Opinions on Advertising are as conflicting as opinions on Religion. Forty per cent of all the people in the world are Buddhists, and are of the Opinion that Buddhism is the only true religion. Twelve per cent of the world?s people being Roman Catholics, are firm in the opinion that the remaining 88 percent are wrong, and sure of damnation accordingly.
Many Advertisers, seem satisfied to spend their money on mere Opinions about Advertising when they might have invested it on Evidence about Advertising. These are the Advertisers whose business must die before they can be convinced that general publicity (merely keeping the name before the people) is wrong and Salesmanship-on-paper right.
They blindly gamble in Advertising when they might have safely invested in it. If they were to buy any other kind of Service, except Advertising, they would demand tangible proof of its efficacy before they spent money on it. If they hired a Salesman, for instance, they would expect him to prove he was earning his salary by making a satisfactory Record on Sales. They would not accept, for long, statements from him that he was? Making a General impression on the Trade? for his salary. Nor would they be satisfied with the statement that he was branding profitably enough to compensate for lack of sales.
Because, true ads are "Salesmanship-on-paper" after all. When it is anything less than salesmanship it is not real Advertising, but only "Branding." And, "Branding" admittedly claims only to "increase favorable name recognition," to produce a " impression on the Trade," and to "Influence Sales" for the salespeople.
Bad Advertising makes the same lame excuses as a Salesman who failed to earn his salary in actually selling goods. But General Publicity, or any other Advertising, should be judged by the same standards as the Salesman is judged, viz., by the goods it is clearly proven to sell at a given cost per dollar invested in it. - 16747
Many Advertisers, seem satisfied to spend their money on mere Opinions about Advertising when they might have invested it on Evidence about Advertising. These are the Advertisers whose business must die before they can be convinced that general publicity (merely keeping the name before the people) is wrong and Salesmanship-on-paper right.
They blindly gamble in Advertising when they might have safely invested in it. If they were to buy any other kind of Service, except Advertising, they would demand tangible proof of its efficacy before they spent money on it. If they hired a Salesman, for instance, they would expect him to prove he was earning his salary by making a satisfactory Record on Sales. They would not accept, for long, statements from him that he was? Making a General impression on the Trade? for his salary. Nor would they be satisfied with the statement that he was branding profitably enough to compensate for lack of sales.
Because, true ads are "Salesmanship-on-paper" after all. When it is anything less than salesmanship it is not real Advertising, but only "Branding." And, "Branding" admittedly claims only to "increase favorable name recognition," to produce a " impression on the Trade," and to "Influence Sales" for the salespeople.
Bad Advertising makes the same lame excuses as a Salesman who failed to earn his salary in actually selling goods. But General Publicity, or any other Advertising, should be judged by the same standards as the Salesman is judged, viz., by the goods it is clearly proven to sell at a given cost per dollar invested in it. - 16747
About the Author:
Dennis Gartland is an expert at testing ad campaign on the internet visit our site or contact us to learn more about our Cleveland Adertising Agency Go to Net Advertising group for information on effective advertising interactive
