Gary Halbert vs Billy Mays
Startin to see a theme lately in this forum.
"This" vs "That".
This forums version of UFC, or WORLD CHAMPIONSHIP BOXING-LIVE..AT CAESARS PALACE...
...."a-r-e"..... ....."Y-O-U"..............."R-R-R-eady".....?!?!?
....."l-l-l-l-e-e-e-t-t-t-s-s"... get.."READY"...... to "r-r-r-r-u-u-u-m-m-b-b-b-l-l-l-l-l-l-e-e-e-e-e"..........!!!!!!!!!!
Just seen Steve's thread about Billy Mays commercials.
But I wonder how he would do in "print" copywriting vs Gary Halbert?
Could he be as successful with print AND edge out Gary Halberts skills?
Could Billy Mays print copy be just as entertaining and exciting as his commercials, thus, having similar conversion ratios of his t.v. spots or equivalent/better conversion ratios of the top copywriters material?
Could Gary Halbert transfer his copywriting magic in t.v. commercials with the same or better results than his print AND beat Billy Mays?
Gary would probably not be in the commercial , but his message can be stated by some actor.
I think Gary Halbert has wrote for some commercials, but I wonder :
1) How successful was it in comparison to Billy Mays commercials, and
2) How much of the commercial and cable t.v. spots he was involved in was mostly Gary Halberts input , copywriting words/script, picture of the message he was painting? 50%? 75%? 100%?
It probably depends on what the client wanted and did not want, approve of and did not approve.
Are these skills directly transferable, usually transferable, how much are transferable, or does one who succeeds in either print or t.v. have to hire someone who can make their points come alive the way they want to present it in any of these medias?
Just because a person is a good writer does not necessarily mean he can jump into movies and give Steven Spielberg or James Cameron a run for their money.
And just because someone is good at presenting a visual story with eye-catching, attention holding cinemagraphics does not mean they necessarily can do equally well or better with just the printed word.
The 13 th Warrior
"This" vs "That".
This forums version of UFC, or WORLD CHAMPIONSHIP BOXING-LIVE..AT CAESARS PALACE...
...."a-r-e"..... ....."Y-O-U"..............."R-R-R-eady".....?!?!?
....."l-l-l-l-e-e-e-t-t-t-s-s"... get.."READY"...... to "r-r-r-r-u-u-u-m-m-b-b-b-l-l-l-l-l-l-e-e-e-e-e"..........!!!!!!!!!!
Just seen Steve's thread about Billy Mays commercials.
But I wonder how he would do in "print" copywriting vs Gary Halbert?
Could he be as successful with print AND edge out Gary Halberts skills?
Could Billy Mays print copy be just as entertaining and exciting as his commercials, thus, having similar conversion ratios of his t.v. spots or equivalent/better conversion ratios of the top copywriters material?
Could Gary Halbert transfer his copywriting magic in t.v. commercials with the same or better results than his print AND beat Billy Mays?
Gary would probably not be in the commercial , but his message can be stated by some actor.
I think Gary Halbert has wrote for some commercials, but I wonder :
1) How successful was it in comparison to Billy Mays commercials, and
2) How much of the commercial and cable t.v. spots he was involved in was mostly Gary Halberts input , copywriting words/script, picture of the message he was painting? 50%? 75%? 100%?
It probably depends on what the client wanted and did not want, approve of and did not approve.
Are these skills directly transferable, usually transferable, how much are transferable, or does one who succeeds in either print or t.v. have to hire someone who can make their points come alive the way they want to present it in any of these medias?
Just because a person is a good writer does not necessarily mean he can jump into movies and give Steven Spielberg or James Cameron a run for their money.
And just because someone is good at presenting a visual story with eye-catching, attention holding cinemagraphics does not mean they necessarily can do equally well or better with just the printed word.
The 13 th Warrior