Re: Testing 1…2…3…Testing….Testing.

> I am now of the opinion that testing is for
> those people who can afford to do it. You
> need to have results first, a baseline of
> information on which to compare your test.
> You need to have a control.

> You can test until something works, and then
> tweak and change it, or you can test against
> something already working. That might be a
> smarter way to go.

> Testing gets much easier ONCE you have a
> pocket full of money, just like finding a
> job is much easier if you already have
> one...

Gordon,

No question that testing is easier once you have the money to test, but...

how much do you need to test? As you know, I'm testing various products. These tests are costing a ton, only about $7-$8 per thousand circulation in daily newspapers. I can blanket someplace like Altoona, PA for a couple hundred bucks. Sure $150-$200 might be a lot for some folks but for many that is affordable.

Will I have to run multiple tests? Absolutely. Just like Ben Suarez has said you will only hit upon 1 out of 7 great ideas. Joe Sugarman said it was more like 1 out of 10. The point is once you hit on one it will more than pay for everything else when you roll it out to 20-40 million people.

Will I sacrifice a couple grand to see if one of my concepts will as Denny Hatch says "fog the mirror" or in other words-have life? As a direct marketer I say YES.

I don't know anyone that is successful in direct marketing that hasn't said YES also.

Spending money on tests that probably will not work, as Bart Simpson says, "Sucks and Blows".

Off to create some more money-losing ads...

Mike Winicki