Bad Typography 04/28/2010
 
In the current issue of Communication Arts, a graphic designer suggests that typography offers an inexpensive way to give a message more punch. Fair enough. I wish he had stopped there, and not shared any examples.

He shows a series of posters for a ski resort, with dramatic photos of snowboarders upside-down in mid-leap. The headlines, all caps, appear upside-down at the bottom of the page. This, he alleges, conveys "…the subliminal message that there are no limits at the resort."

Quite a feat, considering there's no such thing as subliminal advertising techniques that have any effect. But let's be fair; maybe he meant they convey that impression. Fine. Exactly how does he know that anyone besides him is getting the no-limits message from his upside-down type? Saying “this is what happens” doesn’t make it so.

Oh, and by the way, setting a line of type in all caps reduces readership. So does putting it upside down. I know this from testing, not speculation. It's a lesser sin for short headlines, which these are. But ... subliminal? Please.

Next he shows a shopping bag for a lingerie store. On the bag is an admittedly cool illustration of a bra, with copy set in calligraphy of varying sizes swirling about to form the cups. He says it tells "…an evocative story in an engaging manner." Evocative the story may be. I wouldn't know. I was unwilling to rotate the bag (or myself) to read the message.

It doesn't matter how cool the type looks if no one can read it. If you turn it, swirl it, reverse it, set it in caps, use goofy fonts, erratically change fonts or sizes or shape it into a bra, no one will read it. It's too much work — and no one cares enough about what an advertiser has to say to work for it.

Do not think that by making text challenging to read you will motivate people to dig in and decipher it. That would be like saying diners will be more motivated to eat a meal if you make it smell bad.

Right after I fired him, one designer hurled this accusation at me: "You refuse to admit that design is the most important part of advertising."

Guilty as charged.

—Steve Cuno
Add Comment
 
 
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.
Add Comment
 
 
The so-called power of positive thinking has found its way into marketing. "So-called," because most of the lore regarding the power is assumed, not established.

This can have an ill effect on marketing in the form of clients wanting to change lines like "Don't miss this chance" to "Take advantage of this chance."

Sounds great in theory. In practice, beware. People are usually more motivated by the prospect of avoiding loss than by the prospect of gaining. For instance, most people would rather be the only person in a room to win $100 than to win $200 in a room where everyone else wins $1,000.

It even seems to hold true in religion. When I ask people why they returned to the fold after years of prodigal living, only sometimes do they credit a desire to go to Heaven. More often they say, "I was afraid of going to Hell."

—Steve Cuno
1 Comment
 
 
Scientific American just emailed me a survey. An avid reader, I was eager to respond. (I admit that I was also eager for an excuse to take a momentary break from the project I was working on at the time.) 

A survey question asking readers to opine as to whether a gift offer would motivate them to subscribe troubled me. That’s no way to determine direct marketing strategy. So, I emailed them. Yeah, like they care what I think.

I sent the email to the link they provide for “feedback or concerns.” It bounced back as “undeliverable.” 

Not that my effort in writing it was wasted. My unasked-for advice might be useful to others doing market research, so I have pasted it below. If you know anyone at Scientific American whom you think might be interested, please send him or her a link to this post.

—Steve Cuno 

My would-be advice to Scientific American

May I make an observation about your survey questions regarding gift offers? 

Any direct response pro — which I happen to be — will tell you never to ask such a thing in a survey. People don't know and cannot accurately predict what will motivate them to purchase. The valid way to find out if a gift offer works is to test it in the real world and count the replies.

That said, I can already tell you the answer, because our industry has been testing gift offers nonstop for over 100 years. The answer is an unqualified YES. Gift offers always increase sales. 

Perhaps I should qualify that. The right gift offers always increase sales. Which is the right one? Again, don't ask your subscribers. Test various gifts and see which one emerges as the winner. Then, take that winner and "roll it out" to the rest of your market. Based on my experience, I'm betting that offering an item like a calculator, Starbucks gift card or duffle bag will outperform offering literature. But I've been wrong. Which is why I always test. 

In short, I recommend a more scientific approach. Which would seem to make sense, given who you are.

I love the publication. Please keep up the great work.
1 Comment
 
 
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
Add Comment
 
 
Nike has a new spot with Tiger Woods. He stands there as the real, disembodied voice of his late father appears to chastise him. I’m not sure what the commercial will accomplish, nor can I fathom Nike’s objective. Click here to watch the commercial. Thoughts?
 
—Steve Cuno
Add Comment
 
 
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
1 Comment
 
 
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.)
Add Comment
 
 
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.)
Add Comment
 
 
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
1 Comment