Are Squeeze Pages Really Dead?

Is the squeeze page method dead?

How can I get around the "Google Slap" with my pay per click campaigns?

When, where and how should I use a squeeze page?

Contrary to what you may have heard, the squeeze page method is far from dead, and I encourage you to read on before you take your squeeze pages down simply because you read a report telling you otherwise.

That being said, there are circumstances where a squeeze page should NOT be the first step in the sales process, and there are some products and/or markets where a squeeze pages shouldn't be used at all. Remember, before taking anyone's advice as gospel (including mine), always test for yourself.

Setting The Stage

In 2004, we conducted some fascinating tests on paid search traffic. This was at a time when squeeze pages were all the rage, and marketers were dominating pay per click markets with the "name squeeze" method.

At the time, we were spending thousands of dollars per week Google AdWords and generating a healthy return on our advertising dollars using the squeeze method.

In addition to pay per click advertising, we were involved in search engine optimization (SEO) for some very competitive keywords in our market.

Our basic strategy was as follows:

For PPC Campaigns: Create keyword specific ads and drive traffic to squeeze pages and capture visitor information.

For Natural Search: Create content pages with professionally written articles "pre-selling" our solution, which then led visitors to the opt-in process.

As we started gaining more market share in the pay per click arena, many of our much larger competitors began cloning our pay per click to squeeze page model. This made it more difficult to keep our competitive edge, and consequently bid prices went up and our conversions dropped.

Fortunately, our SEO campaign (with content leading into a capture process) continued to perform extremely well for us, and our conversions as compared to our pay per click traffic, were much higher.

This was an interesting observation that caused us to evaluate our pay per click model, namely the strategy of driving visitors directly from our Google Ads to squeeze pages.

We figured PPC traffic and natural search traffic, in theory, should behave the same way, and therefore our conversions should be the same or similar to what we were getting with organic traffic.

So we tested different methods of lead capture, and what we found was intriguing:

What Method Really Works Best For Pay Per Click Traffic?
(To squeeze or not to squeeze?)

In our first test, we took one of the content pages (traditional website with navigation) that was converting especially well for us with natural search and tested against a squeeze page with no navigation, using the same headline and teaser content from the article page.

Sidenote: our natural search landing pages used a method I call "Hybrid Content/Squeeze Pages." This type of page gives you the best of both worlds (High conversions and high search rankings) by combining content/squeeze methods where appropriate. This method has been successfully used for paid and natural search traffic for over 3 years now with comparably good results across multiple markets.

If you are running Google AdWords campaigns, consider testing the "Hybrid Content/Squeeze Method." This looks almost identical to a traditional website with navigation, articles, etc. The only difference is the article pages (used as keyword landing pages) don't give the "full story." The visitor is required to opt-in in order to get the remaining content and other "goodies" you want to give away to incentivize your visitors to enter their contact information.

These "hybrid" pages are very easy to create. You can use your favorite content management platform, or even a simple blog like Wordpress will work.

What we found was the conversions of our "content style" page was almost double what it was on our squeeze page with the same traffic!

Here's how it broke down:

Squeeze Page: a 24% squeeze page conversion rate, meaning 76% of our traffic "bounced" and left the page.

Hybrid Page: 39% squeeze page conversion, and the average visitor was clicking on 2 or 3 "teaser" articles prior to opting into our system.

Was it a fluke? We weren't sure, so we tested several pages with similar results.

This is important, so pay close attention:

There are two schools of thought in PPC marketing. The first school believes the most effective marketing strategy is to offer content first, claiming "pre-selling" visitors is the best method for generating sales. The second school of though believe in the "squeeze tease", then giving the content after the opt-in.

Which one of these schools is right?

Our testing indicates both are right, depending on the source of the traffic!

Visitor Behavior of Search Traffic vs. Direct Response Traffic

What we found after evaluating the behavior of PPC and SEO generated traffic was these visitors had a completely different mindset than our email marketing traffic.

What do I mean?

Consider this:

When you go to Google and type in a search term for a solution to your problem, you are basically in the "shopping mindset." In other words, you are shopping for the best solution to your problem, and you will likely click on SEVERAL ads before you choose a product or service.

The typical mindset of the search engine generated visitor (paid or natural) is that of "click and see." They will "click" on the ad to "see" what you have to offer. When you are in a "click and see mindset" you are less likely to perform an action without more information up front.

I hope this makes sense, because it's critical you understand your website visitors so you can better market to them. It will also mean the "Google Slap" is not an issue, and the changes they require will only HELP YOU get better results.

HOWEVER, before taking your squeeze pages down, let's evaluate another test we conducted. This time, we used email marketing. The test consisted of 3 separate mailings, each going out to ONE MILLION recipients.

What we found in this test (and a few more that followed) was the forced opt-in squeeze method won hands down. Here's a break down of the numbers:

Hybrid Page: 27% opt-in with a .9% click to sale conversion.

Squeeze Page: 49% opt-in with a 2.1% click to sale conversion.

WOW, big difference right? But why is that?

The mindset of an ad respondent NOT generated by a search engine is much different. They are in a "response mindset." In other words, rather than shopping for a solution, they are responding directly to your advertisement. Therefore, they are much more likely to be "led" into the action of opting in than those in a "shopping" mindset. This holds true for almost all direct response advertisements we and our clients have tested, including email marketing, banners, text ads, etc.

This information is based on actual tests conducted in several markets. There is no "definitive" or final answer to what will work and what won't in your given market, and keep in mind you will want to test different capture methods for different traffic sources.

With all the "Squeeze pages are dead" talk of late, I felt it was important to share our real world test results in non internet marketing related niches. I hope you found it informative

Tim Erway

P.S. Would you like to know more about Hybrid pages? Let us know by visiting our marketing forum, or leave a comment below.