There's a difference between using a tactic and using it successfully. They say the NFL is a 'me-too' league. Unfortunately IM makes NFL coaches look like a bunch of anarchists.

They see that Gooroo Joe uses a longish video with no controls, no text, and a fancy animated, time-delayed button on a squeeze page. So they assume it works, since Joe did it. So they copy it blindly, without figuring out how Joe warmed up the audience before the show starts.

Then they come to forums like this one and start threads with titles like "Why isn't my squeeze page converting?"

The best marketers are avid testers. Odds are, if you visit one of their squeeze pages, you are looking at one part of a test. The Catch-22 is that you don't know if you are looking at the winner or the loser. Copy the loser, and odds are you lose, too.

The only way to know for sure is to try it - with your traffic and your offer. You also have to look at what happens after the squeeze. If you generate numbers of opt-ins but no sales, is the tactic really effective?

Just split test it.

Every niche / product / traffic source is different.

Hi Stolpioni,

John gave some great advice! You must test what you are doing and keep testing til you get the result you want or scrap the marketing campaign and start all over.

If you are using a squeeze page to offer a free report to start building a list and you decide to use a video, you don't need a 10 minute video. Use a short video with a headline, a few benefits and a call to action....tell them to enter their name and email to get your FREE report. If you are selling something then you will probably want a longer video to make the sale.

I would recommend that you go to Clickbank and look at the top selling products there and look at their sales page. Are they mainly using video or text. This is a quick way to start because these top sellers have tested their videos and their copy and are getting results.

However, Old fashioned squeeze pages without video still work.

The main thing is to test and see how your prospects respond. If you are getting your prospects from social media places like Facebook, then you probably want to be a little more casual in your marketing because it is more a friend type of prospect as compared to trying to get a cold prospect, where you will want use more powerful sales copy to get them on your list or to make a sale.

As others have said, test it.

I tried using a video on my health niche. The conversion rate dropped to 7% with video, while the pure text was at a stead 22%.

A few more changes and now I'm enjoying 32% conversion rate for my squeeze page. Think of all the lost revenue if I had just stayed with the video!

Test, test, test.

Different strokes for different folks. I personally am a fan of text squeeze pages. There's no telling how fast a person's internet connection is, plus they have to wait until the video downloads via flash - and that can cause headaches too, even on a so-called "high speed" internet service.

As was mentioned above, it really comes down to whether or not you have a video that really affects people in some way. Usually these videos are very well done and hit an emotional point through the use of film. This is really an art.

Now, if you already have some authority and people know your face (and you're marketing only to people who already know you) just putting up a down-to-earth quick video of you in front of the camera can work.

In almost all cases though, less is more. The simple text based squeeze page is still the best in almost every case.

You wouldn't think so, but you'd have to test it.

I guess it depends upon the information that is being given. If it's all usable content, then it might, but if it's one of these really long videos that tell you nothing, and you're not already well know, then probably not.

There is the possibility of doing shorter videos though...

IMO people spend far too much time on traffic and opt-ins oppose to conversions, having longer sales copy will result in lower opt-in rate but can result in higher conversions..

For me, as a potential customer I prefer text but on the couple of squeeze pages where I've used video, I don't force people to watch it all the way through before deciding whether or not to opt in and I'm getting a steady number of opt-ins.

As others have said, so lomg as you're getting sufficient traffic to make a test valid, testing is definitely the way to go.

Hard to imagine, isn't it? :confused:

But many people feel really strongly that "people wouldn't be doing this unless it worked" and that "everyone else must have split-tested it". And if people are going to base their commercial decisions on "logic" like that, discussions about it with them become a bit futile.

Someone who split-tested reported above that video cut his conversion-rate by about two-thirds. Other split-testing results I've seen, in various different niches, have also been entirely in accordance with that sort of result. Others' mileages may vary.

But there are a lot of people making their livings providing video services of various kinds (remember that selling shovels is typically easier than digging for gold, even if many of the shovels are full of holes), and collectively the hype and nonsense you can find online about "the joys of video" does nearly as good a job on gullible marketers as the hype and nonsense you used to find a few years ago about other, now-totally-discredited, often purportedly SEO-based "techniques" (call me a skepchick but I've noticed that some of them are even promoted by the very same people, too!).

This thread's instructive: http://www.warriorforum.com/off-topi...o-content.html

If someone watches a 10 minute video and then decides to opt in, chances are they are a more valuable lead than someone who read a headline and enters an email address to get an ebook.

It's more about who doesn't opt in than who does.