Marketing-Fix: 100-Words-On

It’s a natural reaction.  We’ve all had it.  And it suggests a myopic tendency.

Before engaging an expert – who’s very possibly someone ‘just like’ you – consider two things:

Your customers probably aren’t you. How could they be?  You’re immersed in the details of telecommunications, apparel, insurance…whatever.  They’re seeking solutions not minutae.

Your customers expect you to be them. Ask questions, chat ‘em up, think like them.  Deliver what they want – concisely and fast.  They’ll be loyal customers and become fans.

With these in mind, how about finding experts at “wide-eyed innocence”? They can peer in, ask questions, focus, distill and deliver clarity.

As Roy Williams (the wizard of ads) suggests: we’re all uniquely unqualified to market ourselves.

“I’d like to add you to my professional network.”
– Rachel L.

“Do I know you? Who are you?”
– Kirk

Are we too lazy – or speed obsessed to optimize social media by personalizing?

Let’s not forget the vintage advertising mantra: show me you know me.

If we haven’t spoken in years, met in passing, or never, a generic note won’t motivate me to connect.  Sell me on the value of being linked: you’re fun, we have history, our networks mesh…

Skip ‘faux personalization.’ Personalized subject lines do work – we’ve tested and re-tested for clients*.  But, few of us write ‘Kirk, it’s so exciting…’ ‘Kirk, you’d be surprised…’ in personal communication.  You don’t know me.  You’re marketing me.

Un-friending, un-linking or unsubscribing is like breaking up. It’s personal – and sends a clear message: don’t contact, recommend or refer you to my network.  Remember, few of us can’t be replaced by someone who’s more personal…

* We see about a 15% increase in open rates when leading with your first name – it still gets your attention.

“Listen, I know what our customers want, they’d never want [insert 'fact' here].  No offense, but that’s just a waste of time and money.”
-E Marketing Manager

“That is so…1951, and it’s 2011.”

According to Marketing Sherpa only 46% of electronic marketers actively test
emails, landing pages and such.  True or not – this amazes.

Testing’s never been easier, faster or cheaper than today. Two examples of simple, but powerful testing we’ve done recently:

* Subject-line testing limited to the difference between using ‘watch’ versus
‘see.’  Open rates improved almost 20% with ‘watch’ and click-throughs
increased 15%.

* Content-testing in retail emails that offered product details as bullets
versus paragraphs.  Conversions to sales improved 15% with using full
paragraphs – unexpected, but long a standard in ‘snail mail.’

We’re inclined to believe that we ‘know’ what works – understanding our
customers better than they do, but it’s not true.  From conducting focus groups
to quantitative research to multi-channel testing and being inquisitive wins.

P.S.  If you’re as intrigued by testing as we are check out: www.whichtestwon.com.  It’s fun, provocative and reinforces that our gut can be wrong.

“What’s worse then email spam?  Bacon”

-    Dave Spur, Future Fundraising Now

Dave Spur – always intriguing – recently wrote about the increasing level of unwanted opt-in email we receive.  Bacon he calls it.

He suggests only 18% of commercial opt-in email is wanted/opened and fully 61% deleted.

We’ve moved from spam overload to inbox overload.

Industry leaders like Coremetrics propose sophisticated solutions, but our in-bin suggest that many could start by stepping into customers’ shoes and testing simple options:

Be relevant – take a page from Amazon and tailor your messages to what you know about your customers.

Deliver the right frequency – I mean, does anyone want “exciting offers” from TheatreMania 2 or 3 times a day before tuning out?

Get to the point – how much information do people need?  Williams-Sonoma promotes ‘last chance’ All-Clad sales with a subject line and a link.  That’s direct!

“The best wine we’ve tasted all year”
-Moore Brothers, wine merchants

“How does your garden grow?”
-Neiman Marcus, luxury retailer.  And garden center?

Moore Brothers – a savvy little company – deserves kudos for a clear message that implies a strong consumer benefit: try this wine; we loved it you will too.

Neimans – ostensibly a savvy behemoth – gets two thumbs down.  The ‘humorous’ subject line doesn’t relate to them, or the featured product.

In contrast, M & M Mars uses humor relevantly*.  For example, a focus group of sharks prefers humans who’ve eaten Snickers Squareds to ones who haven’t.  Like Moore Brothers, they deliver a clear benefit: eat Snickers or M&Ms – you’ll feel better.

Reminded us of advertising pioneers like David Ogilvy or Peter Rogers who encouraged marketers to be:

• Smart – but accessible to all.

• Direct – stay simple and clear.

• Humorous – when it serves your brand message.

* You might not like talking sharks or amourous M&M’s but Mars domimated Q1′s most effective TV ads.

“When life hands you lemons, make lemonade and lemon pie”
-Anne White

Ugh, but then again…

I wonder: when problems hit, why not take quick, transparent action? Getting in front of challenges can change customer perceptions – dramatically.

This started with big problems – failing nuclear reactors – but crystallized with a minuscule one: upgrading Mac OS X knocked out our MAC-only database.

Had the vendor jumped on the problem, they’d have taken advantage of ‘sour lemons’ to look like heroes.  Their actions would have conveyed:

• We’re top of our game. Even without advance warning from Apple, when the problem arose, it would appear that they were monitoring and improving – on the spot.

• We care about our customers. They have customers’ emails.  Why not show they’ve ‘got our backs’ before we discover problems?

And from management’s perspective, we bet it would be cost-effective. Aren’t spikes in customer service needs disruptive and expensive?

Sigh. Gotta love that lemon pie!

P.S. Kudos to the service wizards at Philadelphia’s Springboard Media who fixed the ‘glitch’ in a flash.

-Cassandra Clare

“…or seen!”
-Kirk K.

It’s true.  E-mail usage continues to plummet.  And, alternatives from Facebook to Twitter encourage faster communication and more interaction.*

This makes it easier – or at least faster – to build business and personal brands than before.

But – do most of us think through the consequences of instant, multi-channel broadcast communications?

The warp-speed communication helping your business can also cause undermine it just as quickly.

Two examples we’ve gotten recently:

• A ‘personal’ business update to customers that didn’t mask recipients’ email addresses.  Don’t a few thousand of us trust the vendor a little less?

• A frisky photo of partying ‘co-workers gone wild’ that’s been shared and shared and shared.  What happens when it’s in personnel files – or on Tosh.0?

Everyone and everything are everywhere – forever.  Let’s pause before we send.

* Here’s a terrific article about social networking – and its consequences.

We’ve quoted it often:

“Give them what they want and when they want it.  That’s how you keep them satisfied.”
—Waller and Schell

Facebook, Twitter and similar social sites focus on community and connecting. So, many worry that selling here risks violating a social contract that says: we’re just ‘friends.’

Still, many of us ponder how to make direct marketing work in these environments.

Quidsi’s – soap.com / diapers.com – Facebook app offers a brilliantly simple solution:

Current customers can purchase directly from their ‘My List’ without leaving Facebook. And wouldn’t many soap.com purchases be ‘re-fills?’

Seems real simple and widely applicable. Why not start with:

• What do you most want from your customers?

• What do they most want and expect from you?

• What do you do to deliver on their expectations – simply, quickly and cost-effectively?

There’s no need to make things complicated – or grab every sale.  Why build a jet fighter if a kite will do the job?

“I don’t believe in yesterday.”

-John Lennon

but then again…

“The future ain’t what it used to be.”

-Yogi Berra

Exceptional therapist and relationship expert Maya Kollman has wise thoughts about the past, present and future.  Pundits often suggest we focus on only one.

Kollman proposes that  to succeed, we all need to live in all three places.  Her reasoning:

• Living in the past keeps us from changing and growing.

• Living in the present prevents us from preparing for what’s coming next.

• Living in the future inhibits us from experiencing the present and adding to our knowledge.

Our thoughts:

• Mine the past. It’s full of lessons and examples.

• Stay attentive to the present. Observe what’s happening.  Use that to shape decisions.

• Dream big about the future. There’s no better way get where you want to go – in life or business – than stretching.

Here’s to a successful 2011.

“Great. For the price of good.”
-Volkswagen Passat billboard

We loved this headline for the new VW Passat. Hall-of-Fame worthy in our book – but why you might ask?

• It celebrates the product as better and different. Sometimes what we’re selling might not be objectively the best.  But a marketer’s job is buffing and polishing product benefits until there’s a reason to buy.

• It ignores the competition. Just up I-95 from the Passat billboard we saw this: “Mazda 323. What a Corolla wants to be.”  Ugh.  If the Mazda’s better – tell me; don’t even suggest I drive by a Toyota showroom and compare.

• It’s bold. The headline is catchy and concise.  And, it says the Passat is unequivocally fantastic and suggests that if I’m a savvy shopper – regardless of price point – I should consider a Passat..

Bottom line: The ad is Great… for the price of good.