Nidek® E-blast on Combination Laser gets a grade of “F”

June 29, 2011 by Ted in e-mail promotion, E-Marketing, Marketing, Medical Device Marketing

Reading time: 4 – 6 minutes

OK…for the last several posts I have been talking about what makes a good and effective e-blast.  And, I have pointed out some mistakes companies have made with their e-blasts.  Before I go any further, YOU get to evaluate the Nidek e-blast below.  First, look at their from line, subject line and 20% zone.

Sorry Nidek….but this isn’t a very good start.  Let’s see if my assessment matches yours.

• You can’t tell who the e-blast is from.  It says Review of Ophthalmology.  Yes, they are respected and trusted.  That is good.  But without a hint of the true sponsor, you might think this is a message from Review and not an e-blast.
• The visible subject line is very vague….”combination system”???  Is this supposed to be a 3-in-1 diagnostic instrument?  It “saves time”?  So?  And, you cannot see the rest of the subject line that says “increases efficiency”. The subject line is too long.   Some readers won’t make the transition from this line to the content of the e-blast where they can see the entire subject line.  Also, many people have their email client (Outlook, Apple Mail, etc.) set up not to display the 20% Zone.
• The 20% Zone – “Reflections”?!?! What does that mean? I would be really surprised if a large number of doctors get beyond this point.  My bet is that this e-blast has a high probability of being deleted before being read.

What do you think?

Now, scroll down to look at the content of the e-blast.

Oh…now I get it.  “Reflections” must relate to the testimonial from the Dr. Barnebey.  He is reflecting on his use of the instrument.  My international readers would probably agree that the word “Reflections” is confusing.  And, the word has nothing to do with any benefit or feature related to the product.

“The Benchmark of Excellence in Ophthalmic Lasers” ??? This is really old school “puffery” in marketing.  Sort of like all those companies that claim they are the “Gold Standard” or the “Technology Leader”.  This statement may make Nidek feel good about themselves but it communicates nothing to the reader about the benefits of the product.  For the new generation of doctors and consumers at large, this kind of language is interpreted as arrogant.  Never, ever have language like this in your advertising.

What do you think of the testimonial?  I like testimonials.  But this one is weak.  It would have been stronger if Nidek could have worked with Dr. Barnebey on some metrics related to his improved efficiency.  For example, if the doctor had said that he saved enough time to see one more patient per day, other doctors could easily do the math in their head as to the payoff.

What would you have done with this e-blast?  Decide if you agree with me.

• From section – If Nidek would have used BMC for deployment, they could have had their name in the From section.  I am not sure that Review of Ophthalmology can do this.  Also, BMC publishes Glaucoma Today.  So, the email list would have been on target.  That is not to say that Review has a good email list….they do.
• Subject line – “Dr. Barnebey on Nidek laser’s efficiency” or “Why Dr. Barnebey uses Nidek combination lasers” or “Dr. Barnebey evaluates Nidek lasers for efficiency”.  Putting the doctor’s name in the subject line will definitely get readers.  And, we have solved the problem of indicating who the e-blast is from by naming Nidek.  Finally, we have a subject line that will fit in the email client screen of most readers.
• The 20% Zone – Get rid of “Reflections”.  They could do a couple of things here.  One would be to move Dr. Barnebey’s quote up into the zone.  This would definitely grab someone’s attention and move them to continue reading.  Or, they could have a benefit statement related to improved efficiency, “Offer the same patient care and see one extra patient per day”.
• The Content – Again, get rid of “Reflections”.  And, delete the “Benchmark” statement.  Add metrics to the doctor’s testimonial to more clearly demonstrate the benefit to the readers.  This could be in extra patients per day or more time with the family.  It could even be in financial terms.  The difficulty with expressing benefits in financial terms is that some readers might find that too forward…..even though that is what they are interested in.

So…Let me know what YOU think.

More E-Blast grades on the way after the Fourth of July.