Blog / Letters

Teardown of the week

A Sandy plumbing company, scored by our own free tool, and the three fixes that would pay for themselves first.

Every week we run one local service website through our free teardown tool and write up what we find. This week we picked a plumbing company in Sandy, anonymised here because the findings apply to half the service sites in the valley. The owner has not asked for this, and nothing in this note is a knock on their work. Plumbing sites all fail the same five checks, and this one failed three of them.

The tool runs more than 25 checks across six areas: speed, search, mobile, trust, conversion and security. This site scored 54 out of 100. Here are the three findings that matter most, what each one costs the owner, and the order we would fix them in.

Finding one, from the mobile check: the phone number is not tappable. On the desktop header it sits as plain text. On a phone, the number hides behind a menu, and there is no tap-to-call button anywhere on the page. Most local service searches happen on a phone, often with water already on the floor. A visitor who has to hunt for a number does not hunt. They hit back and call the next result. This is the most expensive finding on the site because it attacks the exact moment someone is ready to pay. Cost: every mobile visitor who gives up is a booked job handed to a competitor, at emergency-call prices.

Finding two, from the conversion check: the quote form has eleven fields and no confirmation. There is no message after submission, no email, no text. The owner told us when we called that he checks the form inbox about once a week, and some submissions were landing in spam. Eleven fields on a phone is a wall. People start, lose patience, and leave. Then the ones who do finish wonder if anything happened. Cost: abandoned forms nobody counts, and a delay of days between a ready lead and the first reply. Speed to lead is the whole game in emergency trades. A form that confirms instantly and texts the owner beats any redesign.

Finding three, from the trust check: nothing on the page proves anything. No license number, no mention of insurance, no reviews, and a copyright line that still says 2023. A homeowner choosing between three plumbers picks the one that looks current and accountable. A stale date and missing credentials do not just fail to build trust, they actively erode it, because the visitor assumes the company is not paying attention. Cost: the jobs the company never hears about, lost at the comparison stage before any call happens.

Two other checks flagged issues that did not make the top three. Speed: the homepage loads a multi-megabyte hero image, which drags load times on phones. Search: the site has one generic services page, so it cannot rank for specific jobs like water heater replacement or drain cleaning, the searches that pay.

The fix order we would hand this owner:

  1. Mobile: make the phone number tappable and visible on every screen. One line of markup, biggest single gain.
  2. Conversion: cut the form to five fields, add an instant confirmation, and route submissions to a text message the same minute.
  3. Trust: add the license number, insurance, real reviews and this year's date.
  4. Speed: compress the hero image and lazy-load the rest.
  5. Search: one page per service, written for the job the customer actually types.

Notice the order. It is tempting to start with design or search engine work. It is almost always wrong for a service business. The phone number, the form and the proof decide whether a ready visitor becomes a call. Everything else compounds after that.

If you want your own site run through the same checks, the tool is free and takes about twenty seconds. It scores all six areas and gives you the three fixes worth the most enquiries. Or book a 30-minute call and we will walk through your report together, finding by finding.

Who you work with

Questions on this one? Ask the people who wrote it.

No account managers in between. You speak with the founders, and the founders build your system.

Esther StowellCo-founder · business and creative
Benjamin InyangFounder · software and systems