During my recent trip to Italy, I visited the state-of-the-art studios of R101 — based in Milan but broadcasting to the entire country. Here’s what was going on in the producer’s studio that faced the on-air studio.
Note: This video displays real radio people. Viewer discretion is advised.
Will people pay for a $10,000 sales-oriented seminar if they can get it at a 99% discount? Without having to leave their offices?
I’m happy to report the answer is…yes. Yesterday was the first day of registration for HOW TO GET PAST THE GATEKEEPER: Advanced Strategies for Sales Professionals, and we’ve had a bunch of registrations from across the U.S. and Canada.
(I certainly hope we’ll have registrants from outside North America. Even with time differences, they’ll still receive the complete recordings afterward.)
Prior to announcing this intensive (and, I must say, very cool) teleseminar I signed up with a different telephone bridge provider — a very expensive one.
Why?
1. Much better sound quality. You won’t believe the difference.
2. More reliability. If you took part in my How To Double Your Sales teleseminar with Chet Holmes, here’s some behind-the-scenes drama you didn’t know about: In the middle of the call, my phone connection was dropped.
I was dropped from my own teleseminar.
Frantically I redialed — with the terrible fear that the system wouldn’t allow me back in, thinking that the “moderator” (that’s me) already was there.
Fortunately, I did get back onto the call — and Chet was still talking. Nobody missed me at all (which wasn’t all that good for my ego).
I decided, “Never again.” So if you join us next week, expect much better audio quality. And because I’ll be teaching nonstop, if I get cut off again — Well, at least I hope someone notices.
Tentatively set for Tuesday, November 11. Submit your questions about radio station imaging now!
Ask Mike McVay teleseminar has been set for Tuesday, October 28. I’ll let you know when the website is ready to take your toughest questions on radio programming.
The Story: This guy simply cannot believe that a business would offer a “demo CD” of its products for free.
Let’s think about that a moment, shall we?
What part of “Give us your address and we’ll send you a sales pitch for our products” seems improbable?
If you heard that “call us for a free demo CD offer,” would you think, “Whoa! A free demo CD? What the…??”
This “story” makes for bad radio advertising in two important ways:
1. The guy’s an idiot. Every listener instantly understands the concept of “free demo CD,” but he’s flummoxed by it.
Guess what? He is supposed to represent the targeted listener, who is supposed to identify with him.
But few listeners will think, “Yep, I’m just as dumb as he. I guess I’ll call for a free demo CD, too.”
2. The advertiser is asking us to believe that their offer of a free demo CD is an unprecedented, mind-boggling opportunity.
But it’s not. Which means they’re beginning their commercial with a lie. How believable can the rest of their message be?
Her Performance: In the opening line, she doesn’t sound like a human being answering the phone. She sounds like a telephone voice recording. On her second line we realize she’s supposed to be “live,” and the momentary confusion distracts us.
For the rest of her dialogue, she’s reading as a radio announcer would — not as someone who is participating in a conversation.
As usual, there’s no way of knowing if the VO performer is the victim of bad (or no) direction.
A Thought Struck Me
I sent this spot to VO artist extraordinaire Ann DeWig, asking her to perform the woman’s lines with three different attitudes.
DIRECTION #1: “Do it as someone who is genuinely enthusiastic about the product and just loves being able to help change people’s lives with it.”
Note how she delivers “Excuse me?” Like a real person responding to an odd question.
“Oh, no catch!” — She’s surprised that anyone would be suspicious.
Ann did hit one word wrong, in my opinion: “fastest.” On that one word, she sounds like an announcer . If she weren’t doing this for me for free, on a Sunday morning, I’d ask for another take in which “fastest” matches the next word (“easiest”) in tone and inflection.
“Just like you learned your first language” — Those words sound so spontaneous. She’s just trying to explain to the guy, not pitching the product.
“There is one thing” — The up note on the last word that makes it sound like a question (and makes her sound like a real person)? Brilliant. Delicious.
“In less than 10 minutes” — She adds a gentle teasing quality that makes us love her.
DIRECTION #2: “Do it as someone who really wants THIS guy to learn a new language.”
At the end of her very first line, notice that she has to catch her breath after such a wordy greeting. Instantly that tells us the call is being answered by a live human, not a recording.
“Excuse me?” — A different inflection. Hear that hesitation on the first word? She’s slightly taken aback by the question.
“We’ll give you a free demo CD” — Seductively. She wants this guy to hear the CD.
“Well, Rosetta stone is a completely natural way to learn a new language.” — She’s not reciting a pitch. She’s responding to his doubts about being able to learn a new language. Notice her breathiness on “Rosetta.” She’s coaxing him, reassuring him.
“Oh, but there is one thing” — Compare her deliver of “Oh” to her first version. Both are good. This one is more specific — certainly more specific (and therefore more “real”) than the original. THIS real person has a real personality.
“In less than 10 minutes” — Hear the smile? She’s happy at the idea of the caller learning a new language so quickly.
DIRECTION #3: “Do it as someone who’s really proud of the product and courteously taken aback that this guy would doubt their motives.”
This person isn’t so concerned with the caller. She’s just doggone proud of how her employer’s product helps people.
“Excuse me?” — She hesitates on “excuse”; she’s surprised that the caller is suspicious. Why should he be? The Rosetta Stone is so wonderful.
“Oh, no catch!” — Again, she’s taken aback by his doubting.
“Just like you learned your first language” — She’s slightly on the defensive, but only because for some bizarre reason someone has doubts about this product. So she tries to explain it to him, to convince him.
“You could start speaking a new language in less than 10 minutes.” — Not playful, as the others were. Rather, she’s offering more proof that the Rosetta Stone really works. She’s boasting about the product’s effectiveness but without turning the commercial into a bragging spot.
And did you hear her add a word to the script, over the caller’s voice? “Yeah.” Look how far we’ve come, from a patently false radio commercial to a believable human conversation.
So, which do you prefer? The original version? Or Ann’s first, second or third approach?
Those are the four major topics in the current issue of my Radio Advertising Letter.
I’ve created this post for any subscribers who would like to comment, disagree, or illuminate.
