Hacker News new | past | comments | ask | show | jobs | submit login
Competitor comparison pages (junction43.co)
18 points by whatthe91 7 days ago | hide | past | web | favorite | 5 comments





Depends very largely on your industry. In enterprise, this is a terrible strategy as it leads you away from a discussion on value add to one largely centered around features and price. Deals that are focused on features and price tend to be harder to close and generate less revenue.

I’d question it for most industries actually - what you are tacitly acknowledging in the standard feature comparison page is that the features of the competition are equivalent to yours, but that you have a few additional ones. Usually people will in that situation go for the solution that does 80% of the job but is significantly cheaper.

Overwhelmingly the research shows that people buy on value add, not features, so this strategy is likely to force down your price for marginal gain. Also, the competitor pages tend to be a competitive paid search for a challenger in the market. Rare that you see this with organic.


What kind of "value" can not be specified as a feature? Whether it's a better SLA, expertise adapting the product to the customers needs, or anything else, those are just features which some clients may want, and others may not.

Value is expected value to the user minus total cost of ownership, and a value proposition is a promise of expected value to the user.

Products which sell for higher prices and avoid getting into ‘feature/function’ type battles are those that are able to make clear, measurable and defensible claims about the positive impact that they will have on people’s lives.

These usually begin with a real pain point that the customer is experiencing with their current situation (to give an example of say, Dropbox, users having to email files to themselves and use USB drives, losing data as a result) and move to something more like ‘Never lose a file again’, or as they do at enterprise level talk of the costs and confusion of time wasted of legal departments emailing documents to each other.

Some of the HN crowd would love Dropbox to describe themselves as ‘Distributed file storage and sync across Windows, Linux and Mac’ but there are good reasons why they don’t.


Competitor comparison? Most (SaaS) sites would benefit from stating - plainly and clearly - what features they offer and what are the benefits from those features. The whole "free trial" approach is a joke. My time, no one's time, is not free.

If you can't communicate the essence of your product to me [1] then I can only presume you don't know. That's not a good sign.

[1] Everyone is always asking "Why should I care?" if you don't care to answer that then I'm not going to care either.


My suspicion is that if a marketing person passes this idea past their legal folks (especially in the litigious USofA) will likely get a fairly strong "nope" to having a 'competitor comparison' page.



Guidelines | FAQ | Support | API | Security | Lists | Bookmarklet | Legal | Apply to YC | Contact

Search: