Re: direct postal mail vs. e-mail

Mike,

I don't have any research, but I do have a litte bit of experience on 
the subject.

A local medical office that is one of my clients recently wanted to do 
something similar.  I live in southwest florida, so the overwhelming 
majority of patients are over the age of 65.  Surprisingly (to me at 
least), when surveyed, most had home computers.  However, when given a 
"choice" between paper or email, most chose paper.

The office does both.  When patients come in for a visit, or new 
patients sign up, they're given a small survey sheet that asks a few 
questions, including their preference on receiving the office 
newsletter.  That information is put into the computer and used when 
each newsletter is issued.

We set up a mailing list on our server for them to handle the email side 
of things and they use a local direct mail company to handle the paper 
mail.

This started almost a year ago and the last time I visited with them, a 
few months ago, they claimed to have a lower rate of patients leaving to 
seek other doctors.  And they feel it's a direct result of better 
communication with the patients with the newsletters.

So my suggestion is "don't limit yourself" or "try both".  I don't know 
what your demographic is, but if it's similar then a combination will 
likely work very well for you.

In article <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, [EMAIL PROTECTED] says...
> 
> I'm wondering which tends to generate a better response rate - direct mail
> by post or e-mail.
> 
> The business is an alternative healthcare practice that wants to communicate
> to its patients and generate more frequent visits.
> 
> Location is an urban area in the southeastern United States.
> 
> The business is debating whether to issue a newsletter to its patients in
> paper form or in electronic form in order to communicate some health-related
> information, as well as events and promotions in the practice.
> 
> Does anyone have any educated thoughts on which medium would be more
> effective?  Clearly, sending the paper format is more expensive, but is it
> more effective to the point where it justifies the additional cost?
> 
> Can someone point me to academic research that attempts to establish which
> medium is more effective in general?
> 
> Thanks in advance