Case Study · Website Design & Development · Conversion
A commercial site built to move a shopper from browsing to a basket or a showroom, and a CSR platform built to move a donor from reading to donating. Same parent brand, two completely different decisions to win.
Hero Cycles has been building bicycles in Ludhiana since 1956. Their own heritage timeline runs to the present day, and more than 150 million cycles have come out of that plant alone.
The commercial side sells to a retail buyer choosing between models, at a price point where the decision usually stalls on affordability rather than on the product.
The other side is Hero Umeed, the corporate social responsibility platform that funds cycles for children who would otherwise walk to school. The programme reports 24 states, 110 districts and six corporate partners on its own site.
One is deciding between models and quietly worrying about the price. The other is deciding whether to trust you with their money. Neither is served by a homepage that simply looks good.
Catalogue navigation assumes the buyer already knows what they want. Most arrive knowing a budget, an age and roughly where the cycle will be ridden.
At this ticket the decision stalls on what it costs this month. If that conversation only happens at checkout, it happens after most people have gone.
If the site will not put two models side by side, the shopper opens three tabs, and at least one of them belongs to somebody else.
Nobody needs persuading that a child should not walk five kilometres to school. They need to know who picks the child, who delivers the cycle and how anyone would ever know it arrived.
Not a template applied twice. Two builds, each shaped by the single thing the visitor has to be able to do.
Find My Ride sits in the header on every page of the commercial site. Answer a few questions about who is riding and where, and get a shortlist. The buyer who cannot name a model never has to.
Kids, Teens, New Launch and Accessories. A parent buying for a nine year old should not have to translate frame sizes into an answer.
The monthly instalment, the tenure options and the zero cost EMI route sit beside the price at the top of the product page, ahead of the specifications, because that is the objection that decides it.
Best for, ride style and what stands out, two models at a time, on the page the shopper is already on. Rating, reviews and the nearest store are one tap away from the same header.
One cycle, one child, one amount. Turning an open ended ask into a single yes or no removes the hardest part of the decision, which is choosing a number.
What the money buys, who verifies the child, who delivers, how each cycle is tracked by unique ID, and where the 80G certificate sits. All of it above the donate button rather than in a policy page underneath it.
Both sites are live. The panels below call out the parts built specifically to move the visitor from looking to acting.
The commercial site. Built for a shopper who knows the budget and the rider, but not the model name.
The donation platform. A donor does not need convincing that children need cycles. They need to know where the money goes.
The figures below are the ones the two sites publish themselves, alongside the scope of what was designed and built.
| Commercial site | A guided product finder in the header, audience led navigation, and product pages carrying rating, EMI, comparison and a store locator |
|---|---|
| Affordability | Monthly instalment, three, six and nine month tenures and a zero cost EMI route surfaced beside the price |
| Comparison | Two models side by side on the product page itself, on best for, ride style and what stands out |
| CSR platform | A single fixed donation, an itemised breakdown of what it buys, and a four step identify to track chain |
| Trust | Verified beneficiaries, certified NGO delivery, unique cycle IDs, impact reports and the 80G position, all on page |
| Heritage | A year by year timeline from 1956 to the present, built as a browsable section rather than a paragraph |
Net effect: one site that answers the question a shopper is actually stuck on, and one that answers the question a donor is too polite to ask.
It would have been quicker to design one site and reskin it. It would also have been wrong. A retail shopper and a corporate donor are not the same person having a different day, and the pages they need do not share a shape.
What the two builds do share is the method. Find the single decision the visitor is stuck on, work out what is stopping them, and put the answer to that in front of the thing you want them to click. On one site that is a monthly instalment figure. On the other it is a four step chain showing where a cycle ends up.
Both are live, and both can be measured against the decision they were built to win.
Website design, development and conversion work that starts from what the visitor is stuck on rather than from a template.
Start a conversationOther brands we have built, launched and put on walls.
ASK THE BEE · LIVE
LIVE · AI ASSISTANT
