"That extra effort is what gives traditional media its added oomph—typically 10-100 times that of a plain-vanilla email campaign"
This sentence is used in below paragraph:
They work because, to your prospect, it's a given that you've put in more effort. (A printed sales pack costs you more to put together; a telephone call takes 100% of one person's attention for its duration.) That extra effort is what gives traditional media its added oomph—typically 10-100 times that of a plain-vanilla email campaign.
I think that it means: extra effort can make the media more appealing. But the next part of the sentence is ambiguous for me:
- typically 10-100 times that of a plain-vanilla email campaign
Answer
A traditional media [campaign] (in long-established forms such as radio, television, and newspapers)
has more oomph (strength, power, [sex] appeal)
than a plain-vanilla email campaign (standard, basic, without any added features)
It's a pretty vacuous thing to say, since it's almost impossible to measure/quantify the efficacy of an advertising campaign, and totally impossible to quantify the "oomph/power/appeal" of a campaign except by using "increased sales" as a proxy.
I assume the writer means that if you run, say, a newspaper ad campaign, your sales increase will be 10-100 times greater than it would have been if you'd spent the same amount sending "spam" emails. Obviously if you run a properly-targeted email campaign (only contacting past customers, or people otherwise known to have a particular interest in your product), you'll get much better results. But that costs much more than sending spam.
No comments:
Post a Comment