Which Ad Won?

Big block of text.

The marketer in me wants to say the ad with the bold headline and lots of text. But the first ad actually has photos of what the results may look like, and ....

What the hell...the second one.

The first ad has no compelling offer...in fact, no offer at all. It looks like the ad was created by a photographer...that moonlighted as an ad salesperson.

The second ad is pure direct marketing.

I'm going to guess the second one (the advertorial style one with big block text) was the winner.

The first one is eye catching, but it looks like an ad that's trying to sell something. The second one looks more like valuable info. (almost like a news story)

I think it was David Ogilvy? (correct me if I'm wrong) Who said space ads that look like news, and don't look like advertisements, almost always get more readers, and almost always pull better.

I hope you'll give us the answer when this guessing contest is over?

I''ll go for the ad with pretty images.

Because it's easy to understand and also the benefits is in there.

I can't read all the text of both ads but, I guess the ad with an image will work. Anyway, this is just a guess.

This may be a tough one to call... did anyone notice the phone numbers are the same... same company targeting 2 different segments of market... oh how interesting. The first one has 3 forms of contact.... the second one does offer 2 but visually the mail in is the preferred choice.

So image 1 ( the pretty pictures ) is either a real poor attempt at millennials targeting ( no social connection ) or they are targeting Gen X. I'm saying more Gen X than anything. Specifically targeted to females 40 to 60 if we wanted to get right down to it... Looking at it this way the line "Enriching your life..." becomes the compelling offer. A place to get away from the job the kids.. quiet time... a more enriched life. This is also a branding effort. Kinda powerful I would say in the right context.

Ad #2 the block of text.. probably a newspaper ad. Targeting Boomers. Classic advertising.. speaking right to those that are anywhere near the buying process. No in your face branding here.. other than say the guys face. I will bet they have a TV ad that runs.

Intuitively I want to say #2. You could very quickly look at ad #1 and say this is a pre-sell piece that is looking to brand the company, and get the idea implanted in those that will be in the marketspace in the years to follow. looking at the whole picture this is the long play effort of the campaign.

BUT... ad 1 does something that ad 2 does not... there is a tripwire in the ad.. Doors and Windows. Gen X buy the bulk of homes in the real estate market.. New home.. means new doors and windows. People that buy doors and windows become proven buyers, and may do additional work on their new homes, and look for the conservatory upgrade. Again Enriching their lives, and their new home.

My final answer will be.. #1

I'd say the first one because it looks more attractive. Plus the second one requires mailing in a section of the paper to get a free report, seems like too much work.

I guess neither worked particularly well although one might have performed better than the other.

Their last web crawl on Wayback machine was in 2008.

...and a quick check of companies house records in the UK turned up this-->



I guess no amount of good marketing can keep a business afloat forever.

Best regards,

Ozi

As a buyer I would never pick a wall of text fluff over descriptive images.

With the images I already know what I'm buying into, the wall of text requires a snail mail form which might take weeks for a response. Hell, by the time you hear back from the snail mail you could have the four season room installed.

Either way I have no doubt OP will claim the wall of text won, even If there wasn't a split test.

I slightly favor the text ad. But if it were just me looking for a 'conservatory" The first ad. I just want to buy. I don't want to jump through hoops to find out the "real truth' behind dealers.

The headlines are just wrong. To me the second ad has a strong headline but it attracts a small segment of the buying public. The first ad has a headline that offers a benefit (sort of) . At least the company name isn't the headline.

If I were actually in the market for such a thing, the first ad would attract me slightly more, because i don't want to waste time jumping through hoops.

The text ad would have been a much clearer winner if the headline wasn't so directed at the type of company, and more directed to the benefits of owning, or triggering a fear. And the headline didn't trigger a strong fear, in my opinion.

It's interesting to me that the direct marketers mostly like the text ad and the "regular people" like the display ad more.

Of course, the direct mail ad starts a direct mail campaign and probably a phone call. And there is a stronger call to action, with a booklet as a gift. So it's probably the more profitable. But the headline (appeal) is weak in my opinion.

My guess is that the second ad pulled three to one in actual sales.

I also guess you've got to look at the market they were selling into and the period when these ads were run.

This would have been a time when Yellow Pages and Newspaper Ads were still strong.

The first ad with the pictures has so many more things going for it.

The image of the finished conservatory shows the prospect the result in advance.

The image and the words "Enrich your life" points right to the improvement in Status.

A homeowner buying a conservatory wants to improve their status and show the neighbours what they have.

The first ad is much clearer at illustrating

What the person will have.

How they will feel when they have it.

How it will change their life everyday.

Improvement in their status.

The second ad lacks in building any desire and even the booklet offer is weak.

The title of the booklet is not congruent in several places. Near the photo "The Smart Person's Guide to Choosing a Reputable Conservatory Company" and in the request form it says "Ask for the 10 important questions booklet"

In the headline is says SEVEN critical qualities. - not consistent from headline to offer.

You just wonder why they wouldn't do a good ad with a great headline.

Good image like the first.

A call to action to download or mail in for your "Homeowners Guide to Choosing a Conservatory".

The only way the second one would work is if it was placed inside a publication on Conservatories and the desire was already there and the reader was deciding between two suppliers but even then the incongruency in the second ad would push me away from choosing the company.

Best regards,

Ozi

Looking at Ad # 1, You can picture yourself in a room for all season's. Easier to do business with if some one has cash in had. Pictures tell a story that seems to relate better to the younger generations.

Ad # 2 The long copy and the fact some one has to mail something in is a big turn off factor except maybe older or more paticular buyers. They may even delay the purchase of the room till they line up several contractors. The plus is the ad is old school copy wiriting that draws more attention to take a second look at it.

Still favor ad #1 over ad #2 in a fast pace society. How many sites like Amazon have have quality photos first then the details later. That's what I'm going to pick.

Time frame: The company went into liquidation in 2008. So the ads preceded this time frame. At that time, sniping coupons or phoning freephone was perfectly normal. Websites and downloading free reports was unusual, possibly unheard of in local businesses.

The big block of text will almost certainly be read far more than the pretty images simply because it doesn't look like an ad. People will only look at the pretty images version if they're about to buy.

The proposition in the pretty images is scary. "Phone this number for more information" screams "phone to get the hard sell". By contrast the big block of text is "phone for a free report". And you have an even less scary option of sniping the coupon (perfectly normal at the time these ads would've run). The free report would also have wider appeal, e.g. to those who are dreaming of a new conservatory, but not yet ready to buy.

The combination of more people reading the big block of text and the less scary option would make it a winner by miles.

Ultimately the real success would be how many actually buy. This cannot be determined with the information provided. In my experience, even today, with downloaded free reports and autoresponders, follow up by local businesses is poor.

The company likely went under because the bank withdrew funding/overdrafts. 2008 was the banking crisis and many viable businesses went under because the banks withdrew their funding at short notice.

I doubt this company was Ewan's client, so you're unlikely to get a definitive answer...

As has been mentioned before, it would matter where the ad is placed. Is it in a magazine devoted to Conservatories? High end home improvements?

My guess is that most buyers of conservatories are older people. And older people are used to using the mail.

Assuming the ad is only run in high end home improvement magazines (or a niche magazine devoted to adding rooms like this)...I would guess that the second ad got more sales.

As a direct mail ad, I wonder how many headlines were tested with the second ad?. That may explain why there are incongruities in the ad.


Ewen? Are you going to tell us?

Won what? Clicks or conversions?
I suggest the first one with pics wins in clicks. This is a big money item that people will want to visualize. And since we are talking ads here, SEO won't be the driver of traffic. Not like small ticket items bought off a single ad on a whim. In fact I think many homeowners, the target market, may not even be considering a conservatory or "sun room" until they see the pics. Curiosity will lead them down the funnel to sales.
"Ooouue I like that" turns into "how do I get that", "how much would it cost?", and so on. Either way, the landing page is where the conversions take place. Maybe the text ad landing page had images, maybe the image ad landing page had text. Who knows?
Anyway, the purpose of the ad is to get clicks. And I suggest that these images in this market are incredibly powerful. My past in real estate marketing has proven this time over time.
Darrell

Edit- I am also assuming these are online ads.
Edit edit - well now I look again and they are obviously for different mediums. I still stick with the image ads, even in direct mail or paper advertising.

And the WINNER was, the block of text, won by 300%.

But why folks, why?

Best,
Ewen

Hey Claude, recall those pest control postcards I posted
in which I asked which was the winner...I believe the winner
of both uses the same principle.

What do you think it is?

Best,
Ewen

I'm going to stick with my original reason as to why the text piece was the winner.

The first one is eye catching, but it looks like an ad that's trying to sell something. The second one looks more like valuable info, to help me make a knowledgeable decision.

If we were talking about a $30 item, then the pictures and flashy copy would probably be enough to make the most sales. And the text copy would even be overkill, and a turn-off.

But when you're asking me to spend $30,000, for an addition to my home, then I need to be able to justify the investment with logical reasoning (or at least what I believe is logical reasoning)

If not for myself, then for my friends and family who ask why I bought it. And why I chose this company.

Do I want to sound like a chump, and say I bought it because of some flashy ad that looks like it belongs in the back of a tabloid? Or do I tell them I bought it from this company because I intelligently did my research. (without mentioning that most of my research was provided by Maple Leaf)

Also, I'm going to guess that the free booklet had 10 "important" questions that Maple Leaf could answer yes to; while their competition could not say yes to all of them? (Although, we'll never know for sure, because the booklet probably doesn't exist anymore. But if I was writing it, that's what I would try to do)

Of course, without more info, my original guess was just that... A guess.

For all I know, the text piece was a control during a housing boom (I'd guess like in the 80s, since there's no mention of a website anywhere in the ad?) and the picture ad could have gone to print during the financial meltdown of 2008?

And as most of us know...timing is a always a big factor.

All this noise about shorter attention span is true
in the context of quickly sorting out what's important and what isn't.

However, if the message is about their favorite subject, in Claude's case,
comic book heroes, he would be disappointed if it was too short.

So in the case of this sunroom ad, if the reader is at least half interested in one,
she will want to read about it in depth.

That's from a sheep herder's cunning brain.

Best,
Ewen

The first ad with the pictures makes me want one for my yard! When I read the headline for the second one I was like, "What the heck is a conservatory company?"

The ad-style one, the block of text, addresses something lots of people deal with when making a big purchase: fear of hiring a company that will be wasting your money...

For people not used to building/construction choosing a trustworthy contractor is hard... They don't even begin to know how they can tell... What questions they should answer to get to that... And it does not follow that one good-looking result will yield future good results.

A construction guy working in Suburb B might have no idea how to get the permits fast in Suburb G, the project might end up taking 5 weeks longer just because of that.

These days, it's easier, there's yelp and other review sites. But back in 2008?

The advertorial asks: Do you know how to tell a good construction company from a bad one? And states, if you do not, there's a way, just contact us, and we'll teach you.

Teachers are not sellers or marketers, right?

I happen to know [don't ask why] that the 2nd ad was purportedly the winner. The ads are part of a 'how to write great ads' product that was selling about 5-6 years ago in the uk.

Funny to read that they are now defunct, but in this industry, companies like this come and go and change names/hands on a fairly regular basis.

I still have the product as a matter of fact and it is a masterpiece on newspaper style advertising.