# Anti-Patterns: Landing Page Design

These approaches seem like good landing page practices but consistently hurt conversions.

---

## 1. The Homepage Clone

**The Mistake:**
```
Landing page = Homepage

Same navigation
Same content structure
Same everything

Traffic from specific ad → Generic page

Conversion rate: Low
Message match: None
```

**Why It's Wrong:**
- Homepage serves many audiences
- Landing page serves one audience
- Homepage has many goals
- Landing page has one goal
- Different purposes = different designs

**Better Approach:**
```
LANDING PAGE ≠ HOMEPAGE

HOMEPAGE:
- Many entry points
- Many user types
- Multiple navigation paths
- Brand building
- General information

LANDING PAGE:
- Specific entry point
- Specific audience
- Single conversion goal
- Specific offer
- Matched to traffic source

LANDING PAGE REQUIREMENTS:
1. Message match to traffic source
2. Single focused goal
3. Minimal navigation
4. Specific audience
5. Clear CTA

CREATE DEDICATED PAGES:
Ad about pricing → Pricing landing page
Ad about feature → Feature landing page
Email about offer → Offer landing page

One traffic source = One page
```

---

## 2. The Testimonial Wall

**The Mistake:**
```
Testimonial section:
[Testimonial 1]
[Testimonial 2]
[Testimonial 3]
[Testimonial 4]
[Testimonial 5]
[Testimonial 6]
[Testimonial 7]
[Testimonial 8]
[Testimonial 9]
[Testimonial 10]

All visible at once.
All the same format.
Wall of text.
```

**Why It's Wrong:**
- Quantity ≠ Quality
- More testimonials = less attention each
- Visitors don't read walls of text
- Diminishing returns after 2-3

**Better Approach:**
```
STRATEGIC TESTIMONIALS:

PLACEMENT:
- 1 featured in hero area
- 2-3 after benefits (grid)
- 1 near CTA (objection-related)

SELECTION:
Choose testimonials that:
- Address different concerns
- Show different use cases
- Include specific results
- Have strong attribution

FORMAT VARIATION:
- Featured (longer, photo, logo)
- Grid (shorter, photo)
- Inline (near relevant feature)

QUALITY > QUANTITY:
3 strong testimonials > 10 weak ones

EACH TESTIMONIAL SHOULD:
- Address a specific concern
- Include specific result
- Have full attribution
- Feel authentic

TESTIMONIAL CATEGORIES:
Choose 1 of each type:
- Results focused
- Ease focused
- Support focused
- Transformation focused
```

---

## 3. The Information Overload

**The Mistake:**
```
Landing page includes:
- Company history
- Team bios
- Blog posts
- Press releases
- Every feature
- Technical specs
- Integration details
- API documentation
- Community forum link
- Social media feeds
- Newsletter signup
- Related products
- Partner program
- Careers link
```

**Why It's Wrong:**
- One page, one goal
- Every extra element dilutes focus
- Choice paralysis kills conversion
- Long pages have diminishing engagement

**Better Approach:**
```
MINIMAL EFFECTIVE PAGE:

Include ONLY:
- Hero with value prop
- Social proof
- Key benefits (3-5)
- How it works
- Objection handling
- CTA

REMOVE:
- Company history → About page
- Team → About page
- Blog → Blog page
- Other products → Product pages
- Careers → Careers page
- Anything not serving THE GOAL

CONTENT AUDIT:
For each element ask:
"Does this help them take the action?"

YES → Keep
NO → Remove or link elsewhere

PAGE LENGTH GUIDANCE:
Simple offer, warm traffic → Short
Complex offer, cold traffic → Longer
Always → Focused

FOCUS PRINCIPLE:
Everything either helps conversion
or hurts conversion.
Nothing is neutral.
```

---

## 4. The Slider Carousel

**The Mistake:**
```
Hero section:
[Slide 1: Message A] ←→ [Slide 2: Message B]
[Slide 3: Message C] ←→ [Slide 4: Message D]

Auto-rotating every 5 seconds.
Different message each slide.
User misses most slides.
```

**Why It's Wrong:**
- Users don't watch carousels
- Auto-rotation = content missed
- Multiple messages = no clear message
- 1% of users interact with sliders
- Reduces conversions by 25-40%

**Better Approach:**
```
STATIC HERO:

Choose ONE message.
The most important one.
Display it statically.

IF MULTIPLE MESSAGES NEEDED:
- Separate landing pages for each
- Tabbed content (user-controlled)
- Scroll sections below

CAROUSEL DATA:
- 1% click rate
- 89% of clicks on first slide
- Auto-rotation ignored
- Accessibility issues

ALTERNATIVES TO CAROUSELS:
1. Single strongest message
2. A/B test different messages
3. Scroll sections below hero
4. Static grid of options

CAROUSEL EXCEPTION:
User-controlled testimonial slider
NOT auto-rotating
User initiates navigation
Even then: static often better
```

---

## 5. The Video Wall

**The Mistake:**
```
Hero section:
[Auto-playing video]
[No text visible]
[CTA hidden until video ends]
[Video is 2 minutes long]

User: Arrives on page
Video: Playing automatically
User: Can't find what they need
User: Leaves
```

**Why It's Wrong:**
- Auto-play often muted (no audio)
- Users don't wait for videos
- CTA buried or delayed
- Slow load times
- Not accessible

**Better Approach:**
```
VIDEO DONE RIGHT:

PLACEMENT:
Video supports content, doesn't replace it.
Value prop visible BEFORE video.
CTA visible WITHOUT watching video.

FORMAT:
- Thumbnail + play button (click to play)
- Or: Inline video in supporting section
- Not: Auto-play hero background

LENGTH:
- Hero demo: 30-60 seconds
- Explainer: 60-90 seconds
- Testimonial: 30-60 seconds

VIDEO STRUCTURE:
Hero text + CTA visible
[Video thumbnail with play button]
"Watch how it works (60 sec)"

VIDEO BENEFITS:
- Explain complex products
- Show product in action
- Build emotional connection
- Feature testimonials

VIDEO RULES:
✓ Click to play (not auto)
✓ Text content still visible
✓ Fast loading (lazy load)
✓ Works without sound (captions)
✗ Never: Auto-play with sound
✗ Never: Replace value prop
```

---

## 6. The Clever Copy

**The Mistake:**
```
Headline:
"Revolutionize Your Paradigm Synergy"

Subheadline:
"Where Innovation Meets Tomorrow"

CTA:
"Begin Your Journey"

Visitor:
"What does this company actually do?"
→ Leaves confused
```

**Why It's Wrong:**
- Clever is not clear
- Confusion = bounce
- Visitors need instant understanding
- You have 5 seconds to communicate value

**Better Approach:**
```
CLARITY OVER CLEVERNESS:

BAD (Clever):
"Revolutionize your workflow paradigm"

GOOD (Clear):
"Project management for remote teams"

HEADLINE TEST:
Show for 5 seconds.
"What does this company do?"
If they can't answer → rewrite.

CLARITY FORMULA:
[What you get] + [For whom]
"Email marketing for small businesses"

Or: [What you get] + [Without the downside]
"Beautiful websites without the code"

CLEAR CTA:
Not: "Begin your journey"
But: "Start free trial"

Not: "Get started"
But: "Try it free for 14 days"

SPECIFICITY > CREATIVITY:
"Save time" → "Save 4 hours per week"
"Better results" → "23% more conversions"
"Easy to use" → "Set up in 5 minutes"

COPY PRIORITY:
1. Clear
2. Specific
3. Compelling
4. Creative (optional)
```

---

## 7. The Trust Badge Parade

**The Mistake:**
```
Footer section:
[Security badge]
[Security badge]
[Certification]
[Certification]
[Award]
[Award]
[Award]
[Payment icons]
[Payment icons]
[Partner badge]
[Partner badge]
[Partner badge]
...20 badges total
```

**Why It's Wrong:**
- Too many = noise
- Irrelevant badges dilute relevant ones
- Visual clutter
- If everything's highlighted, nothing is

**Better Approach:**
```
STRATEGIC TRUST SIGNALS:

SELECT RELEVANT:
Choose 3-5 most relevant badges.
Match to audience concerns.

B2B:
- Security (SOC2, GDPR)
- Integrations (Slack, Google)
- Reviews (G2, Capterra)

B2C:
- Payment (Visa, PayPal, etc.)
- Reviews (Trustpilot, star rating)
- Guarantees (money-back)

PLACEMENT:
Near CTAs → Reduce purchase anxiety
Hero → Immediate credibility
Footer → Verification

BADGE HIERARCHY:
Most important: Near purchase CTA
Secondary: Footer
Don't need: Most others

FORMAT:
Small, grayscale, unobtrusive
Don't let badges compete with CTA

BADGE AUDIT:
For each badge ask:
"Does this reduce a specific concern?"
If no → remove it
```

---

## 8. The Pop-Up Assault

**The Mistake:**
```
User arrives on page:
[Immediately: Newsletter popup]
[5 seconds: Chat widget opens]
[10 seconds: "Don't leave!" popup]
[Scrolling: Notification bar slides in]
[Click: Confirmation popup]

User: Overwhelmed
User: Closes everything
User: Leaves frustrated
```

**Why It's Wrong:**
- Interruption = annoyance
- Multiple popups = exit
- Desperation signals
- Harms brand perception

**Better Approach:**
```
POPUP STRATEGY:

TIMING:
Never: On page load
Maybe: After 30 seconds
Better: On exit intent
Best: After engagement

ONE POPUP RULE:
Maximum one popup per session.
Not one per trigger.
One total.

EXIT INTENT ONLY:
Popup when leaving, not arriving.
Less intrusive.
Captures abandoners.

POPUP CONTENT:
Valuable offer, not just "subscribe."
"Get our free guide" > "Join newsletter"

CHAT WIDGETS:
Collapsed by default.
Available, not aggressive.
Don't auto-open.

NOTIFICATION BARS:
One at a time.
Easy to dismiss.
Genuinely useful (sale, update).

POP-UP AUDIT:
Count all interruptions.
If >1, reduce.
Test removing vs keeping.
```

---

## 9. The Mystery Pricing

**The Mistake:**
```
Landing page:
[Beautiful hero]
[Great benefits]
[Social proof]
[CTA: "Get Pricing"]

User: "How much does it cost?"
Page: "Contact us to find out"
User: "I don't want to talk to sales"
User: Leaves
```

**Why It's Wrong:**
- Hidden pricing signals "expensive"
- Users want to self-serve
- Creates friction and frustration
- Qualified leads leave

**Better Approach:**
```
PRICING TRANSPARENCY:

SHOW PRICING when:
- Standard product/packages
- Self-serve purchase
- Predictable pricing

HIDE PRICING when:
- Custom enterprise deals
- Complex implementations
- Variable pricing by usage

IF HIDING PRICING:
Explain why:
"Pricing varies by team size"
"Custom quotes based on needs"
Give range: "Starting at $X"

PRICING PAGE:
Include on main nav (or footer).
Easy to find.
Clear comparison.

PRICING DISPLAY OPTIONS:
- Monthly (default)
- Annual with savings %
- "Starting at" for enterprise
- Calculator for usage-based

FRICTION REDUCTION:
If they want to know price:
Let them know the price.
Gating creates abandonment.
```

---

## 10. The Font Festival

**The Mistake:**
```
Landing page uses:
- Headline font
- Subheadline font
- Body font
- Accent font
- Button font
- All different sizes
- Inconsistent weights
- Various colors

Visual chaos.
```

**Why It's Wrong:**
- Visual inconsistency = unprofessional
- Too many fonts = slow loading
- Hard to read
- Distracting from content

**Better Approach:**
```
TYPOGRAPHY RULES:

FONT LIMIT:
2 fonts maximum.
1 for headings.
1 for body.
(Or 1 font for everything)

SIZE SCALE:
Consistent scale.
H1: 48px
H2: 36px
H3: 24px
Body: 16px
Small: 14px

WEIGHT CONSISTENCY:
Headings: Bold (700)
Body: Regular (400)
Emphasis: Medium (500)

COLOR LIMIT:
Primary text: Dark gray/black
Secondary: Gray
Links: Brand color
CTA: Brand color

MOBILE TYPOGRAPHY:
Larger base size (16px minimum)
More line height
Shorter line length

FONT LOADING:
- Host locally when possible
- Preload primary fonts
- Font-display: swap
- Limit weights loaded

TYPOGRAPHY CHECKLIST:
□ 2 fonts max
□ Consistent scale
□ Readable on mobile
□ Fast loading
```

---

## 11. The Form Novel

**The Mistake:**
```
"Get your free demo"

Form fields:
- First name
- Last name
- Email
- Phone
- Company name
- Company size
- Industry
- Job title
- Department
- Budget range
- Timeline
- Current solution
- Pain points
- How did you hear about us?
- Preferred contact time
- Newsletter opt-in

Completion rate: 3%
```

**Why It's Wrong:**
- Each field = friction
- Long forms = abandonment
- Most info can be gathered later
- Users guard information

**Better Approach:**
```
FORM OPTIMIZATION:

FIELD MINIMUM:
Lead gen: Email only (+ name optional)
Trial: Email + password
Demo: Email + company

PROGRESSIVE PROFILING:
Get email first.
Ask more later (in-product, follow-up).
Build profile over time.

FIELD REDUCTION:
-1 field = +10% conversions (roughly)
Phone field = -15% conversions
Optional fields = confusion

SMART CAPTURE:
Auto-detect company from email domain.
Enrich data post-capture.
Use browser auto-fill.

FORM LAYOUT:
Single column.
Labels above fields.
Full-width on mobile.
Large touch targets.

IF MORE FIELDS NEEDED:
Multi-step form.
Progress indicator.
Save and continue.
"Step 1 of 2" feels shorter.
```

---

## 12. The Competitor Obsession

**The Mistake:**
```
Landing page structure:
"Why we're better than [Competitor A]"
"Our product vs [Competitor B]"
"Don't use [Competitor C], use us"

Entire page: Attacking others.
```

**Why It's Wrong:**
- Signals insecurity
- Introduces competitors
- Negative tone
- Users who don't know competitors = confused

**Better Approach:**
```
COMPETITION HANDLING:

DON'T:
- Lead with competitor attacks
- Name competitors prominently
- Build page around comparison

DO:
- Focus on your own value
- Address comparison subtly
- Use "unlike alternatives" language

COMPARISON PAGE (If needed):
Separate page, not main landing page.
Factual comparison.
Neutral tone.
Let product speak.

SUBTLE DIFFERENTIATION:
"Unlike other tools, we..."
"The only platform that..."
"No other solution offers..."

WHY AVOID COMPETITOR FOCUS:
- Some users don't know competitors
- Introduces options they hadn't considered
- Seems petty
- Not confident in own value

COMPETITIVE LANDING PAGE:
Lead with your value.
"Why [Your Product]" not "Why not them."
Comparison is secondary.
Benefits first, always.

EXCEPTION:
SEM on competitor keywords.
Then comparison makes sense.
But still: lead with your value.
```
