Is This Smart Copywriting?

[vangogh]

Seth Godin has a post this week, The Power of Smart Copywriting (http://sethgodin.typepad.com/seths_blog/2008/12/the-power-of-sm.html), in which he rewrites the copy on a sign for a coffee shop. Personally I think the copy he ends up with will be more effective than the copy the sign started out with.

What do you think?

Is the end copy better than the beginning copy? Will the new copy work? Have any better suggestions for the coffee shop?

[KristineS]

I agree the beginning copy isn't good. I'm also with Seth in that I hate unnecessary capitalization. It's annoying.

I think his idea could work. I'm not sure that "better than Starbucks" is necessarily the way I would go as I know some coffee experts who don't consider Starbucks to be all that good. It would probably work for the average man on the street though.

[Business Attorney]

I agree that the original copy has problems, but I think that once Godin got to "The best coffee you've ever tasted" his copy starting going downhill. I happen to think there are a LOT of coffees better than Starbucks. I think McDonald's and Dunkin Donuts both have better coffee. It's all a matter of taste, but someone comparing themselves to Starbucks makes me think of Starbucks coffee, which I don't care for. That creates a negative association in my mind and would make it much less likely for me to even try the coffee.

[vangogh]

The comparison to Starbucks might not have been the best idea, though it might be perfect for those people who go to Starbucks, but don't particularly love the coffee. I like Dunkin Donuts coffee better myself. In fact I've never had a good cup of coffee at Starbucks. But you have to consider the market this coffee shop is going after. They aren't going to take people away from their favorite local coffee shop or the chain they think has the best coffee, but I'd guess there are many people who go to Starbucks just for the name and could be persuaded to try something better.

[Dan Furman]

I'm not in love with the final one. It's (perhaps) better than the start, but not much. And like David mentioned, it could be negative, depending on how you feel about SB's.

I think he overthought this one. I agree that it could have ended with "The best coffee you've ever tasted". He got into a "well, the only coffee that matters is coffee I've tasted, so..." but I don't see why that's a negative.

My guess is "The best coffee you've ever tasted" is way too simplistic to include on his blog as an example of smart copywriting. I mean, someone in the kitchen could have easily come up w/ that one, right? Certainly he can come up with better than that...

To me, that's sometimes the problem - "creative" or "witty" does not necessarly mean "better".

[vangogh]

True. I'm not sure he was trying to write the best ad copy he could, but rather to make a few points along the way as he rewrote the original.

Actually a great example of the difference a simple rewrite in copy can be is in this short video (http://www.vanseodesign.com/blog/online-business/right-words-matter/). Shows you how important words can be. It's about 5 minutes long and was a short film at Cannes I think. Definitely worth watching if you haven't seen it before.

[the goat]

That is a great video vangogh.

As for Seth's copy, I don't like his end result at all. I have to agree with David, I don't like Starbucks, so it is of no consequence to me if it is better. In fact "nothing like Starbucks" would work better for me.

I wouldn't want to pigeonhole the target market to only those who like Starbucks nor would I choose to validate my competition by using them as some sort of benchmark.

[vangogh]

The video is great isn't it. My dad found it somehow and sent me a link.

I think it's ok to target Starbucks customer base. You're not going to appeal to everyone anyway so this targets one specific set of people. It also happens to be a rather large group of people. I'm with all of you about not liking the coffee at Starbucks. But in a way doesn't the copy play into how we feel. We don't like Starbucks and here's an ad telling us their coffee tastes better than the one we don't like. If you were looking for a cup of coffee and happened past this shop and saw the sign wouldn't you think to go in? Their kind of empathizing about the taste of Starbucks not being all that good so aren't they basically saying we know you don't like Starbucks. Neither do we. We'll give you a cup of coffee you'll like.

[Business Attorney]

I think it is fine to target the customers of Starbucks or some specific competitor IF that is clearly your marketing strategy. However, there is nothing in the original copy that indicates that Peet's strategy was to target only Starbucks customers. Seth's rewrite, on the other hand, would seem to appeal only to Starbucks customers.

[KristineS]

I think the assumption is that Starbucks is where practically everyone goes and that it is a brand name that everyone will recognize. In that sense it does tap a bit of a universal language. I don't drink coffee and I know when someone says Starbucks they are referring to coffee. I'm guessing the end copy was meant to work more off a shared cultural touchstone than it was to appeal only to Starbuck's customers.

It is interesting when you consider that the end copy makes several assumptions about what the shop's customers might think. That can be dangerous, as we've already proven in this case. If you don't like Starbuck's coffee, or think it's all that great, a claim that another shop sells coffee that is better than Starbucks really won't motivate you all that much.

[vangogh]

By the way I'm playing devil's advocate more than anything else to keep the discussion going. I'm not particularly crazy about the final copy, though I do think it's an improvement on the original.

One thing about the mention of Starbucks is how passionate people can be about them one way or the other. Look at how much we're talking just about them.

Agreed that there's really no indication of Peet's target market. I would guess they'd be happy to have anyone who drinks coffee, drink their coffee, but I don't know. I don't know that the final copy would only appeal to Starbucks patrons. The message would actually target people who don't like the taste of Starbucks coffee or wonder if there's better out there more than anyone else.

[Evan]

Looking at it from a marketing perspective, I think his final version is pretty good.

Those that don't like Starbucks probably order coffee only. But their lattes, frappacinos, and cappuccinos are much better than Dunkin Donuts or even McDonald's. Dunkin Donuts' tastes burnt, and don't even bother with McDonald's. Coffee wise, I'd agree that Dunkin Donuts is pretty good and I prefer it over Starbucks. But I almost never get just a coffee at Starbucks, it's a latte.

People that frequent Starbucks go for the experience, not the beverage. I don't like just gettig an expensive beverage without enjoying the place. At Dunkin Donuts, I'm pretty sure you never want to sit down there, the atmosphere isn't pleasant at all. I'm waiting to see the "master plan" for that to improve one day.

Kristine -- people view Starbucks as "the" coffee shop, a bit more upscale. Then you have Dunkin Donuts, which is viewed as just any other. So to say you're better than Starbucks can be a good testimonial, and it'll certainly open some eyes. But again, most Starbucks customers don't get coffee -- they get other beverages.

[Evan]

Looking at the press release of "Dunkin Beats Starbucks" is actually startling.


Among all participants, 54.2% preferred Dunkin' Donuts coffee, compared to 39.3% who chose Starbucks. 6.3% expressed no preference.
Of those participants who did have a preference, 58% favored Dunkin' Donuts coffee, versus 42% for Starbucks.

That means 58% of people preferred Dunkin Donuts, yet only 54% of those said they preferred that taste. With only 476 people surveyed, that means they lost about 19 people in the survey who said they liked Dunkin Donuts and either expressed no preference or a preference for Starbucks.

I think that tells you more than what Dunkin tells you. Source: Dunkin Donuts.

[KristineS]

I'm lost when it comes to Starbucks references. I don't drink coffee and almost never will buy a hot beverage, so I have no frame of reference.

That's one of the tough things about Marketing. You might be creating a campaign for a product for which you have no personal frame of reference. You have to rely on market research to help you determine what your target customers might like to hear. As Evan demonstrated, that can be a dangerous thing.

[vangogh]

Evan the numbers make sense and no one was lost in the survey. The second sentence is only comparing the people who preferred Dunkins or Starbucks.

54.2% + 39.3% = 93.5% of people prefer one or the other

54.2% (people preferring Dunkins) / 93.5% (people preferring either) = 57.97%
or
58% (of people who prefer either Dunkins or Starbucks prefer Dunkins)

[Evan]

Perhaps I'm reading the numbers wrong. I read the first set as people making a statement that they prefer Dunkin over Starbucks, and the second set as those who actually said what they preferred taste wise.

[vangogh]

I was just reading it from what you posted

1. Among all participants
2. Of those participants who did have a preference

So number 2 above is the same question excluding the 6.3% who preferred something other than Dunkins or Starbucks.

Shows how unclear stats can be sometimes.

[Marcomguy]

I took a look at Peet's website to see if I could figure out what their strategy was. As far as I could tell, their point of differentiation is that they hand-roast their coffees in small batches and deliver them to stores within 24 hours of roasting.

I would probably try to get that into a headline, and leave Starbucks out. As Evan said, people go to Starbucks as much for the experience as for the coffee. And as was also pointed out, every time Peet's mentions Starbucks, they're giving their competitor a free plug.

As for the free taste test Godin recommends? It's doubtful whether taste tests result in any long-term market share gain. Burger King regularly beats McDonald's in taste tests, just as Pepsi used to beat Coke. Yet neither company has dethroned the No. 1 brand.

[vangogh]

What's interesting is everyone is assuming the new copy would be targeted to Starbucks customers. I think it could actually work when targeting non Starbucks customers. Those of us who don't care for Starbucks should empathize with the message and possibly be willing to give Peet's a try.

Again I'll hardly say the copy is perfect, but it's interesting how much of a response we have in this thread, because Starbucks was mentioned. This thread wouldn't be as long as it is if the comparison was to any other coffee shop.

[thx4yrtym]

I might have gone with something more positive like ex:

"Deserving of your mom's best desert"

Regards,

Gregg

[vangogh]

I just came across a follow up to Seth's post at GrokDotCom (http://www.grokdotcom.com/2009/01/08/saying-something-powerful-with-signaling-theory/).

This is the part that caught my attention:


The best way to reveal the real substance (or lack thereof) of your message is to strip it down. Remove all the wordsmithing, jargon, self-applied labels, ad-speak, etc and you’ll get down to the core message.

The process of stripping “Unlike any coffee you’ve ever had before” down to “The Best Coffee” reveals the rather empty content of a slogan that, at first blush, doesn’t sound too bad.

To me that was one of Seth's main points, which I think we all agreed was good. The Starbucks comparison on the other hand...

[KristineS]

I think almost every message can stand to be stripped down to see what lies underneath. I think sometimes people get caught up in the fancy words or fall so in love with a particular idea that they fail to see they may not be making the point they wanted to make. Stripping some of the pretty language off can be painful, but it will help you get to the real core of your message.

[Marcomguy]

Speaking of stripping messages down:

Suppose you strip "The relentless pursuit of perfection" down to "The pursuit of perfection" or just "Perfection."

Does that improve the original slogan?

[vangogh]

Marcom I don't think your example would really be stripping down the message. It's removing words, but it alters the meaning significantly. You couldn't have changed "Unlike any coffee you've ever had before" to "coffee" to strip it down. You might change "The relentless pursuit of perfection" to something more like "chasing perfection. Maybe not the best example, but the message is still there.

[Blessed]

I don't think any of the copy suggested is very good... although I love Peets coffee and it definitely is better than Starbucks.

I think Peet's should emphasize what differentiates them from other coffee makers out there rather than getting caught in the "we're better than everyone else just because we are" thought pattern this ad seems stuck in.

[vangogh]

What don't you like about the suggested copy? Keep in mind no one ever suggested any of the copy is what Peet's should be using. This is really all just improving one specific piece of copy they are already using on a sign. Their sign is the one that's trying to send the message "we're better than everyone else." So the new copy is being suggested within that context, because that's the context Peet's set up with their sign.

[Blessed]

Keep in mind no one ever suggested any of the copy is what Peet's should be using. This is really all just improving one specific piece of copy they are already using on a sign. Their sign is the one that's trying to send the message "we're better than everyone else." So the new copy is being suggested within that context, because that's the context Peet's set up with their sign.

Very true Steve... I guess what I don't like about the copy is the "we're better than everyone else message" it is a common theme in advertising and I think it's trite. I want to know what a product is going to "do" for me - if you simply tell me you are better than everyone else I think that you simply don't know enough about what you are doing to give me some real information about your product or service.

As the CBS Creative Steve's has mentioned before graphic designers are usually a cynical lot so maybe I'm just living up to the stereotype but really I don't buy products just because the advertising says they are the best - I buy because of proven track records, information that makes me think I should try the product or service, or for coffee maybe one-liners like... "tantalizing your taste buds" it still doesn't really say anything but I like the mental image I get better than the one I get with "better than Starbucks" or "unlike any coffee you've ever tasted before"

I have to stop here and say that I've written ad copy before that says "we're the best" if that is what the customer wants and I can't talk them into something else then that is what the customer gets... at that point I'd have to say that I like the final version of ""FREE TASTE TEST Are we better than Starbucks?" better than the original - "unlike..." and I like it better because - it gives the customer an action point and a question to resolve - the action is participating in the free taste test and then they can decide if the coffee is better than Starbucks - the customer becomes more involved with the advertising and is more likely to remember Peets than if they just walked past the sign that said "unlike..."

OK, there's my 2¢ :D

[vangogh]

Actually I agree with you about the whole saying "we're the best" thing. It's a meaningless statement since you can't ever tell me your the best. I think that's part of Seth's point. That the original copy, while at first glance, sounds ok, it's really just saying "we're the best" I think that's why he stripped it down to show that was the central message.

I do think the final with the free taste test is good. Will it work on everyone? Probably not, but it will likely get some people to try a coffee taster and some of those people may then go in for a full cup of coffee.

[Marcomguy]

Marcom I don't think your example would really be stripping down the message. It's removing words, but it alters the meaning significantly. You couldn't have changed "Unlike any coffee you've ever had before" to "coffee" to strip it down. You might change "The relentless pursuit of perfection" to something more like "chasing perfection. Maybe not the best example, but the message is still there.

I believe it is an example of stripping the message down. Think of what the slogan implies: that Lexus is on a continual quest to improve upon everything. They're perpetually dissatisfied. So one way of stripping it down would be to say: "We're dissatisfied."

But that could mean a general dissatisfaction; it doesn't capture the intent of the slogan. Another alternative could be: "Striving." As in, Lexus is always striving to create better products.

"Striving" implies efforts against a difficult task. Lexus wouldn't want to give the impression that it's hard for them to approach perfection. Hence "Striving" is out.

We're left with "chasing perfection" (your example), "pursuing perfection," and "the pursuit of perfection." I think the last one is the best. Like any good slogan, it's already pretty well stripped down. Can't really strip it any further. My question about reducing it to "perfection" was just to see if people thought that would make it better/worse.

Someone added "relentless" to "the pursuit of perfection" and gave the slogan its final form. I was just wondering what it would be like if that word was removed.

[vangogh]

That's my point. I think pursuit of perfection would be fine as an example of stripping down the message. It's relentless that's the extra word. But I don't think you can take pursuit out and still have the same message. I added chasing back in, but the basic idea was perfection in isolation was no longer the same message and so by itself wasn't an example of stripping down the message. Taking pursuit out alters the message.

I completely agree about the word relentless being superfluous. I suppose someone might try to argue that the pursuit of perfection may not be relentless, but that person isn't me.

[seolman]

What a great thread. I'm late (as usual).

I loved his rewrite of the banner ad for one simple reason: it made people make a decision. That is what great ad copy does - it involves the audience. Who cares if he included Starbucks, Dunkin' Donuts or Joe's Cafe down the street? He told the reader "I care about your opinion! Give it to me!"

Some of the respondents will like the coffee better and become customers, some won't like his coffee but may become customers anyway just for the fact their opinion mattered.

Any action that gets a person involved in your product is a good one in my opinion. You have 0% chance of converting a client who never tries your product. Great marketers take chances to get people to try their product. This guy just gave a class in how to do that.

[vangogh]

You can be excused from being late since you were dodging the moving earth.

I think the Starbucks part is mostly irrelevant. It could have been any other coffee shop. Starbucks just happens to be the most popular so why not mention them. The taste test is a good idea. Get people interacting with you instead of having them passively listen is always good.

People don't want to be sold to. They don't want marketing messages pushed at them. But if you can get them involved in some way they become receptive to what you have to say without having to oversell to them.

[seolman]

People don't want to be sold to. They don't want marketing messages pushed at them. But if you can get them involved in some way they become receptive to what you have to say without having to oversell to them.

Well put. This is indirectly related to a great management rule (passed on to me by a great mentor of mine): do SOMETHING! Facts and figures are great but don't sit around and waffle, posture or pontificate - make a decision! Use that same idea in your marketing. Make your audience do something or leave.

Sorry to harp on about this but Marketing is what I've done for years. If your message doesn't make your audience take action it's a dead ad. It just sits there..sort of waffling or pontificating or posturing like "we're the best!"

OK - I feel better now:p

[vangogh]

do SOMETHING! Facts and figures are great but don't sit around and waffle, posture or pontificate - make a decision!

Yep. I know it's easier said than done for many, but it's important to take action and do something.

[Marcomguy]

This post is only tangentially related to the thread, but since we are talking about Peet's and Starbucks, here's a link to a Consumer Reports article on the results of their coffee taste test (http://shopping.yahoo.com/articles/yshoppingarticles/204/consumer-reports-picks-the-best-cup-o-brew).

Neither Peet's nor Starbucks was judged the best. Long-time CR readers can probably guess which brand won.

[vangogh]

Eight O'Clock does make good coffee. I'd like to see where Dunkin Donuts rated.

[seolman]

OUTRIGHT BRIBERY HAD TO BE INVOLVED! Nobody can beat the taste of Costa Rican Tarrazu coffee...sorry. Not that I'm biased or anything.:p