a hot-shot framework, etc. are tools. They don't mean you're going to build good / great product. You need a broader awareness for that. Not just how to use the tools, but why.

I was wanting to shine some light on why.