Richard Riccelli made me re-write the ad for flat fee buyer representation last night. He convinced me that trying to sell the whole idea in a space ad would not be as effective as driving traffic to a web page, where we are free to discuss the idea at any length necessary.
This is the draft of the new ad:
If you click on the image, a PDF version will open up, for easier reading.
The modern name for this style of advertising is “advertorial,” but this idea was invented a century ago by Claude Hopkins. This is direct response advertising. The theory is that the buyer wants to be informed and will pursue dense text to gather information.
Properly deployed, an ad like this would be run in different versions — different headlines, different body copy, different offers — to see which version pulls the optimum response — not necessarily biggest response, but highest-profit response. For an ad like this, I can use a different web page for every version to measure response. Moreover, I can build different versions of the web page for a particular ad and test those against each other as well.
Hopkins believed that if you couldn’t (or didn’t) measure your response to find out what was and was not working, you were wasting your advertising dollars. Most advertising is not done this way, precisely because most advertising dollars are wasted.
Richard has already hit me with detailed instructions about what to do with the design of this ad. I have one or more revision cycles on the copy, plus I need to re-write the web page. Even so, we’re just that close to being ready to roll, and I’m showing with a flat fee client later today…
Technorati Tags: arizona, arizona real estate, compensation for buyer representation, phoenix, phoenix real estate, real estate marketing
Jim Duncan says:
I like it. I really like it and think that your idea comprises much of what the future of the real estate industry will look like. One aspect I do not understand is this part:
How so? All of my buyer clients know how much my company is compensated. Frequently I break down exactly how much I will get paid because 1) they need to know, 2) they need to understand that due to our independent contractor status, every single expense incurred is paid directly out of my pocket and 3) it gives me an opportunity to bring up the FairTax. 🙂
October 15, 2006 — 8:58 am
Greg Swann says:
> For one thing, buyer’s agents don’t have to disclose the amount of their compensation.
In Arizona, an agent does not have to disclose to his client commission income coming from the seller or listing agent. Stinks to high heaven, in my opinion…
October 15, 2006 — 9:06 am
Jeff Brown says:
Greg, as you already know, I think you’re going to take this idea to the top, hitting your market like a surprise tsunami. I’m still wondering though about the apparent premise underlying your argument that says the buyer pays everything.
That premise is this: That somehow the market value of the home is controlled by something other than supply/demand, and the other factors of which we’re all aware. Would you please clear this up for me?
October 15, 2006 — 9:24 am
Jeff says:
“I’m still wondering though about the apparent premise underlying your argument that says the buyer pays everything.”
I’m wondering the same thing. Doesn’t this vary with different markets?
January 17, 2008 — 10:02 pm