It could equally be applied to any marketing discipline, and especially PR. The exception is direct response, where each ad is crafted or coded for a particular campaign and the response can easily be seen. I often wonder why so few of my clients in consumer markets don't got for direct response, at least from time to time. But perhaps the disappointment of getting few responses puts them off!
 |
| Pile it high, sell it cheap. Not a great idea for building sound business |
It's not a clear picture, even with direct response campaigns. Let's say you set up a new product specifically with the aim of selling it 'off the page' - to use old newspaper jargon. You know that all sales of that product will come from that single campaign, so you could argue that a poor response suggests the methodology is wrong. But that marketing were that simple.
In the first place, most sales are the result of product appeal. If you don't sell your product, it could be that the product itself isn't pressing the right consumer buttons. And in any case, the direct response may not be the only effect of your campaign.
Most clients would want to try an apparent discount deal to to prompt direct response (I say 'apparent' because, of course, because a deal can be made a bargain without the margin being hacked). Just because the product didn't sell doesn't mean the campaign wasn't effective. The consumer may have decided not to buy - for any number of reasons, many of which may have nothing to do with value for money - but the marketing will still have had some effect. Its core message, product aside, will have sunk in.
That's why I'd always advise against a 'pile it high, sell it cheap' campaign. Once you appear to be selling cheap, it becomes much harder to sell it dear. Far better to sell on the basis that it's not cheap but it's high quality, and that's why it's good value. That's a solid foundation from which you have flexibility to play around with the margin as circumstances dictate.
No comments:
Post a Comment