New site design

[stefan]

OK so we need to be patient,but WHY switch over when your still ironing things out.
Surely you could have left the old site running till the switch over was sorted.
This used to be the first site I visited every day now Its not.

It's the nature of the internet - release early & often, gather feedback, be nimble and responsive. If you wait for perfection before releasing, you'll never release, as things are never perfect.

 

[Ullrich]

Please go back to the old design !!!

Please go back to the old design !!!

1 - Takes ages to load

2 - I don't like having the results in the title either...that's one thing that was nice about cn.com was that I could go there and read the blow by blow before knowing the results.

3 - Prefer the old way to show the daily news : Latest news. Now we need to much going back and forward.

4 - The easy to read and find information has gone

5 - Don´t show the total results in race results, stage results, general classification, etc

I´m going to go with velonews.com and todociclismo.com (spanish)

Pretty sure you gonna miss lots of advertisers

 

[titan_90]

News editions are compiled less often than news stories are posted, so that would push the latest stories further down the front page.

People are accusing us of making things harder to find. Am I right in thinking that you're suggesting we do that deliberately with news stories?

Finally you get what we are saying That was one of the best features of the old site. We came here and didn't go to sites like BikeRadar because we don't have ADD and don't need instant gratification. You guys are totally clueless about what made the old site so popular. Like NO SPOILERS ON THE HOMEPAGE. But, you guys decided you think its better. I wont be visiting the site ever again. I will be on the forums until the Giro di Lombardia because I am participating in the Prediction Game here in the forums.

 

[coachkev]

Hi Kr - defensive? We try to be courteous, stick to the facts, and encourage a sensible dialog. However, as a team we started this project a year ago, and a lot of 'soul' has been poured into it - just as you do, we feel very passionately about this website, but from the other side of the fence. I guess what I'm saying is that we're not faceless corporate 'droids deliberately out to milk every click for cash, without regard for the heritage of the site, and its audience. We're just normal guys, making websites that we want to see succeed. It's obviously a bit stinging when a bunch of people seemingly rubbishes what you've done without (in some cases at least) taking a cool, calm and collected look at the new system beyond "it's not like it used to be, it must be rubbish".

For us (but largely irrelevant to you, unless we screw up), it's been an achievement to create a database-backed platform that can support an astonishingly high load, on comparatively lowly hardware.

We can take any amount of constructive criticism, but some of us are slightly baffled by the all-out hostility and personal abuse thrown around in places (not from you), as I'm sure you can understand.

The problem with the old site, apart from maintaining and updating it, was that - and I know this may sound wrong to your ears - it only really worked for long-time CN users that had taken the time to climb its learning curve. We wanted something with a more modern look that we can take to advertisers (who pay for the upkeep), and also make the site easier to use from the off for a new user - whilst obviously not losing sight of the raison d'etre for the site - the hard-core racing fans like yourself. We haven't got it perfect - I'll be the first one to put my hands up and admit that. We hope that people will give us a chance, rather than abandoning us after 10 years - and 2 days into its new lease of life.

It's unfortunate that in that year there was no effort taken to pin down what made the site so popular. Then, you could have had better guidance in designing a better operating site that still has the same attraction to its faithful audience. Comments have been made before by editorial staff of needing to appeal to a broader audience and attract new people to the site. Well, word of mouth is enormous in growing an audience and I can tell you that devout followers of cyclingews always raved to others about it. Faithful followers are your best marketing tool.

So, as far as the "hostility" being thrown around. I think that part of it is that there are certain aspects that you can change with the new site that you are being adamant not to change. The spoilers of race results has been an outrage to huge numbers of people and you've pretty much said to bad, that's way the news is done. How is this showing interest in keeping your followers of 10 years?

 

[neilf23]

It's velonews for me from now on

It used to be so easy now it's a nightmare. Please go back to the old design. I don't like like seeing the stage winner in the headline, No full results. There is no info on stages not yet raced. The homepage is a visual nightmare, way too much going on. It seems like everyone is ditching this site for other sites. That's what I'm doing. Velonews, while a distant second to THE OLD CN is now my first. I'll only be coming back to this site occasionally to see if the old format is back.

 

[antonia]

did anyone say information?

Is it just me, or are there no live reports anymore? And no stage details - as currently for the Tour de Suisse? I hate to sound nostalgic, but this is a real minus in quality of life.

 

[mtrejt]

Ok, things change. I did prefer the old format, but I can live with this design. Unfortunatelly what I do find deeply disapointing is the complete lack of useful information in the race coverage. Today I wanted to follow the TdS, and was pleased to see that there was a live feed icon. I clicked on it, and what did I get, an empty page. So, I figured that it was a bug that would be fixed sooner or later, and decided to at the very least see what the riders were racing over today. After searching for state details, which I never found, I clicked on the "stage" icon thinking that this would get me the map and profile. Instead I got nothing, an empty page. I hope that this does not protend a permanent status of the service provided by Cycling News. If so, I guess I'm stuck with Velonews.

 

[joeags]

Simple question:

Is there going to be a way to access the live reports and stage profile without seeing these headlines (spoilers) and without typing in some long convoluted link? Simple yes or no will suffice.

Joe

Spoilers:

While I'm keen to hear opinions on this matter I’m afraid that spoilers, or race headlines, are very much here to stay. I understand that some of you are against this but if you look on the majority of news websites you’ll see exactly the same thing. Whether it’s news, weather or sport, headlines in themselves are there to tell a story and entice people in. There are other factors as well, like search engine optimisation but the main reason is that it fits with real news reporting.

Thanks

Daniel

They've stated live reports and stage details are coming... we can access the Tour de Suisse stage details through the "full archive" link at the top of the page. Extra clicks, but it's still there for now...

Is it just me, or are there no live reports anymore? And no stage details - as currently for the Tour de Suisse? I hate to sound nostalgic, but this is a real minus in quality of life.

 

[Surly B]

CN & new look

I like the new look. I also have considered, and still do, CN the best place for cycling news. VN is baloney, to be kind. Now I'm just hoping you've still got a those old "Pro Bikes" of years past stuck somewhere in here. I always like going back to check what pro 'cross racers were running ...

Good luck!

 

[SuperA]

Boyz n' girlz, pull this offline and do more stress, UAT/beta testing

1) Horribly slow to load
2) If new content mgt system, where's the content? Still can't find GC results after todays TdeSuisse stage. Got stage winners, every blasted sprint or climb prime winner, but not GC listing.
3) Appreciate what you're trying to do by introducing new site, but please don't tell readers it's actually faster and bigger than before when many are saying it is not BETTER.
4) I will need to get my cycling news elsewhere for the time being, but best of luck resolving everything in crisis mode.

 

[Skinnytires]

1 step forward, 5 back

Overall I don't mind the new design with tabs and such. If the goal is to get folks to click through more pages with adverts, then congratulations, you scored a 10. The flash driven drop-down menus cause the Chrome browser to crash.

Displaying the winners on the front page must go. Live reports need to comeback.
I'm really trying to figure out why the new site was rolled out before everything could be incorporated back into it.
I'd hate to see the look on Bill's face when he saw the new site for the first time...

 

[LugHugger]

What does thewashingmachine post think?

Brian at the wonderful thewashingmachinepost.com has even been moved to comment:

quote
a site for sore eyes

i've got to be very careful how i word the following, always bearing in mind the mantra 'people in glass houses, shouldn't throw stones. although we're in the middle of bike week in the uk, it seems i may have missed the press release announcing june to be national upgrade your cycling website month, since not just one major site has received a new and improved look: britishcycling.org.uk, cyclingweekly.co.uk and cyclingnews.com have all received facelifts within the past week or so, and as is customary, not entirely to rapturous applause.
first to go upmarket was cycling weekly, or the comic as those of us who can barely wait until thursday comes are wont to call it. i have no desire, or indeed the technical bravado to go into the nuts and bolts of what makes a website work these days. i have become accustomed to the gasps of horror that the post is still compiled using hand-coded html pages, since pretty much everything else these days, including the three sites under discussion, are operated through what is known as a content managed system or cms. there is no doubt that this method benefits those who have a myriad of contributors, often across several continents, and allows for technical whizzes that the post could not hope to accomplish even if i wanted it to. however, such systems seem to benefit the backroom boys slightly more than those of us on the browser side: a euphemism for oft times a paucity of design and logic; a one size fits all approach, if you will.
now this is where it becomes necessary to watch what i say because, while i may not have the development wherewithal, nor the commercial import that these three sites obviously have, i do inhabit the same webspaceness, and it doesn't do to make enemies. however, rather than beat about the bush for too long (!), i might just let you know that i can't see why they bothered. nobody seems to remember the age-old adage if it ain't broke, don't fix it.
biggest culprit here has to be future publishing, owners of cyclingnews.com, who seemingly couldn't resist the urge to turn it into bikeradar mark two - the two websites are darned near identical, though to my mind they were/should be catering to at least two variations of the cycling market. you could just tell that future would do this sooner or later, because they cannot leave well alone: pro-cycling is an excellent case in point. if you're anything like me, you've just watched the end of a stage on eurosport's stuttering online offering, and the video stream has stopped dead a few hundred metres from the line. since the race will be over by the time you refresh the page, the best plan of action is to click across to cyclingnews.com and pick up the winner from there. or at least, that would have been the previous notion. now, however, we are to be immersed in a new audio visual experience, but we only want the results, something the original cycliingnews did beautifully.

cyclingweekly has gone much the same way, while british cycling's website has become a sky franchise as of yesterday. i will confess to not being a particularly frequent user of the latter two, so selfishly, i don't care so much about those changes, though i may live to regret that. this could possibly be the thin end of the wedge. these cycling websites used to be about providing information, clearly, informatively and easily accessible; if there was any selling going on, it was subtly done. now it's all flashing banner ads, moving pictures and a worrying link on the british cycling website that offers to tell us how to use this site. when was the last time you bought a newspaper, magazine or book that contained instructions for use?
exactly.
unable to find any contact information on the cyclingnews site, i was moved to sign up to their forum in order to vent my displeasure in the relevant section, where i did notice a good few others of similar mind. of course, any protestations are pointless: future are determined to inflict their corporate style on everything and it would be tantamount to admitting they'd got it wrong, if they reverted to the original. so even though i've filled these pixels with moaning, my only option is to go to velonews.
which is precisely what i intend to do.
i do hope that, despite the foregoing, rob spedding is still talking to me.
unquote

priceless, brian, you've said it all.

 

[Anonymous]

new site

I really don't mean to be negative as this is my fave site and has been for about eight years...but I think it looks and works awful...I for one would be very happy if you went back to your old format....Good luck and Thanks for all you do!

 

[yournewwebsitesucks]

Your New Website Sucks

I can't believe someone actually got PAID for this??

 

[peterc]

cyclingnews.com, are you listening?

Quote from managing editor, Daniel Benson:
"Of course you’d be correct in assuming that there are commercial reasons for the new format too. It’s a fact that ad revenue, , is used to run, develop and maintain the site, We employ journalists in Australia, the UK, mainland Europe and North America which is expensive. It’s expensive to generate the depth and breadth of our coverage that we offer. While a lot of companies are standing still or cutting back we’ve followed our passion and backed it up with a new and exciting design with new and exciting features. It’s a fast-moving world where change is inevitable, and CN wants to be at the front of that force."

Please, keep the ads (though I remeber a few weeks ago when you were announcing the new site, that the changes include FEWER ads) just go back to the old format. Don't you see that this bad for you, people won't be visiting the new site.

 

[vicemond]

Dynamic menus/tabs crash Safari every time!

Rolling over menus/tabs on pages like Races & Results that have a "+" sign (to indicate that rolling over the link will reveal another menu) - like the Stages tab - make Safari (4.0) crash EVERY time. I haven't taken the time to look at the offending Javascript yet, but it's a bit frustrating...

 

[slcbiker]

Stefan,
Aside from the spoilers (which I agree with you is a purely editorial decision, just one that I don't happen to think is a good one), you claim much of this was done to improve usability and maintainability.

Yet one of the main complaints I've seen from posts here is the Flash content. That's pure fluff, and adds basically zero to either usability or maintainability. In fact I'd guess it makes both worse. And the failure of the you guys to address things like this is what's prompting folks to get frustrated and hostile.

 

[zyxwvu]

CN-

For what its worth, I have personally managed site redesigns for major TV networks and media outlets in the U.S. I currently run a company that measures the effectiveness of online advertising and online media, including site UI development and inventory monetization, so I understand all the motives and complications your teams face. I also used to race bikes, participated in the Olympics and raced for 7-11 and Motorola, and CN is how I stay in touch with the sport. In other words, like all of the people who spoke up on your forums, I am a Cyclingnews loyalist and am concerned about its fate.

Your redesign was well-intentioned and has many features that even this group of die-hards will eventually get used to and come to appreciate. However, I have never seen a mutiny of this magnitude among a core user group, and although I know it is tempting to steadfastly stick to your guns and see this through, it would be a bad idea for you and your advertisers to not think very hard about what you're hearing, and the implications of inaction.

As one sage user said, "It is very hard to build brand loyalty, but easy to lose it." This is especially true in online media, where your competition is but a click away. Your core audience is your bread and butter. Anyone who cares about this kind of content is already here, or will eventually hear about it from a core user. There is no "new audience". Your strength has always been in (as another user put it) your reliable, knowledgable, and trustworthy reporting on the many many dimensions of this amazing sport. You are so far ahead of the competition that this audience is yours to lose. You cannot dumb it down for some fictitious broader audience and expect to retain the real, lasting audience that drives your business.

A few themes clearly stick out in the 40 pages of criticism:
- Spoilers
- Live reports
- Simplicity of content access and navigation
- Depth of content (and again, easy access to that depth)
- Loading speed
- Mobile access

None of these are simply trivial design issues; they are critical to the utility of the site and access to its valuable and unique content. The redesign should have identified these as key objectives essential to retain and attract users. In the sit-forward medium of online, function needs to lead form.

Google is an amazing company for many reasons, but the one that is relevant to this situation is this: they embark on plenty of experiments, some requiring huge investments of capital and talent. But when they realize they have made a mistake, they do not hesitate to swallow their pride and move quickly to throw the thing in reverse and get back on track. CN can recapture equity and earn respect by responding to the overwhelming criticism and reverting to the "old site" until the criticism can be digested and, as appropriate, integrated into the new design. It's probably unthinkable for you, just 3 days into the new launch, but you have already started shedding users. You have already damaged brand loyalty by the way things have been handled on the forums. This act would be an act of deference to your audience while you sort out the next steps forward. (On the issue of redesign: There is always a pull for "onward and upward". But consider two of the biggest winners in the online space: Google and Craigslist. Pure utility and simplicity - which fits the medium. To me, CN used to be a Craigslist for cycling. Did you know they earn $120 million dollars with a 30 person staff? Can you imagine how many people would love to "redesign" CL? New is not necessarily better).

You are lucky to have an audience that speaks so loudly, so quickly. Usually users just abandon without a peep. That your audience would speak so loudly says a lot about the value of your content among the plethora of cycling information sites. Harley Davidson is a brand with such strong loyalty that people will get tattoos of the brand. In online media, the ultimate indicator of brand strength is home page designation and visits per day -- both of which you enjoy. Somehow you have managed to stand out and apart from the rest, so great care should be taken not to squander that market position.

If the redesign is driven by revenue goals, then that is important. But do not forget that what attracts advertisers is target audiences and engagement. Retaining those is the prime directive. There are many monetization strategies that can improve revenue and CPM without undermining your audience, which IS your product. One more time: your product is not your cycling content! It is your audience. That's what you sell, isn't it?

Please listen carefully to your audience. Do not let the momentum of the redesign effort and the personal and financial investments that have been made overwhelm the undeniable response from your user community. These cricitisms are not simple design issues; they are critical to your survival.

Scott McKinley
CEO, Factor TG
scottsmack@gmail.com

Great post man!

I think you're spot on, the main thing is that the CN-guys had absolutely no clue of what made their site so popular. Nearly everything that distinguished them from the others was cut out in this new design. Few things are already brought back in and some others will follow too, but most of the positives of the old site won't come back for sure.

Maybe Lance will tweet about CN in the near future

Almost time to dig up the epic fail pics I guess....

 

[Luz Ardiden]

Hi,

Can anyone tell me what the result of today's ToS stage was? I can only find the top ten. And the GC positions only have 1 digit. All this complaining about design. I don't care about the design, I can't find the content.

And I want to read the race report before I see the result (like so many people). You don't have long before I abandon this site for good. Fix it or switch it back. I work in IT (like so many who visit this site it appears). Ever heard of testing? You tested it, it didn't work and you put it live.

Clearly the way to impress your sponsors is to plaster their names over this shoddy mess, and to half the readership. I loved the old site so much. I feel like I'm in mourning.

)c;

 

[Bartoli]

The thing i miss the most are the full results, one of the reasons CN allways was a standout site. Full results over the years that were easy to find.

 

[hulkgogan]

and the creaking look was not an attractive proposition to advertisers, who pay for you to see it for free.

Really don't see how this follows. Advertisers should be completely design agnostic. What matters to them is ROI.

 

[bobbins]

The majority of the news is from team and UCI press releases with a small amount from journalists that procycling has across europe / america. They are a shared cost. The ad revenue is the main reason that future bought CN. Unfortunately they seem to be losing readers hand over fist so their ad revenue will go down.

New and exciting design with new and exciting features - are you looking at the same site Mr Benson???

 

[Please rethink]

This is really disappointing

I know it must be tough to have so much negative feedback on something you have been working hard on, but please have a rethink.

Unlike some posters I have no experience of web relaunches, and no interest in it. There must be loads of websites that I look at regularly that have been redesigned and I have never really noticed. I've certainly not been tempted to join a forum especially to complain before.

To try to be constructive, my comments are:

1. Black text on white background was much easier to read.

2. The results and race report were easy to read on the old site, and you could quickly scroll down to see who finished where. The new font for the results is hard to read, there is no clear division between different classifications, and having to click to see more than 10 is really annoying.

3. No spoilers on the front page. Reading the complete live report after the race used to be quite exciting, but pointless now. Now I will need to avoid the site during televised stage races.

4. The fact that the old website looked old school was part of the charm - it still felt like a no nonsense results site.

5. The new site is actually hard to look at - so much flashing. The flashing central picture is unbearable. Why purple?

6. The News Editions were the best feature of the old site. They should be more prominent - at least the most recent one.

7. Why are all the links to the races underlined? It looks odd.

Please give us a hint that you are looking at changing some of this? Surely this volume of negative criticism isn't normal after a relaunch?

You sound pretty fed up with the criticism, but it feels like you have bought the domain name and then ruined a site that people loved, without seeming to get what it was they liked about the site. It's like buying someone's local pub and turning it into a bad nightclub. You bought it, you can do what you want with it, but don't be surprised if people are cross with you.

Noone else does what CN used to, but there is a gap now for someone to have a go. I really hope they do so I dont have to keep coming back.

 

[dougiebaby]

Why I don't like the new site.

First of all, I don't like the way the news is presented. I liked the twice daily updates and find the new presentation too fragmented. Second, If they've got the money to redesign the website, how come they don't have the money to do a preview of the Tour of Switzerland? It is afterall one of two major prep races for the Tour de France, the granddaddy of them all. The can't even get the stage profiles in there and third I don't care for the way the results are presented. I understand that the full results will be available eventually, but the spread sheet style with the little lines in between makes them harder to read and takes up too much space.

Anybody wish to pile on?

 

[dmcalpin]

See you never again

Hi Stefan

Thanks for your reply on the "I have not visited cycling news today" page but you could not have know that I speak from experience as I'm also an IT IDIOT -I have a degree in Computing Science, a degree in Business Studies and have worked in IT for over 30 years (no I'm not a doctor like you). I currently work in a team of 70 designers/developers that deliver web service built to USER REQUIREMENTS – have you heard of them.

The fact is you have delivered something your users did not want - easily the worst case of this I have ever seen in over 30 years. Information Technology is about saving money, increasing revenue or delivering what people want/need - I can only assume your motive was to save money/increase revenue as you clearly have no idea what your users want.

See you never again
Dave