Theres lots of scribblings on the web today about the use of ugly design/lack of design to make a website sell.
Here is the article that started it all and a link to the full story.
I wouldnt mind some comment, as it is a toughy….
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.
Click here for air bags strong rebuttal
Click here for a slightly less partisan response
I think ‘anti-marketing’ is just an excuse used by poor designers.
MySpace has been successful because of the service it offers, not because it looks like crap. If an ugly-designed site pulls more revenue that a nicely designed one, its because the service it offers is superior.
Is Markus Frind trying to say that if his site was well-designed, it wouldn’t do as well? And that he actually put some thought into its design? Please.