SALESWeeks to result

The Concentration Technique

Destroy confidence in competitor solutions while positioning your product as the answer

Problem it solves

low close rates

Best for

Marketers in crowded competitive fields, companies challenging established market leaders, and copywriters selling replacement or upgrade products

Not ideal for

Market leaders who would give competitors prestige by acknowledging them, or those with no genuine advantage to offer

Overview

Why this framework exists

Concentration is the process of destroying alternate ways for the prospect to satisfy their desire, then proving that your product eliminates the weaknesses found in alternatives. It differs from ignoring competition because it directly attacks competitor weaknesses -- but only when simultaneously showing how your product provides what competitors lack. Never attack a weakness without providing the solution to that weakness at the same time.

The technique combines all previously learned methods: Intensification to show penalties of the old product, Gradualization to build logical cause-and-effect, Mechanization to prove your product removes weaknesses, and Identification to show the prospect belongs with your product. The most effective structure is interweaving contrast: weakness of the old, strength of the new, weakness of the old, strength of the new -- bad-good-bad-good.

Concentration is most effective when your budget is smaller than the competitor's, when the bulk of your prospects are already their customers, and when your first problem is cracking their image before you can redirect desire to your product.

Core principles

5 total
  1. Never attack a weakness unless you can provide the solution to that weakness at the same time
  2. The prospect knows your attack is biased -- but if the attack serves his interest, he will accept it
  3. The underlying structure is bad-good, bad-good -- interweaving contrast between competitor weakness and your strength
  4. Concentration combines all other techniques: intensification, gradualization, mechanization, and identification
  5. Use parallel sentence structure and word repetition to sharpen the contrast between old and new

Steps

3 steps
  1. Identify Genuine Weaknesses in Competitor Solutions
    Research the actual limitations, drawbacks, and failure points of competing products or approaches. These must be real, verifiable weaknesses that the prospect has experienced or can easily verify. The attack must be truthful to maintain credibility.
    Pro tipThe best weaknesses to attack are ones the prospect has already suspected or experienced but could not articulate. Your ad crystallizes their vague dissatisfaction into specific, named problems.
    WarningIf you can only attack without offering a genuine solution, say nothing at all. Pure attack without an alternative produces skepticism and dislike.
  2. Map Each Weakness to Your Product's Corresponding Strength
    For every competitor weakness you plan to highlight, identify the specific feature or mechanism in your product that eliminates that weakness. Create a parallel: their flaw mapped to your advantage, their limitation mapped to your capability.
    Pro tipThe most powerful contrast comes when the same feature that causes the competitor's weakness is the exact feature your product has redesigned or eliminated.
  3. Interweave the Contrast in Your Copy
    Structure your body copy as an alternating pattern: competitor weakness, your corresponding strength, competitor weakness, your corresponding strength. Use parallel sentence structures and repeated words to make the contrast as sharp as possible. Sell each comparison with emotion, not just facts.
    Pro tipUse deliberate word choices to sharpen contrast: 'A spark plug gives you a thin skimpy spark' vs 'A fire injector gives you a heavy powerful flame.' The adjective pairs create visceral contrast.

Examples

1 cases
Fire Injectors vs. Spark Plugs -- The Interweaving Masterclass

The fire injector ad systematically dismantled confidence in spark plugs through parallel contrast. 'A spark plug jumps a spark -- the most wasteful way to get electricity' vs 'A fire injector fires on the surface -- the most efficient way.' 'Spark plugs accumulate filth and carbon' vs 'Fire injectors never need cleaning and actually break in.' Each pair used identical sentence structures with contrasting adjectives to create maximum contrast.

OutcomeThe copy was so effective that it convinced prospects to replace a universally accepted product (spark plugs) with a completely unknown alternative. The interweaving structure made every weakness of the old product feel like a personal affront, while every strength of the new product felt like liberation.

Common mistakes

2 traps
Attacking Without Offering an Alternative
If your attack only serves to discredit the competitor without simultaneously proving how your product solves the exposed weakness, you will generate skepticism and dislike rather than sales. The prospect sees through self-serving attacks. Every criticism must be paired with your solution.
Giving a Small Competitor the Prestige of Acknowledgment
If you dominate a field, attacking a small competitor by name gives them free publicity and implied legitimacy. Concentration is most effective when you are the challenger, not the leader. Market leaders should generally ignore competition and focus on strengthening their own story.

Origin story

How this framework came to be

Schwartz documented this technique from studying ads that needed to displace entrenched competitors. The fire injector vs. spark plug ads demonstrated the most sophisticated interweaving contrast he had seen, using parallel sentence structure, word repetition, and systematic redefinition to dismantle confidence in spark plugs while simultaneously building confidence in injectors.

Source

Traced to primary
Source · BOOK
Breakthrough Advertising
Eugene Schwartz · 1966
Open source →

Related frameworks

Browse all Sales →