SUNLESS
by Jimmy Coco

Internal commercial review · Re-audit, third pass

Conversion re-audit: the salon page, after the build-out.

The same thirty-phase standard, re-run against the salon page now live at www.jimmycoco.pro. The trajectory reads 4.6 → 8.0 → 8.2 → 8.8. The finding that capped every previous pass is gone: the forms no longer submit by mailto: — they write to a database, and there is a reviewed pipeline behind them. Accessibility and performance are now measured rather than inferred, and both are at or near 100. What has not moved is the other capping finding: there is still not one salon owner's voice anywhere on this page. That is now the single highest-value fix on the site.

Prepared 7 August 2026 · Subject: the live salon page (hero, story, formula, shade, live product card, profit calculator, application ritual, retail line, editorial duo, trial close, certification) · Baseline for deltas: the 16 July re-audit, which scored 8.2 · Domain moved from pro.jimmycoco.email to www.jimmycoco.pro since the last pass · Brand claims language remains excluded from scoring per owner instruction

Part one · What changed since 16 July

Measured, not asserted. Every figure below comes from a Lighthouse run or the built output.

100 / 100 / 100 / 100Desktop Lighthouse — perf, a11y, best practices, SEO
96Mobile performance (Moto G Power, slow 4G)
0Cumulative layout shift — was 0.143
0.6sLargest contentful paint, desktop
The headline change. The trial form and the product order form now post to a server action that validates, rate-limits and writes to reseller_applications in Supabase, then fires lifecycle events. Approval in /admin/resellers creates a trade account; the stockist sets a password and reaches a portal with their own pricing and order history. The page has stopped being a brochure that loses its leads and started being the front of a funnel.

Resolved this pass

FindingStatusEvidence
Forms submit by mailto: — no lead capturedResolvedReact Router actions → Supabase, with honeypot, same-origin check, inline success and error states. Zero mailto: remains anywhere in the source.
No analytics — conversion unmeasurableResolvedGA4 G-15N14ECLZG behind Consent Mode v2, defaults denied, cookie-gated, with a withdrawal control in the footer.
Accessibility 92, eleven contrast failuresResolved100. Palette tokens darkened at source; slider and select labelling fixed; link no longer colour-only.
Layout shift on load (CLS 0.143)Resolved0. Intrinsic dimensions on every image, fonts self-hosted and preloaded, render-blocking third-party CSS removed.
Product card was a flat composite JPEGResolvedRebuilt as live DOM — the spec text is now real text, selectable, translatable and indexable, at 31 KB instead of 67 KB.
No third-party press citationImprovedHello Magazine quote now on-page in the editorial band, plus a credentials block and a certification section.

Part two · The scorecard

Two bars per category: the 16 July pass (bronze) and now (green). The delta shown is v3 → now.

Re-audit · 16 Jul8.2STRONG
This pass · 7 Aug8.8STRONG — +0.6
First impression (5-second test) +0.3
v3
8.7
Now
9.0
Clarity of proposition ±0
v3
9.0
Now
9.0
Visual hierarchy +0.5
v3
8.5
Now
9.0
Information architecture +0.2
v3
8.7
Now
8.9
Cognitive load ±0
v3
8.0
Now
8.0
Copywriting -0.2
v3
8.2
Now
8.0
Conversion psychology +0.3
v3
8.7
Now
9.0
CTA effectiveness +0.7
v3
8.5
Now
9.2
Trust & proof +1.0
v3
7.0
Now
8.0
Form UX +2.5
v3
6.5
Now
9.0
Visual design & typography +0.5
v3
8.5
Now
9.0
Mobile (measured) +1.0
v3
7.5
Now
8.5
Accessibility +2.6
v3
7.0
Now
9.6
Premium perception +0.3
v3
8.7
Now
9.0
Competitive strength (trade category) +0.4
v3
8.3
Now
8.7

The gains cluster exactly where the work went: Form UX +2.5 and Accessibility +2.6 are the two largest movements in the history of this audit, because both were held down by a single blocking defect each. Trust & proof +1.0 reflects real press and credentials arriving, but it is still the second-lowest bar and will not clear 9 without a named salon. Copywriting drops 0.2 — the only regression in this pass, and it is a self-inflicted one, explained below.

Part three · Open findings

HighNo salon owner's voice. Unchanged across three audits.

The page sells to salon owners and quotes exactly one customer — a consumer, on the tan itself: "The tan looks so natural, I thought you'd just been on holiday." Alongside it sits an aggregate survey stat. Neither is a trade buyer saying the thing a trade buyer needs to hear: that it sold, that clients rebooked, that the margin was real. Every other trust signal on this page is the brand asserting its own credibility — Hollywood, red carpet, accreditation, press. Those establish glamour. They do not de-risk a £60 first order for a salon owner in Warrington.

Fix: one named salon, one photograph, one number. "We put 40 clients through the first litre in six weeks and 12 rebooked inside a month." That single block would lift Trust & proof, Conversion psychology and Competitive strength together. It is the cheapest remaining point on the board and it has been the cheapest for three audits running.

HighThe trial box offers a product that does not exist on this page.

At the primary conversion point, the trial box lists "The Sunset professional solution". The product is called Malibu everywhere else — six times on this page, in the product card, the CTAs and the schema. A prospect reading carefully at the moment of committing sees two different product names and has to decide whether the free trial is even the thing they just read about.

Fix: one word. Change it to Malibu, or, if Sunset is a genuinely different trial formulation, say so explicitly.

HighLead capture works. The confirmation email does not exist yet.

This is new, and it is a direct consequence of fixing the mailto: problem. An applicant now submits successfully and sees an on-screen thank-you — and then receives nothing. The uk-reseller-lifecycle campaign is wired but disabled, with no templates built. Under the old mailto: the applicant at least had a sent item in their own outbox as proof. Right now they have neither. For a business asking salons to hand over their details and wait, silence after submission is the worst possible state — worse than before the fix.

Fix: build the four templates and enable the campaign. Until then the on-screen confirmation should say plainly when a human will reply.

MediumThe trial box heading no longer matches its contents.

The heading reads "Become a Jimmy Coco Certified Salon." The two items beneath it are the trial solution and the shade guide — the contents of a sample box, not a certification programme. Certification is a genuinely strong offer and now has its own section at the foot of the page; borrowing its headline here muddies both. This is the copywriting regression noted in the scorecard.

MediumTwo different numbers for the same claim.

The credentials block says over 15 years. The story paragraph says more than 15 years. The trial box says 20+ years of red-carpet colour. Three claims, two numbers, one page. Whichever is right, a reader who notices trusts the rest of the page slightly less — and this page's entire proposition rests on Jimmy's track record.

MediumNo FAQ at the point of decision.

The salon FAQ — equipment compatibility, yield, mobile pros, training, trade terms — lives on the product page. Those are precisely the objections a salon owner raises immediately before requesting a trial, and the trial form is on this page. The answers exist; they are just in the wrong place.

MediumTrade terms are still deferred to a call.

Margin, minimum order and lead time are all "confirmed on your setup call". For a cautious buyer this reads as pricing that varies by how hard you push. A published indicative margin band would remove a real objection without conceding negotiating room.

LowAudit files ship publicly.

This document sits under public/audits/ and is fetchable by anyone who guesses the path. It is now noindex, but internal commercial reviews naming competitors and weaknesses should not be one URL away from a prospect. Move it out of public/.

Part four · The verdict

8.8 — strong, and for the first time the page is not being held back by its plumbing.

Three audits ago this page could not capture a lead. Two audits ago it captured them into an email client that most visitors do not have. It now captures them into a database, routes them through an approval queue, and issues a portal account with trade pricing at the other end. That is a different class of asset, and the technical scores — 100 accessibility, 100 desktop performance, zero layout shift — say it is built properly.

What remains is not technical. Of the eight open findings, six are copy or content, and one of them is a single word. The page's ceiling is now set by the fact that it asks salon owners to trust it without letting a single salon owner speak. Fix that, fix the Sunset/Malibu slip, and turn on the confirmation email, and the next pass clears 9.2 without a line of new code.

Scoring note: Form UX and Accessibility moved further in one pass than in the previous two combined, because each was capped by one blocking defect rather than by a spread of small ones. Mobile is now measured rather than inferred. Copywriting is the only decline.