Quote:
Originally posted by webmaster x
Maybe but I haven't heard any one designer on this thread what kind of statistics-based/semi-scientific method they employ in making design decisions.
The only thing Im getting here is that additional money gets you more time and more experience... which still doesn't answer the fundamental question of (OUTSIDE of random streaks of luck where a design got 1:200 sustained conversions) do you have any method that can be statistically replicated where conversions will fall into a range?
I guess the bottom line is that design is and perhaps always will be an EGO- and HYPE-driven issue that skirts away from actual statistics-based analysis.
Its like saying Jim Bob is a $5K a pop designer cuz he happened to design THREE tours back in the day that hit 1:200 on TGP traffic. The rest of his work since then has been 1:2000 or 1:30K but its OKAY... he's a PROVEN talent.
If that's what we're talking about, wouldn't it make more sense for paysite owners and other holders of capital to invest in cheaper guys hoping to at least pick best of the statistical litter?
|
if your taking that angle, doens't it seem as though Jim Bob may have been potentially "guided by the client" in terms of what he wanted, and so the client's idea spawned the good conversion ratios?
seriously sometimes designers get a lot of heat from shit convertions when the client is the one who decides which niche, market, environment, method, and type of traffic that is being pushed to the site. I agree that obviously the design has significant impact on the conversion ratios, but there are also obvious factors that play into this that the designer has no way to control.
that being said, can paying more make your conversions better? Well, paying more probably results in the designer being more suited and much better at producing what you foresee, the rest is up to you.
my 2.
FF