(UPDATE: Just a quick clarification that the example below was sent to expired subscribers. So these folks had already received — and not responded to — a renewal series. That’s why I put the response in the 1 - 3% range, vs. what one might expect as part of an actual renewal series.)
Print-based magazines are constantly managing subscriber churn. Every year one group of people lets their subscription lapse, while others either renew or subscribe for the first time. Similar to almost any type of revenue-generating enterprise, the magic is keeping attrition rates low and managing the cost of acquiring new customers or keeping existing ones. E-mail marketing is one way to approach a lapsed campaign at a lower cost than a typical direct mail.
For example:
- If your publication decided to send a simple direct mail package to 2000 lapsed subscribers, you could easily invest $1000 or more on the printing, lettershop services, and postage costs.
- If that campaign delivered what I understand to be the industry average of 1%, you’d be lucky to get 20 returning subscribers.
- In this scenario, each returning subscriber came at a cost of $50.
To me, that seems like a pretty high price to pay. Though the lifetime value of that customer may work in your publication’s favour in the long run, it would certainly be nice to be able to invest less in encouraging that subscriber to come back.
Now, let’s say that your direct mail outperforms the 1% rule and gets up to 2% or 3%, reducing the cost per returned subscriber to just $25 or $16. Well now we’re talking, right? Wrong: what if you could achieve the same results for $25? Not $25 per returned subscriber — but just $25 for the whole campaign! Interested? Keep reading…
On Monday night, my partner Melanie took me to see a film that many might call life-changing. 
Syndicate this site