Over the last few months I’ve been reading and studying a bunch of the copywriting/direct response OG’s — David Ogilvy, Claude Hopkins, Gary Halbert, Robert Collier, etc.
And one thing they all believed was that longer copy worked better.
Take it from Ogilvy himself:
“There is a universal belief in lay circles that people won’t read long copy.
Nothing could be farther from the truth. Claude Hopkins once wrote five pages of solid text for Schlitz beer.
In a few months, Schlitz moved up from fifth place to first. I once wrote a page of solid text for Good Luck Margarine, with most gratifying results. Every advertisement should be a complete sales pitch for your product.
It is unrealistic to assume that consumers will read a series of advertisements for the same product. You should shoot the works in every advertisement, on the assumption that it is the only chance you will ever have to sell your product to the reader—now or never.”
“General advertisers use 30-second commercials. But the direct response fraternity have learned that it is more profitable to use two-minute commercials.
Who, do you suppose, is more likely to be right? General advertisers broadcast their commercials in expensive prime time, when the audience is at its peak.
But direct response advertisers have learned that they make more sales late at night. Who, do you suppose, is more likely to be right? In their magazine advertisements, general advertisers use short copy, but the direct response people invariably use long copy. Who, do you suppose, is more likely to be right?”
Until really digging in on this old direct marketing stuff, I assumed that because we live in this Twitter, Instragam, Snapchat, super short attention span world, that all of our marketing and sales copy needs to be short and to the point.