98% Of Salesletters To Become Illegal Soon? What's The Warrior Solution? :)

[E. Fire]

Originally Posted by Jason

So what happens if you live outside the bubble called the USA!! how does this affect my website?

Originally Posted by David_Thompson

I was just wondering the samething here, IM'ers outside the little US
does this affect our business.

It might do if we host our businesses in US territory, then that will subject
our businesses to US laws, I think...

--David

If you would be affected by your site(s) being shut down by a US based host on orders from the FTC, or by being dropped from a US-based affiliate network (or program), then yes.

It's not a simple matter of what the FTC itself will do, but of the business polices that will be put in place by US-based businesses who will want to make sure they cover their arses and don't run afoul of the FTC themselves. The ripple effect can often be much worse than the actual regulation.


Hey, I wonder if the FTC will go after SideWiki commenters making claims that the product they promote on their website is much better?

[designfuschion]

Originally Posted by tomw

yep, as the saying goes;

so many mistake freedom for license.

Also, am I the only (maybe paranoid) one that recognises some real, concrete and obvious steps of the long predicted corporate hegemony of the internet?

Tom

Yep.
This is one the major concerns i have over the sidewiki issue. Google has covered their bases(assuming they have looked at all angles already).
sidewiki in my opinion is just a ploy to bring in laws that will see less freedoms for the small webmaster or Im'er. Only those with the $$$$,or in pockets of politicians will be able to play. I could delve deeper into my reasons,but i won't.

If the bill does come to pass,innocent people could then be targeted through sidewiki.
So not only will we need to worry about figuring out what's 'typical',but competition can post slander,which google could then report to FTC.
I'm sure the NSA,CIA,FBI work in pretty closely to google.

Not sure if american gov is thinking of a net filter,but the australian one is.
of course at the same time they want to improve the adsl network. Problem is,people would get around it with proxies,and our broadband speed would hurtle us back to the dialup ages.

They are saying the net filter is 'to protect the children'. So,imagine if parents start whinging about sidewiki abuse? Wow,they'll bring in the net filter pretty quick then.

From the sounds of it,even though the law is US based,it will still affect global im'ers...it will be a matter of time before they 'claim' we need a worldwide regulated association. (as it's been mentioned here somewhere - a virtual united nations).


edit: i posted just after E Fire. so i'll add..

Hey, I wonder if the FTC will go after SideWiki commenters making claims that the product they promote on their website is much better?

Will be interesting if this is the case. Would this then make google liable.?

[Colin Palfrey]

Originally Posted by Michael Motley

so basically marketers will have to be truthful in their sales letters?


OH THE HORROR!!!

No just the American ones

Looks like someone just selected you all for a major disadvantage.

Although I expect this will be totally unenforceable, I hope so anyway.

[DASHBOY]

The first question is how are they going to monitor the millions of sales pages which are on the internet.

I agree that if your dishonest about your results then the person is more than likely not to buy from you again so honesty is always the best policy if your in this game for the long term.

Later

Graeme

[darrin_cooper]

You all need to start listening to commercials.
At the end, they are having disclosures of actors who portray a certain category of person & disclosing that they are an actor & they are being compensated for the commercial.
Just watch, the Jeff Paul's in the coming weeks, at the end, those commercials will change drastically.

[Lance K]

Originally Posted by DASHBOY

The first question is how are they going to monitor the millions of sales pages which are on the internet.

They're going to count on consumer's to help them out. Like I said above...

IMO, this is going to make CUSTOMER SERVICE just as important as compliance with this new law. Because it's usually a consumer complaint that lands you on the radar of the FTC in the first place.

[Yuds]

I'm sure they'll find some way to get around this and keep on scamming people...

but I can't WAIT until this hits the entire CPA/Flog industry and at least halts it to some degree.

I know that those guys make insane money but there will come a point in time where all that bad karma is going to catch up to them.

I just hope it's sooner rather than later.

[gpower2]

It's like the mortgage industry. A lot of people and/or homeowners, etc. got burned, but it's a necessary evil long term to bring everything and everyone into perspective.

[20092009]

Ya, the USA is looking less and less attractive for EVERYTHING.... Im thinking of moving or starting my own country.

[hyperlite]

People will find ways to get around this just like anything else on the internet

[Handsome J]

Man, can we get any more P-Whipped in this country? What happened to using your head? I think natural selection and survival of the fittest have worked well up until present. I think this potential law is just more of the same BS we have come to see. Over regulation by some policy makers who have no expertise in the things they are legislating. Do I condone fraud? Absolutely not. But come on, how do you extract typical concrete results data from lets say 3,000 converted buyers on a list of 10,000? An in depth interview with everyone who purchased and the variables of their individual situations and applications of your product make trying to get a baseline on a typical result unrealistic at best. Only way I see this even being remotely possible is to do data extraction on typical results using small percentages of conversions. Basically in engineering speak, use a Military Standard. Take a small sampling of the larger pool of customers and apply the Mil Std results for advertising and disclosure on your sales page. FTC is likely just blowing off steam on us because they realized they have egg on their face with the TARP Bailout and the dropped the ball on Madoff. Shiznit rolls downhill it seems.

[claytons]

Mike...in my opinion, no matter how good your product is...it makes a HUGE difference.

We think we have pretty darn good products...we fully investigate every single testimonial we use...and they are all REAL.

BUT...we all know that a HUGE percentage of people who buy courses do nothing with them.

So...if I have 100 people buy, and only 10 people actually do anything with the material...well...that's 90 ZERO's to factor into the "average results"

This is just another example of the government...in a broad brush trying to handle the people who actually are scamming....hurting the good guys the most.

The scammers will keep on scamming...heck...what they were doing before was illegal too...why should this stop them ?!

Only hurts the ones that try to follow the rules and put out good products.

[Michael Stuart Kelly]

Here are a few ideas off the top of my head. I only managed the time to skim this thread, so if I am giving something that has already been mentioned without due credit, I apologize.

How to get around the new upcoming laws on presenting product results?

1. If you cut out or downplay results from your testimonials and sales letters, deepen the bonding factors. Any good copywriter will profile his target customer before writing.

For example, he will use people in his testimonials who are similar to his target (or what his target imagines is ideal). He will not use a punk rocker to sell mobility scooters to the elderly. On the contrary, he will use old people with long-suffering smiles. Ditto for the language. A scientist spouting geek-speak does not communicate well to a rap audience. And I would even say ditto for the backgrounds. A guy sitting in a night club will not give a very convincing testimonial to a Christian audience, no matter what he looks like or says.

On the contrary, good marketing production will use handsome virile-looking men with attractive women fawning over them to sell erectile dysfunction tablets (just look at the TV commercials).

These factors need to be enriched, especially during the testimonials, when the results are downplayed. In fact, when a negative point has to be made, or the competition (or even the "typical results") mentioned, a slight, but negative jolt in the language, background and/or type of person can make the underlying message not as important.

An easy example is to use some big accounting terms in the middle of a lot of hype to mention "typical results." The background can shift from outdoor pools with fancy cars and women to a simple office. And a cool looking dude can change to a nerdy looking slightly overweight older businessman with a bald spot. I'm purposely using a sleazy example to show how it can be done at the extreme. The message at those moments falls flat.

2. As I understand copywriting, the idea is to sell with emotion and justify with logic. Benefits are usually on the emotion side and features on the logic side. That's how I learned it. OK. That's clear enough.

So try to write something using this framework. It's a lot tougher than it seems. In my own experience, at least, I came up with some really stilted crap at the start. It was awful.

I always felt there was a missing piece. Then I recently read a PDF book called "Need to Know" by Paul Myers. (Strong hat tip to Paul.) He gave the missing piece and my writing got a lot easier. It is called "results."

The causal chain goes like this:

FEATURES cause RESULTS.
RESULTS cause BENEFITS.

You can run that backwards, too.

BENEFITS need certain RESULTS.
RESULTS need certain FEATURES.

Man, did writing sales copy get a lot easier after I started doing it that way.

Now look at testimonials and see where the government is sticking its big honking busybody finger: basically right into the RESULTS part.

Knowing that, I see a very easy way to get around this problem. Eliminate the RESULTS from copy and testimonials, but imply them. Vagueness is your friend.

Here's a good example of eliminating results but implying them: before and after shots for weight loss. Get a picture of fat dude and or a fat lady, but someone who has more recent shots of being thin. Rather than caption them as "The was me before using the product" and "This is after," show both pictures, but simply put different captions:

Fat Picture caption: Back in 2008, I was terribly unhappy and insecure.
Thin Picture: Now I am happier and more secure than I have ever been in my life. I absolutely love being me!

I wonder, how is the government going to quantify the pictures? No claim was made. And how is it going to quantify the emotions? Ditto. And the person isn't saying that this was a direct result of using the product.

If such a person says something vague like, "I take the Get-Thin-Eating-Gobs-Of-Rich-Chocolate-And-Raw-Sugar supplement and it has really worked wonders for me," I don't see how this can be "typified."

Once again, I'm purposely using a sleazy example. But doing this kind of stuff where the results are ethical and real should be a piece of cake. (Grak! I tend to do that once in a while... )

2. As to a disclaimer, I believe I saw something similar in this thread to what I am going to say, but I want to put it into different words: Make the claim: THIS PRODUCT IS NOT FOR EVERYBODY. That's what the drug companies do on TV. That way there are no typical results, at least not for everybody. You narrow down your target.

Then if you add a further qualifier, it kicks it out of the ballpark of "typical," to me at least: IN FACT, THIS IS ONLY FOR THE SPECIAL FEW WHO KNOW WHAT THEY REALLY WANT IN LIFE. Or something like that.

How on earth is the government going to demand that you find typical results from a special few who know what they really want in life? Where do you find these good folks (except in the buyer database )? And wouldn't it be fair to demand of the government that it provide some kind of typical results from competing products as a guideline? So where is it going to find those special few?

3. Use "don't know" in both testimonials and disclaimer.

For instance, "I DON'T KNOW WHAT OTHERS THINK ABOUT THIS PRODUCT, BUT I HAVEN'T FOUND ANYTHING BETTER."

And the disclaimer: "WE ARE REQUIRED BY LAW TO GIVE TYPICAL RESULTS FOR THIS PRODUCT, BUT FRANKLY, WE DON'T KNOW WHAT THEY ARE. TOO MUCH DEPENDS ON YOUR OWN MOTIVATION. IF YOU ARE AS MOTIVATED AS WE ARE AND ALL OTHER FACTORS ARE MORE-OR-LESS EQUAL, YOU SHOULD GET SIMILAR BENEFITS TO WHAT WE GET."

4. One guy earlier in this thread went way over the top as humor. He basically bashed typical IM customers and it was quite funny. This works, too. I have seen a couple of videos of Frank Kern and he pulls this off quite well. He says things like he is not a psychologist or lawyer, so people should not take a word of what he has to say seriously. In fact, if anyone does that, they are being foolish.

That's all I've got right now since this was off the top of my head. It was an interesting experience thinking through this thing on a post.

btw - I am not a lawyer, so this is not legal advice and do not expect any results from what I wrote with the nanny state. The only typical results I know of is that if the government wants to screw you, it will.

My unconditional advice is to stay out of its way as much as you can. And if you start getting real big and earning lots of money, be afraid... be very afraid...



Michael