

Why I Stopped Throwing Out Junk Mail - byrneseyeview
http://www.byrnehobart.com/blog/why-i-stopped-throwing-out-junk-mail/

======
wmeredith
Working in Search marketing for a few years has taught me something similar
about writing PPC ad-copy; if you want to see masters at work search for
something like "Home Refinancing" and check out the ad-copy on the sponsored
results. (These guys are paying $50+ per click. You can bet they know what
they're doing; that is, they must if they're going to be doing it for any
amount of time.)

~~~
rms
Probably the most power of instant arbitrary financial transfer any member of
the proletariat has is to search for asbestos or mesothelioma and click on
every ad.

~~~
rms
Did anyone do it in response to this post? You could reply with a new name if
you don't want to admit it. I'm curious how many thousands of dollars were
just arbitrarily shifted around.

------
jsackmann
Maybe this is obvious, but in case it's not: For those interested in really
studying direct mail tactics, there are lots of books on the subject by
experienced practitioners. I read several of them a few years ago; wish I
could highlight one or two as a recommendation, but I don't remember.

As noted in some of the other comments, these folks test _everything_ , right
down to the color of the envelope and the size of the signature at the bottom
of the letter. It's also fascinating to read war stories. IIRC, there's a
direct mail letter for Reader's Digest (or some similar publication) that was
most effective for decades. They kept testing it against other contenders, but
that same letter kept getting results.

------
noodle
i both agree and disagree.

i disagree with the premise that years and years and billions of dollars have
been spent, so it must be the best way. times are changing, people are
changing. i've been trained to throw away every piece of junk mail, and so
have most of my friends. junk mail is being actively read by a shrinking
demographic. just because something has worked does not mean it will continue
to do so, or that the statistics are representative. it might not be a good
plan to hitch your line to a sinking ship.

i agree in the sense that there are some effective design patterns with
respect to effective copywriting, and that some people are forgoing them for
something else, perhaps something more aesthetically pleasing when aesthetics
don't necessarily get the job done.

~~~
Semiapies
"years and years and billions of dollars have been spent, so it must be the
best way"

That way lies cargo cult capitalism.

~~~
byrneseyeview
In the short run, yeah. But if everyone is flinging money at junk mail,
eventually the ones who are doing it wrong will be broke.

------
dpatru
I just had a series of thoughts:

1\. You should learn from others' mistakes because it's cheaper than learning
from your own. (approximation of a famous quote)

2\. You should learn from other's successes, because it's cheaper than
discovering what works by yourself. (simple variation)

3\. Applying mutuality principle: how can we mutually benefit from our
mistakes?

4\. Why not conduct A/B testing and ad word campaigns together so that lessons
learned can benefit the maximum number?

5\. How to do this?

a) The easiest way is just to blog about your own findings and read others'
blogs. This suffers from the free-rider problem: you end up doing research for
others.

b) Another alternative is to form a club where each member spends a certain
amount per month on ads, and they share their results.

c) Another way is to simply do a lot of Google searches (automatically?) and
see what ads are displayed. You're letting Google and the free market do your
work for you. This is the e-version of collecting junk mail. You're not being
a free rider in this case because your results are being used by others too.

------
cedsav
While I find junk mail material sometime entertaining, I can't help to think
that it's designed to sell to a certain category of people. _Especially_ long
copy. It's often for questionable products, dubious benefits or almost scams.
And while I don't doubt it works for them, I'm not sure at all it would work
for my target demographic.

I think a good version of 'long copy' is something like this:
<http://highrisehq.com> where a lot of info is packed on a single page, and
it's very far from "junk mail" copy.

------
ryanelkins
This is a good approach. I do wonder how much of it translates over (from junk
mail to a website or email) but that's something that can be tested. At the
very least it provides a good starting foundation to work off of for those
unsure of their copywriting abilities.

~~~
mahmud
The entire premise is that junk mail is compelling and should be emulated. I
wholeheartedly agree, but only if you're producing something junk-mail
flavored. Membership drive for an online game is not the same thing as a call
for papers for an academic conference, and one of them benefits from emulating
junk-mail copy.

FWIW, I found the article refreshingly unique and "outside the box".

~~~
byrneseyeview
Reading junk mail has changed the way I write other things, like blog posts,
instant messages, and even personal emails. I'm more likely to use numbers,
bullet points, and shorter paragraphs, and much more likely to close with a
call to action.

Your call for papers probably shouldn't end with "Operators are standing by!"
but it wouldn't hurt to establish urgency some other way. ("If your paper is
ready, submit it now--although the deadline is in X weeks, we'll only be able
to thoroughly review papers we get in the next Y weeks.")

------
george_morgan
I think it was David Ogilvy who said anyone who wanted to write advertising
copy should spend a year working in direct response marketing. Same principle.

~~~
byrneseyeview
Yes. Here's a short video on the subject, from Ogilvy: "We Sell or Else."
(Transcript below.)

[http://www.infomarketingblog.com/direct-response-vs-
general-...](http://www.infomarketingblog.com/direct-response-vs-general-
advertising/)

------
billybob
The "junk mail" approach to persuasion is only one approach, and it tends to
be urgent-sounding. When I think about the businesses I like the most, one
common factor is that they have a much more honest-sounding tone.

Maybe the question is not "which technique works best," but "which technique
works best on my target audience."

~~~
ezy
I was wondering about this. It seems to me that the 10% conversion rate for
junk mail is based on selling to a credulous consumer. Hence the urgent tone.
Most people (the other 90%?) toss the shit out because they know even if the
copy sounds vaguely interesting, you're most likely not going to get something
for nothing. Everything from the 4 (bright) color ad to the fake christmas
card goes in the recycling immediately from the mailbox because you know
you're going to be manipulated.

Are people more or less credulous on the web? I dunno, that has to depend on
the category. In some ways, it's harder to avoid reading the copy -- but for
experienced users there is a degree of resentment when you realize you've been
"SEO"ed by an interesting sounding google link into a page of marketing
bullshit.

~~~
byrneseyeview
Direct mail (not so "junk"-y) works for some higher-end products. I know
American Express has launched some of their more expensive cards through
direct mail; luxury car companies use similar tactics; and insurance companies
invest a lot in direct mail, as well.

(And direct marketing companies eat their own dogfood, too. Ogilvy & Mather
sent sales letters to lots of Fortune 500 executives, in order to get them to
pay O&M to send similar letters to _other_ people. It's a great way to
bootstrap your own sales pitch: if your pitch is persuasive, it deserves to
be.)

------
tbgvi
Agree for the most part - direct mailers were doing A/B testing before the
internet existed to maximize their ROI. There's definitely some carry over
between what works in print and on the internet.

That being said, its important to know _why_ the junk mail is presented like
it is, it may not always work for your users.

------
vinhboy
I don't buy it. Can you show me some statistics to prove that this (junk mail)
works? I have always thought of junk mail as a last ditch effort. You have no
other means to reach your customer, so you do the "throw it against the wall
and see what sticks" approach.

~~~
jack7890
I think his whole point is that junk mail's mere existence means that it
works.

Junk mailers pay real hard currency for every letter they send, so they've
can't afford to use ineffective copy. Online, there is no cost to to sending
an email, publishing a blog post, etc., so it's more difficult to determine
what copy actually works.

~~~
gnosis
Or it could be that the old adage that _"there's a sucker born every minute"_
applies not only to the consumers of junk mail, but to its purveyors as well.

~~~
jamiequint
You could say the same thing about online advertising though. Sure, some
people waste money, but the bulk of people get value for the money they are
spending or it would not continue to exist.

~~~
gnosis
I don't know why people think businesses are immune from spending money on
products and services they don't need or which are ineffective.

They may well continue to make money regardless, or for some other reason than
the money they spend on direct marketing (or on online advertising, for that
matter).

What we need are some serious studies published in peer reviewed journals that
prove that direct marketing works, not claims that if it didn't work
businesses wouldn't spend money on it.

~~~
jamiequint
Your argument is flawed. Why do we need these for direct mail any more than we
need them for:

Display Advertising PPC Advertising TV Advertising Radio Advertising Trade
Shows In-Mall Kiosks etc.

Also, how would you do the study anyway? Some people do this effectively and
others do not. Certain types of advertising are better for reaching some
customers and others are not. It seems you are assuming that in the general
case direct mail does not work at all and people are using it just because
they haven't measured their marketing ROI for that channel. With minimal
research you could see that this is false.

~~~
gnosis
I am simply withholding judgment on the efficacy of direct marketing until I
see some solid evidence. Same with the rest of the examples you mention.

So far all I've seen are claims (mostly by direct marketers themselves), not
any kind of reliable proof.

As for how the studies would be done, I have no doubt that scientists (who are
very clever at coming up with innovative research protocols) could figure
something out.

But here is a modest proposal: track the spending habits of a reasonably
large, randomized group of people (should be easy enough to do these days),
along with the ads they receive. See how many of the products are bought by
people who receive and read direct mail ads vs those that don't. That should
be a good start.

------
mikasissonen
I took a direct marketing copywriting course six or seven years ago that
suggested the same, and I've been pinching examples from my junk mail ever
since.

In fact, it looks like the course is still running - and even taught by the
same instructor I had (John Friesen). If you're in the Vancouver area, I'd
recommend it: <http://www.sfu.ca/wp/dmc.htm>

The mail he valued most was the stuff he'd get repeatedly, year after year,
month after month - since presumably it performed the best. If he only saw one
example of something, he figured it was a test that didn't pull well.

------
tptacek
Nicely done. What is it about magazine renewals that seem so effective to you?

~~~
endlessvoid94
They work well.

------
chris123
Beside junk mail and expensive PPC ads, _magazine covers_ and headlines can be
great sources of inspiration, depending on what demographic you're targeting.

------
moron4hire
In my personal lexicon, I call this the "Waffle House Method". WH values
efficiency above all else. They are all-cash stores, with an occasional ATM
machine in the store. Every single element of the store has an efficiency
study behind it. But the single biggest efficiency point they cover is
complete failure to do any market research. Instead, they just build a store
on the same block as a McDonald's. If McDonald's did the market research to
say that this location was good, then it's good enough for WH too.

I use the WH Method for my choices on fashion (when I bother to care about
fashion): I pick a celebrity who looks rather well put together and similar to
me in build, reason that celebrities are required to spend an inordinate
amount of attention on fashion in order to maintain their marketability, and
then wear/style however they do. It works out rather well.

I've also used the WH Method for doing basic site design in a documentation-
happy environment. "Look, every other site with a similar purpose outside your
market does their site design like this. You should have those elements as
well, or users will be confused."

------
pbhjpbhj
I thought he was going to say he was turning the junk mail into paper logs to
burn - free fuel.

------
csmeder
"You can look at the results of a hundred years of careful analysis, big bets,
and bad investments—and you can coast on the results."

Agreed

