Offering to "Fix" a Prospect's Copy - Does It Work?

Occasionally (rarely), I be a copywriter. I don't offer to fix; I offer to get better results.

Seems like I'm playing with words, but I'm not.

As a business owner, if you came to me to fix the copy on my site (many do), I ain't interested. If you came to tell me, you could get my page to send me x% more calls, I'd be interested.

Let's put it this way:

You call a mortgage broker (or, most likely, email them) and say:

Hey, there's 15 things wrong with your homepage/ FHA page, the sales letter you got in my mail box last week, whatever.

One of them is your call-to-action: it ain't strong enough, plus it's all green and waaay too low on the page. (Sounds like you're showing you know what you're talking about, right? But what do they care? Every time they send 100 visitors to that page / send that letter to 100 peeps, they get 2 people to apply for a mortgage loan that'll make them $3 to $6k, or, on average $3275, so, on average $6540.

Ain't nothing wrong with getting $6,540 in revenue when you're spending less than $478.14 to do so (the number changes, some are happy with $6540 if they spend $654 to get it, some want to spend at least a penny under $399.99).

So, if you said, you could get their copy to send their way $3914.47 twice for every time they spend $678.14 to show it to 100 people, they'd be interested.

In other words, fix their problem (or improve bottom line), don't fix copy.

Dave Ramsey uses a rule called "ugly to the bone" to evaluate houses for potential "Buy, Fix Up and Sell" Real Estate investments. The rule is: most houses can be fixed up and sold for a higher price.

But..some houses are so butt ugly you'd have to tear the whole damn thing down again and build another one in it's place. That's twice the work. Not worth the time. Might as well build a new one or move on.