Users don't care what you sell, they care about how they get value:
• Start with an action verb
• Make a bold claim
• Talk directly to your persona
Hook the users so they NEED to read on.
I've rewritten 300+ websites for startups from pre-seed to unicorn.
Here are my top learnings 👇
Users don't care what you sell, they care about how they get value:
• Start with an action verb
• Make a bold claim
• Talk directly to your persona
Hook the users so they NEED to read on.
• Dig at your audience's problem
• Twist the knife at why the problem is bad
• Share your feature's solution
Make your feature sections both memorable AND relatable.
When pitching your product, make users feel like everyone else already knows about it.
• "2,194 trials started"
• "25,000+ privacy community"
• "Join our Beta. It's free."
• "No credit card required"
• "Cancel anytime"
Give users no excuse to NOT click through.
Be specific about the value users get by clicking forward:
• "Get started" → "Sign up now to automate Slack"
• "Join us" → "Start learning"
Reassure users they're on the right path.
Bad: @Retool's demo is overwhelming with text and visuals
Good: @HelloSign instead uses blurred text so users only focus on the features that matter.
I'll reply back with a video teardown.
Feel free to follow me @maiale for more tweets around marketing, community, and growth.
I’ll be replying/DMing teardowns to everyone over the next week :)
I’ll do my best to reply/DM everyone who responded before now throughout this week :)
• https://t.co/WWtARXKLGT
• https://t.co/8rjKYrOYl0
• https://t.co/pXzeSyP9tU
• https://t.co/AFg2a9gAwV
• https://t.co/Re5uCbSih3
What are some other great examples?
More from All
You May Also Like
The entire discussion around Facebook’s disclosures of what happened in 2016 is very frustrating. No exec stopped any investigations, but there were a lot of heated discussions about what to publish and when.
In the spring and summer of 2016, as reported by the Times, activity we traced to GRU was reported to the FBI. This was the standard model of interaction companies used for nation-state attacks against likely US targeted.
In the Spring of 2017, after a deep dive into the Fake News phenomena, the security team wanted to publish an update that covered what we had learned. At this point, we didn’t have any advertising content or the big IRA cluster, but we did know about the GRU model.
This report when through dozens of edits as different equities were represented. I did not have any meetings with Sheryl on the paper, but I can’t speak to whether she was in the loop with my higher-ups.
In the end, the difficult question of attribution was settled by us pointing to the DNI report instead of saying Russia or GRU directly. In my pre-briefs with members of Congress, I made it clear that we believed this action was GRU.
The story doesn\u2019t say you were told not to... it says you did so without approval and they tried to obfuscate what you found. Is that true?
— Sarah Frier (@sarahfrier) November 15, 2018
In the spring and summer of 2016, as reported by the Times, activity we traced to GRU was reported to the FBI. This was the standard model of interaction companies used for nation-state attacks against likely US targeted.
In the Spring of 2017, after a deep dive into the Fake News phenomena, the security team wanted to publish an update that covered what we had learned. At this point, we didn’t have any advertising content or the big IRA cluster, but we did know about the GRU model.
This report when through dozens of edits as different equities were represented. I did not have any meetings with Sheryl on the paper, but I can’t speak to whether she was in the loop with my higher-ups.
In the end, the difficult question of attribution was settled by us pointing to the DNI report instead of saying Russia or GRU directly. In my pre-briefs with members of Congress, I made it clear that we believed this action was GRU.
