Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Why I Stopped Throwing Out Junk Mail

byrnehobart.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

21–30 of 50 posts

Re: Why I Stopped Throwing Out Junk Mail

#21

Post by 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.

Re: Why I Stopped Throwing Out Junk Mail

#22

Post by byrneseyeview »

mahmud wrote: post #13
ryanelkins wrote: post #3

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.

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".

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.")

Re: Why I Stopped Throwing Out Junk Mail

#23

Post by byrneseyeview »

george_morgan wrote: post #16

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.

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-...

Re: Why I Stopped Throwing Out Junk Mail

#24

Post by byrneseyeview »

ezy wrote: post #14
billybob wrote: post #4

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."

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 immediat…

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.)

Re: Why I Stopped Throwing Out Junk Mail

#25

Post by Semiapies »

noodle wrote: post #12

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…

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

That way lies cargo cult capitalism.

Re: Why I Stopped Throwing Out Junk Mail

#26

Post by Semiapies »

jack7890 wrote: post #7
vinhboy wrote: post #5

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.

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.

"there is no cost to to sending an email"

Only if you're not paying for the servers or the copy-writers, etc.

"so it's more difficult to determine what copy actually works."

That doesn't follow. Any sort of tracking, A/B testing, etc. that you could do with junk mail, you can do with spam or more accepted email marketing - and probably more cheaply.

Re: Why I Stopped Throwing Out Junk Mail

#27

Post by nearestneighbor »

wmeredith wrote: post #8

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.)

> These guys are paying $50+ per click.

Google no longer has to be pissed at me for using their service without paying and never clicking any links.

Re: Why I Stopped Throwing Out Junk Mail

#28

Post by byrneseyeview »

Semiapies wrote: post #25
noodle wrote: post #12

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…

"years and years and billions of dollars have been spent, so it must be the best way" That way lies cargo cult capitalism.

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.

Re: Why I Stopped Throwing Out Junk Mail

#30

Post by 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.

Post reply on HN