5 ms·

Hi Jason, I am the founder of Visual Website Optimizer. And to be fair I have been expecting Optimizely post on TechCrunch as soon as I learnt that it was a YC

Hi Jason, I am the founder of Visual Website Optimizer. And to be fair I have been expecting Optimizely post on TechCrunch as soon as I learnt that it was a YC funded startup. To be honest it bites me to actually read it on TC especially when I emailed you thrice :) But anyway that is life. I guess special connections do matter! As far as name is concerned, the company's name is Wingify (which isn't as dull as Visual Website Optimizer). The product name was chosen to differentiate it from Google Website Optimizer, as my tool makes creating tests super easy. As far as differentiation is concerned, well we launched way earlier than Optimizely (so it is them whom you should be asking this question). Actual differentiation comes in the ease of use, while offering all enterprise level features. Here is a comparision table: http://visualwebsiteoptimizer.com/feature-list.php http://visualwebsiteoptimizer.com/feature-list.php As far as interesting story is concerned, well we're bootstrapped (2 people actually), launched two months ago, are profitable (more than just ramen) and have managed to bag customers like Microsoft, Rackspace, 99Designs, Aweber and Threadless. Here is a partial customer list http://visualwebsiteoptimizer.com/customers.php http://visualwebsiteoptimizer.com/customers.php The tool has helped numerous small businesses in increasing conversions and sales. Here are some case studies: http://visualwebsiteoptimizer.com/case-studies.php http://visualwebsiteoptimizer.com/case-studies.php and if you must compare it with other tools, here are numerous (all non-asked) testimonials comparing VWO with other tools: http://visualwebsiteoptimizer.com/testimonials.php http://visualwebsiteoptimizer.com/testimonials.php I don't know how else to pitch you rather than just providing facts. Please let me know if you wish to do a story, I will be happy to provide you with more stats or make it into an interesting story. -Paras Chopra PS: Thanks for mentioning VWO at the end of the post, but I will still stand by saying that it was bit unfair on TC's part.

luckystrike 16y ago
Happy to see your product doing well, and the fact that it is profitable already. Good going. I am sure you are pretty cool about it, but take it easy about the TC (or any other such blog's) (non-)coverage. You got paying customers and if this continues, relevant news coverage would follow soon. Cheers.
- paraschopra 16y ago
  Yeah, I know. I am, of course, not dejected that TC didn't cover us. Long term business viability requires much more than a news story but it is always great to be covered on TC because it is a respected blog read by many potential customers and influencers. Optimizely is an interesting product with a great team so they deserve coverage, but so do we because we have an equally interesting product made and marketed without taking any external funding (that's all I'm asking for!).
webwright 16y ago
That's not unfair. YC is a news-maker. So is Ron Conway. So is Sequoia. So is Jason Calcanis (<shudder>). So is Zed Shaw. If Bill Gates launched a VWO competitor tomorrow, would it be unfair if TC covered it? TechCrunch trades in links, traffic, retweets, and comments. Take two companies of ANY flavor side by side, and TC will pick the one that is somehow associated with a newsmaker (or is otherwise going to drive the metrics they care about). There's nothing "fair" about it. You're just not speaking the language that bloggers care about. You're talking about case studies, feature comparisons, and testimonials, for pete's sake. I LOVE VWO. Love it. But I can totally see why TechCrunch would pass on it (even if you gave them the above pitch at a time where they'd get/read the email).
- paraschopra 16y ago
  Of course, ultimately it is TC's choice whom they cover. But I totally fail to see why just because it is a YC company, it is news-worthy. And as I said in another comment, I am not concerned that they covered Optimizely. All I mind (that too a little bit) is that they passed on us. When TC, Mashable or RWW didn't reply I realized A/B testing may not be as sexy as location-based-gaming or a cool new iPhone app. But then covering an A/B testing startup on basis of YC while passing on another A/B testing startup (because it is not YC) is what I call "unfair". Right, I know it is not an ideal world, but someone has to keep reminding what a fair world could be :) PS: Almost all your examples of news-maker point to the VC/Angel/Web clique and perhaps you are right that blogs that serve that clique may not be interested in a (bootstrapped) startup that doesn't fit the "culture".
  - jacquesm 16y ago
    Very classy response, it gives me great confidence that you will go very far with your company in spite of silly things like this. It definitely isn't fair, but media coverage is transient, long term what matters is business savvy, customer satisfaction and technology. No two bit article featuring a 'me too' competitor, funded or not is going to make a difference there in the longer term.
  - theycallmemorty 16y ago
ThomPete 16y ago
The product name was chosen to differentiate it from Google Website Optimizer, as my tool makes creating tests super easy. Leaning the word up against something like GWO seems more like hoping to catch some customers who confuse the two. I know that is probably not what you are doing but it could be interpreted a such and I would stay away from that kind of possible confusion. If you want it to stand out, call it Wingify. It's not the name that makes the success, it's the product(and the connections and timing etc), but if you want to differentiate your product calling it almost the same isn't going to create anything but confusion.
- paraschopra 16y ago
  I plan to write a blog post on how the name helped us. It may sound unsexy or cheap to the startup/programmer community here on HN but for the internet marketers (who are my target customers), having the "Website Optimizer" pits the product exactly opposite to Google's tool (which was well known at the time VWO launched). It helped us position the tool, other wise we would have to educate what Wingify does. Microsoft's first product was simply called MS-DOS and I don't think having a "OS" word in it caused them any disadvantage (in fact it helped them). But then in days of MS-DOS there were no tech blogs :)
  - ThomPete 16y ago
    How does it pit it against? It seems to leverage on what google created. I am not saying that is a bad thing, but I fail to see the "pitting against" factor.
    - joshuacc 16y ago
      Because "Visual Website Optimizer" implies ease of use as against the very non-visual "Google Website Optimizer."
  - contextfree 16y ago
    nitpick: MS-DOS wasn't their first product
Tichy 16y ago
Unfair or not, I guess it just goes to show that TC is not a reliable news source. Or at least in this case they seem to have failed.

luckystrike 16y ago

Happy to see your product doing well, and the fact that it is profitable already. Good going. I am sure you are pretty cool about it, but take it easy about the TC (or any other such blog's) (non-)coverage. You got paying customers and if this continues, relevant news coverage would follow soon. Cheers.

paraschopra 16y ago
Yeah, I know. I am, of course, not dejected that TC didn't cover us. Long term business viability requires much more than a news story but it is always great to be covered on TC because it is a respected blog read by many potential customers and influencers. Optimizely is an interesting product with a great team so they deserve coverage, but so do we because we have an equally interesting product made and marketed without taking any external funding (that's all I'm asking for!).

webwright 16y ago

That's not unfair. YC is a news-maker. So is Ron Conway. So is Sequoia. So is Jason Calcanis (<shudder>). So is Zed Shaw. If Bill Gates launched a VWO competitor tomorrow, would it be unfair if TC covered it? TechCrunch trades in links, traffic, retweets, and comments. Take two companies of ANY flavor side by side, and TC will pick the one that is somehow associated with a newsmaker (or is otherwise going to drive the metrics they care about). There's nothing "fair" about it. You're just not speaking the language that bloggers care about. You're talking about case studies, feature comparisons, and testimonials, for pete's sake. I LOVE VWO. Love it. But I can totally see why TechCrunch would pass on it (even if you gave them the above pitch at a time where they'd get/read the email).

paraschopra 16y ago
Of course, ultimately it is TC's choice whom they cover. But I totally fail to see why just because it is a YC company, it is news-worthy. And as I said in another comment, I am not concerned that they covered Optimizely. All I mind (that too a little bit) is that they passed on us. When TC, Mashable or RWW didn't reply I realized A/B testing may not be as sexy as location-based-gaming or a cool new iPhone app. But then covering an A/B testing startup on basis of YC while passing on another A/B testing startup (because it is not YC) is what I call "unfair". Right, I know it is not an ideal world, but someone has to keep reminding what a fair world could be :) PS: Almost all your examples of news-maker point to the VC/Angel/Web clique and perhaps you are right that blogs that serve that clique may not be interested in a (bootstrapped) startup that doesn't fit the "culture".
- jacquesm 16y ago
  Very classy response, it gives me great confidence that you will go very far with your company in spite of silly things like this. It definitely isn't fair, but media coverage is transient, long term what matters is business savvy, customer satisfaction and technology. No two bit article featuring a 'me too' competitor, funded or not is going to make a difference there in the longer term.
- theycallmemorty 16y ago

ThomPete 16y ago

The product name was chosen to differentiate it from Google Website Optimizer, as my tool makes creating tests super easy. Leaning the word up against something like GWO seems more like hoping to catch some customers who confuse the two. I know that is probably not what you are doing but it could be interpreted a such and I would stay away from that kind of possible confusion. If you want it to stand out, call it Wingify. It's not the name that makes the success, it's the product(and the connections and timing etc), but if you want to differentiate your product calling it almost the same isn't going to create anything but confusion.

paraschopra 16y ago
I plan to write a blog post on how the name helped us. It may sound unsexy or cheap to the startup/programmer community here on HN but for the internet marketers (who are my target customers), having the "Website Optimizer" pits the product exactly opposite to Google's tool (which was well known at the time VWO launched). It helped us position the tool, other wise we would have to educate what Wingify does. Microsoft's first product was simply called MS-DOS and I don't think having a "OS" word in it caused them any disadvantage (in fact it helped them). But then in days of MS-DOS there were no tech blogs :)
- ThomPete 16y ago
  How does it pit it against? It seems to leverage on what google created. I am not saying that is a bad thing, but I fail to see the "pitting against" factor.
  - joshuacc 16y ago
    Because "Visual Website Optimizer" implies ease of use as against the very non-visual "Google Website Optimizer."
- contextfree 16y ago
  nitpick: MS-DOS wasn't their first product

Tichy 16y ago

Unfair or not, I guess it just goes to show that TC is not a reliable news source. Or at least in this case they seem to have failed.