-TW
April 9, 2010, 10:24 AM
Hi Ankesh...
As I said, I'm sure there IS something to what Glenn does. I've always been sure of that. I'm quirky + I'm naturally attracted to quirky.
But, way-over-the-edge quirky takes WORK to wade through (James Joyce analogy) - and I just decided I don't want to expend the time/energy (ever again).
But here's a question...
Having a non-effective headline lowers response rate, yes?
Therefore it's part of a marketer's 'responsibility' to create (or swipe) ever more effective headlines. Makes sense.
Question is, how in the world do you (in the same breath) give a 'pass' to someone who's very STYLE "polarizes" the reader -- something which, by definition, LOWERS response rate(s). That polarization turns readers off as badly as any lousy headline would, it would appear -- no?
9/10 people receiving a "Glenn special" letter out of the blue (EVEN IF he 'selects' his audience carefully) will look at it for 12 seconds, declare, "WEIRDO," then toss it in the trash -- no?
When you say, "De-crypting," what you really mean is, he's basically not speaking English. He is making the reader "learn a new hobby" and jump through the de-crypting hoop.
That is a response rate CRUSHER -- as bad as any crappy headline -- no?
Like saying, "How to read this letter -- 1) Hold it up to a mirror... 2) Cross out every third letter... 3) Stand on your head..."
No one is going to go to the trouble of doing that -- no matter how "charming/quirky" the writer is trying to be.
It's a SPECTRUM. In my opinion Glenn has crossed over from the Paul Harvey end, right into the James Joyce red zone. The ore per ton of dirt ratio is too low! It just takes too much damn EFFORT to slog through.
So, why "tsk, tsk" bad headlines, whilst "allowing" a narrowly appealing overall STYLE (that also severely REDUCES response rates)??
-- TW
As I said, I'm sure there IS something to what Glenn does. I've always been sure of that. I'm quirky + I'm naturally attracted to quirky.
But, way-over-the-edge quirky takes WORK to wade through (James Joyce analogy) - and I just decided I don't want to expend the time/energy (ever again).
But here's a question...
Having a non-effective headline lowers response rate, yes?
Therefore it's part of a marketer's 'responsibility' to create (or swipe) ever more effective headlines. Makes sense.
Question is, how in the world do you (in the same breath) give a 'pass' to someone who's very STYLE "polarizes" the reader -- something which, by definition, LOWERS response rate(s). That polarization turns readers off as badly as any lousy headline would, it would appear -- no?
9/10 people receiving a "Glenn special" letter out of the blue (EVEN IF he 'selects' his audience carefully) will look at it for 12 seconds, declare, "WEIRDO," then toss it in the trash -- no?
When you say, "De-crypting," what you really mean is, he's basically not speaking English. He is making the reader "learn a new hobby" and jump through the de-crypting hoop.
That is a response rate CRUSHER -- as bad as any crappy headline -- no?
Like saying, "How to read this letter -- 1) Hold it up to a mirror... 2) Cross out every third letter... 3) Stand on your head..."
No one is going to go to the trouble of doing that -- no matter how "charming/quirky" the writer is trying to be.
It's a SPECTRUM. In my opinion Glenn has crossed over from the Paul Harvey end, right into the James Joyce red zone. The ore per ton of dirt ratio is too low! It just takes too much damn EFFORT to slog through.
So, why "tsk, tsk" bad headlines, whilst "allowing" a narrowly appealing overall STYLE (that also severely REDUCES response rates)??
-- TW
