SciMark Report from July Response

My latest SciMark Report in print is now available on the Response magazine Web site. Reviews include: Genius Air, Kitchen Candu and Shed Monster. [a]

{Note: At press time, I did not know the producer of Kitchen Candu. It's Hutton-Miller.}

In The News

AJ talks to AOL News about how he made his first (several) million.

The sub-headline is a bit sensationalized. According to the body of the article, delivering pizzas was only one of his early jobs, when he was in college. Most of us worked low-paying jobs as students for "book and beer money." Those jobs hardly defined us.

My favorite part is when AJ talks about what it takes to be successful in business. "Some people don't want to be thinking about work seven days a week," he says. "Some people don't want to work 12, 14 hours a day. If that's the case, then you shouldn't be in business."

It was also interesting to read about his early hits. Many of the product descriptions will sound familiar. "Old is gold," as they say.

Sore Loser Stuff

I may be good about admitting when I'm wrong, but I must confess -- I'm a sore loser. Even when faced with solid evidence my "unlikely to succeed" predictions weren't right, I still look for ways to prove a hit isn't really a hit.

Of course, it's too easy to say, "Oh, so-and-so is probably just spending at a loss to support retail." That happens, but most campaigns that air enough media to get on my True Top 50 must be delivering some sort of ROI. Otherwise, the margins would be too tight and even retail couldn't make up the difference. One or two times and a company could survive that. Three or four times and a company would go bankrupt. (At least, that's my understanding. Let me know if you have a successful business model that contradicts that understanding: I'll be all ears!)

Besides, that explanation is really just a cop-out. Not knowing the real numbers, I would have no way of knowing which campaigns are just retail pushes and which campaigns are delivering great CPOs. If I'm going to be a sore loser, I at least need to have some measurement to substantiate my complaints ... which is why I went back and compared my "got it wrong" items from the winter to my most recent chart for the spring.

What I wanted to see is how many campaigns I got wrong survived from winter into spring. With the exception of clearly seasonal items, a strong DRTV item should stay on the charts for more than three months. To be fair about it, I went beyond the Top 50 and also looked at spending. Here's what I found:

1. Style Snaps. No. 23 on my winter Top 50 and now No. 18 on my spring Top 50, so I was definitely wrong.


2. Aluma Wallet. No. 29 on my winter Top 50 and now No. 3 on my spring Top 50. Definitely wrong again!


3. Sunny Seat. I predicted it would disappear from my Top 50 by spring -- and it did. Spending dropped 83% from winter to spring.


4. One Second Needle. To date, I still have no idea why this one was a hit, and nobody has explained it to me. It also fell way off the Top 50. Spending declined 95% from winter to spring and barely even registered in the spring period.


5. Fushigi. A fourth-quarter item to be sure, so the fact it didn't register on the spring rankings makes sense. It may have been short-lived, but I understand it was a real hit.


6. Comfy Control Harness. I suspected this was a retail play, but I may be wrong about that. Even though the campaign doesn't appear on the spring Top 50, it would have been No. 63 on a hypothetical Top 100 -- not bad. Spending dropped a bit, but not by much. Seems this is a real hit.

So there you have it. Am I just a sore loser? Or is there something to this method for validating TV winners? I blog; you decide.

Review: Thera Curve

Description: A curved back device
Main Pitch: "Helps alleviate lower back pain"
Main Offer: $19.95 with heat pack
Bonus: 2nd heat pack free
Producer: Infomercials Inc.
Website: www.TheraCurve.com
Prediction: N/A

The Web site for this campaign is down, so it would be un-sporting to make a prediction. However, I've been aware of this item for some time, so I will share my original thought: "unlikely to succeed."

The reason is simple: Others have tried and failed with similar items. Comfort Curve (No. 3) failed in 2010, and LayBack (No. 2) failed in 2008. To use another favorite catch-phrase: In DR, the third time is never the charm.

This case study is also instructive for another reason. When a producer has a major hit, people start to think of them as infallible. They also start to believe creative is more powerful than it really is. But while creative brilliance can take a good item and make it great (see Snap-2-O), it can't sell an item people ultimately don't want.

Review: Snap-2-O

Description: A quick connector for hoses
Main Pitch: "Lets you snap, snap, snap all your hose supplies in one second flat"
Main Offer: $10 for two plus Water Pressure Nozzle
Bonus: 2nd complete set (just pay P&H)
Marketer: Allstar [current True Top Marketer]
Producer: The Schwartz Group
Website: www.Snap-2-O.com
Prediction: Hit!

I liked this product when I first saw it because I thought it solved a real problem. But I absolutely loved the product after I saw the commercial. This is what the best producers can do: Take a good item and make it great. Well done!