January 14, 2006
conventional advertising is slow, complicated, inefficient, painful and expensive
English Cut has now added a monthly newsletter to the equation.
A lot of people have signed up so far. A couple of hundred in the last day or two. I’m hoping we can add a couple of zeros to the final number.
We see it as a good way to touch base with our customers, let them know what we’re up to etc, without them having to read the blog on a regular basis [not everybod wants to read blogs, believe it or not].
Sure, there’s nothing too radical about this approach. It’s just straight ahead “Permission Marketing”. That being said, it does excite me. I really like the idea of being able to find all the business you need, just from the simple act of writing an engaging e-mail every month and sending it out to a willing audience [working in tandem with the blog, of course].
Beats the hell out of conventional advertising, which I usually find slow, complicated, inefficient, painful and expensive.
Please feel free to sign up. Thanks.
This is something I’ve been saying all along — not everybody reads blogs. And blogs are not a magic bullet when it comes to building brands, relationships, and ultimately, selling stuff. Because whatever which way you look at it, this is how our society operates. By selling stuff.
What is ‘conventional’ advertising? TV commercials? Press ads? Direct mail? Google ads and blog ads even?
When one of my clients needs to reach a large number of people fast, then nothing beats a TV commercial. And even with the cost associated, both for media and production, the ROI tends to work. These days, I can assure you, my clients demand value for their money.
If I want to reach a small, specific number of people then nothing beats a direct mail piece containing an offer that appeals to them.
If I want to build a relationship with customers then I will recommend that my clients look into blogging.
As per usual, it’s all about using the right tool for the right job. As you’re doing by adding a newsletter to the blog.
A newsletter, it can be argued, is an ‘old’ way to communicate. Nothing ‘Web 2′ (I hate that expression) about email subscription, after all. But the important thing is that it works. And you and I are both people who help other people to sell stuff — we’re duty bound to use whatever works, regardless of what the latest fashion or buzzword is.
Yeah, well I’m not as bullish as you on conventional advertising, Andreas, for reasons stated above.
For instance, you constant claim that “TV viewing is on the way up”. Did some background checking.
All in all it’s up about 4 minutes a day on average, mostly from older viewers, who are watching more news.
But is it postponing the inevitable downward spiral in any meaningful way? Of course not.
Secondly, the kind of enterprises that require TV for their marketing interest me less and less as I get older. Nobody ever wanted “He protected market share by 6% more than the guy in the next office” inscribed on their gravestone.
All in all it’s up about 4 minutes a day on average, mostly from older viewers, who are watching more news.
Are these UK figures? because research in the US and Canada tells a different story:
From recent research, commissioned by Turner:
“In the just-concluded broadcast season the networks halted audience erosion in the 18 – 49 demographic on a season-to-season basis for the first time in as long as most people can remember. Among households broadcast’s share stayed the same while cable rose.
According to Turner, the average person watched 30.7 hours of television each week in second quarter through June 19, up 10 percent from 27.9 hours four years earlier.
Viewing in the highly sought-after 18 – 34 demographic in that timeframe increased to 26.3 hours, up from 24.3 hours. Adults 35 – 49 watched 31.8 hours compared to 28.3 hours in second quarter 2001. Viewing among people 50 years or older jumped to nearly 40 hours in an average week, from 36.3 hours.
Within the growing television audience, the networks this past season, on the strength of programs such as ABC
What? You mean I’m not allowed to be snide on my own blog??!!
Sorry, I wasn’t trying to be snide about it. It’s just a world that doesn’t appeal to me very much, although yeah, there are good people [like yourserlf] trying to do some interesting work in it.
Still, if I made a list of the top ten marketing ideas that captured my imagination over the last couple of years, not one would belong to the TV advertising realm. Sure, I see the occasional ad that makes me smile, but that’s about it. No big pardigm shifts happening, though.
Thanks for the quote. Even with a dramatic increase in viewing figures, that doesn’t suggest to me that people are paying more attention to commercials, let alone responding more postively to them.
PS. TV might be a good way to reach a lot of people. It’s also a great way to annoy and interrupt a lot of people.
Well, yes and no. Tivo’s success is partly due to people’s desire to blank out advertising, which suggests that viewers are indeed annoyed and interrupted. On the other hand we have data that suggests that viewers don’t mind advertising that is a: entertaining and b: relevant.
The moral? There are no hard and fast facts but there is much fluidity. I am no evangelist for TV advertising, nor am I an evangelist for blogging. Evangelists run the risks of being self serving and my job is to serve my clients. In order to do so I pick the tool that’s right for the job, not the tool that I personally happen to like best.
Fair enough, Andreas. Though my experience with advertising folk is they tend to like the tool that pays them the most.
I agree with you there 100%. Most agencies make their money from media commission, which is of course idiotic. How can they act in their client’s best interest if their own financial success depends on their ability to sell TV commercials?
In response to the above my own agency charges a flat fee for the idea and the execution, we don’t mark up media. It’s the only way to be truly independent in our recommendations.
Sounds like a good plan to me, Andreas. However, I get the feeling that if the large agenices tried doing that their stock prices would plummet overnight. So they don’t like going there.
All a marketer wants from his agency is value for money. Oh, and miracles
Where’s the sample? Why should I sign up for something I can’t try before I buy…a la Stormhoek? I may be interested, I may not but if I’d like the choice to decide.
And before you remind me how cheap I am…
The email newsletter
My occasional sparring partner Hugh McLeod is asking punters to nip over to English Cut and sign up for an email newsletter . My take on these has always been less than enthusiastic as most are crappily written self-serving lumps of junk no-one except…
Bearing in mind the convo we’ve got going on over at my place, it might be worth casting the net about how to attract those who can’t immediately afford the suits but which might go for the shirts. I’ve my own thoughts on that but…
Ok, boys and girls, here is my complaint!
As you may be aware, I have had a bad experience with Tailor and Cutter Academy. In an effort to let others know about my experience I have posted a complaint at the following url:
http://www.thesqueakywheel.com/complaints/2006/JAN/complaint8029.cfm
Please forward this e-mail to as many people as you know! Let me know if you can help.
Yours sincerly,
Mr. Paul Carroll Email: tailorandcutter2004@yahoo.ca