[ Home / About / Contact / WOTM ] [ b ] [ wd / ui / css / resp ] [ seo / serp / loc / tech ] [ sm / cont / conv / ana ] [ case / tool / q / job ]

/case/ - Case Studies

Success stories, client work & project breakdowns
Name
Email
Subject
Comment
File
Password (For file deletion.)
[1] [2] [3] [4] [5] [6] [7] [8] [9] [10]

File: 1791099789576.jpg (138.4 KB, 1024x1024, img_1791099781747_4cfg42gp.jpg)ImgOps Exif Google Yandex

af460 No.2270[Reply]

I'm looking at this idea of moving the email input to the very top of the checkout flow. I don't see how we can tell if it actually helps conversion without a long run. It's probably just a seasonal fluke in traffic volume. I need to see some actual data on field completion time before I believe it does anything.
>moving email to the top of the form
The order of the other fields is a huge confounder here. If you don't keep everything else exactly the same, we won't know if the change worked or if people just got distracted by something else. We should run this for at least two full weeks to account for weekend behavior.


File: 1790747512748.jpg (272.18 KB, 1024x1024, img_1790747504341_ch3u892v.jpg)ImgOps Exif Google Yandex

d6b13 No.2253[Reply]

tried using clay to automate our prospecting last month but honestly just ended up with more garbage in the inbox.
>the automation does the heavy lifting
it's not that simple when your data enrichment is basically just scraping LinkedIn at random.

d6b13 No.2264

>>2253
>the automation does the heavy lifting

you're just letting it run too wild without any filters on the waterfall enrichment. stop relying on the default scrapers for everything and use apollo specifically to verify the email status before you even hit clay. it works if you're targeting mid-market companies where data is cleaner, but don't bother with small startups because those profiles are always outdated. clay just magnifies your bad lists
why aren't you using a verification step?

d6b13 No.2266

>>2264
apollo is fine for a quick check but relying on it as your main verification step is risky. you'll still hit so many bounces if the data hasn't been scrubbed recently. i usually run everything through debounce or something similar instead. apollo's "verified" status feels like a guarantee suggestion half the time. if op is getting garbage, it's likely because the enrichment logic itself is too broad. checking email status doesn't fix bad targeting ⚠

d6b13 No.2268

File: 1791065265254.jpg (204.66 KB, 1024x1024, img_1791065248720_2dvau2k3.jpg)ImgOps Exif Google Yandex

>>2266 use clay to scrape their recent posts for specific keywords before you even trigger the email lookup, it's a lifesaver for personalization though it takes way too long for huge lists tbh.



File: 1791020185812.jpg (223.24 KB, 1024x1024, img_1791020165876_ghclqjtc.jpg)ImgOps Exif Google Yandex

9d268 No.2265[Reply]

was testing broad match on a client's top-tier product set last week thinking it would scale our volume without killing the budget. ngl, it was a disaster because the queries were way too loose.
> much cheaper clicks
it ended up being pure waste because we were bidding on totally irrelevant stuff. switched back to phrase match and everything settled down almost immediately ➡ cost per conversion actually stabilized.


File: 1790545675361.jpg (227.71 KB, 1024x1024, img_1790545666528_wftd91pf.jpg)ImgOps Exif Google Yandex

4ba3e No.2244[Reply]

client had massive crawl budget waste because their german site was tagging every single product variant instead of just the main group. i stripped it down to the parent level only. crawler bloat dropped almost immediately and indexing stabilized. im tired of seeing devs overcomplicate this stuff.

4ba3e No.2251

>>2244
just check the canonicals before you wipe them to make sure nothing breaks. works for most simple catalogs but tbh if they have unique urls for sizes i'd stay away from a blanket strip.

4ba3e No.2261

>>2251 if they're already bloated with variant tags, checking canonicals is just too little too late. if it's not a unique url for size, strip it. lol.

4ba3e No.2263

File: 1790949906569.jpg (171.22 KB, 1024x1024, img_1790949890960_yy73zjfb.jpg)ImgOps Exif Google Yandex

>>2251 if the size is in the url then you can't just strip it. i've seen too many broken links because someone ignored the query params.



File: 1790380381028.jpg (233.9 KB, 1024x1024, img_1790380373970_ljif0ew8.jpg)ImgOps Exif Google Yandex

fa031 No.2235[Reply]

we finally pulled the advanced filter buttons from the basic subscription last month. it felt wrong to take away features people were used to having but the conversion numbers for the pro plan jumped almost overnight. honestly the free version was basically a demo of the paid one at this point. we weren't getting any real value from the users who just stayed on the lower tier forever. it definitely caused some noise in support tickets though. people are complaining about not being able to sort by date or region anymore. i don't really care as long as the revenue stays up like it is now. it's a trade off between user satisfaction and actual business growth. we're seeing way more friction for casual users but the high value clients don't even notice since they already pay for everything. has anyone else stripped features from a free tier to force an upgrade?

fa031 No.2252

File: 1790741956688.jpg (145.12 KB, 1024x1024, img_1790741941513_ffddb6wp.jpg)ImgOps Exif Google Yandex

>>2235
The support ticket spike sounds like a nightmare to deal with. Did you track if those churned users actually left or if they just started hating life downgraded to something else? I'm curious how much of that 'noise' is just people venting without actually cancelling.

fa031 No.2255

>>2235
just check your retention cohorts. if the churn is only coming from users with < 2 months tenure, it's just standard noise and you can ignore it.

fa031 No.2259

File: 1790900556967.jpg (145.1 KB, 1024x1024, img_1790900541676_23mxm2a2.jpg)ImgOps Exif Google Yandex

>>2235
did you keep any of the old sorting options for the free users at all? i had a client go through something similar with their dashboard settings and it felt like we were just breaking the app's usability. ngl, making them lose the region filter sounds like a recipe for a massive headache if they actually rely on that data.



File: 1790827125503.jpg (115.6 KB, 1024x1024, img_1790827115840_mjn7a3qr.jpg)ImgOps Exif Google Yandex

083d6 No.2257[Reply]

tried moving everyone from monthly to yearly but seeing way more churn than expected.
>it's just a simple upsell
really feels like it's killing the ltv for our mid-tier users. has anyone seen this happen with a sudden shift to annual?


File: 1790790352354.jpg (278.87 KB, 1024x1024, img_1790790343216_wqp1ag3z.jpg)ImgOps Exif Google Yandex

e40db No.2256[Reply]

was working with this client yesterday on their referral dashboard and everything looked totally fine until we realized half the clicks were showing up as direct instead of utm_source=uber. turns out their mobile webview was stripping the params before the page even loaded. i tried a quick fix using a tiny script to grab the url from the window location before the single page app could wipe it. ngl it felt like such a stupid mistake to miss during testing but it worked. use this if you're seeing weirdly high direct traffic on specific referral links.

const params = new URLSearchParams(window.location.search);if (params.has(&#039;utm_source&#039;)) {sessionStorage.setItem(&#039;referral_origin&#039;, params.get(&#039;utm_source&#039;));}


i just check the sessionStorage value on the thank you page now to verify it's still there. saves so much headache when the data actually matches what the partners are sending. was literally staring at the screen for an hour thinking the server was broken.


File: 1790423973428.png (102.85 KB, 1200x600, img_1790423964101_g96vctob.png)ImgOps Google Yandex

1c6cc No.2236[Reply]

That 12 percent drop in TBT looks suspicious since they're switching from c5. large to c6a. large instances. I'm not convinced this isn't just a side effect of the CPU throttling or the hardware change, and I wonder how long we'd need to run tests to see if it's actually stable.

link: https://www.speedcurve.com/blog/august-synthetic-test-agent-updates-chrome-firefox-and-lighthouse

1c6cc No.2247

File: 1790641332088.jpg (367.03 KB, 1024x1024, img_1790641318841_mca7piwn.jpg)ImgOps Exif Google Yandex

>>2236
did u check if the thermal profiles on those c6a instances are staying consistent under load?

1c6cc No.2250

File: 1790712754408.jpg (211.62 KB, 1024x1024, img_1790712736151_e21l92cu.jpg)ImgOps Exif Google Yandex

>>2247
Thermal profiles shouldn't be the main driver here. If anything, I'd expect to see a spike in latency if they were overheating, not a drop in TBT. We need to see more data on the actual instruction sets before we blame the heat.

1c6cc No.2254

File: 1790749065054.jpg (130.86 KB, 1024x1024, img_1790749050415_mtbrs20y.jpg)ImgOps Exif Google Yandex

>>2247
>did u check if the thermal profiles on those c6a instances are staying consistent under load?

I'm not sure how heat would cause a drop in TBT. If the CPU throttles, you'd expect much higher latency or at least some jitter. I'm still leaning towards the hardware change being the culprit for the 12 percent dip.



File: 1790704938118.jpg (174.73 KB, 1024x1024, img_1790704929521_198ys11e.jpg)ImgOps Exif Google Yandex

8d010 No.2249[Reply]

>Google treats legal content as a Your Money or Your Life topic
it's basically just hyper-local stuff anyway so the whole eeat thing feels like overkill if you aren't even trying to rank outside your own zip code. anyone actually seeing results from chasing specific case types instead of just broad volume?

full read: https://mangools.com/blog/seo-for-lawyers/


File: 1790625312742.jpg (99.64 KB, 1024x1024, img_1790625302782_tooecu8d.jpg)ImgOps Exif Google Yandex

b8fff No.2246[Reply]

finally killed off that live css panel for the new snippets thing. having actual js snippets with code completion is better than just injecting raw styles into every pane. the whole project based workflow might be overkill if i'm only switching between two sites, but those bookmarks look useful tbh

full read: https://polypane.app/blog/polypane-27-projects-a-snippets-panel-and-chromium-142/


Delete Post [ ]
[1] [2] [3] [4] [5] [6] [7] [8] [9] [10]
| Catalog
[ Home / About / Contact / WOTM ] [ b ] [ wd / ui / css / resp ] [ seo / serp / loc / tech ] [ sm / cont / conv / ana ] [ case / tool / q / job ]