Strong Short Copy vs Weak Short Copy (3 of 4)
 Short Copy Example 1 - Click Here |
 Short Copy Example 2 - Click Here |
Take a look at the 2 websites above.
Both of these websites are using short copy. One website is converting poorly.
The other website is able to achieve high conversions (over 2%) using short copy.
Do you know which website is converting better and why?
Post your comments below!
If you enjoy this post, subscribe to the Free Henry Gold Newsletter
Related Posts:
A Little Information on Henry Gold and His Traffic Blog
Better Blog Content in 5 Simple Steps
How to Power Up Your Sales Copy
Stephen Metcalfe Is The Winner Of The Free Course!
Listen To And Download Teleconference Calls
Eddy said,
October 30, 2006 @ 6:58 pm
I’m not sure - but how can you definately compare the two - they are for different products ?
Tn said,
October 30, 2006 @ 7:04 pm
I think the one on the right is the better convertetr. It’s a lot easier on the eyes.
Milt Raphael said,
October 30, 2006 @ 7:21 pm
Although both are too small to read, it’s obvious that copy #1 is superior.
#1appears to lay out information in a clear, concise manner, with enough open spaces to allow the readers eyes to relax while reading.
Copy #2 is too crouded and takes effort to read. I usually pass this kind up, and never find out what it says.
Regards and God bless,
Milt
Marsha said,
October 30, 2006 @ 10:55 pm
I like the first website. I do not like long copies, I give up and scroll to the end most of the time. Unless it is an article about a particular subject, I will read, if it’s just about a product I do not see why people have to go on and on and on about a software, their life story and make me get bored. Just get on with the damn sale with specific points that grab my attention.
And, that goes for everybody including all you gurus out there!!!!!
Francis said,
October 30, 2006 @ 11:44 pm
I think the second site (at right) converts better because it is clearly definite as to purpose despite the apparent clutter at top.
It clearly delivers potetial benefit and gives the prospect several options.
The first is rather vague and the “link-farm” concept is rather difficult to grasp.
Judy Kettenhofen said,
October 31, 2006 @ 12:50 am
I didn’t even need to look at the text to know that I would like #1 better, and I’m sure it converts better than #2.
Number #2 is just too busy. I feel like I’m being pestered for attention by a small child or a real hard core, fast talkin’ New York salesman. It makes me want to run away. I don’t even care what it says — they could be offering a million bucks, but who would know in this jungle, this cacaphony of words?
Vic Cherikoff said,
October 31, 2006 @ 1:40 am
I prefer the page on the right as the other is too ****-like. All ra-ra-ra and hyped and the testimonial at the very end seems like an after-thought and isn’t too sincere.
The more informative text on the RH page brings me into the story, tells me what, who, how and why, suggests that my wife can do the tasks with a sprog on her lap it’s so easy, gives me heaps of ways to pay and is loaded with some value in freebies, its got the functional PS at the end and no lame testimonials.
Nicely done. One comment though: it is hardly short copy when it still spills over numerous screens and I have to scroll down more than once.
Darren said,
October 31, 2006 @ 1:42 am
If a piece of long copy converts at 4% and short copy for the same product converts at 1% then in that instance, long copy works! It’s all about testing, to get the highest profit.
I think #2 probably converts better (although I suspect it’s nowhere close to what it could be if that’s the case). Why? It likely is talking about what the prospect wants (and makes that clear). It has a heading and a sub head, bulleted list of features and benefits, creates credibility with testimonials, has a compelling offer and an obvious call to action.
Lucy said,
October 31, 2006 @ 1:44 am
I reckon the first one. I say this because i spent may 10seconds looking at the #2 and thought not another one. But then with #1 curiosity got the better of me and gave it a good going over. But wouldn’t join anyway.
Johari said,
October 31, 2006 @ 4:36 am
emm..how to figure it out? For me, they have different styles of how to promott their products.
p.s : I’m still new.Sorry if my opinion not good like an expert.
David Willetts said,
October 31, 2006 @ 5:15 am
For me number 1 immediately hits you with quantified benefits in bullet format, but not much more. Whilst number 2 includes many words on the features but does not draw the reader’s attention to benefits.
Number 2 does include a guarantee and bonuses near the foot of the sales letter but the reader may not get that far.
I would guess the reader’s attention would be grabbed by the easy to read words (benefits) at the top of number 1 and this receives my vote.
Regards
Dave
Russell Carter said,
October 31, 2006 @ 5:42 am
#2 converts better.
#2 - I clearly understood what was presented.
#2 had testimonials.
#2 explained exactly how to buy.
I had to search for the pay link on #1
#1 did not have enough detail - although #2 could have been shorter
#2 was more appealing
Eric said,
October 31, 2006 @ 12:19 pm
Sorry, but I would not read through either of the examples.
The first led to an extremely mixed up page which was uncomfortable to read, and the second reminded me of the small print in a legal document.
I would have left both websites without trying to plough through them.
Paul Cass said,
October 31, 2006 @ 1:57 pm
I would say the first one converts better you can see what your getting instantly
but as for long copy vs short copy it does not matter as long as it sells the product, the copy should be as long as needed to make the sale.
Karen said,
October 31, 2006 @ 3:35 pm
I reckon it’s got to be #1, It gets your curiosity.
#2 is too small and cluttered which makes it quite
hard to read.
Rob Golding said,
October 31, 2006 @ 4:40 pm
I’m suprised either of them convert at all.
However *comparing* the two,
the first is clean, crisp, bright, readable, even if the content just looked like marketing spam to me.
the second is cluttered, ugy, feels like it was thrown up by a five year old, and had I stumbled onto it or been directed there, woudl soimply have closed the browser without findout out what it was about.
Sarah said,
October 31, 2006 @ 7:11 pm
First, I don’t think that example number 2 is short copy. If that is short, whoo boy, long must take hours to read.
I believe that #1 is converting better. It has good spacing, a simple white background with few color elements. It gets to the point and stops.
#2 is too cluttered with type. Not enough spaces and the header takes away from the message. The whole ad looks “dark” compared to the other.
supernatural peru said,
October 31, 2006 @ 8:30 pm
I totally agree with Sarah’s comment, except for the part she doesn’t believe number 2 is short copy. Yes Sarah, long copy does takes a lot of time to read.
I’m afraid number 1 looks more professional.
By the way… it doesn’t really matter what we think as consumers. What matters is what works best in marketing. Period.
Nina said,
October 31, 2006 @ 11:27 pm
I think # 2 WebSite gets more conversion, because it explains
better to the prospect what the site is about.
Although I think it would do much better if it was layed
out with more white space and the Fonts used were at least
a “Courier New 10-12Pt”
John Murphy said,
October 31, 2006 @ 11:37 pm
Site no 1. Layout is appealing and easily draws you in
but goes to fast into benefits without explanation.
You are asking yourself; is this a membership site or
a one shot deal? what’s he selling?
Then without any explanation we go right into something
called slots, what are slots?
Reading down and despite being desperate for traffic I
clicked away from this site. .
Why?
The site did not give me a clear understanding of what
it was all about. It was like; benefits in a vacuum..
You think to yourself—-So what!!
+++++++++++++++++++++
Site no 2. Poor readability, this is going to be a choir,
read 1/4 of the page, then scrolled down to the bottom
and scrolled up a 1/4 of a page in order to get as
much info as I could and put myself out of the misery
of reading all of it.
By default I would say page no 1.. if you understood
what you were buying..
=============================
Cher said,
November 1, 2006 @ 1:19 am
I agree that #1 probably converts better as it is cleaner and more to the point of what the product is. Maybe a little “hype” looking but number 2 was too much to read and frankly the color scheme and small text hurt my aging eyes. I didn’t want to take the time to read all of that.
qutepangy said,
November 1, 2006 @ 2:42 am
I feel that the sentences on the brown web page would be easier on the eyes if the columns are not as wide. But the one that converts better? I think the brown page win hadns down - the site uses benefitsand emotional words a lot more than the other page on the left.
Nigel Gould said,
November 1, 2006 @ 5:48 am
I thought #1 site a bit messy and un appealing , but #2 explained what it was about, but took too long to do it. Like a lot of others I soon scrolled down to the end and got the punchline.
Ted said,
November 2, 2006 @ 3:34 am
Hi
Site 1 Converts better.
2 Differents ways to catch visitors.
Exp1: My name vill provide through others site.
Exp2: Through Autoresponder system and much more.
Nicole said,
November 3, 2006 @ 12:49 am
Neither of the 2 sites look appealing to me.
The first one has a confusing layout, looks hypey and narcissistic ( why the **** should I care about Henry?) and I haven’t got a clue until after the fold what it’s actually trying to promote.
The second one looks dinky and cluttered and starts off naming features rather than benefits, and here too, it takes a bit of studying to understand what the product is.
Lois said,
November 10, 2006 @ 11:42 am
I am not into either one just because the first one is not letting me know what they are selling and the second one is to long. I will not read a site if the person goes over the same thing forever. I think you need to get to the point and forget about how much money you made with the item or product. All I am interested in is if the product works or meets your needs.