The Federal Trade Commission has strict guidelines on the use of the word "free." If an offer requires a purchase, you cannot describe that bonus item as "free" ("free with purchase" is OK, as is "buy this, get that free"). They have similar strictures for the word "gift." See:

http://www.ftc.gov/bcp/guides/free.htm

In one day, I received three offers from different information vendors using the phrase "our holiday gift to you." Let's see if you see what I saw:

Offer #1 entitled me to offer my subscribers a report that normally goes for $24.95 free when my customers would make any purchase from their store.

Offer #2 told me, that as a subscriber, I'd receive a free report when I bought anything from their store between now and December 31.

Offer #3 said that he would let me offer his most popular report free to my subscribers on any condition I chose. He would set up a special download page at his site for the report at which my subscribers would be encouraged, but not required, to subscribe to his newsletter.

I wrote back to the guy making Offer #3 that he was a genius. The others I think are making unfair, immoral and unattractive (check the FTC regulations yourself on the legal issues) plays on the word "gift."

Watch your words, and don't be a scrooge. A gift should come with no strings attached!

Marcia Yudkin

Great point, Marcia.

There's a corollary. As a copywriter, I'm glad someone points this out because consumers and businesses are now so desensitized to the word "free." For example, "Buy my $9.95 ebook and get $1,045,875.98 worth of ebooks FREE!!!!"

Yuck.

And most of these are from third parties and usually free, too -- which is what the law constitutes as misleading. In other words, they are getting something free that's already free. "Buy this and get this free," implies that they are really getting something free -- a REAL gift. But if that "ebook" or whatever is free elsewhere, then it's free anyway. The price is zero. Thus, it's not a gift.

I've seen offers sell even better without any "free" stuff -- be they premiums, bonuses, gifts, etc. Why? Because too many "free" things added to the sale devalues the main product. Sure, Dan Kennedy says that people often buy the premiums, not the product. And I believe that.

But as a copywriter, when you build your pitch around the main product, you're unconsciously telling the reader, "Hey, I'm lying to ya, this is crap, buy this and get this much better free stuff!"

You get the picture.

The law also states that you can't beef up the price of the main product in order to offer something free as a premium. It's not really free, then. And I've seen this happen on the web. Or creating "fake prices" that never existed. There's a difference between retail value and estimated value. If it was never sold before, then it's really not free -- unless you plan on selling it later (according the URL Marcia pointed out).

Anmyway, GREAT point.

Marcia,

I received something remarkably similar with a subject line of "Your holiday gift from ..." and then the first thing you see in the email is "my gift to you is our ........ report" . So, being the diligent student that I am, I read on wondering what it was.

Imagine my annoyance when I found out that it wasn't a thank you gift at all, but an incentive to get me to buy something from their store, because the report was only free if you bought something.

I don't know what the law has to say on this matter (although if you interpret gift as something given freely and without obligation, then clearly this is not a gift), but I thought it was bloody cheeky!

And to connect that to what Michel is saying - it's as though they're trying to sell me the report, so I'll buy any old other thing just to get my hands on the report. Which seems like strange logic to me.

I also happen to agree that endless bonuses dilute the value of the main product, or they look like reasons to over-inflate the price. I have seen a few sites recently with what I consider to be far too many bonuses. Apart from the problems listed above, I find them confusing and overwhelming.

Most of them seem to come in the form of ebooks. I can't speak of anyone else's experience, but frankly I don't need any more ebooks unless they are very specifically regarding something I'm working on right now - I just don't have time to read them. In which case they represent no value to me, and I perceive that I'm paying for a whole bunch of junk that I don't even want.

Over and above this, are those people who "sell" what were already free ebooks as a bonus. I agree with you Michel - this is really naughty. I received your free ebook on Power Positioning as a bonus with a product, and I was pretty miffed when I discovered that all of the bonuses were viral ebooks. So, having inflated the price of the main offer, they are then giving me stuff that I could have downloaded for free anyways.

I'm glad to see that we finally agree on something. I am a little wary of marketing bonuses because I think there's something a bit tacky about it, but I'm sure it does work. The question is, is when is it good to offer stuff like this, and when is it not?

I like what you said, Marcia. Moreover, I like the way you stated your case.

So often, I see the words "moral, professional, ethical" used for social puffery.

Usually, I see them used as an arguement method with no regard for the standards they imply. They are used as a way of saying: "I am" (moral, professional, ethical) and "you're not", for the effect the use of the words so often have on people 1) Use of the word tends to position the user as moral, ethical, or professional and 2) -- that deer in the headlights look and 3) to verbally club or punish others, using shame out of hostility.

It's a triple whammy.

Your statement is pretty darned 'clean', though.

"If you buy 'this', I'll throw in 'that', FREE" appears acceptable, according to that which I've rendered in bold, below. Section "(h)" qualifies section "c".


(c) Disclosure of conditions. When making ``Free'' or similar offers all the terms, conditions and obligations upon which receipt and retention of the ``Free'' item are contingent should be set forth clearly and conspicuously at the outset of the offer so as to leave no reasonable probability that the terms of the offer might be misunderstood. Stated differently, all of the terms, conditions and obligations should appear in close conjunction with the offer of ``Free'' merchandise or service. For example, disclosure of the terms of the offer set forth in a footnote of an advertisement to which reference is made by an asterisk or other symbol placed next to the offer, is not regarded as making disclosure at the outset. However, mere notice of the existence of a ``Free'' offer on the main display panel of a label or package is not precluded provided that


Peter Stone

Addendum edited in: I do get your point

Viral marketing is an important tool. I think it's great to offer something for free and telling others to pass it around, or add it as a bonus to their offerings. But I do have a concern with that.

You see, I don't mind using some of them as bonuses. But my earlier point was referring to people who ONLY use free (or viral, in this case) ebooks as bonuses. Adding one or two among a few other items that are not usually free (or freely available) is good, in my opinion.

But here's the problem.

If people want to buy the main product just for the premiums, and if all the premiums are freely available, then that is misleading. Sure you can say, "We've done all the legwork and research for you, and found pertinent free ebooks and bundled them with this offer -- thus saving you time looking for them, going through them and isolating those books that are meaningful and pertinent and relevant and valuable, etc." But in this case, what's free is not the ebooks in question -- it's the time the marketer spent finding, reading and cherrypicking them for the client. The research is "free," not the ebooks. They're already free.

And that's an issue with copywriting, too, methinks.

Now, again, I truly believe that, if you're going to offer a freebie that's already free, it should be small relative to the other premiums that are truly free, and truly gifts. This is what I teach my clients to do: record a phone conversation with a client (with their permission) and throw it in as a bonus. (Jay Abraham does that all the time, for example.)

Or use a service like http://iDictate.com/ where you call this toll free number, speak for as long as you want, and they'll email you the transcript by email shortly thereafter. (The cost is a penny per word.) Or use software like Dragon Naturally Speaking or Microsoft's Dictation (with Office XP).

And there you have a bonus. Use it to offer tips, commentaries, discussions with clients, interviews and teleseminars. Either the recording or the Dictation. (For the latter three, I usually three-way my phone with the client and iDicate.com.)

Or offer a free teleconference. It's easy these days, especially with a service like Black and White at http://www.blackandwhitecom.com/ (include as a bonus a free "certificate," coded -- like a coupon -- so they can access this free teleconference). Or offer free consulting or Q&A's (brief ones) by email. But make sure to offer it in the form of coupons or certificates, for a couple of reasons.

1) If makes the freebie "tangible." Rather than saying, "you get two free 15-minute consultations" (or critiques, or Q&A's), you give them two coupons (or certificates), coded, saying, "redeem these coupons for a free critique." The bottom line, it adds perceived value. It also implies that the person's time is truly valuable and limited, and the coupons also add a sense of scarcity -- which increases desire, too.

2) It also quantifies the bonus (making people understand that the "free" is not free), which also prevents abuse. People who are simply told they get, say, 2 free consultations with a purchase, will do their best to suck one or two more out of you. Or make the consultation go longer. By offering it in the form of a coupon or certificate, it stops the "grinding away" process because it quantifies and limits the freebie. (Plus, it's a trade-off. You give me your coupon [or code number], and I'll give you [whatever the freebie implies].)

A lot of well-known Internet marketers, back in the "good ol' days," used to teach people to do that ... Find free ebooks elsewhere, ask permission to include it to your bundle, and voilà! And I think that's outdated.

The bottom line is, offer something of value of your own. It's really easy to do these days. (A dietician client of mine offers a set of 30 daily affirmation cards -- from a printable PDF file.) Or find a non-competiting product currently being sold on the Internet (not free), one which fits your target market but may not necessarily be related, and bundle it with your product. Raise the price of the bundle and then both you and the other partner you're JV'ing with can sell the bundle individually -- doubling your sales and marketing efforts. An example is a publisher, teaming up with a cookware manufacturer, bundling a cookware and recipe book combo.

Etc, etc, etc.

(By the way, if someone is offering my book -- currently being sold on its own website -- as a bonus, without my permission, that's illegal. I have caught a few fraudsters doing this, and even a few of them selling it on eBay. That's a HUGE problem these days. But some marketers are selling reprint rights to their books. If you bought reprint/resale rights, and the license gives you carte blanche, I think it's perfectly fine to offer it as a bonus or for free. The marketer has PAID for the rights, and it is being sold or has been sold before, and therefore it is really free. It is a gift from the marketer.)

It may be kind of depressing, but anyone who wants to be aware of how the FTC views the world might want to browse this link for guidance pertinent to their activities. The guide relating to testimonials and endorsements, and (if applicable) the guide concerning dietary supplements, would be important to many.

This particular guide concerning use of the word "free" has sat on the books unchanged since in was published in 1971. I am not sure how high a priority the agency is putting on this issue today in light of the many other things on its plate right now. The world has changed since Richard Nixon was in office, and it may be that consumers would be considered less vulnerable to the problems addressed by this guide in 2003.

Nonetheless, it is obviously better not to incur the wrath of a federal agency, especially when compliance is relatively easy through proper wording.

There are a couple of other selfish interests on the copywriter's part.

a. Although it is technically the client's problem if an ad or promotion that the FTC (or any other agency) considers deceptive is published, it would not be unheard-of for that client to turn around and drag the writer into the proceedings, claiming that the client had "relied on" the writer to stay within legal bounds.

b. If the client takes submitted copy and runs it past its own lawyer, and the lawyer sees what seem to be obvious FTC guide violations, the wording changes recommended by that lawyer are unlikely to be especially well-crafted from a copy and/or sales standpoint. They may turn good copy into copy that sucks, which will hurt response, which will make the writer look bad (and cost money on royalty deals). Better not to open up this avenue in the first place.

Dan Kennedy talks about something or another that Fran Tarkenton was selling in which sales took off when they started throwing in an autographed football. People really wanted the football more than anything.

Getting back to the FTC and why I said that reviewing the guides might be depressing, it seems as though that agency is populated by people who view all business as fitting the evil caricatures that are seen on television, and who seem suspicious of anyone actually making a profit on anything. But the agency is here to stay.

GLB

Yup. And that's the same premise used by Spam Crusaders (and part of the new spam law). I DETEST spam. But I hate overzealous anti-spammers as much as I do spammers. Because they look at any form of marketing as evil. (Ask my friend Paul Myers, who's one of the most vehement person against spam but regards the Spam Gestapo as worse!)

You offer a free ezine, people subscribe, they get their issues and a few lazy bums (sometimes competitors and zealots) would rather report you as spam instead of unsubscribing. Which can shut a business down in no time flat.

It happened to me. One of my articles was reprinted in an ezine that was spammed. Because my URL happened to be in the article, I was shutdown, too. When I approached the organization that reports and manages spam complaints, they said, "But it's still email marketing!!!"

Duh.

I'm afraid politics is surely at play here. It's so easy to score points by accusing someone in marketing of being sleazy, immoral, corrupt... (Marcia was not scoring points, but made a good point).

You can score points with your boss, your social group, constituants of any description.

I don't like the broad wording of some of the official's tools (laws). It allows them to kind of make them up as they go. Still, knowing something about human behavior, I sometimes wonder what's the greater evil - too much or too little regulation.

Explaining things to buyers is just too easy to do, not to do it. I don't think making conditions and qualifications crystal clear has to cut response. That is, as Geoff said, unless it's written in legalese.

The classic book on advertising by Claude Hopkins: "Scientific Advertising", fell into public domain some time ago and yet it's a "free bonus" on every third web site I visit. (Some exageration). Why not just say: "We found this must have book free in public domain and thought you might like to enjoy it with your purchase"? "It's one of the most profound, insightful..."

I can tell you that as an info-junkie, my eyes would glaze over and my hand would go for my wallet.

I do understand the temptation to throw crap at the buying public, but if you're really behind what you're doing, the energy carries through and you can accurately convey information without it ditching your sales.

I swear, I think so much of that little book I mentioned, I could tell you it's free all over the Web, then sell it to you in good concience - because I know of it's power - and all I would need to know is if you want an additional copy at $5.00 off, so you can give it to someone you care about for a holiday gift. It's an absolute powerhouse, packed with a pundits profound knowledge of the intricacies of a prospect's thinking and subsequent action during the consideration of a purchase. It allows the bearer of the book off-the-chart, maximum levels of influence... huh? Oh, sorry.

We don't have to lie. It's not a choice between telling lies or selling, not that that's the point.


Peter Stone

Continuing that thought, Peter, and what I often suggest is (as I said before), offer a book or round up a few of these books, and put emphasis of perceived value not just on the book but also on the research, review and effort that went into finding, reading, isolating and cherrypicking those products that are relevant to the sales process -- or on the fact that the person saves time, effort and money otherwise spent on finding these resources themselves.

But here's another suggestion: take a public domain product and add your own twist to it. Add your own commentaties, case studies, results, etc. Some people I know have added free sfotware, special reports and even republish the content with "sidenotes" or comments throughout. Or bundle it with your own content that complements or supports the "free" or public domain book.

Then, the bonus no longer has that "it's been around" or "available elsewhere" flavor. Look at it as "version 2" or "Mike's version" of that book. For viral books and books that are not public domain material but available for free, get permission to add your own stuff -- even re-branding it or re-packaging it. If it's viral, often the only condition is that the credit and links are left intact.

Here's an interesting product from my friend and copywriter David Garfinkel (and lawyer Bruce Safran):

http://members.audiogenerator.com/postcards/?1606398

I don't want to get into a political discussion about whether or not the FTC should be policing the use of words, but I do want to second Jane's point that presenting a very self-interested offer that costs money as a "gift" is (as Jane said) "bloody cheeky." It's really insulting to customers, not in the spirit of the season and not very smart, either.

Beyond that, it bothers me when people bend the meanings of words in deceptive ways (perhaps deceiving themselves, too, that if they call something a "gift" then it is one).

I'm very glad to see that the overwhelming feeling here among colleagues is against the feeling that "all's fair if you can get away with it."

Marcia Yudkin