RSS Feed for This PostCurrent Article

Classic Direct Mail Marketing Technique: “Lumpy” Mail

Bubblewrap When it comes to getting an almost 100% open rate, nothing beats a love letter.

Next in priority of open-rate effectiveness is receiving a box because instinctively our curiosity is aroused. What is it? Is it a present? Something fun?

That curiosity factor is the key driver behind the big-time effectiveness of a technique called "lumpy mail."

You get a mailing, the envelope isn’t thin or the texture uniform. Clearly there’s something in there — and you gotta know what it is. It almost doesn’t matter what the envelope says or doesn’t say. You need to know what’s inside.

That’s the key to the lastest lumpy mail effort I just received from Capitol One/Small Business Solutions. Large format kraft envelope, on the label is all the info. No teaser. Just something soft and squishy inside. I know it has to be a credit card offer, but … I still want to know what’s inside.

So I open. My reward? A rectangle of bubble wrap.

The letter doesn’t reference it – "We’ll help you cushion the blow of high interest rates!" or some such. No, the only purpose of the bubble wrap was to make the envelope lumpy and get folks inside. The rest of the promotion is standard stuff through well-crafted. (The bubble wrap is a genius because it’s cheap, lightweight and doesn’t have to be affixed to anything.)

Now, here’s the thing to remember. The envelope only has one job to do — Get someone to open the envelope. Once the reader has made the next move, the rest of the package has to drive the prospect to respond. If this was an email promotion we’d have two metrics to analyze. Open rate and response rate. In DM, unfortunately, we only get the latter. But my guess is that this piece will enjoy a wildly terrific open rate.

However, not sure how the response rate will work, especially since the lumpy piece isn’t referenced or immediately relevant to the promotion. Will prospects feel disappointed, a little duped? You tell me …

You don’t see this technique a lot because it tends to be somewhat more expensive. It may involve handwork at the lettershop and additional costs through the postal service for processing. But when it works, it can work really well, despite the higher production costs. In the credit card marketing business which is highly, HIGHLY competitive, this is an interesting twist on the lumpy mail technique.

You’ll know it’s working when you see a flurry of other mailers doing their own versions of lumpy mail efforts. Watch your mailboxes!

Maven’s Maxim
Never discount the effective of pure curiosity in crafting your promotional writing. I tend to like a relevant approach – Mail a brick if you’re a construction company – but test, test, and test some more to find what works best for you and your client.


Trackback URL

RSS Feed for This Post4 Comment(s)

  1. Drew McLellan | Jan 20, 2007 | Reply

    Okay, you are freaking me out a little bit. I have a “chapter” in my book titled lumpy mail!

    And last week, I was just about to pull the trigger on a post about what we can learn from spam and your Nigerian hoax post appeared.

    You are in my head…you are in my head….

  2. Copywriting Maven | Jan 21, 2007 | Reply

    Perhaps as marketers we’re all influenced by getting/reading things about the same time.

    Or I’m just psychic :=)

  3. Michael Stammer | Jan 23, 2007 | Reply

    Let’s not forget that the open rate on greeting cards in 9 times that of a traditional letter – this is a special kind of “lumpiness” that can be easily and relatively inexpensively created.

    But after the open rate, you’ve got to have something worthwhile to get a decent response rate. Personalization and relevance are the key, IMO.

  4. Copywriting Maven | Jan 23, 2007 | Reply

    Excellent point about the effectiveness of greeting cards for boosting the open rate, Michael. I think as so much of our communications goes online, we forget about the power of the “Hallmark” and some such.

    Thanks for your post!

1 Trackback(s)

  1. From Jim Logan | Jan 22, 2007

RSS Feed for This PostPost a Comment