Video VS Text

[Li Weng]

Provide your final judgment!

Which is more effective in YOUR eyes?

[dorothydot]

I vote text.

When you read something, it's like you're thinking it in your mind. If the words don't get in the way, the message is much, much easier to claim as your own thought.

And it is quiet - you can read stuff almost anywhere, anytime. Except, perhaps, when your boss is looking over your shoulder. ;-)

And personally, when I find video playing that I never asked to play, I TURN IT OFF FAST. It's too startling, too public, too much what I did not want to see.

IMHO.

Dot

[Vin_J]

Depends on numerous factors... but one being not everyone is able to watch it. Plus what you say is less relevant when someone sees you (look at the studies).

[Alex Malave]

Obviously both work, but sales pitches are going to be going more and more towards video for 2 reasons.

Easier to provide proof.
Builds trust and credibility faster.

It is also the media people get their news and entertainment the most now a days.

[warriorkevin]

I really dont like video unless it has a real purpose.

In place of sales copy does not seem a real purpose to me.

using video to demo something is very good.

What bothers me is sitting and watching a screen that doesn't move while someone spends 2 minutes telling me what they are going to show and then doddling along.

Show me the meat or break it down into several 1 minute blocks with some text to suppor/explain what you are going to show.

You can also put text on the screen in between clips . It may force you to get to the point quickly with words so I dont have to listen/watch presenter stammer - boring...

k-

[James A. Miller]

Definitely text.

You can't watch video while you're at work. You can't scan the text. Video takes ages to load. Think about Ryan Deiss's Continuity Blueprint video launch -- the videos were of very high quality and I couldn't comfortably watch them with my 1mbit dsl. And I believe that at least 10-15% of Internet users still use dialup.

Video needs flash/plugins. If you're marketing with video to non-computer-savvy people then you lost them completely.

Video resembles TV commercials so much. TV commercials are screaming "I'M ADVERTISING, TURN ME OFF" and there's no real content in them. Long sales letters are more like articles and giving information.

With videos you have to be a really good speaker while with text you only need to be good at swiping ;-) It's so easy to bore the pants off people (think about Bacak or Jordan Hall's Turbo Continuity launch).

Video might be good only as a supplement to a long sales letter. That's just my opinion of course.

[artwebster]

If you can't read and if you can put up with the banality and inconsequencial dross that introduces many videos (and causes me to turn them off), video may well be best.

For myself, I do not like to be patronised, I do not like peculiar local dialectic accents and I do not like unscripted drivel that does not deliver a punch.

Flash videos giving only screen shots as instructions for particular actions are OK but I would much rather have a series of jpgs to view at my own speed.

[HervinBalfour]

I'm going to go with video. Just go to Alexa.com and see the fact that after over a year YouTube is still number one in their search rankings which shows that video advertising is on the rise.

• Video builds credibility and lets people see you. They can tell if you are being sincere or being phony. If you are sincere expect your leads and opt-in to skyrocket. It also brands you as an expert and makes you credible in just a few seconds.
• A recent study I read that prospects retain 50% of the information through video as opposed to text.
• You get to cut down on objections about your product or services. You will never have to worry about handling objections of your leads. We all know the usual "it's a pyramid scheme" crap that we face on a daily basis. That nonsense ends with video.

I actually wrote an article on Video and Web 2.0. It gives my personal insight on video.

Five Hard Hitting Reasons Why Videos Are the Most Effective Tool For Building Your Internet Network

FYI. I don't want people to think that video should totally replace copy writing. Everyone won't be good at video production and if you are an superb copywriter then it won't matter. Because the pen is still mightier than the sword.

[MontelloMarketing]

Originally Posted by HervinBalfour

I'm going to go with video. Just go to Alexa.com and see the fact that after over a year YouTube is still number one in their search rankings which shows that video advertising is on the rise.

Actually what it shows is that people love watching funny, disgusting or sexy videos on their computers.

Where do you think more selling was done in 2008? On Youtube? Or on Amazon?

Now my vote for text isn't my "final judgement." Video will largely replace text at some point, just like tv largely replaced newspapers. But to say search rankings prove it's a done deal, just isn't accurate.

[write-stuff]

I'd have to pick an option that's not there - a mix of both. I find that better than either by itself.

- Russ

[HervinBalfour]

Originally Posted by MontelloMarketing

Actually what it shows is that people love watching funny, disgusting or sexy videos on their computers.

Where do you think more selling was done in 2008? On Youtube? Or on Amazon?

Now my vote for text isn't my "final judgement." Video will largely replace text at some point, just like tv largely replaced newspapers. But to say search rankings prove it's a done deal, just isn't accurate.

Okay. I can see your point. However you also can't say that everything on Youtube is funny, disgusting or sexual and that's all that people watch because there are too many catergories on YouTube that attract different types of people.

However what it does show is that there is a huge audience for video period and that it can be indeed an effective marketing tool. And it's still largely untapped by the IM community.

For example look at the number of hit's Katie Frieling and Johnathon Budd have for their videos. Especially Katie Frieling. She became a top producer for her company just through YouTube alone. I used her as an example in an article I wrote.

I can also tell you that the use of video has dramatically increased my opt-in rate vs not having video.

I have one colleague that only uses video as her sole marketing strategy and she became a top producer in one of the companies I am with.

In fact, it was her that inspired me to do video. So in clarification video, when done correctly can dramatically increase your opt-in rate.

And I personally don't promote my product or opportunity on YouTube I brand myself and use video as a further extension of magnetic/attraction marketing.

I hope that clarifies what I should have said a bit.

[MontelloMarketing]

Originally Posted by HervinBalfour

Okay. I can see your point. However you also can't say that everything on Youtube is funny, disgusting or sexual and that's all that people watch because there are too many catergories on YouTube that attract different types of people.

true... and little if any of what's on youtube is selling. Usually marketers will throw stuff up there to get some traffic. And guess what the link will send them to? A largely (often entirely) text-filled sales letter.

For example look at the number of hit's Katie Frieling and Johnathon Budd have for their videos. Especially Katie Frieling. She became a top producer for her company just through YouTube alone. I used her as an example in an article I wrote.

Are you serious? Her best performing videos have hundreds of views. That's nothing in the world of youtube. She's doing exactly what everyone's doing. Getting traffic from youtube. And not too much of it in the big picture.

I can also tell you that the use of video has dramatically increased my opt-in rate vs not having video.

I don't know what "dramatically increased" means. I'll use Katie as an example... He has like 40 videos. together that's something like (guesstimate) 12,000 viewers. If 1 in 5 goes to her website (that's 20% conversion. I'm being generous for youtube traffic)... we're talking 2,400 people potentially. If half of those (50% conversion is about average on optins) sign up on her list then she's got 1,200 people on the list.

Is that about the size of your list? Bigger? Smaller? Give me an idea of what a "dramatic increase" looks like.

My guess is your optin rate suffered before because you had bad copy (wrote it yourself I'm guessing?)...

I have one colleague that only uses video as her sole marketing strategy and she became a top producer in one of the companies I am with.

"sole marketing strategy?" She closes sales on video? She never has to "get the sale?" Never has them click on an order link on a sales page? Never has to close them on the phone?

In fact, it was her that inspired me to do video. So in clarification video, when done correctly can dramatically increase your opt-in rate.

No doubt that's true... especially if you're comparing well done video to badly done text copy. But when "done corrrectly" video can crush even good text. The only problem is throwing up lifestyle videos using yourself as a testimonial of sorts is not "doing it right."

And I personally don't promote my product or opportunity on YouTube I brand myself and use video as a further extension of magnetic/attraction marketing.

I hope that clarifies what I should have said a bit.

Yeah... I'm just gonna call it as I see it. Attraction marketing is bunk. There I said it. I don't subscribe to the process... think it's ridiculously overused and oversold to people who don't make money, but want to. I can think all I want about nothing but bills coming in the mail and no checks... yet I still make 3-4 times more than most of the "top sellers" in MLM who follow the "laws of..."

You said something that makes sense however... using video to brand yourself is a way to do it right. But it has to go further than that.

Video (actually many different kinds of videos) need to be used in conjunction with text sales letters to effectively snatch the lion's share of money out of prospects and stuff it into your pocket.

Youtube is really just a little way to drive a little traffic and show everyone how you look while drunk and on vacation.

Back to the original question: Video is powerful but only when used as part of a sales funnel. As part of a machine.

Text can do it all without video... but the reverse isn't true.

(Please don't take this as anger aimed at you. Not angry. Just frustrated because newbies come along... see what is written here and think "huh... I'll throw some videos up on youtube and make money.")

[HervinBalfour]

Originally Posted by MontelloMarketing

true... and little if any of what's on youtube is selling. Usually marketers will throw stuff up there to get some traffic. And guess what the link will send them to? A largely (often entirely) text-filled sales letter.



Are you serious? Her best performing videos have hundreds of views. That's nothing in the world of youtube. She's doing exactly what everyone's doing. Getting traffic from youtube. And not too much of it in the big picture.

I don't know what "dramatically increased" means. I'll use Katie as an example... He has like 40 videos. together that's something like (guesstimate) 12,000 viewers. If 1 in 5 goes to her website (that's 20% conversion. I'm being generous for youtube traffic)... we're talking 2,400 people potentially. If half of those (50% conversion is about average on optins) sign up on her list then she's got 1,200 people on the list.

Is that about the size of your list? Bigger? Smaller? Give me an idea of what a "dramatic increase" looks like.

My guess is your optin rate suffered before because you had bad copy (wrote it yourself I'm guessing?)...


"sole marketing strategy?" She closes sales on video? She never has to "get the sale?" Never has them click on an order link on a sales page? Never has to close them on the phone?



No doubt that's true... especially if you're comparing well done video to badly done text copy. But when "done corrrectly" video can crush even good text. The only problem is throwing up lifestyle videos using yourself as a testimonial of sorts is not "doing it right."



Yeah... I'm just gonna call it as I see it. Attraction marketing is bunk. There I said it. I don't subscribe to the process... think it's ridiculously overused and oversold to people who don't make money, but want to. I can think all I want about nothing but bills coming in the mail and no checks... yet I still make 3-4 times more than most of the "top sellers" in MLM who follow the "laws of..."

You said something that makes sense however... using video to brand yourself is a way to do it right. But it has to go further than that.

Video (actually many different kinds of videos) need to be used in conjunction with text sales letters to effectively snatch the lion's share of money out of prospects and stuff it into your pocket.

Youtube is really just a little way to drive a little traffic and show everyone how you look while drunk and on vacation.

Back to the original question: Video is powerful but only when used as part of a sales funnel. As part of a machine.

Text can do it all without video... but the reverse isn't true.

(Please don't take this as anger aimed at you. Not angry. Just frustrated because newbies come along... see what is written here and think "huh... I'll throw some videos up on youtube and make money.")

Would you mind if I sent my lengthy response to your lengthy response to your pm box? LOL

I actually agree with a lot of what you have said but I also disagree with a couple of your points. But I don't want to get this thread derailed by us going back and forth.

[MontelloMarketing]

sure... send it.

[Qbiz]

In my view text wins every time. Videos do add credibility and can be an excellent vehicle for providing proof but I see videos as merely supplemental to the sales process.

Regards

George

[MontelloMarketing]

Originally Posted by Qbiz

Videos do add credibility and can be an excellent vehicle for providing proof but I see videos as merely supplemental to the sales process.

Bingo! Give that man a cigar!

[jrsencio]

Both work. You simply need to track and test to see which works better on a specific page and go with which delivers. It's not as simple as choosing one over the other.

[Collette]

Video is a useful tool for both product delivery and brand-building.

You can use it to develop brand-identity and credibility (as Katie whatshername does) and you can use it to create sales interest (as many Internet marketers do).

Video, by itself, rarely produces "buy right now" sales. You need copy for that.

Additionally, as someone pointed out above: depends on your market. Some markets are heavy on dial-up customers. They're not likely to sit around for 15 minutes waiting for a 3 min video to load.

And some prospects (like yours truly) spend so much time already staring at a computer screen, that the LAST THING they want to do is spend ANOTHER 40 minutes staring at the computer screen. Such prospects are going to need a hellavua incentive to convince them that they should rest their weary eyeballs on your shaky cinema verite camerawork with the dull roar of I-95 in the background.

For those prospects, either pitch to them in copy, or offer them a transcript option. Otherwise, you're gonna lose leads, sales, or both.

[Side note: There have been times when I have NOT purchased an IM product solely because the only option offered was video. I can read a 30 minute video transcript in about 7 minutes. Life is short, and mine is getting shorter each day. If you're going to suggest that I purchase your video product/course - and you don't offer transcripts - you are going to have to give me a damn irresistable Value Proposition to get me to open my wallet.]

So, in answer to "which one is more effective" - depends on what your goal is. Use whichever gets you to your goal. Or a combination of them both.

Whatever gets you to where you're going.

[imamrktr]

Video vs text is an interesting question. For my vote it is video. However, I will say that text is still very powerful as well. I think that you have to factor in the niche that you are in and what exactly you are trying to accomplish. Video lends a sense of rapid creditability.

[whitewindow2009]

I would say, text. For simple reason text in my eyes provide more seriousness and more information than video. With video in my opinion an element of fun, entertainment and no seriousness peeps in. You can explain your topic, your views more in detail with text. With words written in front of you, your mind grasp more than just watching. When you see and listen, you are not applying your mind, you are just watchinga peice of information. But when you are reading something, you cannot go to the next line if you have not understood the previous one. Your mind will not allow this. Hence, text gives much more strong impression than video. It has a long lasting effect on your mind and memory.

[Mr Bloggy]

Text. Video takes a lot more to get it to come across properly.

[Joint Venture]

I use video on the landing page. Page 2: salesletter generated from Eben's PsyhicSalesletter survey software.

[MaskedMarketer]

Originally Posted by Collette

Video, by itself, rarely produces "buy right now" sales. You need copy for that.

Why do you need copy for "buy right now" sales?

Because most people just suck at sales presentations and creating an infomercial?

If the majority of your communication is done through body language and tone of voice, your losing a lot of communication using only text alone...

And most people don't understand or can't create an effective infomercial, sales presentation, and creating sales copy just the easier way to go, in my opinion and for me.

[kctang]

Originally Posted by HervinBalfour

FYI. I don't want people to think that video should totally replace copy writing. Everyone won't be good at video production and if you are an superb copywriter then it won't matter. Because the pen is still mightier than the sword.

Good point here.

If your copy sucks, then the copy in your video will suck.
The copy outside your video will suck.
And if you're looking to replace bad copy with video then you're screwed.

It's really NOT an either/or question.
Video is another tool in your marketing repertoire.
(though the ratio between learning curve and effectiveness is lower with copy)

Good copy, and good video, have a flow to their message.
Good video salesletters are produced with a similar pattern as a written salesletter.
Attention - Benefit - Differentiation - Call to Action

There are more places to go wrong with video than with written copy.

Not understanding the PURPOSE of video media will make you shoot yourself in your foot.
If you don't know why you're putting video on your site, and how that BOOSTS the strength of
your MESSAGE, then it'll just be another waste of time for the cxr...

And we all know what cxrs do when they feel their time being wasted on the internet.

So think about how you want to enhance your message with video, how to make it clearer,
how to relate better, etc.

[Sarah Johnson]

It may depend partially on what you are talking about, either in text or video, but overall I would say text.
It allows the reader to internalize what is being said in an easier way...kind of like grabbing the text and making it their own. Plus I agree that pop-up videos can be obtrusive and annoying. Now if it was a video that I choose to play that may work.

~Mrs. Johnson

[TheRichVillain]

Text and video can be used successfully together, in fact when you combine the elements of reading, watching, and listening, you're hitting the sensory system on three levels at once. Your message can be conveyed more efficiently and effectively. Try using images that describe your message, along with compelling text (a call to action, or "what's in it for me" statements) and mix it up with appropriate music and you'll see the final product pitches your message in a unique way not seen before. The "laws of attraction" ie: "the secret" community has embraced this and refer to it as "mind movies", although in my opinion it works just as well for selling.

[MaskedMarketer]

Originally Posted by kctang

If your copy sucks, then the copy in your video will suck.

If you mean "copy" in the video as your presentation, then thats a big assumption.

I know many sales people who can't translate there message effectively on paper. Just because someone can't write copy, doesn't mean that they can't give an effective presentation on video.

[MontelloMarketing]

Originally Posted by MaskedMarketer

If you mean "copy" in the video as your presentation, then thats a big assumption.

I know many sales people who can't translate there message effectively on paper. Just because someone can't write copy, doesn't mean that they can't give an effective presentation on video.

To craft a proper sales message, you have to know what to say and in what order. Whether that message is delivered via video or a sales letter, you still need the words.

I think it was Shakespeare who once said: "If it ain't on the page... it ain't on the stage."

(Okay, maybe he didn't say "ain't.")

[MaskedMarketer]

Originally Posted by MontelloMarketing

To craft a proper sales message, you have to know what to say and in what order. Whether that message is delivered via video or a sales letter, you still need the words.

I think it was Shakespeare who once said: "If it ain't on the page... it ain't on the stage."

(Okay, maybe he didn't say "ain't.")

I agree you need words.

And im basing what I know from real world stuff, not a silly quote

That quote does have validity, but it doesn't mean what I quoted earlier is not an assumption.

[MontelloMarketing]

Originally Posted by MaskedMarketer

I agree you need words.

And im basing what I know from real world stuff, not a silly quote

That quote does have validity, but it doesn't mean what I quoted earlier is not an assumption.

The quote is nothing... On the other hand my point is something. If you're saying you don't need to know (or hire someone who does know) how to write great copy if you're "only" doing video... then I completely disagree.

It all starts with the written word (that a less silly quote for you?).

Sure... there are those who "shine" on screen... but in order to make sales you have to know how to open, persuade and close a deal.

Whether on video or on the page it is still the same skill.

And I'm basing that on a TON of real world experience.

[NewbieImer]

I think it really depends because if your a great speaker video if not the writing

[MaskedMarketer]

Originally Posted by MontelloMarketing

It all starts with the written word (that a less silly quote for you?).

Sure... there are those who "shine" on screen... but in order to make sales you have to know how to open, persuade and close a deal.

And I'm basing that on a TON of real world experience.

You make great points and I completely agree that in order to persuade you need to know how to influence.

But why must it start with a written word? I do agree it may make it easier for most people.

Originally Posted by MontelloMarketing

Whether on video or on the page it is still the same skill.

That's only part true and is a common misconception.

When giving a sales presentation on video, or in person, the presenter must understand and know how to use body language and voice tonality/inflection. More skills are involved when giving a presentation on video, so more room for error. If a presenter doesn't know how to speak correctly, their voice will be working against them.

More communication is going on in a video presentation than reading a sales letter. And because more communication is going on, its sometimes easier to persuade in video (and in person).

And my original point was, if your copy sucks, your video "copy" (presentation) doesn't HAVE to suck. Sure, most people suck at presentations to begin with, so they NEED a before hand script

I don't see whats wrong with that?

[MaskedMarketer]

Originally Posted by NewbieImer

I think it really depends because if your a great speaker video if not the writing

The good thing is, both can be learned if the desire and determination is there.

[DBofBES]

I think now days with all the media (tv, movies, computers, video games) that the majority has become more visual. The movement pulls one in and "seems" more natural and almost interactive. Now that's taking into consideration that the video is not just a static shot with a weak script.

I believe a strong script delivered well on video is better than text alone.

[MontelloMarketing]

Originally Posted by MaskedMarketer

That's only part true and is a common misconception.

Trust that I have no misconceptions on this. I'm a writer and for a decade I was highly paid to speak to large groups. I also write many video scripts to sell product... and often have tremendous results.

I know what I'm talking about here.

When giving a sales presentation on video, or in person, the presenter must understand and know how to use body language and voice tonality/inflection. More skills are involved when giving a presentation on video, so more room for error. If a presenter doesn't know how to speak correctly, their voice will be working against them.

Listen... there's room for error in everything we do. This isn't surgery... nobody dies when you screw it up. So sure... there's room for error. But with each error you're leaving money on the table. In print... on screen... screw up and you lose sales. It's that simple.

You wanna talk about selling on video? The most money made this way has to be tv commercials. How much money you think would be missed out on if someone just winged it on a commercial?

Ever wonder why you never see that? You never see that because it would be stupid.

And yeah... speakers need to know about tonality... inflection... pacing and all that jazz. But it's icing on the cake. The icing is nothing without the cake. Someone has to bake that cake!

Sure, most people suck at presentations to begin with, so they NEED a before hand script

I don't see whats wrong with that?

Not only is there nothing wrong with that. It's exactly what I've been saying this whole time. You need the written word.

Listen... I don't know you. You're masked behind a nick. I could find out tomorrow you were some big marketing genius. I don't care... All I'm saying is using video without good sales copy in that video... isn't genius. It's stupid.

That doesn't mean a sales video is a guy reading a sales letter. That too would be stupid. It also doesn't always have to be a detailed word for word script. But the person doing the talking needs to know what they're going to say, in what order and what each of those segments is supposed to do to the viewer. And the text that appears on the screen has to be crafted. All of that is written word.

[MaskedMarketer]

Hey Montello,

I do not doubt what you are saying has much truth and that you know exactly what you're doing.

Some communications "experts" still believe in the 7% 38% 55% myth .

And while I believe tonality may have more effect than content- I don't believe the content, or words only make up 7% of communication effectiveness, like many experts may preach.

It just irked me when someone said "Your copy sucks, so your will your video". 1+1 always = 2 , but Your copy sucks doesn't always = your video sucks (imo).

You and others may believe this, but i don't believe its really "set in stone". That's all. And i don't believe "everything starts with written word". I certainly believe it has much truth to it, but i just don't believe anything is set in stone. If there is a "rule"- I'd like to break it

I believe it all starts in the mind- and some may be better communicating verbally and others with the written word.

I certainly respect yours and others opinions. And in fact, I prefer not to agree, as the more times some one can prove me wrong, the more I learn !

And I don't think Video should be Vs. text, because they should be used together to create the ultimate customer experience.

[moises_pk2]

I think, videos

[westernseo]

In my eyes....

Video alone is more effective then text alone.

But the combination of the two is the most effective of all!

I like to use videos to touch on highlights of the product or to use to make a site look more professional....

[Kevin AKA Hubcap]

Originally Posted by westernseo

In my eyes....

Video alone is more effective then text alone.

But the combination of the two is the most effective of all!

I like to use videos to touch on highlights of the product or to use to make a site look more professional....

I second this. The video should support the text and the text should support the video.

[Mark Brock]

Why can't they just both get along?!

Originally Posted by Qbiz

Videos do add credibility and can be an excellent vehicle for providing proof but I see videos as merely supplemental to the sales process.

I couldn't cast my vote simply because I believe that both should be used in conjunction with one another.

I do agree with QBiz in that if you were to create a sales page using just one of these media choices, then I'd have to say text; however I will always use a mixture of both whenever I create a sales page. I feel that this is the best way to go about the process as it gives a more personal feel to the sales process.

Mark

[MaskedMarketer]

Originally Posted by westernseo

In my eyes....

Video alone is more effective then text alone.

But the combination of the two is the most effective of all!

Definitely. Video adds more credibility, rapport, trust, ect. and "in person" adds even more credibility, rapport, trust, ect. This is one reason why business people, fly across the country to have a meeting instead of doing it over the phone or online.

The same reason why when you go to a seminar - they pitch you the 25k+ package there. Thats because in person you can influence more effectively and video is more effective than the written word alone.

And this is part of the reason why you don't see many 25k+ coaching programs being sold in sales letters, its just not as effective as being there in person. And video is the closest you can get than to actually being with the person face to face.

[gtrusler]

Video is pretty compelling, but I like to combine it with text because not everyone absorbs information the same way.

[RickGueli]

Originally Posted by Li Weng

Provide your final judgment!

Which is more effective in YOUR eyes?

You know, it really depends on what generation of viewers we are talking about. Older generation folks seem to be inclined more towards print. It's just a carry-along from the era of newspapers and a largely text-based time spent on the 'net.

I'd say text is more effective if what you are offering warrants that people make as informed a decision as possible before purchasing. On the other hand, if what people are being offered is something they couldn't possibly know much about (aside from the main theme; ala "The Secret") until they actually watch a DVD, buy a book, etc. then Video would take the biscuit, for sure.

Rick

[Nido]

I say it depends on the market and media. Certain people will not buy anything that's not delivered in text. That's how we've always done things and it's out of their comfort zone to go outside it.

There are more and more videos now and I think videos may work better in certain markets...but you'll have to test. I think both would be a better Idea because then I can read or watch. Win Win.