Need honest feedback on my marketing pages - please help :)
I’ve recently launched VIViD, a deep career and work-fit assessment for people who feel misaligned at work but cannot clearly explain why.
It is not a quick personality quiz. Users answer over 100 written questions, with adaptive follow-up questions based on their answers, then receive a personalised report (about 20 pages) showing where the real friction is: the work, the environment, the people around them or the pattern they keep repeating.
I’d really value honest feedback on the marketing pages.
Mainly:
Does the message make sense quickly?
Does it feel clear who it is for?
Does it sound compelling enough to try?
Is anything confusing, vague or too abstract?
Would you understand what you are buying?
I’m especially interested in whether the page explains the value clearly without sounding like another generic assessment.
Link: https://www.askviv.id
Any blunt feedback welcome. I’m too close to it now.
Hey Neil — ran askviv.id through an automated audit while reading this. Complementing the copy notes above, here are the mechanics findings:
Design: 100/100. The site looks polished — that's not what's holding back conversions.
Conversion score: 42/100. Three specific issues the scanner flagged:
No lead-capture form detected. Zero forms on the page. Someone finishes reading and wants to take a step — there's nowhere to go except a phone call many won't make. Even a simple "get a free 2-page sample" email field would catch people who are convinced but not ready to buy yet.
CTA button text is missing. Your primary action button likely has no readable text (image-rendered or JS-injected), meaning screen readers skip it and crawlers can't see it. Hard-code
<button>Start my assessment</button>in plain HTML.Title tag is 27 characters (optimal 50–60). Google pads or truncates it in search results, losing the value prop before anyone lands.
Quick fix prompt for Cursor/Claude:
That addresses the biggest gap the scan found.
(If you want all remaining findings — full free audit at outboundautonomy.com)
Correction to my earlier audit — being straight with you. My tool captured your page before it rendered, so the cookie banner was the only thing in frame and I wrongly said your only CTA was "Cookie Settings." That's wrong — your "Book a call" CTA and your proof cards ($37M exit, $10K MRR, 300k→1M+ users) are right there above the fold, and they're excellent. Re-ran it clean. Real improvements worth your time: the cookie banner overlaps your Tactiq proof card on first paint (move it to a slim bottom bar so it doesn't cover credibility at the key moment); body/testimonial text contrast is a touch low for WCAG AA; and you've got two competing CTAs (Book a call vs Connect on LinkedIn) — make "Book a call" the one dominant button. Minor: 0 schema blocks, so add Person/ProfessionalService JSON-LD for rich results.
Hi There, thanks for taking the time to feedback. I'm a little confused if your reply is for my product as I don't have a book a CTA call or the proof cards?
Sorry Neil — that correction was for a completely different audit (pmmwithtaste.com, Mike Savoff's B2B marketing page) and landed in your thread by mistake. My error entirely. Your VIViD findings are untouched.
Your actual numbers: Design 100, Conversion 42. The gaps are structural — no lead-capture form anywhere on the page, no actionable CTA button text, and a 27-char title tag that gives search engines almost nothing to work with. None of that has anything to do with booking CTAs or $37M exit proof cards — that was Mike's site, not yours.
One update worth sharing: we just shipped screenshot-based visual analysis. Claude looks at what actually renders in the browser on first load — what a designer would see — not just what's in the HTML. First real result from a SaaS page (talonwatch.com, Design 100 structurally but visual score 68):
That last finding is relevant to VIViD specifically: if your email capture or call booking link is below the fold, first-pass visitors never reach it. Visual analysis finds that where HTML scoring misses it entirely.
Full example breakdown: https://outboundautonomy.com/audit/05152/talonwatch-com?ref=ih-askviv
One more piece that complements aryan_sinh's copy work — the visual pass shows WHERE on askviv.id your messaging actually lands on first load: which sections are above the fold, where the form sits, what a visitor sees before they decide to scroll. Copy tells you what to say; visual tells you where to put it. Want me to run it tonight? Screenshot-grounded, ~10 minutes.
The product sounds useful, but I think the page probably needs to make the pain feel sharper before explaining the assessment.
“People who feel misaligned at work” is accurate, but a bit soft. The buyer is probably feeling something more specific: they are drained, stuck, underperforming in a role that should fit on paper, or unsure whether the problem is the job, the manager, the environment, or themselves.
That confusion is the real buying trigger.
I’d make the first message less about “deep career assessment” and more about helping someone diagnose why work feels wrong before they make another career move blindly.
Something like:
“Find out whether your work problem is the role, the environment, the people around you, or the pattern you keep repeating.”
That feels more concrete than another work-fit assessment.
The bigger GTM question is also tied to this. Your first buyers probably are not generic career-growth people. They are people actively searching around burnout, job dissatisfaction, career change, toxic workplace, or “should I quit my job?” style problems.
Happy to write a tighter page/first-buyer breakdown if useful. There’s a clear angle here, but the current framing probably needs to hit the pain faster.
Thanks for the feedback, I agree. Do you think the actual website wording needs altering? Would love to see your thoughts for the copy. thanks Neil
Yes, I think the wording needs changing.
The core issue is that “career assessment” sounds calmer than the problem your buyer is actually feeling. The page should probably lead with the confusion behind the search: is it the role, the manager, burnout, the work environment, or a repeated pattern?
That is where the copy can become much sharper.
Drop your email and I’ll send over a tighter version. Easier to make it useful in writing than turning the thread into a full homepage teardown.
thanks, my email is [email protected]
Just sent you a note.
Kept it focused on the homepage wording, pain-first framing, and the clearest buyer angle for Askvivid.