Hi Mike,

Thanks for the thread, and the forum.

Yes, we the readers hear you. This point of view is
trumpeted from the subtext of many marketing messages.

We readers can respect that point of view, when
it's put as plainly and candidly as your words above.
You're not obligated to walk in our shoes of course.

The respect dissolves when the writer:

1) has no interest in the reader's perspective,
2) but pretends they are a friend trying to help us and,
3) thinks we readers don't see what's happening.

We might imagine a buyer telling the seller a fib, and
not respecting the seller enough to do it well. Those
buyers who ask for a refund on their ebook purchase 90
seconds after the order come to mind.

What kind of credibility does that reader then have?


On to the 2 reasons supporting your point:

On the surface level, I agree. On the surface we can
all be quite different.

On the surface level there's a diversity of opinion and
writing styles in this forum. But on a deeper level,
we posters all share much in common. As example, all
of us here wish to be addressed respectfully, whatever
our opinion, writing style, nationality, age, income, etc.

Why are we making compelling writing in to a science
if not to reach the more powerful currents running
below the surface of the reader?

If buying decisions are arising from these more
powerful inner places, that we all share, isn't there a
real sense in which we are our market?

This all sounds so sophisticated when we writers get
a hold of it but isn't this just very basic "do unto
others" common sense that a kid could grasp?



When it comes to friends and family I take your point.
Some times I can and do indeed benefit from a hard sell
from the people who know and love me.

The analogy breaks down once we start writing for
thousands of complete strangers who we will never
meet. How do we know what's "for their own good"?

Let's not confuse being an expert on our product
with mindreading over the Internet.

Mike, I'm trying to steer the thread away from abstract
theory and towards something more tangible by examining
how real people, us, act in a real writer/reader
environment, this forum.

The more we hard sell each other here, the more the
communication dissolves, until you finally have to lock
the thread.

The more the real people in this real social
environment work our way towards soft selling, the more
credibility, trust and communication blossoms.

It's all documented right here in these threads.

The only thing left to understand is that we writers
are not different than readers in any meaningful way.

Thanks again for hosting an interesting discussion Mike!

PS. Jane, I know you get all this. If any of my posts
imply otherwise, please disregard, poor writing here
is the cause.

That's not what I was implying. In fact, the converse is the whole point, especially by me bringing up Gittomer's article. The fact is, we can't make opinions about what our market wants in a general sense. It's impossible.

We need to research, learn from, test and question our audience. But we must be careful because we can arrive at conclusions at what they need. My point is, what they need and what they want are two different things.

Sure, we need to empathize with our audience. (A great copywriter who teaches me more about empathy is Brian Keith Voiles.)

But empathy is not just by listening to them. It's not about avoiding hype because we hate hype ourselves. It's also investigating them, watching them, researching them, learning about the demo-, psycho-, geo- and technographics about them, and, above all, TESTING them.

Does everyone need insurance? Does everyone need pre-arranged funeral services? Does everyone need to save money for their retirement? Logically, yes. But what they want is different.

(This is the point famous marketer Jack Trout and Al Ries, in "Positioning," tried to convey, when they said that focus groups are usually the worst market research tools. Because they don't reveal the feelings and desires and dreams and passions and propensities and reactions and so on. Especially when they are unconscious and cannot be voiced.)

Philbert, see my earlier point. You don't know what's for their own good. We don't even know what's for our own good, which is my point. We make assumptions about it. We NEVER know. Especially for a larger group of people. (Hence, my earlier point about market segmentation.)

That's the dichotomy we have as copywriters. We are serving a client who wants to sell more product to an audience who doesn't want to be sold. So our job is to research that market, approach it and communicate the benefits that serves all concerned.

Yes. But do we appeal to them in a way we want to be appealed? No. Having this "real sense" will help us, true. We write far more empathetic copy that way. But even we need to be convinced on solutions we may not want to hear, agree to (at first), etc.

As I said, you can't be your audience was used as a corollary to writing in a style we prefer ourselves.

Very true, but it's beside the point. Look at the opposite: how many times have you bought something to realize you were glad you did (and you initially didn't want to)? Take away "hype" or forceful copy (not the illegal kind), and you end up with an emotionless, robotic society who can't make decisions.

To add on to Gittomer's article, I prefer Tony Alessandra (a behavioral scientist and sales trainer), who said the "Platinum Rule:"

"Do unto others as THEY would want to have done unto them."

Philbert, there's a difference between hard/soft-selling, and hurling insults. I lock the threads because engaging debates and arguments sometimes turn into clashes of characters -- not of convictions.

(Note that I tend to lock the forums, not delete them. I think many threads on this board contain a lot of useful information -- hard sell or not.)

Hi again Mike! Couple of quick replies:

There's "they" again. Does this apply to writers also? When you and I, Mike and Phil, buy stuff on the Net, do we need some stranger to tell us what we need?

I'm completely convinced that if I hired a talented writer like yourself to work for my Product Review magazine, you could write objective analysis that was both informative and entertaining, without any other agenda.

If there were no salespeople of any kind in the world, just order takers, would people then stop buying? Would you stop?

The problem with having we writers and sellers analyze our own operations is that we have an undestandable human bias to see ourselves as crucial to the equation.

No problem on the thread locking Mike, I have no argument with it. It's your call, and I think you call it right. You're just calling a needed time out. Thanks again for being the den mother.

There is a difference between hard selling and personal insults, agreed. I was just observing that one has a tendency to lead to the other. People's minds get locked long before the thread gets locked.

Didn't mean to ignore your other interesting points, just running out of time here today.

Have a good one!

And if you visit a doctor for the first time in the emergency room, do you take a prescription from a stranger?

Now, you're going to say, "Ya, but he's a doctor." And that's my point -- he's got instant credibility by virtue of his position. We all have preconceived notions about doctors.

Plus, more important, we're hurting. We already know we have a need. But what if we don't know? For example, in terms of preventative medicine, do we see a doctor as often as we should? Most of us don't. Because we don't "feel" the need to. (And I did say "feel," not "think." I'll come back to that later.)

You said, "Do I 'need' some stranger to tell me what I need?" Oh, there's "need" again. No, you don't need a stranger telling you what you need. But what I need and what I want are different.

What happens if I have preconceived notions and am convinced otherwise? What happens if the product or service really is in my best interest? Do I only need objective data to persuade me that I (first) need it? Nope.

Do you own or know of everything that's out there that can help you, that can change your life, that can make things easier for you, that can solve all your problems, that can save you money? Etc? Probably. You may "know" about them. So why don't you buy them all?

You're going to say, "because I don't think I need them."

And that's exactly my point.

Selling is not about "thinking." It's about feeling.

Your argument is predicated on the assumption that we all "think" we know what we need, or that we all objectively "think" things through when we buy something. (Or that we should.)

For me, just "telling" me something can change my life by throwing mere data at me isn't enough. I need to be convinced. I need to "feel" that it's needed, and not just "know" that it is. I need you to help me pass all my insecurities, fears, doubts and concerns, and all the other emotions that are instinctual to the human race.

Rationally, I know (or I may be convinced) that I need your product or service. But if I don't feel I need it, I won't buy it. (Or chances are slim that I will.)

As sales trainer Brian Tracy once said, "A man convinced against his will, is of the same opinion still."

Because my emotions against buying it are equal or stronger than my emotions for buying it. (Remember Maslow's pyramid of human needs?)

Sure, you can fight rationalizations with rationalizations. But you're not. You're trying to fight emotions (including deepseated, hardened convinctions, insecurities, fears, etc) with rationalizations.

If you do, you're in deep doo-doo.

I don't want to be sold, true. I don't need a stranger telling me what I need, true. But I don't want to part with my money, even if it's to save my life. My money is my security blanket. I have a thick skin. Try to pierce it with mere data. It won't work.

(Or be extremely difficult, especially in our day and age where we're constantly bombarded with information from everything and everyone.)

Sure, there's a place for rational, objective information -- it may be good when I already know I have a need, I may be hurting already (like the doctor scenario earlier) or I already made a decision to do something about it and require information to help me make a decision, especially when considering two or more alternatives.

(Just like large corporations do. But even then, people on committees, in C-level positions or on boards of directors also buy for selfish, ego-centric reasons. They are human beings like everyone else, after all.)

So how do you convince me? By just telling me about your product? Maybe it helps. Do you convince me by selling me, throwing a whole bunch of hype at me? Maybe that helps, too. But either one or the other, independently, is not good.

So if I'm not convinced, how do you convince me? How do you pierce my thick skin? How do you persuade me to at least consider it? By selling me on a purely emotional level? Or by just throwing a bunch of data at me, hoping I "see the light?"

The answer is neither. You do so by helping me buy. And you do so by appealing to both my emotions and my logic.

Yes. I believe they would. Unless I'm already convinced I need it, I'm already hurting, and my pain is greater than my potential pain of parting with my security blanket.

Well said Mike, the emotional aspects are crucial and make or break any communication with humans. Using this knowledge tends to produce not only healthy but most of all effective communication, especially in sales.

However I do think it's not really about helping people buy - because that assumes we already know that buying is their best option and we need to use the techniques in our arsenal to support that option. Which seems wrong.

Although I'm not an expert I feel that it's not a salespersons job at all to "help people buy". As the immutable laws say, people don't read anything at first, they don't believe anything at first and they don't do anything at first. Why? Because they're probably not looking to buy at all... at first.

For me, copywriting is the communication from a company or professional to an individual who is considered part of their target audience. In this communication, the product is being offered by painting an eloquent picture in the mind of the prospect, a textual visualisation of what the product intimately means in their lives.

Of course the key factor here is that that particular individual (as a member of the target audience) gets a bigger "use value" than the cash value asked for the product, and the copy's job is to bring that value alive in the eyes of the prospect. Ultimately, if the picture is painted properly, the prospect will act on the value that he sees and will click that order button - confidently satisfied for doing so.

Then it's the products job to live up to that, of course.

Copy enthusiasm, creating empathy, and emotional appeal are all very human expressions that can help carry the message of value without any conflict to ethics whatsoever.

Basically, the whole debate seems to center around the use of pressure on the one hand, and using the power of marketing techniques on bad, downright crappy products on the other. I think when people say I don't like to be sold, what they really mean is I don't like to be pressured into something. And any copy that delivers less than promised is automatically unethical and destructive copy (to the markets and individual buyers).

And in my opinion any writer who uses these techniques is being unethical. Using pressure means that you're either

A: Using it on someone who's already convinced and putting him a bit more off to his conviction of buying. However you'll probably not change his mind.
B. Using it on someone who's not yet convinced but want to convince by other means than emotional or logical persuasion.

The only people who'll be chalked up as extra sales by means of pressure tactics are those that might not have wanted the product. That might not have a lot of value for it but bought it for other reasons.

Now to me this doesn't mean a copywriter can't create a compelling offer and tell a compelling story of what prospects will lose out on if they don't act now, but using pressure seems wrong to me any way you look at it.

I believe that the power is already within the prospect. The "hurting" as you call it is already inside of him and is the biggest force that you could unleash in the sales process. Any form of writer's aggressiveness or force within copy can only adversely affect the power of the desire this prospect has towards the product, in my opinion.

Erik,

May I politely enquire as to what on earth you're going on about?

What is their job then? What century are you living in?

Why do you talk about selling to humans as though you normally sell to aliens?

I really don't think the debate has anything WHATSOEVER to do with pressure. It's physically impossible to pressure someone with a piece of copy - they will simply toss it into the round file, or click away from your website. In person sales may be quite different, where it's possible to intimidate or frighten the recipient of the message. Again, I don't understand your point.

Well, there may be an element of truth to that, but I think you are missing the wider point and not understanding the distinction between buying and selling.

People like buying. In fact, many people totally get off on it. Whether it's ladies buying clothes and makeup and calling it "retail therapy" or whether it's us night owls buying bits of software and ebooks on the net - we all love buying.

But NO ONE likes being sold. NO ONE likes unsolicited advice, which is essentially the anolog for a sales pitch. NO ONE likes being told what to do or what to buy and when. But a lot of us like assistance in buying.

I have an emergency situation - wedding tomorrow - nothing to wear. Useless boyfriend turns up 50 minutes before the shops shut when he's promised to take me out and help me buy something. Have you any idea how much I would have appreciated a personal shopper to help me put an outfit together? I REALLY REALLY REALLY wanted someone to help me buy. But I definitely didn't want anyone to sell me. I did my own selling.

Forget the online world. Forget, even, the selling world. Listen to Philbert and notice your own reactions the next time your wife or friend or boyfriend try to "sell you on something". Whether it be a good piece of advice or something they want you to do or an outing they want to go on. Do you resist? If not, why not? Did they present a compelling case? Did they sell you on it or help you buy what they were saying?

Maybe we're just using language in different ways here. But I'm firmly of the belief that helping people buy works, and selling people doesn't. If my boyfriend really doesn't want to do something, then no amount of pressure or salesladyship on my part will work. If he has decided not to buy, then I can't pressure him into buying (by selling him on it) and I can't even help him buy, because he just doesn't want whatever it is today.

Jane

I for one appreciate the thoughts being shared here, and the time and energy that each one has dedicated to sharing, or at least trying to share their perceptions regarding hyperbole, emotions in selling, perceived danger zones, etc...

I have thought a lot about this (it is something I enjoy, and gives me a moment to relax perhaps after a long focused writing stretch on a particular copy project).

But I have a question or two that keep coming back as I perceive a kind of never ending circle here...

Before I ask the question, an observation...

This thread reminds me of an Indian parable regarding Truth:

Five blind men surround an elephant, and a sixth man (who can see) asks the five to describe the elephant,

1st blind man touches the elephant... well, it's a giant hose (the trunk)
2nd blind man touches the elephant... no, it's a thin cord! (the tail)
3rd blind man touches the elephant... no, it's a stong pillar! (the leg)
4th blind man touches the elephant... no, it's a wide fan! (the ear)
5th blind man touches the elephant... you're all wrong! It's a huge barn! (the body)

(makes you think of the creation of religion, doesn't it?)

Perhaps some here are more mercenary than others in their selling, and could care less about the individual buyers, but in all sincerity, I don't hear that at all here (at least in this thread and very rarely in others). Different selling approaches all over the place, yes, but not different intentions.

I've also heard almost unaminously, a respect for the different approaches, after all, we're all adults, and a starting point of understanding is first to accept the other.

This forum is focused on a specialized approach to selling, and invariable it mirrors Michel as he is the founder, and those of us that participate generally feel in tune with Michel's approach, or at least enjoy benefitting from the continual exploration of this kind of selling process, but lord knows, there are as many approaches here as there are participants...

Phil in all respect, what I don't understand is what are you selling here? You say you are hard selling us, I just honestly don't have a clue to what it is?

What would you like us to do? What's the deal? It's clear that you are not interested in selling products, just ideas, but what's in it for us, as your obviously targeted potential buyers of these ideas? Where's your proof?

Even if you soft sell, you have to have an order button - what am I getting on that order page when I click?

You've made your points (and I believe that most of us here hear them loud and clear), heck, I can only speak for myself, but I make a very conscious effort on every project to reflect on ways to benefit as many as I possibly can (client + buyers) for as long as possible... are you suggesting we stop honoring our own individual perceptions of how to approach selling for a better one?... To define an elephant as a "barn", instead of a "trunk"?

I mean, most of us are out there just doing it, for better or worse, taking our knocks and successes, doing the best we can and learning along the way... a profession that we enjoy, clients are approaching us, paying us, and the pressure is ON!

In your corner, I just hear philosophizing and endless debate, but going where? Show us proof, show us examples, BE an example!

Debating for the sake of debate is nothing more than mental masturbation, but showing the walk that really does benefit others is honorable (even when they are the first feeble attempts at walking...), before I become a purchaser of anything, ideas included, I need tangible proof.

Show me that your "barn" elephant will get me more happy buyers, and a happier client than my "trunk" elephant will, and you'll have a sold customer. Until then, we'll just have to agree to disagree and wish each other the best in each other's efforts... your ideas alone will not "sell" anyone.

My point was to illustrate that emotion is inherent to humans when they communicate. And much of corporate communication misses that crucial human touch.

I don't normally sell to aliens in another century, although if I live another 100 years, who knows.

But please keep your sarcasm to yourself in the future, for it gets in the way of furthering our understanding in these topics.

Pressure is used a lot in hypey sales letters. "You absolutely can't miss this once-in-a-lifetime opportunity! If you miss out now, how will you ever reach your goals of wealth and happiness?"

The offer that is built up with pressure largely exaggarates the...

- Results that this product will produce
- The rewards that this would ultimately get the prospect
- And the claims of what will happen when he wont buy

If there are no pressure tactics, then what is buyer resistance? You can't develop resistance if there's no force or pressure used. And it usually ends with prospects feeling misled or at least experiencing buyers remorse. It's not just a bad product but they also feel "set up". Maybe I should have called it subtle pressure, but it's pressure nonetheless.

I agree completely, and I think a sales pitch can be effectively designed to circumvent that. If you grab attention and follow up with a hook where you show a link between the goals & commitments the prospect already has (more wealth, more sales, more business, better looks, etc etc) and the results this product will achieve, the sale will start to make itself. You paint the picture that appeals to that particular product, you paint it as he likes to see it.

It seems more effective and less aggressive than persuading a prospect that he needs this product. Rather, show him that he already needs it. Like Eugene Schwartz says: If you think you're creating demand, you're dead wrong because demand is much too big to create. He says to tap into the power of needs already inside the client and put that force to your advantage in the sales process.

Basically my problem with "helping to buy" is that I interpreted it to be disregarding whether the prospect has a genuine use for it or not. However if it assists in adequately fulfilling an existing need, it's a different story.

Once you've qualified the prospect and pain the picture of value, you can certainly help him with all means to make the sale. It's when copy is devoid of that first part and full of the latter that I have a problem with it.

Erik,

You must have misread my post because there wasn't any sarcasm. It sounded as though you were expounding 1960's ideas, and it sounded as though humans were only a segment of the markets that you write for.

My apologies if I was misguided in coming to these conclusions. That's just how it sounded to me.

Jane

What a surprise it must have been to find out I'm actually a full-time human copywriter

Anyway beyond this misinterpretation I think our understandings are not that far separated. I chalk it up to speaking different languages about the same topic.

But apart from that, could you explain to me what your understanding is as to why people don't like to be sold? What aspect of it do you think bothers them most and what aspects of selling harder will eventually turn prospects off?

That seems a very core issue and I'm curious to your answer.

Erik.