Penchuk.com

Thanks to the wonderful invention known as a DVR, I have a new favorite show:  Pitchmen.  For those of you who don’t know it, it’s about Billy Mays and Anthony Sullivan, two guys that are in the direct response business.  Billy is the bearded loud guy that hawks everything from Oxiclean to insurance.  Anthony is a lesser known talent but also has a business creating ads for products.

The premise of the show is these two guys are looking for new products that they can pitch via direct response.  The products themselves are hit or miss, the banter between the two celebrities is sometimes annoying and the show is a little predictable.  So why is it my favorite?  Frankly, because these guys do marketing right.

They have a formula for what makes a good selling product.  It’s simple, easy to understand, has a low price point, offers good value, demonstrates well and has a “wow” factor.  Once they find a product that has these qualities, they pitch it via 2-minute or 30-minute infomercials.  All of the buzzwords and catch phrases get used:  “Now”, “But wait, there’s more…”, “Order now and…”  And before they dump a bunch of money into something, they test it.  They buy limited media runs in different markets using different approaches.  In the end, they end up with the right products getting proper investments.

Marketing is a trial and error game with science mixed in for good measure.  When I was responsible for product marketing back at NetIQ, I used a similar test, test, test approach to email marketing.  For example, for one email campaign I created three different messages and value propositions.  Buzzwords and calls to action were must copy.  Then I tested each message with a segment of my target market.  The best performing message was then rolled out to the rest of the list.  The end result was an improved response rate and higher sales.  Testing takes a little more work, but is compensated for with improved performance.

I’d be thrilled to spend some time with those guys just to watch them in action.

For years I’ve told friends that I could solve the education crisis in this country by paying teachers a much higher salary.  The concept is simple.  Typical teacher salaries are a disincentive to bringing in the best and the brightest.

I worked with kids for many years while with Royal Caribbean Cruise Lines.  It was the most enjoyable job I ever had and not just because I got to sail the islands and travel.  The kids made it worth the while, too.  Even though I only got to spend 7 or 10 days with each group, it was incredibly rewarding. When it was time to come back to land, I considered teaching, but only briefly.  With starting salaries in the $30K’s, I quickly looked elsewhere, namely business school.  But, if the starting salary had been in the $70Ks, I would have given it a second thought.  Put simply, I never became a teacher because the pay was too low.  That’s it.  I want to perform civic duties.  I want to be a pillar of the community.  I want to make an impact in kids’ lives.  (BTW, I hope I’m doing all of those things anyway, just not by teaching as a profession.)

But, if the pay isn’t fair and the long-term prospects for providing me with a comfortable lifestyle aren’t there, then why would I pursue a teaching career?  I’m quite sure I’m not alone.  There are other smart, motivated people like me that would be great teachers but chose something different.   Which is why I was thrilled to see this article about a charter school that will pay $125K salaries to its teachers, specifically “to prove that teachers, not small-class sizes or high technology, are the backbone of an effective learning environment”.  I wish them the best of luck and hope it goes well.

** Please note that this opinion does not mean there aren’t great teachers today.  It means that they’re better people than me for be willing to work for less money than I was willing.