Recession? Let’s decide not to participate.

“Bad economy? Time to get aggressive.”

 

I read a discussion by that title a couple nights ago, from a chat board in the NetworkedBlogs app in Facebook. The talk was pretty good, though I can’t find it again; that discussion board is a bit spam-happy.

But the writer’s point was similar to the general view in a chat I had just a few weeks ago–in a group discussion on BrightFuse, the start-up job-search network from CareerBuilder.

Here’s what I said there:

 

Is a “down” market the good or bad time to invest? 

It’s the good time, right? Because you are buying stock at a value–when chances are very good that, over time, a general rebound will set you up with a really nice return. Fat ‘n happy!

When a client fears spending a buck on marketing, it’s because they are looking only at the “advertising” dollar spent and not at the projected gains in Brand Equity and profit after cost per target response. But in the stock market comparison, there is one more thing that should LEAP out and make your client hunger to invest all he can in a strong marketing campaign… 

It’s about Market Share at a value.

In a down economy, many biz owners pull in the guns and just coast on the customer base they already have. May not sink your ship, but it sure won’t grow your crew. Meanwhile, your client can invest in reaching out, making appeals and offers, testing brokered lists or value-added promotions, etc. This is “Scientific Advertising,” not just flinging money at billboards and magazines, hoping something will stick. That’s the power of data-driven marketing. 

The company that invests NOW gains market share at a value, and on the “recovery” side of this slump… stands out way above his competitors–who reeled it in, just to ride it out.

Anyway. So, “Why listen to Ken on this?” I can hear you say. No big reason, I admit. I’m just a copywriter. But I am excited to find that this discussion is happening all over the web, and it seems (mostly) that experienced marketers say the same thing.

For example: I follow (in NetworkedBlogs) a really sharp blogger who had his own input on this recently. Be sure to play the SlideShare presentation in this post:

The Secret Diary of a Bonafide Marketing Genius: “The Glass is Half Full”

Don’t feel like bouncing, or watching video? Let me tease you with a couple highlights…

“Brands that INCREASE advertising during a recession, when competitors are cutting back, can IMPROVE MARKET SHARE and ROI (return on investment) at LOWER COST than during a strong economy.”
Prof. John Quelch
Harvard Business School

“Four years after a recession: Businesses which had maintained or increased advertising spending during the recession SOLD 265% MORE than those which cut back.”
Prof. Andrew J. Razeghi
Kellogg School of Management
Nothwestern University

Vindicated! Today, I feel a little smarter than usual.

Take that… smart people!

These “laws” may not apply to YOU… yet.

• Reading time: about 4 minutes

Are you a real Marketer, or just a good writer?

Here’s why I ask that question: For my first half-dozen years on the job, I sincerely THOUGHT that I was a professional marketing copywriter. I was not. I was a decent “creative writer,” employed by a marketing-driven company.

There is a big difference.

I mean, there is one simple difference that is VERY big. I call on the venerable (and long late) “Master of the Game,” Claude C. Hopkins, to help me explain…

I like that Hopkins is still counted a “Master of the Game.” He wrote Scientific Advertising in 1923, but because he stuck to a dry-ish, textbook approach to what he identified as fundamental principles, professional marketers will tell you today that it’s a good thing his book is still in print. ‘Cause most of us young lions/punks need a good rap over the head with it to focus our excited rambling into truly profitable effort.

Okay, so in chapter one Hopkins simply establishes a few ground rules. First, he underscores that he will address ONLY what he can share about the empirical “science” which his trade had learned over several decades. Ending the chapter, in fact, he says…

“After [these laws] come a myriad variations. No two advertising campaigns are ever… identical. Individuality is an  essential. Imitation is a reproach. But those variable things which depend on ingenuity have no place in a text book on advertising. This is for groundwork only.”

 

Meaning what? Nothing much, just a smack in my face for all those early years I got away with calling myself a Marketer. When, really, I was a poor “copy hack,” albeit standing at the wondrous trailhead of my own Yellow Brick Road.

And the difference was testing. My own testing.

“It’s not absolutely a law, a given, for YOU… until you prove it for yourself.” That’s all Mr. Hopkins unloads for us in chapter one, but it’s a hefty load if you haven’t already carried this weight a time or three.

The big ad agencies have been at it for decades, now. They’ve tested and tested and tested. For them, and for all who follow along and keep testing, these fundamentals truly are good, reliable science. But the moment you loose your own pen to add a new message into the Grand Stream…

You really don’t know anything yet. Even if you had the laws in mind as you crafted your ad, that’s no promise that you know what will happen.

And you never WILL know anything, about your message or about your audience, until you act like “the Big Boys” and repeat the rigorous science of testing. Why? Well, for one thing, I’m quoting a book that’s exactly TWICE as old as I am myself. Do you REALLY want to run off armed with “wisdom” from 86 long years ago, and ASSUME that Claude is still right? Do you?!

No, you do not. Because you want to succeed as a marketing copywriter. Which means you want to make money for your client or employer. So if you’re already a great writer (and kudos for that, no small feat in today’s educational system), there remains only one thing you must do, and do constantly, and do better each time…

You must track (and act on) response to each new ad.

It’s so easy these days, honestly. Stop complaining that, “I’m a creative resource, not a technical one!” Nonsense. Trust me, once you taste the new profit you can gain from knowing and acting on even one small-but-proven truth about YOUR customer, then you will hunger for more. Like me you will quickly, powerfully transcend your first-flush random successes as a talented writer.

You will become, truly and forever, a “Student of the Game.”

 

---

 

 

I dedicate this blog to conversation driven by what useful insight I/we can siphon out of the books in my personal marketing library. I’ve been collecting for most of my 14 years in the business, and to date haven’t even read half the titles on this shelf. High time I got down to it, eh? Yes, and as long as I’m going to the trouble I want to suck the effort dry, digest/share what I think I learn, and (hopefully) help you grow along with me.

Where to start? I didn’t have to think long to answer that one. Hands down the oldest, and by far one of the most widely respected, titles I’ve picked up is a very small book called Scientific Advertising, by Claude Hopkins. I’ve written a short review of the book on my LinkedIn profile, so I won’t repeat that here.

My plan (one chapter, one blog post) is simple, so I hope you will participate. By the way, I figure I’m good for about 1-2 new posts each week, tops. Don’t worry about getting overwhelmed or falling behind. Especially while I get through this Hopkins material. The 21 chapters are short and sweet. Anyway…

Welcome to my new blog! I hope you’ll come back often, and get involved.

Thanks for reading,

 

 

 

Ken Grindall

P.S. Oh, how could I nearly miss including Hopkins’ two huge testing imperatives?! Let me tell you, in today’s high-tech office, I can get my hands on data more esoteric than Claude could ever have imagined. But when all is said and done, he rightly states that you must weigh, above all else, your results in two criteria: Cost per action (target recipient did what you wanted), and Cost per dollar in sales (from those responders). We will talk more about this in the weeks to come… TTFN.