« A Valuable Reward For Your Thoughts | Home | Like Handing A Monkey A Loaded Gun … »
Confessions Of The $5 Billion Dollar Man …
By Daniel Levis | November 30, 2007
Can You Tell A Break-Even Ad From A Blockbuster?
Ted Nicholas (pictured at left) is one the most successful and revered copywriters and information marketers alive today. His copy, and marketing brainstorms have been directly responsible for more than $5.7 BILLION in sales over the span of his 50 plus year career.
Ted’s remarkable copywriting skill allowed him to turn his first information product, a book called “How To Form Your Own Corporation Without a Lawyer for Under $50″ into one of the best selling business books of all time. He wrote literally hundreds of ads that appeared in national newspapers and magazines to sell the book… split tested dozens of different appeals… and scrupulously tabulated the results.
Since I’ll be interviewing Ted shortly, and digging deep into the story behind one of the most successful of these ads, I thought it would be fun to run a little quiz beforehand …
Below, you’ll find the headline and lead from two ads that Ted used to sell “How To Form Your Own Corporation Without a Lawyer for Under $50″. One of the ads broke even, and the other was a blockbuster money-spinner that made Ted millions. Can you guess the winner just by looking? If you can guess correctly, my assistant Sangeeta will send you a link to the mp3 recording of the live interview I’ll be doing with Ted this coming Thursday.
Are you ready? Go ahead and study the headline and lead from both ads. Then post a comment telling me which one you think was the blockbuster winner, and why. Keep in mind that results were tabulated across a wide variety of general interest business-oriented magazines and newspapers.
Only Way Left For
Little Guy To Get Rich…
Here is the uncensored message my wife
asked me not to write
“I love my wife. And I understand why she wants me to keep my mouth shut. She wants to protect me from the IRS.
But I can’t be quiet any longer. I’m angry. We are really getting jerked around. And I’m tired of it.
The government says one thing. And then does the opposite. Especially Bush. And I even voted for him. One of my biggest mistakes.
First the Feds talk tax cuts. Then they increase taxes. Remember the “read my lips” promise. Who are they kidding?
Average tax payers, you and me, are getting screwed.
The new law doesn’t bother the rich fat cats much. They still have loopholes galore. Let’s face it. They always will.
But recently I ran across a workable angle. It’s cheap. And it’s legal. It’s meant for the rich. But it’s perfect for us little guys. You don’t need any money. And we can get the same breaks the rich get.
I can hardly believe it. Get this. I formed a corporation. Of my own. For peanuts.
It’s my way of fighting back.
Now I have a small one man corporation. I operate out of my apartment. My work? I’m a commercial designer. Brochures, fliers– stuff like that. On my income I didn’t think I could save much. But I’m paying almost zero taxes. And it’s legit. Just like big business does it. I have no guilt. Uncle Sam already gets plenty. Too much from all of us.
One thing the feds didn’t bother much under the new tax laws–corporate tax goodies. Guess they figured right. Burden business too much. Result? No jobs for anybody. Including them. Not to worry. They know better.
From a buddy, I heard about this unusual book. It’s called HOW TO FORM YOUR OWN CORPORATION WITHOUT A LAWYER FOR UNDER $50, by Ted Nicholas. Damnedest book I’ve ever seen. Has the forms right in it. Pages are perforated. You just fill in some blanks, rip ‘em out, and mail them in. A couple of days later you’ve got a corporation. No wonder it’s a best seller. (They tell me over 650.000 copies have been sold.)
OK, so you get the gist of it. Homespun, buddy to buddy. The main appeal is tax savings. The dominant emotion is anger.
How do you think it stacked up against the one below? Same book, same offer. Totally different ad…
DANGER
All Your Personal Assets
Could Be Wiped Out Overnight
There is only one completely safe way to protect your car, home, cash, and other personal assets from business risks
It’s downright scary.
As a self employed individual, your home, car, stocks, and other personal assets are always at risk.
The big fear is that a business disaster, which is beyond anyone’s control, could happen to you. An accident, lawsuit, or financial loss… events which happen every day… could wipe you out.
A major problem is that we live in a ‘litigation-happy’ society. It’s often a dangerous and naive assumption to believe that no one will ever sue you. A law-suit could be filed by a customer, supplier, relative, or disgruntled employee. In fact, there is a strong probability you will be sued in the near future even if you are very careful. You could lose, often on some technical point of law with which you are unfamiliar. If so… boom! Just like that you could lose your business. In addition, your home, cars, cash, stocks, bonds, and other assets could also go down the drain without proper protection.
Fortunately, you personally can avoid this risk. How? Incorporation.
The only way to separate business from personal assets is by forming your own corporation. Almost no amount of insurance can protect you from all kinds of risk like incorporation can. And you can do so even if you’re the only employee. In this way, if the worst happens, you lose only what is invested in the business itself.
Incorporation is also important for the doctor, dentist, or other professional. Unfortunately, many are dissolving their professional corporations because of the new Keogh rules. However, many are unaware of the risks they are taking.
An incorporated physician does not avoid personal liability in conducting his profession, during surgery for example. But he/she does protect personal liability just like any other business person when it comes to debts incurred by the practice, non medically related lawsuit judgements, leases, investments which go sour etc.
But a word of caution. Misinformation about incorporation abounds. If any of your advisors have recommended you not incorporate or dissolve your corporation… whether you have employees or a one-person corporation… you’d be smart to consider the facts. Only then would you be in a position to make an informed decision.
Myth - Keoghs have been…
OK, that should give you the tone and flavor of this one. Here, the dominant emotion is fear. And the ad is selling protection.
Post a comment, and give me your answers to these three burning questions:
-
Which ad is the million dollar ad?
-
What’s your reasoning?
-
What specific copywriting, information marketing, and business related questions would you like me to ask Ted on Thursday, December 6th, at the teleseminar training. Anything goes.
Remember, pick the million dollar ad correctly (the winning ad will be identified on the call), and you get a FREE mp3 recording of the teleseminar. Click here now, and lock in your spot right away. This call will fill up fast. Ted is a legend. To post your opinion on which ad was the winner, and/or a question you’d like me to ask Ted on the call, click on “comments” right here on the very next line. Thanks!
Topics: Uncategorized | 262 Comments »
December 1st, 2007 at 1:49 pm
I believe that the SECOND ad was the million dollar ad.
Why? Because it created a pain for the consumer through the fear.
I don’t see people reading much further than the first few lines of the first article – it just doesn’t address the reader in the same way. People don’t care about you – they care about protecting themselves.
In this way, the second article does a much better way of addressing the reader, creating an urgency, demonstrating the gain, and differentiating its claims.
December 1st, 2007 at 2:45 pm
Although I personally would be more persuaded by the first ad, I would have to go against my own inclination and choose the second ad (”Danger) as the million dollar ad.
My years of experience as an investment salesman have taught me that most people are more persuaded by fear of loss than the desire to get rich quick.
I’d like you to ask Ted Nicholas what is the fast and most inexpensive way for someone to start from zero and get into the information business.
December 1st, 2007 at 3:13 pm
I was quickly bored with the second ad but the explosive word “Danger” probably is what made Mr. Nicholas his millions or, billions. Yet, my gut instinct told me the first ad was the winner!
December 1st, 2007 at 3:14 pm
I’m with Lou. There’s something initially compelling about the tone and personality of Ad #1, but it doesn’t really sell in the end. Ad #2 sets you up with a big dose of fear and then tells you it has the answer – a realistic answer – to the fear. You need that one-two punch of fear + answer to make a successful fear-based ad.
December 1st, 2007 at 3:20 pm
I’m gonna say the 1st ad was the winner. Here’s why…
Taking the ‘us vs. them’ approach is very powerful. When you can engage your prospect by identifying (and rallying against) a common enemy, it’s an instant rapport builder.
The subhead in the 1st piece also does a better job of pulling the reader into the body copy.
That’s the main purpose of a headline, right?
The whole “I’m-as-mad-as-hell-and-I’m-not’gonna-take-it-anymore-and-neither-should-you” approach works great here!
So, there ya go. There’s my two cents.
December 1st, 2007 at 3:21 pm
The second ad is the million dollar winner. Fear motivates far more than anger, plus my fear is more motivationg than your anger. Finally, the second ad quickly provides the antidote to my fear – incorporation. Simple, brilliant.
My question: When starting out building an information and public speaking business, is it better to focus on one medium of marketing done exceptionally well(eletter, blog, snail mail, etc.), or to put out messages via several methods at the same time, done reasonably well?
December 1st, 2007 at 3:21 pm
I also think that the second is the million dollar ad. I am not an expert, but I just recently watched a talk by Dr Cialdini at YouTube and he mentioned that people are more likely to act if there is a possibility of losing something than just for a profit motive.
December 1st, 2007 at 3:32 pm
First one. Tells a story, has intrigue. It’s personal and bonds with the reader.
The second one pitches too soon and fast.
December 1st, 2007 at 3:35 pm
Why guessing ?
Let’s see the test results.
I normally also work best with fear. Fear is a great motivator. Much more then winning something.
The personal tone of the first ad sounds more one guy talking to another.
and it describes how easy it is (just rip it off)
it talked about the costs (not so very much)
and delivered Facts (650.000) = proof
The first ad delivers the product, the second not.
You cannot buy something in Ad 2. Nothing. Or have your ever bougth incorporation ?
The second ad is more formal.
If I Had to risk my life I would make a test
but my believe is Nr. 1
ROberto
December 1st, 2007 at 3:43 pm
Thank you for the interesting challenge Daniel.
I choose the first ad.
The first ad appeals to a much broader audience — pretty much anyone who has ever paid taxes, in fact, can relate.
The second ad makes two assumptions about the reader: that the reader has a business, and that the reader has enough personal assets to be worried about.
December 1st, 2007 at 4:00 pm
I found the lead in #1 far more engaging… common enemy, plain language… But there’s a disconnect between the headline and the lead, and that threw me off a bit. The headline promises “get rich,” the lead promises ’save on taxes.’
I found the lead in #2 less engaging, but the headline got my adrenaline going a little.
I’m also going to guess that there are more readers of general interest business magazines who identify themselves as a “doctor, dentist, or other professional,” than there are readers who feel like “the little guy.”
All things consider, I’d have to vote for #2.
December 1st, 2007 at 4:00 pm
The second ad does the AIDA formula very well. It scares the hell out of them, builds it well and then lets the reader off the hook by giving them the answer to the dilema.
December 1st, 2007 at 4:06 pm
Definitely the second ad because it is based on “Fear” which is strong selling emotion. People don’t like to lose things and this ad shows how you can keep your hard earned possessions and safeguard them from Big Brother.
December 1st, 2007 at 4:11 pm
1. The “DANGER All Your Personal Assets Could Be Wiped Out Overnight” is the million dollar ad.
2. My experience is that pain is a greater motivator than pleasure – The pain of losing all your assets would normally outweigh the future possibility of getting rich. In addition, the first ad has undertones of unethical behavior even if it is directed towards the hated “Tax Man” while the second ad is business all the way
December 1st, 2007 at 4:19 pm
1st ad wins.
Headline includes reference to wife’s fear of IRS, increases reader’s empathy with the writer immediately. The writer lets the reader know a SECRET (he’s found a workable angle, cheap, legal, made for the rich but anyone can use).
Copy makes clear this is for ANY business.
The pitch for the book is no pressure, just a friend giving a tip. Combination of a friend sharing a secret about a broad target (any business) and no-pressure “referral” pitch will win.
The second ad has powerful emotion involved, too, but is targeted more narrowly. The only specific businesses mentioned are professions. Good ad but the narrower target would limit sales compared to the 1st ad.
December 1st, 2007 at 4:20 pm
I choose the 1st ad. It relates to the person individually, and creates a sympathetic bond. It sound less formal, and more like your neighbor giving you some advice. It slides in the sales pitch while seeming to just be agreeing with your problems.
December 1st, 2007 at 4:20 pm
I believe the second ad is the one that earned him millions. It is emergent — fear of overwhelming loss is more motivating than Mr. Taxman.
December 1st, 2007 at 4:26 pm
The second dds is the winner beacuse it’s very powerful. It uses YOU, putting the focus on the reader and is arousing in him FEAR,a very primitive emotion, fear to loose everything, not only the bussiness but whatever he has.
December 1st, 2007 at 4:28 pm
The second dds is the winner beacuse it’s very powerful. It uses YOU, putting the focus on the reader and is arousing in him FEAR,a very primitive emotion, fear to loose everything, not only the bussiness but whatever he has.
Question for Ted: How can I apply all these principles for the selling of courses.
Thanks
December 1st, 2007 at 4:40 pm
Hi Daniel,
I think the 2nd ad is the winner.Because it follows the principles you discussed on the Wed. teleseminar.
Using fear as motivation is, I agree very powerful.Thanks
December 1st, 2007 at 4:52 pm
Hi Daniel
Traditional DM says fear should be the bigger seller but on the other hand, telling a story, engaging the reader, identifying a common enemy are strong too. I can see why Ted wrote both.
So, the crunch, decision time – my hunch is No. 1.
December 1st, 2007 at 4:58 pm
Ad #2
People are more moved by fear.
December 1st, 2007 at 5:01 pm
I believe the second ad is the winner. The entire ad is focused on me, the reader and what can happen to me if I don’t incorporate. It also focuses on specifics.
The second ad is written from the perspective of what happened to the writer. The points are vague and general.
December 1st, 2007 at 5:05 pm
Number one’s personality is like an unhappy partner yakking at you assuming you are hard of hearing and mentally incapable of understanding. The tone is like someone admonishing you for something you did wrong and they are pounding you over the head to make you charge your ways. Too forceful, too ugly of a tone.
Number two: The word Danger immediately alerts one to be cautious and alert. Fear comes when that danger enters your door posing the potential of persoanl loss. Using the pronoun You stresses the information is directed to the individual reading the ad; therefore, it becomes a personal message to very individual. Number two personality is passionate, but it is easier to digest when reading and is informative and more palatable than the pressure one.
December 1st, 2007 at 5:06 pm
Dear Daniel,
I firmly believe that the second ad was the winner.
Here is my main reason: the second ad’s headline is based on the psychology of losing what we already own. And usually, people will go to great length in order to protect what they already have.
Second: the second ad’s lead is more direct. It immediately selects the audience, “the self employed”. Again, this tells self employed people to keep reading.
Also in general, this ad sounds like the patent medicine ad in its structure: Symptom then cure.
The symptoms: business disaster, lawsuits,litigation-happy society
Actually, it uses a huge dose of fear, in order to get the reader to seek a solution…and the solution is “incorporations”
And finally, this ad also gives valuable bits of information (ex: about Keogh) and it enlarges the market by naming doctors etc.
So we have a fear based ad, and enlarged market, with an advertorial slant…
The winner is ad #2.
Sincerely,
Swans G Paul
P.S: If I win, then can you also send me a copy of the winning ad? Merci d’avance. A la prochaine.
December 1st, 2007 at 5:07 pm
Hey Daniel
Both ads are great,but the first ad is the blockbuster ad.this ad is based on fear and anger,It plays to our basic human nature,and that is to take back control our own lives,instead of letting the government control every aspect of our lives.This ad also has a call to action,where you can buy the book and get the papers to incorporate your business.
Question:How do you think web 2.0 is going to affect
information marketing,and is it going to kill long sales copy etc.
December 1st, 2007 at 5:15 pm
Daniel,
“Danger” more successful.
Great challenge! Adds that element of fun.
I will stay with my first instinct and say that the
“Danger” ad was more successful because it played to the emotion of fear of loss. But I did feel more personally compelled to buy from the bud-to-bud approach used in the first ad.
Tough one. I look forward to the answer.
December 1st, 2007 at 5:23 pm
The second ad was the blockbuster ad for Ted Nicholas because people are far more scared of losing something than from gaining something. The first ad merely addressed the possible gains, while the second ad confronted all the fears of a typical business owner, that of losing everything that they had worked hard to get; their home, car stocks and bonds, and the kitchen sink, while offering a solution to their specific problem that wakes them up at 3 in the morning.
My question to Ted- What is the best headline to use for a report on retirement mistakes that people make? I am in the securities business which is highly regulated and I am seeking a lead generation ad to attract prospects.
December 1st, 2007 at 5:39 pm
2nd one is the winner (fear and urgency. Problem agitate and solve formula). First is boring.
I listen to tons of Ted Nicholas and read his books, I’m waiting to read his new book (soon to be released). I have no questions at this time for Ted, except that I wish all his books were in unabridged audio format.
thanks,
Phil
December 1st, 2007 at 5:57 pm
Ad #2 Won.
1. The headline in the first ad does not match the copy.
2. The first ad does not mention “you” or “your,” while the second ad does; notice what a difference it makes in the headline and lead. WIIFM.
3. Fear is a bigger motivator than anger.
December 1st, 2007 at 6:02 pm
I believe ad#2 is the winner becauuse of the fear of loss involved.
However, I believe in 2007,with a much more copy-numbed,educated comsumer,that the b.s. meter might go off after reading the headline alone.
December 1st, 2007 at 6:12 pm
I’m rooting for ad #1. Why? It’s positioned as a David vs. Goliath story. You know, the small guy vs. big government. The story is riveting and pulls you in. Very conversational. And appeals to a strong emotion – ANGER.
Ask Ted, “What are the proven online strategies he uses to create excitement/buzz for a new book or info product that he’s about to release?”
“What was his biggest copywriting or marketing mistake and what did he learn from it?”
“If he could do it all over again… which copywriters would he feverishly study to accelerate his learning curve?”
December 1st, 2007 at 6:15 pm
The second ad is far stronger. Fear is a bette motivator; the headline of the first ad is not as strong and is an implausible promise. In addition, I suspect the second ad is stronger becauase I saw it many times, suggesting that it outpulled the first and became a control.
December 1st, 2007 at 6:17 pm
The second ad is the clear winner. It creates fear and provides a solution. It is aimed at those with assets to protect and provides a tool to protect them. It anticipates objections and answers them.
The first ad promises a path to wealth and then fails to deliver. It targets the wrong audience–those who have yet to build substantial assets.
Robert
December 1st, 2007 at 6:29 pm
I have to go with #2 – Fear of loss and the fact that a lawsuit can happen to anyone for any reason is highly motivating.
Additionally, I think most people don’t believe they can “get rich.” They’d like to, but they just don’t really believe it possible for them.
December 1st, 2007 at 6:34 pm
I am going for ad No. 2.
Because “fear” is a great motivator.
The ad is also aimed at a specifically stated audience, the self-employed.
For Ad No. 1 the headline doesn’t match the expectation. If you don’t earn much then no matter how tax efficiently you live it’s not going to make you rich.
December 1st, 2007 at 6:35 pm
It’s the first one.
The tone of the salesletter is much more personal, and it uses emotional hot buttons to pull people in.
The second one reads like a used car salesman.
Question: What one book would you recommend to anyone starting out writing ad copy?
December 1st, 2007 at 6:36 pm
I approached it this way: I gave each ad only a few seconds of my attention. The 2nd one called out for me to stay with it & find out how the problem could be resolved; how the fear could be alleviated. I didn’t think it through. I just went with my gut response.
December 1st, 2007 at 6:44 pm
I’ll pick #2. Fear and urgency–a powerful one-two punch. The first one sounded like something I could get around to…later (which never happens).
December 1st, 2007 at 6:59 pm
Daniel,
It’s a tough one.
I am going to have to say the first one,
Gary Bensivenga says that the two most important words in Dmr is YEAH SURE
The danger ad has been seen so many times that people will ignore it ..maybe still i don’t know…
The wording in 1 was at a grade four level and in 2 you needed to almost graduate from Wharton to understand some words.
So 1 it is! Maybe
Willy
December 1st, 2007 at 7:07 pm
The second ad is far stronger. Fear is a bette motivator; the headline of the first ad is not as strong and is an implausible, indeed false, promise. In addition, I know the second ad is stronger becauase I saw it many times, suggesting that it outpulled the first— and other tries—- and became a control.
December 1st, 2007 at 8:02 pm
I believe the 2nd ad is the big winner, although the tax breaks implied in the first ad had more pull for me personally. In fact I ordered the book from Amazon already! But our culture seems to be getting more and more fear-based.
December 1st, 2007 at 8:09 pm
The second of the two ads I believe is the more effective.
Why? Simply because at our most basic level, we revert to primal responses and whenever we see or sense danger, we react to protect ourselves accordingly.
This ad alerts one to Danger with the first word, and then addresses how to resolve teh fear.
December 1st, 2007 at 8:22 pm
To my mind, the second is the big money ad.
The reason is that fear is a strong motivator and drives people to take action, particularly when you offer a decent solution.
At the same time, the first ad, if shown to the right audience was likely a great authority-building and therefore list-building ad. It has a strong element of identifying the enemy in it and would tend to create powerful rapport with the reader.
December 1st, 2007 at 8:22 pm
Well, it’s the 1st one. It’s personal, written in simple language, and disguised as someone else’s opinion (not a salesletter).
The question for the teleconference.. Well, are there any ways of fast and cheap (preferably free) product idea testing with the target audience? Is it a good idea to try few product tests simultaneously, to pick the winner?
December 1st, 2007 at 8:42 pm
My vote goes with the first ad. Most people don’t have enough assets to worry about losing them. On the other hand, people are always looking for a way of getting rich.. it’s like Joe Karbo’s million dollar headline “Lazy Man’s Way of Getting Rich”
December 1st, 2007 at 8:42 pm
Ad 2
Fear is the stronger emotive force and call to action
Question: What process do you go through in writing your Headlines?
December 1st, 2007 at 8:50 pm
I guess the second ad was the one that generated a million dollars in orders. The first ad was too much ‘all about me’ and the tax advantages were still unclear (you have a personal and busienss income). And fear is a much greater motivator than greed.
The first got to presenting of the solution a lot sooner. That’s OK but any sales letter will present the solution to the problem expressed in the lead.
Also the headline was about a way to get rich and the promise was not fulfilled in the body copy.
About copywriting in general:
What would be a good way to test whether there is indeed a market for your product?
Is AdWords a good place to start, provided your ad gets sufficient response?
December 1st, 2007 at 10:15 pm
The second Ad was the winner. Fear is an emtion we all can relate to and fear of loss is even greater.
December 1st, 2007 at 10:39 pm
Hi Daniel,
It’s tough to say as both ads as compelling in their own unique way.
I’m going to go with the second ad as I think the fear of loss makes for a much stronger headline.
Please tell Mr. Nicholas that Kevin Koop say’s, “hi.” He won’t remember me, but I had the pleasure to study from him in London at Yanik Silver’s “Underground UK” event a while back and it was a great pleasure to get to meet both he and his son.
Best wishes,
Kevin
December 1st, 2007 at 11:03 pm
I’d have to say the second ad is the million dollar ad because I also think fear of loss is a bigger motivator than anger.
December 1st, 2007 at 11:06 pm
As much as I dislike fear-based marketing, I think #2 is the blocbuster.
#2 sells to emotion.
December 1st, 2007 at 11:10 pm
The choice is yours! You can either continue doing the same thing and get the same disastrous results you’ve gotten before . . . or you can make a change now and put yourself in a position to get rich . . . before you lose everything you’ve ever worked for. #2.
December 1st, 2007 at 11:23 pm
Hi Daniel,
Seeing all the answers here, there is something that sticks in my mind more than anything. The toughest market to sell is protection. Ask any burglary alarm company. Fear of loss is good but not a killer by itself. One of the single biggest success copy by Gary Bencivenga was one that had simply LIES! LIES! LIES! about big government for a financial product. By getting the audience to bond with him against the evil government, he made a killer control. Also stories sell. The more people can identify with you, the more they buy. The most successful ad for the Wall Street Journal was the story of two men. Not a fear, a loss or what you’re missing directly. Stories sell. Look at the comments here where people said they were drawn in by the story but felt the fear of loss was a bigger draw. The clues are there…
For those reasons and others, I pick ad #1 for the killer. I’ve read Dr. Cialdini’s book and as much as fear of loss is compelling, it’s not a prime motivator. However people love stories of personal interest they can identify with. Those evil fat cats are probably already incorporated. A big clue as well is while many rich fat cats are rich, many still view themselves as on the hunt for every advantage. The hint here is a loophole that can get back at the IRS would have many of them drooling already.
Also think about this. While many successful people are already rich, they are always looking for another source of income, savings on what they already have, then throw in a chance to spit in the face of evil big government, how can you miss?
Question: What are some good tools for narrowing in on the hook that really draws your target audience into the copy? Short or long headlines?
Thanks for the great copy! and opportunity!
Take Care!
David
December 1st, 2007 at 11:36 pm
I believe #1 was the best seller because it tells you you can legally stop paying taxes and get something of value for next to nothing…a corporation! All you have to do is a few simple things and bingo!… you’re finally sticking it to them instead of the other way around as usual. Very broad appeal to those of us who hate giving over half our paychecks, vacation pays, bonuses and savings to a spendthrift government because they say so every year!!
My question would be: When starting out as a copywriter, is it best to focus on one thing such as catalogs? Or brochures? And should one attempt to break into the business as a freelancer without any previous experience or clientele? If yes (which is the answer I’m looking for), what steps would you take to get off the ground with your first client?
December 2nd, 2007 at 12:01 am
Ad # 2 wins.
Pain trumps gain. Period.
December 2nd, 2007 at 12:11 am
What’s the winning ad?
I think the winning ad is Only Way Left For
Little Guy To Get Rich…
My reasoning?
The rich are already paying no taxes, whereas the middle class and below are paying taxes and are MAD that the rich pay none.
Many rich people must’ve already thought and prepare for asset protection, which was the selling point of the second ad.
Questions I have for Ted.
None at this time.
However would love to get the MP3 file.
December 2nd, 2007 at 12:15 am
My vote is for the subtle persuasion in Ad#1, though I have taken note of the effort made by you to make the choice difficult through juxtaposing an equally compelling Ad which works on the Fear factor.I am surprised no one has commented on the perennial debate of long versus short copy which is very evident here!.The shorter Ad achieves the end objective admirably, while the longer one labors through a systematically constructed architecture of fear and Catharsis .
My question for the Guest is “Does the SocialNetworking phenomenon pose a genuine threat to the conventional Internet Marketing system?”
December 2nd, 2007 at 12:37 am
Hi Guys ,thanks for all your great input. From reading the posts, I just wanted to make one thing clear.
What you are seeing is just the headline and opening of the ads (about a third of the full page space ad). So keep that in mind.
December 2nd, 2007 at 1:14 am
Hi Daniel,
Both are great ads employing the fear factor.
My vote is for number one….It has all the ongredients using the underdog….everybody goes for the underdog…the day to day people, like you and me who somehow manage to get an edge…
the ads almost grabs you by the hand and tells you you must buy that book,,,gosh, I almost did..
about the question….the eternal how to get people to trust you with a project right off the bat…at the very beginning…
Its easy to get customers after you when you are
responsible for billions of sales but how do you manage to get going when nobody knows you?
tks again.
December 2nd, 2007 at 1:36 am
I think the 2nd ad is the million dollar ad. I believe the fear factor will come out on top. It also does not risk alienating anyone with political opinion.
Thanks.
December 2nd, 2007 at 2:06 am
The 2nd ad, hands down.
To connect with the first ad, you have to see yourself as a “little guy” trying to get some of what the big boys have. While I may fit into that category, technically, being asked to identify myself in that way is a total turn-off.
The second headline, on the other hand, grabs me by the throat and drags me into the ad.
December 2nd, 2007 at 2:34 am
Ad #2 was the Blockbuster. It has all the essential elements of a powerful headline and a powerful lead.It addresses the core emotions of the prospect and speaks directly to him/her. The lead develops the urgency that hooks the reader early on, which gets right to the point, while speaking as an equal.
Questions for Ted Nicholas, how long did it take him to complete this promotion.
December 2nd, 2007 at 3:29 am
Ad # 2 had to be the winner.
Avoidance of pain motivates much more than the possibility of gain.
December 2nd, 2007 at 3:37 am
Having read 62 comments before, ist seems that almost all of them find it a tough decision, although one is a million $ ad. I humbly must say, I agree. In spite of all the teaching available that enables us to write decent copy, great copy obviously is not written just with gut feeling. It takes a master to make the difference between good and great copy.
I personally vote for #1 (greater target market and very compelling, cf. the comments where people vote for #2 conceding that they personally preferred the other one!)
My question: Which one did he write first? Had he the blockbuster ad already running when writing the second or did he try a new angle and found himself rewarded with a super-winner? What was HIS gut feeling, was he SURE had just written a blockbuster ad?
December 2nd, 2007 at 3:59 am
Hi Daniel,
The first ad was/is the big seller
It aspirational and appeals to me being able to take steps to get started. I am in fact that person!
The second one is of a type so often seen in internet advertising – it tries to scare you half to death then offers a solution. Whether it’s true or not I believe the tone is negative.
I’d like to ask Ted about how Ad copy and culture work together with American copy and UK audiences.
December 2nd, 2007 at 6:25 am
1st ad. Only because it kept my interest, ad 2 bored me,
December 2nd, 2007 at 7:20 am
I believe the first add was the winner. Only because the second add cuts out a large part of it’s potential audience. It is attractive only to self employed individuals. The first add is attractive to anyone.
Can you ask Ted how i can get a copy of his book.
I’m sold!
December 2nd, 2007 at 7:53 am
Hi Daniel,
I must confess that ad #2’s headline grabbed me a little more. The word DANGER, in capitals, creates a sense of urgency. However, I’m going to cast my lot with ad #1 for the following reasons:
A. The Headline
1. Conveys exclusivity/uniqueness
–”Only way left”
2. Connects with a greater % of readers vs
that of ad #2.
–”Little Guy”
3. Establishes highly desired benefit.
–”To Get Rich…”
*Ad #2 plays on the fear of loss, which fits
a minority of readers. You’ve got to have
something to lose in order for that fear to
kick in. The use of, “personal assets”
doesn’t register emotionally with the
majority as it tends to be lingo reserved
for the wealthy.
4. Creates a strong sense of curiosity.
One immediately desires to read further. The
yet unread message has now been embued with
an aura of secretiveness, only to be
whispered.
–”Here is the uncensored message my wife
asked me not to write”
B. The Body
1. The writer is a hero.
Our disclosing friend has thrown caution to
the wind for our sake! He fights the good
fight. He is honorable and fearless.
–”But I can’t be quiet any longer”
2. Personal Connection.
The writer takes the position of a friend
who shares in one’s anger (usage of “we”).
This follows logically from the headline’s,
“Little Guy”. We discover that we’re in this
together. We are our hero’s motivation. He
isn’t only a hero, but OUR hero. He leads
our fight.
–”WE are really getting jerked around”;
–”Average tax payers, YOU AND ME, are
getting screwed”
–”Too much from ALL OF US”
–”it’s perfect for US little guys”
3. The us against them stance.
No one is looking out for us, “little guys”.
The government can’t be trusted, and the
rich take care of themselves only. They
have their cake and are eating it too. We
are all alone and must look out for
ourselves.
–”The government says one thing. And then
does the opposite.”
–”The new law doesn’t bother the rich fat
cats much. They still have loopholes
galore. Let’s face it. They always will.”
4. An ironic solution.
We can turn the tables on the powers that be,
who conspired to do us in. We can use that
very same strategy for our benefit! Our hero
wrestled with the enemy, grabbed their gun,
and is prepared to defend us with it.
–”But recently I ran across a workable
angle…It’s meant for the rich. But
it’s perfect for us little guys…And we
can get the same breaks the rich get.”
5. Inexpensive
Settles the big question mark.
–”It’s cheap.”
–”You don’t need any money.”
6. Not against the law
No funny stuff going on here. Above board.
–”It’s legal.”
–”And it’s legit.”
7. It’s simple
We don’t need a degree in advanced physics to
make this work. It’s cut and dried.
–”Now I have a small one man corporation. I
operate out of my apartment.”
–”Damnedest book I’ve ever seen. Has the
forms right in it. Pages are perforated.
You just fill in some blanks, rip ‘em out,
and mail them in. A couple of days later
you’ve got a corporation.”
8. Authoritative
It’s got a proven track record.
–”(They tell me over 650.000 copies have
been sold.)
9. It’s Popular
–”No wonder it’s a best seller”
I’m sure there’s more that I haven’t spotted. Those are the gleanings of a quick perusal.
Question for Ted:
“How do you get ‘in character’ before proceeding with the copy?”
December 2nd, 2007 at 7:55 am
I believe AD #1 was the winner.
Reasons:
1) The headline is capable of stirring enough curiosity in the reader.
2) The mention of IRS and BUSH (though I have nothing against him personally) makes the reader feel identified with. Like it or not, there are lots of emotions when the above two words are mentioned.
3) Its personal. The tone used speaks to the layman. It has an appeal to the layman (the author used the term “little guys”) who would be glad to get sound advice for a very decent price. The book is really aimed at the layman, the little guys and they form the masses, not the rich.
4) The author assures the reader that the solution is an easy one. By doing so, he removed one mental barrier.
5) The testimony “They told me 650,000 copies have been sold.” at the end does have an appeal. Its a hook of assurance for the potential buyer.
Good ad.
December 2nd, 2007 at 8:23 am
I think it depends on the audience. Who was this ad aimed at?
My guess is, if it was sent out to a list of non-incorporated business owners, the second ad would pull well.
So, I’ll go with #2.
And my reasoning is that people will do more to avoid losing what they have than they’ll do to make money.
Also, I agree with a previous poster that said the headline of the first ad doesn’t really fit the body copy.
(and the notion of saving money – “zero taxes” – is hidden away … and not backed up very well in the excerpt we were shown).
Steve
December 2nd, 2007 at 8:24 am
Hello Daniel,
Great challenge!
I’ll go with my gut instinct, which is the 1st ad. It has great appeal, is clear, and it manages to sell me in record time.
The 2nd has fear, yes. But it seems to go on and on, and in the end I wonder what I’m supposed to do.
Question for Daniel might relate to web 2.0 sales – does it change / add to / challenge copywriting for sales. Does he use it, and if so, how?
thanks again,
Wim Franken
December 2nd, 2007 at 8:27 am
I choose the first — for the little guy vs. the establishment. The 2nd is too over the top. Great challenge!
December 2nd, 2007 at 8:27 am
Hmmm, tough choice. Normally pain outpulls pleasure…but in this case, the pain copy is stodgy and clumsy while the wife copy just sings. Plus the first one has all those sweet little elements of mystery: “uncensored”, “didn’t want you to tell me.”
I know, I’m not my audience–but I tend in general to respond more to positive than negative messages anyway.
So I’m going to go against “common sense” and vote for #1.
December 2nd, 2007 at 8:36 am
Hi Daniel,
I have seen Ted live in Australia -Twice now and I can tell you he is pure joy to listen to,I have danced with him in the audience,Yes he gets you dancing…. I love him he is great!!! So,Big Hugs & hello to you Ted!!
Copy #2 is my pick!
The first one is the enemy in common but it has a whiney tone, I feel struggle , underdog and just some friendly advice.
When i read the second one I feel a pull and an urge to act! The second one I feel is written for a person who is willing to take some responsiblity, Danger gets your attention and also gets the blood pumping!!
I have similar questions to lou ,David and others Thank You
December 2nd, 2007 at 9:05 am
I believe ad #1 is the million dollar ad. It immediately draws the reader in and gets on his side with a compelling “us vs. them” narrative that builds and keeps interest.
Ad two is too narrowly focused on the self-employed, and is filled with ideas many would find confusing and uninteresting.
December 2nd, 2007 at 9:07 am
Ad #2…definitely!
The only way I can see #1 winning is that it went to a collection of general distribution sources so the “I’m like you” tone may appeal to someone reading a knitting magazine or something. But while it started strong, it quickly fizzled out with very little closing copy.
Ad #2 compells a business owner to quickly do what they can to avoid the pain and suffering of trying to figure out how they’re gonna come up with a PB&J sandwich for the kids after the home, car, and savings are gone.
Thank God I’m incorporated!
December 2nd, 2007 at 11:05 am
The answer is #2 !
Statistically , people will not act unless they are to avoid “pain” .
#1 is great , BUT , they have to do something … work for it . Therefore , NOT A PRIORITY .
#2 is an “Oh S**T” response , a reaction is necessary to avoid “pain” , & therefore is the definite winner !
December 2nd, 2007 at 11:48 am
I believe the first ad was the bigger seller. It appeals to everyone who thinks he’s too small to gain the tax breaks of the upper 1%, and that’s nearly everyone in America. The second ad would appeal to people who are already incorporated, which is a smaller group–though this group may more readily buy. The first ad also tells how easy it is to use the information, just fill in the pages and tear out on the performations–excellent! However, I want to point out a typo in the first ad–near the end it says “I have no quilt. Uncle Sam already gets plenty. Too much from all of us.” That should be guilt (with a G), not quilt (with a Q).
Joan
December 2nd, 2007 at 11:59 am
It will be #2
This is because the pain of loss always seems to do better than the desire for gain. And the second ad painted a vivid picture of loss.
December 2nd, 2007 at 12:16 pm
I’m going with #1.
Had to stop and read the no quilt comment twice myself and felt the typo added to the folksiness.
#2 didn’t reach me emotionally. The use of fear set up a barrier and lost my trust.
December 2nd, 2007 at 12:26 pm
#2 for sure.
From #1, you can see in the last para, that there is some sort of selling involved. And people definitely do not want to be sold something, instead, be given a “solution”. So for the smart ones, they probably closed the page after reading the last para in #1 or more.
From #2, the headlines are not that compelling but the more one reads, the more one gets pulled in. The paragraph, “Fortunately, you personally can avoid this risk. How? Incorporation.” , is sort of a pyschological tactic, to emphasise simply the solution to your problems.
No offense to the great Ted, but I’ve honestly seen better sales pitches than the 2 shown here so Im really interested to know which one actually made the million break..
December 2nd, 2007 at 12:39 pm
While I felt a greater curiosity response from the first headline, I’ll pick #2 as the winner.
Fear of losing what you have is a greater motivator than gaining something you don’t yet have. And fear of lawsuits is a big one!
Also, #2 painted a clearer problem/solution picture, even though it’s style was less conversational and not as engaging.
December 2nd, 2007 at 1:07 pm
Dan & Ted:
I’m betting the first ad was the one that made alot more than the second. The heading and sub-head were more casual, personal even conversational.
I felt this may have induced more people to buy as it gave one a sense of a friend helping them out instead of a stranger trying to sell them.
If I’m wrong, so be it. That’s why I’m NOT the copywriting guru and you gentlemen are, right?
December 2nd, 2007 at 2:32 pm
The second ad is the winner. Fear is a very powerful emotion to use in your copy and it was well done here. It got my attention instantly.
December 2nd, 2007 at 3:02 pm
#2 Because it is speaking to me(the reader) instead talking about what I’m(the ad writer or the seller)thinking or doing.
December 2nd, 2007 at 3:12 pm
I think No 1 was the Blockbuster.
More Identification, “Take-you-by-the-hand-and-let- you-in-on-a-secret, my buddy” – Style. More genuine, more credible.
No 2 was a little blunt in creating fear of loss, like a headline from a tabloid. Builds more scepticism.
But – I might be wrong, some people are easily triggered by fear.
My biggest question would be about so called “Soft-topic-copywriting” (heard that somewhere).
How do I make people buy effectively without pushing too hard, too obviously (using fear, scarcity etc.), when it comes to subjects like health, babies/children etc. What triggers/strategies do I use?
December 2nd, 2007 at 3:53 pm
The first ad is the block buster ad. It appeals on a personal level where most people are feeling and thinking the same thing………… in anger!
December 2nd, 2007 at 4:05 pm
I would have to say the first ad, as it appeals to
the regular guy trying to get ahead. It also speaks
in a tone of a good friend giving advice.
Question. How many headlines do you test at a time?
December 2nd, 2007 at 4:28 pm
My opinion is more weighted on the headlines rather than the content of each, since the headline is what determines whether I will go further in reading the content.
The first headline is making a pitch for an offer promising information on the ‘only way left’ for ‘the little guy’ to gain wealth. The focus is on gaining or getting something that you might be wishing to have. Some people who have a passion for getting rich and can identify themselves with ‘the little guy’ might be motivated by this headline. Others might question the credibility of the claim, ‘the only way left’ and move on.
The second headline introduces a warning of the possibility of losing something you already have.
Human nature tends toward protecting what we already have with greater urgency than seeking to gain what we don’t have. Fear of loss has a greater force or motivation for action than the desire for gain.
On reading the content for both headlines, the first is selling the concept of forming a corporation to capitalize on the tax advantage as ‘the only way left for the little guy to get rich’.
The second is selling the concept of forming a corporation as a means of protecting the assets I already have from potential loss resulting from living in a ‘litigation-happy’ society. It is more urgent and palatable for me to take action to secure what I already have than exercising an effort to gain more.
My vote therefore will be for #2.
December 2nd, 2007 at 4:59 pm
I believe the 2nd ad is the winner because of the attention getting headline.
December 2nd, 2007 at 5:59 pm
Ad # 2 preys on FEAR, which is a very strong emotion. However, I do believe that the ‘tone’ of this ad is much too formal, and therefore ad # 2 was the ad that pulled steady results that paid for itself and helped ‘build the list’.
Ad # 1 is about Anger (and a bit of danger in defying his wife’s wishes). It is also written in a very informal buddy-to-buddy style that is more like people actually talk to one another. Since these ads were placed in a wide variety of general interest business-oriented magazines and newspapers, I believe it would actually be read by and acted upon (instead of just scanned) by a large audience. After all, who hasn’t paid the IRS before (through payroll deduction if nothing else)?
Therefore, I believe the home-spun approach of ad # 1 was the blockbuster. However, I also believe the saying “No one of us is as smart as all of us”, and so I would actually TEST this, as I know Mr. Ted Nicholas did!
Thank you.
December 2nd, 2007 at 6:18 pm
Gotta be #2.
The first thing justification I could think of is that people will act quicker to prevent losing something they have than to gain something new.
That aside, I thought the tone of the first ad was too defeatist. “The only way” sounds desperate and defeated. “The little guy” is tucked safely in my trousers. Anyone with ambition feels they are not really little guys, in my opinion.
Then there was the plea towards shared victimization. That may work for certain products, but my gut feeling is that people who identify themselves as victims are unlikely to jump at starting a corporation themselves.
As a question, I wonder what Ted Nicholas thinks of using Bush in the ad. I would think you are alienating a chunk of your customers right there, with minimal gain from those who agree with you. (And then are those who will say “What? You voted for him??)
Ad #2 introduces a risk, and plays up the risk to create anxiety – all without introducing any whiny victim terminology. We work hard all our lives, and some greed-crazed crack addict will find a Tenderloin lawyer to take it all away from us. But, for $50, we can protect ourselves and our families.
It would be irresponsible of us not to send in the money!
My question for Mr. Nicholas is what keeps him going after 50 years? Are there still enough surprises to keep his work interesting? If so, I’d love to hear an example of what can surprise somebody with his experience in copywriting.
December 2nd, 2007 at 6:35 pm
My guess is the first ad was the mega-success.
Why?
Because the second ad seems to focus on a prevention (as opposed to a cure) and that’s not an easy sell to make (especially to a mass audience)…
Just my two cents,
- Josh.
December 2nd, 2007 at 7:35 pm
I believe the second ad is the winner, for many reasons. Just the opening word “Danger!” is powerful right from the get-go. I don’t know a single person who sees the word and doesn’t at least read what follows. Whether or not they heed the caution is another story…
December 2nd, 2007 at 7:46 pm
First ad. Everyone wants to keep their earnings and tired of having them literally stolen by government committing fraud on a grand scale. 2nd ad is negative vs proactive and this should sell much less.
December 2nd, 2007 at 7:51 pm
The first ad resonated with me and the second ad just threw facts at me in a way that didn’t touch me at all.
I relate far more with the anger than the fear.
So I’d put number one down as the million dollar ad.
December 2nd, 2007 at 7:52 pm
Second Ad is the one: it has the four u’s: it’s unique, it’s urgent, it’s useful, and it’s ultra-specific. The first one doesn’t really give me a sense of any of those…
December 2nd, 2007 at 8:03 pm
I believe the first ad is the winner – if the spoken word is more persuasive than the written, then the text of this ad really “speaks” to me. By comparison, the second one might be talking about me – it also seems quite a lot more lengthy. The first one seems to cut to the chase faster, and it combines fear with anger which is a heady combination. My company is selling something totally unique, nothing quite like it on the market to date, and I struggle to find copy – or sales pitch – that will engage the potential buyers quickly enough. I have admiration for sales pitches that grab the attention immediately! It’s got to be number one for me!
December 2nd, 2007 at 8:06 pm
The second ad is my pick for the winner. It appeals to the strongest emotion we have — fear. Fear goes to the basic instinct of self-preservation.
Danger catches attention to invoke fear.
The writing tone and voice is not as good as the firt, but the first ad committed the cardinal sin of advertising. Mentioning politics or religion will narrow appeal, no matter how it is done. The only exception is, of course, if one is writing to a politically ideological base, or if one is writing to a specific religious base. Otherwise, it’s a big “no-no.”
If the first ad was the most successful, then I will be amazed that the psuedo-buddy personal style overcame the political reference turn-off.
And I will consider myself to be lost in the fog.
I would say the second ad had 3 or the 4 “U”s — it was urgent, useful and ultra-specific, but it wasn’t unique. Not to business people.
December 2nd, 2007 at 8:11 pm
I think it is the first, because it is a shot against “Big Brother”. People do not wnat to be taken advantage of so I think this is the answer.
Question to Ted Nicholas:
How did you become good at copywriting? How many of your ads/letters became successful and how many were not?
Thanks.
December 2nd, 2007 at 8:17 pm
I believe that the second ad is the blockbuster.
If I’m not a “little guy” or don’t necessarily care about getting rich, then the first ad’s headline doesn’t mean anything to me. However, almost every guy “little” or “big” has some personal assets to protect. The words in the second ad’s headline strike me as more powerful too.
The first ad takes 7 or 8 paragraphs before I even really know what the writer is getting at. I’m glad he loves his wife, sorry to hear that he’s angry, sorry to hear that he’s disappointed with the candidate he voted for, etc. but what does it have to do with me, the reader?
In the second ad, I felt more compelled to read what came next.
I look forward to hearing what Ted Nicholas has to share on the call. I would like to hear Ted’s recommendations on how to get started in a copywriting career.
December 2nd, 2007 at 8:18 pm
I had a gut response to the first ad and the other was so wordy and detailed that it just didn’t suck me in. I think the first one is the winner as it has a stonger emotional pull. The second one was more cerebral with some fear thrown in.
December 2nd, 2007 at 8:18 pm
Ad # 2–I suspect fear motivates more strongly than anger.
December 2nd, 2007 at 8:23 pm
Ted’s first ad is the one that made him millions.
Hits enough hot buttons in the headline and lead to move the reader to want more… looks like a persausive masterpiece in my opinion.
#1 speaks to my listening.
December 2nd, 2007 at 8:32 pm
I believe that fear is not a factor.People take chances on not being sued more quickly than to avoid the wrath of their wives. Therefore,puts ad #1 as the big winner
December 2nd, 2007 at 8:32 pm
The first ad saves you money.
The second ad has you buy protection.
They both invoke emotion.
I choose ad no. 1 for the big seller.
December 2nd, 2007 at 8:33 pm
Ad #1 turned me off right away…I would not have read any further if that mailing came to me. Right away I see there’s the “blame game” expressed. I don’t care for the “Buddy Buddy” style either, though some do. We’re told to write like we talk, but I didn’t care for the boring, long wording.
Ad #2 is my choice..It’s sensible, and gets to the point. At the beginning when I see “Danger” I immediately want to know.. what danger is it that maybe I don’t know about?
Question: Does direct mail sell better by shortening the message..in other words, get the offer out in action words but less repetition of words?
December 2nd, 2007 at 8:37 pm
Ad #1 is too “dumbed down”. The writer sounds like someone who knows very little and is pretty gullible. It might appeal to those who buy blind opportunities, but would turn off any experienced business person.
Ad #2 uses the danger and fear factors well, and is more informative. It appeals to those who have some business experience and have seen what can happen. I would at least give it more of a read and probably buy the product based on the guarantee.
December 2nd, 2007 at 8:37 pm
Thanks for the little game, Daniel. I appreciate learning as much about copywriting as I can..sometimes it seems overwhelming, there’s so much to learn! At first I felt like a walking encyclopedia without a whiff of where to start a Spec letter. Any one recognize that feeling?
December 2nd, 2007 at 8:40 pm
Fear of loss is a great motivator. Especially if the fear is rather nebulous, if you’re not quite sure against what you are defending. Ad #2 exploits the human recoil response against danger and purports to allow one to feel safe again, for only $XX! It promises answers to secret dangers of which other trusted advisors are quite possibly ignorant.
Ad #1 appeals to anger against unfairness between the rich, tax-savvy tycoon and the ordinary joe with no clue and no hope for redress. But the anger stoked by the ad may lead as easily to continued paralysis as buying a book.
December 2nd, 2007 at 8:51 pm
Considering the general audience, I say the 1st one.
Whilst ‘DANGER’ is a great attention grabber in the second, I felt the first had more appeal to a wider audience and kept curiosity to keep the audience reading the copy…the idea that the writer had a secret you didn’t know, and the ’story-telling’ angle was much more conversational and therefore came across as honest…therefore when the pitch was made it just seemed like a recommendation from a friend …i.e. trust was built.
But then again…we’ll have to wait to hear the results – when it comes to copy its never good to assume – test and let the results speak.
December 2nd, 2007 at 8:56 pm
My vote is for the first letter, it will appeal to a larger audience, including the existing small businessman who may purchase simply to learn of any additional tax savings tips he might be missing, but the folksy voice, the us vs. them framing, the compelling sense that there is a great potential in the benefits of incorporating should incite a buying action.
The second letter was perhaps too fear based to the point that readers may abandon the read because they got acsred away before the desire to learn more was created.
That’s my first impression.
Ted, What’s your best choice of products to sell, hard goods or information?
December 2nd, 2007 at 8:58 pm
Although option number two is the obvious logical one to me the better educated marketer, I am convinced option number one was the winner as its’ language was better suited to the people targetted by the marketing message.
Our advertising/marketing message should always be in the language understood by our target audience.
December 2nd, 2007 at 9:03 pm
I only read the headline but I’m betting the 2nd ad was the winner.
People would rather hold on to what they’ve got than reach for something better.
December 2nd, 2007 at 9:07 pm
first one, conspirital tone, Friends Romans country style, drawing people closer to hear a secret, that is what makes gossip poular.
December 2nd, 2007 at 9:12 pm
The 2nd add is the winner
It focuses on fear of loss.We all make our decisions based on averting pain or realising pleasure.The former however is a much stronger force so the appeal is to our fear of loss so we can avert the pain of losing,
December 2nd, 2007 at 9:43 pm
My vote is for ad#2.
The Danger brings out an instant fear of loss which is indeed a great motivator. People will do more to alleviate their fear of loss than they will to make some extra $.
I would like to ask Ted if he is incorporating video, audio and other “sticky” elements to his inernet cop yet?
December 2nd, 2007 at 9:45 pm
I haven’t read all the other comments yet, so this may be a repeat of what’s above.
Both ads are very good. Both ads are targeted at small, unincorporated businesses. And both capitalize on powerful motivators. Either ad could be the winner. However, I’m going to guess that number 1 was. Here’s why: It promotes a startling new–and unintuitive–benefit to incorporation.
Even though the second ad uses fear of loss, which is a powerful motivator indeed, most small businessmen already know how incorporating would protect them from business liability. (And some even know in what ways it wouldn’t.) That’s why as soon as the second ad mentioned the word “incorporating,” it probably lost most of its potential audience. They saw that it was trying to sell them on the benefits of incorporating, which they already know about and have already considered. And if they’re not incorporated already, there’s probably nothing this ad could say to make them decide to become incorporated.
But the first ad does two wonderful things: (1) It capitalizes on the resentment of being cheated on taxes, also a powerful motivator. And (2) it proposes a startling course of action most small businessmen probably never considered: incorporation.
When it comes to taxes, we all “know” that corporations are DOUBLE taxed. So how can you REDUCE your taxes by incorporating? I feel an impulsive need to read on, just to find out how this can be true.
-TimK
P.S. Can’t wait to find out the final answer.
December 2nd, 2007 at 9:47 pm
I am going to go on the headline alone, and say that it was the second ad that was most successful. I say this because I would think that it would be the most compelling, and likely to get a reader’s attention, and s/he would stop and read what came after. The first headline with the text, regardless of how “good” or “bad” it was, wouldn’t matter, if no one stopped to read what it said.
December 2nd, 2007 at 10:00 pm
I had trouble deciding which ad is the blockbuster ad. Then I used a formula that you sent us a few weeks back in an e-mail. Ted Nicholas does the lillte tip you gave us on checking your copy. I used that formula on the ads and I decided that the second ad is the blockbuster ad.
December 2nd, 2007 at 10:00 pm
I would say the 2nd for as the same reason most others are stating… fear of loss. I noticed an increase in our conversions when we went from stating a average savings to stating average money lost and then asking how much money is being sucked out of their pocketbook. this approach has also worked in cold calling.
December 2nd, 2007 at 10:04 pm
Thanks for the invitation Daniel, and for the valuable work that you do in the world! I love your teleseminars and do my best to make them all!
The second piece is designed to move people into action quickly…fear of loss is definitely one of the biggest human motivators – so I’ll parrot all the others who’ve already pointed this out. There’s just no urgency in the first letter – so I’d be quite surprised if it were the winner. #2 all the way!
As far as a question for Ted – I’m planning on doing some offline classified advertising in order to drive traffic to a number of lead generation sites. I’d like to expand my existing knowledge as far as the best ways to write, track and incrementally improve newspaper classifieds. Any good product recommends are most welcome.
Thanks again,
Elise Tooley
December 2nd, 2007 at 10:11 pm
The first ad is the winner because it is a person talking to a person about a problem they share.
December 2nd, 2007 at 10:12 pm
While the first ad may not really compel one to action at the end, it uses so many classic DM techniques that it stands out here. I could barely get through ad #2. To keep it brief, I’ll just say…Let me aquire some wealth before I worry about protecting something I don’t have.
December 2nd, 2007 at 10:29 pm
The first ad is definitely the one that pulled the best.
December 2nd, 2007 at 10:32 pm
Winner: Ad # 2. It worked on me, many years ago. Reason: Fear of loss.
December 2nd, 2007 at 10:33 pm
Definitely the second. It is far more generally focused, doesn’t have the political charge of the other one, and will undoubtedly push more buttons.
December 2nd, 2007 at 10:45 pm
Which ad is the million dollar ad?
The Second
What’s your reasoning?
I think that most folks are very cautious about not loosing what they have and are willing to spend reasonable amounts of money protecting what they have. This is especially so if they have a family. While anger can be a motivator, I think more people would put the information in ad 1 in the “yea I am not happy about that and should do something about it when I get a chance” category.
December 2nd, 2007 at 10:55 pm
The first ad got my attention. I never would have read the second ad had I not been trying to determine which was better. I quickly got bored with the first when it launched into blame and anger. I was bored with the second ad from the word DANGER, but when “forced” to read through it, I felt it had useful information that could immediately help me. Whenever someone starts an ad with DANGER I become suspicious. Regardless, I vote that the 2nd was the winner, but like many others, I was more immediately drawn to the first ad because I love the secondary title about the wife.
December 2nd, 2007 at 10:55 pm
People are more motivated by fear than gain, so ad number two would be my choice.
December 2nd, 2007 at 11:05 pm
I believe Ad #2 was the stronger ad. This ad creates more urgency and is more specific. The first ad raised my curiosity, but was not as compelling.
Question – How important is the length of the headline?
December 2nd, 2007 at 11:36 pm
1st ad, and here’s my reasoning:
It’s personal, engaging and easy to read (short words, short sentences and short paragraphs). Because of these factors, an exception to the maxim of fear being a greater motivator.
Cheers,
Vinay
December 2nd, 2007 at 11:42 pm
Ad #2 I’ve heard enough from every so-called “guru” about how the little guy can get rich. Give me the facts.
December 2nd, 2007 at 11:42 pm
I would suppose that #2 is the winner because it is fear based. I am personally so disgusted with all the exploitation of people’s fear. It is being used to make people feel worse than ever about their lives, it is increasing people’s stress level and therefore making them sicker, which of course makes them more anxious and fearful, which in turn gets them to buy more stuff to try to feel better etc. I am actually a successful business owner who has chosen to appeal to the best instincts in people, not the basest. i have learned alot from your emails, but something in me is really resisting all this exploitation of people’s insecurities.
December 2nd, 2007 at 11:43 pm
The winner is ad #2.
I based my decision on one of the most powerful copywriting “secrets” there is – the word “you”.
Using the word “you” in sales copy is extremely effective as it addresses the reader on a personal level.
Many people make the mistake of focusing on themselves in copy and the simple fact is: it does not work as well as focusing on the potential buyer.
As for a question: I don’t have one at the moment, but I thank you for the opportunity to submit one.
December 3rd, 2007 at 12:13 am
My choice for the Blockbuster Winner is letter #2.
The Reasons are below:
1. The Headline:
The Headline in the 2nd Letter is more attention getting and pulls you into the copy and flows better.
The first headline is 1/2 about the writer. It distracts the prospect who is only thinking of themselves. The headline should be about the prospects not about the writer.
2. The emotion:
People will do more to avoid pain and protect themselves. (2nd Letter)
Than they will to get something from and get even with the government for the resentment they hold. And again the letter is more about the government than it is about the prospect.
The Writers Voice and flow of the letter.
In the first letter, the letter doesn’t flow as well. It is caught between the Resentment and anger toward the government and Helping and getting something for the prospect.
In the second letter. it flows much better it is mostly all about how to protect yourself and has a range of people listed within it that it would help. All the Prospects.
So there you have my reasons why I know that the second letter is the blockbuster winner.
Respectfully,
Ruby
P.S.
It’s hard for me to believe that So… many people would choose The first Letter. They themselves must hold a resentment toward the Federal Government, or maybe they are Democrats mostly. Who knows! Ha! Ha!
December 3rd, 2007 at 12:16 am
The second ad is the winner. It leaps from the page and forces you in.
While the first ad is engaging, it does not command attention… and does not establish urgency on the same level.
December 3rd, 2007 at 12:35 am
#2, fear more powerful than anger.
December 3rd, 2007 at 12:44 am
Fear is the motivator and the answer to take away the fear was there. Anger creates distrust. So nunber 2 is the winner.
December 3rd, 2007 at 12:44 am
Second Ad.
Just my gut feeling.
December 3rd, 2007 at 1:03 am
Ad #1. There’s a better personal connection. It tells a story. I like the #1 guy better.
December 3rd, 2007 at 1:03 am
second ad is the winner.
It brings out the pain of loss exceptionally clearly and we all know fear of loss is a greater motivator than benefit of gain.
December 3rd, 2007 at 1:18 am
I think the first ad pulled the millions. The headline and subheading raised more curiosity and more people read it. Formed an instant bonding with the readership. Had a conversational tone. It quickly described how easy it was to do: buy the book, fill out the perforated pages and send them in. Great quiz and your newsletters have great insight!
December 3rd, 2007 at 1:24 am
IMHO it is the “Danger, you might get wiped out†scare people silly ad so they incorporate for protection. The other one was just boring, more of the same get rich easy. It will be interesting to see if I am right.
December 3rd, 2007 at 1:29 am
I think the second ad was the big winner because it speaks to fear of loss. Like one other person commented, I personally related to the first ad just because I don’t like Bush and his cronies! But, I believe fear of loss is a stronger trigger for most people.
I look forward to finding out the answer.
December 3rd, 2007 at 1:36 am
Fear of loss always seems to be the stronger motivator when trying to get people to take action. For that reason I would have to vote the second ad as the winner.
December 3rd, 2007 at 1:48 am
It’s definitely #2. The first ad jumps around and doesn’t “cut to the chase” quickly enough. Ad #2 has a definite point to it and that point is maintained throughout. There is no question of what the central theme is, unlike ad #1. I can’t think of a question to ask right now.
December 3rd, 2007 at 1:54 am
Which ad is the million dollar ad?
The “DANGER” second Ad is the $5 Billion Dollar Maker.
What’s your reasoning? The First ad was informative,However, the Second Ad FEEDS on our
EMOTIONS…Emotions SELL! Yes, the one emotion is Fear, but Helplessness, Loss, Desperation, ACT NOW all feed into this Ad.
What specific copywriting, information marketing, and business related questions would you like me to ask Ted on Thursday, December 6th, at the teleseminar training. Anything goes.
MY QUESTION:
I would like you to ask Ted how one BREAKS into the Marketing Field with no formal education in this area and builds their own business, NOT working for someone but on there own terms with your own corporation. I am asking this as a person whom has NOT yet read his book.
Thank you.
December 3rd, 2007 at 2:07 am
I identify with the first ad. The emotions could be avoid pain or embrace pleasure. It would give me pleasure to have the book. The second ad is too technical. it has too many details and is like any other ad.
December 3rd, 2007 at 2:29 am
Working alone, I dream of hiring a sidekick to help me get more done. What kind of person do you consider to be of greatest assistance to you? A side kick so to speak. graphic designer, lawyer, high school buddy, editor, etc.
December 3rd, 2007 at 2:38 am
Which ad was the best puller? IMHO it is the “Danger, you might get wiped out†scare people silly ad so that they would incorporate for protection. The other one was just boring, more of the same get rich easy.
December 3rd, 2007 at 2:44 am
I’m having trouble choosing. Both ads are compelling, but to different markets. And we don’t have the benefit of knowing all the information on the target market–buyer profile.
It also is heavily focused on gender(male), rather than business.
The first pitches to the “average guy”, assuming he’s angry and doesn’t have the wealth he thinks he should have. The first ad certainly projects more energy and passion than the second ad. And it’s just a guess, but I’d say the first ad would be targeting Democrats or Independents, rather than Republicans.
The second pitches to a more sophisticated person, assuming he or she, is afraid of losing what he/she has, or might have in the future. It stays away from the political comments–and focuses on business, which would appeal across party and gender lines.
A construction worker setting up a new contracting business might relate totally to the first ad, but I picture a more experienced business person responding to the second ad. This ad walks the reader through a process more than the first ad.
Looking at it in a completely different way…
If 80% of all new businesses are here and then gone in 5 years, then perhaps the new business turnover rate would support the 1st ad as the winner. But then…no data cards or buyer profiles to look at…
So I guess it gets down to what moves me… # 2.
My question for Ted: Do you have a preference for writing your copy appealing to particular motivations, or set of motivations over others?
Thank you!
December 3rd, 2007 at 3:34 am
“Fear” is stronger than “Buddy”. Moreover, there is a slight “outlaw feeling” in the first one that can scare some prospects. Are we sure the IRS is so happy the little guy open his corporation and gets the tax loopholes?
By the way, I loved the first ad and hated the second, but I think the second will make more sales.
Marco
December 3rd, 2007 at 4:20 am
I think the second one. Frankly the first one makes me feel uncomfortable and I had trouble reading it all the way through. The attitude he portrayed was not one conducive to selling – I don’t feel if I had a problem I could chat to him about it – he might bite my head off! The second one was more pleasant – more intriguing, and easier to read to the end. I would buy from the second ad but not the first.
December 3rd, 2007 at 4:31 am
First Ad Better story – pulls you in but benefit is for those wanting to get rich.
Second ad – more realistic benefit for those who want to protect what they already have.
MILLION DOLLAR AD.
Question to Ted
what are the specific questions he asks to get the raw nerves and hot button of his target market.
December 3rd, 2007 at 4:37 am
Which does anyone put first — riches or safety?
I think safety comes first. Therefore, I reckon that the second ad is the one that made the most money.
My question for Ted is: How do you get inside the minds of such a wide range of prospects so effectively?
December 3rd, 2007 at 5:22 am
For me the #2 is the winner. It is not for everybody but for everyone who is a businessowner and they do have to loose an awfull lot. I sure would be scared if i knew whatever I worked so hard for could be taken away just like that. If I could avoid this, I sure would do it.
The #1 is for to broad an audience in my oppinion.
December 3rd, 2007 at 5:50 am
I believe Number 2.
In my opinion people visualise ‘the dream’ but act on fear:
- Identify the problem or ‘wound’
- Sprinkle salt in it
- Press your thumb hard into it and twist
- Make sure it really hurts
- Now offer a painkiller and to dress the wound
December 3rd, 2007 at 8:07 am
People are motivated by fear of lose and desire for gain. In the 2nd ad the element of fear does exists but is not a direct one. There is a premise –what if?
People doesn’t care about hypothetical problems or statistics, they only care about
their lives. If you prove them that there is an increase of 15% in breakings in the last
2 years they will probably do nothing about it. If you break the news about the breaking that took place in the neighborhood they‘ll go buy an alarm or something.
I think the second ad is better. It tells a story.It is always easier to sell this way.
This story has the fundamentals of a good ad. The writer: A) justifies the contact – But I can’t be quiet any longer. I’m angry. B) Demonstrates a big problem-the feds increase taxes .C) Creates empathy-Average tax payers, you and me, are getting screwed. D) Finds a cheap and legit solution. -But recently I ran across a workable angle. E) Test if the solution works-On my income I didn’t think I could save much. But I’m paying almost zero taxes.F) Sell the idea.
December 3rd, 2007 at 8:25 am
the first ad….its obvious.
the heading,tells the downbeat little man
enough really is enough….real teaser copy.
but join me and get mad and more importantly get even.
infact get above even!
it sounds like its full of tips tricks etc the small man can use that have been provided secretly by the rich and famous
so that now you can even out the playing field and shield yourself from the government/taxation/bullshit..intervention.
isn’t it all about one-up-man ship for the struggling little man.
it sound like its made dead easy to follow…..tear out pages…etc
great copy needs to be a me to you conversation.
it needs to flow…it needs to be positive,interesting informal,personal….and most importantly needs to make a call to action.
see i no im right because im sure i understand great copy when i see it…..or am i talking bxxloxxs.
and i dont know jack sxxt!
yours mongoose
December 3rd, 2007 at 8:29 am
Daniel, I’ll bet my house on it. Ad number one was the winner.
Why?
The dominant emotion approach made the spokesman my friend and advocate. He wasn’t trying to sell me anything. We were just two friends who share a common enemy,venting.
He stirred up intense anger in me.
And if I’m angry…then I’m gonna be wanting revenge.
Revenge against “double standards” Washington and its super rich friends, trying to keep me down (a small guy.
And when he presents his offer… well it’s the perfect revenge…buying his book and profiting from the tax savings that they were tring to keep for their friends.
Ad number 2…
Well I thought the fear was a little over the top. I don’t thing the fear of losing EVERYTHING is a dominant fear with the majority of the prospects.
The is noting in the news to suggest that a catastrophe of that magnitude is about to befall me.
It just doesn’t join the conversation I’m already having with myself — in the way that ad number 1 did.
Anyway, thanks for my free MP3 Daniel. I’ll be awaiting it.
December 3rd, 2007 at 9:00 am
Number 2 is the clear winner in my book. The theme is universal, and it doesn’t limit itself to a specific period of time. Number 1 became dated before President Bush (Sr.) was out of office, while number 2 holds the same appeal today as it did when written.
December 3rd, 2007 at 9:08 am
I think the first ad is the winner. The second is fine, and does capitalize on fear, a powerful emotion. But the first ad offers to let you in on a secret so great that, supposedly, even this guy’s wife didn’t want anyone to hear. It makes it difficult for anyone to resist reading more.
December 3rd, 2007 at 9:11 am
I’m happy to bet anyone here $10,000 that the first ad was the winner.
Here are some of the reasons I KNOW that first ad is the blockbuster:
1. It appeals to the “underdog” sentiment. The chance of making it despite obstacles is a far greater motivator for most entrepreneurial minded people than the chance of loss.
If the ads were presented to a group of accountants who were all partners in their firms then ad 2 would probably fare better.
But ad 1 appeals to real people.
2. The second ad taps into the anger of the prospect at the government of George Bush senior at the time…
“The government says one thing. And then does the opposite. Especially Bush. And I even voted for him. One of my biggest mistakes.
“First the Feds talk tax cuts. Then they increase taxes. Remember the “read my lips†promise. Who are they kidding?
Average tax payers, you and me, are getting screwed.”
Appealing to emotion is very powerful in sales copy.
3. The copy is engaging and very personal. It feels like a real person is writing it.
He talks about his wife. He talks about being angry at the government. He talks about his way of fighting back.
4. The opening line is fantastic.
“I love my wife. And I understand why she wants me to keep my mouth shut. She wants to protect me from the IRS.”
It starts with a very short sentence…a huge key to drawing readers in.
Then the next 2 sentences FORCE you to keep reading to find out why the writer needs protection from the IRS…why he should keep his mouth shut.
5. Great benefits delivered in plain language like “I’m paying almost zero taxes. And it’s legit.”
This is how business men and ordinary people talk.
Also I don’t know about you but once I hear someone say “I’m paying almost zero taxes” my ears prick up.
I start thinking about the outrageous taxes I’m paying and what I could do with that money if I could keep it to myself.
Once you make a promise like that I’m going to keep reading just to see if it really is “legit” and will work for me.
It’s interesting to note that this particular benefit was so strong Ted had a swathe of other successful ads leading off with headlines like
“Wage Your Own Tax Revolt” and
“The Ultimate Tax Shelter”.
6. To be critical the second sales letter is a little too stuffy and uses a lot of terms that border on jargon.
eg. “he/she does protect personal liability”
I’m not sure what the hell that means and I’m not sure the average business owner of professional would know either.
“Misinformation about incorporation abounds”
Ted must’ve been having a bad day when he wrote this.
Something more to the point like “you can get burnt BADLY with the lies and half truths everywhere about incorporating”.
“Rely on advice from Uncle George and you’re likely to end up in the federal pokey for tax evasion.”
That’s the kind of language being used in the first ad and it works.
Having said that if I was trying to sell to accountants I’d be very inclined to test the second ad.
Questions for Ted Nicholas:
1. Once you have a winning product what is the biggest secret you’ve learned to running the rapidly expanding business that results from that winner?
2. Do you have any secrets for outsourcing work? How do you get your freelancers, outsourced workers producing the way you want them to?
3. If you had to create an information product today what niches would you be likely to choose and why?
4. Have you ever outsourced the writing of any of your books and if you have how did you do it?
5. Do you ever outsource your copywriting and if so why?
6. What is the most you’ve ever made from a single sales letter?
7. If you had to give the listeners just one secret to copywriting…just one copywriting principle that would be guaranteed to make a difference to their business what would it be?
Kindest regards,
Andrew Cavanagh
December 3rd, 2007 at 9:31 am
Number One talks to me.
In Simple Language.
And pulls me from paragraph to paragraph.
Number two is long dense paragraphs that are hard to follow through and packed with stuff that really makes you think too hard. Information may be great but it has to be packaged nicely and this is too compact for anything.
So No. 1. wins.
December 3rd, 2007 at 10:15 am
1. first one is million dollar ad
2. simple language. story w/emotion. clear. direct. good use of david/goliath.
December 3rd, 2007 at 10:25 am
#2 is the winner simply based on the headline. #1 headline appeals to the “get rich” mentality but that doesn’t resonate as strongly with a business owner (who’s heard that over and over) as the second headline that screams that there is something to lose. It’s one thing to get richer, it’s quite another to lose what you’ve got. #2 must have had better results.
Question for Ted: Where is the average cut off retail price of a product that can be sold via direct mail? For instance could a $10 book be sold this way or is there simply no amount of return that can cover the costs of mailing?
December 3rd, 2007 at 10:50 am
Hi Daniel
1st Ad wins for me. I’m being addressed in a conversational tone, with life situations that I can relate to. Sentences are short, to the point. The copy in the second ad goes ooooonn and oooooonn and ooooooonn! Ugh, by the time I got to the end of the ad, I COULD HAVE had 5 cups of coffee. So many COULDS. I COULD be wiped out, A business disaster COULD happen to me, a client COULD file a law-suit. I COULD lose a law-suit on some technical point. If so… boom! Just like that I COULD lose MY business. In addition, my home, cars, cash, stocks, bonds, and other assets COULD also go down the drain.
Sorry, what was this 2nd ad about again?
The moment someone tries to get my attention by imprinting any kind of fear, I lose interest. I cannot run a business based on fear… I’ll be able to find something to be fearful about in almost every situation I COULD encounter! Don’t try to spook me, just tell me what to do.
Question to Ted: Oh, how to write smashing headlines that will sell the same product (publication) that just gets updated and slightly expanded every 2nd year?
December 3rd, 2007 at 11:03 am
My gut tells me that the first ad was the million dollar winner. In spite of the bolder, scarier headlines in the second ad, I really feel that fear of loss is not enough to drive a person to act, while presenting a life situation which a reader can really take hold of and relate to seems much stronger. It seems like the headline alone could keep running for a long while while still being totally relevant. I wonder if a combination of the two, maybe setting up an ad first with the fear of loss to grab a reader, then hold them with the similar life story/situation would be even stronger? or maybe it would dilute down the message so that neither one caused the readers to act?
The 1st ad really spoke to me, as if I was speaking to a colleague(I’m a commercial designer myself) and the information being presented about incorporation in the first ad seemed more like insider information, something which I’m always drawn to.
December 3rd, 2007 at 11:30 am
My vote is for ad#1. Much more punch, more emotional, less cerebral. Doesn’t immediately filter out readers not “self-employed”, as in ad#2.
December 3rd, 2007 at 11:34 am
Another great post Daniel – I think the emotive energy and power of the first article as well as the personal connection and voice of the writer show through as this being the more effective of the ads. Also the writing style of short punchy sentences rather than longer winded sentences have more of an effect – and it highlights the product – which is sorely missing in the second ad – and there is a call to action in the first ad.
Ad #1 = winner
December 3rd, 2007 at 11:41 am
I am a brain researcher and coach people on how to turn on their brain power. As a new student to copywriting, I find the correlations between neuroscience and copywriting fascinating.
Neuroscience studies show that the brain gets twice as active when it experiences a loss as when it experiences a win.
Many copywriters look to take advantage of this underlying brain process. Fear of loss really gets the brain energized. When you can activate the brain with the experience of loss, you get people’s attention. A well told story gets the reader to imagine a loss and imagined loss activates the brain just like an actual loss.
Ad #1 points to an ongoing loss. What feeling does the IRS elicit in you? For many people, just hearing the word IRS brings up a sense of fear or loss. Every paycheck reinforces this loss.
Ad #2 points to a potential loss, but does not do so in a way that engages the readers imagination. Telling a fact does not engage the imagination or activate the brain in the same way that a well told story does.
Ad#1 Speaks more clearly to a specific reader. Those who are self employed, feel the squeeze of the IRS and who don’t necessarily have the resources to pay big attorney fees to incorporate.
Ad #2 Speaks to professionals with lots to lose. However, most of them have CPAs and attorneys. Ad #2 also suggests to doctors that they are getting bad advice from their legal and financial advisors. I doubt many professionals would believe an ad over their paid legal and financial advisors.
Ad #1 Projects a message from a real person that had a problem that he easily resolved. The use of his wife’s comment was brilliant. The copy was instantly from a real guy with a real wife. It was a one line story that drew me in to listen to what a real guy had to say.
Ad #2 Is more like a lecture. The speaker has no persona and is speaking to a vague audience.
Ad #1 writes short power 1 and 2 sentence paragraphs. While Ad #2 writes more complex and harder to read paragraphs.
My Vote if for Ad #1.
With Appreciation,
Donald McKinnon
December 3rd, 2007 at 11:47 am
Hi Daniel
both ads are very good, very well written.
However I think that adv. No. 2 “DANGER”
is the best adv. because people respond to LOOSING! more positively than they do to gaining/saving.
Keep up the good work and Thank You
Gerry Kenny
December 3rd, 2007 at 12:03 pm
If I were looking to buy that kind of book (tax help), I would respond to ad #1 before ad #2. But, I had to ask myself if I was the target market…
The style of writing is “folksy” – conversational, like one friend to another.
Ad #2 speaks more from the universal “we” position.
For that reason alone, I’d vote #1.
December 3rd, 2007 at 1:03 pm
I’m going to say number 2. Assuming this was targeted toward small business owners who aren’t incorporated I would say many of them are savvy enough to notice that if you could get in trouble with the IRS for selling this info, that they in turn could get in trouble for using it. Either that or you are lying. In either case it damages credibility.
Secondly, in my opinion they both use the “common enemy” tactic but the first is too specific. The second is more subtle, the “enemies” are less defined. Its vague enough to allow the reader”s imagination to connect the “enemy” with their own fears.
December 3rd, 2007 at 1:18 pm
Ad #1 takes the lead.
The ad has a plain-speaking, conversational tone, but pushing several buttons early in the lead: fear (of IRS); a tread of ’secret revealed’; greed/selfishness; and ‘class envy’is woven throughout and closes with a bandwagon or a ‘Jones-effect’motivator. Ad #1 describes as a “best seller… hear 650,000 sold.” Accordingly, it compels other prospects to purchase since so many other people (perhaps like you)have already bought the book…implying, it must be good…so, be like the masses, join them since it’s ok buy the book (less risk assumed since so many others have already been exposed to potential risk).
December 3rd, 2007 at 1:21 pm
#2 By far….
Why? Buddy to buddy is nice, but fear sells deadbolts. Fear of loss is a far bigger motivator to most people than possibility of gain, proven in many psychological studies over time. And today I believe this to be more true then ever- there is a lot of fear in the world, and anything than can provide or even hint at promising possible security (i.e. ‘absence of fear’) in any area can be sold with even the flimsiest or most nonsensical arguments. Perfect example: Would the Patriot Act ever have been passed in the 1970s or 80s? Highly doubtful.
Ad 2 fans the flames of fear. After all, who wants to lose even a little of what they’ve worked so hard to get to “them”- you know, those unethical and godless and greedy lawyers, doctors, the IRS, governments, bureaucrats, lawsuit-bringers, big pharma….you get it- fill in the choice that pulls your triggers.
Having a buddy is nice, but overall most people would rather sleep easy and restfully every night.
Alex
MoreMoneyBetterLife.com
Have your dreams found YOU yet?
December 3rd, 2007 at 1:43 pm
Ad number 1 is the million dollar ad. Common Enemy and taxes — something everyone can relate to in a friendly rapport building ad about a business book. Also doesn’t assume that I am an idiot or acting out of fear, but respects my being somewhat savvy to be reading in the first place. Ad number 2 assumes that I am an uninformed and possibly gullible new business person. I mistrust someone who plays assuming they know what I am afraid of and goes after it.
Ad number two… plays to my fear in a wrong way. I would immediately assume that this sales person is preying on me and would be selling me more and would not trust enough to buy the book.
December 3rd, 2007 at 1:57 pm
The first ad is the billion dollar winner. The reader can quickly identify with the issue because it is presented in a personal manner the average individual can relate to. It does not require deep reflection. The message stirs up emotions associated with being taken advantage of and doing something about it, legally.
December 3rd, 2007 at 2:04 pm
And the Winner is…protecting your assets
My question is:
When you incorporate using your own name as many
sevices firms do. How do you protect yourself personally and does this vary from state to state?
Thank you
John Howlett
December 3rd, 2007 at 2:07 pm
My vote is for ad #1. It stikes a personal chord, deals with a dream most entrepreneurs have, talks about real problems we are struggling with right now (and maybe even gets the reader a little indignant and angry–all the better because they now feel as though they share something with the author), and makes you feel like you are really getting let in on an amazing personal secret. Plus it is a way easier read.
Ad #2 deals with a “what if” scenario that for most folks likely falls into the “it will never happen to me” category. Our society is built on instant gratification and few people really plan for the future. Right away that makes this a much tougher sell. And it “tells” me all about it like a teacher to a student, instead of “showing” me like one friend to anohter as in the first ad. Plus it is just too formal in tone. #1 is much more engaging.
December 3rd, 2007 at 2:16 pm
I would select #1 as the blockbuster. It is true that fear of loss is a greater motivator than desire for gain or anger. However, I believe that more people relate to being the little guy trying to get rich than to being someone with personal assets to protect.
December 3rd, 2007 at 2:38 pm
The 2nd add is the winner. Fear of loss will capture attention quicker and convey that the risk of not taking action is too great.
I liked the personal approach of the first add but it was more interesting, rather than driving me towards action like the 2nd did.
December 3rd, 2007 at 2:51 pm
I think the first ad is the winner! The headline and subline made me curious. I liked the easy reading, folksy and simple message with a simple answer. It quickly described how easy I could slay the enemy….buy the book, fill out the forms and mail them in. The audiance being reached is much larger than #2. #2 seemed more directed at the professional that already has incorporated or had something to protect.
December 3rd, 2007 at 4:54 pm
I think the second one is the million dollar ad. People spend more time on getting out of painful situtations than planning pleasant ones so fear is a great motivator.
The first was more entertaining and I read all that was printed. I only read some of the second.
How do we write ads, that win, with positive messages?
December 3rd, 2007 at 8:52 pm
Danger wins.
The second raked in the cash.
Dripping red letters is the image.
Not a question of if but when.
It captures and leads the imagination from scary to security quit nicely.
Yea, consider the facts is the question asked.
Taking the reader away from opinion to someone just pointing out “whats so”.
The conclusion occurs as if from the readers own thoughts.Where as being told what to do gins up resistance.
A call to action based on a personal conclusion of where the facts lead i will submit is a positive message!
December 3rd, 2007 at 8:54 pm
Number two is the definite winner.
The reason? It treats the reader with respect. The first ad makes several mistakes. One, it names Bush as a culprit; half will agree, the other half won’t ready any further, why throw away 50% of possible sales for no purpose? The other reason is he doesn’t hide what he’s selling, information about the right way to incorporate. He can then do “reason why” follow through. The dominant emotion is more one of urgency than fear alone, which adds an “act now” emotion to the mix.
December 3rd, 2007 at 10:03 pm
The first ad is the winner because it is personal. No one wants to hear any more “scary” news. The second ad is a loser. I didn’t even read it, just skimmed it. I hate that kind of pitch.
December 3rd, 2007 at 10:09 pm
The winner is the 2nd ad… and my reason being that…
…fear is a huge grabber – on a very sub conscience level we all want to be safe, to run to safer grounds or safer sources so to speak… My guess is that people might have gravitated toward the message of the ad through their fear filter…
The question I would like you to as is: IA THE ONE PAGE SALES LETTER REALLY THE MOST EFFECTIVE DIRECT MAKING AD? HOW DO THEY COMPARE TO MINISITES?
Thanks…
December 4th, 2007 at 12:27 am
Daniel,
What a clever way to build almost viral interest in your teleseminar!
I’m going to have to remember this one.
Great job.
December 4th, 2007 at 3:27 am
Hi Daniel!
I feel the first ad is the million dolllar ad. The headline – the only way left…shows us all the solution. We look for solutions. In the first ad which says danger it sounds as if coersion. We as humans never like coersion; even if it’s beneficial for us. we like liberty and shun coersion.
If warnings and downright condemnations that you’ll lose your assets or you’ll get cancer if you smoke kind of stuff can make you act. There wouldn’t be one smoker in the world.
On the other hand, if you give me a solution and gently remind me the wise way out. It works and I’ll be nodding my head in agreement.
I really liked the tone in the 1st ad too. It’s as if someone says straight from the heart: direct with a dash of expletives like these – this irresponsible govt. – would make the tone natural and trigger emotions of empathy and anger which lead us to action. as we often ( i especially ) say when we get upset.
The tone is what made the entire ad starting from the headline makes it – He-talks-to-me, and-to-me- alone & he-means-what-he-says feel.
If there is one question to Ted:
How did he get to this tone and what is the secret to get to this emotional level in copy?
The way you presented the USP is unique. Why you thought when you first wrote copy this tone would work wonders for your propostion?
Once again thanks Daniel for your kind remembrance and the great way this post turned out to be a huge platform to meet and listen to great minds and views!
Can I get some of Ted’s ebooks and at a good deal as I’m not doing so well.
Solomon
December 4th, 2007 at 4:30 am
Anger is motivating as long as it persists. Once it subsides, POOF!! there goes your motivation.
Fear is more tenacious. It persists till the cause of fear is found and removed, atleast from the sight.
I feel the second ad has more punch than the first.
December 4th, 2007 at 4:49 am
Well, first of all I thought Nr. 2 because the headline caught me. Also fear is a strong motivation.
But when I started reading I was boren by Nr. 2, everything written by exclamation mark but technically.
So I choose Nr. 1, which directly speaks to me, word of mouth.
My question: How far can you go until your customer feels duped?
Thanks for your interesting page. I’m sorry that I can’t attend the teleseminar becvause of the timeshift for us Europeans!
December 4th, 2007 at 11:11 am
Fear of Loss every time!!!!!!!!!!
SO I vote for the second one as the blockbuster.
December 4th, 2007 at 12:31 pm
In my humble opinion, the second ad was the million dollar blockbuster for the very simple reason that fear of loss always goes straight to the gut. It’s great to tell me how to gain something, but tell me that I can and will lose something precious and you’ve got my undivided attention!
As for my question, What are some ways to entice your prospect who may have skipped your copy to read the offer first to go back and read your copy?
Thanks.
December 4th, 2007 at 1:15 pm
#1 reeled me in. #2 looks like so many others…good but did not captivate me.
#1 wins!
December 4th, 2007 at 2:55 pm
The man is good.
#1, absolutely. (I’m old. I bought the book from that ad.)
Thanks
December 4th, 2007 at 4:35 pm
Ad #1 gets my vote. The audience is wider–struggling families, as compared with self-employed individuals.
Plus, being a wife, I was immediately interested in what some guy was going to say without his wife’s approval.
December 4th, 2007 at 4:49 pm
The first ad is the winner!
To gain something versus the possible threat of losing something will always been the winner.
It’s winner’s versus loser’s mentality.
December 4th, 2007 at 6:29 pm
#2 has a solid headline. #1 has a good headline but brings a personal tone that follows through in the letter.
I would most likely buy from ad #1 so I’m going with #1 as the winner.
December 4th, 2007 at 6:48 pm
I vote for #1 Ad
First of all he is talking to the everyday Joe who is getting screwed by the government. I like the conversational way he is talking to me personally. I feel his pain and I have a solution to living like the rich and famous.
I now know the secret!
Brilliant!
Look forward to the teleseminar.
Bern
JewelCaddy.com No Tangle Jewely Organizer
December 4th, 2007 at 6:57 pm
I’m sure that if both ads did run, they both did well for different reasons.
Didn’t someone say to use the barstool approach to selling and ad? Talk as if you were talking to the person sitting next to you at the bar.
I myself would respond to #1 rather than #2.
And I don’t even drink.
December 4th, 2007 at 8:05 pm
“One Way Left” – the first ad, is the winner. It is different precisely because it doesn’t try to terrorise you into reading. The letter is written as one guy talking to another guy – like you might actually be talking over beers. No one wants to be a little guy – but most of us know, deep down, that we are just that. We want someone to show us that one way out – that way that hasn’t been blocked up by the “fat cats” trying to keep all the gravy for themselves. We are tired of being afraid. We are looking for someone to speak to us about success – like a friend over beers.
December 4th, 2007 at 11:50 pm
I did not make it through the second ad. I got tired of reading and skipped over portions. The first ad caught my attention.
December 4th, 2007 at 11:51 pm
Fear motivates people. The second ad is the winner. It appealed to the masses.
What is the best place to put strong copy? Ads, newsletters, websites, all of the above?
December 5th, 2007 at 12:30 am
Hi
I believe the second ad is the winner as it is based on the fear.
December 5th, 2007 at 12:56 am
I believe the 2nd was by far stronger and had more urgency.
December 5th, 2007 at 1:02 am
I feel #2 was the winner, fear being a stronger motivator than anger
My question – suggestions for overcoming skepticism – thanks
December 5th, 2007 at 2:06 am
Definitely the second ad. We as people react or make decisions based on past experiences or knowledge. Usually we associate an emotion to the experience or knowledge we gained. If the emotion was good, we will make decisions toward that thing that gave us a positive emotion. If the emotion was bad, we will do what it takes to avoid that bad emotion. The second ad definitely focuses on a bad emotion and gives us the answer how to avoid that unwanted emotion. Given the two ads, it is a no brainer. I am going to buy from the ad that tells me what to do to avoid the negative emotion; ad #2.
December 5th, 2007 at 3:38 am
It is clear enough. Though the 2nd ad did a good job with a great headline that screamed ‘Fear’. It does not do a great job at continuing to stoke the fire of emotion. The winner is, of course the 1st one. The headline sparks interest, the deck copy does a good job at creating suspense and stimulating attention. Way into the story, the body copy engages the prospect the same way a friend would be pouring out his anger in a way his buddy can relate to and be infected by contagious. The call to action pitch is not salesy, but more like a buddy stumbled on a solution to an annoying pest of common interest?
I can say all this, but let the prospect be judge.
Questions:
What are the things one needs to do and how should one structure a plan to become a master copywriter in 6 months?
You have got a great,maybe even unique information product. What would you recommend as guerrilla,little man strategies to implement to generate massive attention and interest through all forms of media?
December 5th, 2007 at 5:34 am
Hey Daniel,
The more I look at the ads the more I think it could be a trick question and they both made a fortune, but if I was to go for any ad it would be No 1. I agree with a lot of people that the fear factor in ad 2 is very strong and fear of loss is one of the best motivators going. But there are a lot of diferent things in ad 1. firstly, ad 2 is too technical, people want simple, and ad 1 giveds them that, even down to tearing the perforated pages from the book. Secondly it brings in the wife or spouse, very important as it attacks two areas at once, the business person and the person who may well have been funding them while they build their little empire. Third, it is the us and them situation, not just the government but the fat cat bosses who already have these lucrative tax loopholes and the little guy now has an option of being just like them. And finally, overall it is the old adage, KISS, Keep It Simple & Stupid.
Question for Ted: Is there any particular market that you left alone and thought afterwards, I wish I had attacked that market when I had the chance?
December 5th, 2007 at 12:44 pm
I believe ad #1 was a clear winner. The second ad, while there are some great keywords like “Danger”, somewhat bored me and didn’t really emotionally grab me. The first one got my attention right off the bat with its personal “arm around the shoulder” approach. It’s less like an advertisement and more like a personal conversation!
December 5th, 2007 at 12:49 pm
First ad motivates me to read the rest of it. Tells a story on a personal level.
I want to attend but am unable due to travel and work.
I’d like to ask Ted: What’s the best and lowest cost way to get started with an info product?
December 5th, 2007 at 2:08 pm
Everyone who said Ad #2: YOU’RE ALL WRONG, WRONG, WRONG!
First ad was the winner by a landslide. There’s a lot of things tha make it the winner. One being that it has a much broader appeal. Another is that most people who the ad is targeted for don’t necessarily have huge amounts of assets to be seized. THEY’RE FREAKIN’ BROKE!
There’s other reasons why its the winner but i’m chipping in with these two.
AD #1 is the winner. I’d put $100,000 on it being the winner.
December 5th, 2007 at 3:37 pm
The first ad kept me reading, the second ad bored me. In ad one the little guy (me) was being targeted and I felt like I had to get that book.
Ask Ted what’s better? To get small report out there to start building a list or going for a full blown ebook or info product that takes longer to create.
December 5th, 2007 at 4:04 pm
Hi Daniel,
I’m going with ad #1. Though I think fear/solution as a motivator/answer would be better then anger in most cases. I found the first ad better and more appealing. I am considering offering my info book to a local media outlet for free (download or s.a.s.e)to get testimonials and leads for future products so my question is ” Is this a wise stratagy and what hidden factors are there that I should consider first?
December 5th, 2007 at 4:53 pm
Dear Daniel:
Great comparison! My money is on the first ad.
The big question is “Who is the market?” At $50 a pop, you must sell an awful lot of books to hit $1M2. I think the first ad is the winner; it appeals to more people. More people means the broad mass of people who would not think of starting their own corporation because of the expense.
The first ad headline and deck evoke curiosity – you are willing to read a little further – regardless of whether you are in the target market or not. Once you break into the body copy, the first ad crushes the second ad for the mass market target – there is something there for just about everyone – but that schmaltzy stuff about “my wife” “the Feds” “average taxpayers” really resonates well with our “average†person who is the target. It is probably a turn off to those who already paid lawyers exorbitantly for their corporations – but who cares? They are not the target market.
What is interesting is that I bet Ted found his second ad more appealing to a successful person like himself – and wrote it for the top end of the market. I also suspect he knew that the first ad would pull better. The question I would ask him is. “Which ad did you think would be the winner going in? Why?â€
Regards, Bob Wilson
December 5th, 2007 at 6:09 pm
Got to be #1 because it is selling a dream
#2 is selling prevention – never easy
December 5th, 2007 at 6:33 pm
I think that its ad number one. It appeals more to real people.
December 5th, 2007 at 7:14 pm
I think #1. People that will be looking for his product are not going to act on the danger thing. They don’t believe it applys to them or they don’t have much to lose anyway. However if there is a way to get rich they want to know about it.
December 5th, 2007 at 7:20 pm
Ad # 1. It offers more appealing benefit and in a more personal form then the first one. The question I want to ask is how to find such great product ideas that can make millions.
December 5th, 2007 at 7:23 pm
Ad # 2 …. it is more appealing because it promises to protect form real world problems. I would like to ask how how to choose the right media for the advertising message for such a product.
December 5th, 2007 at 8:00 pm
Neither actually appeals to me – The danger one looks like SPAM right off the bat (or an anti-virus alert)… so it’s probably that one
I don’t think any would sell unless it was found/advertisied in the right context. If I came upon it by mistake.. I would close the page.
December 5th, 2007 at 8:13 pm
The first ad drew better. It’s a compelling, irresistible opportunity to get back at “them”.
Of course, #2 is powerful as well, but my money… well, my free MP3 at least, is on the first.
December 5th, 2007 at 9:02 pm
An interesting story, an involving predicament anyone can relate to, and down-to-earth conversational language practically guarantee ad #1 will be the blockbuster. It’s powerful copy that communicates emotionally and pushes all the target’s hot buttons.
Ad #2, on the other hand, is not easy to read. It’s not conversational or emotional. And while it does highlight some attractive points, that’s all it does. It’s not emotionally involving enough to rate Blockbuster status. Frankly, I’m surprised it broke even.An interesting story, an involving predicament anyone can relate to, and down-to-earth conversational language practically guarantee ad #1 will be the blockbuster. It’s powerful copy that communicates emotionally and pushes all the target’s hot buttons.
Ad #2, on the other hand, is not easy to read. It’s not conversational or emotional. And while it does highlight some attractive points, that’s all it does. It’s not emotionally involving enough to rate Blockbuster status. Frankly, I’m surprised it broke even.
December 5th, 2007 at 9:28 pm
I believe it’s the first.
December 5th, 2007 at 10:24 pm
Fear of loss is almost always the strongest motivator. Very few people actually believe they will ever be rich. Desire for gain is also a great motivator but I do not believe it is as strong.
The best thing to do would be to use a headline that instills both fear of loss and desire for gain. Such as:
“This is the only way left for the little guy to get rich, but if you fail to act you could eventually lose everything.”
December 5th, 2007 at 10:48 pm
Ad #1 Easy to read to the point written for the reader who needs the info. It tells them we have the solution.
#2 the fear factor would be a turn off too those who needs a solution.
I would have read #1 – #2 I would’ve trashed it
December 5th, 2007 at 11:36 pm
The winner is … Ad #2
I feel that the fear of loss is stronger than gaining something. The letter was pushing the reader to react to save their money.
The first ad, although effective was not a “stong” as the first. It need more of a “the IRS has been watching me – I had to have someone else reveal this information so they don’t lock me away again …” type of letter (which I would have reacted better to.
December 6th, 2007 at 3:09 am
Hmmm… tough choice but I have to go with #1.
I’m no copywriter, but I know enough about it to know the great power of telling a story that the reader can identify with like this. It just sucks you in and keeps you there clear to the end.
BTW: nice strategy to generate a ton of traffic to your blog
December 6th, 2007 at 7:49 am
It’s definitely the first ad:
- strong identification with the frustrations of the target market;
- offers an easy solution;
- good story (involving a cross wife;)
- conversational language that communicates emotionally
What else do you need?
December 6th, 2007 at 8:03 am
Number 1!
Although the headline in 2 caught my attention, the copy in #1 was much more of a compelling read! Most folks are getting thick skinned to the FEAR based copy, though it does work.
December 6th, 2007 at 8:24 am
I’d say the first one. It was more “personal” to me.
December 6th, 2007 at 9:42 am
I’d have to say the second ad, “Danger” was the winner while the first ad broke even.
The reason…first the headline stops people dead in their tracks…second Fear is a powerful emotion. Although Anger is just as powerful, in this case, I don’t know that all the readers would be angry enough to go out and incorporate.
December 6th, 2007 at 9:48 am
HI Daniel. First let me congratulate you on a great teleseminar promo. Really getting everyone involved is so viral. Keep up the good work.
I believe ad #1 is the million dollar winner and was probably a control for Ted.
Using the “common enemy” approach is very powerful in pulling the reader into your story. And since stories are so compelling it draws the reader in to discover more.
Since Ted knew there were more little guys out there I think he really laser targets the masses with this headline and lead.
As you read the lead you feel like your friend is revealing a close secret he just can’t keep inside any longer.
See you on the call.
Rick De Lima
http://www.magneticcopywriter.com
December 6th, 2007 at 9:55 am
Hello Daniel,
the ad #1 gets my vote.
It adresses a much wider audience and is a lot more emotional. Saying: “This guy is right! We can beat them. I CAN beat them!”.
December 6th, 2007 at 10:27 am
Why we incorporated…
We recently incorporated our business (no we’re not bankers, or accountants, we are in retail).
We did this out of FEAR and tax savings (and no you do not pay “almost zero taxes”)
I wanted to separate myself from legal issues of the business, so that if someone sues my company, they will not get my personal assets and vise versa.
I’ll be surprised IF ad #1 wins??
I do not believe it will from my own personal reasons for incorporating.
However IF ad 1 wins, I will be sure to make sure I figure out why.
Thanks,
Phil S.
December 6th, 2007 at 10:43 am
My vote is the second ad…
1. Great headline.
2. The ad is targeted.
3. The ad uses “you” effectively.
4. Has a lot of powerful words on the left hand side of the page.
5. Fear is a great motivator.
December 6th, 2007 at 11:07 am
This is a toughie. I’ve been through several IRS audits with no problem, so I’m not particularly “afraid” of the IRS. I also know enough about taxes and liability to know that just incorporating isn’t as big a protection as you might think. You can really get hammered by the tax man, although a “subchapter S” corporation may solve some of the tax disadvantages.
I own an LLC, and once had two of them. They can provide some protection, but a good umbrella liability policy is also important to have. Covers your home, cars, personal assets, and can cover your businesses.
Bottom line: Don’t do anything without consulting with professional advisers who know the ropes.
Neither ad appeals to me, but I’m guessing #2 did a better pull. But I won’t bet $10K on it.
December 6th, 2007 at 1:06 pm
Definitely the first one is the million dollar ad (for me at least).
December 6th, 2007 at 3:28 pm
I’m going for ad number ONE.
Main reason?
I am certain that I saw it again and again either in the late ’80s or early ’90s. That means it was pulling.
Second reason: It offers hope, talks to “the little guy” (which we all think we are) and promises to level the playing field, and even reveals the nut of what you’ll be gettng and sells you on THAT.
The second ad strikes fear, and does resonate with me at the moment, but seems to be speaking to those who feel that they already have it made. My gut is that a lot more of us feel that we aren’t quite there yet and that the cards are stacked against us and that we could use an inside push. That’s what the first ad promises.
December 6th, 2007 at 3:38 pm
Let me add:
Number one just feels much more conversational than does number two. To me that says that more people read it all.
December 6th, 2007 at 5:44 pm
I have to go with number 1. To me it appears to have a broader appeal to more individuals because it incites the desire to make more money and get your own back from the government.
Do trends seem to associate with the length of sales letters over time or is one always better?
December 6th, 2007 at 8:43 pm
I’m a bit late on this but only just discovered the website through a link from The Total Package. From what I’ve learnt working through the AWAI copywriting program, the first thing that jumped sharply to mind in favour of the 2nd ad was that the first one was all about the writer while the second one was all about the reader. The reader cares about himself; he couldn’t care less about the writer.
December 6th, 2007 at 9:04 pm
My money would be on the first ad to draw the highest response.
I know the fear of loss used in the second ad creates a strong pull on some people, but I think the first add has a less formal and more conversational style, which should appeal to a broader audience.
Lots of us “average taxpayers” can identify with the comments made about the government and how they play games with our money!!
December 6th, 2007 at 10:57 pm
I see said the blind man…
Depends on the target market.
If ad one (1) goes to the general public AND they do not have their own business (I’ve heard 70% of people want to have their own business) this one wins.
I think IF both ads went to people already IN business, ad number 2 would have won.
thanks
December 6th, 2007 at 11:45 pm
Fantastic call today, Daniel, overdelivery is the name of the game with Ted Nicholas, and providing this special gift before Christmas is just delicious! Thank you…
And, yes, I must say that the emotion in me picked the first ad as the winner the second I read it. Now, to turn that intuitive sense into copywriting failure fast! I just loved the discussion about failing fast and many times to make successes ring over the long haul of doing what you love many times over.
Again, thank you, and happy holidays.
Mary (P.S. I don’t even remember how I became part of your mailing list but I am certain now to stay on it! As Ted Nicholas said today, you have “astonished the [this} customer with the value you have provided.”)
December 7th, 2007 at 10:29 am
I am very disappointed that I was not able to listen to the call yesterday because I was dealing with an emergency but I would love to have an MP3 of it so I hope I get it right!
I am going with Ad #1 as the big winner. Though ad #2 is very compelling and provides a strong solution to the problem I believe #1 pulled more readers because to the buddy-to-buddy approach. Everyone is able to identify with it and the team spirit of us vs them.
If I am wrong will the call be broadcast again so I can listen?
December 7th, 2007 at 1:01 pm
Hi,
I feel the first Ad is the winner as it is upbeat and optimistic rather than a downer which can turn some people “off”.
December 7th, 2007 at 4:27 pm
Let’s up this bet to $25,000
Ad #1 is the winner.
December 7th, 2007 at 4:28 pm
my email is iandunlap@aol.com.
We can meet downtown Atlanta anytime you like.
December 10th, 2007 at 6:12 pm
I say it’s number one. I won’t be betting a bunch of money on it, but I am pretty darn sure it’s #1.
December 11th, 2007 at 4:31 am
Answer: Ad #2
Ad #1 focuses on the author’s opinion and relies on the reader’s empathy.
Ad#2, on the other hand, focuses on a specific fear that many readers in that market have, which combined with the offer of a sound solution, will grab the reader’s attention.
December 14th, 2007 at 3:26 pm
The “Only Way Left…” ad is the million dollar winner. It’s buddy-buddy and familiar, vs. the other ad which is more straight forward in its approach. The first ad hits more emotional hot buttons.
December 15th, 2007 at 12:36 am
I vote wholeheartedly #2.
The frightening danger of having every asset wiped out as quickly as overnight, and an easy, low-cost solution. Good “reasons why” — litigation-happy society, accidents beyond your control.
I like the “uncensored honesty” approach of number 1, but the headline isn’t as believable: everyone is saying there’s a way to get rich, which should I believe this is “the only way” left to do so?
Cheers, Dean (not Dan!) Kennedy
December 19th, 2007 at 6:52 pm
would be nice if this was updated sometime……..
January 1st, 2008 at 8:41 pm
Ad #2! The first headline is attention grabbing for men but the second headline pulls across gender. Also the second headline provides a fear component that drives urgency unlike the first headline.
March 29th, 2008 at 3:11 pm
I think the first ad was more effective because of the headline.
March 30th, 2008 at 3:44 am
I proposed #2 a kind of AD that sells
The rich needs assurance and they pay for any kind to get protected and away from danger…
April 19th, 2008 at 2:03 pm
Hi Daniel,
What I can’t quite understand is all the folks commenting, who think the rich are so evil and are voting for ad 1. Well, if they follow your rules and adapt your program and become rich themeselves, then what on earth are they going to say ? Kind of screwy to me…The rich are for the most part, good hard working folks that have found the key to their own success. More power to them. I hope to be in their league one day, soon. Also, Bush ain’t the enemy. Otherwise, ad # 2 IS the million dollar ad, absolutely !
May 7th, 2008 at 10:19 pm
I believe the second ad is the million dollar ad. Why? Because it’s been shown that people are more moved to solve a problem then to gain a benefit. And the second ad points out a problem and brings up fear–a powerful motivator.