When you create direct mail fundraising, the most important element is the carrier envelope. If it doesn't get opened, it really doesn't matter how brilliant everything inside might be. It's game over.
You should put a lot of creative energy into your envelopes.
But that might not mean what you think it means...
Because sometimes the most successful envelopes don't look all that "creative." The best envelopes are often quite boring and give very little information.
Example from the mailbox:

I can picture someone critiquing this envelope as gibberish. Fair enough. It really doesn't communicate anything -- it's not even clear whether it's meant to be the POSTMASTER who's saying this or someone is saying it to the POSTMASTER. What is an "FST Processing No."? Why is this here?
The answer to logical questions like that are not important.
This envelope is about curiosity.
I don't know if it has been successful, but I wouldn't be surprised if it has been.
Curiosity is one of the best ways to improve direct mail response rates.
A strange envelope like this that tells people nothing about its contents almost always does better than one that gives it all away, like a newspaper headline:
You have an amazing opportunity to rescue abandoned puppies!
That would be logical, but usually would not work very well. Because there is no mystery. The only people likely to open that are those who as they look at their mail are already thinking something like "I wonder what I could do right now to rescue abandoned puppies?"
That's not a lot of people, even when you're writing to people who really care for puppies.
This is why envelopes with no content on them at all do better than those with teasers most of the time.
Envelopes that don't signal their contents should be a go-to approach.
Don't feel bad about being "uncreative" or "illogical." Those things aren't the job for direct mail envelopes. Getting people to open them so they get the chance to interact with all that material inside you worked so hard to create.
There are some significant exceptions to this principle. We'll look at some of them tomorrow.
Recent Comments