Rolls Royce copywriting portfolio

by

You probably know the famous Ogilvy Rolls Royce ad:

At 60 miles an hour the loudest noise in the new Rolls-Royce comes from the electric clock

Wouldn’t it be nice to write ads like this all the time?

Wouldn’t you like to simply highlight the classy superiority of the product that you’re selling, instead of teasing people with the amazing secret of the one-legged accountant… or prophesying “The End of America”… or promising a passive monthly income of $5,378… $7,442… yes, even $11,246 — no cash, credit, or skills required?

Well, if that’s what you’re dreaming of, then all I can tell you is, be David Ogilvy. Because even though Ogilvy was a big fan of direct response, this electric clock thing is an ad for a brand.

Back in 1958 when this ad came out, American consumers already knew Rolls Royce well. In fact, they already knew that Rolls Royce was the fanciest car brand around. The electric clock thing was just a dramatic illustration of that.

That’s not to say you couldn’t do something similar in a direct response ad. You just need to have a brand that your audience already knows and likes. Those do exist, at least for very small and tight pockets of people.

But if you ain’t got a brand like this, then you’ll be better off calling out a problem or making a big promise. No cash, credit, or skills required.

But you probably already know this. The only reason I bring it up is in case you’re fresh to direct response copywriting. In that case, maybe you’re wondering why Ogilvy’s ad — celebrated even by Gary Halbert — looks so different than your typical direct response piece.

Actually, there’s a second reason I bring it up.

It’s because it’s relevant to that other newbie question, about creating a copywriting portfolio. Because everything I’ve just told you is basically the best advice I can give to anyone looking to create a portfolio.

Perhaps the portfolio point I’m trying to make is obvious. Perhaps it’s not. In any case, I’ll spell it out in my email tomorrow.

Copywriting: a business or a job?

by

I was out of clean underwear, and things were looking bleak.

I was staying in an Airbnb apartment. I put my clothes to wash earlier in the morning.

But halfway through the cycle, the washing machine got stuck. It blinked stupidly. Even though I talked to it and comforted it, it wouldn’t spin or finish the cycle. My clothes, including all my underwear except what I had on, were stuck inside.

I wrote to the owner. “Oh, that’s too bad,” she answered. “My husband will come after work to take a look at it. If he can’t fix it, we’ll call the repairman.” It was 10am.

A few hours passed. I walked by the washing machine and spotted that the floor was wet. The washing machine was leaking somewhere. Water had pooled behind the machine, and was running along the wall all across the room. It even reached the next room, with the hardwood floor.

I wrote to the owner again. “Oh my God!” she said. “I’ll call the washing machine repairman right away!”

The point being, incentives matter. And on that topic:

Today I got paid the second 50% of the biggest copywriting project I have done to date. And so I did a debrief for myself, to see how the project went, and what I could learn from it.

My conclusion was this: I did a good job. I put in a lot of work, I gave the client much better ideas than they had initially, and I delivered solid copy.

And yet:

Will the client actually get value out of my copy? Will they simply send some cold traffic to it, and have the copy make money out the gate? And if not, will they know what to fix and tweak and test?

If I’m being honest with myself, I know there would be a bunch of things I’d have done differently if there were was some revenue share at stake on this project.

I would have taken more control of the project to put this copy into action sooner… I would have pushed back harder against client ideas that I thought were suspicious… I would have insisted on being involved in the project even now, after I’d delivered the copy.

Royalties are a good system. I’ve told my clients this for a while. And if you’re a copywriter, maybe you can do the same, using the same argument I’ve just given you.

And if you need an argument to bite the bullet and actually make this suggestion to your clients, and to even insist on it, then remember Dan Kennedy. “Copywriting is a business,” says Dan. “You have to get paid on the back end, otherwise you just have a job.”

That’s all the motivation I have for you for today. Now for the sales pitch:

I write an email newsletter. Sometimes I talk about the business of copy, other times I talk about copywriting itself. If this is the kind of thing that floats your lancha, you can join the newsletter here.

Guru to a bunch of bossy bottoms

by

Today’s post is long and heavy. My intention in saying this is to deter you from reading on, but I am aware it might have the opposite effect. Still I feel I’ve done my duty by making this warning. So here goes:

In high school, I was friends with a girl I will call Caroline. Caroline and I liked the same music… liked the same movies… had the same sense of humor. It was like kismet.

Then one day, along with some friends including Caroline, I drank a bottle of gin.

I was not an expert drinker in those days, so I lost control. I started running around like a jackass… I made out with Caroline in a burrito shop bathroom… and then I blacked out for the rest of the evening. Eventually, I puked all over a friend’s car, was taken home, and passed out in my own bed, to wake up the next morning without even a hangover.

And here’s where the plot curdles:

I wasn’t pleased about the drunken burrito-shop makeout with Caroline, but I wasn’t ashamed either.

What I did find unsettling was hearing from several friends how Caroline was going around in the following days, elated that something had finally happened between me and her. She had been hoping for this for months, she said, and now it was finally here. It seems she had had a crush on me for a while.

And the weirdest thing happened. I began to really hate Caroline.

I guess there were two parts to it. One part I understood right then and there, back in 11th grade… the other I realized tonight. Let me tell you about both parts, and how they are strangely relevant to the world of copywriting and online marketing.

Back then, what I realized in a moment of insight was that Caroline had gradually adopted my personality.

I’m not sure how I didn’t notice this before. Maybe I was naive, or maybe I was egotistical.

But what became as clear as gin was that Caroline had picked up on the music I liked and then started listening to the same… she did the same with the movies I said I enjoyed… and she had mimicked whatever humor and mannerisms I had at that time. That was the explanation for the seeming kismet.

My 17-year-old self found this repulsive. The idea that somebody would abandon their own personality and adopt mine… it was the sign of a person who is weird and weak. Not somebody I wanted to be associated with. So in my typical fashion, I cut off all contact with Caroline, and didn’t talk to her for years.

That’s the part I realized back in 11th grade about why Caroline repelled me.

But I never took it one step further, until tonight. I never asked myself, what’s so bad about having somebody idolize you? Why not let them have their fun, and get what you can out of the relationship, which should in theory be a lot?

I’ll tell you what I discovered. The term of art for it is a “bossy bottom.” Or at least that’s what Michael Taft called it in an interview I heard with him today.

Taft teaches meditation, and he’s worked with lots of individuals as well as big corporations like Google and for all I know Halliburton. He has a best-selling book on meditation… he has a successful podcast on the same… and in this particular field, he’s apparently a bit of a celeb.

So Taft talked about how he won’t teach people who treat him as a guru and look up at him with glossy eyes. “I don’t want to teach people who are in a trance,” Taft said. “And plus, that’s not even the biggest issue.”

Because according to Taft, these entranced and enguru-ed people aren’t the passive followers they might seem. Taft believes they control the guru as much as the guru controls them.

These “bossy bottoms” can manipulate the guru by modulating what they allow to apparently affect them. “Oh when he does this thing, I won’t react… but when he does this other thing, I will react.”

So that’s part 2 of my repulsion for Caroline. It’s not that I found her weak and weird… but that I realized how she had actually manipulated me, controlled me, and influenced me, in a way that I was blind to. She had made me feel weak and weird.

Perhaps it’s now clear how this might apply to marketing. Because the high form of marketing is achieving guruship. It’s where you have the biggest and easiest influence. As Ken McCarthy said in a recent interview:

I don’t know where I first got the notion that being a celebrity was a great thing. And then somebody put it in my ear that really anybody can be a celebrity. It’s a manufactured thing.

And I’m like, wow, that’s interesting.

And then the next piece was, celebrity is relative. So you don’t have to be world famous to make a ton of money, you just have to be famous within a finite group of money-spending people, and you can have all the money you can handle.

And when those three items congealed in my brain, I was like: “Whoa, I’m going to be a celebrity.”

And it really can be easy. The steps to become a guru are by now well-known. There’s not much more to it than going outdoors, finding a soapbox no shorter than 6 inches in height, and standing up on it day after day.

Of course, there are other things you can do to speed up the process. But even with just your 6-inch soapbox, people out there will find you, listen to you, and start to follow you. And eventually, if you’re halfway decent and at least a quarterway successful, some of them will begin to idolize you.

As Ken says, it’s easy and it’s profitable. That’s the argument for it. And if you’re doing the Lord’s work or you really love your flock of followers, it can be the best thing in the world.

But if you are just looking to become a guru as a shortcut to freedom… or if you’re after power and control… then maybe today’s post will be an argument against becoming a guru. Because you can’t become a guru, not unless you agree to be completely and secretly manipulated in turn.

But if that don’t dissuade you… and you want to know in more detail what I mean by a 6-inch soapbox, you can see one here.

Crank positioning

by

Yesterday, Ben Settle sent out an email with his interview with Ken McCarthy. And in the first part of the interview, Ken says the following:

So my positioning was, I wanted to be the honest broker of information on internet marketing.

And I also wanted to be the guy that you could trust on innovation issues. That if he said something was worth looking at, it was worth looking at. Not worth mortgaging the farm for, but worth taking a look, worth carving a little time out of your week and making sure that you were conversant with it.

And then I also wanted to be seen as a guy that stuck to the fundamentals, and valued the fundamentals, and drilled the fundamentals. Because the fundamentals really are, at the end of the day, what’s going to get you through everything.

I think there’s a fine line, running from Dan Kennedy, through Ken McCarthy, to Ben Settle, following this type of “honest broker” positioning. Dan and Ken and Ben all follow the three points in the quote above.

But there’s another positioning ingredient shared by all these guys. The best way I can describe is they are all cranks, in the various meanings of that word. For example:

“Being offended… hopefully you will be, at some point. I sort of pride myself on it.” That’s from the start of a Dan Kennedy seminar.

Or Ken’s current quest to prove corona is history’s biggest misinformation campaign.

Or Ben’s strategy of repulsion marketing. Ben mocks, shames, and drives away the many potential customers he does not want to serve.

All three of these guys also make a point of being low-tech, both in their marketing and in their private lives. You can only contact Dan Kennedy by fax. Ken started a recent email with, “Let me be clear: I loathe Facebook.” And Ben prides himself on ugly website design and on plain-text sales emails.

It is all just a coincidence?

I don’t think so. Rather, I suspect there’s a certain personality type that gets drawn to “honest broker” positioning… or perhaps the crank persona gives more credibility to people who adopt this position, and that’s why we hear of the cranks.

In any case, this might be something to keep in mind, if you too are looking to position yourself in your market.

On the one hand, this is probably not a position you can hold unless it matches your own personality on some level.

But if you already feel you are the honest broker of information in your market… or, on the other hand, if you have the personality of a crank, and you want to profit from it… then you might consider adopting the other half of this system.

​​With both parts in place, you can be the crusty but credible grouch, spitting and cursing (and making sales) in a marketplace full of crooks and idiots.

But if crank positioning doesn’t suit you, don’t worry. There are lots of other ways to position yourself. This is something I discuss on occasion in my newsletter. In case you’re interested, here’s where you can join.

Powerful old males argument that doesn’t get used enough

by

Back in 2018, a local newspaper in New York state published a racy article about actress Julia Roberts. The headline read:

“Julia Roberts Finds Life And Her Holes Get Better With Age”

The newspaper later ran a correction. Apparently they meant Julia’s roles, with an R, were getting better.

This story sounds almost fake, doesn’t it?

​​But apparently it’s true. Or at least it was fact-checked by the people at the BBC. They smugly called it a “spectacular reminder of why we need sub-editors – whose job it is to check spelling, grammar and facts in every article.”

There’s no great reason that I’m telling you this. Except one habit I have is to keep a document with unique sales arguments I come across.

Here’s one I read in a sales letter by copywriting legend Robert Collier. Collier was selling a news service for businessmen, and he wrote:

“You are paying for my services whether you use them or not, but you are paying in lost time, in needless mistakes and worries.”

This argument might be something you too can profit from. Because I don’t see this in sales copy today, but it seems very versatile.

You could use this argument to convince a prospect to buy your information product… or to engage your copywriting services… or, if you happen to be a sub-editor who can keep roles from turning into holes, to hire your eagle eyes.

In fact, that last service is something I myself could use, to keep from making needless mistakes in my email newsletter. But if occasional mistakes don’t bother you, and you’d like to get regular emails with ideas on persuasion, sales, and copywriting, then you can join my newsletter here.

Stop reading this blog unless you want to march in my army

by

How do you overcome somebody’s confirmation bias?

That’s something I found out today in a provocative article titled the “Curation/Search Radicalization Spiral.”

The article tells the story of a 13-year-old Jewish kid from Washington D.C. who became a true-believing moderator of an alt-right subreddit.

The story itself is less interesting than it sounds. What is interesting is how Mike Caulfield, the author of the article, explains how this kind of “grooming” happens.

How could a Jewish kid from a liberal family be persuaded to join a far-right community, made up of people who are often hostile to Jews?

And more broadly, how is it possible to overcome somebody’s confirmation bias… and implant ideas that were once inconceivable?

I won’t repeat Caulfield’s entire argument here. But the gist is the idea of gradual curation. Here’s how it works:

1. A person (the mark, for short) goes to a subreddit or a Facebook group or somebody’s blog.

2. There he gets exposed to a curated claim. This is a claim that is carefully selected, provocative, but not threatening to his world view.

For example, the 13-year-old above was accused of sexual harassment by a classmate. So maybe he came across a claim on Reddit that said, “Study in Cambridge Law Journal reports up to 90% of rape allegations are false.”

3. At this point, the mark is intrigued but also a bit cautious. So he goes on to verify the claim for himself by doing a quick Google search. There it is, “Rumney, Philip N.S. (2006). ‘False Allegations of Rape’. Cambridge Law Journal. 65 (1): 128–158.”

4. Mind is blown. Now the mark is ready to repeat the process one level down… with another curated but more provocative claim, which gets him closer to the alternate reality.

None of this is news to marketers. Curating facts is what good direct response copy is all about, and Gene Schwartz wrote about “gradualization” back in 1966.

There are even copy tricks to simulate verifying something yourself. But maybe it’s a bit tasteless to give you a step-by-step here, since we started by talking about the radicalization of a 13-year-old.

So instead, let me tell you what I personally get out of this. It might be relevant to you also:

The upshot for me is to avoid curated content as much as possible. That means turning off social media… news sites… and I hate to say it, newsletters like mine.

Because everybody has an agenda. And if you give somebody a freeway into your mind that’s open 24 hours a day, every day, it gets harder to resist that agenda.

You start being groomed… and the next thing you know, you might be marching in somebody else’s army, fighting somebody else’s war, fully convinced it was your idea all along.

My prediction about the future of direct response hits

by

“The next Tesla may even hire creators to evangelize the company or at least, serve as a paid marketing channel. Creators are essentially media companies now, which means that the creators of tomorrow will operate a lot like the New York based publications of yesteryear.”
— David Perell

My email yesterday looked at some fancy science, and made a simple point:

A hit product is the result of chance. The first few raindrops of popularity determine which spots in the product landscape become lakes, and which ones deserts.

I think this leads to a few conclusions. One is that, just because a product (or an offer) was successful before, this doesn’t necessarily mean it is worth studying. It might have become successful due to chance more than any intrinsic quality or real demand. And vice versa. You clearly cannot count on the quality of your product as your only key to success.

So what can we do about this?

One option is simply to put out lots more offers. This will increase your chances of getting at least one big hit.

And then there’s the fact that early buzz seems to be crucial to long-term success. Which to me suggests that street teams.. astroturfing… or influencer marketing are really where much of your marketing efforts should go.

And that’s what David Perell is saying in the quote above. Media-savvy businessmen like Elon Musk are already using creators as their main marketing channel. And the “next Tesla” will probably do more of the same.

But hold on a second. Tesla? That’s a whole other country from the direct response businesses I normally talk about.

After all, if some guy in 1995 got a sales letter from Gary Halbert about a book on killer orgasms… he probably didn’t go down to the local bar to ask his buddies if they knew anything about this orgasms book, and if it’s worth the $39.95 Halbert was charging for it.

In other words, people chose traditional direct response offers in a more independent way than they choose cars or movies.

But as I’ve written before, I feel that’s changing. In the same way that traditional brand businesses are becoming more direct response savvy… traditional direct response businesses are discovering the power of having a brand. So the same reality of what makes a big hit matters for modern DR businesses too.

The way I see it, that means you’ve got two options:

One is to become a creator yourself, because businesses will need you more and more.

The other is to hire creators or influencers to promote your offers, so you can create enough initial buzz to make it a hit.

That raises the question of who to hire and when and what they should say… All interesting questions. I’ll talk about that another day. And if by some strange circumstance you want to hear what I have to say then, you can subscribe to my email newsletter.

Experts are baffled: The magic ingredient that makes a hit

by

Back when Jim Morrison and The Doors released their first album, they were a bunch of movie school bums whose biggest ambition was to become as big as the cult LA band Love.

Who remembers Love today? Not many. But hundreds of millions know Jim Morrison and Doors hits like “Light My Fire” and “Hello, I Love You.”

This global success might never have happened. But The Doors, bums that they were, spent weeks calling up the local LA radio station, requesting that cool new song, Light My Fire.

​​The song eventually became a local hit… then a national hit… then the album became a hit… and then The Doors became the next big thing.

Maybe you can do the same. At least that’s one conclusion I drew from a mind-opening article by Duncan Watts.

The article is titled “Is Justin Timberlake a Product of Cumulative Advantage?” You can find it on The New York Times Magazine site, and it’s worth reading from beginning to end. But if you’re pressed for time or attention, let me summarize it for you:

Conventional wisdom says the success of a book or a song or a movie is based on two things. One is the product itself. The other is what the market wants at that time.

And the conclusion, based on this conventional wisdom, is simple. If anybody fails to predict what will become successful, he is either too dumb or too lazy to read the writing on the wall.

Well, Watts had his doubts about this. So he set up a clever experiment to test it out. I won’t rehash the full details of how the experiment ran. The gist was it involved looking at which songs became popular among nine different segments of 14,000 people.

People in one segment had no information about how popular each song already was. People in the other eight segments knew how popular each song was, but only within their own segment.

This setup allowed Watts to test two ideas:

1. The most popular songs will be roughly as popular in the different segments.

2. The same songs will float to the top in the different segments.

Both of these hypotheses turned out to be very false.

First, in the eight “social influence” segments, the most popular songs became way more popular than in the “no social influence” segment. And the losers were more thorough losers.

​​Maybe that’s not so amazing. But get this:

In the different “social influence” segments, different songs became the most popular. And this wasn’t a minor reordering. A song could be no. 1 in one segment and no. 40 in another.

Watts explains this in a blindingly obvious way:

People do not make decisions independently of other people. The world is too complex… we usually don’t know what we want… and we often get more value out of a shared experience than out of the “best” experience.

All this means that small, random differences in initial popularity can have a massive impact in what becomes a hit and what doesn’t. That’s what Watts calls cumulative advantage. The rich get richer. And who gets rich initially? Well, that’s a coin toss.

This explains my Grinch story from yesterday. Chuck Jones had to pitch the Grinch 25 times, not because industry experts are too dumb or closed-minded to see the potential that was there… but because it’s genuinely impossible to predict what will succeed.

Randomness is the magic ingredient that determines a hit.

But what about The Doors? And what about direct response marketing, where decisions are more likely to be independent? And is there anything positive we can conclude from all this?

I believe so. But this post is running long already… so if you’re interested in more on this, I’ll finish it up tomorrow.

How the Grinch stole V-day

by

Every marketer in Whoville likes Valentine’s a lot.
But this marketer from Whoville for some reason does not.
So instead of an email that ties into V-day, too,
Here’s how Chuck Jones sold the Grinch, and why it matters to you.

Let’s set the stage:

The year is 1962. Our main character is Charles Martin Jones, better known as Chuck Jones.

If you’ve ever watched Saturday morning cartoons before Cartoon Network came out, you probably know this name. Because Chuck Jones directed a bunch of the most famous Warner Brothers cartoons of all time, the ones with Bugs Bunny and Daffy Duck and Wile E. Coyote and Road Runner.

In fact, when 1000 professional animators were asked to rank the 50 greatest cartoons of all time, Chuck Jones’s cartoons came in 10 times among the top 50… 4 times out of the top 5… and one, What’s Opera Doc?, took the number one spot.

But in 1962, that was all in the past. Because Jones was no longer at Warners, but was now at MGM. He was pushing to get a Christmas feature made, based on a book by his friend Ted Geisel, aka Dr. Seuss.

There are lots of interesting details about How the Grinch Stole Christmas went from a book to a cartoon. But there’s only one bit that’s relevant for us today:

Once Jones created the storyboard for the cartoon, he had to go and sell it. Because in those days, you didn’t pitch a show to a network. Instead you had to find sponsors first. So Jones went around town, giving presentation after presentation of his storyboard for How the Grinch Stole Christmas.

But nobody wanted it. The cereal people… the chocolate people… the sea monkey people. They all said no.

All in all, Chuck Jones had to pitch the Grinch 25 times before an unlikely group — The Foundation for Commercial Banks — finally agreed to finance it.

And then, as you probably know, the Grinch cartoon became a huge success. It’s been playing every Christmas season ever since it came out. And Dr. Seuss’s book, which sold 5,000 copies before the cartoon — not bad for a kid’s book — started selling 50,000 copies a year once the cartoon came out, and never let up.

By now this might sound like a typical story of a sleeper hit, and of the Elmer Fudds who were too dumb to recognize it. And you know what? That’s exactly what it is, and why I’m telling it to you.

Because there are too many stories like this. Star Wars… Harry Potter… The Beatles. Giant hits to which the industry experts said no, no, no.

Did you ever ask yourself why?

You might think it’s the sclerosis of industry insiders… but something else is going on. And if you’re in the business of creating offers and you want them to become big hits, then this is relevant to you too. I’ll tell you the explanation I’ve found for this mysterious phenomenon in my email tomorrow.

How to get free consulting from high-paid experts

by

I was just listening to January’s issue of Steal Our Winners, where Rich Schefren somehow gets top marketers to share what’s working for them right now.

So today I listened to a guy named Seth Greene, who is new to me but apparently has deep roots in the Internet marketing community.

Seth made a throwaway comment that I thought was very valuable. And since it was a throwaway comment, and not the main topic of the presentation Seth was making, I think it’s ok to share here.

In a nutshell, Seth revealed how he gets free consulting from high-paid experts.

High-paid? Like who?

Like Russell Brunson, the face and CEO of ClickFunnels. Russell charges $10,000 for lunch (“to pick his brain,” according to his site) and $1M if you’d like him to get up out of his La-Z-Boy and build a funnel for you.

Those rates might sound outrageous, but they make sense. Because Russell’s ClickFunnels did $100M+ in 2020, and is valued at over $1B. In other words, this guy’s time and expertise is valuable.

And yet, Seth got two separate consulting sessions with Russell for free. Seth got to ask all sorts of questions that were relevant to his own success… and had Russell thinking hard to come up with the best and most valuable answers.

And maybe I didn’t mention this enough, but this consulting was all free. So how did Seth do it?

Easy. He invited Russell onto his podcast.

This is a new spin on the value of a podcast I had never thought about. Maybe it’s new to you too, and maybe it’s something you can use starting today.

“Yeah right,” you might say. “Even if I had a podcast, which I don’t because who would listen to me, how would I possibly get Russell Brunson on my show?”

Well, that’s a part (just one part) of what Seth shared in his Steal Our Winners segment, which is titled, “How To Recruit A Cult Of 50 Evangelists To Promote Your Brand For Free.”

Make no mistake. Seth’s system will take work. And it will take time. But it’s doable for anybody, even if you don’t have authority, charisma, or a deep budget.

And I think that if you head over to Steal Our Winners now and sign up, you can still get the January issue, and Seth’s presentation inside it. In case you’re interested, here’s the link:

https://bejakovic.com/sow