Is direct mail dead as a source of new subscribers?

Interesting online discussion on the Folio: mediaPRO social network about whether -- or not -- direct mail is dead as a means of finding new subscribers. More interesting that it is largely between two of the best writers and designers of direct mail packages for subscriber acquisition.

The discussion is kicked off by a question from Kenneth Schneider of Houston, Texas, who says:

Those days of brilliant outers, gorgeous brochures, and well-written 4-page letters are long gone. Or are they? Have the realities of the "new" economy made them obsolete? Have years of mailing inexpensive voucher/Statement of Benefits packages forever weaned consumer marketers from packages, mini-magalogs, and bookalogs that actually sell content while capturing the tone and personality of the magazine -- and thus attract a more dedicated and loyal subscriber?

In response, Peter Lebensold of Toronto says:

It seems to me, Ken - and I hope this isn't merely wishful thinking - that, as the "business model" for magazines reverts to its roots (with readers paying a larger share of the shot, and advertisers less), there'll be a regained emphasis on obtaining *quality* subscribers - the kind that pay, convert and renew well ... that generate meaningful "lifetime value" ... that boast the kind of relationship with the magazine that no mere website can duplicate ... and that, in turn, will be that much more attractive to advertisers.

Schneider replied in part:

Business models simply must be rewritten to the new realities of the marketplace, i.e. the expense of conducting a truly significant -- and ongoing -- direct mail campaign must be recognized as part of the production process of business. Getting subscribers on the cheap has grossly failed the publishers who've succumbed to the attractiveness of that proposition. If magazines are going to survive, they HAVE to be "sold" to their target audience -- at a cost that OVER TIME builds a loyal and renewing audience.

And Lebensold responded:

Sadly, no one seems to be thinking "over time" any more: It's all about last quarter and this. It's going to require some changes (or changes *back*) at the top (among CEOs, Publishers, and the like), to encourage today's subscriber-acquisition practitioners to think more long-term. Perhaps a look at the ad-sales numbers might help them along! But I worry that - like educating subscribers NOT to wait for the final renewal effort (in the all-too-well-founded expectation that they'll get a more attractive offer the longer they wait) - it may take a generation. Einstein, I think, once said something about people never really changing their minds; all that happens is that those who used to think one way eventually die.