A different "why" question...

[jendoe]

In most of the ebooks, webinars, and classes I've done - the "expert" spends some time upfront to answer the presumed question, "Why am I telling you all my methods?"

The way they answer, it's clear that they think people are asking about competition, ie "If these methods work so well, why would you tell others about them? Won't that create competition, and make them less effective to you?"

(Which is generally followed by a two-part answer that nearly everyone seems to give... a) I love teaching and b) the internet is so huge, you can't hurt me with your competition!)

[PS Sorry - accidentally submitted previously - this is all an add-on edit. Ooops!]

My question...

If the methods are so successful, why are you spending time documenting/teaching them, rather than continuing to work on them? I'm worried that the answer might be - it's more profitable to teach others the methods than to do them.

Am I off base? I hate to be so cynical but... it just sort of struck me tonight.

Thanks!

[MemberWing]

This is very clever psychology tactics - address the most probable burning questions from potential buyers first - and that will remove their "protective" shield they might have against buying your stuff.
I think Gary Bensievenga (sorry if i misspelled his name) was one of the first who presented this tactic on his (very expensive) copywriting seminars.

Car salesmen (who usually dealing with crappy brands - you know which ones) are very skillful in these methods.

Gleb

[CDarklock]

Originally Posted by jendoe

I'm worried that the answer might be - it's more profitable to teach others the methods than to do them.

If you do the math, it is.

Let's say you can make an adsense site in a week that makes $30 a day. Consistently. Every single time.

Week 1, you make no money.
Week 2, $210.
Week 3, $420.
Week 4, $630.
Week 5, $840.
Week 6, $1,050.
Week 7, $1,260.
Week 8, $1,470.
Week 9, $1,680.

You don't build a site that last week. That's two months, right there. And you're making about $85,000 a year.

During that whole nine weeks, you make $7,560.

Now you go out and say "hey, I can teach YOU to make adsense sites that make $30 a day, every single time."

You can charge $5,000 a person for that seminar. That's just short of three weeks income from building adsense sites... per person. So if you can get 30 people, and pull in $150,000? All at once? For a few days of work?

Why the hell would you just sit there making more adsense sites?

In fact, do you know what I'd do? I'd take those thirty people and offer to teach ten of them, one-on-one, exactly what to do. For $10,000. And then, I'd have each of those ten people build me TWO adsense sites over the course of the next month. (They'd probably take twice as long, being newbies.) And at the end of that month, I'd let them look at the income, and pick which one they wanted. A month later, what do I have?

$540 a day in adsense income and a quarter of a million dollars.

Time to play.

Now, if I can just nail down this "$30 a day in adsense every single time I build a site" thing...

[JMPruitt]

I agree, a lot of people use it because it works. However, some of them I know are teaching, and they still continue building sites of their own. You should realize, most of these Gurus are not working at home by themselves. they have an office full of staff that does most of the work for them.

[CurtisN]

Have you ever considered that these experts might actually be human and that they feel some sort of warm tingly feeling inside when the help a fellow human out by teaching them how to make money online?

You might be asking yourself whether they're teaching other people to help them, or teaching other people to make money. In the end, I don't freaking care which one it is as long as you're providing a ton of value to the customer.

I'm usually a cynic too, but in this case, I am a big supporter of the gurus who provide good training. I don't care about their rationale for providing the training - I just care that it's good.

Curtis

[timpears]

Back in the days of the California gold ruch, and the other gold rushes, those that sold the tools to the minors made much more money than the miners ever did. And so it is with all of the gurus, internet, real estate, you name it. There is much more money teaching wannabees than there is doing the work that they teach. Even better if you can do the work and teach as well.

[Greg guitar]

[QUOTE=CDarklock;1376127]

Now you go out and say "hey, I can teach YOU to make adsense sites that make $30 a day, every single time."

You can charge $5,000 a person for that seminar. That's just short of three weeks income from building adsense sites... per person. So if you can get 30 people, and pull in $150,000? All at once? For a few days of work?

Why the hell would you just sit there making more adsense sites?

In fact, do you know what I'd do? I'd take those thirty people and offer to teach ten of them, one-on-one, exactly what to do. For $10,000. And then, I'd have each of those ten people build me TWO adsense sites over the course of the next month. QUOTE]

No offence, but I don't think I'll be signing up to pay $5k-15K to learn to make a fraction of what I can learn to make for $17, or even free. I guess I'll just stick with my $37 war room membership for the time being.

Oh I almost forgot; I've yet to see any high or low priced coaching program that teaches the students by having them build one site for their own profit, and another exclusively for the coach to profit from. That's way over the top.

[CDarklock]

Originally Posted by Greg guitar

I've yet to see any high or low priced coaching program that teaches the students by having them build one site for their own profit, and another exclusively for the coach to profit from. That's way over the top.

However, you HAVE seen programs where one of the benefits is an opportunity to JV with the coach, haven't you?

No? Here's one:

Backend Cash Machine | Internet Coaching | Backend Marketing

"JV opportunity to share your project with my super responsive list of buyers (Value: Priceless!)"

What, exactly, is the difference between these two scenarios... both of which end up with the coach pocketing half of your results from the coaching?

[Greg guitar]

Originally Posted by CDarklock

However, you HAVE seen programs where one of the benefits is an opportunity to JV with the coach, haven't you?

No? Here's one:

Backend Cash Machine | Internet Coaching | Backend Marketing

"JV opportunity to share your project with my super responsive list of buyers (Value: Priceless!)"

What, exactly, is the difference between these two scenarios... both of which end up with the coach pocketing half of your results from the coaching?

I'd say the difference is this: in your scenario, the coach has no skin in the game with the website the student makes for him/herself once the 30 days is over, and is not offering the student the jump start of accessing a responsive list the coach already built.

The coach isn't promoting the site he "lets" the student keep, and he's not sharing the profits from the one he is promoting. The other scenario leaves the student as the owner of all s/he created, while the coach helps promote it.

Sounds like a sweet deal, but not for the student. Sorry but my response would be "How much did you say you want me to pay to work for you!? Can I have a hit of whatever you're smoking?"

Your proposal might attract a few people though. I only say this because I know there are people who've actually paid to go through training programs to learn to become...get this...a janitor! It's sad but true.

One more difference I almost didn't mention: your "build me a site" program is $15k, while
the "promote your site to my list" program is under $2k (but still overpriced, I think).

[CDarklock]

Originally Posted by Greg guitar

I'd say the difference is this: in your scenario, the coach has no skin in the game with the website the student makes for him/herself once the 30 days is over

If the student makes two sites and keeps them both, where's the coach's skin in the game then?

The coach almost never has skin in the game. When a coach succeeds with one or two students, we applaud. When he fails with dozens, we say "well, some people just aren't cut out for this business." We blame the student... every time. Clearly it isn't the coach who's to blame. The student must not have applied himself. He must not have taken direction well. He must have done something wrong. After all... look at the students who had success.

Success and failure in any coaching program are pretty much a 50/50 responsibility. If you succeed, you're just as responsible for that success as the coach is. And I propose that if you fail, your coach is also just as responsible as you are for that failure.

So why not split your month's success 50/50 with the coach?

One more difference I almost didn't mention: your "build me a site" program is $15k, while the "promote your site to my list" program is under $2k (but still overpriced, I think).

Keep in mind that we're talking about a fantasy-land scenario where anyone can build a $30 a day adsense site in a week, time after time. The reality is more like $3 a day, from what I've seen.

But let's take the real-world scenario and scale things down. Is it worth $500 to learn how to build a $3 a day adsense site? Is it worth $1,000 to be personally coached in that process for 30 days, and end up with a single adsense site that generates those results?

Because if it's worth those amounts... why isn't ten times the result worth ten times the price?

Do people pay $1,000 for instruction on generating $100 a month?

Well, yes... yes, they do. And they frequently don't end up with anything that actually generates that income in the end, either. They might. They might not.

So why is $10,000 for instruction on generating $1,000 a month - with real results in your hot little hands at the end of the month - too much?

Is it because I get $1,000 a month, too?

Or is it because you think you should get $2,000 a month at the end?

Consider this proposal. I'll coach you for a fee. During the time that I'm coaching you, I'll take half of your earnings. If you earn nothing, I take nothing. If you earn a lot, I take a lot. Once we're done, all your earnings from that point forward are yours to keep.

It's in my interest to help you earn a lot, right?

And it's in your interest, too - because you're out money for the fee, and you want to recoup that money. Right?

Does it take a rocket scientist to figure out that this scenario makes it more likely that BOTH people are going to work hard to ensure the student earns a lot?

Or how about the alternative: you pay me to coach you, and all the money you make is yours.

Do I really give a flying leap whether you earn money?

I mean, you want to earn money, right? You still have an interest in earning money. But if you need my help to earn it, and I don't really care, will you get as much help from me?

Or will I just let the chips fall where they may, glad-handing and BSing you for a month to make sure you give me a good testimonial because you think you're going to go out and start making loads of money later?

[mattlaclear]

Originally Posted by CurtisN

Have you ever considered that these experts might actually be human and that they feel some sort of warm tingly feeling inside when the help a fellow human out by teaching them how to make money online?

Yeah I agree with Curtis. I actually get more satisfaction out of helping someone learn to fish for themselves than I do in catching a fish myself. But mind you. When you take the time to teach someone a tactic that really works you then bank huge credibility points with that person and set them up to be a long term customer of yours in which they purchase multiple products from you year in and year out.

[DogScout]

In the car biz, we used to say trainers train because they lost their edge.

obviously not true in all IM cases

[Kay King]

spends some time upfront to answer the presumed question, "Why am I telling you all my methods?"

This is addressing objections before they occur and has been taught in sales training offline for years.

Many of the "great ideas from so-and-so marketer" generate a lot of excitement but are methods that have been practiced for years by those in outside sales.

kay

[jendoe]

Originally Posted by CDarklock

In fact, do you know what I'd do? I'd take those thirty people and offer to teach ten of them, one-on-one, exactly what to do. For $10,000. And then, I'd have each of those ten people build me TWO adsense sites over the course of the next month. (They'd probably take twice as long, being newbies.) And at the end of that month, I'd let them look at the income, and pick which one they wanted. A month later, what do I have?

Ooh, nice. I don't have a spare $10k in my training budget (*sniffle!*) but... I like this idea, very clever... and I wonder...

If someone offered training set up like this:

- Training plus one-on-one mentoring to create two sites that bring in money
- You pay $X for this (where X is a bit less than $10k )
- You also give up one of the sites to the mentor at the end.

BUT... with the caveat...
- The site that you give the mentor is part of the price. So, if you fail to finish the program or produce the sites, you then owe $Y (more than $X, of course ) to pay the mentor.

I wonder if this would help solve the "nobody takes action" problem I keep hearing about.

As someone who's still not "getting it" - I think I'd be *very* motivated to finish, knowing that I'd have to pay extra if I didn't... (though enforcement could be difficult). I also suspect the one-on-one mentoring would be a huge help.

Anyway - totally other direction than where I started, but thanks... it's interesting to see everyone's responses.

[jendoe]

Originally Posted by CurtisN

Have you ever considered that these experts might actually be human and that they feel some sort of warm tingly feeling inside when the help a fellow human out by teaching them how to make money online?

You might be asking yourself whether they're teaching other people to help them, or teaching other people to make money. In the end, I don't freaking care which one it is as long as you're providing a ton of value to the customer.

I'm usually a cynic too, but in this case, I am a big supporter of the gurus who provide good training. I don't care about their rationale for providing the training - I just care that it's good.

Curtis

"Have you ever considered... they might be human!"

Ohmygosh - never! Just kidding. Thanks (and to you too Mattaclear) for pointing this out, it's reassuring to hear. I guess after hearing the same spiel so many times, "No, really, I love teaching!" - even *I* start to wonder...

It's nice to hear there are people who actually do it to help others though, thanks for that!

[jendoe]

Originally Posted by CDarklock

Consider this proposal. I'll coach you for a fee. During the time that I'm coaching you, I'll take half of your earnings. If you earn nothing, I take nothing. If you earn a lot, I take a lot. Once we're done, all your earnings from that point forward are yours to keep.

It's in my interest to help you earn a lot, right?

And it's in your interest, too - because you're out money for the fee, and you want to recoup that money. Right?

Does it take a rocket scientist to figure out that this scenario makes it more likely that BOTH people are going to work hard to ensure the student earns a lot?

Or how about the alternative: you pay me to coach you, and all the money you make is yours.

Do I really give a flying leap whether you earn money?

I mean, you want to earn money, right? You still have an interest in earning money. But if you need my help to earn it, and I don't really care, will you get as much help from me?

Or will I just let the chips fall where they may, glad-handing and BSing you for a month to make sure you give me a good testimonial because you think you're going to go out and start making loads of money later?

I think this actually makes tons of sense.

My only concern would be... (as I mentioned in the last post) - the upfront price of the coaching. As a "customer" - I'd love the see the upfront price as cheap as possible but with a big penalty for quitting (for example).

Heck - you know - for the right person, doing "free coaching, but you give me all the sites you make while I coach you" could actually be considered reasonable (although perhaps the coachee would be less inclined to work hard then, no "skin in the game").

I'm also assuming that once you know how to do one or two sites that make a profit, with any method, you can reproduce those without the coach...

[CDarklock]

Originally Posted by jendoe

I think this actually makes tons of sense.

Well, so do I.

Fair warning, I've been drinking. A lot. It's terribly irresponsible for me to be posting in this state.

There are three things you pay for when you get a coach. First, you have to pay for the coach's time. Second, you have to pay for the coach's loss of what he could be doing if he were not coaching you. And third, you have to pay for the future value that you receive from the coach.

It's these latter two things that make the difference between an employee and an entrepreneur. The employee says "my time is worth $60 an hour." The entrepreneur says "my time is worth $60 an hour, PLUS the $7,500 I would make if I were not coaching you, PLUS the $7,500 you are going to make from my coaching that you would not make without it."

So the employee mentality leads a coach to say "pay me $2,000 for a month's coaching." The entrepreneur mentality leads the same coach to say "pay me $17,000 for a month's coaching."

And then, like a good salesman, the coach places value on all the intangibles - and reduces the price. You're going to remove all the risk for me; I don't have to produce the sites myself, you'll do it. I consider a 30% margin acceptable, so let's remove 2/3 of the $7,500 value I get, and cut it to $12,000. And then, because I get the money up front, I think that in a month's time I can make a 20% return on the fee... so I'll drop it to $10,000.

The entrepreneur is all about opportunity cost. It's not just what he gives, but what he loses, and what you get. It's why the same site I might build an AdSense marketer for $200 would cost a multi-million dollar corporation $200,000. The marketer will drive a few thousand people to the site, and make a buck from each of them on the average. The corporation will drive a few million people to it, and make three or four dollars from each. It might look like I'm ripping off the corporation, but they're actually getting greater value for the money.

I'm a massive economics geek. Pretend I drew a lot of complicated graphs here about why and how that happens, because I'm way too drunk to actually draw them.

My only concern would be... (as I mentioned in the last post) - the upfront price of the coaching. As a "customer" - I'd love the see the upfront price as cheap as possible but with a big penalty for quitting (for example).

I think this is what people are going for with the $1 trial to $97 a month membership sites. Anyone can afford a dollar, right? And then you have a month to meet people. To be part of a community. To participate. And you get attached to this.

Now here's the end of the month, and you have a choice: give all that up, or pay $97. And if you give it up... well, now you have to admit something. You have to admit you don't want to pay $97 a month to be in that community.

And you simply can't leave. Leaving is like announcing to that entire community, "you aren't worth $97 a month." You simply won't do that. These are your friends. They've helped you. How can you say that to them? Ever?

You can't. And that's what makes the membership site such a powerful model - you don't have to force continuity. People crave it. They will give up more than you realise for it. We're conditioned that way, not just by society, not just by culture, but by evolution and genetics. It's in our DNA.

There is a part of me that still thinks this is cheating. I'm internally arguing with it. Once I convince it, I'll start doing a lot of stuff in membership sites. Robert Plank and Lance Tamashiro have already won that argument with themselves. Ewen Chia and Eben Pagan have already won it. I'm still trying.

There's a part of me that thinks this kind of arguing with oneself is like giving in to the Dark Side of the Force. I think I have to win that argument first.

Heck - you know - for the right person, doing "free coaching, but you give me all the sites you make while I coach you" could actually be considered reasonable (although perhaps the coachee would be less inclined to work hard then, no "skin in the game").

That's called an "internship." They're very common in the art community; less so in the technical and engineering communities. I had interns when I was running my software consulting business; I could get a dozen whip-smart young programmers from art and IT schools around the area, and have them build me all kinds of profitable projects... for nothing. All I ever had to do was write a couple letters to their schools talking about what a great job they were doing.

They got A's and college credit for the experience. And over the three years I did this, the interns grossed over three million dollars for the company. Not a bad trade.

I could have paid them each an $80,000 annual salary and still made a profit. Instead, I paid them nothing and worked them like dogs, sometimes over sixty hours a week. They still loved the experience and sent me their resumes when they graduated. A few of them actually didn't send their resumes anywhere else... they wanted to work for me, end of story. And being a huge sentimental arsehole, I simply had to hire all of those.

(Sometimes I wonder if they knew that, in the second and third years. I did tell my two first year "only for you" applicants that their dedication and loyalty touched me, and I simply couldn't say no. I got rather more than two in the following two years. And that was, in retrospect, a bad business decision. I've made a lot of those.)

It might seem odd, but in some industries, the newbie honestly loves the work. It fascinates and captivates them. They stay up nights doing work. They look for more work to do. They invent work where there was none before. And what has always frustrated me is that once they start to get paid for it... the wonder goes out of it for them, and it becomes work. The dirty-word variety of work, that one should avoid as much as possible.

I don't know how to fix that. I simply can't find a way to reliably make people feel the way I do about my work: wait, you're going to pay me? Really? I mean... wow. Whether I'm writing an article, or building a website, or developing software - I love this job. It's like getting paid to play.

Do what you love, the money will follow. Or - more correctly, to my mind - when you honestly don't care about the money, it will come in torrents.

Kind of like women. When you go out and try to get laid, you won't. When you just stop trying, the women come out of the woodwork and beg to sleep with you. And then people come running up and offer you anything to teach them how the hell you do it. But even when you tell them, they can't. The fog of desperation around them is like ten feet thick. They can't stop trying. They don't know how.

"How you doin'?"

Best. Line. EVAR.

I'm also assuming that once you know how to do one or two sites that make a profit, with any method, you can reproduce those without the coach...

That's the main takeaway I'd expect from coaching: that you can then go out and replicate the same results yourself. If you can't take what you learned from a coach and improve on it, either your coach sucks, or you suck.

Bad wording, actually. Everybody sucks. We're just on different levels. Once you stop sucking at this level, you graduate to the next level, where you really suck. My sensei Jeff Culley used to say "Becoming a black belt doesn't make you an expert. It just means you suck on a whole new level."

Crap, what did I do, write a book here? I have squeeze pages to write.

[Eric Louviere]

I went to speak at a workshop in Houston, a few weeks ago, for free. I spoke for a few hours and did not pitch a thing. I did it as a favor for a friend and also because I wanted to.

Why? Because it helps me grow. It's stretching my comfort zones. It feels good to help. It is fun. When you share something you know with someone (or a group) of people who REALLY-REALLY want the information you have, it's fun.

Yes, it is a bit of an ego boost and yes, it's about feeling significant too. But, most of all, for me anyways, this business is what I know best. period.

I eat, drink, breathe and sleep "marketing" and "personal development" and "wealth creation" and "business". It's what my passion is. I can talk about it for hours and hours — and still feel energized, excited and empowered when I'm done.

What's the best way to learn something? Do it and/or teach it. If you learn something, and then turn around and teach it, you'll KNOW it much better and be more likely to USE it and retain it. I know my wife is probably pretty sick of me teaching her my latest discovery.

At that workshop, a guy caught me during the break and said, "Eric, why are you doing this for us? Why are you sharing this information? etc etc"

I said, "It's my passion. I feel empowered when I share."

However, it's interesting also, that when you teach, share and do business in the same marketplace you're most passionate about... it's interesting how easier it is to also make money in that marketplace. Much, much, more money.

It's like a pathway or something.

Additionally, for me, I did not grow up rich. And sometimes, we were even sorta poor growing up. I was taught money = bad. I think when I give and share, that weird-deep-seeded money = bad association goes away.

All in all, in this business, we sell money and freedom, more life, luxuries and redemption. I think that has to be amongst the easiest stuff to sell and market on the planet, don't you think?

Lastly, reason "why" selling is a tremendous concept to understand when marketing something. What is the reason "why" you are selling this product? Provide a reason why you are selling your product, for prospects viewing your sales message, and you're sales can skyrocket.

Thanks!

Eric Louviere

[Greg guitar]

Originally Posted by CDarklock

If the student makes two sites and keeps them both, where's the coach's skin in the game then?

The coach almost never has skin in the game. When a coach succeeds with one or two students, we applaud. When he fails with dozens, we say "well, some people just aren't cut out for this business." We blame the student... every time. Clearly it isn't the coach who's to blame. The student must not have applied himself. He must not have taken direction well. He must have done something wrong. After all... look at the students who had success.

Success and failure in any coaching program are pretty much a 50/50 responsibility. If you succeed, you're just as responsible for that success as the coach is. And I propose that if you fail, your coach is also just as responsible as you are for that failure.

So why not split your month's success 50/50 with the coach?



Keep in mind that we're talking about a fantasy-land scenario where anyone can build a $30 a day adsense site in a week, time after time. The reality is more like $3 a day, from what I've seen.

But let's take the real-world scenario and scale things down. Is it worth $500 to learn how to build a $3 a day adsense site? Is it worth $1,000 to be personally coached in that process for 30 days, and end up with a single adsense site that generates those results?

Because if it's worth those amounts... why isn't ten times the result worth ten times the price?

Do people pay $1,000 for instruction on generating $100 a month?

Well, yes... yes, they do. And they frequently don't end up with anything that actually generates that income in the end, either. They might. They might not.

So why is $10,000 for instruction on generating $1,000 a month - with real results in your hot little hands at the end of the month - too much?

Is it because I get $1,000 a month, too?

Or is it because you think you should get $2,000 a month at the end?

Consider this proposal. I'll coach you for a fee. During the time that I'm coaching you, I'll take half of your earnings. If you earn nothing, I take nothing. If you earn a lot, I take a lot. Once we're done, all your earnings from that point forward are yours to keep.

It's in my interest to help you earn a lot, right?

And it's in your interest, too - because you're out money for the fee, and you want to recoup that money. Right?

Does it take a rocket scientist to figure out that this scenario makes it more likely that BOTH people are going to work hard to ensure the student earns a lot?

Or how about the alternative: you pay me to coach you, and all the money you make is yours.

Do I really give a flying leap whether you earn money?

I mean, you want to earn money, right? You still have an interest in earning money. But if you need my help to earn it, and I don't really care, will you get as much help from me?

Or will I just let the chips fall where they may, glad-handing and BSing you for a month to make sure you give me a good testimonial because you think you're going to go out and start making loads of money later?

Man, I hope you don't get too offended, but I have to point out the cynicism in this post. I sure hope you don't mean what you've implied: that coaches don't give a "flying leap" about helping someone succeed unless they get a share of the profits.

If I ever do pay big bucks for a coaching program, it would only go to someone I believe genuinely wants me to succeed, independant of his/her profit motive for himself. In fact, it would probably go to one of the awesome warriors that I've seen give away million dollar ideas and advice for no personal gain at all; just the kick they get from helping a fellow entreprenuer.

I'm all for profit sharing, but if I thought for a moment that someone coaching me was only in it for their own profit, I'd fire them in a heartbeat. There are just too many brilliant, generous marketers; why should I deal with those who don't enjoy helping others do well?

I totally dissagree with the generalized assumption underlying this post. In my experience, many coaches seem to be driven primarily by connection, and the thrill of making a positive difference for others, and only secondarily by personal gain. I believe this is a key attitude among great coaches. Clients can smell insincerity, and if I don't feel my coach cares, her/his ability to help me get the best out of myself is impaired.

If for example, I hired Rachel Rofe, Willie Crawford, Jason Fladlien, or Maria Gudelis to coach me for a flat fee, I wouldn't doubt for a second that they would bring their "A game". I think you need to re-examine your beliefs about what motivates entreprenuers, because it's not just personal gain.