The main idea I was trying to get across was that there are three different ways in which people expand the total number of landing pages they produce:

1. They add more pages to a test. So instead of just doing an A/B test on two different pages, I might try 4 different pages, or 8 different pages. However many pages I add to this test though, it’s still really only one landing page as far as a respondent is concerned. This is TEST SCALING.

2. They create many different landing page “destinations”, where each destination is crafted to be very specific to a particular ad. For example, instead of sending ads 1, 2, 3, and 4 to the same landing page A, I might send ad 1 to landing page A, ad 2 to B, and 3 and 4 to C. This is HORIZONTAL SCALING. Or, as I like to think of it, matching The Long Tail of ads to a Long Tail of landing pages.

3. They create landing experiences that are more than one page — they’re more like microsites or conversion paths that might be made up of two or three or five pages connected together. These are deeper and more sophisticated than the stereotypical one-page landing page. This is VERTICAL SCALING.

My article was attempted to distinguish between these three different types of ways in which landing page initiatives are “scaled up”, since they each have their own challenges and opportunities.

In practice, a marketer would typically be scaling on all three axes in parallel.

Is this a better explanation? Or have I just muddled the waters further?