Benefit Headlines Don’t Work
March 15th, 2006 by Bob Bly
In a shocking teleseminar today, superstar copywriter Clayton Makepeace told attendees that benefit headlines don’t work any more, for 3 reasons:
1. Yours is the 200th “benefit” head your prospect has seen today.
2. Your benefit head screams, “THIS IS ANOTHER AD!”
3. Benefit heads increasingly make customers think, “Yeah, RIGHT!”
So what works?
One technique Clayton teaches: address the reader’s skepticism in the headline instead of promising a big benefit.
His example: a promotion for a nutritional supplement to improve vision that began with the headline, “Why Billberry and Lutein Don’t Work.”
What do you think? Is today’s customer too smart, sophisticated, and skeptical to respond to traditional benefit-oriented advertising? If so, what are you using instead?
This entry was posted on Wednesday, March 15th, 2006 at 6:30 pm and is filed under Direct Marketing, General. You can follow any responses to this entry through the RSS 2.0 feed. You can leave a response, or trackback from your own site.
March 15th, 2006 at 7:17 pm
I was on the teleseminar you mentioned. I enjoyed it and think Clayton did a great job, giving a lot of information and good reasoning to back it.
I agree with his position on benefits and points why they aren’t as effective as they used to be. In my own experience, I’ve found skepticism on the rise – there are too many messages, too many overstatements, and too many big promises. People are jaded.
Not long ago I wrote a post about today’s challenge in writing a truly great offer – will anyone believe it. The offer that’s too good to be true too often is.
Lately, I’ve been using what Clayton calls the Confirmation of Suspicions and Story leads. I don’t have any objective data to share, but they both seem to be effective in gaining reader interest. In a couple projects I’m beginning next week, I plan to use the Skeptical and Dominate Emotion leads Clayton mentioned. It should be interesting…and fun!
March 16th, 2006 at 11:24 am
Please, let’s all take a deep breath here.
I did NOT attend the teleconference but I am familiar with Clayton Makepeace and I think you need to take his comments with a significant grain of salt.
Clayton Makepeace’s experience is in writing mail-order promotions for nutritional supplements and newsletters. He is apparently very good at it and he’s not shy about telling you he’s made a lot of money at it.
But if you read his e-newsletter, you learn very quickly he is fond of making sweeping, over-the-top, grandiose claims in his copy – which is obviously designed to get the reader’s attention and read on.
His brand of copywriting has worked very well for his clients and now he is using it to sell himself – I’m sure with equal success.
I don’t question Clayton Makepeace’s credentials – and I don’t doubt his headline comments were based test results – but I would be very careful about jumping to any conclusion that “benefit headlines don’t work any more” – even more so when you try to apply that advice to the much larger world outside of mail-order vitamins and newsletters.
Bob McCarthy
McCarthy & King Marketing, Inc.
March 16th, 2006 at 11:25 am
Quote:
“His example: a promotion for a nutritional supplement to improve vision that began with the headline, “Why Billberry and Lutein Don’t Work.””
Isn’t this just really the other side of the same “benefits” coin, though? I mean, isn’t there an implied benefit … that I will learn why two things don’t work and learn what does?
March 17th, 2006 at 10:32 pm
Did Clayton do any testing to arrive at his conclusions? Did he test his opinion on different types of audiences — ie: B2B? If he did, I would love to see his numbers.
Dianna Huff
DH Communications, Inc.
March 19th, 2006 at 7:28 pm
In responce to Patrice, I agree - it is just the other side of the “benefits” coin. As a reader, however, it would make a difference to me if I used Billberry and Lutein. I would read on to see why I was spending my money on something that doesn’t work. If I received a message that simply said “The benefits of xxx,” I would dismiss it while thinking, “I don’t need that. I already use Lutein.”
Thus, if I had a list of Lutein and Billberry purchasers, this would be a significantly more powerful headline than a benefits headline - for the same reasons politicians continue to use negative campaigning.
March 20th, 2006 at 10:22 am
I’m ashamed to admit I never heard of Clayton Makepeace so I certainly can’t comment on him or his methods.
I do believe that the consumer is much more jaded today. But there are few consumers who do not respond to a well written benefit headline. Now it can’t be over the top. People are not stupid and, in fact, feel their intelligence has been insulted when you get too over the top with your claims.
But I think the old Ogilvy-type copywriting will work for many more decades. I believe that people will always buy benefits. People will always want to know what’s in it for them. They care not about anyone else. They care about them. To address that need, you must have a benefit.
So at least to that extent I don’t agree with Clayton Makepeace’s comments.
March 22nd, 2006 at 9:06 am
Why Benefit Headlines Don’t Work: Explanations Stolen From Eugene Schwartz And Claude Hopkins
Clayton is great; I subscribe to his newsletter, and I love every issue.
But Eugene Schwartz explains in two ways why certain times, a big benefit headline will flop…”Why Haven’t TV Owners Been Told These Facts” outpulled “Fix Your TV By Yourself” type of headline.
First, the comment of Patrice is on target. Telling the customer not to do something or not to buy something implies revealing some secret or new information (benefits) to the reader…therefore the headline : ” Why this or that doesn’t work” addresses the reader’s skeptism, confirms his doubt, and tells him :”Here’s a chance to know for sure why this or that doesn’t work” and this chance is a BENEFIT.
Second, in Breakthrough Advertising, which I guess most of you must be familiar with, Gene Schwartz talks about market awareness and market maturity and life cycle of markets.
I think the power of benefit headlines is tied to the market awareness in these ways: is the customer aware that he can have the benefits you’re offering, is he prepared to believe the benefits you’re offering? If the prospect is not aware of the benefit, that the benefit can be obtained, if he is not aware of the need, but only feels that there is a general problem, a benefit headline might not win against a “Skepticism Headline” or ” questioning the status quo headline”.
Second, market maturity explains why benefit headlines become impotent. If 200 products are being presented using the same benefits (super-generous guarantee,outselling everybody else, offering employee discount,or other performances or offers…etc), after a certain time the benefits will be common ground and 1)they will have less impact on the reader 2)no company is really offering something different.
Claude Hopkins says something similar about market maturity, in My Life In Advertising. Basically, if everybody is screaming that their beer is pure, then nobody is really making a favorable impression on the beer drinker…the beer drink has grown accustomed and tired of the same old claim of purity. The claim of purity has lost its power.
Therefore the maturity of the market (how many products have been presented to the prospect, how many wild, and wilder claims have been presented to him, how much of these wild humongous benefits is he willing to accept or reject)…the maturity of the market explains why Benefit Headlines would not work on a SPECIFIC PRODUCT at a SPECIFIC TIME.
I hope I was clear: Level of Awareness on the Part of The Prospect and Market Maturity can tell you why a Big benefit headline will flop. If I were not clear, please get yourself a copy of Breakthrough Advertising, anywhere you can, anyway you can.
Benefit Headlines will not work for a specific product at a specific time of the product life and the market maturity.
Swans G Paul
Instant Results Advertising
March 25th, 2006 at 9:07 pm
I’m a little turned-off by what I call super-fluff headlines. Ones that scream “Make tons of money, Lose 50lbs of ugly fat, and Live to Be 100 - Guaranteed!”
How intelligent does this guy think his readers are? I use very matter-of-fact headlines in my copy. It’s not easy to find the balance between sensibility and attention-getting, but I don’t beleive it has to include cynicism to connect with the prospect. Hey, maybe I’m wrong, but so far, so good.
March 29th, 2006 at 12:38 am
Come on folks! Benefits headlines do not work for what—people that are looking for problems maybe. I would like to see some actual research to back up these claims. The fact is that people are less interested in why things fail than how to achieve success. When people are looking for solutions, they are attracted to benefits.
Could you imagine writing a book titled “10 Reasons Not to Buy This Book?” You might get some interest, but come on.
I will grant that for an article, perhaps the suggestions might work, but for something more substantial, such as a white paper or a book, you are much better sticking with what you know will work rather than experimenting with an “in your face” experimental approach.
My thoughts.
May 2nd, 2006 at 3:49 pm
I actually read Clayton’s Lutein promo. Way back on page X, he talks about the vitamins he is selling. And guess what? The first two ingredients mentioned are lutein and bilberry–the two ingredients “debunked” in the headline. I wrote to him about this apparent contradiction, and he’s yet to respond.
The primary reason benefit headlines don’t work in Clayton’s space any longer is that the products don’t work as advertised. People have grown skeptical because enough of them have tried–and failed–to make 1000% on this or that stock or achieve 3-hour erections on a consistent basis. At some point, the product has to work or the advertising won’t.
May 5th, 2006 at 9:55 am
Hi — Clayton Makepeace here.
OK if I clear up a few things?
Some folks who read this blog (and are now going on to post on other blogs and their own websites) seem to be under the impression that I’ve claimed that benefit headlines don’t work.
Problem is, I NEVER SAID THAT!
My position: Pure benefit leads don’t always work as well as they once did because they scream, “Hey –this is an AD! Read this so I can SELL you something!”
In our over-advertised-to generation, each prospect is exposed to thousands of advertising impressions each day. Most of these ads are worthless – pure image BS. Most of the rest use benefit headlines. And many of them promise exaggerated benefits without proof elements.
Our prospect’s BS detector is screaming. The anti-advertising “Maginot Line” in his brain is on red alert, ready to defend against this onslaught of unbelivable product-oriented headlines.
Prospect-focused, dominant emotion headlines and advertorial copy defeat these defenses in much the same way Rommel defeated the Maginot Line during WWII: They slip AROUND prospects’ defenses by addressing their deepest fears, frustrations and desires.
Do benefit headlines still work? Hell yes! I use them all the time. But in many markets and for many products, they’re working less well than they once did — and so “A” level writers have evolved other ways to seize prospects’ attention and convert that attention to readership.
Any copywriter who competes at my level knows that mastering the art of dominant emotion and advertorial leads is essential. It’s a powerful tool for beating controls.
Have I tested my theory? Every day for at least 25 years. Every time I get a new control, I go to work cranking out up to six cover tests for each roll-out, each one trying a different type of lead.
Sometimes, my benefit heads win. Other times, my dominant emotion leads win. Recently, I’m finding that in heads-up A/B splits, dominant emotion leads are winning more often. And looking back over the 34 years I’ve been doing this, the fact is, most of my biggest controls (packages that mailed 20 to 30 million pieces per year)have had dominant emotion leads.
Don’t think that I’m the only writer who has used this concept effectively. ‘Way back in the early ’90s, Gary Bencivenga’s legendary “Lies, Lies, Lies” headline for Mark Skousen blew away every other financial promotion in the country.
Also — allow me to correct three inaccuracies regarding the Lutein and Billberry example Peter Schwartz refers to in post #10 above:
First, I didn’t write that package. Carline Anglade-Cole did, and it was a huge control that paid her slightly more than $125,000 in royalties (I just called her to verify that number). Not bad for three weeks work!
Secondly, despite Peter’s assertion that the stuff we sell — supplements — don’t work as advertised, the idea for the headline came from a survey in which a whopping 70% of Lutein and Billberry users said these supplements DID work for them, and provided truly amazing testimonials on their effectiveness.
Carline could have simply written another run-of-the-mill “benefit” lead, shouting “70% of Billberry and Lutein Users Report Improved Eyesight!” But she was smarter than that. She reasoned quite ingeniously that the 30% of her prospects who had not found relief would be more emotionally exercised and more likely to read an advertorial that validated their feelings.
Thirdly, if you’ll read the whole package, you’ll see that the reason why these substances often disappoint is that most L&B supplements don’t contain the amounts of these substances demonstrated to be effective in double-blind placebo-controlled studies that were conducted at major medical facilities and reported in several peer-reviewed medical journals.
Hope this helps.
May 24th, 2006 at 11:15 pm
[…] Bob Bly has a post and comments on this topic you’ll want to read. Be sure to chime in and give your opinion. […]
May 26th, 2006 at 1:13 am
Evolution has dictated that our tiny brain pays attention to things that stand out above the crowd. Animals grow dazzling patterns at the risk of being easy prey in orde to find a mate. This means that anyone who is sufficiently self confident and exerts “coolness” to be willing to not conform gains natural animal magnetism.
Artists have known for generations that picture composition requires a subject to be placed against an uniform background. Note that the background doesn’t have to be dull… just uniform. For instance the colour of red riding hood walking in a thicket of dark brown woods will instantly attract our eyes to the subject.
I remember one of Mr Bly’s book where he reminded us that getting the user to open the envelope is the first step of any campaign. Mr Makepeace’s approach is similar, in trying to invite the user to read the products claims. I haven’t seen Mr Makepeace’s copy but the headline is sufficient to whet my appetite too. The beautifully feathered peacock has to be very fit to outrun it’s predators while carrying it’s heavy plumes. Similarly, the reader’s curiosity is piqued because the ad is either going to fly or crash. Either way, it makes great entertainment.
September 18th, 2006 at 3:01 pm
nice one
October 12th, 2006 at 3:25 pm
Great post….At last some solid information.
Really looking forward to more articles from you….
October 25th, 2006 at 10:06 pm
This is a great post, I really am enjoying your blog. Just thought I should say you’re doing a great job.
December 16th, 2006 at 4:14 pm
Clients everywhere will continue to thrust Benefit Heads down the throats of everyone within spitting distance.
It’s not red, it’s October Red.
Who cares?
I’m jaded to benefit driven headlines, they try too hard come off as desperate.
-kevin
January 12th, 2007 at 3:20 am
Benefit Headlines don’t work always, today everyone has means to look for the genuine points.
January 12th, 2007 at 5:38 am
Not always.
January 15th, 2007 at 12:33 pm
Interestingly, I lately observed that when I see a sales page I immediately scroll down to where they say something about features. And if they don’t and give me more benefits I become seriously irritated or leave.
I don’t want benefits, I want facts.
But then there are benefits and benefits.
If someone tells me that using their system will make me happy (because I will be able to create a fantastic lifestyle because I will earn lots of money because I will get tons of traffic because my site will hit the top in Search Engines because of their system) then I skip it.
If they tell me I will rank better in SE because of their system, that’s a benefit that speaks to me.
And, whether it’s benefits or featuers, I want HONESTY.
February 27th, 2007 at 3:57 pm
pagine piuttosto informative, piacevoli =)
March 1st, 2007 at 9:07 pm
disegno piacevole, lavoro grande
March 1st, 2007 at 9:28 pm
i’am really impressed!!
March 1st, 2007 at 10:30 pm
Great site! Good luck to it’s owner!
March 1st, 2007 at 11:12 pm
disegno piacevole, lavoro grande
March 1st, 2007 at 11:53 pm
I’ll tell my colleagues about your page..!
March 2nd, 2007 at 12:16 am
Interfaccia comoda, colori piacevoli, buoni!
March 2nd, 2007 at 1:19 am
Ich fand gute und wichtige Informationen - dir zu danken.
March 2nd, 2007 at 2:21 am
ooo! it’s one of the best sites ever!
March 2nd, 2007 at 3:03 am
work’s done the way it must be..! ^^
March 21st, 2007 at 8:35 am
Hello admin, nice site ! Good content, eautiful design, thank !t
April 6th, 2007 at 9:40 pm
Thanks so very much for taking your time to create this very useful and informative site. I have learned a lot from your site. Thanks!!
April 15th, 2007 at 9:13 pm
Great Site - really useful information!p
April 22nd, 2007 at 12:00 am
Lavoro eccellente! ..ringraziamenti per le informazioni..realmente lo apprezzo: D
June 19th, 2007 at 12:16 pm
Hello! Good Site! Thanks you! ruvcvhnwudmfz
June 19th, 2007 at 12:33 pm
Hello! Good Site! Thanks you! wnynyidgsz
June 20th, 2007 at 1:49 pm
Hello! Good Site! Thanks you! waxiggyhef
November 18th, 2007 at 2:28 pm
huyak
May 7th, 2008 at 4:36 pm
Clayton cleared up a lot about “Dominant Emotion” and “Benefit” driven headlines for your ads.
I just wanted to add my list of FACT-BASED Headlines specifically for email subject lines. If you use email to get people TO your ads, if they don’t open them, then emotion or benefit-driven becomes moot.
Plus I find that using the FACT-BASED header as a third way to get your direct response emails opened, ads read, and help people enter the sales funnel works as well
Note: ALL of the following have worked and generate the best attention-getters and open sesame commands I have found and tested. Try one and see how it works for your next email and corresponding direct response piece:
1. [COMPANYNAME] Sales & Marketing Newsletter
2. Eye on [COMPANYNAME] Update(May 31-June 13)
3. [COMPANYNAME] Customer Testimonials
4. [COMPANYNAME] May 2008 News Bulletin!
5. [COMPANYNAME] Newsletter - February 2008
6. [COMPANYNAME] Newsletter - January 2008
for [ *|FNAME|* *|LNAME|* ]
7. [COMPANYNAME] and [COMPANYNAME] Invites You!
8. Happy Holidays from [COMPANYNAME]
9. ATTENTION [COMPANYNAME] Members-Only!
10. ATTENTION [COMPANYNAME] Readers!!
11. Invitation from [COMPANYNAME]
12. [COMPANYNAME] May/June 2008 Newsletter
13. Website news - Issue 3 - [COMPANYNAME]
14. Upcoming Events at [COMPANYNAME]
15. [COMPANYNAME] Advisors: Letter of Interest
16. Coffee Xchange - [Company]-[Disaster]Update
17. We’re Throwing a Party!
18. May 2008 Newsletter - Your Choice…
19. [COMPANYNAME]: 05.10.08 Company Newsletter
Obviously many of these are opt-in and from a company. But ANY [COMPANYNAME] works, especially if it has an Inc. after it. These are meant to get you thinking about a third TEST after the dominant emotion or benefit-driven headline that Clayton Makepeace and Carline Anglade-Cole talk about. The SKEPTICAL … but CURIOUS.
Enjoy and Learn!
David Grebow
www. davidgrebow.com