Can we suppose, the real key to this is in the fact that the different subject lines attract different personality types or appeal to persons only when in a certain state of mind – SO… the person who is drawn to the romanticized subject line, is already “in the mood” and/or pre-conditioned to be woo-ed and wow-ed. They are thinking with their right brain, the creative side that “believes”, “hopes” and “dreams”, vs. the left, logical side that “questions”, “tests” and “proves” with facts and evidence before making decisions involving an investment of their money?

I suspect that different personalities respond differently to delivery styles. Yours convinced me far more than many others I have seen. Excellent and correct way to use PowerPoints – Oh my! (Of course, your finding appealed to me also because I have chosen a quirky title for a how-to book I’m just completing.)

Well done on a masterful delivery as usual. I guessed correctly overall, although initially thought I had it wrong at the CTR stage.

In my book, it’s the overall cash that you haul to the bank, in relation to spend that counts. Thanks for re- assuring me that my thinking is on the right lines, and giving me a great (quirky) spark into a campaign I’m currently writing.

Regards, Philip

This was a fascinating case study and nicely presented. I got the CTR leader right but totally missed it on the ROI.

The side benefit I received is that I’ve been wrestling with the headline to use for an upcoming Lightning Talk. Your headlines sparked dozens of new idea for me! I’ll be setting up a test to find the real winner!

Thanks again,
Bill

I read your email enticing us to click through and wondered how you could say, “But one of these subject lines produced 1,208% more sales than the others.” I couldn’t understand how a HEADLINE could produce more sales. I still can’t. And unless a headline was all you used, I don’t see how you can make that claim.

I got to your video page and my suspicions were confirmed – it wasn’t just the headline that produced results. The text of the message had to relate some way or the headline never would have contributed to making more sales. I’m betting that by the end of the message, the reader had long forgotten about the headline – unless you referred to it again. There was likely an irresistible offer that had a big part in compelling people to take advantage of the offer.

For you to assume that everyone knows there had to be body coy following the headline doesn’t align with how you position your expertise. For you to say you didn’t realize that is a bit questionable to me.

You’re right, it SHOULD be clear to everyone that there needs to be congruity and continuity from headline to message, otherwise the whole effort loses credibility instantly. You know good and well that what you were saying about the headline doing all the work was an incomplete statement. You’re too experienced a marketer to not realize something like that. Just admit it.

I didn’t click through to your explanation of all this because I don’t know these things. I clicked through because I continue to get a steady stream of crap from online marketers who hype and mislead to get attention and click-throughs.

The types of headlines you used might be better classified as…

Headline 1: Old School – the hypey way it’s been communicated by businesses that don’t know better.This is similar to your approach with a headline that claimed to produce 1,208% more sales when it didn’t produce sales on its own as a headline alone.

Headline 2: New School – the way a lot of marketing is done in recent years, a bit more manipulative than just making sensationalized claims, but also hints at a previously unknown expertise-producing solution – the problem resolution you mentioned.

Headline 1: Correct School – positioning and differentation by insinuating a better, more effective way without hype – assuming that you actually did teach the French a thing or 2.

I know I’m ragging on you a bit, but to me, the success of this test is only relative to what was actually tested. We can’t assume that the text of the message was necessarily the best copyrighting (but if you wrote it , it was probably pretty damn good). The ultimate winning headline here is only as good as the text that followed it.

I was stupified that you closed by saying, “The only measurement that really counts is how much more (or less) profit one subject line produces compared to another.

I still think that’s a very inaccurate statement.

Try those same headlines with equally different text messages following them and tell us what those results are. If the headlines successes are still the same, I’ll eat beets.

Or take your masterful headline and write 3 different sets of body copy. Then tell us that the headline was the difference that made all the sales. Per your argument, the results should be the same for all emails.

All that aside, you are totally correct in that most people don’t know how to measure ROI. That’s what makes pay-for-performance advertising and marketing a solid business model.

Specifically, in each case, the copy immediately built upon the subject line, which seems almost mandatory given today’s short attention spans.

The third subject line is so different (quirky) from the other two that it almost needs a follow-thru in the first few lines of copy (such as the copy I received: “Bet you didn’t know that I’m now considered to be a minor love expert, did you? etc …”).

I’m having a tough time visualizing how the copy following the 3rd subject line could be the same as the copy following the 1st or the 2nd.

Thanks in advance.