The goal is not to present a comparison table. We will create a page that holds the "criteria" for comparison and takes the lead in selection.
The loss of orders in B2B manufacturing is more a result of being buried in the "comparison arena" than losing to competitors. What the other party is comparing is not just price, but also quality, range of services, risk, reliability of delivery times, structure, track record, and guarantees. However, many company websites do not organize the materials for comparison, creating a situation where customers can only "compare based on price." In this service, we will extract the criteria where your strengths can win and create a comparison page that incorporates a compelling structure to win in competitive comparisons. You can choose whether or not to mention competitor names. The key is to design it in a way that reduces confusion in the comparison process and leads to consultations. ■ Provided Content (3 points) 1. Design of comparison criteria (organizing the decision-making materials that customers truly care about) 2. Articulation of differentiation (conditions where your company can win, scope of application, and rationale) 3. Page creation (comparison table/FAQ/case study pathways/CTA) Deliverables: A complete set of competitive comparison pages (structure, copy, comparison table, pathways, implementation specifications) *If you know the names of 2-3 competitors, please provide them; if not, please tell us the "common reasons for losing." We will design from the comparison criteria.
Inquire About This Product
basic information
■Provided Content Basic Structure of Comparison Page (Winning Model) - "How to Choose Without Failing in Comparisons" (Presentation of Judgment Criteria) - Differences Among Methods and Companies (Comparison Table/Comparison Diagram) - Conditions Under Which Our Company Can Win (Scope of Application/Conditioning Strengths) - Evidence (Quality System/Process/Standards/Track Record/Warranty) - Common Misunderstandings (FAQ for Counterarguments) - Next Steps (Consultation Permission Type CTA) Handling Both Showing and Not Showing Competitor Names - Showing: Direct Comparison (Can target SEO but requires careful management) - Not Showing: Taking the Lead with Method Comparison and Selection Criteria Comparison Design Points for Comparison Table - Not Just Focused on Price (Include Risks, Certainty, and Systems) - Place "Winning Axes" at the Top (Design the Reading Order) - Weak Axes Should Be Reinforced with Explanations (Clarify Conditions, Premises, and Misunderstandings) Navigation Flow - Comparison Page → Technical Page → Products → Case Studies → FAQ → Consultation - Can be differentiated for Purchasing (Approval Materials) / Designers (Application Conditions)
Price information
600,000 to 2,500,000 yen (varies based on comparison difficulty, data preparation, and implementation) - Basic (comparison criteria + structure + comparison table + copy): 600,000 to 1,200,000 yen - Standard (basis preparation + FAQ + navigation + CTA): 1,200,000 to 1,800,000 yen - Expanded (multiple comparison pages, method comparison × competitor comparison set): 1,800,000 to 2,500,000 yen * "Estimate required" notation is also acceptable.
Delivery Time
※Minimum 2 weeks / Standard 3 to 6 weeks
Applications/Examples of results
■Concerns Compared on price and ultimately lose Inquiries come in, but the decisive factors are not communicated Unable to explain the differences from competitors, leading to exhausted sales efforts Often stalled in the approval process (insufficient decision-making materials) Want to win in comparisons without mentioning competitors' names ■Deliverables Comparison axis design sheet (decision-making materials and weighting) Comparison page structure proposal (section design) Comparison table (item design + wording) Copy (top explanatory text + each section) Evidence content proposal (identification of necessary materials) FAQ (objection handling: price, delivery time, quality, scope, guarantee) CTA design (consultation permission type → estimate → confirmation of estimate conditions) Implementation specifications (input structure assuming CMS) *optional ■Purpose Improving win rates in comparative evaluations (control over decision-making axes) Avoiding price competition (differentiation through conditions, risks, and systems) Advancing the approval process (preparation of materials for purchasing) Improving inquiry quality (meeting applicable conditions) ■Examples of achievements (company name not required format) Precision machining × 80 employees × price loss → Overcame price comparison by presenting selection criteria Industrial equipment × 200 employees × lack of decisive factors → Increased consultations by controlling decision-making axes through method comparisons Chemical materials × 500 employees × stalled in approval → Advanced by presenting evidence of risks and systems
catalog（20）
Download All Catalogs
Company information
A site that is just cheap ultimately increases costs and risks." We propose web development that maximizes business results while thoroughly addressing essential requirements. Are you creating a website like this? - It seems that the websites of competitors look better, but you don't know why. - Every update incurs additional costs, and before you know it, expenses have ballooned beyond expectations. - While the appearance is nice, it ignores laws and industry-specific rules, leading to complaint risks... - You want to attract customers and inquiries, but the production company only talks about design. - As a result of choosing a production that is simply cheap, you are overwhelmed with trouble handling and can't focus on your core business. Point 1. Avoid troubles with a design that has no "gaps or omissions." 2. Minimize operational costs with a design that assumes in-house updates. 3. Planning power that pursues business results. "Is the initial cost a bit high?" But in the long run, it's safe and cost-effective. We have prepared a plan to truly deliver results "correctly.
