Financing decides more purchases than price does. Here is where to place it in the script and what cannot be said.
Where to place it in the script
Three positions, only one works.
Right at the start: the viewer does not want the product yet, the information falls flat.
Right at the end: the decision is already taken or abandoned, the information arrives too late.
Just after the demonstration of the product and before the price is announced: that is where the doubt appears, and that is where financing removes it.
One editing consequence: that sequence has to be removable or replaceable without breaking the video. Film it as a self-contained module.
Saying it without small print
Four principles, all verifiable.
What is displayed has to stay readable long enough to actually be read, at normal reading speed.
The essential conditions appear with the offer, not on a final screen nobody reads.
No displayed information may contradict what is said out loud.
And the statements applying to financing offers are checked with a lawyer before publication, because they come under a specific framework.
One practical consequence: a video dealing honestly with financing inspires more confidence than a video hinting at it without stating it.
What the creator must not claim
Four prohibitions protecting everybody.
Advising anyone to take on debt, in any form.
Claiming that the financing is free, interest-free or unconditional, if that is not exactly the case.
Naming a bank, an institution or a payment method without written authorisation from the brand.
And presenting financing as a general solution rather than as a payment method.
One safe and effective wording: describe the fact, not the advice. "It is possible to pay in instalments" works. "You should take it in instalments" does not.
The video's expiry date
Three elements dating a video in this category.
The number of instalments, which changes with the offers.
The displayed price, even more volatile.
And the logos of payment methods, which change with commercial agreements.
The defence comes down to one rule: none of those three elements may be spoken or filmed on a real screen. Everything goes as on-screen text, added at the edit, on a version kept with no text.
One arrangement extending the lifespan: systematically ask for delivery of a version with no text at all, in addition to the final version. It is often worth more than the video itself six months later.
What must be visible when a payment is split
| Element | What must be shown | Otherwise |
|---|---|---|
| The number of instalments | The exact figure | A vague promise |
| The amount per instalment | The sum, not a percentage | A calculation to do |
| The total cost | The final amount paid | An impossible comparison |
| The conditions | What triggers fees | A nasty surprise |
What is shown on screen rather than spoken
The table displayed on the product page, filmed as it is. A figure read aloud changes at the first adjustment; a dated screen capture stays verifiable.
What is checked before each release
The validity of the offer, the conditions attached to the payment method and the mandatory notices. These change often, to be confirmed with a lawyer.
What to measure
Three indicators, in this order.
The share of purchases with financing out of the total: that is what tells you the message got through.
The average basket of financed purchases, generally higher, which justifies the effort.
And the drop-off rate at the payment step, which should fall if the information was given early enough in the video.
A fourth indicator, useful for arbitrating: the number of customer-service questions about payment terms. It should decrease, and that is the most reliable sign that the video did its job.
One last marker, valid for the whole category: in a market where purchasing power varies, the most profitable video is not the one lowering the price, it is the one making the expense possible within the month's budget. That is a difference of form, and it changes the result.
