Sadly they're a name I didn't hear a single time when asking my clients what they use when they don't already know a specialist, angie's was huuuge though I mean BY FAR the most-common answer!! Which sucks, as I'll explain below:
Yeah it's looking more&more this way, sadly...
I just heard from my rep-- $few-hundred$ bare-minimum buy-in to get my foot in the door with their pay-to-play.... I'd totally gotten the impression I could do 'dip the toes' type plans, I mean they restrict by-area so thought I could just pay for, say, 1 week of promotion in my zip code only, but when I queried "my rep" about this he responded with a hard-answer of (paraphrased) "$3** is the lowest possible I can get you in today, if you can get that you'll get X leads over the next 90 days and make X if you're getting X/job", basically leaving it at "it's this way or the highway"....
I SWORE I've seen lower #'s (maybe it was just seeing "averages" or something), but dropping that $ on something that I cannot even know will generate leads (he's suggesting I'll get 20-40 contacts in the 90 days for my $$; I have seen "contact/lead quality" rates/estimates for Angie's ranging from 1/2 are good, to 1/10th are good.....I know you can request refunds on bad leads but, well, these #'s for a few hundred up front seems...doesn't seem the deal that I'd thought Angie's would be, I mean this ^ type of "results" means I could get, on the low-end, just 20 contacts and find half are good, at that point it's 10 leads for $300 so $30/lead, and lead /= job also plenty of leads will surely be "we have a lil limb over the pool" and other tiny jobs, heck if the job's not over 300 then 10% GROSS profit goes to angie's...and since I'm small my projects probably average in the 300's range....)
FML this sucks, I accepted lowering my standards and going for pay-to-play, only to find it's far less a sure-thing & way more a gamble than I'd been lead to believe :/