I keep seeing Webflow posts (including sponsored ones) on Facebook and I cannot but think that Webflow’s advertising messages are inherently wrong for the majority of its target audience.
I’ve had the occasion of showing Webflow to hardcore programmers, as well as to so called “web designers” (people who do both graphic design and coding). The response is uniformly dumb - “site builders produce bad code, site builders are for five page hobby sites only and why the hell aren’t you using Wordpress?”
Programmers, coders, graphic designers and all combinations in-between, just stubbornly keep their deep-ingrained notion that Webflow is yet another site builder.
Even after showing them how it actually works and after they do understand that this is not exactly the Wix type site builder, they would not accept the new reality. They would just continue to look down upon it as nothing more than an “extra geeked” Wix.
Drawing on my modest marketing experience, I’d suggest that Webflow at least experiment shifting focus from advertising Webflow as a tool (with such and such capabilities) towards advertising the concept of “visual coding” on its own.
The word “coding” is essential. It may outline the differentiation from the regular site builders. It may also create some degree of intimacy with the (not very flexible) minds of programmers and such. That is, it may reassure them that this is their territory.
My underlying hypothesis is that only once the concept of visual coding is made popular, would (the majority of) users become aware of the role of the specific tool for it.
Another approach could be to focus on “emerging Wordpress alternative” or “Wordpress rival in the making” or something like that. I personally would not use such though, as it sounds too aggressive and aggression is usually a display of weakness. But keeping some comparison with Wordpress should be utilized, it’s just about the means for doing so.