<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
		>
<channel>
	<title>Comments on: Post-click marketing: designing for conversion</title>
	<atom:link href="http://www.rickwhittington.com/blog/post-click-marketing-designing-for-conversion/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://www.rickwhittington.com/blog/post-click-marketing-designing-for-conversion/</link>
	<description>Helpful tips to make your website more effective from Rick Whittington Consulting, Richmond, Virginia</description>
	<lastBuildDate>Wed, 28 Jul 2010 15:17:33 +0000</lastBuildDate>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=2.9.2</generator>
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
		<item>
		<title>By: Scott Brinker</title>
		<link>http://www.rickwhittington.com/blog/post-click-marketing-designing-for-conversion/comment-page-1/#comment-7471</link>
		<dc:creator>Scott Brinker</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Mon, 16 Apr 2007 12:00:02 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://esc05.hostican.com/~rickwhit/wordpress/post-click-marketing-designing-for-conversion#comment-7471</guid>
		<description>Hi, Rick -- thanks for the kind nod to my article. I think your suggestions are right on the money: keep it clean and simple. We&#039;ve run a lot of experiments comparing heavy vs. light pages in post-click marketing landing paths, and 9 times out of 10, the &quot;lighter&quot; strucuture (less copy, simple/relevant images, only asking for the necessities to deliver what the customer is looking for) wins, hands down.

Granted, there are cases where a given offer requires more explanation, or you may need to alter the presentation to different audience segments. But in those cases, 2 or 3 simple pages in a path usually outperforms one mega page that tries to cram too much. (Agreed though that other things being equal, &quot;shorter is better&quot;.)

Love the emphasis on the customer&#039;s goals.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Hi, Rick &#8212; thanks for the kind nod to my article. I think your suggestions are right on the money: keep it clean and simple. We&#8217;ve run a lot of experiments comparing heavy vs. light pages in post-click marketing landing paths, and 9 times out of 10, the &#8220;lighter&#8221; strucuture (less copy, simple/relevant images, only asking for the necessities to deliver what the customer is looking for) wins, hands down.</p>
<p>Granted, there are cases where a given offer requires more explanation, or you may need to alter the presentation to different audience segments. But in those cases, 2 or 3 simple pages in a path usually outperforms one mega page that tries to cram too much. (Agreed though that other things being equal, &#8220;shorter is better&#8221;.)</p>
<p>Love the emphasis on the customer&#8217;s goals.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
</channel>
</rss>
