Ron Wall, Sr. VP of Publishing at Canon Communications shares a great story of how he beat a "print ads are dead" objection raised by a client by making him an offer he had to refuse. The client told Ron that print ads were not responsive and therefore of little value.
Ron countered by offering a FREE spread in his magazine. But there was a catch. The ad had to make an offer, have an 800 number, and anyone who called even just to inquire about the offer would get a free iPod.
The offer of a free spread got Ron's client thinking. What would the offer be? How many callers would buy as result? How many iPods would he have to give away? Whoa! A lot of free iPods!
As the client did the math and considered the number of people who might call to get a free iPod he realized it could run into hundreds or thousands. The client started backing off from Ron's offer. Then Ron, a twinkle in his eye, asked, "But wait a minute, didn't you just say print advertising is not responsive?"
Ron's point, that the right print ad can be very responsive had been made. Print is not dead, and print ads can generate response as long as they are designed with a compelling offer. Great story. Thanks Ron!
Wow. This is a wild study. Kind of makes you think twice about click through metrics.
Posted by: Hermes Birkin Bag | December 30, 2011 at 11:40 AM
There are plenty of technological factors that are killing the book (not least of which... people read alot less than they used to). One key concept is this: the Internet has removed the time and space from thievery. Almost any form of 'art' (media, movies, books, etc) can be had in seconds. This sort of shatters the supply/demand models of old. Now companies are scrambling to find the iTunes for books (Amazon's Kindle Store), and find the right price points and DRM keys, etc. I love my Kindle. As long as teh stories keep coming, and great authors are happy, I'm happy. :D
Posted by: 21tigermike | November 17, 2011 at 10:29 AM
interesting piece,,,
btw...i really like your blog i have been following it on http://b2breps.net
Posted by: dave | November 30, 2008 at 05:07 PM
Wow. This is a wild study. Kind of makes you think twice about click through metrics.
Josh
Posted by: Josh | November 23, 2008 at 02:18 PM
The problem with on line ads are the Natural Born Clickers.
Those who click on all kinds of adds you don't want on your website as they won't buy.
Study by Starcom MediaVest Group
http://www.smvgroup.com/news_popup_flash.asp?pr=1643
The study illustrates that heavy clickers represent just 6% of the online population yet account for 50% of all display ad clicks.
Posted by: LEADSExplorer | November 23, 2008 at 01:04 PM
I completely agree that the right print ad can really get a client noticed. While it is impossible to completely measure how many people will actually take notice of a print ad, indexes can be utilized to make educated estimates, and are especially useful when trying to determine the possible success of ad based on target audience’s demographic and or psychographic.
As far as online ads go, while online advertising is becoming more and more popular, it’s also very important to keep in mind that there are so many clicks on advertising that are actually false. I mean, there are people out there who are paid to sit and click on an organization’s ad, which falsely represents the number of people actually clicking on the ad out of interest.
Posted by: meggyp | November 18, 2008 at 07:56 PM
The problem with print adds is the tracking and tracing.
Online adds can be tracked and traced easily.
Print adds not (or very hard).
If marketing needs to spend money, they prefer to spend on ads that can be traced in order to have proof of their spending.
Posted by: Engago Team | November 17, 2008 at 11:06 AM