1) The top screenshots coming into foreground is a nice touch, but something seems choppy about the animation. I think it's less to do with the currently hovered image, but what happens to the previous image you had selected. It seems to just drop away in one frame, which looks awkward. Maybe moving it to background instantly, but putting a delay to slide back down would be better; it's difficult to visualize though.
2) Nobody really clicks through carousels anymore, and waiting for them to move automatically is irritating. Not sure what would be better, but consider something else if that information is important.
3) The sticky header at the top is not my favorite thing, and this may just be personal preference. I will actually close a website that does that to me. I may be alone here.
Is there a data point to back up this statement? I know I definitely do click through carousels, if I'm intrigued enough about what might be there.
Of course you click through if you're intrigued enough. I'm not sure carousels are meant to create intrigue about a product. I'm not really sure what their purpose is. Every carousel I've seen has been probably better off being displayed all at once rather than one at a time. This is the Internet, many people (barring disabled/elderly users, who shouldn't be ignored) are used to consuming a lot of data simultaneously, most don't want it fed through a tiny straw.
I see them as a design fad that are typically asked for because someone's friend/competitor has one, or "ooh, ahh" 'ed at by clients who didn't know animation on web pages was possible.
Theres isn't a lot of data to support the claims, but its a nice read anyway.
That's a little presumptuous, don't you think? I can read it, as can many other people who have commented. Don't assume no one here can understand Dutch or any other language for that matter.
What I meant of course is: most of the people cannot read it. So, lets trigger them to judge the design, just by its design. This gave me a lot of new insights I want to thank everyone for :)
The pricing table seems a little silly, since most of the points are similar across all three price levels... It's a table for the table's sake, I guess.
Also, I personally think the pricing is fairly steep for what you're offering. I actually have an eenmansbedrijf and I spend very little time per year doing invoicing and taxes, let alone per month. Maybe you need different price differentiation, i.e. make it cheap for < 20 invoices / year. That would actually let me ease into it.
I don't like such an experience. This is exactly why I don't differentiate in functionality, but only in price based on the commitment. Our target customers are freelancers, our companies with at most two employees.
We only have one plan: THE AWESOME PLAN. Depending on how long you're willing to commit, you get a discount. I agree the table could point that out a little bit better.
I don't think many poeple will actually click through the carrousel "Dit kan MoneyMonk voor jou betekenen..." so it might be better to condense it down a bit and make it into a long-form page.
Also, that the screenshots at the top move up is nice but I still can't see enough to figure out what they're actually saying...
But al met al zeker wel een mooie site...
Good point about the carrousel. I might want to track some events to see if people actually use it. But if it is a long form, doesn't that hurt the experience? On massive long page?
You are actually able to click on the screenshots, but I guess we could make that more clear? Thanks for the feedback! Much appreciated!
Concerning the business model I just wanted to say that I feel the biggest opportunity in this area is actually for a site where you can just send all your digital correspondence and have it either stored or processed by a bookkeeper.
You can combine that with a service that will receive all your mail and digitize it for you or offer a discount on a Fujitsu ScanSnap (doable for yearly plans e.g.) and have the scans sent straight to your service.
In the Netherlands Yuki gets close but their UI is bad and costs are too steep to also send non financial documents there.
By the way, I dig the anchor name of the pricing section.
(I'm a happy customer of MoneyBird)
Of course there are similarities, giving the fact we target the same audience. But I really think we have a different kind of product. This sort of competition is only a good thing. It keeps us all motivated to make the best software for our customers. In the end it is the customer who wins.
We thought: what is accounting about? It is about registering financial facts. That's what we actually do. We optimized the user interface for normal human beings registering financial facts. We are then able to derive the entire accountancy fundament with double entries, ledgers, etc.
Suppose one transfers 100 euro from their bank book to the cash book. This should be registered using a cross post (don't know if this is the correct term). No human being (freelancer) understands this. But if they can select: oh, this was a cash withdrawal, Money Monk knows how to register the financial facts.
How does moneymonk compare to moneybird?
However, my first language is English. I do struggle a lot with Dutch taxes as my speaking is generally better than reading/writing. I wonder if it would be worth you offering an English localization of your site? I know there are a lot of ZZP'ers in the Netherlands whose first language is not Dutch (my gf works for a recruitment company, and they recruit heavily from Italy, Spain, and India).
The past couple of weeks I've been reading a lot of great articles online, viewed a couple of inspiring TED talks and other video's, and I used that information to build the landing page.
Tomorrow I'm going to try to recap which articles I read, which video's I watched, and I'll write about it in a blogpost.
(Temporary hack while you add in @media queries, I assume)
You offer different plans to make one sound like a bargain, you offer an expensive one to make the others look relatively cheap and you offer a cheap one too. No-one chooses the cheapest wine.
It's a human psychology thing, nothing to do with features. If you aren't using this trick, you probably shouldn't present it like that as it's confusing.
You can use support levels instead or something to make an expensive premium plan if you want to take advantage of this marketing 'trick' that everyone else uses.
In the beginning we need cash flow, cash is king. So we hope lots of people buy the 2-year-deal. We are not trying to trick anyone. And I want an easy product, not a complicated one with different kind of support levels etc. No, I target a very specific audience, where there is no room for feature differentiation, imho. But who knows, this is just my feeling right now, we might change the offers in the future.