CASE STUDY · AMRANTHÉ
A premium skincare brand, a €110 cream, and ads people clicked more often than usual. Yet fewer than 2 in 100 visitors added it to their cart. We rebuilt the product page around how people decide about a new brand and an expensive product.
STARTING POINT
Amranthé is a premium skincare brand positioned around “skin longevity”. Its new product, NAD+ Skin Renewal Cream, cost €110 for 30 ml, and Meta ads sent people straight to its product page.
The ads did their job: people clicked more often than usual. The problem started after the click.
| Ad → click | ~3% | norm 1–2% |
|---|---|---|
| Session → cart | 1.68% | cold traffic 5–10% |
| Purchases in week one | 0 | |
| Cart → checkout | not measurable | too few carts |
| Price | €110 | 30 ml, no reviews |
THE KEY FINDING
Buying a €110 cream from a brand you've never heard of is a risky decision. In that moment people read the page not as an ad but as evidence: can I trust this brand? And the page gave the wrong answer. It carried copy about another product, a countdown stuck at zero, “coming soon”, and a pickup point for an event that was already over. None of that is a design question. Each one signals that nobody is looking after the page, and for a new brand that costs more than any font.
WHAT THE AUDIT FOUND
The ingredients section described an oat-based cleanser with PHA acids, and the how-to-use block was about washing and rinsing. None of those ingredients are in the cream.
A sale countdown showed 00:00:00:00, “coming soon” sat in the URL and the meta description, the pickup point was an event that had passed, and two different discounts ran at once.
No reviews, no founder, nothing about who stands behind the brand. For cold traffic to a new brand, this is the most common reason a purchase stalls.
The cream contains no NAD+. It contains niacinamide, vitamin B3. The people who click an NAD+ ad are exactly the ones who check ingredients, and when they find no explanation, they leave.
On mobile the add-to-cart button started at 844 px on an 812 px screen, with no sticky button. The benefits only began after two scrolls.
WHAT WE CHANGED AND WHY
What we saw
Copy about another product, a countdown at zero, “coming soon”, a past event and two discounts at once.
What we changed
We rewrote the ingredients, usage and benefits for this cream. We removed the countdown, “coming soon” and the past event, and kept one discount.
Why it works on the buyer
Someone weighing a risky purchase is looking for a reason to say no. One mismatch makes them doubt everything else. Consistency is a trust signal in itself.
What we saw
Nothing on the page moved the risk from the buyer to the brand.
What we changed
The founder's note with her name and photo right under the button, a rating by the product name, and four short facts: science-led formula, fragrance-free, free shipping from €50, secure checkout.
Why it works on the buyer
In a risky decision people look for a person, not a logo. A face and a name by the price turn an unknown brand into someone who answers for the product. Delivery and payment facts remove uncertainty, and uncertainty slows people down more than price does.
What we saw
The product is called “NAD+”, but there is no NAD+ in the formula, and the page didn't explain that.
What we changed
The page no longer implies the cream contains NAD+. A “Why Niacinamide” section explains the active the cream really contains, in three steps: in the cream, in your skin, the result.
Why it works on the buyer
An audience that clicks on a scientific promise checks the ingredients. If the promise and the formula don't match, they notice and leave. If the explanation matches what they find in the ingredient list, it becomes a reason to trust.
What we saw
On mobile the add-to-cart button was below the fold, with no sticky button.
What we changed
One line under the name saying what the cream is. Size next to the price. The add-to-cart button on the first screen, and a sticky button that stays visible as you scroll.
Why it works on the buyer
Every extra step between wanting and doing loses some people. When the button is always within reach, the decision can happen the moment it's ready, not when the button is found.
What we saw
The page didn't say when, or what, a buyer could expect from a €110 cream.
What we changed
A results timeline: what usually happens in weeks one, two and four, and a suggestion to take a photo on day one.
Why it works on the buyer
An expensive skincare purchase is a promise about the future. When people can picture the first weeks, the doubt about whether it will work shrinks. A day-one photo gives them a way to see the result for themselves.
What we saw
On the first draft, the client found too many colours and icons, and several blocks repeated what was already said.
What we changed
Headings in one colour and on one line, fewer icons, and the repeated blocks removed. We also took out a block that promised more than the brand can prove, and a 5-day delivery promise that can't be guaranteed to the US.
Why it works on the buyer
A premium buyer judges how the page looks, too. Too many colours make it feel like something is being pushed, and nothing registers. A promise you can't keep is worse than no promise.
RESULTS
The ads haven't run on the new page yet, so there are no results yet. When they start, we'll compare against the same baseline with the same definitions.
| Metric | Before | Target |
|---|---|---|
| Session → cart | 1.68% | 5–7% |
| Cart → checkout | not measurable | measured from 30 carts |
| Purchases | 0 in week one | to be measured |
WHAT WE LEARNED
Most of this page's problems weren't design. They were small errors the brand no longer saw, because they had been there for a while. A buyer seeing the brand for the first time notices exactly those. That's why every audit starts with how the page looks to a stranger, not with what could be added.
Start with a conversation. We'll tell you what delivers the biggest effect first.