What do you think of Neil Patel's new ad?

The ad is a reflection of what goes on in his mind.

Don't blame him- having a hot girl sing your praises is best boost to your ego...ever.

this is not like him at all ...hmm

Poor taste for online marketing and the MMO niche? Hardly. If the ad is accurate, I think it is actually quite clever.

What I find in poor taste are marketers that

• Scam people out of their money
• Lie about their product or service
• Don't provide the level of quality or utility they claim
• Don't provide assistance or customer support
• Won't stand behind their sales
• Resort to spam in order to broadcast their message
• Claim to be rich and successful when they are not

Steve

Any regular person can tell that the ad is borderline politically correct/incorrect.
And if someone has to resort to this to get attention, it says a lot about his marketing skills.

I have to agree with Steve - it is somewhat clever, considering she is someone, as a Playmate, who quite literally takes her clothes off for money. That being said, I am NOT a fan of using sex to sell anything - I dislike it tremendously. Shoemaker has the same sort of thing going - "Hey, watch me help this hot chick make money."

While I find that stuff objectionable on an intellectual level, if you are going to get mad at every business that uses a hot girl to sell stuff, well, get ready to get pissed off at the world, because it is everywhere. Where is your disgust with all of the knuckleheads upon whom that ads works? Are they 'guiltless' in this, for without them, Neil would have never run such an ad.

How 'bout this? Where is your blame and offense towards the girl in all of this? Afterall, SHE is the one who uses 'sex' to make money and catapult her into fame, not Neil. He is just siphoning off a bit of the sex to sell his stuff. She is at least as 'guilty' as Neil in all of this, so why just point him out?

What do you think the demographic of Neil's audience is? Probably mostly filled with dudes in their 20s-30s. On top of that, us dudes are idiots when it comes to that sort of stuff. You ladies know that about us. That angle flat out works. And a hot chick will sell more to guys than a hot guy will sell to ladies.

Look, advertising is all bullshit (yes, I know you cannot 'lie' and I am simplifying and generalizing here). Turn on your TV, and it is paid actors (often good looking) pretending to be a customer of a company, with a happy life, and a happy family, etc. It is all fictional and made up, and not true. Selling a pipe dream, just like is oft sold here.

So, do you suggest new rules, where only certain emotions are being toyed with in advertising? What emotions are you trying to manipulate with your sig and what you are selling here? There is NO difference between what Neil is doing and what you are doing - he is just using a hot chick, while you are trying to trigger other emotions in people - like sloth and greed, and magic money falling from the sky if they buy your system ...

You know what I HATE about all of this stuff? The fact that to be successful in advertising (offline or online, small business or international corporation), you have to try to intentionally bypass a person's logic process to play and toy with their emotions. Copywriting = bullshitting and intentionally trying to manipulate someone via their emotions. And it ain't just Neil. The biggest and most respected corporations involve themselves in the game of advertising and manipulating people's emotions.

So, if society accepts it, the biggest and most respected companies engage in advertising bs, what's stopping Neil from 'playing by societal rules'? Or you, or me, etc.

I get it. I am not saying this stuff shouldn't be commented upon, but I don't know what to tell you - dudes are dudes, aren't we?

Don't blame Neil for doing something wrong if you are not willing to condemn everyone involved, including the lady involved here that uses sex and taking her clothes off to make money and all of the people that ad works on ...

Or it might be the losing end of a marketing test. Unless Patel opens up his books, we'll never know.

Personally, I don't find the ad all that objectionable. You have a pretty, healthy young woman dressed in relatively conservative jeans and tee shirt. Yes, she is a Playboy model, but that's a simple fact. All she's doing is teasing that Neal Patel showed her a different way to make a living.

It's not like he used her centerfold.

Back in the days of banner exchanges, one of my most successful ads showed a a woman's eyes open wide. The shot was cropped from the eyebrows to the top of the cheekbones. The tag line was "Wanna see what she's looking at? Click here."

I don't know Patel , but I look at this way this is our issue and not his , girl in the ad is not naked nor is she barely dressed but it is because she was a centerfold of some sort that has people upset!

Image if this had been a guy nothing more said ?! but if this was just a girl on the street and she said "he saved me from living on the street" we would be applauding him

So remember it is how your eye's and brain that look at the ads that makes this wrong

Jason

I think it's smart marketing. He used a Playboy Playmate to provide social proof. Nothing wrong with that.

Giggle.

When was the last time Neil Patel was the subject of a thread here in the forum?

When was the last time Neil was even mentioned in the forum (I did last month as a recommendation)?

How many viewers have gone off to find out about Neil and be smart enough to listen to what he says?

And ... when was the last time anyone here yelled SEX! to get everyone's attention? Heard it a lot in college.

It's human nature to stop, look, and listen to anything that has sex attached, especially when it involves a Bunny, plus IM is a male dominated industry, so....

Oh, and I've been given to understand that the many of the female IM'ers dress sexy and wear over-the-top makeup at the events. Been told that by two guys who hardly ever miss events for the networking ops.

Offhand, I think Neil was smart to put up the ad, and even this old great-grandmother thinks it's cute, and I am such a prude.

-Annie

its an ad. its meant to trigger emotional response. Patel knows what the hell he's doing.

I think this would have been more effective as a split screen.

Put that gal on one side and put someone a bit less attractive (or someone who looks like they are just waking up and not leaving the house) who is perhaps peeking over their shoulder and we see a naked back - who says,"Neil taught me how to make money and I don't even have to put my clothes on."

so the thing is ..SEX sells ?

If the ad appears on Niel's website, that's great--it gives him some credibility. If it appears anywhere else, it's not so great.

It really doesn't seem to sell anything other than Niel's credibility. He's not asking you to click the ad and sign-up for his coaching; If that's what he's hoping for in my opinion it's a failure.

What is it selling?

Why would I want to click that ad? It downright TELLS you there are no naked pics of Sara on the other end. So, there isn't even THAT incentive.

It DOES grab your attention, though, so there's that.

It's an ad - and the only thing I wonder is how much he paid the model....

Can someone please explain why this would be offensive?? I think the ad is clever.

He has nothing I would ever buy, but she can sell me anything. :-)

Cheers. - Frank

I think it's smart marketing.

The AD is brilliant! its easy to remember, its provocative, it conveys it's message quickly and powerfully. And most importantly we are talking about it.

I LOVE IT!!!!

I hope he makes a killing with it too. You think you know this man... in the same way that wives that have serial killer husbands think they know their spouse too. Let the man ball and do his thing, and have fun. He doesn't have to *conform* to industry "standards".

Plus he got money anyway.

WOW this is clever on so many levels.

The fact that she is real and was a playmate who actually does get paid to take off her clothes which is legit occupation in itself all combine to make the ad "raunch proof."

But he still manages to use sexy to make himself the professional alternative to using sexy to make money. Now that is rich.

Well, he has all of you talking about it and passing it around...

It's interesting, now that I think about it, I'm shocked no one else has taken this approach in this niche yet

The first time I saw this Ad, I went looking for that ''Sara Underwood'' to see if it's true that he changed her life, if it's true then we should be thankful to him for saving her ass from getting f**ked for the rest of her life.

However, I don't like how he is bragging about it, When you help someone do something, it is unethical to brag about it, especially in front of millions of people.

Besides from that, I think this Ad is GREAT! It is one of the best Ads that I ever seen,

this is the future of internet marketing i guess

He reminds me of this guy.

To me it's just which side of the force do you want to use? The Dark Side or the Light side?

Marketing can be powerful and successful either way. The Dark Side doesn't have to play by any rules that the light side does so it sometimes makes it easier. Here, not only does sex sell (and always will), but this ad will PISS women off. That will just draw more attention to it. And attention is the name of the game i.e. Paris Hilton built an entire empire on attention alone.

I actually think it's easier to peddle BS and it costs less to do so. So, it's really about do you want to make money ethically or not. If the goal is simply to make money, this works.

If his product is good, then the ends might justify the means and it appears here it does.

He's probably advertising on p*rn websites with this ad right?

I think this is solid marketing. Neil is a smart man and clearly knew this would get his name out there a bit more and have more people talking about him and the way he markets. Nothing wrong with this ad at all in my opinion.

No.1 Sex always sells.

No.2 If Neil is promoting in this way...it works!

No.3 Neil has a 'team' of people working for him. All 'his' ideas are not all his ideas.