At the Northern Voice conference I met Markus Frind, founder of Plentyoffish.com. He’s Google’s #1 Adsense user in Canada. His site is pulling in more than $10,000 per day from Google, he told me, and has millions of passionate users. Tens of millions of page views EVERY DAY. Whew!
What’s the secret to his success? Ugly design. I call it “anti-marketing design.”
Huh?
He says that sites that have ugly designs are well known to pull more revenue, be more sticky, build better brands, and generally be more fun to participate in, than sites with beautiful designs.
Ahh, yet another example of anti-marketing marketing.
He joins a good list. Google. Is it pretty? No. Craig’s List? Pretty? No. MySpace? Pretty? No.
He says he designed his site to be easy to use, fast to load, and uncluttered, but he didn’t pick pretty colors or fonts. He did, however, spend a lot of time learning how search engines indexed their contents.
Why does anti-marketing design work? Well, for one, big companies will never do a site that doesn’t look pretty. Why? Cause of the prevailing belief that great brands need to be beautiful. Look at what corporate branding experts study. Apple. Target. BMW. Everything those guys do is beautiful. Aesthetic. Crafted by committees of ad marketing department experts.
But, go deeper: we’re sick of committee-driven marketing. We don’t believe it. If we ever did. We’ve built a bulls**t filter that filters out well-designed things in a commercial context. We trust things more when they look like they were done for the love of it rather than the sheer commercial value of it. That’s why my Channel 9 videos work. What kind of company committee could come up with something like that? Let some goofy guy with a goofy laugh go around with a cheap camcorder, no lights, no makeup, no editing and record conversations? Fire the guy who came up with that! 
Look at Plentyoffish again. It was designed and coded by one guy: Markus. Seriously. One guy did that and is making all that cash. No committees. No experts. Just a guy who wanted to learn to program and did.
Oh, and I love that he picked .NET to code his site. It’s all running in .NET 2.0 and you should hear the praises he has for .NET. I wish I could film him and put him on Channel 9. It’d end all the talk that Windows isn’t scalable, isn’t secure, and can’t keep up a highly trafficed site.
But, back to the anti-marketing design. I think I accidentally fell into this as well. My design is ugly. Anti-marketing. Why? Because I wanted to make it fast. I didn’t choose a pretty font because doing so would have added a little bit of weight to my CSS file. Does this matter? I think it does. I read a LOT of blogs on my cell phone and mine loads WAY faster than many blogs out there.
It’s amazing how few corporate types get that the quality and engineering thought behind your HTML matters more than whether your site is pretty or not.
Maybe MySpace is kicking blogging’s behind because most blogs are simply too pretty!
By the way, his anti-marketing message continues right to his about page.
If it’s ugly is authentic. Not corporate. It is good. No?
The anti-marketing design is becoming popular.
http://www.aretheyopen.com is using it, and they are doing pretty well.
I will tell you that – screw ugly sites! This is not the stone age, you know. Even that I am not a design geek and don’t understand the idea behind XHTML, CSS certification and other stuff like that, I still prefer good looking sites over bad looking ones. Why? Because people who make their sites look good care about their visitors. Care about tomorrow, not about the early 90′s. And just in relation to this topic, I accidentally landed on an interesting story last week. Boy, was I agree with that guy. You bet I was! And even that I am not completely aware what the hell web 2.0 is I appreciate their effort to bring some light in this business. I am not sure how their profits will look in the end, but as for me, if I was a dating site user, I’d prefer their service, that’s for sure!
I will tell you that – screw ugly sites! This is not the stone age, you know. Even that I am not a design geek and don’t understand the idea behind XHTML, CSS certification and other stuff like that, I still prefer good looking sites over bad looking ones. Why? Because people who make their sites look good care about their visitors. Care about tomorrow, not about the early 90′s. And just in relation to this topic, I accidentally landed on an interesting story last week. Boy, was I agree with that guy. You bet I was! And even that I am not completely aware what the hell web 2.0 is I appreciate their effort to bring some light in this business. I am not sure how their profits will look in the end, but as for me, if I was a dating site user, I’d prefer their service, that’s for sure!
Wow, has this generated comment! Had to get to entry 63 by Tom Foremski for the denouement though. Sex sells and drives the net like nothing else – ask plentyoffish to set up another site for paperclips and compare. Buy you a drink if it works to the same degree…
Also think your marketing story would, on the other hand, make for a more intriguing article.
Cheers.
Wow, has this generated comment! Had to get to entry 63 by Tom Foremski for the denouement though. Sex sells and drives the net like nothing else – ask plentyoffish to set up another site for paperclips and compare. Buy you a drink if it works to the same degree…
Also think your marketing story would, on the other hand, make for a more intriguing article.
Cheers.
I’ve spoken with the owner of edate and he is not corporate and he just wants to offer a totally free dating service that takes on the big boys. It is currently pretty new so he is transferrring thousands of users over from another site!
I’ve spoken with the owner of edate and he is not corporate and he just wants to offer a totally free dating service that takes on the big boys. It is currently pretty new so he is transferrring thousands of users over from another site!
[...] 2 new ones for you: Truth about ugly websites and it’s original source (I think), Anti-Marketing-Design… both were lifted from Stylegala today. [...]
I find the sides first-class. Greetings from Schwarzenbek
I find the sides first-class. Greetings from Schwarzenbek
What i´ve learned on highschool is that design is not about beauty, it´s about function. If “ugly design” (in the sense of the lack of beautiness) works, it _is_ good design. Good “designers” know that!
What i´ve learned on highschool is that design is not about beauty, it´s about function. If “ugly design” (in the sense of the lack of beautiness) works, it _is_ good design. Good “designers” know that!
Interesting discussion … for me, it also depends on the subject/business of the site. Sometimes the content demands ugly design (=simple design?)
Interesting discussion … for me, it also depends on the subject/business of the site. Sometimes the content demands ugly design (=simple design?)
[...] Are we all out of a job? Purposefully ugly, anti-marketing design has some pretty persuasive champions, including Goggle, Craig’s List and this chap: Scobleizer [...]
Hi I also like asians, visit my blog at
http://allasianpass.spaces.msn.com/
Hi I also like asians, visit my blog at
http://allasianpass.spaces.msn.com/
Why The Anti-Marketing Marketing Book?
I’ve now shared with a few of my friends, in and out of the marketing industry, this blog and the larger idea of me writing a book. For the most part, the response has been quite encouraging….
So, true. I left working for this company because they wanted me to “design” a website to be perfectly porportionate. When they wanted me to redo the website for the 4th time because of a problem of being proportionate. I said effin* make the damn website your self!
So, true. I left working for this company because they wanted me to “design” a website to be perfectly porportionate. When they wanted me to redo the website for the 4th time because of a problem of being proportionate. I said effin* make the damn website your self!
on june,31 2006 i make 1097.05$ from google adsense. This is only 5
days only, you can see a little TIPS from this site
http://www.netdesignmedia.com/acne/index.php
- – - – - – - – - – - – - – - – - – - – - – - – - – - — – - – - – - – -
Ten Days Make 1000 Dollar
on june,31 2006 i make 1097.05$ from google adsense. This is only 5
days only, you can see a little TIPS from this site
http://www.netdesignmedia.com/acne/index.php
- – - – - – - – - – - – - – - – - – - – - – - – - – - — – - – - – - – -
Ten Days Make 1000 Dollar
[...] I read this story: 10,000 a day the other day and still haven’t stopped thinking about it. Here is a guy with a free dating site that is pulling in 10k in adsense revenue. The article is more about anti-marketing design, but I’m interested in what it takes to pull that kind of cash off a website. [...]
Love is Free. Why pay? Meet thousands of local singles. Never pay a cent. Instant access.
Love is Free. Why pay? Meet thousands of local singles. Never pay a cent. Instant access.
I am not sure that the issue is “ugly” versus “pretty” design, but maybe just simple and uncluttered versus overdone. I can imagine some awfully ugly designs that would be so busy they would likely not make much money. It would seem to me that one would be best served by a design that was simple, fast loading, and in some way distinctive. As for the site mentioned pulling in major bucks, I think that is has a lot more to do with servicing the most primary drive in humans, apart from eating and drinking
I am not sure that the issue is “ugly” versus “pretty” design, but maybe just simple and uncluttered versus overdone. I can imagine some awfully ugly designs that would be so busy they would likely not make much money. It would seem to me that one would be best served by a design that was simple, fast loading, and in some way distinctive. As for the site mentioned pulling in major bucks, I think that is has a lot more to do with servicing the most primary drive in humans, apart from eating and drinking
[...] I partially agree with some of the other propositions: that these sites succeed despite their bad design, that bad design is perceived as being more trustworthy in some cases, and that design is about more than just visual appearance. I definitely do not agree that ugly sites are more usable. [...]
[...] Every few months someone notices the top 20 sites on the internet are butt-ugly, thinks they’ve discovered something new, and sparks an argument with one side saying “design doesn’t matter” and the other side pointing to the innumerable examples of design mattering and having measurable impact on signups, clickthroughs, ROI, whatever. [...]
The Numeral not real for such site…. Real numeral well can 1000 well not as not 10000 . though tastesdiffer.com speaks that interrupt record of the home site
The Numeral not real for such site…. Real numeral well can 1000 well not as not 10000 . though tastesdiffer.com speaks that interrupt record of the home site
Is it my imagination but has the PlentyofFish website had a design change to make it more pretty since this article?
Is it my imagination but has the PlentyofFish website had a design change to make it more pretty since this article?
Buon luogo, congratulazioni, il mio amico!
Buon luogo, congratulazioni, il mio amico!
you’re mixing things up that are not necessarily related. design is good, if it serves its purpose well (and even better if it does not defy other purposes the designer might not even have thought about). “be beautiful” – which BTW is what the intended audience/the users perceive as beautiful or desirable esthetic qualities – is just one of several possible imperatives there. acknowledged: there is a certain share of designers out there who work more in a way like hairdressers or confectioners in a fancy, expressive would-be-artist way. your perception about design might have become a little bit distorted by those. and even them i.e. the better ones amongst them still do good design in areas where it is important to exactly do something their way. and then there are those specialists for a certain kind of hyperclean anal-retentative “professional-looking” corporate design which might visually please their clients – but not serve the purposes of their actual audience. and sadly quite often share certain visual preferences with those.
IMNSHO myspace works so well because it extremely lowers the entry barrier for anybody without visual skills, i.e. the largest share of people. it does not make users ashamed of their lack of skill.
google OTOH is absolutely clever designed. people still believe that it was simple. if you just take a look at the search engine this may still hold true, but the large and _complex_ majority of google’s services is hidden behind this facade of simplicity. perfect marketing, i would say.
and OTTH the dating site works well, because… well, it is a free dating site. it serves a need that has and propably will always be profitable to serve. heck, it might even work better and be even more succesful with a better interface, but neither can i prove this nor you can prove the contrary.
BTW, agencies and marketing departments of certain companies have been using non-corporate looking design very purposefully for quite some time now, especially where popular youth culture is concerned. and that’s also one point why, to me, anybody using the word “authentic” in public without turning beet red deserves a severe flogging for either being ill-spirited or for excessive naivity and extreme lack of insight. marketing already knows quite well, where it should not dress up like standard industry marketing to be perceived well.
maybe you should think again. there *are* some points in the original post, but in the end the conclusions drawn from them turn out as nothing but hot air.
you’re mixing things up that are not necessarily related. design is good, if it serves its purpose well (and even better if it does not defy other purposes the designer might not even have thought about). “be beautiful” – which BTW is what the intended audience/the users perceive as beautiful or desirable esthetic qualities – is just one of several possible imperatives there. acknowledged: there is a certain share of designers out there who work more in a way like hairdressers or confectioners in a fancy, expressive would-be-artist way. your perception about design might have become a little bit distorted by those. and even them i.e. the better ones amongst them still do good design in areas where it is important to exactly do something their way. and then there are those specialists for a certain kind of hyperclean anal-retentative “professional-looking” corporate design which might visually please their clients – but not serve the purposes of their actual audience. and sadly quite often share certain visual preferences with those.
IMNSHO myspace works so well because it extremely lowers the entry barrier for anybody without visual skills, i.e. the largest share of people. it does not make users ashamed of their lack of skill.
google OTOH is absolutely clever designed. people still believe that it was simple. if you just take a look at the search engine this may still hold true, but the large and _complex_ majority of google’s services is hidden behind this facade of simplicity. perfect marketing, i would say.
and OTTH the dating site works well, because… well, it is a free dating site. it serves a need that has and propably will always be profitable to serve. heck, it might even work better and be even more succesful with a better interface, but neither can i prove this nor you can prove the contrary.
BTW, agencies and marketing departments of certain companies have been using non-corporate looking design very purposefully for quite some time now, especially where popular youth culture is concerned. and that’s also one point why, to me, anybody using the word “authentic” in public without turning beet red deserves a severe flogging for either being ill-spirited or for excessive naivity and extreme lack of insight. marketing already knows quite well, where it should not dress up like standard industry marketing to be perceived well.
maybe you should think again. there *are* some points in the original post, but in the end the conclusions drawn from them turn out as nothing but hot air.
Paid dating sites do have an advantage over free dating sites because they can limit the amount of spammers. People on paid services need to use a credit card which, for the most part, assures that they are a real person that can be tracked back for spamming. Also, social networking sites like myspace are taking over but there are too many people to weed through. Also, they are flooded with spam too.
I recommend signing up on all dating sites and social networking sites if you are serious about meeting the right person. You might find a great date online, at a singles bar, or just walking down the street. However, the more that you, and or, your pictures are exposed to other singles the better chance you will have to find love, friendship, intimacy, a one night stand or whatever you are looking for.
Also, just think, if you find someone you like on a paid site is $20.00 to much money. Yes, it’s great to have the internet free but most free dating sites are full of ads, spam, players. Again, I would suggest using the free services too but just be prepared to figure out who is and is not trying to spam you.
Paid dating sites do have an advantage over free dating sites because they can limit the amount of spammers. People on paid services need to use a credit card which, for the most part, assures that they are a real person that can be tracked back for spamming. Also, social networking sites like myspace are taking over but there are too many people to weed through. Also, they are flooded with spam too.
I recommend signing up on all dating sites and social networking sites if you are serious about meeting the right person. You might find a great date online, at a singles bar, or just walking down the street. However, the more that you, and or, your pictures are exposed to other singles the better chance you will have to find love, friendship, intimacy, a one night stand or whatever you are looking for.
Also, just think, if you find someone you like on a paid site is $20.00 to much money. Yes, it’s great to have the internet free but most free dating sites are full of ads, spam, players. Again, I would suggest using the free services too but just be prepared to figure out who is and is not trying to spam you.
Common guys. I saw a lot of comments – bursting with envy.
900K CAD is about 800K USD. 400K per month (exclude tax fee). But do not forget that Markus should pay for HUGE outgoing traffic. 100K cash isn’t too much but very good for one person
He made nobody elso couldn’t dream about.
This is an example how an ordinary dating website can make so much money
So we have a chance too?
Common guys. I saw a lot of comments – bursting with envy.
900K CAD is about 800K USD. 400K per month (exclude tax fee). But do not forget that Markus should pay for HUGE outgoing traffic. 100K cash isn’t too much but very good for one person
He made nobody elso couldn’t dream about.
This is an example how an ordinary dating website can make so much money
So we have a chance too?
Good to hear such a thing.
Then my site is doomed for success, eh?
It is just disheartening to be abused to develop and market a beautiful website, which loads in 20 seconds, is barely crawlable and with no navigation.
Our own projects we (SEOs) go for.
To the previous comment.
I’d say Markus deserves what he gets. He has put hours, weeks, months and years into what he has created. So, why not?
If someone is jealous about Markus, I’d rather not imagine how they feel about Bill Gates.
Good to hear such a thing.
Then my site is doomed for success, eh?
It is just disheartening to be abused to develop and market a beautiful website, which loads in 20 seconds, is barely crawlable and with no navigation.
Our own projects we (SEOs) go for.
To the previous comment.
I’d say Markus deserves what he gets. He has put hours, weeks, months and years into what he has created. So, why not?
If someone is jealous about Markus, I’d rather not imagine how they feel about Bill Gates.
[...] Well, it turns out that some folks believe that MySpace is so insanely successful precisely because of how ugly it is. Shows what I know, huh? So about a year ago I went ahead and created a MySpace page so that I could give it a test drive, and also to possibly keep up with non-blogging friends and co-workers who are “MySpacers.” I don’t have much of a presence – pretty much just a place-holder to direct folks to my real sites – but hey, at least I gave it a shot. Any of you folks have a MySpace page? Share This Entry:These icons link to social bookmarking sites where readers can share and discover new web pages. [...]
[...] A new form of design, ugly design, is becoming a mainstream technique. What is ugly design? It’s a website that isn’t overly attractive or appealing to the eye, but serves a very useful purpose and is easy to navigate. [...]
Below is a letter I have been trying to get to Plentyoffish management. It has been a great site up until now. Obviously Mr. Frind has a few issues he needs to work out. I KNOW I have done nothing wrong, yet he has blocked me from his site probably at the behest of a “female” user that wanted to cause problems for me (as explained in the letter below that it seems he will never see)
Thanks,
Don
Mr. Frind,
It appears that you have blocked my access to your website. While you certainly have that right, I would like to ask you why. You are not obligated to discuss this with me but I would like to say that if you check your records you will find that I have used your site for quite some time and have never had a problem. There have been some disagreements with some of the other members from time to time, but as far as I know I have never done anything to warrant this.
I do suspect however that a female I blocked because she continued to solicit me to solve electrical problems for her is the cause of this. I have no idea what she may have said, but if you checked your records and found that I was in violation of your agreement, I would appreciate you letting me know what it was. I have tried to contact you after you have blocked my access when I try to re-establish a profile but you do not respond.
The only other incident was one female who was not expecting one of my photos to be shirtless, however I do not view that as a violation since I see women in skimpy clothing all the time and I saw nothing in your agreement that stated that a man without a shirt on was in violation. Furthermore, in this last instance, this particular lady continued to talk with me via instant messaging and had no issue with the photo after we talked. However, I doubt it was her but who knows? People do strange things.
So, I have no idea why you are blocking me. Would you care to explain or at least let me know what is going on?
Don
Below is a letter I have been trying to get to Plentyoffish management. It has been a great site up until now. Obviously Mr. Frind has a few issues he needs to work out. I KNOW I have done nothing wrong, yet he has blocked me from his site probably at the behest of a “female” user that wanted to cause problems for me (as explained in the letter below that it seems he will never see)
Thanks,
Don
Mr. Frind,
It appears that you have blocked my access to your website. While you certainly have that right, I would like to ask you why. You are not obligated to discuss this with me but I would like to say that if you check your records you will find that I have used your site for quite some time and have never had a problem. There have been some disagreements with some of the other members from time to time, but as far as I know I have never done anything to warrant this.
I do suspect however that a female I blocked because she continued to solicit me to solve electrical problems for her is the cause of this. I have no idea what she may have said, but if you checked your records and found that I was in violation of your agreement, I would appreciate you letting me know what it was. I have tried to contact you after you have blocked my access when I try to re-establish a profile but you do not respond.
The only other incident was one female who was not expecting one of my photos to be shirtless, however I do not view that as a violation since I see women in skimpy clothing all the time and I saw nothing in your agreement that stated that a man without a shirt on was in violation. Furthermore, in this last instance, this particular lady continued to talk with me via instant messaging and had no issue with the photo after we talked. However, I doubt it was her but who knows? People do strange things.
So, I have no idea why you are blocking me. Would you care to explain or at least let me know what is going on?
Don
Mr. Frind,
I forgot to tell you that you can contact me anytime at x2751@hotmail.com
Don
Mr. Frind,
I forgot to tell you that you can contact me anytime at x2751@hotmail.com
Don
How is his site not corporate? He is making money, the site doesn’t look bad and he is not doing it for free. Maddox wasn’t “corporate” until he had a book deal.