The discipline of marketing and advertising is hardly new.

The classic text on direct response marketing, “Scientific Advertising” was published as long ago as 1923.

So it is something of a puzzle as to why large companies, who spend large sums on their marketing, often make what appear to be elementary blunders.

A recent case pointed out by the great Drayton Bird involves UK giant Tesco…

“The other day Tesco’s shares took a beating when for the first time since 1968 they issued a profits warning. Their new chief executive admits with admirable honesty that this was because they changed their promotional approach and got clobbered.

I may be maligning them but I suspect this needn’t have happened. For me the first law of marketing is to test. A friend who worked for Revlon founder Charles Revson told me Revson used to test everything including price in an area before he launched a product nationally.

It is hard to believe they tested their Big Price Drop promotion properly before they gave up the other promotions that were working well. Promotions pretty much identical to those which helped their competitors snatch business from them – and which have worked for years.

Incidentally, I wager Big Price Drop is not as good as The Big Save. I know that because I am a copywriter, and I know that what something does for the customer (save) beats what it is (price drop) every time. That took a split second to occur to me, but if I had a big shiny office fitted out with hot and cold running planners and account handlers I could charge you, assuming I wrote nice long report, a few grand for it.”

Worth reading the whole piece “Big Price Drop = Big Share Drop: Tesco’s Three Mistakes”.

Couple of pretty basic points (poor testing and poor choice of wording).

Now, I know that nobody’s perfect and if you’re an active marketer you’re going to make mistakes now and again.  In fact, if don’t “make mistakes” you’re probably not trying hard enough.

However, business is hard enough without making what are really unforced errors.  Tesco can survive this…a typical small business has less leeway.

And here’s another example…

…this time relating to positioning.

Again, not a new concept and pretty mainstream in the world of marketing.

The seminal work “Positioning” by Al Ries and Jack Trout was published in 1976 (after a series of articles in Advertising Age way back in 1972).

So I was a little surprised the other day when I saw a ad on the side of a bus for the Alfa Romeo Giulietta proudly trumpeting a recent award.

Now, when you think of an Alfa Romeo, the words “Italian”, “Stylish”, “Sporty”, “Hot”, “Sexy” might come to mind.

Depending on your age, less desirable ideas like “rust-bucket” and “unreliable” might also come to mind.

However, I’d be pretty confident that “Safety” wouldn’t be the first idea that pops up.

And if you were thinking of buying an Alfa Romeo Giulietta, the fact that it is…

“The safest compact car ever tested by Euro NCAP”

…wouldn’t necessarily be helpful.

That’s because “safety” and “compact” (let alone the combination) equals “boring” and ordinary in the minds of most people.

So in this particular case, this award doesn’t support the main positioning idea.  So why emphasise it?  It must have been very prominent in the ad I saw for me to notice it…remember the ad was on the side of a bus and I probably saw it for a couple of seconds at most!

Will this lose sales for Alfa?  Hard to tell, but in difficult economic times why take the risk by making sloppy mistakes?

It’s as if many mainstream marketing professionals and their agencies know the right buzzwords and things to say…

…but they have no idea about why an ad works and why a sale is made.

Final words on this point from Drayton Bird talking about a friend getting ripped off…

“The client and his media agency clearly don’t know what makes ads work otherwise their ads would have been doing OK before.  So eventually one of two things (maybe both) will happen.

1. The client and/or the agency will start getting bored with the ad and try to “improve” it. Almost invariably in doing so they will miss out something essential or add something unwise

2. The winning ad will run out of steam eventually and they won’t know how to create another.

However, I think this kind of thing will be on the increase in the next year or five, which is all the more reason to know what works, what doesn’t and why – whether you’re the client or the agency. Otherwise when things go wrong you have no idea what to do.”

Full story at “Will this kind of short-sighted behaviour grow in the recession?”

Pretty much every business needs a continual inflow of new prospects and potential customers to remain healthy in the long term.

But not all prospects are of equal value and some may actually be damaging to your business.  Advertising is one of the primary ways to attract new leads so it’s important to get that right.

Here’s a guest article from my good mate Pete Godfrey that reveals the formula for attracting the kind of business you want…

*****

Reinvent Your Advertising

If you want to start dealing with qualified prospects instead of tyre-kicking time wasters, then one thing you should be doing is using Lead Generating Advertising. Let me explain…

It all starts with reinventing your advertising from one-step ads to two-step ads. Many sales professionals try to sell themselves in ads and that’s a mistake for many reasons we haven’t got time for today.

However, one BIG mistake is there is not enough room to sell yourself in a one-step. And many business owners who try compete on price alone which is another BIG mistake which opens a Pandora’s Box of problems.

The key positioning secret is this: With lead generation ads you are attracting, not chasing, and this changes the whole dynamics of the situation. As Kennedy would say: “When you chase you’re a pest, when you attract, you’re an invited guest.”

So here is a solid template to follow when using our kind of advertising.

Lead Generation: Collect qualified leads. This is the only objective of your ads. Here’s the formula…

Step One: Define the who. Focus on a very specific prospect.

Step Two: Create an irresistible headline.

Step Three: Create a Special Report specifically targeted to the who.

Step Four: Create a means for them to get your Special Report. (24hr Recorded message, website)

BIG Lesson: Make your title of your Special Report so enticing to your prospects they would pay money for it.

Examples of Special Reports

For Accountants:

5 Secrets The Tax Department Pray You Never Discover That Saves An Average Family Up To $1,500.00 or More On Taxes!

For Naturopaths:

The 7 Roadblocks To Successful Weight Loss

For Roofing Plumbers:

FREE 21 Point Comprehensive Roofing Safety Audit valued at $97

And here are some BIG lessons to take on board.

• Make it urgent. Your ads must contain a deadline or a limited number or both.
• Always put a value on the Special Report. Make people value your FREE offer by giving it a realistic price.
• Attract ideal prospects, repel others. Hone in on one particular prospect. This repels some, but attracts your ideal prospect even more.

I’ll leave you with some important questions to keep you on track when creating your own Lead Generating Ads.

1: Who is you target audience? You’ve got to know who you are targeting and what gets them HOT.

2: Why should they pay attention to you? You’ve got to get their attention and get them to stop and read your ad. (Headline)

3: What are you offering them? You’ve got to make a compelling limited offer. (Special Report with time limit or limited number.)

4: How do they get the offer? You’ve got to make it easy and make it clear exactly what they are getting and how they go about getting it. (Free recorded message and or website.)

BIG MISTAKE TO WATCH OUT FOR: Trying to accomplish too much in your ad.

The only objective of your ad is to sell the freebie (Special Report). In many cases this is a

free report, a free DVD, or even both. You are NOT there to sell them on you or your firm.

Be clear on this. You are there to sell your freebie to qualified prospects… that’s it!

*****

About Pete Godfrey…

With more than a decade of experience in the marketing arena, Pete Godfrey, AKA “The Wizard of Words”, has developed a keen eye as to what it takes to succeed in business. As one of Australia’s most successful and highest paid copywriters/sale strategists, Pete’s client list contains many of the world’s savviest entrepreneurs. To get to know Pete better and see how you can profit from his hard-won advice go to http://www.petegodfrey.com/blueprint and grab his new FREE report “Business Profits Blueprint: How to Profit in The New Economy”. Valued at a very real $97, it’s yours FREE for a limited time.

This story caught my eye and demonstrates, among other things, the enduring power of (1) controversy and (2) sex…

“Jack Wills censured for ‘overtly sexual’ catalogue”

There’s also a “Royal” connection (apparently Prince Harry is a fan of the label) which always adds spice to stories like this.

And to support my argument about the attention grabbing properties of stories like this, I note this item was one of the “most viewed” on the site.

Note that the racy photo at the top of this post is NOT from the Jack Wills catalogue.  Check the link for a look at what’s caused the controversy.

Now, I confess that I’d never heard of Jack Wills before I saw this story.  I discovered that they are a UK fashion company catering primarily to the children of the well-to-do…

…”Outfitters To The Gentry”, in fact.

Ignore for the moment the faux controversy over the catalogue (shades of “French Connection” methinks).  I’m guessing that this will do no harm to sales and the catalogue will quickly become something of a collector’s item.

(See this comment for some support on this point.)

No, more interesting to me is the example of a very clear positioning strategy taken by the company.  They know what they stand for and they’re very clear on who their customers are (note the care they take over the location of their stores and the promotional strategy).

Another example of a company being successful marketing to the affluent.

The great Drayton Bird, direct response marketing and copywriting maven par excellence, recently held a free webinar for his subscribers.

The topic was the “10 Best Ads Of The Last 10 Years”.  The ads were selected primarily on the basis of how effective they were and the results they produced.

One of the ads (campaign, really) was for UK insurance comparison site “CompareThe Market.com”.

This is the campaign featuring the (now) famous meerkat Aleksandr Orlov, proprietor of meerkat comparison site “CompareTheMeerkat.com”.

Here’s the original ad…

Now, this campaign has been extremely effective.

The immediate results of the campaign were…

…an increase in market share of 76%(!). Perhaps more importantly, quotes were up by 80% and the cost to make a sale down 73%.

Note these were the results in the first 9 weeks of the campaign.  I don’t know what the longer term results have been but the longevity of the campaign and the fact that the theme is continuing to be developed suggests that the campaign continues to deliver.

I’d suggest there are a number of things to note about this ad.

Firstly, it does a great job of getting attention.  There’s something about cute furry animals that gets people to watch, at least briefly.

Then it introduces and develops the “Compare The Meerkat” concept quickly…

…but swiftly brings in what they really want to talk about…”Compare The Market”.

There are some very clever psychological tactics being used here.

The whole “Compare The Meerkat” thing is funny and a little bit bizarre…and gets “under the radar”.  With the viewer’s defences down temporarily, it’s then the perfect time to introduce the product.

They then use a very clever tactic, what’s sometimes called “Choice of One” to direct attention on the action they want the viewer to take…

…which, of course, is checking out comparethemarket.com.

Note the repetition used, as well.

A very, very clever ad and very effective.

Now, there’s something of a funny story about how the origins of the campaign.

Apparently, the creative types assigned to the campaign were struggling to come up with a decent idea.  The UK comparison site market is very competitive and there really didn’t seem to be anything unique to “Compare The Market”.

(As an aside, for a site dealing with car insurance, it’s a terrible name.)

Anyway, bereft of ideas they retreated to a local pub for a break and in search of inspiration.

After consuming copious amounts of booze, the best they could come up with was that in some bizarre way “Compare The Market” sounded somewhat like “Compare The Meerkat”.

Somehow, this seemingly absurd idea did not disappear and was somehow developed into the remarkable campaign that we now see.

In case this sounds like something from “Mad Men”, what makes this campaign work so well, in my opinion, is the attention to detail.

There is in fact a site www.CompareTheMeerkat.com and, of course, it’s an extension of the ads…

…and used to feed people back to the home site www.CompareTheMarket.com.

A very well executed campaign and despite the seeming craziness there is a relentless focus on the action they want people to take…

…which is going to www.CompareThe Market.com…

…”For Easy Way To Save On Car Insurance”.

Simples, huh…

…but brilliant.

Tourism Australia has just launched a new advertising campaign and the style reverts to a more traditional format after the somewhat arthouse style of the previous Baz Luhrmann created ads.

Unsurprisingly, there’s been a chorus of complaints from sections of the intelligentsia bewailing the “unsophisticated” image the ad presents.

Here’s the ad “There’s Nothing Like Australia”…

OK, let’s see what a real expert on the subject, the great David Ogilvy would have to say…

In the book “Ogilvy On Advertising”, there is an entire chapter devoted to “How To Advertise Foreign Travel”.

The key point?

You have to show your audience the places and things that they desire to visit…not what you think they should want to visit.

In Ogilvy’s words…

“When you undertake to advertise a foreign country, you have to be prepared for a lot of political flak.  Research told me that what American tourists most wanted to see in Britain was history and tradition…So that is what I featured in the advertisements, only to be slaughtered in the British press for projecting an image of a country living in the past.”

So did it work?

“When our campaign started, Britain was the fifth most visited European country among American tourists.  Today it is first.”

Note the importance of research to discover what your audience wants.

Other points…

1. Sometimes it’s advisable to correct the image of a country, if there is a genuine misunderstanding in the mind of the target audience.

2. Most advertising for countries should be designed to plant a long term image of the country…BUT there are occasions when it can be used to solve temporary image problems.

3. Choose things to illustrate that are unique to the country.

Other words of wisdom…

“People dream about visiting foreign countries.  The job of your advertising is to convert their dreams into action.  This can best be done by combining mouth-watering photographs with specific how-to-do-it information.”

So how does “There’s Nothing Like Australia” stack up?

I’d suggest pretty well on Ogilvy’s criteria.  The key point, of course, is has the right research been done?  My guess is that the ad does indeed capture the main reasons why people want to visit Australia.

I confess the ad is a little “twee” for my tastes but I find it charming nonetheless and that tune is catchy!

We’ll see what the results are like.

Unless you’ve been completely cut off from the online world the last few months…

…you’re most likely aware that there has been a fair amount of discussion and not a little concern about new guidelines issued by the US Federal Trade Commission (“FTC”) relating to online marketers.

Specifically, as how they relate to bloggers, affiliates and the use of testimonials.

Marketing maven Jim Edwards has done the internet marketing community a great service by going straight to the source and interviewing Rich Cleland of the FTC about these new guidelines.

You can watch the webinar right here…

http://www.igottatellyou.com/blog/ftc-change-interview/

It’s completely free, nothing to buy and in the spirit of the FTC regs, I am NOT an affiliate (LOL!).

Seriously, all marketers and copywriters need to be on top of this and a big “Thank You” to Jim for organising this and making it freely available.

If you’re not in the US, don’t think this doesn’t apply to you.  Most countries have similar laws (in Australia it’s the ACCC and the Trades Practices Act) and the FTC is often seen by other authorities as setting the standard.

The old-style newspaper business is struggling in many countries around the world.

Falling circulations, shrinking ad revenues because of difficult economic conditions and an ineffective response to the disruptive change of the internet mean that traditional media groups are in danger of going out of business.

So no great surprise when media baron Rupert Murdoch announced recently…

…that he plans to start charging for access to the online content of his NEWS Corporation’s publications.

Predictable scepticism about whether or not he can make this work.  Few newspapers have been able to charge for their online content – the Murdoch owned “Wall Street Journal” being one that does.

Charging for access is only likely to be viable, I’d suggest, when there is unique and valuable information being provided.  So, it’s not too surprising that specialist financial publications can charge for online access.

But, for the more regular publications I suspect it will be harder.

The big problem for the conventional media is that their business model has been broken by the disruptive impact of the internet.

Media companies never really made their money from selling content.  The money came from advertising, especially classified ads.  The big newspaper and media groups used to have a stranglehold on the distribution channels for advertising (particularly local advertising).

The internet has destroyed that model and the likes of Google have trounced the old media in the battle for the online advertising market.

So the old business model is broken and the media groups are trying to find a new one.  But it seems to me that all their efforts amount to trying to fix up the old model somehow.  They still seem to want to rely on charging for content (the digital equivalent of paying for your newspaper) and advertising.

But would a direct response marketing model make more sense in this new era?

Think about it.  The old media has 2 big assets…

1. Their content; and

2. Their readership

Instead of charging for online content, how about continuing to make it available for free, but requiring readers to opt-in?  Almost instantly, the publication would build a big list that they could then market to.

And they could easily repackage their content into offerings that people would pay for…provided it was properly put together (providing unique, useful information) and properly marketed.

Now, many publications already do this to some extent, but in a half hearted way it seems to me.  As an example, I subscribe to Men’s Health, which is owned by direct response marketing giant Rodale.

And yet, I get surprisingly few targeted offers sent to me.  Their online efforts are, frankly, pathetic.  So if these guys don’t get it, it’s no surprise that the dinosaur media groups haven’t got a clue.

Part of the problem, of course, is that with a few exceptions the traditional media don’t understand their business.  All too many newspaper people seem to have vastly inflated view of their own importance and the role of the “Fourth Estate”.

We’ll see I guess, what will happen as revenues come under increasing pressure.

Every now and again, I come across a piece of advertising copy…

…usually a headline or tagline of some sort…

…that is absolutely breathtaking in its utter inanity and stupidity.

Bear in mind, that as a direct response copywriter I read a lot of ads and see a lot of mediocre advertising.  So I’m not easily shocked.

However, when I saw this…

“We’re whatever direction you’re heading.”

…from a major bank prominently displayed on a huge outdoor billboard…

…I really was stunned.

Why? Well think about this for a minute.  They might just as well have said…

“We don’t have a clue who we are and what we stand for, so you tell us”

…and while you’re at it, why not take advantage of our utter cluelessness?

Statements like this are completely at odds with any idea of focus and positioning.

As I’ve emphasised before, marketing  strategy, positioning and focus is as much about what you choose to NOT do as what you choose to do.

And the idea of a bank being whatever a customer wants them to be is just plain foolish.

(Not to mention dangerous.  Part of the cause of the current financial crisis was banks chasing business indiscriminately.)

Now, I’m guessing the bank in question doesn’t really mean this and that they’re really trying to say something else.

Because I notice that this is part of a campaign with the theme…

…“We’re a bank you can bank on”…

…which on the face of it isn’t too bad a concept in the current uncertain environment.

But it’s a little bland and in any case what kind of a bank is it that you can’t rely (bank) on?

What does it really mean?  Does it mean that whatever I need from them they’re going to come up with the goods?

Don’t think so.

Look, I know that coming up with a sound strategy and positioning and a compelling USP isn’t easy.

But when you don’t have those things worked out…

…you end up with inane advertising that relies on vague generalities and “feel good” type statements that does absolutely nothing for the bottom line.

…who don’t use direct response marketing and copywriting.

In the UK “Daily Telegraph” is this article…

“Marketing Spend Falls At Sharpest Rate For Nine Years”.

A recent survey found that…

…49% of companies cut their marketing budgets in the fourth quarter of 2008 and further cuts are expected.

Now, this is fairly typical behaviour from businesses when recession hits.

And the typical response from practitioners of direct response marketing and copywriting is that it’s crazy to cut back.

After all, the beauty of direct response marketing is that the results are clear and measurable.

Marketing spend is not an expense, it’s an investment.  And as long as you’re getting a positive return then you continue.

However, for those business owners who do NOT use direct response techniques, there’s a certain logic behind the cuts.

After all, those business owners are in the same position as John Wanamaker when he quipped…

“I know half the money I spend on advertising is wasted, but I can never find out which half.”

(Presumably this was before he met legendary ad man and copywriter John E. Powers!)

The problem, of course, is if you don’t know what’s producing results, then how do you know which part of the marketing budget to cut?

You could end up cutting the very thing that’s bringing in business and keeping you afloat.

Making cuts to your marketing blindly like this really is playing Russian Roulette with your business.

In good times, direct response marketing is highly effective and will boost profits for any business.

In bad times, using direct response will be the difference between life and death for a business.

Had to bring this item to your attention, partly because of the “controversy” but also because the ad is actually a good example of direct response copywriting.

In London, there has been a storm of outrage over billboards carrying the following headline…

“Want Longer Lasting SEX?”

The rest of the copy reads…

“Nasal Delivery Technology.  Call The Doctors At Advanced Medical Institute”

…and there is a 1 800 number to call.

(There’s an article in the UK “Daily Telegraph” here and there’s a photo of the ad here.)

As you can see from the photo, these ads certainly grab attention.

Now, the ad is actually aimed at Men, so the headline would be improved by adding “Men” at the beginning.  However, there are clearly space constraints.

Other than that, you can see that it follows the classic template for a classified ad.  Big benefit headline and promise.  A hint at a new approach and a simple call to action.

I’m a little unconvinced about using the wording “Nasal Delivery Technology”, but I’m guessing the advertiser ran some tests before splashing out on billboard advertising.

This campaign was actually first run down here in Australia in August 2008.  I remember seeing one of the ads in North Sydney.  Typically, they were placed on busy main roads and they certainly caught my attention!

(Must have been the Nasal Technology!)

The campaign stirred up complaints and opposition here as well and ended up being modified.

However, I’m guessing that the advertiser isn’t too fazed about all this.  After all, the coverage and publicity they are getting must be worth a great deal to them.

So, a good example of the power of controversy and how “Sex” is almost guaranteed to get attention.