A question from someone who was kind enough to read my latest Deliver column, followed by my answer:

Q: Is an order form equally important when it’s a nonprofit arts group selling tickets? I always push for including a user-friendly order form or invoice for subscription brochures, but am getting increasing pushback.  Clients feel they’re unnecessary, take up space, people go on the internet anyway, so why bother? I’m assuming we should include them for the same reasons you cite for reply cards. I don’t have pushback about using reply cards when requesting a donation, but subscriptions are much more complicated so order forms take up more space.

A: The most responsible answer to any "what works best" question is, of course, test. That said, my own experience is that you should ABSOLUTELY include a reply card, invoice or order form (I'll just say "reply card" from here), even when people can respond online. My reasons:

• Even the technologically adept follow the course of least resistance. If checking YES on a card and dropping it in the mail is faster and easier than logging on, people will do it. We recently mailed a subscription offer for an email newsletter. Online sign-up was easy, yet half of the response came from people who checked YES on the reply card and snail-mailed it.

• The reply card does more than enable snail-mail and phone replies. It is often the first looked-at piece. A good one impels readers into the other materials. They may reply online, but the reply card set the sale in motion. The trouble is, if that's happening, it's invisible to you and the client. Only split testing will tease it out.

• People often discard the rest of the mailer and hang onto the reply card to revisit later. Omitting the card takes that option away, possible at the cost of sales. Again, the card may drive them to the web. But with no card to hang onto, they may do nothing at all.

Some quick notes on split tests (at the risk of repeating what you already know):

To split-test your mailings, send half of your list a package with the card and half without, and see if there is a difference in response over time and over multiple tests. Over time and over multiple tests, because flukes happen. Allow time for all responses to drag in, and be wary of drawing a firm conclusion from one or even two tests. I'd also be wary of generalizing for all clients based on test  results for one. And, be wary of carving test results in concrete. I'd retest from time to time, as behaviors sometimes change.
 
 
Yesterday I was a guest presenter in a webinar sponsored by DirectMarketingIQ. I thought I’d share two questions from participants, along with my answers.

Q: I've heard that a different headline would pull up to six times more than another. Is this true?

A: A headline change can certainly do that. Headlines (and, in a sales letter, the P.S.) are read first, so that's where you'll see a good deal of impact. Even changing a single word in the headline can make a significant difference. Decades ago, the legendary John Caples increased response 20 percent by changing "How to repair cars" to "How to fix cars." Sometimes surprisingly mundane changes work wonders. An educational institute for bankers once asked us how to get more branch managers to respond to their newspaper ad. We suggested simply adding the words "BRANCH MANAGERS" in large type at the top of the ad, leaving everything else, including the headline, unchanged. Replies shot up. 

Q: Should we tell the client how they may feel about a collectible product? For example tell the customer this product will take your breath away or instead say this product is breathtaking.

A: "Breathtaking" merely describes the product, whereas "take your breath away" describes the effect on the reader, so it makes sense that the latter might pull better. BUT: what seems to make sense often fails in real life. It makes sense that a product priced at $24 would outsell the same one priced at $29, but the opposite is often true. So, rather than try to reason which wording will sell more, you can know by doing a split-copy test. (I assume you're dealing with a headline. If the wording is buried in copy, I would stress over other things first.) That said, I can't help observing that neither term is particularly convincing. Can a collectible really take one's breath away? There may be a more believable, more compelling claim as to the effect your product will have on its proud new owner. 

—Steve Cuno
 
 
I will not market products that don't work. (At least, not knowingly. I have been duped—more on that in a moment.) That has meant saying NO to, and sometimes angering, prospective clients who were ready to spend.

Products that I have declined include: 

• Multi-level marketing schemes (also known as network marketing). To be clear, some are legit. But generally in MLM, the product is secondary; what's really for sale is the unattainable dream of quickly building a downline, getting rich quick, and quitting your day job after just a few months. The only people who get rich in these schemes are those who enroll in them early. Later enrollees are their prey.

• Alternative medicines and alleged nutritional products. Most are flimflam. If you don't believe me, read their disclaimers. Those that aren't flimflam can interfere with other medications and have side effects, so they should be used only under the supervision of a real doctor. (Note: a real doctor. Not a chiropractor, naturopath, acupuncturist, aura manipulator, psychic healer, etc.) Never mind the so-called clinical studies. If I wanted, I could produce a clinical study showing that listening to Prokofiev instead of Mozart will make you live longer. (Come to think of it, though that's not true, it should be.)

• Purported stock market prediction products/systems. They don't work. All they do is encourage people, many of whom can't afford to lose, to risk foolishly.

• Weight-loss hypnotherapy. There is still only one proven weight-loss method: eat less, eat smarter, and exercise more. Trouble is, there's not much money in that plan. No valid test has shown hypnosis to be of any effect.

• Astrology. It's bunk.

• A lobbying group that would scare the daylights out of anyone who thinks highly of the First Amendment.

• Subliminal self-improvement CDs. You know, the kind you play while you're asleep. Bogus.

I am sorry to say that, a few times, I have been duped into selling products which I later learned didn't work. Here are a few:

• Stock market prediction software. I took on this client before I knew better. They were great people, most of whom I think believed their product worked. Though, looking back, it is curious that no one in the company used the software to get rich—except by selling it.

• An antioxidant product. Never mind what you've read to the contrary. Antioxidants don't do anything but cost you money. I didn't know that at the time.

• A high-tech device. Devices of this type work. But, three years after the account moved to another agency, I learned that the engineers of this one had lied to me about their patented chip's advantages. Evaluating their claims required expertise and high-tech toys unavailable to me, so I believed the PhDs and wrote ads based on what they told me. I'm still mad. (I lack sufficient documentation to fend off a lawsuit, so for now I must be silent on the details.)

Thank goodness there are still plenty of legitimate products for my agency to sell. Otherwise, I'd have to return to my first job at age 16. Don't get me wrong. There's nothing wrong with busing tables at Denny's. It just wasn't the long-term career I wanted.

—Steve Cuno
 
 
Beware statistics. Or at least beware how people wield them.

A friend was at work on a public service campaign aimed at meth abuse. Research had shown that young moms represented more addicts than any other demographic, and my friend's objective was to change that. I facetiously suggested that one way of attaining that objective would be to get other groups to increase their usage until it outstripped that of young moms.

As wisecracks often do, this one illustrates a problem. Statistics comparing where you are relative to where someone else is can be meaningless. A better question is, where are you relative to where you wish to be?

Utahans raise a fuss when they learn that their state spends less than any other per student on education. Yet by itself, this statistic isn't necessarily damning. If all other states suddenly dropped their spending to less than Utah's, would Utah's level of spending suddenly be OK? Never mind what other states spend. The real question is whether Utah spends enough, spends it wisely and spends it effectively. While I suspect the answer to all of the above is no, comparing Utah's spending to that of other states doesn't establish as much.

—Steve Cuno
 
 
Published this week in Inside Direct Mail

Insisting that our markets accept responsibility for their buying decisions in no way alleviates us marketers of responsibility for how we use our marketing knowledge. 

The knowledge itself is neutral. Knowing that a P.S. in a sales letter pulls high readership does not make it immoral to put compelling copy points there, nor does knowing the power of limited-time incentive offers make it underhanded to use them. It is in the content of marketing that abuses can and do occur. 

To be sure, much if not the majority of today's direct response marketing is forthright and honorable. But some of it resorts, if not to out-and-out lies, to the classic subterfuge of stating what is technically true in a manner that is designed to mislead. Don't believe me? Consider the number of products that makes fantastic claims in body copy — which the fly type directly contradicts.  (To continue reading, click here.)
 
 
Picture
Intuitive inklings may be good guides when buying a house or a car. But Steve Cuno thinks they can be disastrous when planning a campaign to launch a product or elect a politician.

Cuno, an author living in Sandy, has written Prove It Before You Promote It , which he says helps take the guesswork out of marketing.

The 230-page book, published last year by John Wiley & Sons, is "brilliant," said Alan Rosenspan, a former creative director at advertising giant Ogilvy & Mather.

"The book is engagingly written and includes key summary points in every chapter, which are a great guide for every advertiser," Rosenspan said in an e-mail. (Click here to read the Salt Lake Tribune article.)
 
 
Customer loyalty is attained by giving your best customers privileges. Not by entrapping them. And privileges are not necessarily freebies. Let me illustrate.

Entrapment: Unhappy with your new cell phone carrier? Tough. You're stuck with them for the duration of your contract, unless you want to pay bail. What's more, if you pay bail and switch, you risking ending up just as unhappy and just as stuck with your next provider.

Loyalty: I came down with bronchitis. Yesterday it became unbearable. I called my favorite clinic. Lots of clinics take my insurance. What makes this one my favorite? For one thing, my doctor told me, "If you ever need a same-day appointment and my receptionist tells you I'm booked, tell her I said I will always work you in." For another, when I arrived, I was told there were two ahead of me. No problem; I'd brought a book. But the doc walked in just a moment later. She said, "You're a long-standing client, so we moved you up." For yet another, she called me a few hours later. "When I wrote your prescriptions," she said, "I forgot to ask if you needed cough syrup to help you sleep. Do you need me to phone that in for you?" In short, this clinic is my favorite because they treat me like I matter.

Loyalty is the antithesis of entrapment. Loyalty means customers willingly stay with you because they like you better and trust you more. And that is a result of how you treat them. Not of what you claim in your ads.

P.S. The cell phone provider that drops long-term contracts and keeps customers by earning their business every month will have an opportunity to clean up.

—Steve Cuno
 
 
I'd always had my suspicions about brainstorming. Now it turns out that research validates my hunch.

In his book 59 Seconds, psychologist Richard Wiseman assembles a number of scientific tests on human behavior. A few of them in his chapter on creativity show that people come up with more and better ideas on their own than in groups.

That has been my experience. But it's nice to see some data behind it. Incidentally, I highly recommend ANY book by Wiseman — especially Quirkology, my favorite from him.

—Steve Cuno
 
 
USA Today has a new plan to increase space sales to advertisers. In ads targeting corporate marketing decision makers and ad agencies, they're going to feature the tagline, "What America wants."

Geeze, that changes everything. Imagine all the holdouts who, as a result of reading that line, will run ads in USA Today henceforth.

—Steve Cuno
 
 
I just heard a radio spot for a car dealer where the announcer said, "We don't treat you like a number." Come on, writers, think these things through. When was the last time you overhead someone say, "I'd like to buy a car, but I yearn for a dealer that doesn't treat me like a number." Or, when was the last time you overhead someone say, "They don't treat me like a number? I'm going there to buy a car right now!"

—Steve Cuno