ASO AgencyShopping · US iPhone listing
Does their ASO suck?
Listing creative score · first three captured iPhone screenshots
5/10Fine. A dangerous place to stop.
Back Market spends two opening frames saying refurbished phones cost less. We heard it the first time. The harder question is what premium refurbished actually means for the device in the buyer's hand. That argument deserves more than small reassurance links.
Gab’s verdict · 5/10Gabriel Machuret
One storefront, one language and a dated capture. This is an independent editorial audit, not a client case study.
Gab’s take · Five criteria. Two points each.
The saving is clear and the shopping interface is recognisable. Those are useful foundations. Buying refurbished also involves trust in condition, and that question deserves more attention than a second price celebration. The retail interface is recognisable, but the opening repeats the savings argument while leaving condition underexplained. Price gets an encore; the purchase decision is still waiting backstage. Replace the duplicate pitch with a readable condition comparison and accurately scoped purchase protection. Polished merchandising is not a complete refurbished-buying argument.
Savings are clear, but the premium-refurbished benefit is underexplained.
Shopping is visible while device condition remains difficult to judge.
Repeated yellow frames and small product rows flatten the hierarchy.
The opening moves from savings to product inventory, so it does progress. Repeated price messaging leaves the condition decision underexplained.
Refurbished positioning and purchase-policy cues offer relevant reassurance, but the condition distinction needs a concrete readable example.
0: not earned · 1: useful but incomplete · 2: clearly demonstrated. Judged on the dated opening creative; public metadata provides context. These points assess creative execution, not private conversion or ranking performance. Read the scoring criteria · See all ten verdict levels
Inspect the numbered original, read the problem, then compare the proposed fix. The publisher’s creative stays unchanged.
What the visitor sees → what I’d change
Look at the original: The store interface quickly connects the brand to refurbished devices and shopping.
Why I’m flagging it: A deals screen supports a predictable savings message.
Show one specific refurbished-device benefit beside a clearly labelled product example.
What the visitor sees → what I’d change
Look at the original: The rows vary by model and display price, carrier and model controls.
Why I’m flagging it: Model rows repeat price comparison without explaining condition differences.
Replace the repeated savings pitch with a condition-grade comparison and meaningful device detail.
What the visitor sees → what I’d change
Look at the original: The example exposes reassurance links beside a specific unlocked device.
Why I’m flagging it: Returns, warranty and delivery information shrink into a product-page list.
Zoom into the relevant current protection and condition terms, preserving eligibility and exceptions.
Proposed copy for discussion. These are not current listing fields or tested winners.
Observed listing
Premium refurbished tech
Proposed alternative
Buy devices, trade in old tech
Name 29/30 · Subtitle 30/30 charactersMove the product category into the name and make the two marketplace jobs explicit in the subtitle. The proposal is grounded in the current shopping and trade-in description.
The tradeoff: This removes premium wording and changes the current buy-and-sell title structure. Trade-in eligibility varies by device and offer, so it must not imply every item is accepted or that a quote is a guaranteed payout.
Read the sequence from top to bottom on mobile, left to right on desktop. These are message-layout sketches, not screens from Back Market or tested results.
Proposed headline
Put this in the frame: A verified current product search with model and compatibility controls.
Why it earns the space: Establish the practical buying job.
Proposed headline
Put this in the frame: One condition comparison for the same specifications, with truthful illustrative pricing context.
Why it earns the space: Make the key refurbished tradeoff understandable.
Proposed headline
Put this in the frame: The applicable seller, delivery, return and warranty details for that example.
Why it earns the space: Turn reassurance into an informed decision rather than a universal guarantee.
The test: Does a condition-aware second frame improve buying comprehension and qualified acquisition? The sketch gives the designer a direction; the actual product and access conditions decide what can ship.
Bring the listing. I’ll help you decide what to keep, what to fix and what to test.
Observed competitor metadata
Buy, sell & resell marketplace
eBay names both online shopping and selling across a broad marketplace.
The lesson: Back Market can foreground refurbished-device condition rather than compete only on generic buy-and-sell language.
Observed competitor metadata
More benefits, fewer steps
Amazon uses broad shopping and convenience wording in its metadata.
The lesson: Show the specific refurbished decision that a general shopping promise leaves unexplained; metadata does not establish a price or service advantage.
Observed competitor metadata
Shopping
Swappa identifies itself as a marketplace with a generic Shopping subtitle; its captured description focuses on used tech.
The lesson: Buying a used device is adjacent intent, but used and refurbished are not interchangeable standards. Explain Back Market’s verified condition process without claiming a competitor is unsafe.
Intent candidates grounded in the listing—not fabricated search-volume or difficulty scores.
Visitor’s job: Buy a previously owned device with a defined condition and service proposition.
Evidence: The subtitle and opening explicitly name refurbished tech and show phone offers.
Decision: Keep the category central and verify condition wording rather than treating refurbished as synonymous with new.
Visitor’s job: Find a compatible model at an acceptable total price.
Evidence: The first three stills show iPhones, carrier controls and product details.
Decision: Address specifications, condition and compatibility; do not add another company’s trademark to the proposed app name or imply the lowest price.
Visitor’s job: Receive an offer for an unwanted device.
Evidence: The current app title includes selling and the description describes trade-in assessment.
Decision: Keep trade-in as a separate intent with assessment and offer conditions; the three opening stills primarily demonstrate buying.
The unseen keyword field may already cover some of these terms. Build an evidence-backed keyword shortlist before making a metadata change.
Three 2023–2026 accounts were selected to contrast grade expectations, changing offers and post-purchase resolution. Successful purchases and a completed refund are retained alongside complaints. Allegations of deliberate fraud and unsupported environmental or savings percentages are not adopted as verified findings.
Sample: 3 selected accounts from 8 displayed reviews. Dates: 13 February 2023–24 June 2026. No sentiment percentage is calculated.
13 February 2023 · 5/5 stars
“I always go with excellent”
A February 2023 buyer described successful laptop and phone purchases and usually chose excellent condition, while acknowledging that cheaper grades can have visible wear.
What I’d investigate: Preserve the selected-grade context. One buyer’s results do not prove every device will arrive without marks or issues.
Listing review source · Review ID 961282617224 June 2026 · 2/5 stars
“prices frequently change”
A June 2026 buyer reported finding a lower price for an apparently equivalent laptop shortly after purchase and receiving incorrect tracking information; they also described support as trying to help.
What I’d investigate: Verify configuration, seller, timing and total cost before diagnosing pricing. The account was still awaiting delivery, so do not invent a final outcome.
Listing review source · Review ID 142209579256 December 2024 · 1/5 stars
“refunded me”
A December 2024 buyer said the first faulty phone was refunded, then described a replacement purchase with condition and accessory concerns and an unsatisfactory support experience.
What I’d investigate: Retain the first refund and the subsequent offered return option. Research condition expectations without turning the account into a blanket claim that refunds are unavailable.
Listing review source · Review ID 12033039921A displayed review can be old, unusually positive or internally inconsistent with its star rating. These accounts suggest questions; they do not establish current defects or typical customer experience. Use the Review Research Desk to keep evidence and interpretation separate.
A deals screen supports a predictable savings message.
Deliverable: Show one specific refurbished-device benefit beside a clearly labelled product example.
Creative brief and current-product checkModel rows repeat price comparison without explaining condition differences.
Deliverable: Replace the repeated savings pitch with a supported condition-grade comparison and meaningful device detail.
Creative brief and current-product checkReturns, warranty and delivery information shrink into a product-page list.
Deliverable: Zoom into the relevant current protection and condition terms, preserving eligibility and exceptions.
Creative brief and current-product checkDoes a condition-aware second frame improve buying comprehension and qualified acquisition?
Check Apple’s current product page optimization guidance and custom product page guidance before configuring a test. Write your experiment brief.
1–3: thumbs down · 4–6: thumbs up and down · 7–10: thumbs up
The basics need a serious rethink.
Too many obvious things have been left unfinished.
There is a useful product here. The listing needs to show it.
Some basics work, but the opening wastes attention and under-explains the benefit.
There is usable creative here, but too much of the sales argument is left to the visitor.
Real strengths, undermined by meaningful gaps in the opening story or execution.
A clear, useful demonstration with specific refinements still needed.
The main promise is clear and supported. Refinement matters more than reinvention.
Clear positioning, thoughtful choices and very few loose ends.
An unusually clear, convincing storefront worth learning from.
An editorial verdict on the captured storefront, not a measured ASO score or an assessment of an agency’s private work.
No private analytics, search-rank dataset or internal keyword field was supplied. Review quotations are short excerpts; explanations are our summaries. App names and screenshots belong to their respective owners. We are not affiliated with Back Market. Read our editorial methodology.
Your app. Your priorities.
Send your listing, market and the problem you want to solve. I’ll explain the scope and fee before work starts. Your budget should buy decisions, not a longer PDF.
Build a relevant keyword shortlist, plan your screenshot sequence or get help with the creative decisions.
