May 2003
A year's worth of mail: a case study
Breaking the ice Madeline Stanionis
What's up online Dan Weeks
A year's worth of mail: a case study
IN THE LAST ISSUE of Mal Warwick's print newsletter, we reviewed the housefile mailings received in 2002 by the newsletter's generous Phantom Donor. To refresh your memory, we discussed how our 20 organizations — to which the Phantom donates $25 annually — each sent an average of nearly 20 mailings over the course of the year.
This ranged from a low of two — a thank-you and, as requested, information on making a bequest — to a high of 30.
Now we'll take a closer look at the 12-month mailing pattern of just one of our nonprofits. For this case study, we chose the environmental group Natural Resources Defense Council (New York, NY). That's because, compared to our other groups, NRDC's schedule featured one of the broadest mixes of mailing types.
In total, NRDC delivered 26 separate packages to the Phantom during 2002 (or an average of one every two weeks). The overall combination of mailings broke down this way: five annual membership renewals, eight special appeals, nine newsletters/magazines (a bi-monthly newsletter and a more elaborate quarterly magazine), three planned giving packages, and one thank-you mailing.
Here's a glimpse into the two key components of NRDC's direct mail schedule: renewals and special appeals.
Renewals
Taking our five renewals in the order they were intended — which, in effect, combines packages #3-5 in the 2002 series with #1-2 for 2003 — the first annual membership renewal arrived toward the end of October. This was approximately two months prior to the date of the Phantom's gift. The second package arrived near the anniversary, at the end of December. Packages #3-5 then mailed at one-month intervals (January, February, and March).
Each of the five packages mailed in a #10 envelope, metered at the nonprofit rate. And yet no two outers looked the same. The colors varied from white (used twice) to Kraft to cream to gray. Teaser copy changed in look and tone. One carrier was closed-faced, one had a double window.
The five letters were each printed on one 8-1/2 x 11" page, with #3 and #5 running only one side.
The second renewal plugged a 2:1 matching grant, #3 included a four-color bookmark, #4 featured an appeal from an NRDC program director, and #5 pulled out all the stops with a "we-don't-want-to-lose-you" approach. (Though, frankly, the Phantom was somewhat put off by #5's heavy-handed tone — since she or he had sent a gift three months earlier and already received a January 29th thank-you.)
All five packages used the same reply form, with one small portion reserved for targeted information that was then lasered.
The appeal process
The Phantom received special appeals in early February, early April, late May, early August, mid-September, mid-October, and then early and late December. All were metered at the nonprofit rate. Format-wise, NRDC stuck to either a #10 or a larger-size, 9 x 12" flat.
In reviewing these appeals, it seems that what works best for NRDC is the petition form of involvement device — not a total surprise for such an activist-oriented organization. Six of the eight packages asked the Phantom to sign either a petition or a declaration.
Actually, these six really represent three separate campaigns (mailed February, August, and December). In each case, a follow-up petition package was the next appeal mailed — and included the original letter stamped "COPY," an additional lift note acknowledging the follow-up effort, and a duplicate reply form/petition.
What's particularly noteworthy is how NRDC dramatically altered the look of these envelopes — both in terms of format and copy — so as not to identify any of the three packages as follow-ups.
The other two appeals - both labeled "URGENT DISPATCH" — then mailed in the "off months" of May and October.
These special appeals alternated signatures between NRDC President John Adams, Trustee Robert Redford, and staff attorney Robert F. Kennedy, Jr.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Breaking the ice
By Madeline Stanionis
AISH.COM, A MEGA-SITE sponsored by Aish HaTorah, an international network of Jewish educational centers, delivers a vast and constantly changing array of Jewish learning and wisdom. It reaches about 1 million monthly visitors and more than 70,000 e-news subscribers.
Until recently, the organization had rarely asked its subscribers for money. Complicating matters is that the handsome site looks like a major portal, a la AOL. So, despite fundraising appeals on the Web site, many readers didn't realize that Aish.com was a nonprofit organization depending on them — at least partly — to continue its work. But a lot can change in six weeks.
Sight unseen, Aish.com hired my firm to develop and implement an online membership strategy. For our first campaign, we decided on a goal of converting about 1.5% of Aish's e-mail subscribers into donors — a nice, round 1,000 new members in about six weeks.
When the smoke cleared, we had added over 1,000 members, most of them new. The average gift was $80 — very respectable — for a total of $80,000. Not bad for a six-week campaign! We were all happy.
Here's what we did:
Three stand-alone e-mail appeals
Promotion on the home page and other key pages
Blurbs and graphic appeals in the e-newsletters
Pop-ups and pop-unders
Text appeals in call-out boxes on some of the most popular authors' articles
And here's why that worked:
We asked, they gave. Simple, yes. But previously, the organization had been uncomfortable with the idea of direct fundraising via e-mail. Guess what? Very low unsubscribe rate, no complaints . . . $80,000. Case closed.
It was a campaign, not just an appeal. Our messages told subscribers that this was Aish's first membership drive, with a goal of 1,000 new members, and we communicated progress as it proceeded.
Subscribers responded to thoughtful, persuasive messages from people who mattered to them — the site's editors (with an appealing photo of them), a particularly popular author, and a beloved Rabbi standing in front of the Wailing Wall.
It was a truly integrated campaign. Appeals on site, the giving page, and e-newsletter appeals all echoed the e-mail messages.
A success, yes, But not everything worked:
Most people gave via the e-mails. While the Web site appeals may have supported and reinforced the e-mail messages, they didn't receive the click that counts.
In particular, the pop-under ads (that load under the Aish.com Web pages being viewed) performed badly. We used two different versions and tracked responses for each. They were a no-go — a good test, but we probably won't use them again.
What's next for Aish.com? A calendar of special appeals, a robust online renewal series, testing more embedded appeals in their e-newsletter and site, and then . . . who knows? This successful campaign has broken the ice, and there are surely more good results to come.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Madeline Stanionis is Vice President of Donordigital, a direct response agency assisting nonprofits with online fundraising, advocacy, and marketing. She may be reached at (415) 278-9444 or madeline@donordigital.com.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
E-mail wanted!
Conributing Editor Nick Allen wants to know about your organization's fundraising experiences online — for good or ill — and whether you're willing to allow him to write about them in this column. Get in touch with Nick at nick@donordigital.com, call (415) 278-9444, or check in on the Web at www.donordigital.com. Those of us involved in the emerging field of online fundraising are all learning the hard way. Let's learn from one another! Maybe that will make it a little easier for us all.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
What's up online
by Dan Weeks
When visiting Greenpeace online, you actually have a choice of more than one website to visit. The primary Greenpeace website, at www.greenpeace.org, is well-organized, with "Join" and "Act" buttons clearly found, as well as a plug for their vote in the People's Choice category of the 7th Annual Webby Awards, which will take place June 5, 2003.
However, the primary site also offers a remarkable 22 different language choices. After choosing English/USA, I was brought to www.greenpeaceusa.org - also an excellent website, with rotating photos relating to their primary issues of concern and an eye-catching, large red telephone icon to focus on their current telephone action alert.
I think, though, that what makes both Greenpeace websites worth visiting is that they're so irreverently fun. I can't decide which I like more — is it the "attack of the speech bubbles," in which you upload your own photo and attach a speech bubble message directed at Esso/Exxon/Mobil? Or is it the parody of the Iraq playing cards, called "Who's Got Nukes?" ("If You Have Nuclear Bombs Are You Playing With a Full Deck?") Greenpeace members dealt out the decks to delegates in Geneva at the recent Nuclear Proliferation Treaty Preparatory Committee. Of course you can order your own set, and you can even play nuclear solitaire online!
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Want more? Subscribe to Mal Warwick's e-Newsletter: Successful Fundraising Online.
