From Bob Clark (931006 10:50 am EDT)
DAG FORSSELL (931003 1400)
Dag, your proposed title is much better than mine.
You feel that my remark about your "Control" summary is "debatable."
Logically, I agree that it does fit. But I don't think that it fits
your primary purpose. You still seem to be more concerned with
"selling PCT" than "selling your services." After the sale is closed
PCT may become pertinent.
Your short added section about "stress" fits your "Defining Control"
summary nicely. But I am not sure that this summary belongs between
your "Introduction" and your "Results." Perhaps at some later point.
You still seem to be "selling PCT" rather than your services.
I like your experimental approach -- the "innocent acquaintance."
There is nothing quite like exploring what some people call
"reality." This suggests that it is more important to "use" PCT than
to "sell" it."
Regarding your sample sales letter: generally, great! You'll be
interested in Mary Ann's comment that her university course in
Business Letter Writing strongly emphasized the "you" orientation.
That is also what I am talking about.
We suggest that you begin your letter with "Executives are often...."
-- omitting the first paragraph. You could consider using the first
paragraph later, but it doesn't seem to contribute to the sales
appeal.
Your opening is intended to remind herm of some problem that hesh has
already recognized -- arousing hish curiosity as you noted.
Note also -- the word "theory" (and its various forms) is a major
"turn-off" for some (unpredictable) people. I suggest saving it for
a time when it becomes essential.
Your sales letter is intended to make a "friend" of your prospect --
ask him for his advice. He then tends to become part of your
project. A "participant" rather than a "customer." What do you think
of this approach?
Regards and "happy hunting", Bob Clark