Why are there so many crap websites?

[Nick@Daydot]

I'm interested in opinions and perspectives on this question.

Whilst it's hard to get everything right all the time on a website there are many many sites that I (and you) encounter every day that have obvious (to me) usability problems. Sometimes we won't know that we've been positively or negatively influenced by a site design or wording (that's what A/B testing shows), but if you know what to look for there are so many easy fixes that could be done, as well as hard ones.

It's not a secret that good customer service including website usability makes a difference to the bottom line.

And yet even trying to give feedback to a site on issues is typically ignored. There are times when I've offered a free review, or actually done a professional review and sent it over and get no response - and I've not been touting for business, just trying to help. There's an element of people only valuing what they pay for.

I've worked in usability related roles for many years and have done a lot of research into what works and what doesn't on digital interfaces of different types. I know objectively many things that will degrade the experience of a website for a customer and lose money for the site owner. When I do paid professional reviews the site owners typically find them tremendously valuable. So I find it frustrating come across usability issues that can so easily be fixed.

It doesn't have to be expensive to discover issues with your site and fix them, but it does require will. My guess is that there's a lot of inertia where site owners are 'doing ok' and are busy. There'll be some who really don't understand that they are not the customer and that they could actually make more money with site improvements.

One cause is engineering houses who offer website builds but have no customer insight. They build pretty but dysfunctional sites. They don't do it intentionally, it's just not their core expertise.

I dream of a parallel universe where there's a prime time tv show or viral social media channel where people laugh at rubbish sites so the owners are motivated to do something.

What's your view?

 

[fisicx]

People often see a website as an expense and not an investment. This means they get suckered into using cheap hosting with rubbish site builders resulting in a useless website.

Or they employ a cheap freelancer who installs WP + elementor and delivers something pretty but pointless.

 

[Shopclicks]

Or they employ a cheap freelancer who installs WP + elementor and delivers something pretty but pointless.

Don't blame the page builder!

 

[antropy]

And yet even trying to give feedback to a site on issues is typically ignored.

You're confused because you've hit upon a marketing fact that's counter-intuitive until explained.

We too often come across terrible websites with errors on the pages and major problems. In the past we eagerly contacted the owners awaiting a pat on the back and the chance to bring on board a new client for our diligence.

But it never happened. Why?

People with good websites want better websites. People with bad websites don't care about websites.

Time for a car analogy ...

If you're trying to sell new Bentleys, would you look for someone with a beaten-up old Ford Fiesta? Of course you wouldn't. Would you look for someone with a nice Bentley that's perhaps just a few years old? Indeed, if you had any sense you would.

So the answer is that a website tells you whether the business owner cares about and is willing to spend on their website or not.

You would do better to focus on making good websites even better than fixing broken old ones that the owner clearly doesn't care about.

Paul.

 

[Mark T Jones]

There are many angles on this. Let's start with 'experts' put a site for review on here and the experts will often disagree on what is wrong or right. Experts on here, whose opinions I respect, still will often disagree.

Then there are the multitude of 'web designers'. Ignoring the 20 emails every day promising me a 'top performing website', there are hundreds of others who are honest in intent but who know zilch about marketing, conversion or customer experience their skills revolve around software and pretty design.

And finally, the customer. Most small businesses (hopefully excluding eCommerce) don't really know what their website is actually supposed to do. (I include myself in that category) somewhere between a brochure and a vague call to action. I once likened small business websites to sandwich toasters- bought in a blaze of glory, pored over for couple of months, before gathering dust and eventually being stuck under the sink.

We are slowly but inexorably moving away from the idea that every business has to have a website. Perhaps a side effect of ghat is that those who do have websites will take themselves more seriously.

 

[Nick@Daydot]

People with good websites want better websites. People with bad websites don't care about websites.

I get where you're coming from but don't entirely agree.

I've worked with business who just didn't realise how bad their site is. Once they get it they are keen to make improvements. I think there are many site owners like this. The question is how to help them get it.

 

[Nick@Daydot]

There are many angles on this. Let's start with 'experts' put a site for review on here and the experts will often disagree on what is wrong or right. Experts on here, whose opinions I respect, still will often disagree.

I wouldn't expect everyone to agree on everything - but I would expect a large degree of consensus between people who actually know what they're doing. Usually this will be based on a history of conducting or observing user research and AB testing, and an ability to articulate usability issues in terms of principles.

And finally, the customer. Most small businesses (hopefully excluding eCommerce) don't really know what their website is actually supposed to do. (I include myself in that category) somewhere between a brochure and a vague call to action.

I agree. Which is why a competent site designer should spend time with the client digging into this and if necessary doing research to understand customers and their needs, as well as the usability of a site. Of course, if a site owner just wants to pay someone to build a site to their specification without a debate then there's not much to be done about it other than do the job and take the money.

 

[Mark T Jones]

I agree. Which is why a competent site designer should spend time with the client digging into this and if necessary doing research to understand customers and their needs, as well as the usability of a site. Of course, if a site owner just wants to pay someone to build a site to their specification without a debate then there's not much to be done about it other than do the job and take the money.

Correct - the key differentiator between a quality provider (insert any value service) and a novice is the ability to ask questions and to effectively manage expectations.

That process in itself will weed out good value clients and cheapskates who thing that £500 will buy them a lead magnet.

Rather than free reviews, which have become a bit cliched - and are often mentioned in the afore-mentioned spam, I'd say a far more Enlighted and positive approach would be to open with questions around what they want their site to achieve s what it is actually achieving.

 

[JEREMY HAWKE]

Site quality is irrelevant if you have something in your warehouse that needs to be 300 miles away yesterday.

The customer just wants your phone number

 

[Shopclicks]

Site quality is irrelevant if you have something in your warehouse that needs to be 300 miles away yesterday.

The customer just wants your phone number

It's true that they may only need a phone number. But a clickable phone number in the header on a mobile friendly site might be a better idea (just in case they want to read a bit more about you)

 

[WaveJumper]

Interesting thread this, due to a rather large data breach in the press just recently which apparently has repercussions for myself I have been visiting all sites I have on record and doing some updating over the last few weeks. Which I have to say has left me pretty astonished at how badly some are set up and the lack of functionality when you actually try do do anything.

What I found even more surprising was when I did manage to speak to an actual person they / the company seemed to be either totally oblivious to the problems or as with one phone call today with a credit card company ...... "ah yes sir your quite right we've been having problems now for some time" ... but we can action your request over the phone.

So my advice for what its worth would be if you have a website go on it regularly and make sure it works like you think it should, it might look all shinny and have loads of bells and whistles but does it actual do what you think it should.

 

[Nick@Daydot]

What I found even more surprising was when I did manage to speak to an actual person they / the company seemed to be either totally oblivious to the problems or as with one phone call today with a credit card company ...... "ah yes sir your quite right we've been having problems now for some time" ... but we can action your request over the phone.

Yeah - but there's never a sense that it's being logged and passed on to the web team. Ironically this is something that's easier for small companies to do as the communication lines are shorter. Still doesn't happen much though.

So my advice for what its worth would be if you have a website go on it regularly and make sure it works like you think it should, it might look all shinny and have loads of bells and whistles but does it actual do what you think it should.

Yes, that's the right starting point, but I'd go further. I'd ask the customers what they think - or get someone to ask for me.

More generally when people say 'I know what my customers want and tell me about my site' you're hearing from people who've made it through the hurdles to be a customer. You're not hearing from the customers you could have had if the site had been better.

 

[fisicx]

Consider also many will have paid for their site and been sold a dream. You then come along and suggests it's a steaming pile and they get all upset. After all their developer is a really nice person and wouldn't have shafted them.

I had one client who paid £1500 for a site and didn't have any access. All changes had to be made by the developer (who charged extra). They paid me for a custom plugin that they then couldn't install because the developer didn't want to - apparently security. But they could pay the developer to build a plugin for them...

 

[Martin Patfield]

Yes - I hate our website. Not fit for purpose and I still haven't done anything productive about it.
I built a dummy site on Wordpress and got it ranked above our own official site without paying a penny. Just a bit of seo care and our ceo found it on a search 'recommended to take it down'. Great, so we have no visibility for people searching certain words which are extremely important to us getting enquiries.

Could be the difference between getting a few more projects in the bag or users just heading to our competitors.

 

[Nick@Daydot]

Yes - I hate our website. Not fit for purpose and I still haven't done anything productive about it.
I built a dummy site on Wordpress and got it ranked above our own official site without paying a penny. Just a bit of seo care and our ceo found it on a search 'recommended to take it down'. Great, so we have no visibility for people searching certain words which are extremely important to us getting enquiries.

Could be the difference between getting a few more projects in the bag or users just heading to our competitors.

I think it depend on how much your CEO understands about SEO and how people find your company. If he knows nothing much then coming across a random duplicate site might well be something to take down.

The sensible thing to do would be for him or her to find out about it and how you could make your current site more effective. So it might be that the best course would be for you to see if you can get some time with the CEO or someone who can influence them and do a short punchy presentation which gives the context and focuses on what it could do for the bottom line.

 

[Fagin2021]

My definition of a ‘crap’ site is a site that doesn’t do what it is intended to do – be that convert sales, generate leads, provide information, build brand awareness or whatever. It might be beautifully presented, load like lightning, be stuffed with great content and use the latest techniques and technologies but if it doesn’t fulfil its purpose – it’s ‘crap’.

The problem with my definition is that half the time, website owners don’t actually know what their site is for. Ask them and you’ll get answers like “nowadays you have to have a website” or “all our competitors have one” or “to let people know what we do”.

Years ago, before browsers blocked autoplay media, I spent a happy time trying to persuade a business owner that he should remove some really dire music that autoplayed whenever you visited, or reloaded, the home page.

“Ah”, he would say, “many of my customers tell me how much they like it.”

“Yes”, I’d reply “and how many of them wouldn’t buy from you if you didn’t have it? And how many people don’t buy from you because you do have it?

Try as I might to convince him to install some simple analytics software and run A/B tests, he was having none of it.

 

[thetiger2015]

Try as I might to convince him to install some simple analytics software and run A/B tests, he was having none of it.

...because that sounds really expensive and has no return for him. The music has generated a response and people say they like it. Why would he spend hundreds of pounds to find out that some people don't like the music? That's a waste of a few hundred pounds?

I understand web designers pointing out rubbish websites but the owners of most of those sites couldn't give two hoots. They get their enquiries from being on the golf course or down the pub, they would never ever get an enquiry from a website because their customers don't use websites, they're down the pub sitting next to them. Same as roofers, they stick a leaflet in your letterbox, they don't need a website for local customers, it's a waste of money and time, the leaflet does the trick and costs £50 for hundreds!

Plus, if you're selling locally, a website will just increase the volume of enquiries from areas you don't serve. Unless you start getting in to the complexity of geolocation and targeted ads etc. I don't think people with a rubbish website are going to have any clue about any of that, nor will they care.

 

[fisicx]

Roofers (and other trades) are a good example. Most don’t even need a website. They might possibly have GBP and even then it will never get updated.

The plumber we use doesn’t have any sort of online anything. He has enough clients to keep him busy all year.

 

[Fagin2021]

...because that sounds really expensive and has no return for him. The music has generated a response and people say they like it. Why would he spend hundreds of pounds to find out that some people don't like the music? That's a waste of a few hundred pounds?

You missed the point which is...
1. Customers didn't buy from him because they liked the music - they would have bought from him anyway.
2. He was potentially losing customers because it's generally accepted that music blaring out at you when you visit a site makes a lot of people leave immediately.
3. Testing would have revealed this. It's not expensive - you can do it for free.

Roofers (and other trades) are a good example. Most don’t even need a website. They might possibly have GBP and even then it will never get updated.

The plumber we use doesn’t have any sort of online anything. He has enough clients to keep him busy all year.

That's very true.

 

[Noke]

I'm interested in opinions and perspectives on this question.

Whilst it's hard to get everything right all the time on a website there are many many sites that I (and you) encounter every day that have obvious (to me) usability problems. Sometimes we won't know that we've been positively or negatively influenced by a site design or wording (that's what A/B testing shows), but if you know what to look for there are so many easy fixes that could be done, as well as hard ones.

It's not a secret that good customer service including website usability makes a difference to the bottom line.

And yet even trying to give feedback to a site on issues is typically ignored. There are times when I've offered a free review, or actually done a professional review and sent it over and get no response - and I've not been touting for business, just trying to help. There's an element of people only valuing what they pay for.

I've worked in usability related roles for many years and have done a lot of research into what works and what doesn't on digital interfaces of different types. I know objectively many things that will degrade the experience of a website for a customer and lose money for the site owner. When I do paid professional reviews the site owners typically find them tremendously valuable. So I find it frustrating come across usability issues that can so easily be fixed.

It doesn't have to be expensive to discover issues with your site and fix them, but it does require will. My guess is that there's a lot of inertia where site owners are 'doing ok' and are busy. There'll be some who really don't understand that they are not the customer and that they could actually make more money with site improvements.

One cause is engineering houses who offer website builds but have no customer insight. They build pretty but dysfunctional sites. They don't do it intentionally, it's just not their core expertise.

I dream of a parallel universe where there's a prime time tv show or viral social media channel where people laugh at rubbish sites so the owners are motivated to do something.

What's your view?

You know what they say, old people don't like change, and I am guessing that mostly they are old people who can't be bothered to change the layout because they would have to refamiliarize themselves with the new layout and that is too much effort on their side.

I mean I kind of get it, when Discord releases a new UI layout, I get pissed off for like 2 days, because I am unable to use the app efficiently. Then I get used to it and its back to normal, so I am guessing that they don't want that phase, and would rather stay in their comfort zone. Even thought it might be hurting sales.

 

[japancool]

You know what they say, old people don't like change, and I am guessing that mostly they are old people

Gosh, those stupid old people, eh?

 

[Noke]

Gosh, those stupid old people, eh?

Hahahha, yes. It's kind annoying telling them about any new concept, my grandpa truly believes that carrots makes his night vision better. No matter what I show him, he is like, "Nope" ?

 

[fisicx]

You know what they say, old people don't like change, and I am guessing that mostly they are old people who can't be bothered to change the layout because they would have to refamiliarize themselves with the new layout and that is too much effort on their side.

I know what you mean. I'm old and when they add new block to WP it's just too complicated for my poor old head. Takes me almost 20 minutes to work out what to do. When I was young I could do it in 10 minutes.

 

[Nick@Daydot]

You know what they say, old people don't like change, and I am guessing that mostly they are old people who can't be bothered to change the layout because they would have to refamiliarize themselves with the new layout and that is too much effort on their side.

I mean I kind of get it, when Discord releases a new UI layout, I get pissed off for like 2 days, because I am unable to use the app efficiently. Then I get used to it and its back to normal, so I am guessing that they don't want that phase, and would rather stay in their comfort zone. Even thought it might be hurting sales.

In my experience it's not limited to any particular age group. Older people will sometimes have more experience and broader perspectives and know when something needs changing.

 

[HFE Signs]

The worst thing you can do on any website is hide your phone number.

 

[AlanJ1]

The worst thing you can do on any website is hide your phone number.

I can think of a hell of a lot worse ?

 

[MarketingQuote]

Another thought is that technology moves on so quickly and trends come and go.

A great looking website today can look out of date tomorrow.

Our website was bespoke, then transferred to Wordpress back in 2006; keeping it looking modern is a challenge as there are so many databases that run in the background.

 

[Nick@Daydot]

Another thought is that technology moves on so quickly and trends come and go.

A great looking website today can look out of date tomorrow.

Our website was bespoke, then transferred to Wordpress back in 2006; keeping it looking modern is a challenge as there are so many databases that run in the background.

Yes and no. You're right that a site developed in 2006 probably wouldn't work too well now - it wouldn't have been designed for mobile as well, would be designed for lower screen resolutions and might have a left-hand menu etc.

If by database you mean the templating system then yes, but a datastore shouldn't affect the design of the front end.

And there are some universal principles that apply regardless - like 'make it clear what the site is about at the start', and 'group related items together, separate from non-related items'. Those type of things.

And ultimately there's the principle of finding out what the user thinks of the site, not the owner.

 

[fisicx]

And…

The website isn’t for you. It’s for your customers. Which means building what they want not want you want.

Our website was bespoke, then transferred to Wordpress back in 2006; keeping it looking modern is a challenge as there are so many databases that run in the background.

Not sure why the database will affect the front end. Keeping a Wordpress site looking modern is simple. All you need to do is update the theme.

 

[japancool]

Not sure why the database will affect the front end.

Kind of depends what the databases are doing. I've seen systems that have multiple, complex (and often outdated) databases parsing and processing data that makes making any front end changes quite complex.

But in general, yes, properly designed, the back end should not affect the front end.

 

[fisicx]

True, but this is pretty simple Wordpress site. There is only one database.

 

[Nick@Daydot]

Kind of depends what the databases are doing. I've seen systems that have multiple, complex (and often outdated) databases parsing and processing data that makes making any front end changes quite complex.

But in general, yes, properly designed, the back end should not affect the front end.

The complexity of back end systems can make it hard to change the flow of an application or get meaningful data to present to the user, but none of it prevents changing colours, fonts, words, layout etc

 

[japancool]

The complexity of back end systems can make it hard to change the flow of an application or get meaningful data to present to the user, but none of it prevents changing colours, fonts, words, layout etc

Again, it depends what the OP means by "looking modern".

 

[JEREMY HAWKE]

You know what they say, old people don't like change, and I am guessing that mostly they are old people who can't be bothered to change the layout because they would have to refamiliarize themselves with the new layout and that is too much effort on their side.

I mean I kind of get it, when Discord releases a new UI layout, I get pissed off for like 2 days, because I am unable to use the app efficiently. Then I get used to it and its back to normal, so I am guessing that they don't want that phase, and would rather stay in their comfort zone. Even thought it might be hurting sales.

It depends on how much money the business is making and if it is achieving the desired return for the owners
Far better to make a lot of money with Ol skol values than subscribe to the above attitude with limited knowledge and experience of how to gain valuable customers using all disciplines

 

[Nick@Daydot]

It depends on how much money the business is making and if it is achieving the desired return for the owners
Far better to make a lot of money with Ol skol values than subscribe to the above attitude with limited knowledge and experience of how to gain valuable customers using all disciplines

Well, if a site is delivering what the owner wants, and they don't want to expand the business or make more money then ok. But it's also a trap for owners to say 'my site's doing what I want' when in fact they could be doing even better.

 

[japancool]

Rajiv, Suraj and co. from India tell me my site is crap all the time, and keep telling me how I too, can be on the first page of Google.

 

[The Guru]

I'm interested in opinions and perspectives on this question.

Whilst it's hard to get everything right all the time on a website there are many many sites that I (and you) encounter every day that have obvious (to me) usability problems. Sometimes we won't know that we've been positively or negatively influenced by a site design or wording (that's what A/B testing shows), but if you know what to look for there are so many easy fixes that could be done, as well as hard ones.

It's not a secret that good customer service including website usability makes a difference to the bottom line.

And yet even trying to give feedback to a site on issues is typically ignored. There are times when I've offered a free review, or actually done a professional review and sent it over and get no response - and I've not been touting for business, just trying to help. There's an element of people only valuing what they pay for.

I've worked in usability related roles for many years and have done a lot of research into what works and what doesn't on digital interfaces of different types. I know objectively many things that will degrade the experience of a website for a customer and lose money for the site owner. When I do paid professional reviews the site owners typically find them tremendously valuable. So I find it frustrating come across usability issues that can so easily be fixed.

It doesn't have to be expensive to discover issues with your site and fix them, but it does require will. My guess is that there's a lot of inertia where site owners are 'doing ok' and are busy. There'll be some who really don't understand that they are not the customer and that they could actually make more money with site improvements.

One cause is engineering houses who offer website builds but have no customer insight. They build pretty but dysfunctional sites. They don't do it intentionally, it's just not their core expertise.

I dream of a parallel universe where there's a prime time tv show or viral social media channel where people laugh at rubbish sites so the owners are motivated to do something.

What's your view?

You raise fascinating points about how website success isn't always tied to perfect design. While usability matters, compelling copy that addresses customer pain points often drives conversions more than polished aesthetics.


I've noticed businesses frequently prioritize visual appeal over addressing their customers' core problems. A "pretty" but ineffective website misses opportunities to connect with visitors and convert them into customers.

 

[DontAsk]

Rajiv, Suraj and co. from India tell me my site is crap all the time, and keep telling me how I too, can be on the first page of Google.

Same here. Even when I had a simple hand-coded html site with a PayPal button I was top of the Google search for the product, when searching by function. Built a successful, if v small, business, shipping all, over the world.

 

[Chris Ashdown]

I have had reason to look at two US sites this week and both were apaling in design and the payment sections the absolute pits. admittedly they were relatively small companies but no need for rubbish just like the first UK sites 25 years ago

 

[Nudge]

I'm interested in opinions and perspectives on this question.

Whilst it's hard to get everything right all the time on a website there are many many sites that I (and you) encounter every day that have obvious (to me) usability problems. Sometimes we won't know that we've been positively or negatively influenced by a site design or wording (that's what A/B testing shows), but if you know what to look for there are so many easy fixes that could be done, as well as hard ones.

It's not a secret that good customer service including website usability makes a difference to the bottom line.

And yet even trying to give feedback to a site on issues is typically ignored. There are times when I've offered a free review, or actually done a professional review and sent it over and get no response - and I've not been touting for business, just trying to help. There's an element of people only valuing what they pay for.

I've worked in usability related roles for many years and have done a lot of research into what works and what doesn't on digital interfaces of different types. I know objectively many things that will degrade the experience of a website for a customer and lose money for the site owner. When I do paid professional reviews the site owners typically find them tremendously valuable. So I find it frustrating come across usability issues that can so easily be fixed.

It doesn't have to be expensive to discover issues with your site and fix them, but it does require will. My guess is that there's a lot of inertia where site owners are 'doing ok' and are busy. There'll be some who really don't understand that they are not the customer and that they could actually make more money with site improvements.

One cause is engineering houses who offer website builds but have no customer insight. They build pretty but dysfunctional sites. They don't do it intentionally, it's just not their core expertise.

I dream of a parallel universe where there's a prime time tv show or viral social media channel where people laugh at rubbish sites so the owners are motivated to do something.

What's your view?

You’re absolutely spot on—so many websites overlook usability, even when small fixes could make a huge difference to customer experience and conversions. I think a big part of the problem is what you mentioned—inertia. If a site is “doing okay,” it’s easy to put improvements on the back burner, especially when owners are juggling so many priorities. I’ve seen this a lot in e-commerce—beautiful sites with clunky navigation or confusing checkout processes that drive customers away. And you’re right, it’s not always about big, expensive changes. Sometimes it’s simplifying forms, improving mobile responsiveness, or clarifying calls-to-action that instantly move the needle. I also think data plays a role here. Business owners sometimes don’t realise what they’re losing because they aren’t looking at bounce rates, abandoned carts, or session recordings to spot problems. Tools like Hotjar or Google Analytics help, but you still need the will to act on what they reveal. I love your idea of a viral social media channel showcasing website fails—gentle humour with actionable fixes could actually work as a wake-up call. Until then, I guess we’ll keep chipping away at awareness, one conversation at a time! Curious—what’s the biggest usability mistake you find again and again?