How much do you charge for a heuristic evaluation? $200 sounds really bargain basement.

And why would the owner choose the most valuable comments?

And how could reviewers ensure they're not wasting their time, since the client wouldn't exactly be giving briefings on user profiles etc?

Posted by: Frank on June 6, 2002 11:39 PM

 

interesting idea...but why would I pay for this link? are you offering some level of traffic that the site wouldn't get otherwise? I guess you'd have to check the click thru and conversion rate on the links and provide back some reporting as well to the company paying for the link

Posted by: scott on June 6, 2002 11:51 PM

 

I love this idea. The key success factor is whether the incentive to view and comment on a site is high enough. There is a value in the subscribers you have, and it seems a reasonable way of accessing them.

Maybe a better approach would be to invite participants to be on a panel. Nothing fancy, just a simple registration with, for example, sex, geographic location and age. Webword could sell a service to companies where they would have access to the panel. They could set the questions or use a standard questionnaire.

Maybe a $10 per participant fee would be reasonable if, say, five took part? Keep the questions they are asked down to a miniumum. Could be a nice extra stream of income after a while if marketed well.

It would be great to target web and system design companies - I'm sure I be delighted to offer this service as an "extra" to my clients. (Independent review of your site by 5 individuals for just $200...!)

Hey, I'll be writing a business plan next... Now... where's the reseller programme :-) I'd be interested in doing something like this in the UK.

Regards,
David.

Posted by: David on June 7, 2002 02:07 AM

 

I think it's a good idea and would participate in review.

Posted by: James Tuddenham on June 7, 2002 03:58 AM

 

What's the point of reviews if you know practically nothing about a site's mission, its target users, profiles, etc.?

I'm short on time, so I'll write in more detail later tonight.

Posted by: MadMan on June 7, 2002 04:37 AM

 

FYI "Open Usability-Test Forum" does this in a non-commercial way in german. have a look at http://open.usability-test.net

I like the idea (as well as john's webword).

Posted by: Freies Usability-Wissen on June 7, 2002 04:42 AM

 

Test it and let us know what happens. In a way, you are setting yourself up as a conduit for people who otherwise would not get together. I'm guessing you do best if you did some matchmaking research ahead of time and gave specific interest groups of people links that they might like/want/need. If that is not done, I believe most people will not open the link. I wouldn't normally take the time unless I thought you were giving me something you felt was worth my time personally.

Posted by: mark on June 7, 2002 06:24 AM

 

i really like this idea john, go for it!!!

Posted by: hopbot on June 7, 2002 09:39 AM

 

The review service you're proposing is a great idea, and it is worth much more than $200. The creative solutions that will come from the reviews of this group will easily save thousands of dollars for the target sites. I would start the service at around $400-500 to get it off the ground, then increase it to $1000-2000.

The quality of the reviews would naturally need to be higher than if the service were $200, but the reviewers would be duly compensated from the increase in revenue. These reviews should not only note general problems and vague solutions, but should include a specific suggestions.

Alternatively, you could offer a range of services that cost from $200-2000. Quick, general reviews from 2-3 webheads for $200, and deliberated, in-depth reviews from 5 or more webheads for $2000+.

Posted by: Todd on June 7, 2002 10:34 AM

 

I wonder about how this will really work for the company paying for the ad. In cases where a non-web knowledgeable worker pays for the ad, how will they know what 2 or 3 comments are most valuable out of all of them? They may choose the 3 most useless comments because it is what they want to hear or it is what they understand, but doesn't provide much actual value as to the usability of their site or what the main issues they should focus on. Do you have concerns about situations like this and how it would reflect on yor company?

Posted by: Deirdre on June 7, 2002 11:03 AM

 

"Good idea? Bad idea? Too capitalistic? Too stupid?" I'm leaning toward the last three...

Consider your assumptions:

That the reviews would be done and be valueable to the website owner.

Other people would benefit from the reviews.

The website owners' choice would encourage valueable reviews.

You deserve to generate a profit from such a venture.

Sounds like something taken directly from a .con business plan.

Posted by: Ron Zeno on June 7, 2002 01:06 PM

 

The idea is good. But it would be a great idea if you had a dedicated backend system to support everything, which is where the real cost would be involved. Kind of like a heuristic evaluation version of Google Answers? Instead of charging a flat rate, the websites who want the review could determine how much it's worth to them based on the size/complexity of the site. I think the traffic generated from the link would be a small portion of the companies return on investment.

Posted by: Joshua Kaufman on June 7, 2002 03:07 PM

 

How many web site owners would want their reviews posted and available to the public? And if you kept them private, how would the community of web developers benefit?

Posted by: on June 7, 2002 03:48 PM

 

I heard something about this recently and it was explained to me in such a way so that I totally see the gain here... a gain for everyone involved; the average viewer, the owner of the website that is being linked to and you, the owner of webword. Great idea!

Posted by: asdf on June 7, 2002 08:02 PM

 

I can personally tell you that although this is a great idea, it has many, many pitfalls. Talking from experience, my website spidermetrix.com has been providing exactly that service for the last two years.

It has taken us this long to establish the business, get a reasonably sized (and diverse) panel, and most importantly prove to the clients that what we offer is a truly great service (and not yet another pay-for-clicks rip-off).

Please, before you jump into it, talk to me, I am always on the look out for business partners and affiliates throughout the world. We have the infrastructure in place, and the membership to support Web Site Reviews.

Posted by: Jerry Evas on June 8, 2002 03:23 AM

 

Charge $1000 not $200 - pay 5 participants $100 not $10. Then I may be interested in participating. The product quality would be much higher. Don't ask the client to "vote" - though you can pay-for-performance.. give the top 1 or 2 participants a bonus or withhold some payment if the partipicant's review was lacking, etc, etc. But don't do this thing as a "bargain basement" service - it'll attract the wrong type of client.

I think a good idea if you can get it in front of decision makers and get them to buy it (now that's the tricky part of all this, as always.. ;)

-Ryan

Posted by: Ryan Walker on June 9, 2002 09:49 PM

 

I echo: great idea, and far too cheap. It doesn't have the ring of a .con concept to me because it is genuinely unleashing one of the net's most powerful forces: the ability to form narrow communities of interest (as opposed to location).

I do this service for free via chinwag's usability forum in the UK, as well as for SealedMedia's clients as an additional consulting service (not for free and still very highly valued). I would *love* to have a way to provide such services to several clients which:
- centralised admin and marketing effort
- allowed me to serve more clients in less time
- was low-cost to clients ($1000 for a full eval)

Posted by: Ben Hunt on June 11, 2002 02:43 AM

 

John,

Very good idea.

By posting an advertisement via webword we have already received valuable feedback on how to improve our site. Watch for a new site soon ;)

Think you would need to provide some "structure" (for consistency) around the evaluation review and John Rhodes could refine the findings to deliver a more polished report (as you would normally do for your customers)

Also suggest defining what part of the site you want people to review and agree with Madman on getting some initial data from the customer (person who wins this) like - "site's mission, its target users, profiles" etc

Would also prefer less on the review committee as per Ryan Walker's suggestion.

Posted by: Daniel on June 12, 2002 04:27 AM