[caspar]

> I've been struggling to sell it ... they will value a one-shotted pretty UI over all these other aspects.

I do not think that it's your competitors' pretty one-shotted UIs that are losing you your leads. FWIW your website:

  * Does not explain the benefits nor the feature-set of what your platform offers
  * Has a Docs page which seems to be a link to 6 sets of reference APIs (or similar) in disparate Github pages - that's worse than most open source products.
  * Uses cute animated characters which does not give off the "we are a serious enterprise and you can rely on us" vibe
  * Has a novel pricing scheme ("implements a techno-feudalist pricing model") that requires a 4 paragraph explanation and somehow tries to frame introducing additional uncertainty for potential buyers as a feature (it's a good thing that _my_ pricing tiers could be adjusted by other customers' votes!?)
  * Additionally prominently features cryptocurrency in the topnav, which is for many people a yellow or red flag (regardless of what seems to be your good intentions behind it)
 Doesn't have any demo apps I can click around in to smoke test the platform's functionality, let alone fiddle with the backend
  * Has almost zero information on basic business-y compliance-y things - no info on security, availability, SSO support, etc let alone more hardcore things like compliance standards your platform meets.

[socketcluster]

Thanks for the feedback. The part about the voting aspect of the pricing model is a good point. I will remove this and try to use a bit more conventional language whilst maintaining a kind of exclusive licence model.

Also I'll try to explain like "Estimated to be X times faster to develop and requires 70% fewer tokens than alternative stacks and easier to configure security."

That's actually realistic based on some recent analysis I did. I didn't have this info before.