Tips for Effective Lumpy Direct Mail 03/18/2010
Thomas wrote today with a great question about lumpy ("dimensional," for you purists) direct mail: I am new to the marketing and promo business and I read with much interest the article on Lumpy Mail: An Engine for Lead Generation. I enjoy creating ideas and programs such as this and have already learned from you in this article. I do have one question that I hope you can shed some light on. When you send an item, to the extent that it lends itself to it do you use a printed item or a blank item and just let the item and letter do the talking. For instance, the hockey puck or volleyball. Did you have that printed with your clients information (i.e. name, message, etc)? Thanks for the time and any other hints that you might kick back to me are much appreciated. My reply: Glad you liked the article, and thanks for writing. I avoid printing on the enclosed item. That way, the item creates more curiosity, leading recipients to read the sales letter. The moment you print anything on the item, even your company name, it begins to look like a promotional item whose job is to put your name in front of someone, thus reducing the curiosity factor. Another mistake to avoid is what I call a "payoff headline." Placing an item in a box with a great headline on the outside is good. Putting a headline inside that gives away your message is bad. Suppose, for instance, that you enclose a tennis ball. A good headline on the outside of the box might be, "WHACK! (Details inside.)" But if on the inside of the box lid you print, "We could make a great match," you've just alleviated any need to read the letter. (Not to mention the fact that wimpy puns like that make for awful strategy.) For examples of well-crafted (if I say so myself) lumpy mail letters, click here. Clicking on any of the images will bring up the letter so you can read it. Followup from Thomas: One last question if you don't mind. Where do I find postal regulation or guideline related to mailing "lumpy mail" or is all of it contained in a box or envelope as a standard piece of mail. The reason that I ask is that years ago I received a tennis shoe in the mail. It had a mailing tag attached with a postage label on it though it was not "packaged" in any way. Anything you can add to this is much appreciated. My reply: My experience has been that you can address, stamp and mail just about anything, as long as it's non-hazardous and not likely to fall apart en route. You also need to watch for state regs. For instance, sending produce to California or Hawaii is tricky, and sending alcohol to Utah is flat-out illegal. It's always wise to check in advance with a business mail specialist at your main Post Office. They won't guarantee their answer, but it's usually reliable. You may have noticed that we mailed the volleyball without a box. We just shrink-wrapped an addressed envelope to the ball. We did the same thing some years earlier when we mailed frisbees for Wells Fargo. Each time, however, I called my USPS rep be sure it would be OK. (I pity the letter carriers who had oodles of volleyballs rolling around in the back of the truck, much less had to carry them from office to office.) —Steve Cuno Add Comment Target Marketing publisher Ethan Bolt quotes Steve Cuno in his new article "7 Tips Copywriting Tips That Should Be Put to the Test.” This is the third time Cuno has been quoted in the magazine. Steve Cuno's latest Deliver article I cringed when I read an article on how to launch a successful business. The author claimed that after deciding upon a product or service, the next most important step was to come up with a “catchy slogan.” The article appeared in a national magazine. Heaven only knows how many more lame slogans you and I will have to endure as a result. To be fair, there are good slogans. It’s hard to argue with… (click here to read the rest) Most-Watched Oscar Commercials 03/08/2010
If you’re an advertiser, TiVo can bring both bad and good news. On the bad side, it lets people zip past your ads. On the good side, it tells you which ads are skipped and which aren’t, so you can learn something about appealing to viewers. TiVo just announced the least-zapped televised movie promos for yesterday’s Oscar contenders. During the past six months, “Up in the Air” with George Clooney was zapped the least. Similarly titled animated feature “Up” was a close second. “Avatar” came in third. I might add that TiVo finds that the most-watched categories of TV commercials in general are, first, movie promos and, second, direct response spots. Think about that next time you’re about to sink your budget into a self-indulgenty entertaining spot just because your ad agency assures you it will win a Clio. —Steve Cuno Starbucks: Silence Makes for Brilliant PR 03/02/2010
On Sunday, gun rights activists marched into a Virginia Starbucks wearing plainly visible guns. They hoped to provoke Starbucks into tossing them out so that they could raise a First Amendment fuss. Starbucks ignored them. That was smart PR by Starbucks. Staying out of a fray takes vision, smarts and guts. And, that was bad PR by gun rights activists. The public is less likely to agree you're being picked on when you go around provoking confrontations. (Click here to read the NPR story.) Steve Cuno Ugly Can Be Beautiful 03/01/2010
An angry client hauled me into his office, slammed our latest ad down on his desk, and told me to pull it. Why? It was (and I had to concede this) ugly. Why his underling approved it was beyond him. I happened to have brought along a spreadsheet showing the results. The ad was outselling its more pleasingly-designed predecessor seven-to-one. "Keep running it," growled the client. Don't get me wrong. I understand the importance of design. I understand that the look of your advertising reflects upon your brand. And bad design is certainly never an objective. But sometimes bad design is a valuable tool. In fact, sometimes bad design outsells good. Consider all those ugly ads in in-flight magazines. You know, the full-page ads crammed with three columns of 8-point type without the slightest regard for design. Know why they never go away? Because they sell oodles of products. Sometimes successful direct marketers run ugly ads because, starting out, they don't know better and/or can't afford a designer. When profits roll in and they spruce up the ads, they often find the improved look makes no difference in sales. Sometimes the makeover even drives sales down. Steve Cuno Help Fight Libel Law Abuse 02/25/2010
This letter from author Simon Singh appears in Swift, the newsletter of the James Randi Educational Foundation. Singh, one of my favorite science writers, is being sued for libel by a British chiropractic association for having referred to their trade as “bogus.” For the moment please set aside your feelings about so-called alternative medicine and instead consider the implications of the UK’s maniacal libel laws. No matter what country you live in, they have the power to affect you. Then, please click here (or on the link in the text) and sign the petition.--Steve Cuno From Simon Singh Dear Friends, Rationalists, Bloggers, Journalists, Medics, Skeptics & Scientists: As you may know, I am currently being sued for libel. My own case is largely irrelevant, because the bigger issue is libel reform so that scientists can discuss ideas openly, fairly and robustly, without fear that they might end up in court. There are currently three ongoing cases involving libel and science/medicine. This is a very English problem, but it has a chilling effect on debate around the world because English law can have a global jurisdiction. Hence, I am asking for support from around the world. One way to help achieve libel reform is for 100,000 people to sign the petition for libel reform before the political parties write their manifestos for the upcoming General Election. We already have 29,000 signatures, but we really need 100,000, and we need your help to get there. If you have not yet signed, then please click here. To find out why we need to reform English libel law, then please read on. (Read the rest of this article by clicking here now.) Steve Cuno More Bad News for Social Media 02/23/2010
Readers of this blog know that I am a social media skeptic. I acknowledge that some social marketing successes have popped up. But they have not been replicated, which indicates that, so far, they are more likely the product of randomness than indicative of a hot new marketing tool. This week, Advertising Age reports results from the Edelman 2010 Trust Barometer, a study that asks people their level of trust in various media messages. Only 25% of people polled consider friends and peers as credible sources of consumer and business information. Now, I'm also skeptical of research that asks people to self-report their feelings. Such “research” often tells you much about respondents’ self-concept, and little about anything else. However, when this same study was done two years ago, that number was 45%. The decline gives pause, self-reporting notwithstanding. Perhaps marketing’s attempt to institutionalize word-of-mouth advertising has robbed it of its very power. Steve Cuno RESPONSE blog reader, fellow skeptic and public relations pro Michael Hartwell sent this note: I know you've written about the Super Bowl being an inefficient time to advertise, but I am seeing a lot of advertisements selling products to enhance the Super Bowl — mostly snack food and televisions. But instead of directly saying it's for the Super Bowl, they're saying it's for the "big game." I imagine this is due to some copyright concern. Is this "nickname" practice used in other situations, is there more at play here then copyright and is it fair to say these event-based advertisements are the real advertising success stories around the Super Bowl? Thanks, Michael. Let me break this down into two parts. 1. On advertising during the Super Bowl I wouldn't characterize the Super Bowl as an inefficient time to advertise. It draws a mass audience, a big chunk of which actually looks forward to watching the ads. If your objective is to put your message in front of a huge, receptive audience, the Super Bowl is ideal. But before spending the minimum $2.6 million for one 30-second exposure this year, you'd have been well-advised to weigh the benefits. A "receptive audience" in this case may mean "expecting to be entertained," not necessarily "open to making a decision to buy." And reaching a vast audience is no assurance that you'll sell anything to any of them. Running spots during the Super Bowl may make sense for certain advertisers. But I'd recommend a better success measure than how many people saw, recalled or liked the commercial. 2. On "Super Bowl" as a trademark Michael is right as to why advertisers tell you to stock up on their product for "the big game." Were they to come right out and say "for the Super Bowl," they'd hear from the big game's attorneys in no time. The Olympics get nasty in like fashion when you use the O word and, sometimes, even "Games." During the 2002 Winter Olympics in Salt Lake City, a ski resort ran billboards promoting the fact that no Olympic events were were taking place on their slopes. The idea was to attract locals seeking a crowd-free place to ski. The IOC made them remove "Olympics" from their billboards. My non-legal opinion is that both organizations are bullying and getting away with it. Companies name other companies in their ads all the time. Pepsi names Coke. Mac names Windows. GM names Toyota. But who wants to take on the Super Bowl or the Olympics in what would certainly prove a costly, years-long legal battle? Is it worth the fight, given that the Super Bowl arrives but once a year and the Olympics, counting summer and winter, arrives but every two? And who wants the PR liability of being the whiner who sued a beloved institution? Those are, I suspect, the reasons that no one bothers to call the bullies' bluff. Steve Cuno |       Click here to read Steve Cuno's column in Deliver Magazine   ArchivesJanuary 2012 Looking for older posts? CLICK HERE.
 Click here to read the official newsletter of the James Randi Educational Foundation, for which Steve Cuno is an occasional writer. |
RSS Feed
