Ask HN: How far can you go when disparaging a competitor in your marketing copy? | Hacker News Reader

Ask HN: How far can you go when disparaging a competitor in your marketing copy?

2 pointschubs6 comments

Hi all,

I'm thinking of building a subscription web app, as a simpler-but-cleaner competitor to an entrenched current service. Every one of the last few places i've worked has used this existing service, so i know there's a huge market, and anecdotal evidence suggests that most people don't really like using it, so i think there's room for a competitor.

I've been thinking that in my marketing copy, it'd be great to position myself as 'the anti-xyz', and comprehensively cover their weaknesses to contrast against the purported simplicity and strengths of my service. In this way, i think i could really resonate with people's current dislike of the existing service, and hopefully build an opinionated fan base of customers.

But i'm worried about legal exposure - would i at any risk of being sued for trademark infringement, libel, or anything else for using my competitors name in my marketing copy and pointing out their weaknesses?

FWIW I'm in australia, and so is the competitor.

The less accounting guys took a slightly different approach which was to collect what the users hated about their competitor rather than saying it themselves:

http://weallhatequickbooks.com/

If your competitor is as well used as you say this might work for you.

You'll probably get a better answer from a local startup forum, laws on competitive advertising vary heavily from country to country.

Good point. I think i'll do just that.

I wouldn't speak negatively of them nor their shortcomings. Instead, I'd focus on positively promoting the benefits your platform offers.

The fact that your benefits happen to solve their problems is just a convenient coincidence.

Thanks for your response.

I've considered that approach - it's kind of like taking the moral high ground, isn't it? Which is great. However, i think i could really hit a nerve in the marketplace with people who use X but really hate it, and it would position my product brilliantly.

As opposed to 'this product will do X really well'. I think the copy would pretty much write itself if i said 'Are you using X but sick of how complicated it is? I'll do the same job, but in half the time and with half the headaches.'

I'm just thinking this approach, however risky it is, could really be a lightning rod for attention. However i'm really interested to see what others think around here?

The point though, is that if they're really feeling that pain, they'll 'know what you mean' either way.

For example, people who hate Java's verbose syntax are instantly attracted to "minimal syntax" and "faster development time" claims, while equating that to their own pain points automatically. Plus, then it seems more like a solution to them than something panning the competition, and endears themselves more to your service without having had to resort.

Simply put, you're likely to get better traction if you don't go negative, and if the pain points you mention are real, you don't need to spell out that you are "less wordy than Java." Just prove that you can get the same output with less work.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com