13
When Does Short Copy Beat Long Copy?
Entry Feed TrackbackI was talking to Pat Corpora the other day (he was president of Rodale Books for 15 years, head of AOL’s direct marketing for 3 and president of HCI Direct for 4-5 more) and he said something REALLY interesting about the long-standing long vs. short copy debate.
At Rodale longer copy outsold shorter copy on pretty much every test they ever did.
Year after year after year.
It didn’t even make too much difference if a better copywriter wrote the shorter promotion.
Famed copywriter Gary Bencivenga, who pioneered long copy direct mail, said it best, “The more you tell the more you sell.”
And so for the new generation of copywriters who heard these stories the assumption has been that long copy always out-pulls short copy.
Pat, after 15 years of tests, found the flaw in that assumption.
When he left Rodale to head up direct marketing at AOL he was sure he could beat the crap out of their control because it was a CD mailer with half a page of copy.
Working on the assumption that long copy out-pulls short copy he expanded the promotion.
Response went down.
They tested a different version. Response was still lower than the short copy control.
Test after test after test the short copy beat the long copy.
After 15 years of tests going the other way this was puzzling for Pat.
After a few years at AOL Pat went to HCI Direct which sold women’s hosiery on continuity he found the same thing.
HCI Direct had a short copy control. Pat hired some of the best copywriters in the business (names every insider would know) to beat the control.
Long copy failed again. And again and again.
Short copy out-pulled long copy at HCI just like it did at AOL
Finally, Pat figured it out.
Both AOL and HCI had clear, compelling offers. At AOL it was an offer to get FREE Internet Service for a month or more.
And at HCI Direct it was to try a FREE pair of pantyhose. A product their prospects were buying every month.
He reasoned that because both AOL & HCI were generating leads with a great, FREE offer the long copy interfered with a strong offer.
At Rodale and other companies the offer is FUNDAMENTALLY less attractive.
You still end up paying $30 for a book or $50-$100 for a newsletter so you need longer copy to make the sale. The more you tell the more you sell indeed.
After talking to Pat I realized I’ve seen this exact dynamic too.
Long copy – even fantastic long copy – can interfere with a powerful offer and depress response.
We were working with Dave Martin and Greg Marsden from SMART Marketing – real pros at Pay-Per-Click. I’ve sat back in awe as they drove traffic to produce 39,000 opt-ins a MONTH for a client!
Anyway, so when you have a squeeze page with a great offer the same thing happens — short copy out-pulls long copy.
Dave Martin came up with a short, short copy squeeze page that was converting at happy 20% over the longer copy page that was doing 7%.
Not bad, huh? So for every 100 folks who saw the squeeze page 20 opted in. (I’ve seen another short-copy squeeze-page converting at 80% but, sadly, don’t have permission to share it.)
MORAL OF THE STORY:
A good deal sells itself.
If you have a truly strong offer don’t let the salesman interfere with the sale.
No test result is absolute. What works in one market won’t necessarily work in another. What works for one offer, won’t necessarily work for another.
By the way, in 2005 Pat Corpora was named Direct Marketer of the Year by Target Marketing Magazine because of his work at HCI Direct. He’s easily one of the top tier direct marketers in the country.
So what do you think of the long vs. short copy debate? Do you have any results to share? Feel free if you do.
John
I’ve always been on the side of “whatever works” in the long vs. short copy debate. My experience over the years has been that short copy tends to (not always an absolute) win over long copy where the offer is very compelling *and* the product is pretty easy to understand.
Hence the results at AOL. The offer was always the hero of the mailing and the product (internet access) was fairly easy easy to understand, at least by the late ’90s.
I’ve seen, however, that longer copy tends to (not always an absolute, though) produce a somewhat better customer on the backend, which you’ll see in the form of higher take or lower writeoff percentages. It’s important to test, though, as you’ll sometimes see a slight depression in upfront response. It’s all in the P&L.
I’ve also known Pat for a bit via AOL and he is, as you say, one of the very best DR people out there.
Mark Pilipczuk at Feb 25, 08 at 8:38 am
Hi Mark,
I agree. I think it was Denny Hatch that pointed out a publisher ditching their longer copy direct mail control for a pre-printed postcard because the post-card out pulled the letter.
A year down the road they found the post card people didn’t renew their subscriptions so ROI from the direct mail letter was much better.
A great example of how not looking at all the numbers can cause serious mistakes.
I’ve always thought the long vs. short debate is a bit funny. Because as you say, it’s about what works.
Glad you stopped by, Mark.
-John
John Newtson at Feb 25, 08 at 12:03 pm
[...] Long copy is better than short copy. (JOHN: Except some cases, read this post on short vs. long copy to know the difference). [...]
Dick Benson’s 31 Direct Marketing Rules of Thumb : Explosive Direct Marketing at Jul 18, 08 at 11:26 am