5 ms·

Yes, but per the above post, what tends to work best is if you present people with the shortest path to what they want, and with up sell/retention opportunities

Yes, but per the above post, what tends to work best is if you present people with the shortest path to what they want, and with up sell/retention opportunities either in that path or in follow up after successful conversion. I guarantee you that a custom landing page for these campaigns would work out better for them.

jiofih 6y ago
Data says otherwise - plenty of e-commerce sites taking you to search, with the thing you saw just pinned at the top. I hate the pattern but it seems to result in higher engagement.
- uoaei 6y ago
  Folks are slowly noticing that this concept of "engagement" is a shallow, toxic one that encourages poor behavior that generally harms the end user.
  - RussianCow 6y ago
    [citation needed] Maybe tech-savvy folks, or people otherwise paying close attention, but I don't think this describes the vast majority of people by any stretch.
    - uoaei 6y ago
      I think the discussion around Facebook and Russia opened a lot of eyes to how ads-based businesses can be exploited, and how the infrastructure they built directly lends to this phenomenon.
      - RussianCow 6y ago
        And yet, people still continue to use Facebook/Google/etc en masse. These companies are in the news what seems like every week, but the number of people who have left those platforms is negligible.
        uoaei 6y ago
        Because we are not all using the same brain. Many people have many opinions, and some people even sometimes act counter to their preferences based on the context! Wild stuff.
        RussianCow 6y ago
        Your original comment implies that folks "slowly noticing" dark patterns is going to make some sort of difference in the grand scheme of things. I am arguing, based on my experience with humans, that it will not—and even if it could, that not enough people are paying attention for it to matter.
- majormajor 6y ago
  > Data says otherwise - plenty of e-commerce sites taking you to search, with the thing you saw just pinned at the top. I hate the pattern but it seems to result in higher engagement. That's extremely different than the thing described here: "take you to a category page with something else entirely pinned at the top."
TeMPOraL 6y ago
A hungry customer is going to get food from a restaurant anyway. For the platform, it doesn't matter from which one.
- chipperyman573 6y ago
  If you googled "dominos delivery" and clicked a link and got pizza hut, would you order hut or go back and click the next link to get dominos?
  - thewebcount 6y ago
    Not the best example since Dominos and Pizza Hut are both of equally terrible quality. If I searched for my favorite local pizza place and was sent to Pizza Hut, I would definitely go back. If I was searching for Dominos and got Pizza Hut, I'd probably assume Pizza Hut bought them out. I've had stuff like that happen before.
- ganstyles 6y ago
  Of course it does. The most basic reason would be that since they take a percentage, door dash would prefer you purchase from a more expensive restaurant. But there are all kinds of other reasons, such as some restaurants spending more on advertising with the platform.
- edmundsauto 6y ago
  More friction will lead to dropoff. And, for the platform, it should matter -- they will have different margins depending on the deal, different levels of support, likelihood for the restaurant to churn, ad spend, all kinds of things to balance. Pushing the user into the "find a restaurant" model, after they want a specific one, gives the platform an opportunity to optimize for their needs. This may or may not be a positive for the customer, and it may or may not be enough of a lift for the platform to overcome the dropoff because of a poor landing page experience. One misconception I see about conversion optimization is that it's generalizable. Google's blue button test doesn't matter to any product except that exact one. None of us can say, without seeing the results; our previous experience is not relevant. EG, maybe a 10% conversion to order dropoff is OK if we can direct X% of users to an expensive restaurant. The 10% drop cost is offset by a 50% increase in order cost.
droopyEyelids 6y ago
That makes sense if the consumer is DoorDash's _only_ customer. If Applebees is paying for some sort of marketing/relevance service, then all bets are off, and it's up to DoorDash's leadership to choose which of their opposing customers get screwed.
- edmundsauto 6y ago
  An alternate phrasing might be "it's up to DoorDash's leadership to choose which of their customers they optimize for." Giving preferred treatment to partners that are strategic or have higher margins is not screwing your other customers. I do have issues with the misuse of the restaurant brands -- seems unethical to send me to Pizza Hut when I click on Dominoes.
  - kerkeslager 6y ago
    > An alternate phrasing might be "it's up to DoorDash's leadership to choose which of their customers they optimize for." Giving preferred treatment to partners that are strategic or have higher margins is not screwing your other customers. You're polishing a turd. Call it whatever you want, but if I'd prefer not to be a customer of a company who prioritizes competing interests over me.
    - edmundsauto 6y ago
      Every business prioritizes competing interests over each other, at varying times. Amazon might be the closest to prioritizing customers uber alles, but that hasn't been a popular result on this board of late. Can you name a few companies you think do a good job of not prioritizing other interests over you?
      - kerkeslager 6y ago
        Almost any local business. Amazon is a terrible example of prioritizing customers--what part of selling counterfeits, putting sponsored products higher in search results, or retroactively deleting books off your Kindle serves users?

jiofih 6y ago

Data says otherwise - plenty of e-commerce sites taking you to search, with the thing you saw just pinned at the top. I hate the pattern but it seems to result in higher engagement.

uoaei 6y ago
Folks are slowly noticing that this concept of "engagement" is a shallow, toxic one that encourages poor behavior that generally harms the end user.
- RussianCow 6y ago
  [citation needed] Maybe tech-savvy folks, or people otherwise paying close attention, but I don't think this describes the vast majority of people by any stretch.
  - uoaei 6y ago
    I think the discussion around Facebook and Russia opened a lot of eyes to how ads-based businesses can be exploited, and how the infrastructure they built directly lends to this phenomenon.
    - RussianCow 6y ago
      And yet, people still continue to use Facebook/Google/etc en masse. These companies are in the news what seems like every week, but the number of people who have left those platforms is negligible.
      - uoaei 6y ago
        Because we are not all using the same brain. Many people have many opinions, and some people even sometimes act counter to their preferences based on the context! Wild stuff.
        RussianCow 6y ago
        Your original comment implies that folks "slowly noticing" dark patterns is going to make some sort of difference in the grand scheme of things. I am arguing, based on my experience with humans, that it will not—and even if it could, that not enough people are paying attention for it to matter.
majormajor 6y ago
> Data says otherwise - plenty of e-commerce sites taking you to search, with the thing you saw just pinned at the top. I hate the pattern but it seems to result in higher engagement. That's extremely different than the thing described here: "take you to a category page with something else entirely pinned at the top."

TeMPOraL 6y ago

A hungry customer is going to get food from a restaurant anyway. For the platform, it doesn't matter from which one.

chipperyman573 6y ago
If you googled "dominos delivery" and clicked a link and got pizza hut, would you order hut or go back and click the next link to get dominos?
- thewebcount 6y ago
  Not the best example since Dominos and Pizza Hut are both of equally terrible quality. If I searched for my favorite local pizza place and was sent to Pizza Hut, I would definitely go back. If I was searching for Dominos and got Pizza Hut, I'd probably assume Pizza Hut bought them out. I've had stuff like that happen before.
ganstyles 6y ago
Of course it does. The most basic reason would be that since they take a percentage, door dash would prefer you purchase from a more expensive restaurant. But there are all kinds of other reasons, such as some restaurants spending more on advertising with the platform.
edmundsauto 6y ago
More friction will lead to dropoff. And, for the platform, it should matter -- they will have different margins depending on the deal, different levels of support, likelihood for the restaurant to churn, ad spend, all kinds of things to balance. Pushing the user into the "find a restaurant" model, after they want a specific one, gives the platform an opportunity to optimize for their needs. This may or may not be a positive for the customer, and it may or may not be enough of a lift for the platform to overcome the dropoff because of a poor landing page experience. One misconception I see about conversion optimization is that it's generalizable. Google's blue button test doesn't matter to any product except that exact one. None of us can say, without seeing the results; our previous experience is not relevant. EG, maybe a 10% conversion to order dropoff is OK if we can direct X% of users to an expensive restaurant. The 10% drop cost is offset by a 50% increase in order cost.

droopyEyelids 6y ago

That makes sense if the consumer is DoorDash's _only_ customer. If Applebees is paying for some sort of marketing/relevance service, then all bets are off, and it's up to DoorDash's leadership to choose which of their opposing customers get screwed.

edmundsauto 6y ago
An alternate phrasing might be "it's up to DoorDash's leadership to choose which of their customers they optimize for." Giving preferred treatment to partners that are strategic or have higher margins is not screwing your other customers. I do have issues with the misuse of the restaurant brands -- seems unethical to send me to Pizza Hut when I click on Dominoes.
- kerkeslager 6y ago
  > An alternate phrasing might be "it's up to DoorDash's leadership to choose which of their customers they optimize for." Giving preferred treatment to partners that are strategic or have higher margins is not screwing your other customers. You're polishing a turd. Call it whatever you want, but if I'd prefer not to be a customer of a company who prioritizes competing interests over me.
  - edmundsauto 6y ago
    Every business prioritizes competing interests over each other, at varying times. Amazon might be the closest to prioritizing customers uber alles, but that hasn't been a popular result on this board of late. Can you name a few companies you think do a good job of not prioritizing other interests over you?
    - kerkeslager 6y ago
      Almost any local business. Amazon is a terrible example of prioritizing customers--what part of selling counterfeits, putting sponsored products higher in search results, or retroactively deleting books off your Kindle serves users?