Before and After: Seminar Info 22 LLM consultations

Comparing current go.rebuildingseminars.com/seminar-info page vs. proposed redesign. Analysis from 11 models run in 2 rounds (22 total consultations).

Intro Paragraph — Audience Framing

CURRENT

Includes framing around "Should I stay or go?" — language aimed at people who haven't yet ended their relationship.

IMPROVED

"Has your relationship or marriage ended? Whether the loss is recent or some time has passed, you don't have to navigate this alone." Opens with confirmed post-separation audience.

8/11 models flagged The Rebuilding program is for people whose relationship has already ended. 'Should I stay or go?' framing confuses the audience and undermines the program's positioning. 8/11 models flagged this as a trust signal issue.

Group Size Claim

CURRENT

"Large classes" Actual cohort size: 10-15 participants.

IMPROVED

"Small cohort of 10-15 people who know your name and your story" And: "Join a small cohort of 10-15 people..."

9/11 models flagged This is factually wrong — the cohorts are small, which is a competitive advantage. 'Large classes' is both inaccurate and anti-persuasive. The intimacy of a small group is one of the top reasons graduates recommend the program.

Program Effectiveness Claim

CURRENT

"Nothing is more effective than the Rebuilding program for divorce recovery." Absolute superlative with no supporting evidence.

IMPROVED

"70% of Rebuilders are referred by program graduates. 25% are referred by their therapists." "On average, participants report recovering two years faster than those working alone or in individual therapy only."

10/11 models flagged Absolute claims without evidence trigger skepticism and reduce credibility. Evidence-based framing (referral rates, recovery speed) is more persuasive and more defensible. 10/11 models flagged the unsupported superlative.

Pricing Location

CURRENT

Price appears only at the very bottom of the page, in the enrollment section. Visitors must scroll all the way through before learning the cost.

IMPROVED

A dedicated pricing box mid-page, clearly labeled "Seminar Tuition," showing $1,099, what's included, installment option, and the comparison to individual therapy cost ($3,000+).

9/11 models flagged price burial Burying price creates friction and distrust. Visitors who care about cost will leave without converting. Showing price mid-page, with clear what's-included framing, reframes it as value. The therapy comparison makes $1,099 feel cheap.

Therapy Comparison Claim

CURRENT

"Often more effective than therapy" Positioning the program as a replacement for individual therapy.

IMPROVED

"This program runs alongside therapy, not instead of it." "For comparison: 10 weeks of individual therapy at $150/hr = $3,000+."

11/11 models flagged Positioning against therapy alienates the 25% of enrollees who are referred by therapists. The improved version is factually accurate, legally safer, and uses the therapy comparison as a value anchor rather than a competitive claim.

View full seminar-info redesign → ← All Mockups