Firstly, I’d like to apologise for the lack of my posts. I had a break out of hives that kept me bedridden for weeks. I was forced to eat raw catfish and pea puree for breakfast, lunch, and dinner.  Now I’ve lost the feeling of my top lip.

I kid; I’ve just been busy.

I don't know why I used this image, just thought it looked groovy. Best excuse I could come up with was "Mr Green Ill" as in "Kim Jong Ill"...*crickets*

Let’s get down to business…

Plenty of Fish came out with a new ad format 310 x 110. I thought I’d give it a whirl and share my results with ya. To make things interesting, I decided to promote something a bit tougher than dating. Plenty of Fish recently added a new targetting option. You now have the option to target people who have pets. So I talked to some people who know people, and found a nice dog training lead generation offer, it was bitch’n (pun intended).

I presented myself four questions for this case study:

1. Do 310 x 110 banner ads perform better than the 110 x 80 text ads?
2. Is it better to make the 310 x 110 banners look like the 110 x 80 ads, or is it better to make the 310 x 110 banner ads stand out?
3. Do cheaper CPMs mean lower CRs?
4. Can I make a dog training lead generation offer profitable on a free dating website?

I gave myself an $800 budget. I have used exactly the same ad copy and imagery in all ads.

Test 1: Do 310 x 110 banner ads perform better than the 110 x 80 text ads?

As you can see I made two identical ads; the only difference was they were served as different ad formats.

Results:

Standard Ad: 3.3% conversion rate, 0.031% CTR | 310 x 110 ad:  4.6% conversion rate, 0.034 CTR.

The 310 x 110 just scrapped through. I did not expect such similar results.

Test 2: 310 x 1110 ad that looks like 110×80 vs a 310 x 110 that stands out.

Results:

110×80 look-alike: 4.6% conversaion rate, 0.034% CTR | Ad that stands out: 9.6% conversion rate, 0.17% CTR.

Uhhhhh what the truck just happened there!? DOUBLE the conversion rate, and exactly FIVE times the CTR. I like the colour green for many reasons, this is one of them. That just turned a very weak campaign into a contender

Oooweee I like where things are going. Time to turn the crank up a bit.

Test 3: low CPM vs high CPM.

I tested that lean green 310×110 marketing machine of an ad with a 0.41 CPM and 0.21 CPM.

Results:

0.41 CPM: 9.6% conversion rate, 0.17% CTR. | 0.21 CPM: 6.3% conversion rate, 0.058% CTR.

CRs and CTRs dropped heavily as I dropped the CPMs. The ROI was still better on the lower CPM but volume hit the big time. Note how important it is to play with bids. In this one test I increased my CPM by 20 cents which in turn increased the CR by 50% and double the CTR. Isn’t that just swell?

Test 4: Can I make a dog training lead generation offer profitable on a free dating website?

Hells yeah! Still running at 50% ROI.

___________________

Summary for my ADHD angels:

- 310×110 that stand out fricking rock (in the LOLmoney kind of way, not in the geology way).

- CPMs alter CTRs & CR like a boss.

- Non-dating offers STILL work on POF.

P.S. Targetting info and full creatives will be shared on the forum soon. Why? Well, I’ve been lead to believe that the lead singer from Creed has recently started reading my blog.  I don’t feel like sharing the goodies with him.

Have you guys messed around with 310 ads? What results did you see? Have ya been successful with any whack non dating offers?

Related posts:

1. Plenty Of Fish Case Study – Crazy Eye Results. Earlier this week I ran a creepy plenty of fish case study based off a tweet I read by @smaxor. I tried to figure out...
2. Plenty of Fish – Creepy Case Study Last week I had a little skim through the ole twitter… I saw this tweet: “Interesting” I said. I had to test this for myself!...

The masses asked for conversion data, so I am answering! I have slapped down some succulent slices of split testing goodness, cooked it ’til it’s golden brown, then served it up on the finest silverwear in the land.

If you haven’t read the intial headline case study post, please do so.

Alright, moving on…

Test 1

(Two Principles vs. The Two Principle Haters)

A1 follows the principles of focusing on the value proposition and having it in the front of the headline.  B1 does the opposite.

The Results:

A1: CTR = 0.162%, CR = 14% Total Conversions = 11.

B1: CTR = 0.160% CR = 6% Total Conversions = 5.

Total spend: $100

My Thoughts:

Crazy! Close to exactly the same CTRs, however, A1 had more than double the CR. Value proposition at the start of a headline = win. Thank you Marketingexperiments.com.

———————-

Test 2

(The original definition of conversation vs. The Mr Green definition of conversation)

The Results:

A2: CTR = 0.158% CR = 6.89% Total Conversions = 6

B2: CTR = 0.187% CR =  19.5% Total Conversions = 17 (profitable)

Total Spend: $70

My Thoughts:

The reason I came up with this test is because I disagreed with a point MarketingExperiments.com made. I humbly accept this overwhelming victory. B2 (the question) absolutely destroyed A2, both CTR wise and CR wise.

This is how I see the two conversations went down…

A2 – (conversation level low)

Me: Get a Girlfriend. Click Here.

POF Lonely Guy: I want a girlfriend! Click.

——–

B2 – (conversation level through the roof)

Me: Want a Girlfriend? Click.

POF Lonely Guy: Yes, I want a girlfriend! How did you know? You reckon chicks will dig me? Click.

Something for them haters:

I know some of you are worried about inconclusive tests and statistical significance. Well Mr Angry Russian showed me an anti-hater tool supersplittester.com. You insert all your campaign data and it tells you whether you have enough data to call your test conclusive.

Here are my supersplittester results:

Test 1:

A1 has a higher CONVERSION RATE than B1 (90% confidence level)

Test 2:

B2 has a higher CONVERSION RATE than ad A2 (95% confidence level)

Boom bang bing!

Final Words:

I had a 32 character space to write my headlines. By changing five characters I was able to increase my headline CTR by 26% and my CR by 300%. It ended up a profitable campaign (I’ll share it on the forum). From this case study alone I’ve gained a new appreciation for headlines.

The goal of a headline is to get users to converse, so start asking them questions!

Related posts:

1. Plenty Of Fish Case Study – Crazy Eye Results. Earlier this week I ran a creepy plenty of fish case study based off a tweet I read by @smaxor. I tried to figure out...
2. Case Study Results: David Ogilvy vs. Bill Bernbach Thanks to all my readers who voted! I’d love to give you all first prize…but I can’t…because a lot of you got it wrong. (If...

Alert: This post contains copious amounts of data and discussion. 50mg of ritalin recommended.

Editor’s note: Due to unforseen complicationz I will be reverting to my natural spelling which is British English. P.S. The “h” in herb is pronounced.

I think all agree that affiliate marketers are the kings of writing headlines with high CTRs (click-through-rates).

However, many struggle to create headlines with high CTRs and CRs (conversion rates).

I am guilty of creating sucessful headlines, but not taking the time to understand why they are successful.

I read one case study today that really opened my eyes (thank you Mr Polarbacon from the forum). It really made me appreciate the craft of creating effective headlines.

Marketingexperiments.com posted this case study where they split tested 10 headlines for the paid survey website seen below:

Before they released any data they asked their readers to chose which headline they felt would produce the highest conversion rate.

Voting results looked like this:

“Get Paid to Take FREE Surveys” was the king of the ball taking a quarter of all votes. “Here’s Your First Survey, and an Invitation to Join Our Research Community” was crowned the ultimate loser. The actual best performing headlines were:

Headline two smashed the original headline by 10.44%. Ok cool, that’s not going to float no boat. The really cool thing is how these guys break down this data.

Look at headline eight. It scored 7.23%. Look at headline four. It scored 7.46%. There are two principles that you need to know that demystify the results of this data set.

Principle 1. All marketing messages must emphasise what visitors GET, not what visitors must do.

Principle 2. Treat headlines like the opening scenes of movies. Dominate your visitor’s attention. Place the value propositition at the start of the headline.

With these two principles in mind, move you gorgeous eyes over to the image below:

Boom! Five out the top six performing ads follow the two principles to a tee. The four worst performing, peasant-esk headlines, completely ignored the principles. Fancy that!

I really enjoyed the data they drew from this case study. However, some of their comments made me say “Eh?” (in a kiwi twang).

For example they say:

“The goal of the headline is not to sell your product. The goal of a headline is not to enforce your call to action. The goal of a headline is to get them in conversation.”

Although I agree with that concept, I don’t agree that they applied that concept to their case study. Maybe it’s just me but I don’t know many conversations that would spur from “Surveys – Quick, Easy and FREE.” I would use headlines like “Hate Your Boss? Click here” or “Want Money? Try our surveys.” If I want to introduce conversation into my marketing campaigns, I use questions. Simple as that.

Anyway enough of my theorectical hating, time to hate in the way Mr Green knows best.

Mr Green Case Study to De Death!

I just booted down the door to the Plenty of Fish ads platform and set up two campaigns as seen below:

Fight 1: The two principles vs. The two principle haters.

Fight 2: The original definition of conversation vs. The Mr Green definition of conversation.

I put all the theories I just spoke about into battle to see which ones hold true. The images are indentical. The ad copy is identical.

Which ads do you think will CONVERT the best? I will post results sometime this week. Correct answers will be given a free supply of oxygen for a year.

Extra for experts.

For those of you superior beings who managed to get through the post, you would have noticed that I skipped past one headline that stuck out like a sore thumb.”Here’s Your First Survey, and an Invitation to Join Our Research Community.” This headline performed second best in the headline case study. However, it received the LOWEST amount of votes in the poll. It also ignored the two principles (marketingexperiments.com beg to differ).

Why do you think that headline performed so well? I’m stumped.

Summary for  A.D.H.D sufferers.

1. Headlines should focus on benefits for the user, not what they should do.

2. Headlines should mention the benefits for the user before anything else is mentioned.

3. Headlines should not be used for selling but to start conversation with your visitors.

4. The first three points could all be proven wrong in the case study I’m running. I will get back to you on that sometime this week.

5. You are free to go now.

Earlier this week I ran a creepy plenty of fish case study based off a tweet I read by @smaxor. I tried to figure out whether or not eye direction on ads made any difference, and if so how much?…It was also a way of finding out whether guys fancied chickies with wandering eyes.

I then got everyone to vote on which ad they thought would draw the highest CTR. Over 50% of votes were for the two ads which had the woman staring at the call-to-action (I would of voted for that too).

Here are the actual results:

Exhibit A.1 0.14% CTR | Exhibit B.1 0.16% CTR

Reader votes: 8.8% and 7.9%

(eyes looking at camera)

—————————

Exhibit A.2 0.17% CTR | Exhibit B.2 0.19% CTR

Reader votes: 30.7% and 18.6%

(eyes looking at call to action)

—————————

Exhibit A.3 0.15% CTR | Exhibit B.3 0.24% CTR

Reader votes: 5.1% and 6.5%

(one eye looking at camera, one eye looking at call to action)

—————————

Exhibit A.4 0.19% CTR | Exhibit B.4 0.21% CTR

 Reader votes: 14.9% and 7.4%

(crossed eyes)

The Conclusions:

• The girls looking into the camera (A1, A2) performed the worst.

• The girls looking at the call to action did better than the default ads, but lost out to the crazy eye ladies.

• Ad B3 destroyed the competition with 0.24% CTR. 6.5% of you voted for that one, congrats! 93.5% of you didn’t, booo!!!

• The girl on the right out performed the girl on the left in all experiments.

“Thanks Mr Green for that interesting case study (who says thanks to themselves in third person?), I can totally understand why the crazy eye women had the best CTRs, but I bet the normal looking girls had the most conversions, am I right?”

Wrong…

A1. 2 conversions   A2. 2 conversions  A3. 2 conversions A4. 4 conversions

B1. 2 conversions  B2. 4 conversions  B3. 5 conversions B4. 5 conversions.

This is the part where I hate internet marketing. I feel like I have it all figured out, I feel like there is all this logic to it. Then when I get results like this it makes me second guess everything.

It wasn’t just that the ads with more conversions received more clicks, the clicks actually converted better.

I’m unsure what to draw from this…

Guys dig crazy eyes?

Am I a guy?

Who am I?

P.S. I  dedicate this case study to this kiwi song

Related posts:

1. Plenty of Fish – Creepy Case Study Last week I had a little skim through the ole twitter… I saw this tweet: “Interesting” I said. I had to test this for myself!...
2. 12 Buttons 1 winner (Plenty of Fish Case Study) Call to action buttons are silent assassins. They are usually the feature that is least focused on when creating ads. That’s kind of strange considering that...

Last week I had a little skim through the ole twitter…

I saw this tweet:

“Interesting” I said. I had to test this for myself!

Note: I am not trying to call Jason out, I just thought it would be a fun test to try out. 

I decided to solely focus on Plenty of Fish Ads and CTRs, (click-through-rates) since that would be the easiest thing for me to test, then I added a bit of spice .

Firstly I created two simple ad variations of women looking into the camera as seen below (thank you to Polarbacon at the stackthemoney forums for the 7000 dating images pack!).

Exhibit A.1 and B.1 –

(eyes looking at camera)

—————————

I then opened Photoshop and created another two ads. I tweaked the women’s eyes to focus on the call to action button.

Exhibit A.2 and B.2

(eyes looking at call to action)

—————————

Mr Green didn’t stop there though!

What if we split tested their eyes? One eye looks at the call to action, one eye looks at you. You could get the best of both worlds!

Exhibit A.3 and B.3

(one eye looking at camera, one eye looking at call to action)

—————————

The next two ads I created, I really had no reason to make other than seeing if guys dug chicks with cross eyes.

Exhibit A.4 and B.4

(crossed eyes)

I will post the results of this case study soon.

But firstly I’d love to get your thoughts on which creative you think would preform the best CTR wise?

Do you think the more normal looking ads will rock it?

Do you think the whacko girls will get the guys?

Vote below!

Please do tell why you voted a specific creative, I’m curious.

Related posts:

1. 12 Buttons 1 winner (Plenty of Fish Case Study) Call to action buttons are silent assassins. They are usually the feature that is least focused on when creating ads. That’s kind of strange considering that...
2. Weird Plenty of Fish Case Study Have you ever been rejected by a member of the opposite sex because of your height? You don’t need to answer that. Plenty of Fish...

Welcome back! I am Ryan Seacrest and this is not American Idol (nor am I Ryan Seacrest). For those of you who don’t know what this banner ads case study is about please read this.

The Results:

Mr Green readers voted 43% for banner 4:

24% for banner 3:

19% for banner 2:

13% for banner 1:

I’m sorry but your votes don’t make the decisions, the wonderful panel of Plenty of Fish users do. Which means that 81% of readers guessed wrong leaving 19% of voters picking the correct ad.

*Side note: Did you know that if all you voters had have taken a wild guess, statically 25% of you should of picked the correct banner.

Before I read out the results, I would just like to say that I feel like an extremely generous guy, ’cause these results are ridonkulous.

Winner:

Banner 2 - 0.41% CTR,  $0.31 CPC

Readers who commented the correct answers in the comments: Harshad, Jonathan Volk, Artur, POF Ben, Josh Todd, Farmer, Krupesh and Stian (Sorry to the 56 others who answered correctly, but the poll doesn’t show names).

Banner 3- 0.13% CTR, $1.25 CPC
Banner 4 – 0.09% CTR, $1.38 CPC
Banner 1 – 0.02% CTR, $2.81 CPC

My Thoughts:

The white space on banner 2 absoultely owned! If you are testing ads like these already, you are missing out. The difference between this ad’s performance and the normal ad layouts is huge. Why do I think banner 2 did so well? I feel that it changes the landscape of POF. POF users must be so used to seeing full colored 728×90 ads, but this banner is just a standard size ad in a 728×90 space. Basically, it’s a banner blindness killer. The big surprise for me was the standard size ad, now that got owned.

Ridiculous Projections:

Now let’s say in theory a dating company came with a $100,000 budget looking to run the exact campaign as above. And they knew their average conversion rate of 5% from ad to sale (worth $50).

Banner 1 would have generated $88,967 worth of sales.

Banner 2 would have generated $806,451 worth of sales.

In all of the case studies I’ve run on this blog, this has generated by far the biggest margin ads.

Hope at least one of you will go out and start doing some testing using this ad layout, it frikin’ rocks. Thanks to all that voted!

Related posts:

1. Banner Ads Fight To The Death (Fight 1). This post has taken me 27 hours to long to publish. Crashing servers, published posts self destructing, the works! I have hate. Everyone loves a...
2. Case Study Results – 92% Of Marketers Guessed Wrong. I posted a Plenty of Fish Case Study yesterday. Check it out if you haven’t already. If you’ve already read it, and voted, it is...

Here are the facts:

- There is a Drylock Summer Wetsuit Medium USED for sale.

- It’s been used about 30 times.

- No one famous or notable has worn it, just a complete John Doe.

- The seller bought it new got around $500.

- A few signs of cosmetic wear.

How much do you think that would sell for? $100, $200, $300, more?

So far it is at over $20,000 and viewed over 500,000 times. Why? Simply because of great copywriting.

Here are a few extracts from this copywriting extravaganza:

“You’re probably thinking “People p*ss in wetsuits, I’m not sure about a second hand wetsuit”, but believe it or not I have NEVER urinated in this suit, seriously, these suits are too good to be doing such a vulgar act in, the wee just ends up staying in the suit and then when you’re sat having a post-surf pint in the pub you smell awful and girls don’t like boys that smell of p*ss  so you just sit there, alone all night, sobbing into your pint of Betty Stoggs like a lonely desperate p*ss smelling man”.

and some more…

It’s a size medium or “m”, it was the top of the range suit when I bought it, I think I paid around £300 for it, still a great warm suit that will make you surf at least 200% better. It won’t really but it will keep you warm and it’s flexible so you’ll be able to throw your arms around like Beyonce whilst you’re bouncing along a wave. People will look at you and say “f*ckin hell check that dude out, he knows what he’s doing wearing one of those Xcel suits and he’s got some fresh dance moves”. They probably won’t say this.

last one…

Why am I selling it? Well I’ve just bought a new one, as I’m a flash tw*t like that, I tend to get a new suit every season, I just like the feel of fresh neoprene on my soft skin, and well to be honest I could do with some cash to pay for prostitutes. No, that was a joke, now you’re going to think the suit is riddled with disease but it’s not as I was joking I do NOT engage with ladies of the night.

After this auction went viral the owner kindly said he would donate 95% of proceedings to Japanese earthquake and tsunami victims. Once that was said 15-20 surf related companies helped out and offered donations to push auction.

Next time you think about selling your old motorbike helmet or your good for nothing computer on Ebay try unleashing some of your creative copywriting skills.

Sorry, I had to post one more segment…

This listing for my urine-free wetsuit is getting a lot of unexpected attention which is nice but I’m feeling I should do something positive with all the ‘f*cking energy man’, so I’ve decided to give 90% of the money it makes to the Red Cross to aid their efforts in Japan. That sounds all ‘oh look at me I’m so nice I’m giving to charity’ doesn’t it… yeah well p*ss off.

This shows the crazy power of copywriting which transformed a semi useless wetsuit worth around $200-$300, into a $20,000+ extravaganza. All because of the boredom/creatively of a surfing chav.

I’m curious to know if anyone of you has had viral success due to mental copywriting on auctions or have seen any as successful as this one?

Related posts:

1. 11,000,000+ Images for Ads If you run campaigns on Facebook, PlentyofFish, Myspace, do media buys or run any image based creatives, this will benefit you.  I don’t know if...
2. You Make $400,000 A Month? So What. If I told you last month I did over $400,000/month in sales would you be impressed? How about if you found out that it cost...

Everyone loves a good fight, especially when death is involved.

So now I introduce you to a royal rumble of semi-epic/modest proportions. I’ve always wanted to run this case study, but haven’t because of brilliant excuses. However, this week I came across a post from Ben (POF) that made me say “hey why not?” like a Pakistani cricketer presented with a manila envelope.

*Warning* concentration needed for this next paragraph (no skim reading allowed).

The basics of it is testing small single ads vs. bigger sized ads with multiple small ads within them then taking it one step further and adding animation so you can multiply the amount of different ads within one ad. In the end trying to figure out which gives you the biggest bang for your buck.

Without further ado, I present to you the brave contestants:

1) Users see one ad. I created 4 versions of this standard ad size. Bidding at 0.60 cents.

2) Users see one ad. I created 4 versions of this 728×90 banner. Bidding at $1.20.

3) Users see two ads. I created 2 versions of this 728×90 banner. Bidding at $1.20.

4) Users see 4 ads. I created 1 version of this 728×90 banner. Bidding at $1.20.

This case study is not 100% full proof. There are a few things that could tip the scales, but I’m not bovered.

The offer/landing page I will be using is this piece of artwork:

So now I leave it to you.

Yes, you.

No, I’m not talking about my other readers. I’m talking straight to you.

Which ad do you think will draw the lowest cost per click? (based on click-through ratio and bid amounts)

Vote now:

Correct answers will win. Yay!

If you have some stunning logic behind your pick please comment below. I will post results later this week.

A.D.H.D Summary: I’m split testing whether single ads vs multiple ads within a single ad. You need to vote in the poll above or you will die instantly (unless you read the post the cure is hidden within).

Related posts:

1. Must Read: Marketing Masters Battle To The Death *Disclaimer: I’m sure you have all seen Power Rangers. When they combine together they make this super massive Power Ranger. Well think of me as...
2. Zero Cent Clicks On Facebook Ads “Zero cent clicks Mr Green? Seriously what are you on about?” I would tell you straight up now, but I don’t want to. I feel...

Mr $10k: I’ve  been doing affiliate marketing for a couple of years now, and – at least for my standards – I’ve been doing well over the years. The first half of 2010 was financially great: I was making $25,000 profit each month, while working approximately 25 hours a month on my business. And now, 6 months later? I’m not making ANY money at all…

Even worse, taking all the ongoing costs (servers, domains etc.) into account, I’m actually losing money each month. How did I get from being a “level five” affiliate marketing making a decent amount of money, to a “level one” noob making no money at all? I’ll tell you, and I will keep you guys posted on my way back up in the affiliate game until I make a decent amount of money again!

The Good

Over the last 5 years I’ve been doing a lot of different stuff related to online marketing: I started out by running my own online shop, switched to the Adwords/Adsense arbitrage and eventually started doing affiliate marketing. At first the focus was on SEO, but later on I switched to mostly paid traffic. Even though I was running my business part-time, the business was growing steadily. Most of it was running on auto-pilot, giving me the opportunity to do a lot of other (non-work) stuff.

The Bad

I would never say my business went bad because of “bad luck” or other external factors. It has everything to do with me, my strategy and especially my mindset. Even though the money was still good in 2010, it all happened late 2009. As mentioned, most of the business was running on auto-pilot, so I decided to do some traveling in 2009. Besides some stats-checking and small campaign-adjustments, I didn’t do anything in terms of work.

When I came back, these months turned out to be the most profitable months I ever had! Even though I knew there was no causal relationship (not working -> more profit), it started to change my mindset regardless. I had some other things I wanted to focus on at the time (i.e. university, girlfriend, friends, more traveling), and I shifted of to a state of mind in which I actually felt the money would keep on coming, even if I didn’t do any work. This terrible mindset did not slip in overnight, but eventually, it did slip in.. I pretty much decided to stop working and enjoy the autopilot money (at that time between 20,000 and 25,000 US dollars a month).

This mindset – and the fact that I pretty much stopped working – obviously accounts for the decline for the biggest part, but I also made some fundamental mistakes earlier on while running my business. I was focusing on the short-term instead of on the long-term, even though I knew I had to change course. The money was just to good to adjust the strategy, and thus my business was pretty much dependent on only two traffic sources. I wasn’t building any e-mail lists, or adding a lot of real value for the visitors. I was, so to say, a “thin affiliate”. Buy traffic and forward it to the highest bidder, optimize where you can and *boom*: you’re making good money.

During the second half of 2010 I saw the statistics going down month by month. Campaigns dried out, advertisers went bankrupt, all my Google Adwords accounts got Google-slapped, other PPC prices went up, etc.. At that time I was already committed to some other (non-work) pursuits, so I stood by and watched my affiliate business bleed to death.

The Challenge

Starting with this guest-post, I would like to publicly challenge myself to get back in the game.

The goal? To earn 10,000 US dollars a month (hence Mr. 10K) by running an affiliate business with a long-term strategy.

This public challenge is a win-win: you guys can read my story of how I will try to climb back up (instead of reading some random article of this guy “who made $38,39549.43 in just 5 days”), while I’m hoping to get feedback that will keep me motivated during this adventure.

The biggest struggle I will have to overcome is my mindset. At this moment I don’t have the mindset of a winner. It feels like 10K a month is an impossible goal for me, and I won’t be able to make a nickel. I feel that most of the techniques I used to make money are outdated, and that I won’t be able to start from scratch again. I had the illusion that I could get my mindset back by reading the right books and articles, but there’s only one way I will get my mindset back: by earning the first dollar again. By seeing the results of the work I will put into this challenge.

As mentioned, the challenge of going from 0 to 10,000 a month starts with this post, so I need to start with deciding which direction I’m planning to go. I will keep you all posted regarding my progress, including how much money I’m making! I bet that makes it more interesting for you all.

Do you recognize any of the above? Are you planning on doing the same? Are there specific parts of the path I’m going to take you would like me to write more about? Let me know in the comments!

Related posts:

1. PPV Networks Uncovered (Part 1) Question: Do you really know what you’re paying for on PPV Networks? Answer: For 90% of you the answer would be no. Most PPV networks...
2. Plenty of Fish. Plenty of Money (Part 1) Plenty of Fish ads has come from absolutely nowhere to become one of the best targeting platforms in existence. If Facebook ads is like a...

If you don’t know what I’m on about, please refer to this button shape case study.

The Results:

(ordered from highest click-through-ratio to lowest)

Conclusions:

I wish I had some profound reasoning as to why the boring rectangle received the highest CTR, but I don’t. My initial thought was because it’s what people are used to clicking. However, that would be incorrect since rounded buttons are the most common shape these days.

The left pointing arrows both came out with respectable CTRs. Why? As Kim and Browie both mentioned, they draw attention to the underlined text.

Shape #2, with the most votes, came in with the 7th best CTR. The only difference between that shape and the winning shape was the small arrow on the right. In terms of difference CTR it was a 40% drop. Go figure.

The loser, poor guy, just didn’t pull his weight. Had close to half the CTR the winning shape had. Size seems to matter here.

The Heckler:

“Mr Green these numbers are cool and all, but is it really worth the hassle?“

Alright I’m going to put my lab coat on for this one.

Lets compared winner shape 1 (0.196% CTR) vs loser shape 8 (0.096% CTR).

Say we are launching a new product called the Underwater Snuggie. We have a $100,000 budget, which would get us 100,000,000 ad impressions. We have a conversion rate of 5% from ad to sale (worth $50). Let’s assume that conversion rates are identical between the ads.

Shape 8 would generate: $240,000

Shape 1 would generate: $490,000

Worth the hassle? I think so.

The Gold Pass Champion:

No one commented the right answer! Damn it guys! Even though 9 people voted for it in the poll. So I had to choose from votes for the second best button which was button number 12. The Gold Pass Champion is a reader from France Keeg (I don’t have your details so please contact me and I will send you the gold pass). Très bien!

Final Thoughts:

My split test, even though was only a couple of hundred dollars worth of traffic, showed the big difference between the simple shape of button. I haven’t even touched color, text, or location. The square shape won this test, but that doesn’t mean that it will win all tests. Traffic changes. What worked this week might not work as well next week. I’m sure most of you have active landing pages or campaigns. Have you split tested your buttons?

The results showed the very reason why you need to test…97% of assumptions were wrong.

————————–

A.D.H.D Summary (You guys did just great to scroll down here!): 400 votes. 400 assumptions. 9 correct answers. If you want to assume anything, assume that you will be wrong.

Related posts:

1. Case Study Results – 92% Of Marketers Guessed Wrong. I posted a Plenty of Fish Case Study yesterday. Check it out if you haven’t already. If you’ve already read it, and voted, it is...
2. 12 Buttons 1 winner (Plenty of Fish Case Study) Call to action buttons are silent assassins. They are usually the feature that is least focused on when creating ads. That’s kind of strange considering that...