Hi GHL Team/Developers,

I appreciate the recent "Prebuilt Sections" addition to the Template area. Selecting templates visually rather than relying solely on text descriptions is a huge step forward. I’d love to see this approach extended to all template areas.

Over the past few years, I’ve built numerous websites and funnels using Go High Level and have likely saved multiple versions of similar (if not identical) Section templates. The challenge is remembering what I saved six months or a year ago. Visual references make locating and reusing saved sections much easier, saving time and reducing redundancy.

This got me thinking: What if GHL implemented Duda’s SaaS website builder solution? I’ve worked with several platforms, and Duda’s builder stands out—it’s user-friendly, efficient, and comparable (if not superior) to platforms like Elementor. Their visual template management system is particularly noteworthy.

Here’s a link to their solution for reference:

👉 https://www.duda.co/solutions/saas-platforms

Integrating a solution like this could significantly enhance the user experience within GHL, especially for those managing multiple projects. It could be offered as an option while keeping the existing builder available for users who prefer it. This way, everyone can choose the tool that best fits their workflow.

A Designer’s Visual Wishlist for Improvements (WYSIWYG):

Limited Control: Options for accordion menus, button styling, padding, bullets, icons, font uploads (for consistent branding), font styling, color usage, and more could be significantly improved.

Template & Section Management: Saving and reusing sections is less intuitive than in other systems, which offer visual displays for quick access.

Out-of-the-Box Styling: Squarespace, Duda, and Elementor provide more ready-to-use styling options.

Mobile Responsiveness: Adjusting for mobile views isn’t as seamless as with other builders, which auto-adjust more accurately.

Built-In Widgets: More built-in widgets that work seamlessly would be valuable.

Thanks for considering this suggestion—I believe it could make Go High Level even more intuitive and efficient while aligning with the many similar requests from other users.