In the movie “Boiler Room,” Ben Affleck plays the head recruiter at a sleazy boiler-room selling worthless IPOs by cold-calling investor lists.

When he hears a broker-in-training patiently explaining some investment basics to a potential customer, Ben berates the young broker.

“Telling’s not selling!” he screams. “Always be closing!”

The idea, still preached by some old-line salespeople, is that the salesperson must always push the prospect toward an order … and anything else is a waste of time.

While that attitude today is viewed by many as antiquated, do you think there is some truth in it?

A case in point is SA, a personal real estate agent I know.

SA is always willing to lend a hand to colleagues and clients in need. He can frequently be found moving furniture or cleaning out a house.

SA is a nice guy. Everybody says so. Everybody likes him.

Yet SA, afraid of being viewed as too pushy, is extremely reluctant to qualify prospects very hard … or to push buyers he is working with into a decision.

As a result of his inability to ask for the order or be selective in who he works with and how much he will do for them, his income is minimal and, at age 52, he has a net worth of a little over zero.

So while asking for the order may seem unfashionable in this era of soclal-media, free-content-driven marketing, isn’t qualifying prospects and closing the sale ultimately something we have to be good at — online or offline — to get the business?

Or is simply being a nice guy (like SA), a respected expert, or a helpful resource enough to get prospects to buy from you — and not from your competitors?

What online marketing technique generates the highest ROI for customer acquisition?

According to a survey published in Target Marketing (3/09, p. 37), it’s not online advertising, podcasts, search engine optimization, or webcasts.

E-mail marketing was cited by 28% of the marketing professionals ls urveyed as delivering the strongest ROI for customer acquisition online.

Search engine optimization came in a distant second at 7%.

Given that something like 80% of online purchases begin with an online search, I find this result surprising — and a bit suspicious, to say the least.

Your thoughts?

BTW, e-mail was also voted #1 for customer retention online, at 39%. This I find more credible: there is no better way of communicating with existing customers than e-mail.

“Why don’t you sell products from the platform?” my fellow speakers ask me all the time. “You are leaving money on the table.”

My original answer — that I just don’t like it personally and find it unseemly — didn’t convince them.

“There is nothing wrong with selling from the platform,” these speakers responded.

They pointed out that many conferences don’t pay the speakers a fee or even cover their expenses.

So as a result, they, as speakers, have a “right” to pitch their products. “It’s how we make our money and get compensated for our time.”

“How could you object to selling?” they ask me. “You are a copywriter. It is your job to sell.”

But here’s the problem….

If I write a hard-sell e-mail, and you are not interested, you can delete it in less than a second with a mouse click.

If I write a hard-sell direct mail sales letter, you can tear it up and throw it in the trash — in less than 5 seconds.

But when a speaker sells products from the platform, I can’t escape! I am in the seminar room. If I got up and walked out, it would seem incredibly rude.

So I am forced to listen as the speaker drones on and on about his “big package” which is worth $68,458, normally sells for $14,997, but if I buy within the next hour is only $2,777.

As for the argument that the speaker is unpaid by the seminar promoter, how is that my problem or my concern?

I paid hundreds or thousands of dollars for my seat at that seminar. Shouldn’t the platform time be devoted 100% to educating me, not 80% to educating me and 20% to selling me more stuff?

I am least offended by the sales pitch when, proceeding it, the speaker has delivered genuine value and real content, without holding back.

I am most offended when the entire presentation is clearly crafted not to educate me, but to tease the audience and maximize orders for the big package the speaker is selling.

How about you? Are you offended or turned off when a speaker begins to transition into his sales pitch, which he delivers on your time?

Or do you cheerfully accept it as a standard operating procedure in the seminar business today?

I?ve never been happy with who I am.

In fact, I feel quite guilty about it.

Let me explain?.

I?m a bookworm ? a bibliophile ? a ?bookaholic.?

I am most content and fulfilled when I am sitting alone in my office, clicking away at the keyboard — writing copy for my clients or my own Internet marketing business ? or articles and books for my publishers.

When I get home from a typical 12-hour day at the PC, I want nothing more than to sit on the couch — and read a book.

I don?t play sports ? or watch it on TV. No golf ? no tennis ? no bridge.

I don?t garden ? or do handyman stuff around the house ? or have any discernible hobby ? other than reading.

I love my kids, and enjoy spending time with my family ? but I never voluntarily socialize with friends or relatives unless my wife pushes me to do so.

It seems to me that this makes me a narrow, limited person ? hence the guilt and shame.

?It?s not that I don?t like people,? writes NPR?s book critic Maureen Corrigan. ?It?s just that when I?m in the company of others ? even my nearest and dearest ? there always comes a moment when I?d rather be reading a book.?

As a bookaholic, I?ve developed another trait many consider odd: my preference for bad weather.

Gray, cold, rainy days make me happy.

While warm, cloudless days with sunshine make me depressed.

Why?

Because when it?s cold and gray, I can stay inside ? and read or write.

But when it?s a nice day, I?m expected to participate in outdoor activities that I enjoy far less.

?My favorite kind of day is a cold, dreary, gusty, sleety day, when I can sit at my typewriter or word processor in peace and security,? wrote the late Isaac Asimov.

?A perfect day fills me with the nameless dread (usually fulfilled) that Robyn [Asimov?s daughter] will come to me, clapping her little hands in excitement, and say, ?Let?s take a walk in the park. I want to go to the zoo.?

?Of course, I go, because I love her, but I tell you I leave my heart behind, stuck in the typewriter keys.?

At this point in my life, I?ve spent over half a century feeling guilty over who I am ? a prolific workaholic writer — what I like, and what I want to do: spend my life with words, information, and ideas.

Have you, like me, ever felt that you were letting people down by not being the type of person you think others expect you to be?

Well, I?m going to suggest that you join me now ? and together, we let go of our guilt.

Let?s embrace who we are, rather than reject it.

In the original ?Nutty Professor? movie, Jerry Lewis says: ?If you don?t love yourself, how do you expect others to??

?Be a real person,? advises my friend, Internet marketing guru Fred Gleeck. ?People are sick of phonies. Be who you really are and don’t worry if some people don’t like you. For those who don’t, there are plenty who will LOVE you for being yourself.?

Listen: I don?t know why I am so addicted to books and the printed word.

I just can?t help it. Nothing comes close to engaging my admittedly limited intellect the way writing does.

But now, I don?t care ? or feel bad about it ? any more.

That?s the way I am, and after 50 years of living, now I am at peace with it.

I hope you can be at peace with who — and what — you are, as well.

Because ? to quote Vince Vaughn in ?Dodgeball? ? you?re perfect just the way you are.

New media evangelists have long denigrated e-mail as “interruption marketing” and praised both search and social networking as non-intrusive alternatives.

The younger generation (my teenagers) also seems to shy away from e-mail, preferring Facebook and texting as their primary means of online communication.

In an article in Direct (3/09, p. 8), Ken Magill notes that e-mail marketing remains “the top online applications,” with more than 9 out of 10 Internet users sending and receiving e-mail.

Do you agree that e-mail is not only a viable but an extremely profitable online marketing channel, and will be for many years to come?

Or do you side with new media gurus who predict e-mail marketing is going the way of the dodo and the dinosaur?

In an interview with DM News (3/2/09, p. 10), Kent Lewis, President of Anvil Media, said that current social media platforms and communities do not have much of a chance to become a meaningful part of the overall online markeitng mix.

Lewis explains: “Users have demonstrated time and again that they not only ignore advertising in social media, but eschew it.” He cites as proof that Facebok generated only $2.50 in ad revenue per user per year.

Why is Lewis so negative about marketing with social networks? “Social networks are seen as personal collaboration and communication platforms, not information or research tools,” he claims, though here he cites no research to back up this assertion.

He believes we should concentrate our online marketing not on social media but on search engines, because they “effectively connect buyers with sellers” and “advertising is welcomed.”

Do you agree with Lewis that social networks are an insignificant part of the online marketing mix today?

What do you think are the most effective online marketing methods right now? Social networking? Organic search? Pay per click ads? E-mail?

JS, a subscriber to my e-newsletter The Direct Response Letter, writes:

“I have been reading a lot of your promos as well as those of many other of the [marketing] columnists and writers. All of them (the promos or letters) are very long. I would think in today’s busy world that people don’t want to take time to read such long marketing letters yet you’ve been in business for a long time and obviously have learned what works well and what doesn’t. When I was employed by a Chamber publisher and writing their marketing materials, everyone told me, ‘keep it short, no one reads long emails.’

“Are there studies available that prove the effectiveness of long sales and marketing letters? Or is it just a given among those of you who have been doing this for so long, and that they’ve worked for your customers?”

The question of long vs. short copy is one of those tiring arguments that never seems to quite get settled.

Do you agree with JS’s publishing boss, who insisted that “no one reads long [copy]”?

Can you cite any evidence, either way, on the superiority of long vs. short copy or vice versa?

If you “cop out” (nothing wrong with doing so) and tell me, “It depends” — then I ask you: “Depends on what?”

I just heard a radio spot for Tony Robbins offering an interesting twist on using the web for fulfillment.

Instead of sending the listener to a URL on the web, the commercial tells you to call toll-free 800-503-3980 and leave your e-mail address on the voice mail.

They promise to send an e-mail to your address with a link to where you can get a free success system online.

I’m not sure this is better than just giving the URL directly in the radio spot, although the reasoning is that it’s easier for a driver to call the 800 # on his cell phone while in the car. It also captures the e-mail address.

Unfortunately, when I called the 800 number, I got a message saying the voice mail box was full — and I could not leave my e-mail address with them.

So you could say the radio spot was so effective it overloaded the voice mail system with calls. Or, the advertiser planned poorly, did not arrange sufficient inbound phone lines, and therefore poured an unknown amount of radio ad dollars down the drain.