WSO sales copy being Rejected! - Tips please

by 163 replies
0
So I've posted several WSOs in the past, and because of the new rules that just recently started several days ago, I can see that there are several things I'll have to do just a bit differently, including income proof.

One thing I noticed that changed was even though I provided income proof to get my salescopy approved, it still wasn't. The admin told me to look at the rules on #17 of the announcement.

I noticed it said:

"Sellers are not to make claims around income that has been made unless this income can be verified through Warrior Payments. Sellers are not permitted to make claims about or imply that income will result from purchasing a WSO. This will be strictly enforced to protect the Warrior community.

This is applicable to the WSO Marketplace and all sub-forums."

I don't seem to understand what they mean by "Unless this income can be verified through Warrior Payments." What exactly does this mean? What do they mean by verifying through Warrior Payments?

(I wanted to send these questions to admin, but I know they may not reply right away, so I thought I might as well just ask my questions here. )
#main internet marketing discussion forum #copy #rejected #sales #tips #wso
  • Seriously?

    It means that if you make an income claim you have to
    provide verifiable proof that the claim is legitimate. The
    only verification source acceptable is prior sales via Warrior
    Payments. What's confusing about that?
    • [ 3 ] Thanks
    • [2] replies
    • Yes, I am very serious. I still don't get what you mean about the Warrior Payments. I've never used it.

      What do I have to do?

      Do I provide more than just a screenshot?

      That's all I needed to use before. I used to even submit threads that weren't even finished with just plain text, and then add in the bbcode and finish the rest of the salescopy when it's approved. This new style is great though to help protect Warrior members from fraudulent products.
    • So, if I'm understanding this correctly, only WSOs about creating and / or selling WSOs would qualify, and only if the seller used Warrior Payment for past sales of the current WSO they are selling....

      I understand that WF can easily verify these income claims, but in reality, it's rather pointless. Might as well do away with income claims altogether then, it would seem.
      • [ 11 ] Thanks
      • [2] replies
  • I'm not them but the way I read it is let's say I want to claim I made $1,000 in the last week with technique X. Only if I sold those $1,000 through Warrior Payments, would I be allowed to claim I made that money.

    My take anyway.

    Mark

    • [ 4 ] Thanks
    • [2] replies
    • Thanks for the advice.

      But I find this part really odd. I guess I have to just remove all income claims since it's a product related to Fiverr, and I wouldn't know how to prove it's legit.
    • What Mark has said is correct. We have no way of verifying any income claims unless you are referencing a product sold through Warrior's own platform, Warrior Payments. https://payments.warriorforum.com/

      Because Warrior Payments is our platform, we can verify the claims being made. For other platforms that we do not own we cannot verify the claims you are making.
      • [ 7 ] Thanks
      • [1] reply
  • When I go through Warrior Payments, what do I need to do to verify the income claims?
    • [1] reply
    • The only time you can reference income being made is when you are referencing income being generated from Warrior Payments. As you are claiming the money you made was from another platform, we cannot verify it.

      Because it cannot be verified it cannot be included in the sales copy.
      • [ 2 ] Thanks
  • What you're going to have to do is learn how to sell
    without using the crutch of income claims.
    • [ 8 ] Thanks
    • [5] replies
    • I agree. But, many people won't buy (justifiably) without seeing income proof.
      So, a little catch 22 here, it seems.

      -- TW
      • [ 1 ] Thanks
      • [2] replies
    • Not really. He is being forced to earn income from one particular system in the future IF he wants to use income claims in his WSO sales copy. Income claims are still there, they just want it to be within the system they run.
      • [ 4 ] Thanks
    • I had a witty comment for this But I forgot it when I saw this as I went to post,



      I guess it depends how much cash your handing over?
      WSO $20
      Banner Ad $100 a day.

      Just sayin.......

      ODA
      • [ 3 ] Thanks
      • [1] reply
    • Luckily enough, I have.
      • [ 1 ] Thanks
    • That's exactly what you'll have to do.

      And now that all the products with dubious income claims plastered everywhere have been stopped, the hope is to start seeing the return of 'quallity' products to the WSO section
  • I wonder if someone buying a banner ad needs to prove some of these outrageous headline claims.
    • [ 2 ] Thanks
  • From the WSOs I have bought in the past, income claims have rarely, if ever, been the determining factor on my purchase decision. It is definitely true that some vendors may have exaggerated/lied about their income levels. I like that WF is trying to clean up the WSO subforum. Some changes we simply may not like.

    A lot of these changes were done after feedback from us as the users. They may not please everyone though, but that's how it is. We simply have to adapt to it.
    • [ 1 ] Thanks
  • Oh so warrior payments are like a JVZoo?
  • Banned
    [DELETED]
  • [DELETED]
  • Looking at the WSO section right now and it's flooded with income claims. So I guess people who have bought a thread before these new rules are good?

    If so, then wouldn't new threads be at a severe disadvantage when old WSOs with powerful income claims are being bumped?
    • [ 3 ] Thanks
    • [3] replies
    • Banned
      Seems we have to report threads that break the rules.
    • I got a message from a mod to change the title of my wso when I bumped.

      No worries, I like the new rules.
    • Buyers might think that bumped old WSOs have verified income claims!! This could be misleading.

      • [1] reply
  • I think there's a huge difference between someone saying "I made xxxx" and "You will make xxxx". "You will..." is a real income claim where the seller has absolutely no idea if that would be true of all customers who purchase.

    Stating "I made..." is based on personal experience that the product creator achieved implementing what they're teaching. Of course with proper disclaimers like"You may make nothing implementing this" attached to them, many people use the sellers results as a measuring stick when evaluating the potential of a product.

    I'm not sure why the two are being grouped together as being the same when one can be stated as fact.

    Without the seller having to state anything in regards to income. this could have some serious unintended consequences because now there's no barrier for entry, no burden of proof so to speak.

    Anyone can think up some ridiculous idea that sounds good on paper, or take something like PPC that they read about but never implemented themselves, package it up, and they don't have to prove anything.

    If someone asks on the thread, the seller can simply tell them they are not allowed to disclose or imply any sort of income. The buyers can't offer any type of serious scrutiny and it's basically a big guessing game for them.

    This can (will) leave things wide open and I'm sure there's people drooling right now to get in the WSO game because the only thing that held them back before was having to prove stuff.

    Just saying... I'm all for the vast majority of the rules, it's something that needed to be done for a long time.

    But maybe some plain, good, old-fashioned common sense would go a long way in evaluating these WSO threads/sales pages versus a policy that opens up a loophole and can expose the members here to even more of a guessing game when it comes to products.
    • [ 13 ] Thanks
    • [6] replies
    • If all you verify are payments made to the seller through WarriorPay - that seller may be earning 100% of his income selling to newbies on this forum and nothing outside the forum.

      Mark is exactly right - the thinking on this idea of verification is confusing and convoluted. What a seller earns through one NEW payment system run by this forum has nothing to do with what that seller has earned with the method/process/application he is advertising for sale here.

      If the verification of WSO sales (which is what it is) is clearly labeled on the WSO as "income verified" - it will be just as misleading (or more so) as the previously allowed "WSO of the day". But if that's what it is - it will be easy to avoid buying those WSOs and may be that message will get through.
      • [ 3 ] Thanks
    • Frankly I didn't like it when I first saw it....but I later realized the forum is moving in the right direction after all (or at least trying to). It's not possible for them to verify claims linked to other platforms and in any case that would just delay the approval process (of WSOs).

      Maybe in the near future they'd understand that Warrior Payments isn't the only platform that people use to make money and other platforms would somehow be verifiable too (I don't see that being possible though).

      As of now it's good that a product should sell based on its USPs and not on its "bling" factor.

      This is also going to force some buyers to become more mature and stop running after shiny objects. Buyer do need to understand that all that glitters is not gold after all!
    • What did they really have to prove before (given most of the proof wasn't really credible proof)? It does raise the question though. Doesn't the seller still have a burden of proof to show that whatever they are offering works (somebody is bound to ask) ? then it kind of gets into the grey area I mentioned in another thread but no one seemed concerned about.

      The answer will probably come close to an income claim....You can hardly say something works without somebody asking for details on how it worked.

      So the action is really going to move from the sales copy to the replies on the thread. I think its nevertheless a big improvement to not have it in the title or the sales copy OP. Buyers will have to look for thread titles that appeal to them on a more logical basis than it screaming dollar amounts at them.
    • Banned

      Without substantiation, the "fact" that the buyer made a certain amount of money is no more true or false than the implication that the buyer will make money. Sellers lie about income and provide fake proof all the time. That's the point. It gives the buyer false hope if the income claims are not true.
      • [4] replies
    • Mark the issue driving this is one of legality rather than ethics to be honest. according to the ftc any income claims must be "of typical results" thus you cant even say i made XXXXXX thus implying that buyers will make XXXXX to if they buy this product and do what i did.

      The is more about WF covering their proverbial legal ass than about them trying to actually regulate the quality of the products released as wdo's

      Regulating quality is very very subjective. Me and my 20 years of online marketing experience means that to ME 95% of the wso's are nothing more than rehashed products. but what about to the guy who just started his IM journey last month? should he not have access to they stuff i call rehashed junk?

      i am also accurtely aware that there is plenty of true junk in the wso section. i wam just pointing out that trying to regulate product quality is not very easy at all.

      some would say a product about making money with traffic exchanges is junk. but there are those on this forum making solid incomes with them, so who is to say a few more folks couldn? You, Me....? who.

      I say let the buyer determine that. As long as the sales pages says what i am getting and the product delivers that, i am good with what i call sub par products.

      you know some men buy their wedding rings at walmart. does that mean they are getting a sub par woman?

      but the income claims thing is a straight legal issue.... not an ethics or quality thing.
      • [ 3 ] Thanks
      • [2] replies
    • Your attorney general or the FTC can explain it to you... what they'll say is this...

      The claim of personal income is a fraudulent inducement in that it implies
      that the potential buyer is likely to achieve the same results. If that weren't
      the reason behind the claim the claim wouldn't have been made in the first
      place.

      Saying "I earned $20K doing X" is no different than saying "You can earn $20K doing X"

      In fact... the latter statement is less fraudulent than the first. In either case the
      reason for the claim is exactly the same for both.
      • [1] reply
  • I think it's positive that warrior forum vets income claims it gives me more confidence when buying! It just be frustrating though starting over when you already have a proven track record selling.
  • What I get from it is that if THEY can't verify that you made X amount of money, it's outside of the rules, and the only way they can truly verify it is if you made that money through their payment system.

    They aren't saying that you can't also offer it somewhere else...just that they have no way of verifying money you made on someone elses' platform.
    • [ 1 ] Thanks
    • [1] reply
    • Hi All

      Just wanted to chime in here with our view.

      To change a "thinking" pattern inside a forum like this you need to use a BIG STICK type approach first and then relax it back to normality later on.

      What the BIG STICK approach does is it sends the Cowboys and Shonky Sales People somewhere else to peddle their wares.

      This is Good News for all of us Real product creators.

      We released 4 products on another Platform in 2014 and sold almost 4000 units - this is well documented.

      The big thing is that we made Zero claims of Earnings on any of our Launches.

      We all need to look after each other in this industry and remember it "Is Not" about Rape and Pillage.

      We would all be better off without the Crooks in this industry.

      Regards

      Bronwyn and Keith
      • [ 2 ] Thanks
  • When it's all said and done this new rules is really just a
    chickens**t way of banning income claims since it would
    be pretty much impossible to have sold everything through
    their payment system.

    Why don't they just come out and say it... no more income claims.

    That would be a good thing.
    • [1] reply
    • If someone made $x selling WordPress plugins using Warrior Payments and they wanted to release a WSO on their experiences, why shouldn't they be able to include their sales total since it can be verified?

      Both the seller and the buyer win in that scenario.

      Sellers of competing items that didn't use Warrior Payments may feel left out, but everyone knows moving forward that the decision to use Warrior Payments or not impacts the ability to print income claims in a potential future WSO.
      • [2] replies
  • Though I don't have any kind of legal knowledge on subject but one thing is sure, I have never ever seen a 6 or 7 figure launch as WSO or outside WSO, which does not involve an income claim. And first thing that WF moderator should do is, delete all current WSO as almost every one of them have income claim in some or the other way, direct or indirect. I was browsing WSO main page, and I didn't even need to open threads, all of the have income claim as subject line.
    • [2] replies
    • they happen daily man. just not in the super small IM niche world you guys are in. The BIG im launches are really not big launches at all really. Many in the business world would laugh at the MEGA launches in the IM industry at think why do these guys keep playing small ball.

      You should step into the world of marketing and get out of the overhyped...super small niche of "how to be an IMer" niche.

      the truth is most real IMers are and never will be in the IM niche. its too dang small, competitive, and scammy.

      by the same token, you take most "gurus" and put them into highly competitive real world markets and they would struggle big time. they are preying on the weak and desperate and have been for years in the industry. And i know that a generalization, but if the shoe fits...wear it.
    • Banned
      You must have missed these monster launches in 2014.



      These product launch pages did not provide income claims and guarantees like what are being discussed on this thread.

      Cheers

      -don
      • [ 2 ] Thanks
  • from a principle standpoint, i believe it should all be on the buyer. i rarely get scammed these days because i learned numerous ways to spot them ... I am rarely disappointed in a product purchase because over the years i have learned how to make wise choices when it come to purchases.

    i guess i am very much an advocate for everyones right to fail just as much as them having the right to succeed. if you make crappy decisions, you dont do well... and that fine with me.

    if a person desntt want to learn the skill of assessing whether someone is feeding them bs or not, then no rule or law is going to save them from making bad decisions ultimately.

    that being said. their are definitely rules and laws sellers must follow whether we agree with them or not.
    • [ 2 ] Thanks
  • Good to see the forum owners taking a stand against the BS.



    -Chris
    • [ 1 ] Thanks
    • [1] reply
    • Hi Chris

      We like number #3 the best - a Million Bucks sounds Awesome.

      Hope we can do that by Monday!!

      Where do we sign???


      Regards

      Bronwyn and Keith
      • [ 1 ] Thanks
      • [1] reply
  • You just need to adapt your sales advertisement with something else.

    Not income claims, in this case
  • Subscriber: "Can you guarantee the income I will make?

    Me: "Neither myself or anyone else can do that."

    Subscriber: ...

    Would dreamers buy lotto tickets if all the advertising said, "Keep your money in your pocket. This is a fools bet."?

    Serious business people are not influenced by income claims.

    That being said, the people who operate this "model" will just move to the next platform.
  • I know what you said and you were wrong... you just continue
    to look silly by arguing about it.
  • I am shocked at how fast this thread grew, and I didn't even get to stay up to date with it at all.

    As a random update, my WSO did get approved, and there were no income claims. I think the biggest problem that really shocked me was how my thread had got rejected multiple times, and I never knew they made updates. All I have to say is, it's confusing to me still as to who can make income claims, (if you have to strictly only talk about making money from WSOs, which I think is pretty weird. ) But either way, I think this is a 50/50 situation.

    There is a bright side to this (like how nobody can just barge in, make an income claim, collect sales, and then move on.)

    But there is some downsides as well....and several people like Mark Hess has explained it pretty well. I'm glad multiple sides are being shared, and I guess we'll have to wait and see what happens.
    Overall, I am beginning to like the new change
  • This is all kind of extreme talk in my opinion.

    Let people just adapt. They always have. They always will.

    It's easy and like someone else already said... and it's true for me too.. when I purchase something, income claims aren't the determining factor.
  • Makes sense. That rule change BUILDS trust in the system. WSO sellers are the ultimate beneficiaries. The more people trust the system, the better.
  • [DELETED]
  • And yes, I am 100% sure that they will be doing this on a case by case basis on every single person trying to sell their WSO, which is good.
  • Simple question:

    What about income claims that are results of simple mathematics:
    for example:
    a wso about Amazon niche with products priced above $500
    $500 x 4%(min. aff commission) = $20

    Would it be ok to write something:
    "Make $20 every time someone buys using your aff link"
    or
    "You will make at least $20 when someone buys using your aff link"

    Is it still income claim, or not?

    Where is the line?
    And I'm not only asking WSO but in general, FTC etc.
    • [1] reply
    • Zero numbers are allowed. Saying people could make X amount is not allowed.
      • [1] reply
  • I think the main reason for this rule is because the Warrior Forum owners want to get more money in their pocket. They want to eliminate the competition (Warrior Plus, JVZOO) Let's tell it like it is.

    What they don't realize is the fact that guys who are most likely to create multiple WSOs in the future don't really need this forum so much. They have lots of JVs to help them with their launches and they can skip the Warrior forum completely.

    Bad move WF, you'll loose traffic and business big time.
    • [ 1 ] Thanks
  • Banned
    I find this very confusing. This was posted on the 3rd.

    Discover How I Easily Created And Launched This WSO In Under 48 Hours...Banked $1000’s In Profit...And How YOU Can Do The Same On Your Very FIRST Try!

    Is that or is that not an income claim and an income guarantee to boot?

    This is a WSO about creating WSOs in under 48 hrs and has a Warrior Payments button. So I guess that you verified that he "banked $1,000s and that his customers can do the same on their very first try."
    • [1] reply
    • In my opinion if they are limiting income claims to only those that are verified by them, they also should mark those WSOs that they have really verified those income claims. A banner at the top or something.
      this way buyers would know if this is true or not.
    • [DELETED]
      • [1] reply
  • I dont think the new rules are being 100% adhered to by WSO approval people.

    I noticed the WSO Suzanne mentioned and a few others including web design and automation bots / software so it seems its down to luck on who you get to approve your WSO.

    Also the rule about having a max of 3 offers on WSO and classifieds page 1 is not being enforced as one guy had 7 on p1 of classifieds.

    Try not to let it bother you.
  • I think that one mentioned by ForumGuru was posted before the new rules and has maybe been bumped.

    Dont know if bumped WSO's get re approved or if its automatic.

    Also dont know if the new rules apply to old WSO's being bumped.
    • [1] reply
    • Banned
      Yeah, it's a bumped WSO and it has been stated multiple times that the new rules do apply to old WSOs. This one and others have been reported using the red triangle...

      Cheers

      -don
  • Most of my WSOs have been backed with proof...

    AND I made this SO THAT I WILL COINCIDE WITH THE RULES.

    This is the reason why I made this thread so I won't be breaking any of the rules. Even when I'm not promoting something or selling something I get disrespected.

    If they decide to remove them, then it is COMPLETELY fine with me. I don't feel like I have to go back and edit every single one because they were all submitted before the rules were changed, AND I don't plan on bumping them.

    I'm guessing if they'll be getting mad about my PAST threads, then they should be able to correct every other WSO that has gotten WSO of The Day that either has zero income proof and nothing but income claims. But I doubt that'll ever happen considering that the forum makes good money off of those who bump those threads that have won WSO/Deal of The Day.
    • [2] replies
    • Maybe they should anyway as 'WSO of the day' was an award(?) given out by WSOpro and has nothing to do with the forum really.
      • [1] reply
    • A true income claim would be...

      1% of buyers will make the income I claimed in this adcopy

      20% will make somewhere between $1 and half my claim

      79% of you will make zero, zilch, nada

  • I'm glad this is happening.

    I'm tired of seeing these ridiculous WSOs.

    And I'm tired of the authors of these WSOs
    refusing to show income proof.
    • [1] reply
    • You realize that with the new rules, there will NO income proof whatsoever, right?

      Mark
      • [ 1 ] Thanks
  • Banned
    Supposedly they are no longer allowing "WSO award" mentions that were not given by WF.

    Daniel has addressed this...


    http://www.warriorforum.com/warrior-...wso-rules.html

    Cheers

    -don
  • As far as I am concerned, that still doesn't remove the idea that the guys behind big threads that DIDN'T win WSO of The Day won't be told to change their threads.

    Like the guy behind "$465 In 4 Hours". Will the mods tell him to change his threads? He has been bumping that WSO for years, and the forum is making great money from this one guy alone.

    Honestly, I really don't care if they choose not to or if they do. I won't be going to the WSO forum just to see if there are income claims or not. Whatever they decide, I have no problem with what the forum does.
  • Banned
    It looks like the peeps doing the approvals are missing some of the other new rules as well. Like the 3 Threads On The Front Page rule. They just approved 3 more of this guy's threads giving him 7 threads on the front page of the classifieds section.







    Cheers

    -don
    • [1] reply
    • Hi Don,

      I have corrected this and have communicated with the seller in regards to the new WSO rules that have been violated. This is a tricky rule as it comes down to when the seller chooses to pay for their approved thread.

      I appreciate you reporting this. Moving forward it would be more useful to report via the red triangle. We'll be able to address these reports much faster.


      • [ 1 ] Thanks
      • [1] reply
  • Banned
    @ Kay

    Here is a link to my June 20th, 2012 test thread...can you see it too?

    http://www.warriorforum.com/showthread.php?t=621746

    Cheers

    -don
    • [1] reply
    • Hi Kay and Don

      We have only ever been able to see our own test in the test forum.

      Ours is pretty exciting it says - This is a test page.

      We use it only for a few minutes each time we do up any BB Code to make sure that we haven't messed anything up and then put our - This is a test page message back up.

      We had no idea that anyone else aside from the mods could see this but took a natural precaution anyway.

      To hear that their are people who have been using the WF in this way is pretty disturbing and a sad testimony to some of the types we get on here.

      Let's find them and boot them out of the Forum.


      Regards

      Bronwyn and Keith
      • [1] reply
  • I haven't received an email yet, but then again, I don't check that email as often. I'll make sure my thread titles and the salescopy won't have any income claims. I just hope I can do it before January 12! I've got about 2-3 days to do it, so we'll see.

    I would like to know if this is an official statement because I haven't received an email yet, and neither is it in the announcements section of the WSO rules. Is it official already?

    Thanks for the link. I'll check it out.

    Edit: they haven't said anything in the link though. Hopefully they'll update it so that others who don't see this thread will know about this.
    • [2] replies
  • Is that thread where he says "click here to read the discussion about clarification etc" this thread? If so, that's really cool.
    • [2] replies
    • Banned
      No, it's not, it's one of the threads I had linked above. It's this thread, posted by the main man Alaister, which has been up since December 29th.

      Cheers

      -don
    • I don't think you've avoided a problem. You have ten (?) WSOs that appear to be active and open - and all have income claims. Only your most recent WSO meets the new rules.

      You may have one WSO left? My understanding is this rule applies to ANY active WSOs (i.e., open and available for sale) whether they get bumped or not.
      • [1] reply
Join the discussion

Next Topics on Trending Feed

  • 0

    WSO sales copy being Rejected! - Tips please

    So I've posted several WSOs in the past, and because of the new rules that just recently started several days ago, I can see that there are several things I'll have to do just a bit differently, including income proof. One thing I noticed that changed was even though I provided income proof to get my salescopy approved, it still wasn't. The admin told me to look at the rules on #17 of the announcement.