Engine 01 · Landing pages & content

Test your landing page before you launch it.

50 agents read your page the way your buyers will, each one built from your buyers’ own reviews, calls and win/loss notes. Back in 30 minutes: what’s working, what’s broken, and what to fix.

50 agents, 10 per reader. Every finding quotes a real buyer.
COMMITTEE · /platformLive
Committee Simulation interface
Runs against
Any URL or PDF
Agents
50 per run
You get
Working, broken, fixes
Ground Reality

You don’t write the personas. Your buyers already did.

Before they meet you: review sites, community threads, competitor complaints, and how all of it shifted over 18 months. After they meet you: call recordings, CRM notes, win/loss reasons.

Most tools get one half. A persona doc gets neither. How Ground Reality works

The process

URL in, fix list out.

Your buyers are built from evidence first, then sent through the live page.

01

Where your buyers come from

Your reviews, community threads, call recordings and win/loss notes.

02

Send in the agents

10 per reader, each in a different mood.

03

Watch what they do

Scan, hunt for proof, click or leave. Each with a reason.

04

Read the counts

Who stayed, who left, and a ranked fix list.

Why it breaks

Three things a page review never catches.

All three stay invisible until the traffic arrives.

Failure 01

Analytics gives you 3%

It will not say which reader caused the other 97%.

Counts per reader, and the exact element that lost them.
Failure 02

The handoff snaps

The end user loves it. Security finds no SOC 2. Finance never finds the ROI.

You see which handoff broke, so you fix the trigger.
Failure 03

Same page, different page

A distracted security lead scans only the nav. A sceptical engineer clicks the first CTA.

Every reader runs in all three moods, weighted to your traffic.
What you get

Six things land in your inbox.

More diagnostic depth than months of analytics, in a single run.

committee synthesis
Conflict Graph · committee
Champion ✓ Technical End user ✓ Security ✓ CFO ✗ VETO
Cascade: Technical doubt → CFO veto. Missing proof: ROI calculator above the fold.

Conflict Graph

Which reader stopped, and what it cost downstream.

Fix list

Ranked changes, effort estimate, exact element.

Counts per reader

Stayed or left, with the number behind it.

Inner monologues

What each reader looked for, and where they stuck.

Sales Battlecard

Objections and handling, per reader.

Editorial call

Publish, polish or rewrite.

Who it is for

Built for whoever owns the page.

Landing Page Testing

Product marketing

Win finance without losing the engineer.

Web and UX

Evidence a redesign works, before you build it.

Demand gen

Confirm the page holds up for a new vertical.

Sales enablement

Know the objection before the call.

The conflict graph

Everyone approved it. Nothing moved.

Five readers, seven handoffs. All five finished convinced. 45 of 50 clicked forward. None converted, because two handoffs snapped: no documentation to pass to the technical reviewer, no inspectable proof to pass to the budget holder. An average score calls this page a winner.

Five committee roles with two snapped handoffs, from a real landing page run.
One run on a live landing page. Every node opens its own record. Anonymised.

Read the full report this came from →

Get started

Run it on a page you already know the ending to.

Pick a page whose numbers you already have. See whether we catch what happened. Grade us yourself.