Bob Bly Direct Response Copywriter Official Banner

Opposing Philosophies on Viral E-Book Marketing

July 22nd, 2008 by Bob Bly

I have the greatest respect and admiration for David Meerman Scott.

But the advice he gives on his www.webinknow.com blog on viral e-book marketing is diametrically opposed to mine.

David advises: “Make the content totally free with no registration requirement at all so people are more likely to download it and share with colleagues.”

As a result, his latest free viral e-book was downloaded 250,000 times.

I advise my readers to require the user to submit his e-mail address … and opt into my e-list … in exchange for getting my free viral e-books like my latest on selling to the “GOM” market — men age 50 and older.

You can see the landing page — and get the free report — at www.marketing2goms.com.

I understand David’s thinking: he wants his e-book, name, and ideas to spread as quickly and widely online as they can.

I don’t care about that: my purpose is to build a large opt-in e-list of qualified prospects for my paid information products.

Why? Because with an e-list, I can consistently and reliably monetize my online promotions — and measure the results to the penny in real time.

If you are an Internet marketing entrepreneur, your e-list is your most valuable asset — the key to building a successful online business.

Everything you do should be aimed at either making a sale or getting the visitor to opt into your e-list.

Obviously in David’s world — mainly corporate B2B marcom — the goals are quite different, though I am not fully convinced they should be.

What about you? Do you currently give away free content online as part of a viral marketing campaign (if not, you probably should)?

Do you let people download it without capturing their e-mail addresses, as David does — or use free content offers to build a large and profitable e-list, like I have?

Does David know something I don’t? Or vice versa?

Share

Category: General | 63 Comments » |

Does Sex Sell?

July 18th, 2008 by Bob Bly

New media gurus these days rave about getting tens of thousands — or millions — of page views on MySpace and YouTube.

But any idiot can put up a video that gets a ton of traffic. The easiest way: just use sex.

As Steve Hall writes at www.adgabber.com: “Anytime you stick a stunningly beautiful, hot looking, busty girl in a video, wide viewership is not far behind.”

When I took my first marcom job in the late 1970s at Westinghouse Defense, a product manager told me: “Forget all that marcom crap you guys do; HERE’S how to sell defense systems.”

He opened a thick binder with 8 X 10″ color photos of bikini models straddling missiles and control panels.

What the social media/online video crowd seems to be missing is that getting attention is easy — always has been. Just use sex, violence, or weirdness.

However, getting the kind of attention that draws qualified prospects who are interested in your product — and ultimately buy — is another story.

And relatively few marketers — new media or old — are masters of that skill.

Anyone can post a video of a hard body girl in a bikini doing jumping jacks.

But how do you monetize that if you are not selling relevant, related offers like beauty, health, travel, or fashion?

Share

Category: General | 80 Comments » |

How Critical is Your Mission Statement?

July 17th, 2008 by Bob Bly

When I began my corporate career in the late 70s, corporations spent huge amounts of time and money perfecting their “mission statements,” which they proudly posted on placards in the lobby.

Multi-channel marketing guru Don Libey thinks most mission statements are for the most part banal and of limited value.

His advice: “Get rid of the silly framed parchment proclamations and teach everyone the following: ‘Sell more stuff to more people any way we can!'”

Do you agree that Libey’s version gets right to the point.

Isn’t the idea to sell more stuff and make customers happy and increase revenues and profits?

Or do you prefer the thoughtful, conceptual, idealistic, warm and fuzzy mission statements that companies throughout America have spent so much effort to dream up and display?

Source: Libey Economic Outlook, 7/08, p. 1.

Share

Category: General | 39 Comments » |

Is “Content is King” a Load of Crap?

July 7th, 2008 by Bob Bly

Gurus like David Meerman Scott say that giving consumers lots of useful content is the key to marketing success — at least in the 21st century.

But something Tim Sanders says in his book “The Likeability Factor” (Crown Publishers, 2005) seems to contradict that belief.

Says Sanders:

?There?s too much information in today?s world, and our defense mechanism to sort through it all is to vote with our gut, to vote what we feel. We look for shortcuts, and those shortcuts are called brands. The reason you buy Tide detergent at the grocery store is that you don?t want to read fifty labels. You trust Tide because you already know it works.?

We’ve heard this comment before, of course.

It basically boils down to: the consumer is time pressured, overloaded with information, and too busy to read — which seems on the surface to be an accurate description of the harried pace of modern life.

But if it’s true, then how can content-based marketing work?

If people are too busy to read, then won’t they throw your white paper in the trash … or click away from your content-rich site long before they can dig into all the great information you posted there?

Who is right? Sanders, who says we don’t want more content to make decisions? Or Scott, who says we do?

Share

Category: General | 51 Comments » |

Should Direct Mail Design be Ugly?

July 1st, 2008 by Bob Bly

“Ugly works” in direct mail design, writes my colleague Denny Hatch in his latest column in Target Marketing (7/08, p. 50).

His premise: direct mail should be intentionally designed to look ugly and junky, because it will increase response.

The reason (here Denny quotes his former boss Lew Smith): “Neatness rejects involvement. If a thing is too neat, a reader will look at it and say, ‘Isn’t that nice?’ and move on.”

Old school DM experts have preached the “ugly direct mail design is best” rule for decades.

But … I can’t help noticing that most of the winning direct mail promotions that cross my desk today are not ugly. They are cleanly designed and easy to read — not at all “junky.”

So let me ask you, Gentle Reader: which school do you stand with?

Do you, like Denny, deliberately create direct mail packages that look crude, ugly, and cluttered — in the belief that “ugly works”?

Or do you find today’s direct mail prospects respond better to a more professional and sophisticated graphic approach?

Share

Category: Direct Marketing | 46 Comments » |

Pure B.S. or Great Copy?

June 30th, 2008 by Bob Bly

Critics often accuse direct marketing copywriters of hype and puffery, but I think the real B.S. artists in marketing today are wine and beer writers.

Listen to this description of Route Des Epices beer from the Beer of the Month Club newsletter (vol. 14, no. 12):

“On the nose, you can’t miss the influence of black and green peppercorns. Behind the peppercorn is a mild citrusy character with a caramel backbone, a touch of spruce and almonds, and some floral hop tones. Look for an emergence of tequila-like notes amidst a subtle floral character, notes of coriander, subtle apricot tones, and a woody spruce-like component.”

In the same issue, another beer, Rosee D’Hibiscus,” is said to have “notes of under ripened peaches, coriander, and pomegranate.”

Talk about piling it on high and deep. I drank a bottle of each, and they both tasted like beer.

Why do people rabidly attack direct marketing as hype-filled and sleazy, but ooh and ah and nod their heads in wonder at the writer’s sophistication when they read B.S. like the above beer reviews?

Share

Category: General | 103 Comments » |

Business Entrepreneurs

June 25th, 2008 by Bob Bly

A radio spot for Web site developer American Eagle tells how the company created a successful Web site for a “business entrepreneur.”

Business entrepeneur? As opposed to all those entrepreneurs who have nothing to do with business?

Obviously, “business entrepreneur” is redundant — given that the Oxford English dictionary defines an “entrepreneur” as “a person who sets up a business.”

Is using the term “business entrepreneur” a bad thing?

Admittedly, it’s not a huge sin.

But it bothers me — especially in a commercial for a company in the communications business.

The problem with redudancy is twofold. First, it wastes words. Second, it demonstrates suboptimal language skills.

I might trust American Eagle to design my Web site … but not to write the copy for it.

Your thoughts?

Share

Category: General | 85 Comments » |

What’s Better — Traditional or Self Publishing?

June 22nd, 2008 by Bob Bly

MF has written a nonfiction business book and wants to know whether I think it’s better to self-publish or look for a traditional publisher.

Here’s what I told MF….

If you want to establish your reputation as a though leader in your field, gain visibility, and build credibility, getting your book published by a mainstream publisher like McGraw-Hill or John Wiley is the best way to accomplish those goals. It is the most prestigious form of publishing, the one most likely to impress others.

If you want to maximize your revenues from sale of your book, I’d go with publishing it as an e-book. You can charge more than for a regular book, and your profit margin is much higher than with a printed book.

If you are a frequent speaker and need to get a book out on your topic quickly — to sell at your talks or to send to meeting planners to convince them to book you — a self-published printed book is the way to go.

A famous self-publishing guru once said in a speech that self-published books are no less prestigious than traditionally published books. “People don’t shop for a McGraw-Hill or a John Wiley book. They don’t care who the publisher is.”

True, but many people (not all) look down on self-publishing. Every self-publisher I know save one (the guru mentioned above) has confided in me that the moment they reveal their book is self published, they feel somehow embarrassed or apologetic.

Mainstream publisher for prestige … e-book for profit … traditional book for back of the room sales or a give-away to potential clients. That’s what I told MF. Do you agree with my assessment of her book publishing options?

Share

Category: General | 96 Comments » |