Let me recommend Mark Daoust’s article “The Surprising Truth about Ugly Websites.” He opens with the argument:
Ebay is unbelievably ugly, Craigslist has never won an award for innovative design, and IMDB has never even bothered to format their text out of the default Times New Roman. What is it about ugly websites that makes them so successful?
Personally, I’ve always had a sneaking geeky respect for Craigslist because it is so bandwidth-efficient and gets so much information on its home page. If Yahoo! had done it, it would have half as much content and take twice as long to load. But I digress.
His argument is that a plain or even ugly website conveys a reassuring message:
You can trust us. We are a family run business and do not employ a marketing team. Our website is simple, but functional. Most importantly, our goal is to serve our customers, not necessarily learn HTML.
Actually, I suspect that they work because they achieve a lot of usability (quick download, scannability, written for the web etc. etc. see posts passim) by accident. The good looking website that is designed by a marketing agency might look fab but the Flash animation, pictures, lack of accessbility and deviation from standards undermines usability.
Daoust makes a similar point by emphasising the functionality and simplicity of plainer sites. I agree.
A beautiful website may draw a user in initially, but a simple website will keep your users coming back. If one of your users gets lost trying to navigate your website, check out of your web store, or finding simple contact information, then you unnecessarily are increasing the chances that this user will simply leave.
Related posts:
