Photo © 2007 Jeff Meyer CC BY-NC-SA 2.0

A couple months ago, I talked about why I believe e-books should be cheap. Big, scary (and scared) publishers tend to be raising prices on e-books, sky-high, sometimes charging as much for the e-book as for a hardcover. Responding to this trend, I advocated prices as low as possible, even under a dollar. Why then am I quadrupling prices on my own e-novels, starting next week?

1. Firstly, I never said that 99¢ was the right price for an e-novel. I only said that the right price was way less than the hardcover, and less than the trade paperback, and even less than the mass-market paperback. Mass-market paperbacks retail for $6-$8. So an e-book price as high as $6 might be palatable, given the right circumstances.

2. And these circumstances make a difference. Part of the reason e-books are worth so little is that publishers saddle them with DRM, and they bully readers into never sharing them with their friends, never giving them away, and—most importantly—never reselling them. Publishers in every media have always hated the used market and treated libraries with suspicion, believing beyond hope that if readers couldn’t buy used books and CDs, they would pay full price. The reality of course is quite the reverse: readers that become excited enough in a book to share it with their friends, those are the fans who spread fandom for the author and increase sales. That’s why my e-books never use DRM, and I don’t even mind if you share them with your friends. Knock yourself out.

3. On the other hand, industry big-wigs have a point when they say that low prices “devalue” the product. That is, people tend to think they get what they pay for. In one anecdote, often retold, a woman who owned a souvenir shop, before she went on vacation, told her clerk to cut the price of a cheap tchotchke in half, because she needed to move them; she was tired of them taking up space in her shop and wanted to get rid of them. When she returned from vacation, the store had successfully sold out of the crappy baubles. Yay! But the clerk had misunderstood. Instead of cutting the price in half, she had doubled the price. That’s what caused the pieces to sell out. Psychological studies have documented that when we have to work for something, we want it more and cherish it more. Similarly, when we have to pay more for something, we tend to value it more, even to enjoy it more, to see its good points and ignore its bad points. And I can easily understand this effect when it comes to fiction, because appreciating fiction is a very personal experience. We each have things that we like about the books we read, and things we hate. And each of us forms his own list of pros and cons according to his own feelings, which are in part formed by forces such as how much we had to pay for the book.

An aside: It’s interesting that if you receive a free copy of a book to review, the FTC is afraid that you’ll be more likely to give the book a positive review as a quid pro quo. But the converse effect can be just as strong. If you pay for the book out of your own pocket, you’ll be more personally invested in it and therefore more likely to trivialize its weaknesses. I believe, however, the biggest factor affecting most reviewers is their relationship with the author or publisher; they’ll tend to review and rate highly books that they get from authors that they’re friends with.

4. People expect 99¢ e-books to suck. Again this is the “you get what you pay for” mentality, which is hard-wired into our brains. My latest e-books have been getting 5-star reviews. Now, I don’t know how many of those reviewers genuinely loved the book, and how many were just being nice. Regardless, I think it’s clear that—for all my inadequacies—the books don’t suck. So then why do I only ask for 99¢? Well, I explained why in the earlier blog post, but do you expect prospective readers to look up that blog post and understand my rationale? Not likely. I don’t want prospective readers to think that I’m just a wannabe with my head in the clouds. So I’ve given into the fear, and I’m thinking I need to charge more than 99¢.

5. Even Amazon doesn’t believe in under-a-dollar e-books. Yes, Amazon will allow you to price your Kindle e-book at 99¢, but that’s basically the price of distribution. The publisher gets only 35¢ of that, which means the publisher is turning a loss on those sales. And for larger e-books—that is, e-books with a larger download size, possibly containing lots of graphics or images—Amazon requires an absolute minimum price of $1.99 or $2.99, depending on the size of the e-book.

6. I expect most e-books will go up to at least $2.99 this summer, to take advantage of Amazon’s 70%-royalty option. Normally, Amazon only pays the publisher 35% of the list price of Kindle books. But starting this July, Amazon will pay the publisher 70% (minus download costs), if publishers price their Kindle e-books between $2.99 and $9.99, and don’t undercut the Kindle price by selling the e-book cheaper elsewhere, and price the e-book at least 20% less than the cheapest hardcopy edition. For big, scary publishers, this is supposed to try to convince them to bring their e-book prices down. (For an e-novel with a $7.99 mass-market paperback version, the highest eligible Kindle price would be $6.39.) But this move also indicates that the ideal e-novel price, at least in Amazon’s view, is probably between $2.99 and $6.39. In any case, it probably marks the effective end of the 99¢ e-book.

7. I’m giving away free short e-books now. When I wrote the earlier blog post, I didn’t have any short e-books to give away. Since then, I’ve published two. Each is a self-contained short story. Each is revised, mastered, and published using the same, full process used for larger books. I give them away as free samplers. And I plan to publish more of these. I’m hoping that by giving away free short e-books, I’ll draw more readers, which will increase the value of my novel-length books.

Besides, I’m only raising my price to $3.97. That hardly brings it out of the impulse-purchase range. (So, it’ll cost the price of a package of candy bars, rather than just a single candy bar. Big whoop.)

Even so, if you want to get either of my e-books, right now is the right time, before the price goes up. Click here for more details.

-TimK

"how do you feel right now?" by Bella Lago; © 2009 Bella Lago, CC BY-NC-SA 2.0

The most important skill a writer can develop, in any field or genre of writing, is to empathize with his reader, because the reader will always judge your writing ultimately by what he feels. Mastery of this skill has resulted in some of the greatest feats of writing magic, especially among writers of sales copy, and neglect of it has resulted in some of the most notable snafus.

This week, for Wishcasting Wednesday, Jamie Ridler asks, “What do you wish to remember?”

Well, I wish to remember, as a writer, always to feel what my reader feels, which has historically been nigh impossible for me to achieve.

Growing up, as a teenager and young adult, I lived the life of a romantic. That is, when it came to girls, I felt romance, lived romance, fell in love at the drop of a hat, unafraid to break my heart yet again, because I needed to love and to be loved. But I also rarely considered whether the objects of my affections felt the same as I, because I didn’t know how. Therefore, my own deeply romantic gestures only scared my beloveds, resulting in heartache after heartache, until I finally learned the secret of love.

That’s not to say these experiences went to waste. No, they were violently painful learning experiences, which finally produced a happy ending, and they eventually became the inspiration for Love through the Eyes of an Idiot, so I can’t complain about that.

Even so, I’ve always had a very introverted personality, emotionally. I’ve always found it easy to understand what I feel, even if I can’t find the words to talk about it. And I’ve always found it difficult to understand what others are feeling, especially when those feelings differ from mine.

Fortunately, a good part of my training as a writer has helped me tunnel through that mountain. Because in creative writing, the characters come first—they’re the most important aspect of a story—and in order to understand the characters in a story, a writer must understand the people behind those characters. This is as true for fictional characters as it is for characters based on real, live people. Moreover, the reader’s feelings generally reflect those of the sympathetic characters. So creative writing helps a writer to understand his reader’s feelings.

Even so, sometimes my own feelings overwhelm me, and I forget about the reader’s. When I’m writing sales copy for a book or for the web, sometimes I’m so desperate to sell, because I’m worrying where next week’s grocery money will come from, I forget that the reader does not want to be sold. It should be easy for me to step into the shoes of prospective customer, because I am a prospective customer myself sometimes. But I need to remember to do so.

And as I’ve been revamping my software-development résumé, I had the hardest time understanding how a résumé can tell a “story,” as they say, because I just didn’t get it. Then I realized that I am a prospective client as well. If I were looking for a software engineer to help me develop my websites, what words on his résumé would really catch my attention and make me desperate to hire him? As soon as I remembered to feel what the reader feels, the words for my résumé just started dropping into place.

So, as a writer, this Wishcasting Wednesday, I wish to remember to feel what my reader feels, because that will make my writing the best that it can be.

-TimK

This site delighted me not only for the off-kilter humor of the concept, but also because it’s genius from a marketing perspective. It appeals directly to cat-lovers, but with a twist that just makes you want to click through. Ha!

-TimK

I think the literacy coaches and cadres and their burgeoning publishing empire should be scrapped and the money saved. But not all the teachers present at the 11th grade curriculum rollout agreed. One man stood up and called the program “powerful,” and any number of other sycophants, excited over the prospect of promotion, fawned all over the presenters. How do I overcome this? How, for starters, do I prove that poetry is valuable, that we should spend money teaching it?

You know what, I can’t prove it.

How, when you think about it, can anyone prove anything?

That’s a good question: How to “prove” that poetry is valuable. Answer: It depends on what you mean by “prove.”

If you mean you want to prove it scientifically, I’m sure it can be done by well designed longitudinal studies. I don’t know whether anyone’s actually done it, but maybe someone’s tried. If you can find relevant studies, they could easily be used to support your claim, because scientific studies lend credibility to an argument, even if the studies are complete B.S.

I know what I tell my kids: that one of the most important things they can do, no matter what, is to read, read, and read some more. Read fiction. Read non-fiction. Read prose. Read poetry. Read the classics. Read new books. Read, because doing so will increase your knowledge, improve your socialization skills, and improve your communication skills. Of course, I can’t prove any of that scientifically, because the only proof I personally have is anecdotal evidence and intuition. Yet I know in my heart it’s all truer than true.

There’s a lesson there. Sometimes, all you need to “prove” a proposition to the masses is anecdotal evidence and intuition. I’m thinking of Robert Cialidini’s book Influence: The Psychology of Persuasion. (Note that I read it. Just a coincidence?) Scientific studies can be very convincing because they have an aura of authority. The fact that they provide numbers to quote also makes them seem more convincing, because people tend to believe in numbers, even if the numbers are complete B.S. However, all you really need to “prove” the value of poetry and literature (or anything else) are some real-life stories of people whose lives were made better because of poetry or literature.

-TimK

• I already have all the medications I need, and I sure as hell wouldn’t get them from Canada!?
• I have already had all the news from CNN that I can stand.
• I am currently satisfied with my sexual prowess. (Really, I am. Just ask my wife.)
• If you really want me to be able to have sex 10 times a day, please find me a babysitter.
• I have not been selling stuff on eBay, nor buying it, nor do I have a Google AdWords account. (Okay. Not completely true, but I am smart enough to know whether an email is really coming from eBay or Google or not.)
• I do not have an account with Wells Fargo.
• For future reference, UPS tracking numbers do not begin with the letter N.
• I have no friends; therefore, they do not send me Hallmark e-Cards.
• I neither need nor care for a Rolex. And if I did, I wouldn’t want a cheap knock off.
• I do not speak Russian or Chinese.
• I do not gamble or run a gambling site.
• I do not need a job that pays “1000$,” nor one that pays $125,000.
• Think about it: If I really wanted to see Angelina Jolie naked, I probably already have.
• I do not care to hear from Jeff Dominguez, Geraldo Krueger, Scotty Kaplan, Blaine Hinkle, or anyone else whose name you made up.

If you could integrate these facts into your future marketing efforts, you would dramatically increase your response rate. At the same time, you would be improving life for all online marketers, especially those of us who actually know what we’re doing.

-TimK

To review, about a month and a half ago, I got an oversized postcard in the mail from RCN. It said, “You’ll lose programming on: July 22, 2008 [unless you get a digital converter box]. But once installed and the date has passed, you’ll enjoy more entertainment choices than ever before. For a limited time, YOUR FIRST STANDARD CONVERTER BOX IS FREE, and additional boxes are only $2.95 a month per box.” (emphasis in original) So I called right up and got 2 converter boxes.

The first problem is that this bill is $25.03 higher than the last one. (I was expecting something about $3 higher.) WTF? A brief examination showed that that they charged me $2.95 for one box and $5.95 for the other. On top of that, they back-billed me for last month’s rental on the converter boxes. (So double the overcharge amount.) And to sweeten the deal, they charged me for digital cable, which shows up as a $38.49 additional charge. WT-double-F? But more on that in a second.

So I immediately called them. Had to do some creative reading to figure out the number to call (877-RCN-BILL), because the note about how to dispute your bill doesn’t mention which number to call, only that you “can call.” Smart. I’m sure that will cut down on complaints. (NOT!) And make angry customers happier. (Double NOT!)

I talked to a “a Company representative,” whose name I will withhold because it wasn’t his/her fault–I’ll just use “he” from now on, even though it might have been a woman. It wasn’t his fault that he was such a hard-ass. That’s just his job, and if he were actually accommodating to customers, he wouldn’t get paid. (Hint: Get a new job.)

So here I am, pissed as hell and coming down with a stress headache, arguing with him over whether I should get the reduced rate. And he’s telling me about how the reduced rate applies only to new customers. (Well, I guess that puts a value on loyalty, doesn’t it? A negative value. But as I recall, Comcast puts the same negative value on loyalty.) But the notice I got clearly says, “You’ll lose your programming,” so this rate clearly applies to me, because how could I lose my programming if I were a new customer? And thank God I had saved the notice they had sent me. And then he needs to check on whether I had previously had a cable box. (I hadn’t, but he couldn’t figure that out.) And do you know what? I don’t care about any of that shit. That’s his problem, not mine, and I really don’t want it foisted on me. All I know is that I got a notice in the mail, and it said the rental would cost this much, and RCN is overcharging me. So FIX IT ALREADY!

34 minutes later (10:54 AM – 11:28 AM) he finally got it all straightened out. Now, I told him that there was a rate-increase associated with going to digital, and that none of the materials I got mentioned it. At first, I thought the rate increase was $38.49, but– Hold on. That’s not right. Here’s the breakdown. Before digital cable, I was paying $46.99 for analog cable. Now, I’m paying $13 for “basic cable service” plus $38.49 for “Signature cable TV,” which totals $51.49. That’s a rate increase of $4.50, not nearly as bad as I had thought. But they still forgot to mention that in any of their marketing materials or notices, and that sucks.

And it still sucks. How could such a piddling little increase be such a problem. Because they didn’t tell me about it, that’s why. This does not appear to be part of the other rate increases that some RCN customers are seeing, so I expect for those customers, it will be added on top of those. Or maybe not. Who can know what will happen when you’re making it up as you go along? (Not that RCN is making it up as they go along, mind you, only that it looks that way to an outsider.)

It still gets me, though, that I had to argue with him over this piddling 6-dollar-a-month charge, which amounts to less than 5.3% of the services I buy. And truth be told, I was considering (since I have digital now) whether I wanted to upgrade to a more expensive programming package. (Not considering it anymore, strangely enough.) Of course, those are just idle thoughts and not worth anything in $$$ until I actually do it. Still…

Hey. I understand. I’ve done it myself. I’ve said something stupid to piss off a potential client or customer. (I’ll have to tell you the story sometime of… But right now, it’s too fresh in my memory, and I’m not even sure how it will turn out.) What do you do? You cringe. You apologize if you can. And then you go on the best you can. We all make the mistake. But I’m thinking that only the best of us learn from it.

I shouldn’t even have to write these down. But maybe if I do, someone at RCN will get the message. (Or maybe not.) Whatever RCN does, you can take these points away from my experience.

1. Whatever you told your customer you would do, just do it. Figure out on your own time how you’re going to account for it.
2. Freely give your loyal customers the same discounts you give new customers, because that makes them more likely to buy your premium offerings.
3. If you’re going to charge the customer more money than he’s used to for any reason, tell him about it up-front. Do not “forget” to mention it on the theory that you can justify it later.
4. Always ask yourself, “Would the IRS do this?” And if so, re-assess immediately.
5. And while I’m thinking about it, make sure you occasionally call your own call centers and place an order, or register a complaint, and see how they handle it. Be creative about thinking up unusual situations for them to handle. Think about anything in the process that could have gone wrong. (Including that the post office lost all your mailings to a particular customer, every single one.) Make sure the call center mentions all the up-sells in the script, and make sure the process is as pleasant and seamless as possible. Then make changes to the call-center scripts to fix the problems you find.

I was browsing the Comcast channel lineups and price guides even while still on the phone with RCN. Seriously. What else was I to do while waiting on hold? (The Internet is so kewl.) I’m thinking now I should call Comcast and say, “Hi. I’m an RCN customer, and I’m wondering what kind of a deal you can give me for switching?”

-TimK

But this week I got a direct mail piece from my cable provider, RCN, who in the Boston area is eliminating its analog channels and switching completely to digital. The 5.5-by-8.5-inch, full-color oversized postcard did get my attention. So the headlines were… uh… effective. But the message behind the piece was so haughty, so nasty, so badly conceived, I just had to take a moment out of my blogging sabbatical to skewer RCN for this egregious marketing faux pas.

Yeah, it caught my attention. And it made me angry, so incensed that I actually considered switching to Comcast. (The Comcast guys are always begging me to switch. But I never do, because I don’t usually expect to be treated any differently by them.) But after I did a little research–for the information RCN should have shoved in my face–I found out that this change is actually good for me, the customer. (Hmm… RCN has been losing customers of late. I wonder how many RCN customers will go through the same effort I did to get at the truth of the situation.)

Starting with the front: “TIME IS UP!” And then, “Get your converter boxes or you’ll lose your RCN programming.” That’s actually pretty good. Captures my attention with a one-two punch. I do indeed want to continue receiving RCN programming, and the warning that I could lose it is very effective. Similarly, on the back, “This is your FINAL NOTICE.” Excellent headlines. I’ve got the message. I need to take action, and I need to take it now, or else I will be sorry.

After that, however, the piece falls apart: “As previously notified, [in other words, it's my fault, not theirs, even though I do not recall any previous notification] you MUST have a converter box on every TV… or you’ll NO LONGER RECEIVE RCN PROGRAMMING on that television.” The copy then goes on to explain that while the first converter box is free, additional television sets will cost me an extra $2.95 a month each. So, it’s my fault, apparently, that they’re strong-arming me to rent converter boxes I don’t really want at 3 bucks a pop? Oy vey!

The Bulleted Feature List

The bulleted feature list is the centerpiece of any marketing copy. Unfortunately, this card does not have one.

After my initial shock and revulsion, I looked into the situation. And you know what? It’s not as bad as they make it sound. They actually do allude to the feature list in the copy, with a short half-sentence, “… you’ll enjoy more entertainment choices than ever before.” Unfortunately, that’s vague enough to be less than useless. Especially next to “$2.95 a month per box” or else they’re going to take away my programming.

Any copywriter worth his paycheck knows how important the feature list is. But RCN doesn’t mention it in this piece. They don’t even seem to know what it is. If I were putting together this direct-mail piece, here’s what I would start with:

• digital quality
• 80 channels you can’t get with analog cable
• 155 channels total (note not 370 channels, as they claim on their website; if there are actually 370 channels, you get them only if you buy all the upgrade and premium packages; and I only counted 155 channels in their latest channel guide, not the 180 they claim are included as standard)
• 30 HD channels
• 46 Music Choice digital music channels (again, I counted them)
• Video ON DEMAND
• access to Pay-Per-View
• parental controls
• channel capacity: each analog channel = 10 SD digital channels

Rewriting the copy

Taking an admittedly shoddy, first crack at rewriting this ad copy, here’s what I came up with:

Note: The following is a mock-up I’ve created. This ad has not been run and this offer has not been made, as stated here, by RCN. That is why I’ve struck through the name “RCN” in the copy that follows.

This is your FINAL NOTICE

We’re switching all of our programming to digital. That means you need to act now in order to get RCN converter boxes for all your TV sets that receive RCN programming, or else you’ll NO LONGER RECEIVE RCN PROGRAMMING on that television.

But if you do act now, with the new all-digital RCN cable TV, you’ll get digital quality on every channel, 80 channels you can’t get with analog TV, 155 channels in all, including 30 HD channels and 46 Music Choice® digital music channels, plus Video ON DEMAND, parental controls, and access to Pay-Per-View. All at the same price you’ve been paying. Plus, because each analog channel takes up the space of 10 standard-quality digital channels, we can offer hundreds more channels of programming in the future, choices that we simply can’t offer you right now. For more information about these exiting new features, visit rcn.com/digital.

You’ll lose programming on:

July 22, 2008

… unless you act quickly. For a limited time, YOUR FIRST STANDARD CONVERTER BOX IS FREE, and additional boxes are only $2.95 a month per box.

• Call XXX-XXX-XXXX and have us mail them to you for FREE so you can install them yourself.
• Pick them up at: [addresses]
• Or call XXX-XXX-XXXX to schedule an appointment to have one of our technicians install them for you for a $49.95 fee.

Note also that I’d get rid of the black background, because that’s way hard to read. And I’d use a red headline, because they actually do get better results. I’d also get rid of the last, useless paragraph: “For TV how you want it, when you want it–add an HD converter box (HDTV required) or add an HD/DVR converter box and pause, record and replay live TV.” Probably, anyone who has an HD TV already has upgraded to an HD box.

But I would train the people at the call center to up-sell to the RCN PREMIER package. (When I called, the woman I talked to didn’t mention any up-sell.) I’m not saying a high-pressure up-sell. I’m just saying, make the customer aware that it’s only $N to upgrade, now that he already has a converter box. RCN could even sweeten the deal with a free-trial period.

Every customer interaction is a marketing opportunity

Every direct-mail piece, no matter its function, should be designed as a marketing piece. It should have a captivating headline, a list of specific benefits and features, and a call to action. And it should be written to convince the recipient to take action. This piece by RCN had the headline, and then it failed.

A misleading claim made on RCN’s website. (Highlighting is mine.) In actuality, you only get the “370 – Cable TV channels” when you upgrade to the premium packages.

Of course, it’s a cable company. Even as the underdog, RCN is still in the odd position of not having any significant competition. Choosing between the two cable providers I have access to is like choosing between the Republicans and the Democrats. At the end of the day, it really doesn’t matter. So they can afford to say one thing and do another. They can afford to make claims that may be misleading (like the statement on RCN’s web site, at right, that I’ll get 370 channels of programming because they’re converting to digital). They can afford to let it sound like they’re pushing us around occasionally, as long as it’s for a good cause.

But you and I are not in that position with our customers. So take care.

• Start with an attention-grabbing headline.
• Don’t blame your customers for your inability to get through to them.
• Do make them feel like they’ll be missing out unless they act.
• Make them an irresistible offer.
• Offer specific features and benefits–the more specific the better. (And do have someone actually sit down and count the number of channels in your channel guide to make sure it’s the same as the number on the sales copy.)
• Put a deadline on the offer, a ticking time bomb that will go off unless they act now.
• Give them a clear call to action.
• Offer them an up-sell, but only after they choose to act.

-TimK

UPDATE: There’s more to the story. There actually was an implicit rate increase, which I guess they must have forgotten to tell me about. (Or maybe they just couldn’t figure it out themselves.)

Clayton Makepeace put me onto this idea, and it struck a chord, even though he doesn’t even have a blog. He has an e-zine. Actually, this is also the best gift you can give to someone who publishes his own e-zine or writes for any kind of opt-in email list.

If you’ve never heard of Clayton Makepeace, he’s a world-class, old-school copywriter. His story is like that of many self-made people. At the end of his rope, broke, surviving on Ramen noodles (or however it goes), he learned how to write killer copy, and he got rich. Of course, somewhere in there were many, many hours of work. That’s the part of the story the get-rich-quick schemers never tell you, the many, many hours of work. But Clayton always levels with you regarding that part of the story, and I appreciate it.

I and other bloggers like me spend untold hours researching, planning, writing, and refining our blog posts. But what makes it all worth it is hearing how much this effort accomplishes in the lives of others.

• Maybe I’ve inspired you with my story of leaving my job and striking out on my own.

• Maybe you’ve picked up useful tips on how to run your business, or how to develop software better, or how to make your job more fulfilling.

• Maybe you’re sick of the clueless, and like it that someone else agrees with you.

• Maybe you enjoy the fiction and non-fiction that I’ve posted.

• Maybe I’ve challenged and excited you, with my bizarre, alternative point of view.

• Or maybe I even helped you save hours of wasted effort. (Like one person who wrote me to thank me for my patch for w3mir.)

Because you’re a kind, caring person, returning the favor would surely gratify you. I know it would me. That’s why I’m going to return the favor to Clayton Makepeace in this blog post, and I hope to do the same several more times for other online writers in the coming weeks. At the same time, I think you’ll see, I’ll be delivering more useful content to you.

Here’s my gift to Clayton Makepeace

As I said, Clayton Makepeace is a world-class sales copywriter, an expert in his field. I couldn’t afford to hire him to write a sales letter for me. I couldn’t even afford to hire him to sign an autograph for me. But I do subscribe to his free marketing e-zine, The Total Package. Clayton has put together a killer team of top-notch entrepreneurial marketers to write for this e-zine. Every single article reveals real copywriting and marketing secrets, some of which I’ve encountered nowhere else. Just looking at my email archives, I see recent articles that have included:

• 5 quick questions that will instantly tell you if you have what it takes to be a direct-response entrepreneur (and Harvard Business School has nothing to do with it).

• The sales number you should be tracking, and how it can easily add 50% to your bottom line.

• 8 ad elements you can tweak to get a big bump in conversion, and how to pull it off.

• The common trap that can hurt your customer service, and 4 fast and effective ways to show your customers you care and keep them coming back and buying more.

• 3 simple questions to consider when adding new products or changing existing products, in order to get the most from your existing customer base.

• The 2 things you need to have in place in order to make a good deal, and when you should pass on a deal, even if it means potentially losing millions

• How a Viennese psychiatrist survived three horrific years in a Nazi concentration camp and turned his experience around for the good of many.

• 6 kick-butt techniques that gave one entrepreneur an advantage over every single one of his competitors in a very competitive market.

• The key to making sure package design doesn’t kill your copy.

These are just a few points from a random selection of recent e-zine articles. The problem with The Total Package is that there’s a new article almost every day, not wimpy articles that gloss over the subject and provide no new useful information, but deep articles that have practical advice I can put to use immediately. That means there’s just way too much valuable advice, and it makes me feel stupid.

As I said, The Total Package is a free e-zine, and you can subscribe for free at www.freetotalpackage.com.

Do you see what I just did?

Because this is the blog of an entrepreneurial writer, I figured there’s a good chance you might be interested in knowing about an e-zine published by a top-notch copywriter and marketer. So I posted a link. More than just a link, actually, because I also talked about some of the e-zine content that I found interesting and useful.

So here are the two gifts you can give me, based on Clayton’s christmas wish-list…

Gift #1: Send an e-mail to every family member, friend, and business contact you believe would enjoy reading The Conscience of Abe’s Turn. Just say why you think they’d enjoy reading my online serial. Then give them a link to conscience.jtimothyking.com/about.

Gift #2: Talk up The Conscience of Abe’s Turn online. If you use Twitter, tweet about it. If you frequent an appropriate online forum, mention it there. If you use MySpace or Facebook, recommend it on your page or the discussion boards. If you have a blog, post about it.

Or if you associate with other writers…

Do one of the above with my writing blog, Be the Story, and point them to BeTheStory.com/about. Send an email to every writer you know. Respond on your blog to something I wrote there. Or discuss it in an online writer’s forum.

Why are these such valuable gifts?

Because one word from you will do more for me (or any other blogger you recommend) than a thousand words from me. Really. It doesn’t matter how well I write. It doesn’t matter how passionate I am, or how hard I work. No one will care unless my fans talk about what I write.

That’s why it’s such a big deal for a book author to get on Oprah.

I’m not asking you to get me on Oprah. But I am saying that Oprah’s audience is loyal to her, and they trust her. So when she invites a book author onto her show, she bestows on them the benefit of that trust. And that’s also why she has that trust in the first place, because her audience expects her to invite book authors onto her show. See? She helps her audience and her guests at the same time.

And so do you, when you pass along a recommendation for a blog or website you really like that can really help the person you’re talking to. That’s why writers like us need fans like you. Frankly, your recommendation is more valuable to us than all the ad space in the Superbowl. And that’s why this is the most valuable gift you can give a blogger.

Happy holidays!
-TimK

I clicked on the link and discovered it was just their terms of service. Huh? I re-reviewed the terms of service for the zillionth time and… there’s nothing wrong with the campaign, and there’s nothing wrong with the keywords, and there’s nothing wrong with the ads. And it wasn’t even a human being who “disallowed” these ads, because I had just then added them.

I was just about to dig out the contact info for Google AdWords support, when I discovered that the ads were in fact running. But the UI still said they were disallowed. Maybe, I thought, it’s because I just now added this ad group, and it’s going to take a little while for the correct information to percolate through Google’s system.

Well, here’s a screenshot from a little while later, after all the latest status has clearly bubbled to the UI.

Ha! What a riot!

It says, “Ad showing? No.” It says the keyword is “not permitted” to show my ads. But look over to the right where there are 4 ad impressions and 1 click-through for that keyword. I wish Google would get its story straight!

-TimK

On the Official Google Blog today, Brad Taylor, a “Spam Czar” at Google, talked about how Gmail filters more spam now than ever. He links to a Spam explained page at Gmail, and includes the graph shown there. As you can see, the graph has two lines on it. The top, orange, ascending line represents the growing amount of spam in circulation. The bottom, blue, descending line represents the declining amount of spam in Gmail users’ inboxes. The caption reinforces this perception, saying, “As the amount of spam has increased, Gmail users have received less of it in their inboxes, reporting a rate less than 1%.”

The thing is, if you look closely, you’ll see that this is not what the numbers say!

So then, “a rate of less than 1%,” eh? That means that less than 1% of the email users get in their inboxes is spam, right? And spam represents 70% of the email Gmail gets, which is the orange line. So Gmail filters out the other 69% automatically, right? Wrong!

Because if you look carefully at the legend of the blue line, it does not tell you anything about how much spam Gmail users get. The orange line does tell you how much spam Gmail gets, but the blue line should be “percent of total email in inboxes that is spam.” But that’s not what they show you. Rather, they subtly shift the terms of the measurement without drawing your attention to it. They subtly shift from “percent of total email” to “percent of total spam” that gets to email inboxes.

Here’s the real problem: Google claims they’ve made great strides in filtering out spam, and I’m sure they have. In general, spam filtering has improved everywhere, in that never-ending battle between spammers and the rest of us. But here’s the thing, the way Google has defined the graph, even if Gmail users are getting more spam now than ever, the blue line could still trend downward. Because the blue line represents how much spam Gmail filters out, not how much spam is in user’s inboxes.

Look at it this way, let’s say Google had done absolutely nothing. Let’s say Gmail were to filter out the same proportion of spam today as it did 3 years ago. Over those years, the amount of spam has increased by over 3 times, as you can see from the orange line. Therefore, if Gmail’s spam filtering were only as good as it was 3 years ago, users would be getting over 3 times as much spam in their inboxes, compared to the legitimate email they get. But what would the blue line look like? Would it have grown over 3 times, representing the increased amount of spam being delivered to users? No! It would be completely flat, representing the fact that Google has not lost any ground to the spammers. But that would not be the perception that most Gmail users would have.

Now let’s say Google had made only modest gains against the spammers. While overall spam has increased by over 3 times (the orange line), let’s suppose that spam in Gmail inboxes has increased by only doubling. That means Gmail users would be seeing twice as much spam today than they did 3 years ago. That’s the green line in the mocked-up chart. But what would the blue line look like? Yes, that’s right. The blue line would be descending, showing less spam, even though users would be getting more spam today than ever.

Given the choice between the blue and green lines, which one would you choose to put on your marketing materials?

The bottom line (no pun intended) is that Google has chosen the blue line to make themselves look better than they actually are. They put it on the same graph with the orange line, which correctly shows more spam in circulation than ever. But instead of choosing the green-line measurement from the mocked-up graph, the one that accurately represents how much less spam Gmail users get today, Google chose a subtly different measurement that makes themselves look deceptively better than they really are.

And here’s the thing: Google doesn’t have to do that. And neither do you.

It’s said that marketers and salesmen are liars. They have no scruples, and they’ll sell you snake oil if it means another dollar in their pockets. But I say, it’s only stupid marketers and salesmen who do that. If you have something that’s valuable (like Google does in Gmail) you don’t need to distort your statistics and over-hype it, because what you have is what your customer wants. But if you do choose to distort your statistics and to over-hype it, you’ll make yourself seem like a snake-oil salesman. Because only snake-oil salesmen need to lie to make their offering seem valuable.

-TimK

P.S. (Added the evening of October 30 at about midnight.) Here’s another mocked-up graph, this time showing the green line as it would appear, at least as best I can make out, or something like that. It’s just an estimate, because I don’t actually have the numbers that Google used to construct the original graph. But I can get a good idea, based on the orange and the blue lines.

To reiterate: Google does a great job with spam, as can be seen by the fact that the spam in Gmail users’ inboxes has decreased, despite the fact that Gmail has been deluged with spam (as have we all).

I have to keep reiterating that, because this graph unfortunately speaks for itself, and I feel like I need to point out what a great job Google has been doing. Which of the two do you think makes Google look better? The blue line or the green line? And once you know that Google included in its marketing materials the blue line–regardless of how much more useful a measurement it is–but that the green line shows this information using the same scale as the orange line… You can see why I need to keep reiterating that Google has been doing a great job and still does a great job.

I guess I’m saying, be careful what you’re communicating to your users, especially if you’re an engineer. Consider that the green line tells the same story as the blue line, just in a different way. The title of the graph is the same: “More spam, but not in Gmail inboxes.” Yes, that’s exactly what the green line shows. Even though most of the email on the Internet is now spam, Gmail users enjoy even less spam in their inboxes than they did 3 years ago. Now imagine this is your business instead of Google’s, and one of your users has called you on the carpet for using the more useful blue line instead of the less misleading green one.