← Back
case-wingman-competitive.md Apr 2021 to Oct 2022 Read time · 5 min

Wingman competitive · how I positioned against Gong, on Gong's home turf. Without bashing them.

Wingman was a conversation intelligence platform.
Gong had defined the category, raised heavy, and owned the buyer's first search.
The brief was simple. Keep playing in Gong's category. Stop fighting on Gong's terms.
The comparison pages were where the positioning actually had to hold up against a buyer who'd been on a Gong demo the week before.

Comparison pages live 11 comparison + alt LPs vs Gong, vs Chorus, plus alternative LPs for the full conversation-intelligence set (Avoma, Balto, Dooly, ExecVision, Salesken). All on Webflow, all Wayback-verifiable.
Inbound revenue post-rebrand 90%+ inbound revenue post-rebrand Self-reported by CEO Shruti Kapoor on SaaS Club Podcast #341. Comparison pages were a load-bearing piece of that inbound funnel.

What it was

Generic "vendor X vs vendor Y" comparison pages were the category default. Feature tables. Checkmarks. A green column for "us" and a red column for "them." Buyers had read fifty of those before they hit ours. They worked for SEO. They did nothing for trust.

What I did instead

Opened the Gong comparison page with a real concession. "We actually like Gong." Then reframed the buying criteria around the jobs Wingman was actually built for: real-time coaching, async review, fast onboarding for smaller teams. Same move on the Chorus page. Same move on the alternative-keyword variants. The honesty was the differentiator. Stating what Gong did well bought the right to say what Wingman did differently.

The receipts

Four Wayback snapshots from the live Webflow build. Each page individually verifiable.

Wingman vs Gong comparison landing page, January 2022. Hero: Wingman vs Gong. Sub-text leads with budget-honest framing. Feature table compares both products line by line.
Wingman vs Gong, the direct comparison LP. Wayback, Jan 27, 2022.
Wingman vs Chorus comparison landing page, January 2022. Hero: Looking for Chorus? You deserve better. Coaching-first reframe.
Wingman vs Chorus, the parallel build. Same structure, different buying criteria. Wayback, Jan 27, 2022.
Wingman vs Gong Black Friday variant landing page, December 2021. Hero unchanged. Comparison table identical. Seasonal entry point for Q4 budget cycle.
Black Friday variant. Q4 budget-cycle entry point, same positioning spine. Wayback, Dec 8, 2021.
Wingman the Gong alternative landing page, January 2022. Long-form comparison covering call recording, sales coaching, performance analysis, ease of use, customer support, integrations. FAQ section at bottom.
The /compare/gong-alternative SEO variant. Long-form table for buyers searching "Gong alternative." Wayback, Jan 27, 2022.

What I actually did

  1. Read every public Gong customer review (G2, Capterra) and every Chorus review. Coded the language of frustration. The pattern was clear: Gong felt overbuilt for sub-200-person teams.
  2. Wrote the Gong page with an opening concession. "We actually like Gong." Tested it against three sales reps. They picked it over the standard "us vs them" frame, 3-0.
  3. Same structure for Chorus. Same structure for Avoma, Balto, Dooly, ExecVision, Salesken, Salesken alternative-keyword pages.
  4. Built two variant sets: alternative-keyword LPs (for SEO traffic searching "[competitor] alternative") and direct-vs LPs (for buyers searching the comparison directly). Both ran simultaneously.
  5. Shipped seasonal variants. The Black Friday "wingman-vs-gong" page was a Q4 push when Gong was top-of-funnel for budget cycles.

What stayed honest

The 90%+ inbound revenue is from the CEO on a public podcast. The comparison pages are individually verifiable on the Wayback Machine. I cannot tell you which specific page closed which specific deal. The CEO can. What I can show you is the body of work that the inbound machine was reading from.

What it became, in substrate

The honest-comparison page structure, the repositioning move that keeps you inside a category the leader defined, and the G2/Capterra coded-language extraction routine are three of the moves substrate carries forward. The skill, routine, and principle layers are open source for any client to clone and run.

Like what you read? Book 30 minutes.

Pick a slot →
← Back