ASO AgencyTravel · US iPhone listing
Does their ASO suck?
Listing creative score · first three captured iPhone screenshots
5/10Fine. A dangerous place to stop.
GetYourGuide has produced a very attractive holiday brochure. Unfortunately, a brochure cannot explain your meeting point. The opening sells kayaking, then browsing, then more browsing. Three valuable positions, and the practical reason to install is still waiting at the departure gate.
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 design is doing its job: big type, clean hierarchy and real browsing screens. This is not a broken listing. It is a booking argument that stops too early. Right place and Right time create a mood, but they leave me asking what I can actually choose and book. I'd keep the travel appeal, then show one activity's useful details and where the ticket fits. The point is to move from inspiration to a decision, not squeeze the whole booking tutorial into three pictures. The brochure has had its turn; give the practical reason to install some space.
Destination imagery and activity discovery establish a relevant travel use case. The opening still needs a more specific reason to book through the app.
Browsing is visible; choosing a date and receiving a ticket are not.
Large type, strong contrast and a clear visual hierarchy earn full credit.
The discovery screens add browsing context, although they stop before activity evaluation and ticket access. That is an incomplete progression rather than no progression at all.
Activities and discovery views establish the category. The opening does not demonstrate a concrete booking advantage over another way to find the same experience.
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 opening is destination and activity imagery with branding rather than a booking interface.
Why I’m flagging it: A beautiful experience is a category advertisement. It does not explain what booking through this app makes easier.
Pair the kayaking hero with a large, specific booking benefit and an authentic activity-detail crop.
What the visitor sees → what I’d change
Look at the original: Search and destination cards make the discovery action visible beneath a comparative popularity claim.
Why I’m flagging it: The search screen shows breadth, but the popularity badge occupies space that could explain a useful choice.
Zoom into one activity's date and participant selection; keep any verified popularity claim secondary.
What the visitor sees → what I’d change
Look at the original: The image adds activity-level discovery and navigation to bookings and a wishlist.
Why I’m flagging it: Another browse view extends the catalogue instead of resolving the traveller's next question.
Replace this frame with a verified ticket or confirmation example and clearly visible meeting information.
Proposed copy for discussion. These are not current listing fields or tested winners.
Observed listing
Attractions, Tours, Events
Proposed alternative
Tours, tickets & things to do
Name 25/30 · Subtitle 29/30 charactersKeep the current name and describe the activity-discovery and ticket intent in plain language. The alternative connects browsing with booking without a universal availability promise.
The tradeoff: It removes attractions and events from the subtitle and adds broader things-to-do language. Query relevance and the current product mix should justify that trade before release.
Read the sequence from top to bottom on mobile, left to right on desktop. These are message-layout sketches, not screens from GetYourGuide or tested results.
Proposed headline
Put this in the frame: A current destination search leading to a representative activity, with example data labelled.
Why it earns the space: Keep the inspiration connected to a usable search action.
Proposed headline
Put this in the frame: A verified activity detail with date, participants, meeting point and relevant conditions.
Why it earns the space: Help a traveller judge fit before making a booking.
Proposed headline
Put this in the frame: A confirmation or ticket view with the actual operator-contact and meeting information.
Why it earns the space: Show the post-booking handoff without claiming entry or refund conditions that have not been verified.
The test: Does a practical activity-detail third frame improve booking comprehension while preserving qualified conversion? 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
Plan travel experiences
Viator names tours and attractions with a travel-experiences planning proposition.
The lesson: The category overlap is direct. A clear detail-to-ticket journey is more useful differentiation than another generic travel promise.
Observed competitor metadata
Tickets, Tours, Transport
Klook names travel and activities with tickets, tours and transport.
The lesson: Its broader trip utility overlaps with booking intent. Explain the specific GetYourGuide activity handoff without assuming identical cancellation or transport coverage.
Observed competitor metadata
Hotels, Restaurants, Tours
Tripadvisor names trip planning and booking across hotels, restaurants and tours.
The lesson: This is a broader discovery alternative. GetYourGuide can make the activity-specific decision clear without claiming superior provider quality.
Intent candidates grounded in the listing—not fabricated search-volume or difficulty scores.
Visitor’s job: Find an experience at a destination.
Evidence: The observed subtitle names attractions, tours and events, and the creative shows destination and activity discovery.
Decision: Retain explicit experience intent; validate actual queries rather than inferring demand from destination examples.
Visitor’s job: Check a date and obtain the correct access for an activity.
Evidence: The name says Plan & Book and the interface includes a bookings destination.
Decision: Verify the detail, confirmation and ticket steps before promising instant entry, guaranteed availability or a particular cancellation rule.
Visitor’s job: Compare a trip from a base city or a specific type of activity.
Evidence: The third frame includes a Day trips category and local Rome experiences.
Decision: Show relevant departure, duration and meeting information; do not imply that every activity begins at the landmark searched.
The unseen keyword field may already cover some of these terms. Build an evidence-backed keyword shortlist before making a metadata change.
Three 2022–2026 service-and-booking accounts were selected for meeting information, cancellation understanding and departure location. Two reviews focused on the quality of individual excursions were excluded from app-workflow evidence. The resolved refund is retained, and reports do not establish current policy, provider prevalence or a confirmed mobile defect.
Sample: 3 selected accounts from 8 displayed reviews. Dates: 23 September 2022–24 May 2026. No sentiment percentage is calculated.
23 September 2022 · 4/5 stars
“instructions”
A September 2022 account reported confusing meeting instructions and booking-number recognition, but eventually found someone who had them on the tour list.
What I’d investigate: Investigate the current meeting-point and operator handoff. The reported operator remark is not evidence of a recurring platform failure.
Listing review source · Review ID 911349905012 August 2024 · 4/5 stars
“was refunded”
An August 2024 account described a difficult cancellation dispute and later explicitly confirmed the money was refunded.
What I’d investigate: Preserve the resolution. The reviewer’s explanation of cancellation policy is not treated as the current rule for every activity.
Listing review source · Review ID 1160223739824 May 2026 · 1/5 stars
“departure location”
A May 2026 account reported booking a departure location they could not practically reach and difficulty obtaining support.
What I’d investigate: Research departure-location prominence and transport assumptions without adopting the alleged algorithm fault as an established cause.
Listing review source · Review ID 14101036884A 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 beautiful experience is a category advertisement. It does not explain what booking through this app makes easier.
Deliverable: Pair the kayaking hero with a large, specific booking benefit and an authentic activity-detail crop.
Creative brief and current-product checkThe search screen shows breadth, but the popularity badge occupies space that could explain a useful choice.
Deliverable: Zoom into one activity's date and participant selection; keep any verified popularity claim secondary.
Creative brief and current-product checkAnother browse view extends the catalogue instead of resolving the traveller's next question.
Deliverable: Replace this frame with a verified ticket or confirmation example and clearly visible meeting information.
Creative brief and current-product checkDoes a practical activity-detail third frame improve booking comprehension while preserving qualified conversion?
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 GetYourGuide. 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.
