How buyers find and evaluate us
Nobody buys an enterprise platform from a landing page. A purchase here involves an architect who wants to understand the data fabric, an operations lead who cares about the workflow engine, a security reviewer who will read nothing but our compliance material, and a finance owner who opens the pricing page first and last. Those are four different readers with four different objections, and trying to satisfy all of them in one document produces a page that satisfies none. So our platform page goes deep on architecture, solutions is organised by the problem being solved, and enterprise speaks to the procurement and security review directly.
That split is also how we get found. The searches that matter to us are rarely the category term. They are specific: replacing a middleware layer, keeping an approval workflow compliant without adding latency, unifying data that currently lives in several systems. Each of those is a page or a post on this site, written by someone who has sat through the migration being described. The demo request and the customers page then do the last part of the job, which is proving that other companies with the same constraints have already been through it.
Technical searches, not category searches
An architect evaluating us does not search for a cloud platform. They search for the thing that is currently breaking - a middleware layer nobody wants to maintain, or reporting that pulls from too many sources to reconcile. Our post on why enterprises are moving off legacy middleware exists for precisely that reader, and it sends them to the platform page rather than to a form. The solutions pages are arranged the same way, by the problem a team arrived with, because that is how the question is phrased before anyone knows what to call the answer.
The security review starts before we know it has
In most deals someone reads our enterprise page before we have spoken to anyone, and forms a view about whether we will survive their review. So that page states how the security layer works and what documentation we can provide, without making a reviewer request it first. Our post on building compliant workflows without slowing them down addresses the objection underneath the whole category - that governance and speed are a trade-off - and it is read far more often by prospective customers than by anyone else.
Being explained accurately by an assistant
Evaluators now ask an assistant to compare platforms and to explain architectural approaches, and those answers are drawn from prose that defines terms cleanly. Our data fabric post exists partly for that reason: it defines what we mean, distinguishes it from the adjacent concepts it gets confused with, and does so in sentences that stand alone. If an assistant is going to summarise our architecture to a buyer we have never met, we would rather it summarised our own definition than a competitor's characterisation of it.
Where we spend, and the campaigns we killed
We advertise against a small set of intent-heavy searches tied to migration and integration, and against nothing else. Broad category advertising brought us conversations with teams whose requirements we could not meet, which wastes their evaluation cycle and our engineers. We also stopped bidding on competitor names - an evaluator who searched for someone else by name and landed on us arrives annoyed, and that is a poor way to open a relationship that will involve a security review and a procurement process.
Enterprise SaaS Platform marketing questions we get asked
What does SEO look like when four people evaluate one purchase?
It means four sets of pages rather than one. An architect, an operations lead, a security reviewer and a finance owner arrive with different objections and search in different words. Platform, solutions, enterprise and pricing exist so each of them lands somewhere that was written for them.
Why write about problems rather than the product category?
Because an architect never searches for a cloud platform. They search for whatever is currently breaking: a middleware layer nobody wants to maintain, or reporting pulled from too many sources to reconcile. Naming that problem is what makes a page findable before anyone knows what to call the answer.
How much of a security review happens before you speak to anyone?
A great deal of it. Someone forms a view about whether we would survive their review by reading a page, not by asking us. So the enterprise material states how the security layer works and what documentation exists, rather than waiting for a reviewer to request either.
Why does defining your own terms matter so much?
Because evaluators and assistants both summarise from prose that defines things cleanly. Our data fabric writing distinguishes what we mean from the adjacent ideas it gets confused with. If our architecture will be described to a buyer we never meet, the definition doing that work should be ours.
Which campaigns did you stop running?
Broad category advertising and competitor-name bidding. The first brought conversations with teams whose requirements we could not meet, wasting an evaluation cycle on both sides. The second delivers someone who searched for a rival by name and arrives annoyed, which is a poor start to procurement.
This site runs on WorkspaceCMS, and the campaigns described above are run by its team. See how enterprise saas platform campaigns work.
