Interesting post about long copy salesletters appearing as "scams."
Along with my answer...

http://nickusborne.typepad.com/blog/...subtle_ar.html

Any long sales letter that talks rubbish is a scam. In fact ... wont get read. I dont agree with Nick Usbornes comments at that link at all. They are biased and NOT from the viewpoint of a direct response copywriter.

All the greats soon discovered that the length of copy for a genuine product or service would increase response.

Lousi Engle wrote an outrageous piece of copy for stocks and bonds donkeys years ago.

It contained 6,540 words. At the time a monster ad. Did it work? Sure it pulled 10,000 coupons.

Francis X Houghton wrote an trust ad with 4,750 words and again it pulled. I myself have written letters or ads and web pages with what felt like zillions of words ... most pulled well.

Does long copy work. In the right instance... YES!

As someone who has an "active" sales letter site of over 7,000 words, I'd have to say long copy works incredibly well. That letter pulls well day in and day out.

In fact, I often find that longer copy on the Web often outperforms shorter, tighter copy because of the natural skepticism of online prospects -- they need those extra words to trust you and see you as a provider of the solution they want.

-John Reese

My uneducated guess is that the person who wrote the article has never written a successful ad in his life...and wants to see his name in lights.

And what's the easiest way to do that?

Appeal to all the "why not me's" out there...validating their frustration with their own lack of performance by saying....yeah...those guys that are actually out there DOING something are scams.

Sure are. Look at 'em sell their stuff. Gotta be dishonest. After all, *I'm* honest and I can't sell my way out of a paper bag.

Boy are smart to just sit here and TALK about business. Yessiree.

Wankers.

Nick is polarizing the quality of writing non-issue to generate enthusiasm from his supporters -- those who couldn't sell compassion to Jesus if their souls depended on it.

His camp has been licking their wounds in the shadow of their insecurities for months. They understand that the style of chit-chat copy many of them write, may be out of place on the Web.

Perhaps Nick can pull sales with "acceptable" form, but I doubt his supporters have the ability to accomplish the same results.

Nick is a smart cookie, though. Don't underestimate his marketing prowess. He knows the Internet is not the home ground of the elite. That's why I think his agenda is self-serving and promotional in nature.

It shouldn't come as any surprise to anyone when I say that the Internet is fast becoming the common man's marketing wet dream. It's the National Enquirer and a lap dance with the Viagra bonuses rolled into one. It represents an opportunity to turn your computer into a raging cash machine, "Quickly and easily". People are in Disney World on the Web and they're loving it.

The one true difficulty I have with Nick's assertion is that he's completely out of place to come onto a common man's turf and say who is good enough to stay and who isn't up to standards.

What actually disturbs me is that there seems to be an underlying message in his article and other writings.

The message is that different cultures are only welcome on his terms. Act like "us" and you can play, too. What happened to the democratization of information, I wonder?

Any attempt to homogenize the Internet environment isn't wise and I'm sure Nick knows this. His supporters -- his buyers, don't. They seem to think homogeny, ethics, and professionalism are one in the same.

It's an old song. One that Nick is capitalizing on as would any good marketer.

He does write well.


Peter Stone

It's a shame when people who should know better don't.

All anyone has to do is page through the history books of effective advertising to be reminded of the famous long copy ad by David Ogilvy for Rolls Royce "At 60 miles an hour the loudest noise in this new Rolls-Royce comes from the electric clock" or when Mercedes launched their campaign for Diesel cars (hence they needed to educate the public) they had an extremely successful long copy sales letter apporach.

I see things quite differently - in todays atmosphere off short attention spans and soundbite commercials... it's only the mature and stagnant indusrties (ones that aren't doing anything new) that can rely on these glitter techniques.

But when you seek to bring a product to market that's new, that uses different technology, etc... you must educate while you sell. and you can't do that with a talking sock, captain kirk or any other silly gimick.

In my lifetime I've spent about 5 million dollars (of my own money) on print advertising... and long copy always and I mean always outpulled short copy.

Guys like me and Armand as well as the respected contributors preceedeing me on this post, John Reese and Frank Kern use long copy
because when it's your own money thats on the line you go with what you know works. end of story.

seth would do himself some good by refamiliarizing himself with the works of Ogilvy, Lasker, etc...

some of the most costly words in business (as the previous dot-bombs showed) have always been "this time it's different" it's never different, what works... works. and advertising is no exception.

but the silver lining around this wourldn't-know-effective-advertising-if it bit-him-in the-you-know-what-cloud is this: as long as these guys think this way (anti-long copy) ... we, the men and women who know better will always have an advantage.

Rich

WELL said all, couldnt agree more!

The reply ...

http://nickusborne.typepad.com/blog/...ly_to_mic.html

Interesting: Have any of us ever seen any of Nicks copy? Now dont get me wrong, he has a mighty reputation and I think his debate is good but ... I wonder.

How does he measure his response rates? Let be brutally frank here. There is corporate pleasing copy. In other words, we want the top guy cause he's the top guy. We want a massive bill, cause, we pay massive bills. We want something that looks good for the board, cause the board has to be impressed. And the prospect ... the what ... dont be silly!

I write a sales letter. I get an email later on that tells me, Al ... your copy totally flunked it converted like an Arab to Shinto.

Or ... Al, your copy was awesome, I had 181 replies from my 2,000 mail-outs, thats $xyz.00, thanks bud!

In other words its always measured. Let ne honest. Writing for the likes of Visa. We all want that gig. Anyone can do it. Look at the support. Money. Cash. Gold. T.V. Radio and more bladdy, bladdy blah. In other words its all part of a monster machine. Does the local entreprenuer have that at hand?

No they rely on convincing, compelling, emotional copy that "convinces" the prospect to buy. Money back gaurantee is there for those that buy and hate it.

Nick if you read this board. I admire your voice, its healthy but let us see some sales copy you have done. Let us see some response rates. Let us see some facts.

Nick makes a good point about the fact that the copy needs to appeal to the audience, and different copy must meet different needs. Tony Blake made a great comment on this forum. Read it here: http://forum.successdoctor.com/viewtopic.php?t=57