WJ Book

Page 4 of 5  


Fear not, help has arrived. Wire away with reckless abandon but just remember to wrap the inside and the outside of your dust collector's PVC pipes with bare wire to avoid static buildup and the inevitable explosion and fire.
--

-Mike-
snipped-for-privacy@alltel.net
  Click to see the full signature.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
And don't forget to use food-safe finish.
A.J.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
wrote in message news:lDmle.21435

Ah - but if I never buy another book from them it only costs those who DO!! Ergo, it's still f**king free to me!
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload

Do you pay doctor bills? There are many people that do not pay their bills because they know the clinic will eventually absorb the charges and raise their rates, insurance premiums go up and so on. The patients paying the bills basically pay for those that don't. Same thing here except the publisher is encouraging this practice by the attached letter to not pay or return if you don't want to. Those that do buy the book from that publisher partially pay for the book that they encouraged you to keep.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
Well, actually, you're wrong on two counts.
First not paying doctors bills that are truly owed isn't even close to paying for a book for which you do not owe. People who go to the doctor are engaging a service for which they know a payment is expected. They use the services, then willingly stiff the doctor. These books are sent as a marketing enticement to encourage the recipient to engage the service. Those who choose not to engage the service (that is, receive more books) do not owe anything. That is why the follow-up letters from WWJ are not invoices, not bills, and not dunning letters. They fact that you interpret them to be so, does not make them so. They are what they are: marketing offers.
Second, sending these books is a marketing campaign that has already figured the cost of non-returns into the campaign itself. Books that are not returned do not raise the price of the books that are later sold. It's just the opposite -- books that are later sold eliminate the (negligible) cost of the non-returns. These types of campaigns make far more money than they lose. In other words, the fact that they do MAKE money means that they -- the marketers of such items -- LOSE nothing, and therefore do not have to pass on the costs of those loses to others.
A.J.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload

Dog gone it A.J. - that's too damn lucid. More fun to pull chains.
V
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
<<Dog gone it A.J. - that's too damn lucid. More fun to pull chains.>>
"Pull the chain." That was the phrase my dad used to use to mean "flush the toilet."
Lee
--
To e-mail, replace "bucketofspam" with "dleegordon"



Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload

I'd say "Whatever floats - bit that brings unpleasant visuals to mind :)
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload

I actually remember those toilets! Tank was fixed High on the wall. I had to stand on the rim to 'pull the chain' and always feared slipping off into the bowl.

Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload

I did not mean to take my comparison quite so literally. I was only demonstrating that waste costs all consumers directly or indirectly.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload

There is no waste involved in this example, except perhaps the annnoying invoices being sent.
This is a planned campaign whose cost has already been factored into budgets.
--
~ Stay Calm... Be Brave... Wait for the Signs ~
------------------------------------------------------
  Click to see the full signature.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
Dave Balderstone wrote:

A lotta' those useless things called trees might not have agreed... :)
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload

It's okay to use paper... It grows on trees.
Example. The mill we buy our newsprint from has a fixed harvest area in northern Alberta. They harvest and pulp exactly zero trees per year. Instead, they lease rights to sawmills and buy the chips, which they then pulp and turn into what's recognized as the highest quality newsprint in North America.
Now, if cutting trees for lumber and using the chips for pulp offends thee, you're definitely in the wrong newsgroup.
--
~ Stay Calm... Be Brave... Wait for the Signs ~
------------------------------------------------------
  Click to see the full signature.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
Dave Balderstone wrote:

No, what bugs me is the end use of it as simply adding (for the most part) to the landfill or burn pile as most mass-mailings are.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
news:260520051847400346%

Umm, product being given away has a cost. Period.

Yes it is, the wast is factored in to the price of everything that they market. Those that pay for the product pay for the factored in waste.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload

Waste is factored into the price of EVERYTHING that EVERYBODY f'ing markets. Do you buy tools? Waste is factored into the f'ing cost. Do you buy wood? Waste is factored into the f'ing cost. Do you buy food? Waste is factored into the f'ing cost. Do you buy clothes? Waste is factored into the f'ing cost. Do you buy vehicles? Waste is factored into the f'ing cost. Do you buy paint? Waste is factored into the f'ing cost. Do you buy stain? Waste is factored into the f'ing cost. Do you buy sandpaper? Waste is factored into the f'ing cost. Do you buy toothpaste? Waste is factored into the f'ing cost. Do you buy anything at all? Waste is factored into the f'ing cost!
Do you have a PayPal account? I'll send you a buck if you'll use it to buy a clue about this subject.
--
~ Stay Calm... Be Brave... Wait for the Signs ~
------------------------------------------------------
  Click to see the full signature.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload

I see your point, I think you are missing my point. There are hundreds of cost factors that go in to determine the price of something you will buy. THIS METHOD OF MARKETING however points out to the consumer one of those "wasteful" cost factors and throws it in the consumers face. When the buying public sees such an obvious fixable waste on an item that he may consider buying he should be insulted to think that this type marketing has picked him to be the dummy thinking that he will not not realise that he is the one paying for those that do not pay.
I'll refrain from offering to sell you a clue.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload

Once again, you are assuming facts not in evidence. I am not saying that you are wrong, just that I see no evidence that you are right. Let's work a little example:
Assume that the fixed cost for the book writing, editing, graphic design, setting up the presses, etc. is $200,000. Assume that marginal printing cost is $5 per book (cost of paper, ink, electricity, postage) Assume they target 100,000 customers with their marketing campaign.
Scenario 1: wasteful (according to you) approach: Print 100,000 books Total cost: $200,000 + 100,000*$5 = $700,000 Hit rate from this approach 50% Paying customers: 100,000 *.5 = 50,000 Cost per paid-for book: $14 Gross Profit if sold for $20 per book: 50,000*($20-$14)=$300,000
Scenario 2: more economical (according to you) approach: 100,000 letters sent Hit rate from this approach 20% 20,000 books printed (NO WASTE!) Cost: $200,000 + 20,000*$5 = $300,000 Cost per book: $15 Gross profit if sold for $25 per book: 20,000*($25-$15)=$200,000
So with the waste-free approach in this example, even if the publisher raises the price by $5, he makes less money!
Note that I am NOT claiming that these scenarios are close to the real thing--I am just pointing out that there is not enough info here to accept your theory that their approach leads to higher costs for the book buyer.
And I have a sneaky suspicion that if I were in the publishing business, I WOULD know these costs and response rates, and would use the approach that would generate the best return.
--
Alex -- Replace "nospam" with "mail" to reply by email. Checked infrequently.

Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload

Your estimates of the 'hit' percentages are high, for both methods. The _relative_ difference is much larger than your estimates, however.
*Very* few people buy 'reference'-type books 'sight unseen', with the exception of 'standard' works -- e.g. the Mirriam-Webster Dictionary.
Getting the sample into the prospect's hands increases the sale rate by a factor of somewhere 25 to 40 times.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload

But they sure as hell look like an invoice. I don't have mine any more or I'd scan it and post it to get other's (and your)opinions. Just like junk mail that comes in plain brown official looking government envelopes, people can get confused. If I get a third one, I'll post it and then we'll pick it apart together. While perfectly legal, I see this sort of thing frequently in the commercial sector too.

I'm sure if they lost, they stop the practice. We are just expressing our opinions of it.
BTW, in case you missed my other post., I did hear from Woodworker's Journal about the subscription rates. It was clearly explained (that is all I asked) and I got a very fair deal. I'll probably renew again next time it comes up. They did take the time to reply and that is appreciated. I've had crow for dinner before and may have some more. Important thing is they did clarify.
--
Ed
http://pages.cthome.net/edhome/



Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload

Related Threads

    HomeOwnersHub.com is a website for homeowners and building and maintenance pros. It is not affiliated with any of the manufacturers or service providers discussed here. All logos and trade names are the property of their respective owners.