After owning/operating an ad agency for several years, I think I’ve been numbed to the effect that direct mail can have. Our typical response rate was in the single digits in most cases. We were able to get higher responses from more clever, dimensional mailers, but unless the margin on the product or service was there, the additional cost usually could not be justified.

I’ve been doing some analytics/social media and web strategy for a mayoral candidate here in San Antonio, and they tend to use a lot of direct mail.

I use our analytics software to measure the increase in web traffic from the various neighborhoods the pieces were dropped down to the street level, and I found that direct mail was effective in increasing visitor traffic about 200-400%, but had a useful life of about 3 days, and so traffic was back to normal with very little retention by the 3rd day – in fact, the lift was so small I don’t even think I could attribute it to DM.

Ryan

Where many have moved away from direct mail, in some way this is what can make it more effective now, less noise. Another thing I find is that with executives, a personal letter and invitation has always worked over email. We’ll see about Twitter, but based on what Pear Analytics found it may take some time.

Direct mail can still have power.

While both channels may serve similar purposes, each has very unique characteristics. Direct Mail can be a highly personal form of marketing and Direct Mail campaigns can be designed to reach a very specific target audience. An advantage as you discuss that Twitter doesn’t have the capability of list management.

Overall, Mail still has some distinct characteristics that allow marketers to connect with customers, retain their business and build brand loyalty.

Rod DeVar
Manager, Direct Mail
United States Postal Service