In email, your timing is everything.

In real estate, they'll tell you that success is based on only three factors: location, location, and location. It's a simple formula, and it works every time.

But you are in marketing, not real estate. And you're looking for ideas that work.

Maybe you've thought about using emails to promote your business or service. And you should be! It's fast. It's inexpensive. It's a foundation of multi-channel marketing.

But you don't want to deploy the emails yourself because you've heard that the all-powerful ISPs could decide you are a Dreaded Spammer, and then they could yank your email privileges. That would be not good, no sirree.

On the other hand, you've read that the Marketing Sherpas say for every $1 spent on email advertising you should get $43 back in sales. Sounds good. Maybe even Great! But if you don't reach that level, are you a failure? What does it take to get to that level?

Maybe you should stick with the gal what brung ya—traditional print advertising and direct mail. Maybe you should sit this one out until you have a clearer view of what to do and where to go. Maybe you need a team of expensive twenty-somethings who were born with computer mice in their grubby little hands to help you. That's when panic and doubt set in.

Whoa, pardner! Stop a moment. Take a deep breath.

You're in marketing, right? By now you should know that there is no such thing as magic fairy dust. One person's magic fairy dust is another person's dust allergy. You need to test, record and analyze.

Timing is to email what location is to real estate. Your job as a marketer is to find the optimal time of day and day of the week to deploy your email.

So what is your "Optimal Time?" Unless you've tested, you simply don't know.

Obviously, you have to consider when your audience would be most receptive. A pizza company should do well on a Friday or Saturday night, or before the big TV football game. But a company promoting motorcycle gear might do better on a Saturday morning when people are thinking about taking a ride.

Sometimes testing leads to non-intuitive results. Poolawg.com, a Colorado-based retailer of billiard supplies, tested emails every day of the week and several times during the day. After extensive analysis, they found that late Tuesday mornings worked best for them. Their open rates soared 200% and their conversion and click-through rates tripled. Michael Feiman, president, explains "Customers are far more likely to open an email if they are already online."

However, Pittsburgh-based nonprofit SponsorChange.org found that 9 a.m. and 1 p.m. got more volunteers and more donations. Why? They reason that being first in the in-box (first in the morning, first after lunch) was their winning formula.

Multi-Channel Marketing: A Generational Divide The Times They are a'Changing!

Bob Dylan knew it. Now Pitney Bowes confirms it. The Times They are a'Changing.

A new study by Pitney Bowes demonstrates that the practitioner's age makes a huge difference in media selection among marketers. 47% of marketers over age 55 are satisfied with the results they get with just one media channel, while only 16% of the under-35 crowd limit themselves to just one media.

Makes sense. Old codgers grew up in a time and space that had fewer options. They became familiar with and versed in a more limited universe of options. The youngsters had more technologies and options available to them. Like most of us, we go with what is comfortable.

And here is where it starts to get interesting. Really interesting.

Looking at online media, marketers under 35 are (no surprise here) most like to use email (66%), social media (34%), mobile media (28%) and QR codes (22%). Senior marketers use email (57%) while mobile marketing and QR codes are barely a blip on the radar screen for them.

That the youngsters embrace online channels shouldn't come as a surprise. This is, after all, their native language. They grew up with all things electronic. But their enthusiastic embrace of direct mail does come as a bit of a surprise.

According to the Pitney Bowes study, marketers under 35 are more likely (57%) to use direct mail than their elders. In the 35 to 54 age group 40% use direct mail and in the 55+ age group only 35% do.

Hypothesizing on the wide acceptance of direct mail among younger users, Joseph Piteo, a business development manager at Vision Critical, which conducted the survey for Pitney Bowes, suggests that the large numbers of entrepreneurs in their early 30s may be the reason. "Some of the digital marketing channels would be quite expensive to implement for a small and medium-sized business owner," he suggests.

So what's up with the old guys and direct mail?

Why the decline in direct mail use as the marketer ages? It is possible that older marketers who responded to the 500-person survey are individual consultants, not working within the corporate structure anymore. (Someone said a "consultant" is just an older person who is unemployed—and in this market, there sure are a lot of consultants on the street!)

As consultants, they may be focusing on electronic media to seem "hip" to the younger crowd, aka their client base. Like a man with a truly bad comb over wants to hide the obvious, they want to seem relevant to the footsteps they hear approaching from the rear.

On the other hand...

Despite indicating a preference for direct mail, younger marketers indicate they have less comfort with and knowledge of the media. They find it harder to track results with direct mail than with email or social media. Ultimately only 21% of the youngest marketers cite direct mail's proven effectiveness, compared to 42% of those over age 55.

Older marketers, the study suggests, have seen it all over time. They know what response rates are, and more clearly understand the value of that information. In other words: older marketers have more experience. Duh!

But can the older generation teach the youngsters what they know? And can the youngsters be patient with their elders as they fumble their way into social media acumen?

So many questions. So few answers.

Pitney Bowes says more studies are in the works. Maybe they will answer some of these unanswered questions. Or raise new ones. Only time will tell.

Nonprofit Marketing; Know Thy Audience

You’ve got a great message. Anybody would support it.  Right?  You want to launch fast, using any and all media available, while the issue is still hot. Throw crumbs on the water; wait for the flood of responses to come pouring in.

Not so fast!  I don’t want to pour cold water on your plans, but you need to slow down.

New research released by Georgetown University’s Center for Social Impact Communications and Ogilvy PR studied the difference in responses between black, white and Hispanic adults to nonprofit, charitable and political causes on social networks.

The study finds that ethnicity plays a huge role in how people perceive messages and influences whether they get involved further.  Depending on your message and your media, you could get widely divergent responses.

Let’s plunge right in.

First consider your media.  Are you using traditional direct mail, print, radio and TV or hipper social media?  The media you use can affect the response you get.

70% of blacks and 61% of Hispanics say they are more likely to support causes presented in direct mail, print, radio and TV rather than online; 76% of whites agreed.  That’s an overwhelming vote of confidence for traditional media.  But as our population ages, the traditional media may lose ground to social media.

It’s happened so fast, that it’s hard to remember, but just a few years ago there was no social media.  Today, 62% of blacks and 64% of Hispanics said social-networking sites made it easier to support a cause. But only 54% of whites agreed.

Of those who do use social media, Blacks and Hispanics were also more favorably inclined toward Facebook, Twitter and blogs as vehicles to “spread a message” at 58% and 51%  respectively.  Whites lagged at 34%.

Whites are also less likely to use Twitter at all. In another study conducted by Princeton Survey Research Associates International just 9% of white internet users said they used Twitter, but 25% of blacks and 19% of Hispanics said they Tweeted. 10% of black internet users Tweet on a typical day, compared with 5% of Hispanics and 3% of whites.

Feel like you’re drowning?  It gets worse!  An earlier study shows that women and men use social media in different ways.  Women like FaceBook; men like YouTube.  Women look to interact and share information with others; men want to get information.

Putting aside the gender issue, there are solid demographic reasons why these three ethnic groups react so differently.

African-Americans and Hispanics tend to be younger and more technology-aware.  Because they may also be less well off, they may use mobile devices to access the web.  Having the smaller platform makes Twitter more attractive to them.

White donors, who are typically older, Tweet less, which is consistent with other findings that tweeting declines with age.  They are more comfortable with traditional media.

Finally consider your message.  The three demographic groups respond quite differently.  For instance, among donors: 

• 46% of black online contributors gave to feed the hungry, compared with 38% of Hispanics and whites.
• 34% of black donors online gave to fight diabetes, compared to 32% of Hispanics and 24% of whites. 
• 31% of Hispanic donors support groups that fight global warming, but only 25% of whites and black donors do.

So what are you to make of this sea of statistics?

Despite the tsunami of interest in social media, social networking and blogs, these new media are a distant second to the traditional media of direct mail, newspapers, radio and TV if you’re looking for where your audience is getting their information.

As Julie Dixon, deputy director at the Georgetown Center, reiterates “what the study shows... is not to put all your eggs into the social-media basket.  Instead organizations should tailor their communications strategy based on how their audience is likely to engage.”

It all comes down to know thy audience before you launch.

Direct Mail: Dinosaur or Dynamite?

If you're under 30 you may think Direct Mail is ancient technology. Passe'. A marketing dinosaur in an increasingly electronic age. But before you write off Direct Mail as being irrelevant, youngster, you may need a bit larger perspective than your tender years allow.

What you may not realize is that direct mail is the Grand Dame of marketing. Like Grand Dames everywhere, Direct Mail lead the way to Direct Marketing. Like what other Grand Dames—Katherine Hepburn and Elizabeth Taylor—did for the film industry, Direct Mail did for Direct Marketing.

If Hepburn and Taylor showed ingenue actresses who followed how to act with style and maximize their assets, Direct Mail showed upstart media like email, websites, microsites, text messaging, Twitter, Facebook, LinkedIn, other social media and YouTube how to do it with style... and how to maximize their results.

Segment data, test packaging, test messages. Use personalization, teasers and pinpoint messaging to get the best return on investment. The first media to do it all—and to do it all right—was Direct Mail.

But life goes on. Sometime around 1960 the electronic invasion began and direct marketing rules started to change. Equipment got smaller, faster. New technologies arose to take advantage of these smaller, faster thingies. Other new technologies allowed better data capture and collection. This is where you enter the picture, newbie—at the dawn of the electronic era.

The wave of new media changed the way we communicate, giving us many new ways to do so. And because the older generation really does want to communicate with the younger (please ask your Mother), Direct Mail had to learn a few new tricks as well. After all, a True Grand Dame can evolve—just look at what Elizabeth Taylor became. (I could digress at length, but will avoid the temptation.)

Today, savvy marketers of all generations say Direct Mail has proven to be one of the most effective means of driving leads to websites and mobile platforms.

How did Direct Mail do it? By integrating new technology into print media. That's how. Personalized urls (PURLS), and quick response codes (QR codes) are only two of the most obvious techniques Direct Mail has made its own.

Variably printed PURLs direct prospects to personalized microsites customized to the individual recipient's interests and concerns. On the self-named site, recipients can leave specific information about themselves, which allows the marketer to prequalify leads and segment lists for more accurate messaging later.

Want another great evolutionary and revolutionary example? Try QR codes! QR codes take a recipient with a smart phone straight from the printed page to the mailer's webpage, YouTube video, or FaceBook page.

Want to promote something with a web-based address? A QR code is the fastest shortcut to get an interested person there. Want to segment your list into different messages or different platforms? Use different QR codes—one for each message or platform.

And it gets better! The USPS is so excited about QR codes, that it is offering a 3% postage rebate in July and August of 2011 for mail pieces that meet the requirements. I mean, when have you heard of the government giving the public something? Big banks and brokerages, car manufacturers, oil drillers, Big Ag and pharmaceutical megalopolies, sure. But you and me? This is amazing!

But more is coming. This is only the beginning. Direct marketing is evolving as I type. Intense list segmentation and data mining is creating the possibility of ever more personalized approaches. Variable Data Printing ensures that each recipient can get a message and graphics specific to that person's needs and interests. I can't begin to predict where Direct Marketing will be in even a few months. But someone somewhere is working on an amazing new app today that will change the conversation yet again tomorrow.

After all, Grand Dames don't become Grand Dames by sitting around on their tushes and eating bon bons. They get out and do things. They make things happen. They change themselves and their worlds.

That's what Direct Mail has done... and is doing. In the process it has become marketing dynamite.

I say Pot-AY-to; You say Po-TAH-to. Let's call the whole thing off! Nonprofits look at donor acquisition sources.

It's a big world. There's room for differences of opinion.

For instance, I like apples; you like oranges. Neither of us is right or wrong as both apples and oranges are good for us. Just ask Michelle Obama. In lawyerly compromise, she'd probably say that a fruit salad is better than its component parts.

A similar either/or debate has been raging in the nonprofit world between the merits of donor acquisition by email or direct mail. Again, both sides have plenty to say, with avid proponents of each approach vociferously defending their turf.

So into this fracas fearlessly steps Blackbaud, a leading provider of nonprofit software. In its recently released 2011 Multichannel Giving Benchmarking Report, Blackbaud proffers its own analysis.

WARNING!! For those of you with an aversion to research studies—even really good ones—skip to the bottom of this article. I've synopsized it for you.

For those of you who want more in-depth knowledge, here are some of the high points of the study:

• Allowing that the internet is becoming an increasingly important acquisition tool, the study also says that its use is not widespread yet, though many new donors give their first gift online.

Duh! New donors trend younger. Younger people tend to use the internet more than older people. Hence the internet would be their obvious point of entry.

• DM is still the work horse for nonprofit marketing, with the typical nonprofit receiving more than 75% of its total gifts through DM and only 10% online.

So oldsters are still doing the heavy lifting. Figures. Other research shows that the average nonprofit donor is a 62-year old woman. She's sticking with mail.

• Most donors give through only one vehicle, and that vehicle is direct mail.

Don't fix it if it's working.

• DM is responsible for 75% of new donors; 16% of new donors arrive online.

As the population ages, this figure will probably equalize. But for the next 10-15 years DM will rule the roost.

• Online-acquired donors are significantly younger and tend to have higher household incomes than mail-acquired donors.

Makes sense. Onliners are still in their peak earning years. DMers are often retired, living on fixed incomes and husbanding their resources.

• Online acquired donors tend to give larger gifts, but have lower retention rates than mail-acquired donors.

Makes sense again. Previous studies have shown that online donors have less loyalty and tend to spread their donations around. That makes them appear flighty.

• Just under 50% of on-line acquired donors switch to being direct mail donors as their relationship with the organization deepens. But only a tiny fraction of DM donors migrate to online.

Yep. As their interest in and commitment to the organization increases, they want to know more—information that can only be conveyed in print.

• And while on-line acquired donors have higher value over the long term than traditional mail-acquired donors, that value depends on the original gift level. Furthermore, the higher gift amount can mask the lack of retention.

Previous research concurs. Online donors tend to give big, but only once, then move on. IF (big "if") an organization can keep their loyalty over the long term, they should be worth a great deal to the organization. It's a combination of age at buy-in, size of gift, and years of future projected income.

• Evidence of past multichannel giving is not a good predictor of future retention or long-term value. Traditional DM tracking variables (recency, frequency, gift amount) are far more successful at predicting an individual's long-term value to an organization.

At the end of the day, dance with the gal what brung ya.

So here comes Blackbaud's lawyerly compromise:

"It is the ability of online-acquired donors to... start giving through direct mail that significantly boosts the long-term value of this group of donors. The most successful organizations have integrated online and offline marketing teams and CRM systems to develop effective multichannel communication strategies that can maximize donor value."

Got It?

OK. Here's the super simplified synopsis I promised.

Bottom line message for those of you who only read the PS on fundraising letters:

Direct mail is key to nonprofit donor retention and loyalty. DM remains the single best source for nonprofit donations.

Nonprofits report that 75% of their donations come in through DM and only 10% come in online.

Take-away action: Include direct mail in your nonprofit fundraising efforts. It works.

On some issues there is no difference of opinion.

So Much to Do; So little time

Everybody is in a rush today. For many of us it's instant breakfast, instant drinks, instant potatoes, instant gratification. If something takes longer than we think it should, it aggravates us. ("Why is my computer so slow today?" "Can't he see the light turned green already?" "Why is she running late, again?")

Every second counts.

That's why if your website takes too long to download, (whatever that means) you may be costing your business or organization big bucks.

Well, according to research released recently by the Aberdeen Group, we now know what "too long to download" means.

It means one itty bitty second.

The average impact of one second delay is enormous, according to this study.

The number of page views goes down 11%. The number of conversions drops by 7%. And customer satisfaction rating plummets a stunning 16%.

Life on the web is competitive enough without self-inflicted damage. People expect—nay, demand—speed today. If your precious flash introduction is slowing up your presentation, you'll lose your audience. They will simply walk away with a click of a finger.

You've invested thousands of dollars in your website presentation. Don't lose your hard-won audience in the last second. Take a minute to open your own website. Check out how fast it downloads. Then fix it if you must.

Remember, every second counts. And some more than others.

Getting Inside Your Head and Staying There

In an age when advanced neuroscience technologies like eye tracking, fMRI and neural activity analysis are standard for sophisticated marketing studies, (this is like yesterday's focus groups on steroids!) it was only a matter of time before someone studied human response to various media. And specifically, direct mail versus digital mail.

That "someone" was the United Kingdom's Royal Mail.

In the Royal Mail-funded study conducted last year, researchers at Bangor University discovered—natch—that we perceive messages on different media differently. Researchers used fMRI scanners to monitor test subjects' brain activity while the subjects either read a physical piece of mail or looked at the same presentation on a computer screen.

Stay with me, dear reader. This is great stuff. Really!

In the end, the researchers found three significant differences in perception:

1. Direct mail generates a deeper emotional response in the emotional centers of the brain.
2. The brain sees physical mail as more "real" than digital mail.
3. The areas of the brain connected to memory and introspection stayed engaged longer with direct mail.

Drawing conclusions from their findings, the researchers proffered that "the brain is more emotionally engaged and is...reflecting more of a response" when viewing direct mail. Also, because the brain sees mail as "real" (as opposed to digital images) the brain is creating deeper memories.

One researcher stated "From an evolutionary point of view, you pay more attention to something that is real and physical. You want to understand it more than something that is transient, like something on a screen."

I get it. Our caveman ancestors were more concerned about that hungry lion hiding in the grass, than about wispy pictures in the clouds.

Are you there, dear reader? I promise, there's a pay day coming!

So what does this science mean to you, a marketer?

Even in this digital era when email is fast and cheap, direct mail resonates more strongly with the recipient, and stays in his subconscious longer.

As a savvy marketer, then, you should include direct mail in every marketing strategy to maximize your potential. And that's what the researchers said!

But traditional measurement metrics like response rate and ROI don't tell the whole story. Direct mail has staying power that digital does not. Hence, direct mail builds brand recognition better than digital.

In the Old Days, we'd call that a "Lasting Impression." Today, the scientists call it "preferential treatment in the brain." Whatever.

Direct mail may be the tortoise to email's hare, but look who won that race in the end.

[Warning! Here is the research team again.] "Marketers need to start focusing on the overall impact of their direct mail rather than just the response rate. Direct mail has also raised awareness and left an imprint of your brand which we can substantiate with research."

"I don't think that marketers should see direct mail as just a direct response vehicle," the researchers concluded. "It can be both a brand building AND a direct response mechanism."

Bingo! Did you get it? Direct mail is better at getting inside your head...and staying there!

And that, dear reader, is exactly where you want your marketing to be: inside your customer's head.

It's not simply about immediate response rates. Sure, response rates provide the tale of the tape. Was the effort productive? Did you get new business? How much? What was the bottom line? That's what green-shaded bean counters—and your boss—want to know.

But Direct Mail provides more, according to this research. Because it sticks with the recipient longer, it provides an unquantifiable extra: time--time to absorb your message and mull it over. That extra time may be at a subliminal level, but it's there working for you. Hence, the value of oft-touted repeat mailings.

And that's what you, a savvy marketer, need to know: that your repeat direct mail efforts are building brand awareness among those who receive your literature.

This may not be new news, but it's great news. Direct marketers have known it for years: repeating your message builds affinity and responses.

Cutting-edge neuroscience simply proves it.