COMMENTS
Great post. The USPS also fails to realize that their customer service is the absolute worse. If we as business owners treated our customers like we get treated when we have to stand in their lines, we wouldn't be in business
I'm not sure I agree entirely with the "throw the baby out as well..." approach. The truth is that direct mail does work if done well.
A hammer is a very good tool to drive a fastener into some material, but when you are using it to pound a sheetrock screw into a piece of sheet metal to attach the metal to a cinder block, well that is just plain stupid. Yet, if the only tools in your toolbox is a hammer and a sheetrock screw, you might just be tempted to use it. "Ah, crap! Nothing works!" you scream as the sheet metal falls to the ground, unattached to the cinder block.
Yet, it doesn't mean the hammer is a poor tool just not the right one.
In-bound marketing is the same way; it is not the tool from every job. I NEED the USPS for reminder post cards for our soccer tournament product http://www.tourneycentral.com for when teams apply or when email is getting bounced. I also need blogs, email and RSS for in-bound marketing.
Teams like the postcard and they respond to it, when used correctly. Blasting out a poorly design postcard that says "Come to our soccer tournament." is crap, I agree. But, a well-designed card that 1) reminds them to do something like confirm attendance or check their schedule and 2) says "hey, psst.. remember me? are invaluable in my business.
I also disagree there is no data. When I use the USPS to push teams to my web sites, I see direct and measurable activity in increased page views and actionable items, like confirmations, applications, team list submissions, etc.
Please refrain from making over-arching, hyperbolic statements. The USPS is not dead. Neither is print, neither is the telephone. They are merely tools to be applied to the correct problem. I do, however, agree that the USPS needs to change and that an over-reliance on direct mail is also not their "holy grail" to recovery.
Back to my metaphor; if all you have is a hammer, then you will see every problem as a nail. Not every problem is a nail.
Dear Stephen,
Direct mail is actually a more viable option now. Because of the reduced volume, a well crafted mail piece can be very effective and should compliment your online advertising efforts. The deciding factor is the dollar value of what you are selling. Yes you can hawk your widget (the old kind) online, but if you are promoting high dollar items or services. The mistake that is made by most is buying one of those lists and sending out mail shotgun style. A direct mail list should be targeted to clients who you have qualified yourself.
1) Dedicate a staff person to calling and getting names. Unlike a cold call, you are simply updating a list so it doesn't take sales skills.
2) Trade show leads. What have you don with all those business cards?
3) Your online subscriptions. Don't rely on an email address alone. Also get their physical address.
4) Your customer list. Even existing customers need to be sold sometimes, and former ones can be brought back. You may have a new service or product. This is the way to get them interested.
5) Be creative. High production value and a real concept that coordinates with your image are important.
6) HAVE A CALL TO ACTION OR OFFER.
This is the step that is often ignored. Tell then what you want them to do. Visit your site for more info. Call for a free demo. Book your service now for a discount. Add a value to the piece.
By doing that the expense of a mail piece will pay off many times over.
Don't think this is a slanted view comes from a Direct Mail provider or agency. I'm the owner of a video and integrated media production company. It's just part of our own marketing plan. It works.
Keep up the good work on your blog. I find it very useful. Thanks for your time.
- Mike Weber
www.cmrStudios.com
Gerard, great comment. This is the wonderful thing about blogging -- you get immediate, challenging feedback right away. It makes you better at what you do.
Perhaps, I'm a little too strong here, but I do think it's fair to say direct mail (and print) are dying.
Yes, done right, some direct mail campaigns will work. But at what cost? If you hired a great sales person to go talk to everybody on your list, that would work, too. But you don't do that because it's prohibitively expensive. Soon, we will see direct mail the same way. Yes, you could do it, but the resources involved don't justify it.
Gerald is spot on. There are a lot of lousy blogs out there too. Doesn't mean blogs are bad. It comes back to content and delivering value to the right audience. It's junk when it has no value to the recipient--whether it's mail, email, print, phone, or blog. It's more accurate to say that Direct Mail--as it's been done in the past--is dying.
Your post is 99.99% wrong! Direct mail is not dead, far from it. I have been a direct mail guy for 28 years. I've mailed over 1 billion pieces during that time period.
With this as background, here's what experienced direct mailers in the consumer market know.
1. Direct mail is more expensive. The factors making DM more expensive over the past couple of years are increases in postage (35% or more), paper increases and list rental increases on solid performing lists.
2. To offset cost increases, good marketers have worked tirelessly on their creative message (always be testing), have tested formats (moving from magalogs to digests and sometimes envelope packages), have pressed print and other vendors for every pennny of savings and finally carefully researched and choosen direct response lists based on product affinity, similar average order value, who else is mailing the list and tight analysis of the response.
3. Increased costs and market uncertainity creates opportunity for smart mailers as some people/firms (like the Rick Burnes, the article writer) say direct mail is dead or untentable.
As for my own experience, direct mail held up just fine just 2008. Our response rates averaged over 1.4% with some nearing 2.0% The average order, while bouncing around in the Spring and Summer (maybe due to oil price sticker shock) has now stabilized and for us is healthy at >$100.
People like me from the "old school" asl know that its best not to be a dinasour and have put our toes in the online world. We're not fully there yet (success is a realtive continium) but we're learning and watch out for we'll be tough competitirs when we figure it out.
Finally, the point that is missing from your letter to the USPS is that the USPS should take a page out of the UK and European Postal counterparts. In the UK and Europe you negotiate price with the postal authority based on volume. The more you mail, the less you pay per piece. If the USPS followed this lead and really understood it's cost structure the business world would be alot better off.
Michael, I completely agree with you. The bottom line is content and delivering value to the right audience.
There is a big difference b/t bad blogs and bad direct mail, though. Bad blogs cost virtually nothing except the author's time. Bad direct mail comes with the costs of producing, sending and filtering the mail.
@Rick Burnes: Again, to my point.. it is a MIX, not one or the other. Sometimes the resources DO justify it. Print says "I'm legit." Really good print says "Let's do business."
@Mike Weber: #3 by extension, having a mailing address in addition to just an email address is a legit way of qualifying a lead.
@Michael Mallory: Gerard, not Gerald.. no "L" :-) But, thank you for piping in.. Good point! Everything else is dying.. including in-bound marketing and news tuff is being born. And crap is crap, whether it is printed, blogged or emailed.
Now, for a sense of irony... notice the mailing address at the beginning of this letter. Did you mail it using USPS? :-)
Rick and Mike, you both point out ways to improve direct mail campaigns.
These sounds like the right things to do if you want to get more value out of the mailings you send to people.
However, I think it's far more efficient to do things that make it easier for potential customers to find you.
A lot of great information in this article and probably even more so in the comments. Anyone have any thoughts on how products like Zumbox (zumbox.com) could further change the landscape of direct mail? Seems like an interesting idea, but is it really all that realistic?
@gerard I absolutely agree that a mix is a good thing (your point about the right tool for the job is a good one). I'm writing in absolutes here because the center of the conversation needs to be shifted away from traditional methods.
And re the irony -- I don't hope for or expect the USPS' demise. It's a great service. Except it should be in the business of deliver stuff people WANT, not stuff people automatically throw away.
Direct Mail is dead for YOUR business. Not because your creative wasn't engaging (it probably was great). Not because you bought the wrong list (you guys probably spent some time w/ your consultant or agency making sure the "right" people were targeted). It doesn't work for you for one main reason: for the people you are selling your product/service to, direct mail is not part of their CONTEXT - it doesnt matter to them, it isn't something they bother to look at, it doesn't work for your customers.
When the creative is great, and the message is right and the list is properly managed and maintained and the call to action is there and there is an attempt to "close the loop" Direct Mail works.
It works for Ford Motor Company. It worked for Ikea. It works for the US Navy recruiting (and seriously - THAT is a huge marketing challenge considering what is happening in the world today). Direct Mail drives to web, drives to phone center, drives to mobile... if done right it can be powerful (I have seen it work first hand).
Lets bring CONTEXT back into the conversation. While we all think the Social is the greatest thing since sliced bread, the user, the average Joe, the person who doesnt have a twitter AND tumbler AND flickr AND Facebook AND brightkite AND Qik AND AND AND doesnt live in our world (the world where Direct Mail is thrown away). They still watch TV commercials and infomercials and fill out reader reply cards. They dont all have TiVos and iPhones and are savvy users (the spam business would have died a painful death years ago if it didnt work - there are still people who click on spam).
"X, Y & Z Are Dead" is so old and tired. CMOs aren't going to turn their entire marketing budget over to the Social kids anytime soon. The guys in the Marketing department are working these techniques (you guys are branding it as "inbound") into their orgs over time but they aren't throwing out the other channels. While the old school may not be viable for a new company or startup (which needs maximum impact with low cost/effort), large and established companies have goals and success metrics to meet (whether its leads, sales, whatever) that right now just-Social or just-digital cannot reach. We still don't know which 50% of our marketing budgets work (to paraphrase Wannamaker) but 50% is still working.
It's going to be an evolution, not a revolution.
People have been reporting the death of direct mail for decades. Nothing new.
It is changing, and the halcyon days of big mailings to big lists went the way of the big SUV years ago.
But to say it's dead and irrelevant is short sighted and just plain wrong.
The way people receive info has become so fractured -- they want it immediately, yet they'll sit through months of American Idol to see who the winner is. We want hour by hour stock market updates online, but wait (somewhat) patiently for the next book in the Twilight series.
We say we abhor direct mail, yet appreciate the offer to save 25% on our yard work for 2009, enjoy getting that catalog from a musical instrument company, or simply wouldn't receive our bills any other way.
Anyway, direct mail has changed dramatically. Hopefully, many people have changed with it.
Thing is, if you blog, or work in e-retail, or search or some other online business ... don't get too smug. Our industry changes a whole lot faster than direct mail ever could.
To Rick Burnes point that he thinks "it's far more efficient to do things that make it easier for potential customers to find you" (he implies through a mix of online marketing efforts/strategies that Hubspot promotes - these on the surface are GOOD and should be done) my personal experience is the opposite. Measured in Acquistion Cost Per Customer I acquire paid customers for $35-$50 by direct mail and up to 50% more online. I readily admit that I'm not a genius online but my colleagues at other companies doing both dm and online report the same experience.
The key take aways are 1) the USPS like most things the Government puts its hands on is bloated and ineffective. It needs a complete overhaul. If not, let FEDEX or USPS take over the business. 2) Hubspot and other groups (MarketingExperiements.com) add valuable insight into what's working and practical steps for implementation 3) its important to step out of professional comfort zones and learn and try new things.
@Rick Popowitz My experience with direct vs. online (primarily with geo-targeted mailings) is the exact opposite; I've found direct mail to be at least 100% more than online advertising.
I'm sure the audience matters (I was targeting a connected audience). And I'm sure there are ways my direct mail campaigns could have been more efficient.
What type of online campaigns were you doing -- ppc? display advertising? Or something like blogging, webinars or other content creation? We find the later to be far more efficient.
@sean Thanks for raising the evolution vs revolution point. I totally agree ... except that in order to nudge the evolution along, you often need to act like there's a revolution going on.
I don't think one can argue with the facts that direct mail is decreasing and email marketing is growing, but to say that direct mail doesn't work is not true. Perhaps direct mail is wrong for hubspot, for your target audience, for your product, etc.
Let me first start out by saying your printed brochure/whitepaper sat on my desk for months before I engaged your company. It was a constant reminder of your company. Your emails... buried or filed into bytes/bits out of sight.
Don't get me wrong, I like (love) online marketing, but having a total approach to marketing using multiple channels increases your reach. To rely on just email marketing or online online marketing... we would disastrous.
So let's review your points.
1. Expensive -- Yes, when you look at per unit costs vs email. No questions about it. Here you might need to make decisions on reach and frequency and other factors to make it more cost-effective.
2. No data/tracking -- Depending on the offer or message, you can point people back to a web site or have them bring the piece in to your booth or company, etc. Many trade events we exhibit at have attendees bringing in their direct mail letter right to our booth. Every situation is different. Maybe the mail objective is to get your company name in front of people so it becomes top of mind when an email or phone call is placed.
3. Don't like it -- Since I get so few direct mail pieces, I take the time to read/look them over. Tossing the mail piece is not a medium issue as I can click "delete" faster than I can toss paper. (doesn't hotmail and gmail have "junk" and delete buttons to make it leave just as fast as it comes in. So you can argue there's junk with methods. A well crafted piece gets my attention which is true to any advertising. Another point (as I mentioned about your brochure), sometimes that piece sits on someones desk (front and center). Final point... our industry target audience receives on average 75 emails a day!!!!! The competition with email is tough if you can get beyond the traps.
4. Cheaper, more efficient -- cheaper was point one, more efficient? I find creating either to be the same amount of work. I think this just depends on what you are doing. Just a month ago, a friend of mine was discouraged as it was taking her 30+ hours to pull off their monthly e-newsletter.
In a nutshell, you need to do what works for your company and if it's direct mail, mail away... if it's blogs, blog away or do both.
Well, you sure did stir up a flurry with this post, Rick!
Some great points have already been made in support of the cardiac health of direct mail. I'll just ad this.
Effective marketing begins with 1. a strategy
2. a plan to execute the strategy and
3. attention to the details of delivery: language, tone, graphics etc.
Direct mail - when done right - can be an effective part of the marketing mix for many businesses.
(BTW, in that last sentence you could take out direct mail and plug in blogging, email marketing, pay per click, SEM ... emphasis on the "when done right" please :)
@chris "you need to do what works for your company and if it's direct mail, mail away" -- no question.
The point here, made beneath a rhetorical layer to get a conversation going, is that the efficiency difference means that fewer companies will find that DM "works" for them.
That's why the USPS, which is undeniably a good thing we want to see survive, should rely less on DM.
Ha! This reminds me of a speaker I heard last year who told the audience email was dead -- as if!
Well, I'm sorry, but like that speaker, you are just plain wrong on this one. Direct mail does work. It works even better as part of an integrated campaign with email marketing and online marketing strategies. That should have been the focus of your post -- how well they work together.
You cannot compare the objectives of a postcard campaign with those of a blog post. They are meant to achieve different goals. Postcards are about time-sensitive, special offers and clear calls to action. Blog posts are evergreen. That content establishes your company as a SME by making useful, interactive content available. Too entirely different approaches, both of which need to be used. Try putting a call to action or announce a sale in a blog post and see how many readers respond to that.
And measurable results? That is the strength of direct mail -- that it is focused on a goal of sales, and you can track that effectiveness. Try doing that with your blog! If you send a postcard advertising a discount on a certain product in July, and you sell 50% more of that product that month, darn right you can track that result. What made you think you couldn't?
Marketers are not choosing between internet marketing and direct mail these days. Internet marketing is a given. They may be choosing between direct mail and print advertising, however. And online advertising may not decrease in 2009, but it has certainly slowed down.
I'm not saying that direct mail is the answer for every company and nonprofit. But where do you get your information that it is ineffective, or that people hate it? It is a well-established fact that direct mail does work well as a marketing technique. Your post would have been stronger if you had shown otherwise, but you'd have a hard time proving your point. That is because there are myriad examples, but to cite just one: a study found that 58% of teens were influenced to buy as a result of a direct mail campaign vs. 12% for a social media campaign. Bet you did not see THAT coming! :)
Just because companies are cutting back on direct mail doesn't mean that direct mail isn't effective. People are cutting back on radio, print, and TV advertising too. I'll give you another example. A nonprofit organization I belong to was holding their annual gala. We promoted it by word of mouth, Facebook (mentions and pages), an email campaign, even Craig's List. We had seven registrations until we dropped our invitation in the mail -- then we sold out the event.
Your fourth point was that it costs money. Yes, it does. But look at the ROI. If you write blog posts that do not convert your customers (or constituents), it doesn't matter how relatively inexpensive it is, you've still wasted money. But if you spend several times that amount on an effective direct mail campaign that actually makes sales? Bingo.
In fact direct mail can be a very valuable measure. It´s much more easier to delete the spam folder in my inbox than throw away a well designed direct mail which may suit my need as a customer. Therefore I agree with Mr. McLean.
Of course it may be harder to track your success, but it is not impossible using e.g. flagged promo codes for each target group you address. Of course you have some work in the beginning, but it´s much easier for the second or third run because in the end you get a detailed figure if you target group responds well on direct mail. Simple as that.
It simply depends on the feedback channel you implement.
I have read a study of a combined marketing action using direct mail and online measures which was an overwhelming success regarding response quotes.
In the end it simply depends on your product and who you want to reach.
It is all about the mix - and having the guts and data to change course/adapt/iterate when necessary.
The more I think about it, the more good and horrific examples of digital media I see, the more I realize that it is less about "this thing of ours" and more about how it all connects together. Integration is where a lot of these campaigns and efforts are breaking down (dont get me started on "campaign thinking").
Digital, and especially Social, can be the "red thread" that stitches these tactics together, but there needs to be a deep understanding of the user AND a real strategy.
To Rick's reply to my reply (hello recursive), the Revolution might just be the Evolution. :)
I do not wish to over simplify this topic, but I believe we have seen and will continue to see a decrease in Direct mail from market leading companies.
Personally, I cannot remember ever receiving a direct mail piece that made me say; “wow, this is exactly what I have been looking for to solve my ______problem, I had better call these guys” Well, I should take that back, I did receive an AOL disc in a metal clamshell, and I signed up, but that was in the early 1990’s.
How about you? If direct mail in your space has made you take action, engage, buy something, and by all means keep using it. But if you are like over 80% of us, the answer is no, it does not cause you to take any action other than throwing it away.
To paraphrase a great speaker:
1) When was the last time you bought something because of a piece of direct mail you received?
2) When was the last time you bought something after researching it online?
Ask yourself those questions. Ask your friends and colleagues as you go through the day. I think the answers are very informative.
@sean "The more good and horrific examples of digital media I see, the more I realize that it is less about "this thing of ours" and more about how it all connects together."
Awesome. Very, very well put.
Rick - Great post. I have a 5th reason not to use direct mail: It creates trash and kills trees. And in 2009, you don't have to be a "tree hugger" to care about that. Millions who care are taking themselves off direct mail lists. There are hundreds of thousands of websites that will help you do that if you Google "Remove from Junk mail lists". Since my ideal customer cares about stuff like that (and so do I), it makes no sense for me to convert more trees to trash by marketing via junk mail.
"Inbound is good" does not necessarily imply that (all) "Outbound is bad"
Hubspot obviously sells to a very online & tech-savvy customer base. My company does not. For my (and many others') customers - there's absolutely still a place for well-executed Direct Mail.
I believe that direct mail marketing can be a very good weapon to collect leads or just a appreciation card will warm up your customers heart.
Don't ever abandon this wonderful weapon in marketing.
I have read that post cards to young adults 12-18 work well. The reason, young adults love to get things in the mail. So if your market is this younger group, post cards advertising a Theme Part will most likely work for this marketer.
@Mark OF COURSE! US Mail is so... retro!! Like black coffee, LP on vinyl, and .. *gasp* newspapers! Do you know where that study would be? (other than my personal youth focus group of my two kids 23 and 18) but they are getting older and kinda useless for the task :-)
Direct mail does not work. It's is environmentally unsound, requiring fuel consumption and paper waste. Many people toss out unsolicited direct mail. I personally rarely even check my mail and when I do, 90% of it or more is advertising I couldn't care less about- into the trash it goes.
I have recently used the postal service and regretted it. Two items I mailed from California to Nevada NEVER ARRIVED. Never saw the items again. This type of problem was a rarity in the past, but for this to happen to two separate mailings shocked me. I avoid USPS when at all possible.
To respond about the comments of deliverability, yes, in isolated instances, mail does not reach all of its intended recipients BUT 20% of all email never reaches recipients. Legitimate email, not SPAM.
Nothing is fail-safe, but it is still valid.
And to respond to the comment about do you ever buy something because you received direct mail -- of course! All the time. If there is a discount or coupon, you bet. People who say they never buy through direct mail are not thinking this through. What, you never used a restaurant or dog-grooming coupon? What about holiday fundraisers? You never contributed to that? Membership solicitations? You don't renew your AAA or professional org. membership because you received a direct mail solicitation or reminder? When was the last time you downloaded a Dominos pizza coupon from a website? Come on! :)
Since I have seen a few posts making statements that print is killing trees, I thought I would share a different perspective from Edward L. Glaeser, a professor of economics at Harvard University who stated in an Boston Globe article titled, “A road map for environmentalism.”
He states, “The trees used by paper mills are a renewable resource. When people use more paper, suppliers plant more trees. If we want bigger commercial forests, then we should use more paper not less. Our policies should directly protect important wildlife habitats, not try to reduce our demand for paper.”
Consider this economic cycle. Most of the paper used for printing for U.S. based associations comes from North American forests. If we print less, we place less value on paper. Less paper being needed translates into paper companies selling their forested acreage to the highest bidder as this is the best chance for revenue. This in turn means they plant fewer trees leaving the land to just sit there “idle” or be sold to developers
Using paper for printing raises the demand for paper, which means the paper companies plant more trees and keep land dedicated to managed forests.
This is how it workk... It takes 5-6 years to grow a tree that is used for paper. Consider a forested plot of land divided into 6 segments. Year 1, they log segment 1 and replant. Year 2, they log segment 2 and replant. This goes on for 6 years and we’re back to segment 1. That is sustainable forestry.
So it’s not like trees are being clear cut and nothing is replacing them (as is the case in some parts of the world where the forests get clear cut for soybeans, sugar cane and cattle farms). Most mills have sustainable forestry practices ensuring they are replanting more trees because this is their business, trees are their crop.
Kind of makes sense if you really think about it...
So back to direct mail. You're choice to use direct mail or not is totally up you. If it works for you - Amen! If not, do something else.
Both arguments are right.
Ironically enough, one of our soccer tournaments sent out postcards, enabling a new blog post to illustrate my point using real world stuff. Enjoy.
http://www.tourneycentral.com/using-postcards-as-effective-soccer-tournament-marketing.html
LOVE IT! So 2.0
Someone needs to write a letter to the phone companies next to tell them what a waste their phone books are and how all that paper and printing is getting businesses no where fast. Used to be folks might at least use phone books and yellow pages as a booster seat for a child or something to put under the TV to position it a little higher, but now a days...the phone book is just outdated and unused.
Great blog to check out with the same type of information is "Broadband Evolved"
Broadband Evolved An especially insightful post was Online Advertisements: Who do you trust more?
<a href="http://www.broadbandevolved.com/my_weblog/2008/10/online-advertisements-who-do-you-trust-more.html
LOVE IT! So 2.0
Someone needs to write a letter to the phone companies next to tell them what a waste their phone books are and how all that paper and printing is getting businesses no where fast. Used to be folks might at least use phone books and yellow pages as a booster seat for a child or something to put under the TV to position it a little higher, but now a days...the phone book is just outdated and unused.
Great blog to check out with the same type of information is "Broadband Evolved"
An especially insightful post was Online Advertisements: Who do you trust more?
<a href="http://www.broadbandevolved.com/my_weblog/2008/10/online-advertisements-who-do-you-trust-more.html>
Previous comments from Mike Weber, Rick Burnes, ... heck, I agree with most of the counter opinion here.
There are just as many failures in marketing on-line as there are with direct mail, it just doesn't seem to cost as much.
It's the copywriting fundamentals people are missing, you write bad copy or you fail to connect with your reader providing a compelling offer, and any campaign will fail (no matter the media used.)
Many think Internet and email marketing doesn't cost anything because they aren't being billed for provider services.
You aren't paying for the entire transport path, in fact, relying on other peoples networks. With the postal service you are paying the majority of costs associated with the media.
If you aren't paying to send the message on-line, then your recipients are surely paying to receive it. A poorly implemented e-mail campaign is just as big a flop as direct mail in both it's cost and lack of production.
My most successful (and economically stable) clients are using a mix of direct mail, Internet and email marketing, telephone, and test anything else they can discover. It's about reaching customers where they are, in multiple channels.
Great discussion.
Sincerely,
Justin
I am a college student, and I work for their admissions office. When I started looking for a college to go to, I received a ton of mail from many different colleges. It actually became detrimental to the college image in my opinion. Now that I work at the place that sends out the mail, I see how inefficient the process is. Granted, this is only one scenario, but this is the one that I am familiar with.
We send mail to tons of people. We send it to students that show interest, students that don't show interest, and also students that have shown disinterest in my school. Every letter (or packet) that we send out adds to our total costs. USPS is going to raise the cost of postage (again) and this cost is sent back to my college. However, the letters do not magically get sent out. People need to write the letters, print them (at times we send out over 10,000 letters), fold them, and then send them out. We actually use people to send them (student workers like myself). We sit for hours folding paper. We make close to minimum wage, but still, the amount of time that we spend on those letters costs my school a great deal of money.
Direct mail isn't dead, but it is dying. And if it isn't, then it needs to evolve, or else it will be dead. Marketers need to ensure that the mail gets into their target market's hands, or else their money is wasted.
There may be expenses related to direct mail but inbound marketing isn't exactly free. I have spent lots of time, money, effort, and tears learning inbound marketing. And its a constantly changing method which means constant relearning and more money and effort.
Direct mail isn't dying, there are just more ways to reach out to consumers, and like with email and inbound marketing, you just have to learn to do it right.
Thats probably why diretc mail won't ever go away, because everytime you hear that people are not using it as much ,more people will use it assuming there's less competition in the mail. Over saturation of direct mail by mulitple businesses at once is what hurts diretc mail. Thats only because a resident is receiving 10 - 20 pieces each time they get the mail. Companies would do better to bulk up into catalogs and co-advertise. Then your local residents receive one catalog, its not tons of junkmail, its sectioned and categorized, and it would cost you less in a group of businesses. The oddity is that some businesses say they don't like to do that because they don't want to be packed in with many other businesses... yet, with loose junkmail, that's exactly whats happening.
Great blog! Direct mail is too expensive and can be a complete waste of time. You can reach more people on the Internet through email marketing. Websites like http://www.orangepoint.net are making it possible for business owners to sent prospects product and sale announcements and other email applications.
I wonder if e-mail or online marketing will become a better way to reach a target market in these economic times. What do you think?
We have definitely been questioning direct mail ourselves.