Chat With Us
We are here for you!
Talk to a fellow human.
One logical fallacy that frequently occurs when evaluating Extended Validation is to assume that if some other site is not using EV SSL, that means you shouldn't either. Read on to learn why this reasoning is a dangerous fallacy.
Sometimes IT decision makers seem to be going out of their way to find excuses not to invest in Extended Validation SSL. That may owe itself to the fact that it’s easier not to ask for incremental budget, especially when you’re not the one on the hook for hitting the site’s business metric targets. It may owe itself to loss aversion. Either way, we commonly observe this mental exercise of trying to find a reason not to go with EV.
One of those reasons we hear is that such-and-such of a site doesn’t use EV, so that means I don’t have to either. Typically that site is a competitor or something that is considered a leading web property. Amazon and Google are common choices.
This reasoning is riddled with logical flaws. They more or less divide into assuming that these other sites are making an optimized decision and assuming that their situations match yours.
Here are some reason this other company may not have made an optimized decision:
And here are some reasons this other site may not be in the same situation as yours:
Surely there are others. But either way, it’s important not to blindly assume that another business made the optimized decision for EV or that this business’s optimized decision would be the same as yours.
This fallacy is particularly egregious when it comes to competitors. So your competitor is doing something suboptimal, failing to maximize transactions and site usage, providing a worse customer experience, and missing out on the opportunity to create a positive brand impression. That’s great news. You can gain a leg up in all these ways by showing you’re using best of breed technology to protect site visitors. Or you can fail to rise to the occasion and just copy your competitors’ level of mediocrity.