Put another way...
To niche down or not?
When I first discovered direct response copywriting (and was reading everything I could find on the internet about it) I found out there were two camps --those who support finding one niche and sticking to it and those who advised against it.
Both sides seemed to have good points.
Those who supported niching down argued that going broad would leave you overwhelmed. Also, having a niche makes you a specialist --and therefore you earn more.
Anti-niche camp argued that you can't know what's best for you until you try everything. And going broad makes you more versatile. You can take on any client you want. You can sell anything and everything.
I might be missing some other points that have been made, but these are the ones that stuck.
I also noticed something interesting. The old guard copywriters (those ones whose books you read) didn't stick to one niche. They wrote promotions for different products and services. While the more modern copywriters mostly stuck to one niche --or at least I see a lot of them preaching it.
So what could be the reason for this shift? (I do know there are lots of modern copywriters who write for different niches, but I'm referring to the popular opinion --and perhaps practice?-- that supports sticking to one niche).
So what are your thoughts about this?
To slay only zombies or every monster you see?
PS: bonus point if you give solid reasons behind your choice