

Ask HN: How far can you go when disparaging a competitor in your marketing copy? - chubs

Hi all,<p>I'm thinking of building a subscription web app, as a simpler-but-cleaner competitor to an entrenched current service. Every one of the last few places i've worked has used this existing service, so i know there's a huge market, and anecdotal evidence suggests that most people don't really like using it, so i think there's room for a competitor.<p>I've been thinking that in my marketing copy, it'd be great to position myself as 'the anti-xyz', and comprehensively cover their weaknesses to contrast against the purported simplicity and strengths of my service. In this way, i think i could really resonate with people's current dislike of the existing service, and hopefully build an opinionated fan base of customers.<p>But i'm worried about legal exposure - would i at any risk of being sued for trademark infringement, libel, or anything else for using my competitors name in my marketing copy and pointing out their weaknesses?<p>FWIW I'm in australia, and so is the competitor.
======
blazzar
The less accounting guys took a slightly different approach which was to
collect what the users hated about their competitor rather than saying it
themselves:

<http://weallhatequickbooks.com/>

If your competitor is as well used as you say this might work for you.

------
ig1
You'll probably get a better answer from a local startup forum, laws on
competitive advertising vary heavily from country to country.

~~~
chubs
Good point. I think i'll do just that.

------
timaelliott
I wouldn't speak negatively of them nor their shortcomings. Instead, I'd focus
on positively promoting the benefits your platform offers.

The fact that your benefits happen to solve their problems is just a
convenient coincidence.

~~~
chubs
Thanks for your response.

I've considered that approach - it's kind of like taking the moral high
ground, isn't it? Which is great. However, i think i could really hit a nerve
in the marketplace with people who use X but _really hate it_ , and it would
position my product brilliantly.

As opposed to 'this product will do X really well'. I think the copy would
pretty much write itself if i said 'Are you using X but sick of how
complicated it is? I'll do the same job, but in half the time and with half
the headaches.'

I'm just thinking this approach, however risky it is, could really be a
lightning rod for attention. However i'm really interested to see what others
think around here?

~~~
bmelton
The point though, is that if they're really feeling that pain, they'll 'know
what you mean' either way.

For example, people who hate Java's verbose syntax are instantly attracted to
"minimal syntax" and "faster development time" claims, while equating that to
their own pain points automatically. Plus, then it seems more like a solution
to them than something panning the competition, and endears themselves more to
your service without having had to resort.

Simply put, you're likely to get better traction if you don't go negative, and
if the pain points you mention are real, you don't need to spell out that you
are "less wordy than Java." Just prove that you can get the same output with
less work.

