I'm a BIT of a movie geek, and often wonder why some sequels are given the go ahead - as if they could possibly improve upon the original. Are they trying to beat the banker?

Take Aliens, sequel to the classic Alien. More action, more guns, bigger explosions, bigger aliens, faster, more intense – bigger is better! But not always.

Look at the Bond films. Regarded as having gone downhill for a while, last year's Casino Royale – which went 'back to the basics' of Bond – seems to have injected new life into the tired franchise and put it back on track to greatness. Less style, more substance.

So where am I going with this?

It's often hard to beat a banker. You sometimes wonder why you bother. But creative, like creative people, gets tired sometimes, and response rates start to drop. You can run out of cold lists - and it never hurts to see if a new creative approach can uplift response, or the ROI.

Go the Aliens route, or the Bond route. Try bigger and better, or a stripped back, spare approach. Either can work, as long you have the heart of the charity in mind and the authenticity and transparency to match. Don't fear the banker. Sequels can sometimes be even better.

Steve Tse