Loose Cannon: Some Scams Are More Equal Than Others
Remember the direct response advertisements that used to run in the backs of comic books? In most cases, the promise of the copy and the actual products had at best a cursory connection.
Take the “Magic Bill Changer,” which supposedly turned an ordinary slip of paper into “A Real $1 Bill!” as the ad trumpeted. At age five I was convinced that this was my family’s ticket out of the middle class. I was halfway to the mailbox before my mother pointed out there was probably less there than met the eye.
She also pointed out that letters generally need stamps, thereby providing an essential lesson about pre-paid reply envelopes and direct marketing.
Other ads urged pre-teen girls to send their allowance in for a product that would help them accentuate their decolletage. And, bless their teenybopper hearts, they would, only to receive a box filled with crumpled tissue paper.
Homeowners could purchase a “Guaranteed 100% Effective Household Pest Elimination System.” This consisted of two wooden blocks, labeled “A” and “B.” Customers were instructed to place the household pest on block A, and to strike block A forcefully with block B.
One could argue that respondents were victims, but in each case, the product did exactly what the copy promised. The ads may have been cons, but if so they were artful ones.
In contrast, look at the folks running Enron, Peregrine Systems (which is coming under fire for the same type of financial statement chicanery) and WorldCom. Their financial statements out-and-out lied to investors and others, unlike those back of the comic ads.
WorldCom is issuing a cash flow restatement to the tune of $4 billion. That’s more than an accounting glitch. They don’t make decimal points that large.
This is not the soft distortion of over hype: It’s an endemic series of lies. It’s the difference between using a prospect’s greed against him and never giving him a chance.
It’s an odd era when comic book ad copywriters are more honorable than corporate titans.
To respond to the opinions in this column, please contact [email protected]
