6 ms·

This must be really frustrating when your startup gets so much attention that your shop breaks down and you end up making no money out of that

DivineTraube 10y ago
And it not only hurts because of revenue. Slow sites also let users preceive quality and credibility as lower (Fogg et al. 2001; Bouch, Kuchinsky, and Bhatti 2000). The startup/brand will end up being seen as less interesting and attractive (Ramsay, Barbesi, and Preece 1998; Skadberg and Kimmel 2004). So being slow or offline can even have a long-lasting negative impact on the coolness of your startup.
- dahdum 10y ago
  The site is taking 10+ seconds on the "createTransaction" call when trying to checkout right now.
  - DivineTraube 10y ago
    Unfortunately on the server that method executes a synchronous API call to Paypal Plus, which has very flaky response times.
- stonogo 10y ago
  Do you have any references dating after mobile browsing became ubiquitous? People have definitely adjusted to shitty cellular connections. I have severe concerns whether these studies from pre-iphone eras are of any modern value.
  - DivineTraube 10y ago
    Sure. There is an abundance of studies. My favourites are [1]: -100ms of additional page load time cost 1% revenue (Amazon) -400ms means -9% vistors (Yahoo) -Showing 30 search results instead of 10 and therefore accepting 500ms of additional page load time means traffic goes back by 20% (Google) -Every second of page load time reduces conversions by 7% There are many more. There is a nice infographic summarizing a few more studies in a nice way [2]. In fact, I think the trend is quite the opposite: as devices and connections get better, people start to expect that websites are very responsive and load fast. [1] http://www.baqend.com/product.html http://www.baqend.com/product.html [2] http://infographicjournal.com/wp-content/uploads/2016/02/How-Page-Speed-Impacts-your-Sales1.png http://infographicjournal.com/wp-content/uploads/2016/02/How...
    - icebraining 10y ago
      The first and third are from 2006 and the second is from 2008 or earlier, so they don't seem to fit with stonogo's request for references after mobile browsing became ubiquitous (the iPhone only came out in 2007, and the first Android only in late 2008).
      - DivineTraube 10y ago
        How about Googles Doubleclick (2016): 53% of mobile site visits are abandoned if pages take longer than 3 seconds to load [1]. Mobify (2016): For every 100ms decrease in homepage load speed, Mobify's customer base saw a 1.11% lift in session based conversion, amounting to an average annual revenue increase of $376,789. Similarly, for every 100ms decrease in checkout page load speed, Mobify's customers saw a 1.55% life in session based conversion, amounting to an average annual revenue increase of $526,147 [2]. Staples (2014): conversion increase per second [3]. Or the Obama campaign (2012): making the page 60% faster increased donations by 14% [4]. More new studies from recent years can be found at WPO stats [5]. [1] https://www.doubleclickbygoogle.com/articles/mobile-speed-matters/ https://www.doubleclickbygoogle.com/articles/mobile-speed-ma... [2] http://resources.mobify.com/2016-Q2-mobile-insights-benchmark-report.html http://resources.mobify.com/2016-Q2-mobile-insights-benchmar... [3] http://de.slideshare.net/cliffcrocker/velocity-ny-how-to-measure-revenue-in-milliseconds#stats-panel http://de.slideshare.net/cliffcrocker/velocity-ny-how-to-mea... [4] http://kylerush.net/blog/meet-the-obama-campaigns-250-million-fundraising-platform/ http://kylerush.net/blog/meet-the-obama-campaigns-250-millio... [5] https://wpostats.com/ https://wpostats.com/
        user5994461 10y ago
        > 53% of mobile site visits are abandoned if pages take longer than 3 seconds to load Well. 100% of web page needs more than 3 seconds to load on my mobile connection. We'll both agree that I ain't a statistically fair sample. I join @icebraining on that we need information that is relevant to the mobile web. [2] is behind a paywall. [3] is quoting all the common worthless old studies. There are some graphs and stuff but lacking test methodologies and information. Graphs are showing a few percent of gains, and latencies going from 1s to 10s, which is a lot less effect than other studies. [4] is out of topic and gives no data. (x% of what? absolute latency? before? after? well, they didn't test for latency and impact on revenue)
user5994461 10y ago
Personal story (P.S. I am not the author, I just worked in startups as well): For me it didn't, especially when we were not prepared for it, and we know that we couldn't take the traffic if it happened. What really killed me instead, was when our site was slowish or half-fucked during some events. And people still managed to use it harder and harder for the entire day. And we made unusual loads of money and new customers, with a crap site xD There is of course a feeling of "how much did we miss out? that must be a lot considering how much we did get.", but it's less prominent than the feeling of "how the hell did all these people manage to pay us at all? and why the fuck did they keep using the site?". That does contradict every known blog and article out there about people just leaving.

DivineTraube 10y ago

And it not only hurts because of revenue. Slow sites also let users preceive quality and credibility as lower (Fogg et al. 2001; Bouch, Kuchinsky, and Bhatti 2000). The startup/brand will end up being seen as less interesting and attractive (Ramsay, Barbesi, and Preece 1998; Skadberg and Kimmel 2004). So being slow or offline can even have a long-lasting negative impact on the coolness of your startup.

dahdum 10y ago
The site is taking 10+ seconds on the "createTransaction" call when trying to checkout right now.
- DivineTraube 10y ago
  Unfortunately on the server that method executes a synchronous API call to Paypal Plus, which has very flaky response times.
stonogo 10y ago
Do you have any references dating after mobile browsing became ubiquitous? People have definitely adjusted to shitty cellular connections. I have severe concerns whether these studies from pre-iphone eras are of any modern value.
- DivineTraube 10y ago
  Sure. There is an abundance of studies. My favourites are [1]: -100ms of additional page load time cost 1% revenue (Amazon) -400ms means -9% vistors (Yahoo) -Showing 30 search results instead of 10 and therefore accepting 500ms of additional page load time means traffic goes back by 20% (Google) -Every second of page load time reduces conversions by 7% There are many more. There is a nice infographic summarizing a few more studies in a nice way [2]. In fact, I think the trend is quite the opposite: as devices and connections get better, people start to expect that websites are very responsive and load fast. [1] http://www.baqend.com/product.html http://www.baqend.com/product.html [2] http://infographicjournal.com/wp-content/uploads/2016/02/How-Page-Speed-Impacts-your-Sales1.png http://infographicjournal.com/wp-content/uploads/2016/02/How...
  - icebraining 10y ago
    The first and third are from 2006 and the second is from 2008 or earlier, so they don't seem to fit with stonogo's request for references after mobile browsing became ubiquitous (the iPhone only came out in 2007, and the first Android only in late 2008).
    - DivineTraube 10y ago
      How about Googles Doubleclick (2016): 53% of mobile site visits are abandoned if pages take longer than 3 seconds to load [1]. Mobify (2016): For every 100ms decrease in homepage load speed, Mobify's customer base saw a 1.11% lift in session based conversion, amounting to an average annual revenue increase of $376,789. Similarly, for every 100ms decrease in checkout page load speed, Mobify's customers saw a 1.55% life in session based conversion, amounting to an average annual revenue increase of $526,147 [2]. Staples (2014): conversion increase per second [3]. Or the Obama campaign (2012): making the page 60% faster increased donations by 14% [4]. More new studies from recent years can be found at WPO stats [5]. [1] https://www.doubleclickbygoogle.com/articles/mobile-speed-matters/ https://www.doubleclickbygoogle.com/articles/mobile-speed-ma... [2] http://resources.mobify.com/2016-Q2-mobile-insights-benchmark-report.html http://resources.mobify.com/2016-Q2-mobile-insights-benchmar... [3] http://de.slideshare.net/cliffcrocker/velocity-ny-how-to-measure-revenue-in-milliseconds#stats-panel http://de.slideshare.net/cliffcrocker/velocity-ny-how-to-mea... [4] http://kylerush.net/blog/meet-the-obama-campaigns-250-million-fundraising-platform/ http://kylerush.net/blog/meet-the-obama-campaigns-250-millio... [5] https://wpostats.com/ https://wpostats.com/
      - user5994461 10y ago
        > 53% of mobile site visits are abandoned if pages take longer than 3 seconds to load Well. 100% of web page needs more than 3 seconds to load on my mobile connection. We'll both agree that I ain't a statistically fair sample. I join @icebraining on that we need information that is relevant to the mobile web. [2] is behind a paywall. [3] is quoting all the common worthless old studies. There are some graphs and stuff but lacking test methodologies and information. Graphs are showing a few percent of gains, and latencies going from 1s to 10s, which is a lot less effect than other studies. [4] is out of topic and gives no data. (x% of what? absolute latency? before? after? well, they didn't test for latency and impact on revenue)

user5994461 10y ago

Personal story (P.S. I am not the author, I just worked in startups as well): For me it didn't, especially when we were not prepared for it, and we know that we couldn't take the traffic if it happened. What really killed me instead, was when our site was slowish or half-fucked during some events. And people still managed to use it harder and harder for the entire day. And we made unusual loads of money and new customers, with a crap site xD There is of course a feeling of "how much did we miss out? that must be a lot considering how much we did get.", but it's less prominent than the feeling of "how the hell did all these people manage to pay us at all? and why the fuck did they keep using the site?". That does contradict every known blog and article out there about people just leaving.