Who else wants a measurable result?
/While I was sitting down this morning having a cup of coffee and reading the sports section, I noticed two golf ads. One ad was for some golf seminars...learning Hogan's Secrets, etc. The other was for a golf course in Virginia. I live in Charlotte, North Carolina.
Here's the seminar ad. Here's the Virginia ad.
The ads, which were stacked on page 6C, provide a classic example of direct response versus branding.
The direct response ad isn't perfect...there are some things I would change. But it's got some good elements...like the low price and the irresistible offer...a greens fee if you go to the seminar.
If you opened the ads, the seminar ad looks like the one in the paper. The Primland ad looks terrible in the paper; I think it's a massive mistake to run color in the newspaper; I can go with some spot color but no four color.
The Primland ad is completely terrible from a response standpoint. It's not even good from a branding standpoint. In the paper, the massive clubhouse looks like something from a Hitchcock movie and there's what can only be a nuclear missile launch silo next to the clubhouse. The headline is "The views are stunning. Then you look outside." It's clever, perhaps, but the view is not stunning, it's awful. The row of small photos at the top of the ad cannot be discerned in print; online, the ad looks like it includes a photo of a bidet. NICE!!!!!
OK - so Primland's USP is...WE HAVE THE NICEST BIDETS!
The body copy for the Primland ad is about 8 point and set on a yellow background and cannot be seen. It's a good thing: it's sheer drivel and the writer has clearly never even seen a golf club. The phone number is the phone number on the website, so there's no way to measure response, which is a good thing...for the agency and the newspaper, who cannot now be held accountable.
The people putting on the golfer's seminar will know their response and their ROI. I imagine they're trying to sell something else but who cares? At least the seminar boys are not flushing money straight down the toilet.
PLEASE PLEASE PLEASE...if you're in the golf business, do not run ads like the Primland one. Use direct response techniques and measure your response. The beauty of direct response is...you can get a response AND position your ad.
I'm sorry Primland but you're totally wasting your money and I hope you can make some changes or get out of your contracts. Doubt me? OK...how much revenue did your ad in today's paper generate? How may emails did you harvest from the ad?
I solve the web copy bottleneck problem...I'm the fastest direct response copywriter. For my copywriting website, go here.
Charlotte copywriter: www.scottmartinwriting.com
North Carolina copywriter: www.scottmartinwriting.com
Direct response copywriting; direct response copywriter.
Here's the seminar ad. Here's the Virginia ad.
The ads, which were stacked on page 6C, provide a classic example of direct response versus branding.
The direct response ad isn't perfect...there are some things I would change. But it's got some good elements...like the low price and the irresistible offer...a greens fee if you go to the seminar.
If you opened the ads, the seminar ad looks like the one in the paper. The Primland ad looks terrible in the paper; I think it's a massive mistake to run color in the newspaper; I can go with some spot color but no four color.
The Primland ad is completely terrible from a response standpoint. It's not even good from a branding standpoint. In the paper, the massive clubhouse looks like something from a Hitchcock movie and there's what can only be a nuclear missile launch silo next to the clubhouse. The headline is "The views are stunning. Then you look outside." It's clever, perhaps, but the view is not stunning, it's awful. The row of small photos at the top of the ad cannot be discerned in print; online, the ad looks like it includes a photo of a bidet. NICE!!!!!
OK - so Primland's USP is...WE HAVE THE NICEST BIDETS!
The body copy for the Primland ad is about 8 point and set on a yellow background and cannot be seen. It's a good thing: it's sheer drivel and the writer has clearly never even seen a golf club. The phone number is the phone number on the website, so there's no way to measure response, which is a good thing...for the agency and the newspaper, who cannot now be held accountable.
The people putting on the golfer's seminar will know their response and their ROI. I imagine they're trying to sell something else but who cares? At least the seminar boys are not flushing money straight down the toilet.
PLEASE PLEASE PLEASE...if you're in the golf business, do not run ads like the Primland one. Use direct response techniques and measure your response. The beauty of direct response is...you can get a response AND position your ad.
I'm sorry Primland but you're totally wasting your money and I hope you can make some changes or get out of your contracts. Doubt me? OK...how much revenue did your ad in today's paper generate? How may emails did you harvest from the ad?
I solve the web copy bottleneck problem...I'm the fastest direct response copywriter. For my copywriting website, go here.
Charlotte copywriter: www.scottmartinwriting.com
North Carolina copywriter: www.scottmartinwriting.com
Direct response copywriting; direct response copywriter.
