You think the FTC's new rules are out to get you? Then I hope they do...

15 years ago

People like John Reese have been saying this for a long time now - transparency is the only way forward for web business these days.

John Reese uses tons of testimonials...in fact, at one point his sales letter for Traffic Secrets was nothing BUT testimonials. I think that's smart marketing.

I don't at all follow that someone who uses testimonials is looking to deceive. I have one product with over 500 UNSOLICITED testimonials...am I deceptive to want to share them, or does that just mean my product works?

It's amazing double-think, or perhaps just ego-protection that for years upon years marketers have known the value of great testimonials and now after an FTC guideline is published testimonials are now supposedly some sort of weak scam tactic?

People who get 90% of their customers doing nothing, are the same people who are attracting 90% of the wrong people in the first place!

Sorry, could not disagree more with this although it sure sounds clever.

As a consumer I want to be able to make the choice as to whether or not a product is right for me. If I buy an exercise bike and it becomes a coat hanger, that's my fault- no one else's.

As a marketer, it's important to identify your target customer and seek them out. However, whether it's 90% or 20% there is always going to be a segment of customers that are simply looking for entertainment rather than real solutions.

As for affiliate disclosure...those in the affiliate game should already be doing it, FTC or no. I agree with that. The biggest offenders are offshore and will continue to scam, lie and deceive no matter what the FTC says. Look at spam.

Thanks
1 reply

Signature

Tired of Article Marketing, Backlink Spamming and Other Crusty Old Traffic Methods?

Click Here.

{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[1264959].message }}

Jeremy Kelsall 15 years ago

Nick, you do copy, right?

Would you mind posting some examples of your copy so we can see whether you are walking the walk or not?

The FTC sucks - Plain and simple.

I agree that measures need to be taken to protect consumers - After all, I am a consumer

But, when you start involving government agencies on this scale - IT ISN'T A GOOD THING FOR ANYONE.
- [ 6 ] Thanks
Signature

A Blog With Reviews, Drama, and a Few Swear Words.
{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[1264988].message }}

Mark-Dickenson

15 years ago

Originally Posted by Nick Brighton

(AND HERE'S WHAT NOBODY HAS POINTED OUT YET: If you stop misleading people in the first place, then your average customer WILL get results, because you've already filtered/screened them through your marketing. People who get 90% of their customers doing nothing, are the same people who are attracting 90% of the wrong people in the first place! Duh? Don't these folks see the irony going on here?!!!)

First of all, you act like we are all scamming people and being misleading. That is not the case

Originally Posted by Nick Brighton

I can't understand why people are so worried. Here's the thing:

Thats because you don't live in the states. You see, many of these people in gov who write and enforce these rules/laws aren't fit to work at a McDonalds

I am being serious

I was in the mortgage business for 8 yrs and when gov got involved, they actually did more harm to the consumer when trying to come up with solutions.

It was obvious the people making these decisions didn't have a clue about finance. It was absolutley ridiculous

Now they are butting in with rules that are as vague as Ebay's so they can come after you if they get bored

Thankfully, I think it is going to be really hard to police, but I feel sorry for the person they make an example out of...and they will make an example out of them

[ 3 ] Thanks
1 reply

Signature

==>Discover the Secret of How an Ugly 2 Page Site Averages $1,117.94 per day!

{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[1265009].message }}

Steven Wagenheim

15 years ago

Nick, sorry but I can only agree with you to a point.

We all know that many people get no results with your product because
they don't use it...PERIOD.

So no matter how good your product is, you're still going to get 97% of
the people showing no results.

It's not always the quality of the product that's the problem, and I can
prove that with my own results of products I've purchased but I'm not
going to get into that.

You're painting a broad stroke of paint over a problem that is only partially
caused by poorly made products.

Or more to the point, YOU show me one product where 97% of the people
who bought it had good results with it...documented.

I'd be willing to bet my bank account that neither you or anyone else can
do that.

People are inherently lazy.

And no product, no matter how good, is going to change that.

[ 2 ] Thanks
3 replies

Signature

My Soundcloud Music Channel

{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[1265059].message }}

Nick Brighton

15 years ago

Originally Posted by LB

John Reese uses tons of testimonials...in fact, at one point his sales letter for Traffic Secrets was nothing BUT testimonials. I think that's smart marketing.

I don't at all follow that someone who uses testimonials is looking to deceive. I have one product with over 500 UNSOLICITED testimonials...am I deceptive to want to share them, or does that just mean my product works?

I'm not saying testimonials are bad. I'm saying that if you rely on exceptional testimonials to move product, then you require exceptional people to get results from your product.

And the rest of 'em? Well, screw 'em - they're lazy, right?

(major misconception).

Originally Posted by Jeremy Kelsall

Nick, you do copy, right?

Would you mind posting some examples of your copy so we can see whether you are walking the walk or not?

The FTC sucks - Plain and simple.

I agree that measures need to be taken to protect consumers - After all, I am a consumer

But, when you start involving government agencies on this scale - IT ISN'T A GOOD THING FOR ANYONE.

I write copy, but I don't get involved with testimonials. I do agree, that writing copy is a tricky game to balance these issues. But I never make claims in my copy that aren't true.

My point isn't about generic copy per se, more about the usage of claims./proof/testimonials, which directly related to the FTC's new rulings.

Originally Posted by Mark-Dickenson

First of all, you act like we are all scamming people and being misleading. That is not the case

No, no, no. Not at all. I'm not assuming or calling out anyone in particular. I'm just making a point about this issue, and the fact that there ARE people out there doing this.

Originally Posted by Steven Wagenheim

We all know that many people get no results with your product because
they don't use it...PERIOD.

I agree, but not all people who buy a product don't get results because they don't "use" it.

Originally Posted by Steven Wagenheim

So no matter how good your product is, you're still going to get 97% of
the people showing no results.

It's not always the quality of the product that's the problem, and I can
prove that with my own results of products I've purchased but I'm not
going to get into that.

You're painting a broad stroke of paint over a problem that is only partially
caused by poorly made products.

Or more to the point, YOU show me one product where 97% of the people
who bought it had good results with it...documented.

I'd be willing to bet my bank account that neither you or anyone else can
do that.

People are inherently lazy.

And no product, no matter how good, is going to change that.

you might be coming down on the wrong side here. Put it this way - if 100 people come to your site, and 97% are lazy tirekickers looking for an easy way to do something, and make a lot of money doing it, then a testimonial saying how easy it was to make $10,000 using your product is going to attract that 97% demographic.

However, putting "filters" in place which stipulate results are far from typical, and what you can REALLY expect, will filter out that 97% of lazy, uncapable demographic, leaving you with the real prospects who will run and fly with your product.

And then, you'll experience a much higher success rate of the people you sell your product to, see what I mean?

Thanks
2 replies

{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[1265155].message }}

Jeremy Kelsall

15 years ago

Nick,

It won't be long before you can't use words like "cash sucking" or "easy" in your headlines. After all, how do you prove something is "cash sucking" or "easy"?

Is something really "free" if someone has to give you an email address?

Is it really so easy that a 12 year old can do it?

What is the FTCs definition of easy?

What is their definition of auto-pilot?

Seriously, it's only a matter of time before our headlines have to read like this:

"BUY MY PRODUCT THAT IS IN THE GOVERNMENTS EYES A SCAM AND GOOD FOR NOTHING OTHER THAN A PAPER WEIGHT - BECAUSE I'M A NICE GUY..."

Marketing, at least in part is about evoking emotion and getting people to have a vision of what your product can do for them. How can you do that if the FTC for the most part won't let you say anything good about your product - or even share the great results someone has had with your product without following it up with:

"you probably won't have the same results because that is how life is - buy it anyway and if it doesn't work out you can sue me"

The government here in the states has already proven that they could screw up a bachelor party at the bunny ranch. Embracing them having more power over our business, should not be encouraged by ANYONE.

If someone screws you over, take them to court, sue them, report them to the authorities - But, giving someone that much control on the front-end is ridiculous.

[ 2 ] Thanks
2 replies

Signature

A Blog With Reviews, Drama, and a Few Swear Words.

{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[1265172].message }}

Nick Brighton

15 years ago

Originally Posted by Jeremy Kelsall

Nick,

It won't be long before you can't use words like "cash sucking" or "easy" in your headlines. After all, how do you prove something is "cash sucking" or "easy"?

Is something really "free" if someone has to give you an email address?

Is it really so easy that a 12 year old can do it?

What is the FTCs definition of easy?

What is their definition of auto-pilot?

Seriously, it's only a matter of time before our headlines have to read like this:

"BUY MY PRODUCT THAT IS IN THE GOVERNMENTS EYES A SCAM AND GOOD FOR NOTHING OTHER THAN A PAPER WEIGHT - BECAUSE I'M A NICE GUY..."

Marketing, at least in part is about evoking emotion and getting people to have a vision of what your product can do for them. How can you do that if the FTC for the most part won't let you say anything good about your product - or even share the great results someone has had with your product without following it up with:

"you probably won't have the same results because that is how life is - buy it anyway and if it doesn't work out you can sue me"

The government here in the states has already proven that they could screw up a bachelor party at the bunny ranch. Embracing them having more power over our business, should not be encouraged by ANYONE.

If someone screws you over, take them to court, sue them, report them to the authorities - But, giving someone that much control on the front-end is ridiculous.

I know where you're coming from, and yes, one of my sales letters does say "cash sucking" and "easily".

But at no point does it have testimonials that say "Nick's copy made me $10.000 and anyone who hires him will get the same, I can assure you!" type of crap.

I agree, even sales copy itself will come under the hammer sooner or later - but if you can substantiate it, and give reasoning, then when the men in black come knocking at the door, then you won't have any problems.

Either way, my whole point is about testimonials and claims of results...which is the whole new FTC ruling issue.

Thanks
2 replies

{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[1265203].message }}

Jeremy Kelsall

15 years ago

Originally Posted by Nick Brighton

I know where you're coming from, and yes, one of my sales letters does say "cash sucking" and "easily".

But at no point does it have testimonials that say "Nick's copy made me $10.000 and anyone who hires him will get the same, I can assure you!" type of crap.

I agree, even sales copy itself will come under the hammer sooner or later - but if you can substantiate it, and give reasoning, then when the men in black come knocking at the door, then you won't have any problems.

Either way, my whole point is about testimonials and claims of results...which is the whole new FTC ruling issue.

No, but some of the testimonials say "fast" and "great", right?

Who gets to decide what fast and great mean?

Do you now have to provide a disclaimer that says what your average turnaround time is? Or put an anonymous poll up for your customers to see how many of them think it was "great"?

I know it probably seems trivial, but it's only a matter of time before the regulations get tighter and tighter - especially on the "small guys" like us online business owners.

Thanks

Signature

A Blog With Reviews, Drama, and a Few Swear Words.

{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[1265224].message }}

rtrotter

15 years ago

Originally Posted by Nick Brighton

...I agree, even sales copy itself will come under the hammer sooner or later - but if you can substantiate it, and give reasoning, then when the men in black come knocking at the door, then you won't have any problems.

The problem is, when the men in black come knocking it cost money, even if you can prove you did nothing wrong.

I liken this new rule to a state saying the speed limit is what ever you want as long as it is safe. That is very subjective and the policeman that pulls you over obviously did not have same view of safety as you, put you still have to pay.

If they can write the rules so a 12 year old can read my sales copy and know whether or not it is okay, then I would probably agree the rule is one I can follow. When everyone has a different view of compliance then there is a problem.

Also, think about the Pareto's rule. You can probably count on 80% of people buying your product doing nothing with it. It's human nature.

[ 1 ] Thanks
1 reply

Signature

Ping All Your Feed On Auto-Pilot
www.kping.com

{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[1265305].message }}

JohnMcCabe

15 years ago

First off, I think many people are giving a government agency credit for way too much ambition. Agencies don't "get bored and come after people", they figure out more and better ways to shuffle and stack paper to justify their budgets.

I'm not sure how the words 'typical' or 'generally expected' came to mean average. "Average" has a strict mathematical meaning that depends on a fixed sample. Actively sold products can't have "average" results, because the sample changes every time a product is either sold or refunded. Requiring a statement of "average results" would be unenforceable, IMO.

If your MMO system is set up to generate $10 per sale, and if the user gets the 1% conversion often touted as typical, then the user can "generally expect" to make $10 for every hundred prospects. If the user fails to do anything, they can "generally expect" to make nothing.

Unless your sales copy claims otherwise.

The FTC isn't out to get you. That would be too much like real work. Many times rules are written very vaguely to make them easier to not enforce.

[Insert standard CYA] IMO, unless you're burning up late night TV or your product actually kills someone, there isn't much to worry about.

Thanks
2 replies

{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[1265373].message }}

bobsedge

15 years ago

Originally Posted by JohnMcCabe

First off, I think many people are giving a government agency credit for way too much ambition. Agencies don't "get bored and come after people", they figure out more and better ways to shuffle and stack paper to justify their budgets.

I'm not sure how the words 'typical' or 'generally expected' came to mean average. "Average" has a strict mathematical meaning that depends on a fixed sample. Actively sold products can't have "average" results, because the sample changes every time a product is either sold or refunded. Requiring a statement of "average results" would be unenforceable, IMO.

If your MMO system is set up to generate $10 per sale, and if the user gets the 1% conversion often touted as typical, then the user can "generally expect" to make $10 for every hundred prospects. If the user fails to do anything, they can "generally expect" to make nothing.

Unless your sales copy claims otherwise.

The FTC isn't out to get you. That would be too much like real work. Many times rules are written very vaguely to make them easier to not enforce.

[Insert standard CYA] IMO, unless you're burning up late night TV or your product actually kills someone, there isn't much to worry about.

I agree with you that government agencies are generally lazy and uninspired.

But the FTC has a very specific agenda. They target certain industries and go after deep pockets and headlines.

Their investigations cost hundreds of thousands of dollars that line the pockets of lawyers, accountants, etc. There is usually very little money left for the consumers.

If you happen to be in an industry of interest, you will be a target if you are one of the big boys on the block and if you hit the radar with the Better Business Bureau. The BBB has become their watchdog.

Thanks

{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[1265394].message }}

psresearch

15 years ago

Originally Posted by JohnMcCabe

First off, I think many people are giving a government agency credit for way too much ambition. Agencies don't "get bored and come after people", they figure out more and better ways to shuffle and stack paper to justify their budgets.

I'm not sure how the words 'typical' or 'generally expected' came to mean average. "Average" has a strict mathematical meaning that depends on a fixed sample. Actively sold products can't have "average" results, because the sample changes every time a product is either sold or refunded. Requiring a statement of "average results" would be unenforceable, IMO.

If your MMO system is set up to generate $10 per sale, and if the user gets the 1% conversion often touted as typical, then the user can "generally expect" to make $10 for every hundred prospects. If the user fails to do anything, they can "generally expect" to make nothing.

Unless your sales copy claims otherwise.

The FTC isn't out to get you. That would be too much like real work. Many times rules are written very vaguely to make them easier to not enforce.

[Insert standard CYA] IMO, unless you're burning up late night TV or your product actually kills someone, there isn't much to worry about.

Wow. Tell this to the FTC attorneys who have NO paralegals who put in 12-14 hour+ days AND weekends.

How exactly are these new laws "justifying a budget" that is already way too small? and how are the litigators doing "no real work"?

I agree that people are overreacting but not at ALL for the reasons you've put forth.

Even though there are aspects of the new guidelines that will make it easier to prosecute, the FTC is STILL going to prioritize cases and go after the most egregious and pervasive offenders first and there are MULTIPLE things that have to happen before any potential case would likely even get on a list for their consideration.

...or I would say the most egregious cases that they can *win* - and that's unfortunate because the very worst criminals seem to be able to avoid prosecution for long periods of time since it's so easy to set up anonymous corporations tied to secret bank accounts as was recently proven by Jason Sharman's study which was discussed in the Economist here:

"In other cases Mr Sharman formed companies by providing no more than a scanned copy of his driving licence. In contrast, when trying to open accounts in Bermuda and Switzerland, he was asked for documentation such as notarised copies of his birth certificate. "In practice OECD countries have much laxer regulation on shell corporations than classic tax havens," Mr Sharman concludes. "And the US is the worst on this score, worse than Liechtenstein and worse than Somalia."

Thanks
1 reply

Signature

Work At Home Truth - Extra Income Edition | Swindles.org

{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[1265661].message }}

Justin Jordan 15 years ago

Honestly, even if you are dishonest and a scammer, the FTC is not a huge threat. I knew someone who worked for a financial planner who was both incompetent and massively dishonest, and ultimately lost a few million dollars worth of customer's money.

Amongst other things, he was forging client signatures (which is what caused my friend to resign, actually) destroying records, falsifying records, tranferring money from other accounts when clients asked for money that actually no longer had and, generally, a laundry list of other crap.

The FTC knew about this at least seven years ago, and while they did take some action, after having him directly reported, he was able to stay in business until earlier this year, when the FBI and a few other entities became involved.

(As a side bar, he's being criminally prosecuted with some zeal largely because the Bernie Madoff thing made this sort of thing newsworthy, so the local medi became involved enough to pressure law enforcement to become directly involved.)

The FTC is limited in people and money. They simply can't spend the time rooting out small time operations on any real scale. It's not effective use of their time and money. So the odds are good that for most people, the FTC will never notice them.

Even if the FTC does notice them, the most likely outcome isn't some kind of business devastation. They'll simply have to change how they're operating. For the vast majority of people, even the real con artists, you're unlikely to be making enough money or scamming enough people to be worth going after.

If you're worried about the FTC, then you probably should change the way you do business, but most of the fear is pretty irrational.
- [ 1 ] Thanks
{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[1265721].message }}

psresearch 15 years ago

Originally Posted by Jeremy Kelsall

Marketing, at least in part is about evoking emotion and getting people to have a vision of what your product can do for them.

I think this is closer to the real problem here.

How many of us HAVE bought products based on the vision and - heaven forbid - even the hype - and have BENEFITED from the purchase and might NOT have bought otherwise.
- Thanks
Signature
Work At Home Truth - Extra Income Edition | Swindles.org
{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[1265705].message }}

Steven Wagenheim

15 years ago

Originally Posted by Nick Brighton

And then, you'll experience a much higher success rate of the people you sell your product to, see what I mean?

First of all, if you look at almost all of my sales pages (minus a few
exceptions) you will find...

1. No testimonials.
2. No promises.

And only a few even have income claims of myself or others.

I've been greatly criticized for not "selling" hard enough and not using
testimonials. Personally, I hate that kind of marketing.

But even without it, it's rare that I'll get somebody write to me and say,
"Thanks, this stuff really works." No, instead, most of the emails I get
read like this.

"I'm sorry but I'm just starting to get to you <product name> that I
bought last year. I can't seem to find the download though. Can you
send me another link."

This is the nature of the MMO niche. The majority of the people are
looking for a quick fix. Not making promises doesn't discourage these
people. The only thing that will is if you specifically put on your sales
page...

"You must work very hard to make this work. It will take hours of your
time and it won't bring results right away. It could take 3 to 6 months
before you will get the kind of results that I am achieving (which I can't
share with you because the FTC won't let me)"

If I do that, my sales will go from 300 plus a month to about 30 plus a
month and I'll need to start selling products outside of the MMO niche.

But why should I have to?

The products I create, sharing the tactics I use, actually earn me a good
living each month. So if people actually used them, they'd actually have
some success.

Point is, it's not that I'm selling snake oil. It's that people are lazy and no
copy is going to make them not be lazy. All it will do is keep them from
becoming customers.

Again, if I want to do that, I might as well not be in business at all.

And mind you, that is with sales pages that are absolutely within FTC
guidelines. If I made the kind of sales pages that everybody else did, I'd
be making 3,000 sales a month instead of only 300.

And as somebody asked above (forget who it was) let's see your sales
pages and see how brutally honest they are.

Thanks
1 reply

Signature

My Soundcloud Music Channel

{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[1265207].message }}

Nick Brighton

15 years ago

Originally Posted by Black Hat Cat

Being from the UK, it's no surprise you're pretty much conditioned to accept overbearing government intrusion with barely a second thought.

Well I guess if I was more "black hat" I wouldn't need to worry about being honest, legit and transparent, and care about whether consumers get treated the way they deserve to be, right?

If the government is coming down hard on something, it's because there is substantial cause for concern in the first place (ie. lots of people protesting, making claims, complaining etc).

If it weren't for such governing bodies, then you, me and the rest of the world would be susceptible to being scammed day after day...or at the least, misled with our hard earned money.

I really can't see why this is such a monkey wrench for so many people, when getting around it/dealing with it is pretty easy.

@Jeremy - I agree, it could get out of hand, but as I say, rulings come from existing problems. If people play nice in the first place, then problems won't occur so much in the first place.

Thanks
1 reply

{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[1265249].message }}

Nick Brighton

15 years ago

Originally Posted by bobsedge

Nick,

The sad thing is that in a week or two after we are all done discussing this, nothing will change.

Look at the industries that have been under attack in recent years by the FTC- debt and credit. The FTC selectively goes after a few businesses but the rest go about their business as usual playing a game of Russian Roulette.

And you know what, the odds are in their favor that they will never be touched. This will be particularly true on the internet where the state regulators have no impact at all.

I totally agree, and yes, it is sad. Still, gives us a reminder of how to treat people, huh?

Thanks

{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[1265253].message }}

CDarklock

15 years ago

Originally Posted by Steven Wagenheim

We all know that many people get no results with your product because they don't use it...PERIOD.

So no matter how good your product is, you're still going to get 97% of
the people showing no results.

Want to know how to deal with this?

Go to one of those "Rich Dad" real estate seminars in your area, and pony up the few hundred bucks they want for advanced training. A major selling point throughout that class is that 98% of people who enter the real estate market fail.

But not you, right?!

Who cares if you want to do real estate or not, you can see how it converts. It's worth the price.

IM is a lot like real estate. Not only do most people in it get no results, but they try to pursue it as a full-time income... and fail miserably. Then they blame their failure on the industry, not themselves.

We like to blame the industry, too. We like to tell people that it's not their fault, because people lied to them. We'll tell them the secrets those gurus don't want them to know. Damn gurus. Keeping those secrets. This industry is full of liars and thieves.

Wait a minute, WTF? Why would you do that? You're working in this industry. Those are your friends. Those are your colleagues. They're your mentors and partners and clients. And do you think that helps matters? What do you think they hear after they've tried your product and still fail?

"Here, buy my product because this industry is full of liars and thieves... thanks for the money, sucker!"

Look, there's still an us and them, okay? There's an "us" who succeed and a "them" who don't. But stop walking over to them and pointing at us. You're part of us. You're not one of them. They know it. You're not fooling anyone. Try excusing their failures (a time-tested persuasion method) in some other way, okay?

Thanks
2 replies

Signature

"The Golden Town is the Golden Town no longer. They have sold their pillars for brass and their temples for money, they have made coins out of their golden doors. It is become a dark town full of trouble, there is no ease in its streets, beauty has left it and the old songs are gone." - Lord Dunsany, The Messengers

{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[1266318].message }}

marciayudkin

15 years ago

If you rely on "over seasoning" your marketing copy, or your offers, or the use of 3rd party testimonials...or whatever else it takes to make a commission or sale, and you can't make money without the hyperbole, then one this is obviously clear...

...you can't deliver enough value to your visitors in the first place.

This is way off base.

I have been teaching people for years that the very best kind of testimonials are "results" testimonials. These testimonials may be 100% true, and provably so, and yet now with the new regulations, they may create more trouble than they're worth because they must be accompanied not just by disclaimers but also by statements about the results that the average person gets from the program in question.

There is ample reason for completely honest, ethical and non-hypey marketers to be concerned about the new FTC rules and to want to know what changes they need to make in their marketing because of them.

Marcia Yudkin

[ 1 ] Thanks
1 reply

Signature

Check out Marcia Yudkin's No-Hype Marketing Academy for courses on copywriting, publicity, infomarketing, marketing plans, naming, and branding - not to mention the popular "Marketing for Introverts" course.

{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[1266959].message }}

LB

15 years ago

Originally Posted by marciayudkin

This is way off base.

I have been teaching people for years that the very best kind of testimonials are "results" testimonials. These testimonials may be 100% true, and provably so, and yet now with the new regulations, they may create more trouble than they're worth because they must be accompanied not just by disclaimers but also by statements about the results that the average person gets from the program in question.

There is ample reason for completely honest, ethical and non-hypey marketers to be concerned about the new FTC rules and to want to know what changes they need to make in their marketing because of them.

Marcia Yudkin

Thank you. At least there is another voice of reason when it comes to testimonials.

What kind of testimonial is, "Thanks for your product, you're a great guy!"?

Thanks

Signature

Tired of Article Marketing, Backlink Spamming and Other Crusty Old Traffic Methods?

Click Here.

{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[1267361].message }}

Steven Wagenheim

15 years ago

Originally Posted by CDarklock

Want to know how to deal with this?

Go to one of those "Rich Dad" real estate seminars in your area, and pony up the few hundred bucks they want for advanced training. A major selling point throughout that class is that 98% of people who enter the real estate market fail.

But not you, right?!

Who cares if you want to do real estate or not, you can see how it converts. It's worth the price.

IM is a lot like real estate. Not only do most people in it get no results, but they try to pursue it as a full-time income... and fail miserably. Then they blame their failure on the industry, not themselves.

We like to blame the industry, too. We like to tell people that it's not their fault, because people lied to them. We'll tell them the secrets those gurus don't want them to know. Damn gurus. Keeping those secrets. This industry is full of liars and thieves.

Wait a minute, WTF? Why would you do that? You're working in this industry. Those are your friends. Those are your colleagues. They're your mentors and partners and clients. And do you think that helps matters? What do you think they hear after they've tried your product and still fail?

"Here, buy my product because this industry is full of liars and thieves... thanks for the money, sucker!"

Look, there's still an us and them, okay? There's an "us" who succeed and a "them" who don't. But stop walking over to them and pointing at us. You're part of us. You're not one of them. They know it. You're not fooling anyone. Try excusing their failures (a time-tested persuasion method) in some other way, okay?

CD, first off, I think you're a really cool guy. Love the OT participations
for all the music threads and stuff, so I have no beef with you. Also, I
see you're a copywriter. Great. I write my own copy...well enough to make
6 figures a year though I am in no way a professional and freely admit
that.

But I'm also no idiot. I have a very logical mind. And when the FTC now
says to me that I can't have a testimonial that says...

"I used Steve's product and in my first week I made over $200"

without showing average results (which I can't do, obviously)

and when I can no longer tell personal stories like...

"I was broke, but then I discovered this very simple system that now
allows me to make a modest $200 a week from it on autopilot"

without showing average results (which I can't do, obviously)

What the F***K is left?

We all know, even we average copywriters, that features don't sell.
Benefits sell. But we can no longer state any benefits of a product
because in almost all cases, those benefits involve making some kind of
a claim, even if it's just "get your work done faster."

What's faster? And how fast is the average result?

Do you see what the problem is with this new law? It is hurting the honest
person with an honest product a lot more than it's hurting the crook,
because the crook isn't going to care. He's going to keep writing his copy,
open up Swiss accounts to keep hiding from the feds and it will be
business as usual.

So I challenge you, right here and now, to write me effective copy for
say, a money making product, that will pass FTC guidelines and STILL get
the job done AS effectively as BEFORE the guidelines.

I don't think you or Michel Fortin or God himself can do it.

Because you can't make something out of nothing.

That's why this law is pure hell on earth and is going to effectively
destroy a lot of businesses.

Thanks

Signature

My Soundcloud Music Channel

{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[1267118].message }}

Yankabilly

15 years ago

Steven,
Hit, The NAIL ON THE HEAD WITH THAT ONE:

Originally Posted by Steven Wagenheim

Nick, sorry but I can only agree with you to a point.

We all know that many people get no results with your product because
they don't use it...PERIOD.

So no matter how good your product is, you're still going to get 97% of
the people showing no results.

It's not always the quality of the product that's the problem, and I can
prove that with my own results of products I've purchased but I'm not
going to get into that.

You're painting a broad stroke of paint over a problem that is only partially
caused by poorly made products.

Or more to the point, YOU show me one product where 97% of the people
who bought it had good results with it...documented.

I'd be willing to bet my bank account that neither you or anyone else can
do that.

People are inherently lazy.

And no product, no matter how good, is going to change that.

Here's My Two Cents Worth:

Our GOVERNMENT the good old USA, can't handle their OWN problems. They are always Raising our Taxes or something, Giving Money Away To The WRONG PEOPLE, Always, Always putting there NOSE where it don't belong, have for years now... They have proven Time & Time Again they CAN'T HANDLE MONEY, They themselves Run the Biggest Money Racket Going... They Need To Start Looking At Them SELF'S FIRST and QUIT Lying To US so much, before they talk about adding a New Law...

I totally agree that Most People don't do anything with "The Products" they buy, because There Lazy, Yes, this Includes Me Sometimes... and that's a lot & most of the problem, why it don't & won't work. The Product, can't make "You TAKE ACTION" you have to do that yourself.

Most People Still Believe When They Get On The Internet (and even in there daily lives on the street as well) That If They Do SOMETHING That They Are Going To Get RICH in 24hrs or Less (It's Called A Dream). And that's not always a bad thing and it doesn't make them bad for thinking that way either. But life for the Most Part doesn't work that way...

Yes, some People on the Internet & even on the Streets sell That Same Dream to others and (That's Wrong) but it's OK, that Radio & TV does it everyday.. (What's Uncle Sam doing about them) Also most of the People In The World live in a Fantasy all there LIFE one way or another...

I Truly Love This Country, but I don't like how our Government runs it... Most of all, How The People Here Are Treated Once They Reach A Certain Age...

Understand To Own A Business - You First Must Have A Understanding Of How To Run A Business...

Thanks To All
John

Thanks

Signature

Discover A SIMPLE System For Generating Fast & Easy Money On Money On Complete Auto Pilot!
Grab This Free Report Now!

{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[1267391].message }}

bobsedge

15 years ago

I think claims will become a thing of the past as it has in franchising in the US. With franchising, and I believe with MLM's as well, if you make a claim you need to substantiate it. To say the least, you will almost never find claims any longer in those two sectors.

When you purchase a franchise, the franchisor gives you references you can call but they are also obligated to give you a complete list of all franchisees with their contact information.

The thing with the FTC is that they intentionally keep rules broad so they can use discretion on how they implement the rules. Only time will tell on how they intend to enforce this.

Thanks

{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[1265236].message }}

Black Hat Cat

Banned 15 years ago

Originally Posted by Nick Brighton

Here's my take on the new FTC rulings regarding affiliates, sponsors and other marketing activities for profit online...

Being from the UK, it's no surprise you're pretty much conditioned to accept overbearing government intrusion with barely a second thought.

Thanks
1 reply

{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[1265237].message }}

marlon

15 years ago

Bro,

I disagree on average results.

The average person reads 2 books a year, believes in ufo's and can't spell potato.

The average ebook buyer does NOT read more than a few chapters. I embed tracking links
in my products to know how far people read.

The average consumer of how to information topics buys things for research and never INTENDS to do anything. They are curious or doing research.

And the PROOF is on your book shelf. Either you're average and don't have many books there at all. Or if you do, how many have you actually read cover to cover and followed the
majority of the advice in them?

Honestly.

It's not how books or info products are read nor used.

I have no problem with the law. But as far as average results, I don't care how good the
product is, the average results won't be good.

On average how many people who read Dale Carnegie actually go out smile, listen and
stop doing all the stuff he tells you? Like about none!

How many people who read Think and Grow Rich actually write down the stuff he says
on an index card and read it 3x per day as he instructs for more than 1 week?

Very few.

My ex client (passed away) was worth $600 million. He made that after reading Think
and Grow Rich. When people would come to him for business advice, he'd tell them to go
read that book THEN come back for advice.

In all his years, not ONE person did that.

Marlon

[ 6 ] Thanks
1 reply

Signature

[CENTER]Free in depth weekly newsletters on my blog |

{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[1265254].message }}

Steven Wagenheim

15 years ago

Originally Posted by marlon

Bro,

I disagree on average results.

The average person reads 2 books a year, believes in ufo's and can't spell potato.

The average ebook buyer does NOT read more than a few chapters. I embed tracking links
in my products to know how far people read.

The average consumer of how to information topics buys things for research and never INTENDS to do anything. They are curious or doing research.

And the PROOF is on your book shelf. Either you're average and don't have many books there at all. Or if you do, how many have you actually read cover to cover and followed the
majority of the advice in them?

Honestly.

It's not how books or info products are read nor used.

I have no problem with the law. But as far as average results, I don't care how good the
product is, the average results won't be good.

On average how many people who read Dale Carnegie actually go out smile, listen and
stop doing all the stuff he tells you? Like about none!

How many people who read Think and Grow Rich actually write down the stuff he says
on an index card and read it 3x per day as he instructs for more than 1 week?

Very few.

My ex client (passed away) was worth $600 million. He made that after reading Think
and Grow Rich. When people would come to him for business advice, he'd tell them to go
read that book THEN come back for advice.

In all his years, not ONE person did that.

Marlon

Marlon...thank you.

You said, what I was stumbling over, much better than I could have ever
said it.

Yeah, that's about the size of it.

Thanks

Signature

My Soundcloud Music Channel

{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[1265264].message }}

Nick Brighton

15 years ago

Stephen, I'm not attacking you personally my friend. Nor anyone else for that matter. My post is a way to make a point about the correct way to conduct business as an affiliate, and how to use ethical, honest testimonials without misleading your prospects.

You are obviously already doing that, judging by your comments in your last post!

Thanks

{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[1265240].message }}

bobsedge

15 years ago

Nick,

The sad thing is that in a week or two after we are all done discussing this, nothing will change.

Look at the industries that have been under attack in recent years by the FTC- debt and credit. The FTC selectively goes after a few businesses but the rest go about their business as usual playing a game of Russian Roulette.

And you know what, the odds are in their favor that they will never be touched. This will be particularly true on the internet where the state regulators have no impact at all.

Thanks

{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[1265242].message }}

sbucciarel

Banned 15 years ago

People who are protesting and twisting the entire thing around to preposterous levels are probably those with the most to worry about. It's all spelled out pretty clearly in this thread, but for those who don't want to go absorb the info, here's the gist of it.

http://www.warriorforum.com/main-int...ould-read.html

Originally Posted by Steven Carl Kelly

I've seen a lot of what I consider "overreaction" to the new FTC guides. Bear in mind that these new guides apply to the "Use of Endorsements and Testimonials in Advertising". Ads not using endorsements and testimonials are not addressed herein.

I see far too many good, honest Warriors fretting unnecessarily about this and that's why I want to try and clarify a few a points.

Regarding ads with testimonials and endorsements, I seem to see a lot of folks particularly concerned on the issue of disclosing "average results". First, understand that the guide doesn't address "average" results but instead addresses "generally expected" results. There's a very specific reason for that: because the FTC recognizes that it would be impractical to survey every one of your customers and to create a true mathematical average result.

From the FTC guide:
For example, the term "generally expected results" is used rather than "average" in order to convey that this disclosure would not have to be based on an exact mathematical average of users of the product, such as might be developed from a valid survey of actual users.

In addition, you must also understand that the FTC guide further qualifies the generally expected results to apply to "the depicted circumstances" in the testimonial.

From the FTC guide:
Advertisers are not required to identify a "typical consumer" of their product and then determine what result that consumer achieved. Rather, the required disclosure in this circumstance is "the generally expected performance in the depicted circumstances." Thus, advertisers are provided some reasonable leeway to make this disclosure. For example, the term "generally expected results" is used rather than "average" in order to convey that this disclosure would not have to be based on an exact mathematical average of users of the product, such as might be developed from a valid survey of actual users. For example, substantiation for a "generally expected results" disclosure could be extrapolated from valid, well-controlled clinical studies of patients matching the profile of the persons in the ad, even though consumers' real world results are not likely to match exactly the results in the clinical study.

Pay particular attention to the above. You can use the "depicted circumstances" to limit the "generally expected results" you need to disclose. Limit the circumstances and you may limit the disclosure.

From the FTC guide:
In other cases, the advertiser may be able to limit the scope of the disclosure by limiting the circumstances depicted in the advertisement. For example, if all of the testimonials used in an advertisement are clearly identified as persons who have been members of a weight loss clinic for at least one year, the disclosure can be based on performance data from that group. In any event, the disclosure of generally expected results should clearly identify the group from which the data were obtained.

You can also use scientific principles to substantiate.

From the FTC guide:
In some instances, advertisers may rely on generally accepted scientific principles (e.g., the average individual needs a net calorie deficit of 3,500 calories to lose 1 pound) to determine generally expected results.

So you say that most of your customers won't even bother to implement your program and thus your "average" result will be a big fat ZERO? The FTC recognizes this as well.

From the FTC guide:
The Commission recognizes that differences in physiology and commitment will affect the results that individual consumers will get from a particular weight loss or fitness product or program. The proposed revisions to Section 255.2 do not prescribe a uniform one-size-fits-all disclaimer, however, and an advertiser could take these factors into consideration in crafting a disclosure. With meaningful disclosures, consumers not only would have a realistic sense of what they can expect from a product or service, but could also take away the message that if they dedicate themselves as much as the testimonialist did, they might achieve even more.

The FTC even recognizes that you, as a marketer, may not even have the necessary information to be able to disclose generally expected performance. Does that mean you can't use testimonials at all? Absolutely NOT!

From the FTC guide:
Nevertheless, as the Commission recognized in the November 2008 Federal Register notice, 73 FR at 72382, some advertisers may not have the information available to them to be able to disclose the generally expected performance of their product or service to consumers. In these cases, advertisers using testimonials need either to exercise care not to convey a typicality claim, or to rely on statements of general endorsement of the product, e.g., "I've tried many products and this was the best."

Great! You can still use testimonials that offer an OPINION without any disclaimer of generally expected performance. Just don't use testimonials that make a SPECIFIC CLAIM about SPECIFIC PERFORMANCE.

Joe Schmoe says: "I used Jay's new Internet Money Suction Filter System and I made $1.2 million in 17-and-a-half minutes!"

That requires a disclaimer of generally expected performance.

Joe Schmoe says: "I've bought nearly two dozen online money-making guides, and I can say that Jay's new Internet Money Suction Filter System is by far the best I've ever purchased."

No disclaimer required.

Take a step back and look at what the FTC guide is requiring and what it is allowing. If you're a legitimate, concerned, serious marketer then you should be able to easily determine that these guides are a GOOD thing for you because it should, in at least some way, cut down on the number of unscrupulous marketers who have no qualm in offering false claims for their products. You will also see exactly how you can use these guides properly to ensure that you can continue to effectively market your products without fear of running afoul of the FTC.

Don't freak out. Be calm, examine all of your marketing materials, and revise them as appropriately. If you're like me, you may eventually come to see that this HELPS marketers like you and I.

Thanks
1 reply

{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[1265251].message }}

Kevin AKA Hubcap

15 years ago

Of course, because everyone who questions the necessity of additional government regulations is obviously a scammer.

Kevin

Originally Posted by sbucciarel

People who are protesting and twisting the entire thing around to preposterous levels are probably those with the most to worry about. It's all spelled out pretty clearly in this thread, but for those who don't want to go absorb the info, here's the gist of it.

http://www.warriorforum.com/main-int...ould-read.html

[ 3 ] Thanks
1 reply

{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[1265760].message }}

psresearch 15 years ago

Terrific post by Steven.

Thanks for the link, Kevin!
- Thanks
Signature
Work At Home Truth - Extra Income Edition | Swindles.org
{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[1265771].message }}

JayXtreme

15 years ago

I did see the point in the OP..

But I think Marlon summed it up quite well

Peace

Jay

Thanks

Signature

Bare Murkage.........

{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[1265278].message }}

bobsedge

15 years ago

Marlon,

You're right, but who cares.

The FTC does not like claims. On the companies they go after, claims is almost always the first cause of action, period.

Businesses basically have three choices.

1. Stop making claims
2. Make claims but stay small and under the radar
3. Make claims, grow big, and go to bed at night praying that your company is not the one they select to go after

Thanks

{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[1265282].message }}

Dan C. Rinnert

15 years ago

Originally Posted by Nick Brighton

The bottom line is - sites that offer value and ethical, honest and transparent content will gain more trust from their visitors than those that mislead instead.

Honest marketers will continue to be honest. Though, some may opt to get into a different field, not because they were dishonest, but because they fear the heavy-hand of government stepping in.

Dishonest marketers will continue to be dishonest.

The FTC may go after some of them and make examples out of them, to show the public they are going to make a strong effort to clean things up and "protect" the consumer.

Here's the rub...

Dishonest marketers will continue to be dishonest. Some may be outside U.S. jurisdiction, either because they are legally outside U.S. jurisdiction or because it may be too impractical to go after them where ever they are.

However, because the FTC may have made a big deal out of making an example out of some marketers, the public is going to be more likely to have the perception that things are being cleaned up. So, if a marketer is making a claim, it must be true!

As a result, more people will end up being scammed. And then tougher regulations will come down, and the cycle will begin anew.

At any rate, what is often the case is that tougher laws or regulations negatively impact honest, law-abiding businesses more than they do the businesses that were actually causing harm.

The CPSIA is a good example of that. That was passed as a knee-jerk reaction by politicians when lead-tainted toys appeared in the marketplace. The CPSIA requires (expensive!) testing of children's products for lead. The big corporations that imported the lead-tainted toys were actually in favor of the law! For them, the expense of lead testing is a drop in the bucket. But, for smaller businesses, those that weren't even found to be selling problematic toys, the expenses are too high.

Increased laws and regulations may be well-meaning but it is often the case that they cause more problems than they resolve.

[ 2 ] Thanks
1 reply

Signature

Dan's content is irregularly read by handfuls of people. Join the elite few by reading his blog: dcrBlogs.com, following him on Twitter: dcrTweets.com or reading his fiction: dcrWrites.com but NOT by Clicking Here!

Dan also writes content for hire, but you can't afford him anyway.

{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[1265329].message }}

psresearch

15 years ago

Originally Posted by Dan C. Rinnert

Honest marketers will continue to be honest. Though, some may opt to get into a different field, not because they were dishonest, but because they fear the heavy-hand of government stepping in.

Dishonest marketers will continue to be dishonest.

The FTC may go after some of them and make examples out of them, to show the public they are going to make a strong effort to clean things up and "protect" the consumer.

Here's the rub...

Dishonest marketers will continue to be dishonest. Some may be outside U.S. jurisdiction, either because they are legally outside U.S. jurisdiction or because it may be too impractical to go after them where ever they are.

However, because the FTC may have made a big deal out of making an example out of some marketers, the public is going to be more likely to have the perception that things are being cleaned up. So, if a marketer is making a claim, it must be true!

As a result, more people will end up being scammed. And then tougher regulations will come down, and the cycle will begin anew.

At any rate, what is often the case is that tougher laws or regulations negatively impact honest, law-abiding businesses more than they do the businesses that were actually causing harm.

The CPSIA is a good example of that. That was passed as a knee-jerk reaction by politicians when lead-tainted toys appeared in the marketplace. The CPSIA requires (expensive!) testing of children's products for lead. The big corporations that imported the lead-tainted toys were actually in favor of the law! For them, the expense of lead testing is a drop in the bucket. But, for smaller businesses, those that weren't even found to be selling problematic toys, the expenses are too high.

Increased laws and regulations may be well-meaning but it is often the case that they cause more problems than they resolve.

All great points.

The U.S. Safe Web Act was supposed to help combat foreign fraud targeting Americans, but as you've mentioned it doesn't do much good if it's impractical (or budgetarily unfeasible) to make use of the Act.

For example, it seems like the hidden negative option offers that are (probably) run by organized crime are heading towards even smarter ways of organizing and avoiding detection in the same way the Estonian Cybercrime hub operated per this recent Trend Micro report.

Thanks

Signature

Work At Home Truth - Extra Income Edition | Swindles.org

{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[1265725].message }}

Scott Ames

15 years ago

I'm not worried about valid testimonials. It's a given that most honest marketers will use real ones.

What I object to is the gathering of data of what the "typical" customer can expect. How the heck would I know? I only know what customers tell me. I only know about those that take the time to write.

Thanks
1 reply

Signature

Success consists of going from failure to failure without loss of enthusiasm. -Winston Churchill

{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[1265475].message }}

gabbydeb

15 years ago

Love your Pic! Tooo funny! and makes the point!

Originally Posted by Scott Ames

I'm not worried about valid testimonials. It's a given that most honest marketers will use real ones.

What I object to is the gathering of data of what the "typical" customer can expect. How the heck would I know? I only know what customers tell me. I only know about those that take the time to write.

Thanks

Signature

{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[1268091].message }}

Steven Carl Kelly

15 years ago

Lots of overreactions to the new FTC guides -- guides, not laws or regulations -- the laws have been around for decades.

Come on, folks.

[ 1 ] Thanks

Signature

Read this SURPRISING REPORT Before You Buy ANY WSO! Click Here
FREE REPORT: Split Test Your Landing Pages the Easy Way

{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[1266127].message }}

UKTim29

15 years ago

Hmm, will this have an effecton some WSO headlines!!!!!

Thanks

{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[1266156].message }}

Richard Tunnah

15 years ago

Originally Posted by Nick Brighton

Here's my take on the new FTC rulings regarding affiliates, sponsors and other marketing activities for profit online...

If you're worried about the effect your business will have because you can no longer make misleading, unrealistic claims in your content and testimonials, then it's time you had a long hard think about what you're really offering people in the first place.

I understand why it's a worry that you have to disclose your "average" customer results alongside those exceptional results-based testimonials on your website...

...after all, you can't control the people who make your product look bad by doing nothing (and not getting results, bringing the averages down)...

...but you can't go wrong by telling legitimate, serious prospects what your intentions are, and by being transparent with them.

(AND HERE'S WHAT NOBODY HAS POINTED OUT YET: If you stop misleading people in the first place, then your average customer WILL get results, because you've already filtered/screened them through your marketing. People who get 90% of their customers doing nothing, are the same people who are attracting 90% of the wrong people in the first place! Duh? Don't these folks see the irony going on here?!!!)

I can't understand why people are so worried. Here's the thing:

If you rely on "over seasoning" your marketing copy, or your offers, or the use of 3rd party testimonials...or whatever else it takes to make a commission or sale, and you can't make money without the hyperbole, then one this is obviously clear...

...you can't deliver enough value to your visitors in the first place.

On the other hand, when visitors get something out of your site, your content and your overall marketing, trust me, they won't care if you make a commission from them clicking your links.

(unless you're selling to other marketers of course, who in general, have become predisposed to a whole different set of ethics when it comes to buying through each others affiliate links)

The bottom line is - sites that offer value and ethical, honest and transparent content will gain more trust from their visitors than those that mislead instead.

People aren't stupid anyway. They know your claims are to be taken with a pinch of salt...and the FTC is merely protecting those people who DON'T take things with a pinch of salt and get led into a false sense of hope and misdirection when handing money over to you.

People like John Reese have been saying this for a long time now - transparency is the only way forward for web business these days. Just like offline business can't hide behind BS and faceless management to win the trust of their market, neither can (nor should) website businesses either.

It's obvious to most of us, and I personally think this is a great change to the world of online marketing. Finally, it forces those amongst us who get by on creating cheap, misleading and thinly spread content to generate income from false hope, to finally create value and a real user experience for web users.

And when that happens, guess what? Web users regain trust with websites, and then EVERYONE of us stand to benefit when the dust has settled from this.

It's win-win, unless you're in the game of misdirection and deception of course.

A perfect example of a website that has been doing it "the right way" for years before this ruling, is www.moneysavingexpert.com/

Martin (the website owner) is a trusted source of information, appearing on TV and radio regularly.

And wherever an affiliate link appears, he signals it with an asterix, and then explains to the reader that if you click that link, his company makes a direct profit.

And I recall him saying in an interview that his site generates tens of thousands of pounds per month in affiliate advertising revenue.

So perhaps it won't affect your sales to be honest, transparant and law abiding after all...

...providing you give value, people will always click your links.

Yes Martin Lewis has done very, very well by being a straight shooter. I think because people know and expect that from him he can be like 'this is a great product or service and yes I get paid if you click the link to it'. I think it would be great if a few more were like him.

Rich

Thanks

{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[1266242].message }}

tomw

15 years ago

Originally Posted by Nick Brighton

People like John Reese have been saying this for a long time now - transparency is the only way forward for web business these days. Just like offline business can't hide behind BS and faceless management to win the trust of their market, neither can (nor should) website businesses either.

I agree with almost all of what you said - it's about time someone said it - except for this. Only the naive would truly believe that.

On the online side of what we do, I and my companies make a lot of money online. Across multiple markets, several sectors, numerous niches and I wouldn't have a clue how many products.

Nobody has, or ever will have, any idea of who we *actually* are and who's *really* selling them all this stuff. This holds true for an awful lot of the most successful people online. I could name some, but obviously I won't.

All over the web (and everywhere else!) things are being recommended, pitched and sold, *purely* by great copy. Not two bit personalities that you can waste your life away with on Twitter, Facebook, blogs and forums while they pitch at you.

Ask yourself,

"Do I regularly come across the names and faces of any of the so called magical mystical beasts lumped together as one large, homogenous group and deemed the 'Super Affiliates?'"

No.

But you do know the names and faces of those attempting to peddle a $97 system that is "guaranteed or your money back" (after untold hassle, if at all) and claims to "pull back the curtain," "give YOU the keys to the kingdom" and "show YOU every secret the 'so-called' Gurus don't want you to know" about how to join their ranks.

It's a joke!

And the rest of us are laughing all the way to the bank, while countless others needlessly cry into their Camtasia courses and ebooks.

You know, sometimes, the naivety, complete blindness to important lessons that are child's play to learn, replicate and profit greatly from (right there, in front of their very eyes) *and* a total absence of business acumen of so many on this forum astound me. It actually upsets me that really wonderful people who really do need real help are lead down such ridiculously winding dead ends. They toil for a tuppence when it just doesn't have to be that way.

How many times?

You don't make real money seeking fame, courting respect in your market and peddling a $10 dollar tonic for toenail fungus.

Part of me has been tempted so many times in the past to get some of my guys to create a real training program that *actually works* (shock horror!). However, I always stop myself and think of the obnoxious customer support issues, the fact that maybe one in a hundred will actually watch the damn thing, one in a thousand will take action and I'll have to put my face to it and waste my days Twittering and frittering away time spent more profitably elsewhere.

Like in all societies, you reap what you sow, the world you create is that in which you live. For the infoprenuers out there, as far as I'm concerned, the nature of the business you're in, so relentlessly discussed on this forum day in, day out, is simply a result of what YOU AS A GROUP have created.

On the one hand you complain about the state of the business and of scammers making things difficult for you, thwarting trust and stifling sales. On the other, an attempt to commendably amend regulations that might actually improve things is announced and so many of you are up in arms concerning your right to rip people off!

Tom

[ 1 ] Thanks
2 replies

Signature

STOP THE TRAFFIK: PEOPLE SHOULDN'T BE BOUGHT AND SOLD
Help Us Rescue, Rehabilitate And Reunite Victims With Their Families
STOP THE TRAFFIK is a growing global movement of individuals, communities and organisations fighting to PREVENT the sale of people,
PROTECT the trafficked and PROSECUTE the traffickers.

{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[1267248].message }}

TelegramSam 15 years ago

I wonder if McDonalds, Crispy Creme and Pizza Hut will now have to state the following:

"The typical person who uses our products will get fat and feel terrible within a few months".

Or perhaps Budweiser, Heinekin and the other beer companies will have to state:

"The typical person who drinks our beer will drink too much, get drunk and get into trouble with his Mrs".
- Thanks
{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[1267311].message }}

Steven Wagenheim

15 years ago

Originally Posted by tomw

I agree with almost all of what you said - it's about time someone said it - except for this. Only the naive would truly believe that.

On the online side of what we do, I and my companies make a lot of money online. Across multiple markets, several sectors, numerous niches and I wouldn't have a clue how many products.

Nobody has, or ever will have, any idea of who we *actually* are and who's *really* selling them all this stuff. This holds true for an awful lot of the most successful people online. I could name some, but obviously I won't.

All over the web (and everywhere else!) things are being recommended, pitched and sold, *purely* by great copy. Not two bit personalities that you can waste your life away with on Twitter, Facebook, blogs and forums while they pitch at you.

Ask yourself,

"Do I regularly come across the names and faces of any of the so called magical mystical beasts lumped together as one large, homogenous group and deemed the 'Super Affiliates?'"

No.

But you do know the names and faces of those attempting to peddle a $97 system that is "guaranteed or your money back" (after untold hassle) and claims to "pull back the curtain," "give YOU the keys to the kingdom" and "show YOU every secret the 'so-called' Gurus don't want you to know" about how to join their ranks.

It's a joke!

And the rest of us are laughing all the way to the bank, while countless others needlessly cry into their Camtasia courses and ebooks.

You know, sometimes, the naivety, complete blindness to important lessons that are child's play to learn, replicate and profit greatly from (right there, in front of their very noses) *and* a total absence of business acumen of so many on this forum astound me. It actually upsets me that really wonderful people who really do need real help are lead down such ridiculously winding dead ends. They toil for a tuppence when it just doesn't have to be that way.

How many times?

You don't make real money seeking fame, courting respect in your market and peddling a $10 dollar tonic for toenail fungus.

Part of me has been tempted so many times in the past to get some of my guys to create a real training program that *actually works* (shock horror!). However, I always stop myself and think of the obnoxious customer support issues, the fact that maybe one in a hundred will actually watch the damn thing, one in a thousand will take action and I'll have to put my face to it and waste my days Twittering and frittering away time spent more profitably elsewhere.

Like in all societies, you reap what you sow, the world you create is that in which you live. For the infoprenuers out there, as far as I'm concerned, the nature of the business you're in, so relentlessly discussed on this forum day in, day out, is simply what YOU AS A GROUP have created.

On the one hand you complain about the state of the business and of scammers making things difficult for you, thwarting trust and stifling sales. On the other, an attempt to commendably amend regulations that might actually improve things is announced and you're up in arms concerning your right to rip people off!

Tom

Sorry Tom, but I take great exception to you saying that we all want to
rip people off.

I can count the number of complaints I've had about my products in the
almost 7 years I've been doing this on ONE HAND.

Most people, if they write to me at all, thank me for an honest product
without all the hype.

But now, the FTC is telling me that this same person who used my product
and made $200 in their first week or two, can't give me this as a testimonial
and I can't use it as one BECAUSE I don't know what the average results
are...something there is no way I can know when I've sold hundreds, if
not thousands of products.

So now what do I have left to sell with?

YOU tell ME?

Show me a line of copy that will make a prospect say, "Hey, I think this
will really help me" that DOESN'T violate the FTC guidelines.

I pride myself on my ethics and the quality of my products, but the FTC
has essentially told me that all I can say on my sales page is this.

"This is a product that will teach you <whatever>. I can't make you any
promises as to how well it will work for you or even tell you about my own
success using these methods because the FTC will no longer allow me to.
I can't even tell you what it will do without implicitly making claims (such
as, this product will help you build an opt in list) This implies that you'll
actually build a list of any size at all, even if just ONE person. And since I
don't know what the average results are, I can't even tell you that you
WILL get one person."

Do you see what my problem is with this whole law? It's beyond the point
of reason.

But what I object to more than that is you inferring that we all want to
rip people off.

Please do NOT paint us all with a broad stroke of the brush because there
are some people here who actually conduct and honest and ethical
business.

Thanks

Signature

My Soundcloud Music Channel

{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[1267322].message }}

tomw

15 years ago

Steve,

I think you and I have known each other long enough to know that we both only have the best possible intentions for our fellow man and our fellow Warriors.

As much as I like you and respect a lot of what you do, I also know your posting patterns well enough to expect you to read a *generalised* view of a *wider* situation, internalise it and then often reply with a self engrossed (sometimes displaying traits of clinical narcissism), histrionic reply - usually with some form of (not so) subtle pitch woven into the narrative. For example,

"I can count the number of complaints I've had about my products in the almost 7 years I've been doing this on ONE HAND. Most people, if they write to me at all, thank me for an honest product without all the hype."

and

"I pride myself on my ethics and the quality of my products..."

Of course not *all* infopreneurs want to rip people off. Stop being silly.

Tom

Thanks
1 reply

Signature

STOP THE TRAFFIK: PEOPLE SHOULDN'T BE BOUGHT AND SOLD
Help Us Rescue, Rehabilitate And Reunite Victims With Their Families
STOP THE TRAFFIK is a growing global movement of individuals, communities and organisations fighting to PREVENT the sale of people,
PROTECT the trafficked and PROSECUTE the traffickers.

{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[1267389].message }}

Steven Wagenheim

15 years ago

Originally Posted by tomw

Steve,

I think you and I have known each other long enough to know that we both only have the best possible intentions for our fellow man and our fellow Warriors.

As much as I like you and respect a lot of what you do, I know your posting patterns well enough to expect you to read a *generalised* view on a *wider* situation, internalise it and then often reply with a self engrossed (sometimes displaying traits of clinical narcissism), histrionic reply - usually with some form of (not so) subtle pitch woven into the narrative. For example,

"I can count the number of complaints I've had about my products in the
almost 7 years I've been doing this on ONE HAND."

and

"I pride myself on my ethics and the quality of my products, but the FTC
has essentially told me that all I can say on my sales page is this."

Of course not *all* infopreneurs want to rip people off. Stop being silly.

Tom

Well my apologies then but this is the most upset I have gotten here in
a long time. You've been gone a while and don't know what went down.

I was banned for a week and finally realized I had to straighten up and
fly right. I now spend most of my time in OT talking music. Look in
main discussion and you'll find very few threads that I've started in the
last few months. I just don't bother anymore.

But the tone of your post and that remark about wanting to rip people off
was way too general to just let slide by. Had you qualified it with a many
or even most, I would have let it slide. But the way it came out sounded
like you were painting us all with a broad stroke.

Anyway, I just wanted you to know where I am coming from. If anything
I have been accused of not selling hard enough. I've had copywriters tell
me my sales pages suck because they're too low key. So I'm not at all
concerned about the FTC coming after me because if they do, we are all
in trouble. And I mean all literally.

For what it's worth, I detest the sales pages that are currently online. I'd
point out tons of examples but that would be in violation of the forum
rules. But you know it as well as I do...most, not all, but most sales pages
are going to get fined if there are enough complaints and the FTC does
what it says it's going to do.

My problem is with the honest guy who has an honest testimonial for a
product that actually does what it says, only he can't use it anymore.

That's what I have a problem with.

And correct me if I am wrong, but your attitude about this seems to be,
"Oh well, if honest businessman can't use that testimonial anymore, that's
the way it goes."

I can't feel that way. I think it's wrong. I think the law is going too far.
I understand that the FTC has no way of knowing who is telling the truth
and who isn't. But the law is going to punish the innocent, not the guilty.

The guilty will go get a Swiss account somewhere and a server in Asia
and that will be the end of it.

Anyway, I think you know how I stand on this issue. So I guess we will
just agree to disagree.

Thanks
1 reply

Signature

My Soundcloud Music Channel

{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[1267457].message }}

tomw

15 years ago

Originally Posted by Steven Wagenheim

Well my apologies then but this is the most upset I have gotten here in a long time. You've been gone a while and don't know what went down.

But the tone of your post and that remark about wanting to rip people off
was way too general to just let slide by. Had you qualified it with a many
or even most, I would have let it slide. But the way it came out sounded
like you were painting us all with a broad stroke.

And correct me if I am wrong, but your attitude about this seems to be,
"Oh well, if honest businessman can't use that testimonial anymore, that's
the way it goes."

That's a fair point and I apologise for the misunderstanding. Often I'm maybe overly concerned with how words and sentences read (flow or scan) and don't pay sufficient attention to the precision of their meaning. This means that I sometimes leave too much room for "individual interpretation." One of my (many) failings.

I've amended the post (in bold).

You're not wrong about my view. I've been working in marketing since 1989. There have been so many rule changes, amendments and hair-brained legislative moves that it's difficult to keep up. More often then not, these are the result of political ideologies of the time (or day!) and pressure groups exerting undue influence and lobbying on behalf private interest or private capital - and of charities and consumer groups. Sometimes, they're as a result of a celebrity's child getting a rash because of the toxin used in the production of painted make up on her barbie-doll and whipping up a media frenzy. Then of course, there are those made because there is a real need and "something has to be done."

I'm of the view that in this case the latter applies.

Dark clouds for some, however the eternal silver lining is that;

the world is full of people that want or need all kinds of weird and wonderful stuff and you have the opportunity to profit from this by simply delivering it to them.*

Market conditions change all the time. Those that react and adapt profit. Those that don't, don't.

Tom

[*especially by providing *real* value and not causing harm.]

Thanks
1 reply

Signature

STOP THE TRAFFIK: PEOPLE SHOULDN'T BE BOUGHT AND SOLD
Help Us Rescue, Rehabilitate And Reunite Victims With Their Families
STOP THE TRAFFIK is a growing global movement of individuals, communities and organisations fighting to PREVENT the sale of people,
PROTECT the trafficked and PROSECUTE the traffickers.

{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[1267513].message }}

Steven Wagenheim

15 years ago

Originally Posted by tomw

That's a fair point and I apologise for the misunderstanding. Often I'm maybe overly concerned with how words and sentences read (flow or scan) and don't pay sufficient attention to the precision of their meaning. This means that I sometimes leave too much room for "individual interpretation." One of my (many) failings.

I've amended the post (in bold).

You're not wrong about my view. I've been working in marketing since 1989. There have been so many rule changes, amendments and hair-brained legislative moves that it's difficult to keep up. More often then not, these are the result of political ideologies of the time (or day!) and pressure groups exerting undue influence and lobbying on behalf private interest or private capital, of charities and consumer groups. Sometimes, they're as a result of a celebrity's child getting a rash because of the toxin used in the production of painted make up on her barbie-doll and whipping up a media frenzy. Then of course, there are those made because there is a real need and "something has to be done."

I'm of the view that in this case the latter applies.

Dark clouds for some, however, the eternal silver lining is that;

the world is full of people that want or need all kinds of weird and wonderful stuff and you have the opportunity to profit from this by simply delivering it to them.*

Market conditions change all the time, however. Those that react and adapt profit. Those that don't, don't.

Tom

[*especially by providing *real* value and not causing harm.]

So in other words, and again correct me if I'm wrong, I have to find a way
to get somebody to my sales page (not the hard part), look at it and say,

"This person has gained my trust. I believe this product will help me and I
am going to buy it"

without...

1. Posting any results based testimonials that the product actually worked.
2. My own story telling how it worked for me.

but simply by...what?

1. Describing what the product does? Isn't that a claim in itself?
2. Asking them to trust me? Why should they?
3. Pointing out the features of the product? We all know features don't sell.

Look, I admit, I'm no million dollar copywriter. So please enlighten me.
Your answer to the problem...

Market conditions change all the time, however. Those that react and adapt profit. Those that don't, don't.

is so vague that I don't even understand what this means.

Adapt how?

What am I supposed to do?

I have a product. I know it works. I am 100% sure that if used, it will work.

But hell, I can't even say that in my copy. All I can say is, "Look folks,
the typical user will probably use this as a coaster for his beer. So I can't
make you any promises. All I can do is offer you a complete money back
guarantee if you're not happy."

I don't see anything else.

Provide value? That's a given. And yeah, we can still load up on the bonuses
(value ones) and all that stuff.

But what good is it all if the person can't see that somebody actually
used this thing and it worked for them?

Please enlighten me Tom. I see no way to create a sales page that is
going to comply with the FTC and make any kind of sales.

And this has NOTHING to do with the integrity of the product. Show me one...
just ONE product out there with an ad that doesn't violate FTC guidelines
(online or offline) that is raking in the big bucks.

Unless of course what you're saying is that there really are no products
that do any good and the only way they sell is with these ads that we see.

As a consumer of many products, I would disagree with that. I have bought
many things that work and the ads that sold them to me would all violate
the FTC ruling.

Unless I'm mistaken, it's called marketing (putting your product in the
best light) and I see nothing evil about that, especially not when the
marketing is honest.

And somebody using your product, getting results with it, and reporting
those results IS honest.

But we can't use it anymore.

So you say adapt.

Okay Tom...to what?

I admit it. I'm an idiot. I have no idea what to do about this. So what's
the answer?

Thanks

Signature

My Soundcloud Music Channel

{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[1267557].message }}

Steven Carl Kelly

15 years ago

People, people, people.

Stop imagining what you THINK the new FTC guides mean and instead READ THE DOCUMENT for yourself and see that you can, indeed, still use results-based testimonials if you like.

Personally, I've never used them, but if you DO use and still want to use them, you still can. Again, READ the document and stop taking other people's word for what is in there.

[ 2 ] Thanks
2 replies

Signature

Read this SURPRISING REPORT Before You Buy ANY WSO! Click Here
FREE REPORT: Split Test Your Landing Pages the Easy Way

{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[1267443].message }}

Steven Wagenheim

15 years ago

Originally Posted by Steven Carl Kelly

People, people, people.

Stop imagining what you THINK the new FTC guides mean and instead READ THE DOCUMENT for yourself and see that you can, indeed, still use results-based testimonials if you like.

Personally, I've never used them, but if you DO use and still want to use them, you still can. Again, READ the document and stop taking other people's word for what is in there.

I did read it, and unless I am as dense as a stone, my understanding is
that you can only use results based testimonials IF you also include what
the typical results are.

How are we supposed to know what the typical results are?

[ 1 ] Thanks
2 replies

Signature

My Soundcloud Music Channel

{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[1267462].message }}

Steven Carl Kelly

15 years ago

Originally Posted by Steven Wagenheim

I did read it, and unless I am as dense as a stone, my understanding is that you can only use results based testimonials IF you also include what the typical results are.

How are we supposed to know what the typical results are?

First, I am not a lawyer. This is not legal advice. Consult your own counsel.

I point you to page 32 of the document, through the first part of page 34.

Advertisers are not required to identify a "typical consumer" of their product and then determine what result that consumer achieved. Rather, the required disclosure in this circumstance is "the generally expected performance in the depicted circumstances." Thus, advertisers are provided some reasonable leeway to make this disclosure. For example, the term "generally expected results" is used rather than "average" in order to convey that this disclosure would not have to be based on an exact mathematical average of users of the product, such as might be developed from a valid survey of actual users. For example, substantiation for a "generally expected results" disclosure could be extrapolated from valid, well-controlled clinical studies of patients matching the profile of the persons in the ad, even though consumers' real
world results are not likely to match exactly the results in the clinical study."

In other cases, the advertiser may be able to limit the scope of the disclosure by limiting the circumstances depicted in the advertisement. For example, if all of the testimonials used in an advertisement are clearly identified as persons who have been members of a weight loss clinic for at least one year, the disclosure can be based on performance data from that group. In any event, the disclosure of generally expected results should clearly identify the group from which the data were obtained.

Pay particular attention to the above paragraphs, and especially the portion "the generally expected performance in the depicted circumstances." Again, "in the depicted circumstances". Since the FTC provides for disclaimers of generally expected results based on individual circumstances, if I were doing performance-based testimonials that quote specific results, I would include a link to a unique disclaimer for each and every testimonial. That disclaimer would include the circumstances of that particular user's results.

Additionally, from the document:

If the advertiser does not have substantiation that the endorser's experience is representative of what consumers will generally achieve, the advertisement should clearly and conspicuously disclose the generally expected performance in the depicted circumstances, and the advertiser must possess and rely on adequate substantiation for that representation."

So...

If Joe Blow used my product and wrote a testimonial: "I made $1.7 billion in 11 minutes using Steve's new Money Grabber II Electric Boogaloo System" then in the testimonial box I'd like to a disclaimer that says:

"Generally expected results depend on the amount of commitment and experience each individual provides when implementing the Money Grabber II Electric Boogaloo System. Joe Blow has been involved in internet marketing for 3 years. He was provided a review copy of the system and no charge. Joe completely read the entire documentation provided with the system, and then spent 6 hours developing a strategy for implementation. Joe worked his strategy for approximately 2 hours per day for 5 weeks. Once he launched his site live, he received a total of $1.7 billion in the first 11 minutes after the site was launched using the techniques in my system combined with techniques Joe had already learned prior to purchasing the system. These are the generally expected results based on Joe Blow's circumstances".

Again, me no lawyer. But it seems no matter how many times I've read the document that I can't come to any other conclusion. The new guide allows for generally expected results based on circumstances.

Advertisers are not required to identify a "typical consumer" of their product and then determine what result that consumer achieved. Rather, the required disclosure in this circumstance is "the generally expected performance in the depicted circumstances." Thus, advertisers are provided some reasonable leeway to make this disclosure. For example, the term "generally expected results" is used rather than "average" in order to convey that this disclosure would not have to be based on an exact mathematical average of users of the product, such as might be developed from a valid survey of actual users.

Pay also close attention to:

The Commission tested the communication of advertisements containing testimonials that clearly and prominently disclosed either "Results not typical" or the stronger "These testimonials are based on the experiences of a few people and you are not likely to have similar results." Neither disclosure adequately reduced the communication that the experiences depicted are generally representative. Based upon this research, the Commission believes that similar disclaimers regarding the limited applicability of an endorser's experience to what consumers may generally expect to achieve are unlikely to be effective.

Nonetheless, the Commission cannot rule out the possibility that a strong disclaimer of typicality could be effective in the context of a particular advertisement. Although the Commission would have the burden of proof in a law enforcement action, the Commission notes that an advertiser possessing reliable empirical testing demonstrating that the net impression of its advertisement with such a disclaimer is non-deceptive will avoid the risk of the initiation of such an action in the first instance."

You could couple the above example with a broader disclaimer that indicates what some folks on the WF have already suggested: a disclaimer of generally expected results that most users of the system fail to put in enough effort to be successful.

Thanks
1 reply

Signature

Read this SURPRISING REPORT Before You Buy ANY WSO! Click Here
FREE REPORT: Split Test Your Landing Pages the Easy Way

{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[1267531].message }}

Steven Wagenheim

15 years ago

Originally Posted by Steven Carl Kelly

First, I am not a lawyer. This is not legal advice. Consult your own counsel.

I point you to page 32 of the document, through the first part of page 34.

Advertisers are not required to identify a "typical consumer" of their product and then determine what result that consumer achieved. Rather, the required disclosure in this circumstance is "the generally expected performance in the depicted circumstances." Thus, advertisers are provided some reasonable leeway to make this disclosure. For example, the term "generally expected results" is used rather than "average" in order to convey that this disclosure would not have to be based on an exact mathematical average of users of the product, such as might be developed from a valid survey of actual users. For example, substantiation for a "generally expected results" disclosure could be extrapolated from valid, well-controlled clinical studies of patients matching the profile of the persons in the ad, even though consumers' real
world results are not likely to match exactly the results in the clinical study."

In other cases, the advertiser may be able to limit the scope of the disclosure by limiting the circumstances depicted in the advertisement. For example, if all of the testimonials used in an advertisement are clearly identified as persons who have been members of a weight loss clinic for at least one year, the disclosure can be based on performance data from that group. In any event, the disclosure of generally expected results should clearly identify the group from which the data were obtained.

Pay particular attention to the above paragraphs, and especially the portion "the generally expected performance in the depicted circumstances." Again, "in the depicted circumstances". Since the FTC provides for disclaimers of generally expected results based on individual circumstances, if I were doing performance-based testimonials that quote specific results, I would include a link to a unique disclaimer for each and every testimonial. That disclaimer would include the circumstances of that particular user's results.

Additionally, from the document:

If the advertiser does not have substantiation that the endorser's experience is representative of what consumers will generally achieve, the advertisement should clearly and conspicuously disclose the generally expected performance in the depicted circumstances, and the advertiser must possess and rely on adequate substantiation for that representation."

So...

If Joe Blow used my product and wrote a testimonial: "I made $1.7 billion in 11 minutes using Steve's new Money Grabber II Electric Boogaloo System" then in the testimonial box I'd like to a disclaimer that says:

"Generally expected results depend on the amount of commitment and experience each individual provides when implementing the Money Grabber II Electric Boogaloo System. Joe Blow has been involved in internet marketing for 3 years. He was provided a review copy of the system and no charge. Joe completely read the entire documentation provided with the system, and then spent 6 hours developing a strategy for implementation. Joe worked his strategy for approximately 2 hours per day for 5 weeks. Once he launched his site live, he received a total of $1.7 billion in the first 11 minutes after the site was launched using the techniques in my system combined with techniques Joe had already learned prior to purchasing the system. These are the generally expected results based on Joe Blow's circumstances".

Again, me no lawyer. But it seems no matter how many times I've read the document that I can't come to any other conclusion. The new guide allows for generally expected results based on circumstances.

Advertisers are not required to identify a "typical consumer" of their product and then determine what result that consumer achieved. Rather, the required disclosure in this circumstance is "the generally expected performance in the depicted circumstances." Thus, advertisers are provided some reasonable leeway to make this disclosure. For example, the term "generally expected results" is used rather than "average" in order to convey that this disclosure would not have to be based on an exact mathematical average of users of the product, such as might be developed from a valid survey of actual users.

Pay also close attention to:

The Commission tested the communication of advertisements containing testimonials that clearly and prominently disclosed either "Results not typical" or the stronger "These testimonials are based on the experiences of a few people and you are not likely to have similar results." Neither disclosure adequately reduced the communication that the experiences depicted are generally representative. Based upon this research, the Commission believes that similar disclaimers regarding the limited applicability of an endorser's experience to what consumers may generally expect to achieve are unlikely to be effective.

Nonetheless, the Commission cannot rule out the possibility that a strong disclaimer of typicality could be effective in the context of a particular advertisement. Although the Commission would have the burden of proof in a law enforcement action, the Commission notes that an advertiser possessing reliable empirical testing demonstrating that the net impression of its advertisement with such a disclaimer is non-deceptive will avoid the risk of the initiation of such an action in the first instance."

You could couple the above example with a broader disclaimer that indicates what some folks on the WF have already suggested: a disclaimer of generally expected results that most users of the system fail to put in enough effort to be successful.

Okay, I read all that...again.

And as you said, you're not a lawyer. This is YOUR interpretation of it,
which, for all we know, might be dead on the money.

But that's the problem...we don't know...not for 100% certain anyway.

And all honest John Doe marketer needs to do is follow your suggestions,
put up his site, have somebody complain, even with all those disclaimers
and my little bit about most people using this info for toilet paper, and
the FTC can still come cracking down on this poor guy's head and slap
him with an $11,000 fine. Yes, I know I read somewhere about warnings
first and all that and a chance to fix what's wrong.

Are YOU willing to take that chance?

I'm not. I need somebody from the FTC to look at my pages and sign off
a document saying that I comply.

And let me tell you something...if we could get that, an FTC approval
seal, think about what they would do for consumer confidence.

See, I'm not all against this law entirely as long as it's enforced fairly
and product creators can actually benefit from it by being recognized as
being complient. Sort of like a BBB seal.

Bottom line: After reading all that again, I am not 100% sure that what I
do with my sales pages is 100% within FTC guidelines.

[ 1 ] Thanks

Signature

My Soundcloud Music Channel

{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[1267595].message }}

JohnMcCabe

15 years ago

Originally Posted by Steven Wagenheim

I did read it, and unless I am as dense as a stone, my understanding is
that you can only use results based testimonials IF you also include what
the typical results are.

How are we supposed to know what the typical results are?

As I said in an earlier post, a lot of people are going under the assumption that TYPICAL = AVERAGE. The two words mean very different things.

As I interpret the words, 'typical' means that if the same actions are repeated under similar conditions, the most likely outcome is a similar result.

'Average' is a mathematical concept applied to a fixed sample with known data. Cumulative results divided by the number of elements in the data set equals the average value.

If your data set is constantly changing, as you sell products and issue refunds, computing an average is impossible. That's why you have vague phrases like 'generally expected' and 'typical results' - to allow the marketer some room for marketing without granting an open license to lie.

Here's a 'just suppose' for you...

-----------------------------

Suppose you like to play golf, but you don't like the banana ball you usually hit off the tee. Physics tells us the problem is either the way you set up to the shot or the angle at which the club face meets the ball.

I have a product that shows you how to correct both of those faults.

If the 'typical' user follows the instructions, they can 'generally expect' to hit straighter shots. That claim is defensible using basic physics - line up straight, hit the ball squarely, and the ball will fly straighter.

Now you get a testimonial that says, "before I got this product, I sprayed balls all over the golf course. Now most of my shots land in the fairway and my scores are 4-5 shots lower. Thanks!"

The testimonial is consistent with the claim.

-----------------------------

Even if you could construct a mathematical average, it can be skewed so many ways as to make such a determination useless. Unless you are in Lake Woebegone, where the men are pretty, the women strong and all the kids are above average...

Thanks
1 reply

{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[1267534].message }}

Steven Wagenheim

15 years ago

Originally Posted by JohnMcCabe

As I said in an earlier post, a lot of people are going under the assumption that TYPICAL = AVERAGE. The two words mean very different things.

As I interpret the words, 'typical' means that if the same actions are repeated under similar conditions, the most likely outcome is a similar result.

'Average' is a mathematical concept applied to a fixed sample with known data. Cumulative results divided by the number of elements in the data set equals the average value.

If your data set is constantly changing, as you sell products and issue refunds, computing an average is impossible. That's why you have vague phrases like 'generally expected' and 'typical results' - to allow the marketer some room for marketing without granting an open license to lie.

Here's a 'just suppose' for you...

-----------------------------

Suppose you like to play golf, but you don't like the banana ball you usually hit off the tee. Physics tells us the problem is either the way you set up to the shot or the angle at which the club face meets the ball.

I have a product that shows you how to correct both of those faults.

If the 'typical' user follows the instructions, they can 'generally expect' to hit straighter shots. That claim is defensible using basic physics - line up straight, hit the ball squarely, and the ball will fly straighter.

Now you get a testimonial that says, "before I got this product, I sprayed balls all over the golf course. Now most of my shots land in the fairway and my scores are 4-5 shots lower. Thanks!"

The testimonial is consistent with the claim.

-----------------------------

Even if you could construct a mathematical average, it can be skewed so many ways as to make such a determination useless. Unless you are in Lake Woebegone, where the men are pretty, the women strong and all the kids are above average...

Okay, I used the wrong word. Typical, fine, whatever.

How do I know the typical result?

What's the typical result?

How do you find out?

For some products, yes, maybe it's easier than for others. But what if
you use a system to build an opt in list and it works for you? The proof is
in the size of your list.

What's typical?

Is it building a list of 100 people, 200 people, 1 person?

If somebody uses my system and happens to build a list of 3,000 people
and sends me a testimonial to that fact, I can't use it.

Why?

I still have no idea what the typical use can expect or what the typical
results are.

So that testimonial does me no good.

Please correct me if I am wrong. I'm no brain surgeon but I think I am
intelligent enough to understand the basics of this ruling.

Can I use that testimonial?

And if not, what do I have to show in order to be able to use it?

And please don't answer with "typical results" because I don't know
what they are.

Thanks

Signature

My Soundcloud Music Channel

{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[1267571].message }}

Frank Donovan

15 years ago

Originally Posted by Steven Carl Kelly

Stop imagining what you THINK the new FTC guides mean and instead READ THE DOCUMENT for yourself and see that you can, indeed, still use results-based testimonials if you like.

Steven, the FTC guidelines have now been out a while. They've been discussed in several threads on this forum. And yet, otherwise intelligent and sharp marketers are still continuing to either willfully, or carelessly, misinterpret the wording.

Just see some of the posts in this thread which invent an "average results" scenario simply, it would seem, in order to ridicule it. Of course it would be impossible to comply with such a condition, for the reasons John McCabe has already described.

My guess is that the objections, in the main, spring from a political standpoint. I'm not saying that point of view isn't valid - I'm no fan of big government or (most) state agencies - but from an ethical marketing perspective, I don't see very much in the FTC guidelines (such as they now exist) to get concerned about.

Frank

Thanks

Signature

{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[1267556].message }}

Steven Carl Kelly

15 years ago

I've tried my best on this subject, I guess.

Thanks
2 replies

Signature

Read this SURPRISING REPORT Before You Buy ANY WSO! Click Here
FREE REPORT: Split Test Your Landing Pages the Easy Way

{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[1267590].message }}

JayXtreme

15 years ago

Originally Posted by Steven Carl Kelly

I've tried my best on this subject, I guess.

Some people don't want to understand, Steven

it's their problem, not yours.

Peace

Jay

Thanks
1 reply

Signature

Bare Murkage.........

{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[1267597].message }}

Steven Wagenheim

15 years ago

Originally Posted by JayXtreme

Some people don't want to understand, Steven

it's their problem, not yours.

Peace

Jay

No Jay, it's not that some people don't want to understand. It's that some
people don't understand.

You want to call me an idiot, that's fine. But for me, this ruling is not clear.
It leaves too much open to interpretation to the point where I won't feel
comfortable without a lawyer explaining it to me and looking over my sales
pages.

And in my opinion, for anybody in this business, that would be the smart
thing to do.

Thanks
2 replies

Signature

My Soundcloud Music Channel

{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[1267605].message }}

JayXtreme 15 years ago

Originally Posted by Steven Wagenheim

No Jay, it's not that some people don't want to understand. It's that some
people don't understand.

It's the exact same thing, only a desire TO understand is missing.

You want to call me an idiot, that's fine.

I don't.... and can we please leave the amateur dramatics out of a discussion for once?

I won't feel
comfortable without a lawyer explaining it to me and looking over my sales
pages.

Then go see a lawyer, if you feel that is your only way.. fill your boots.

And in my opinion, for anybody in this business, that would be the smart
thing to do.

You said it, Steve!

Peace to ya

Jay
- Thanks
Signature

Bare Murkage.........
{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[1267615].message }}

Steven Carl Kelly

15 years ago

Originally Posted by Steven Wagenheim

But for me, this ruling is not clear.

It isn't a ruling. It is a guide explaining rules that have been around for decades. If you are out of compliance now, you have been out of compliance and subject to prosecution for a long, long time.

Thanks
3 replies

Signature

Read this SURPRISING REPORT Before You Buy ANY WSO! Click Here
FREE REPORT: Split Test Your Landing Pages the Easy Way

{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[1267616].message }}

Steven Wagenheim

15 years ago

Originally Posted by Steven Carl Kelly

It isn't a ruling. It is a guide explaining rules that have been around for decades. If you are out of compliance now, you have been out of compliance and subject to prosecution for a long, long time.

Steve, if that's the case, take a look at the products in the Clickbank
marketplace. Some of them are years old, way out of compliance (IMO)
and yet, are still in business.

So what you're saying is that all of this is just a lot of smoke?

If so, then why come out with this new document?

Or are these sales pages now going to be in a lot of trouble?

Point is, while many might have been out of compliance (whatever that
means) for a long time, is it only now that it's going to be a problem?

Or is it not going to be a problem at all?

This is what I am still not clear on if what you're saying is true (these
things always being in effect)

So then what's the big deal?

Thanks

Signature

My Soundcloud Music Channel

{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[1267638].message }}

marciayudkin

15 years ago

As I said in an earlier post, a lot of people are going under the assumption that TYPICAL = AVERAGE. The two words mean very different things.

As I interpret the words, 'typical' means that if the same actions are repeated under similar conditions, the most likely outcome is a similar result.

Your golf example is pretty clear because the laws of physics are fairly solid and predictable. However, when we are dealing with things like job-hunting, getting published, finding a mate, avoiding an audit, building a business, we are not dealing with the laws of physics. There is luck involved plus a whole lot of other factors, like timing.

And in those kinds of endeavors, I'm not sure how to apply the word "typical." For example, I can teach someone how to write a great letter to a literary agent. Sometimes it will get results the first time out and sometimes it will never work. There are too many factors to talk about a typical result. Or else I simply do not understand what the word means.

The dictionary definition of "typical" is no help at all: "Exhibiting the qualities, traits, or characteristics that identify a kind, class, group, or category." How does that apply to my examples?

I am not sure that anything I have ever achieved in my life is "typical."

Marcia Yudkin

Thanks

Signature

Check out Marcia Yudkin's No-Hype Marketing Academy for courses on copywriting, publicity, infomarketing, marketing plans, naming, and branding - not to mention the popular "Marketing for Introverts" course.

{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[1267643].message }}

sbucciarel

Banned 15 years ago

Originally Posted by Steven Carl Kelly

It isn't a ruling. It is a guide explaining rules that have been around for decades. If you are out of compliance now, you have been out of compliance and subject to prosecution for a long, long time.

That's not exactly true. The guide has just changed. Before testimonials were ok if you had fine print at the bottom that said "results not typical." That is no longer enough to keep you out of hot water. You have to show what typical results are.

You also have to divulge if your testimonial is a paid for testimonial. You can't just "review" a product like you have in the past and pretend that you are actually a user/customer who just loves this product to death. If you are getting paid to endorse, you have to disclose that. Since affiliates are getting paid to endorse (if they make a sale), I'm not really certain whether or not an affiliate relationship has to be disclosed. I am affiliate of more than one product and am not compensated for it.

Thanks
2 replies

{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[1267911].message }}

JohnMcCabe

15 years ago

Originally Posted by Steven Wagenheim

Okay, I used the wrong word. Typical, fine, whatever.

How do I know the typical result?

What's the typical result?

How do you find out?

For some products, yes, maybe it's easier than for others. But what if
you use a system to build an opt in list and it works for you? The proof is
in the size of your list.

What's typical?

Is it building a list of 100 people, 200 people, 1 person?

If somebody uses my system and happens to build a list of 3,000 people
and sends me a testimonial to that fact, I can't use it.

Why?

I still have no idea what the typical use can expect or what the typical
results are.

So that testimonial does me no good.

Please correct me if I am wrong. I'm no brain surgeon but I think I am
intelligent enough to understand the basics of this ruling.

Can I use that testimonial?

And if not, what do I have to show in order to be able to use it?

And please don't answer with "typical results" because I don't know
what they are.

My layman's reading is that, yes, you can use that testimonial. In the absence of data, you can fall back on generally accepted rules of thumb. I.E., there's a widely quoted rule of thumb that says sales pages typically get a 1% response rate. Some do better, some do worse, but it's a commonly used benchmark. Your "out" is that using commonly accepted benchmarks, 'typical' results are such and such. Diligence, market choice and dumb luck can and will likely affect results.

Originally Posted by marciayudkin

Your golf example is pretty clear because the laws of physics are fairly solid and predictable. However, when we are dealing with things like job-hunting, getting published, finding a mate, avoiding an audit, building a business, we are not dealing with the laws of physics. There is luck involved plus a whole lot of other factors, like timing.

And in those kinds of endeavors, I'm not sure how to apply the word "typical." For example, I can teach someone how to write a great letter to a literary agent. Sometimes it will get results the first time out and sometimes it will never work. There are too many factors to talk about a typical result. Or else I simply do not understand what the word means.

The dictionary definition of "typical" is no help at all: "Exhibiting the qualities, traits, or characteristics that identify a kind, class, group, or category." How does that apply to my examples?

I am not sure that anything I have ever achieved in my life is "typical."

Marcia Yudkin

In some cases, there is no 'typical result'. As I read the document, simply explaining that there is no typical result because there are too many factors outside the control of the writer should be sufficient. Testimonials do represent real results, but can't be claimed as typical because there is no such animal.

Originally Posted by Steven Wagenheim

Okay, read it...got it.

Seems pretty straight forward to me, but please correct me if any of my
interpretations are incorrect.

This is a no-no

Customer sends testimonial on how your product did (whatever) but those
results are not typical, so you have to show what the typical results are.
If you can't do this, you can't use the testimonial.

This is okay.

Nowhere in the document does it talk about the product creator himself
going on and on about how he uses this (whatever) that he created and
it just makes his life so wonderful. The guideline, from my understanding,
ONLY covers third party testimonials and NOT your own personal
experience as a product creator.

Affiliate marketers, however, are third party and thus they would fall
under the guidelines and thus, if they say on their blog "I use this and got
X results" they have to disclose not only what typical results are but also
that they are being compensated for their endorsement.

Is that pretty much this whole thing in a nutshell?

If not, please correct me as to where I am not understanding.

My (layman's, again) interpretation is that if you personally experienced the claimed results, that's a personal claim. It's up to the seller to provide 'typical' results. You are simply sharing your personal experience, as long as you don't promise that others can duplicate your results.

You would, however, have to reveal that if a purchase is made through your link, you are compensated. No need to make a big deal out it, just put it out there.

Originally Posted by sbucciarel

That's not exactly true. The guide has just changed. Before testimonials were ok if you had fine print at the bottom that said "results not typical." That is no longer enough to keep you out of hot water. You have to show what typical results are.

You also have to divulge if your testimonial is a paid for testimonial. You can't just "review" a product like you have in the past and pretend that you are actually a user/customer who just loves this product to death. If you are getting paid to endorse, you have to disclose that. Since affiliates are getting paid to endorse (if they make a sale), I'm not really certain whether or not an affiliate relationship has to be disclosed. I am affiliate of more than one product and am not compensated for it.

In other words, you can get penalized for lying. Sorry if I can't crank up the waterworks on this one. Print and broadcast media endorsers have had to reveal that they are being paid for many years now. I haven't seen the wheels of commerce fall off yet.

Thanks
2 replies

{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[1267990].message }}

sbucciarel

Banned 15 years ago

Originally Posted by JohnMcCabe

In other words, you can get penalized for lying. Sorry if I can't crank up the waterworks on this one. Print and broadcast media endorsers have had to reveal that they are being paid for many years now. I haven't seen the wheels of commerce fall off yet.

I can't crank up the waterworks either. It's all much ado about nothing in my opinion, but then I don't really do any paid testimonials and not much affiliate marketing. I sell my own products and have a long way to go before the FTC would be watching what I am doing. I stand by my products but I am not going over my sales pages with a lawyer or a fine toothed comb.

In their own document, they said that the FTC is not large enough to monitor millions of web pages and these guidelines will be largely self-regulated ... and that they will be targeting the ad networks to educate their affiliates.

They will make an example of some huge companies who are obviously misrepresenting their products, and using phony testimonials with false claims.

Thanks

{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[1268282].message }}

Kevin AKA Hubcap

15 years ago

Originally Posted by JohnMcCabe

In other words, you can get penalized for lying. Sorry if I can't crank up the waterworks on this one. Print and broadcast media endorsers have had to reveal that they are being paid for many years now. I haven't seen the wheels of commerce fall off yet.

I see and hear many endorsements on broadcast media where the endorsers don't reveal they're being paid, especially radio programs.

Kevin

Thanks
1 reply

{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[1268335].message }}

marciayudkin 15 years ago

I see and hear many endorsements on broadcast media where the endorsers don't reveal they're being paid, especially radio programs.

"Lots of other cars were speeding."

Ever tried that argument on a cop - or on a judge? Doesn't get you off the hook.

Marcia Yudkin
- Thanks
Signature
Check out Marcia Yudkin's No-Hype Marketing Academy for courses on copywriting, publicity, infomarketing, marketing plans, naming, and branding - not to mention the popular "Marketing for Introverts" course.
{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[1268350].message }}

Steven Carl Kelly 15 years ago

Originally Posted by sbucciarel

That's not exactly true. The guide has just changed.

Well, to be preci... oh, never mind. It's all good.
- Thanks
Signature

Read this SURPRISING REPORT Before You Buy ANY WSO! Click Here
FREE REPORT: Split Test Your Landing Pages the Easy Way
{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[1268016].message }}

Steven Wagenheim 15 years ago

Originally Posted by Steven Carl Kelly

I've tried my best on this subject, I guess.

Steve, I know you have and I don't blame you for this problem at all. It's my
problem, okay? I don't get it. I'm not comfortable with having to interpret
what all this means.

So I know what I'm going to do.

I'm going to get a lawyer and have HIM explain to me what I can and can't
do.

And if that doesn't do it, I'll get a hold of the FTC myself and get answers
directly from them, sending them to my own sales pages if I have to.

Either way, by the time I'm done, I will understand this.
- Thanks
Signature

My Soundcloud Music Channel
{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[1267612].message }}

Steven Carl Kelly

15 years ago

I can't help you any further, Steven. I think you need guidance that doesn't currently exist. Personally, I am convinced of several things as regards my own business:

1) These FTC rules aren't new, they've been around for decades.
2) The FTC responds primarily to complaints.
3) One complaint won't likely set off any alarm bells.
4) I've never known the FTC to target legitimate marketers who make good faith compliance efforts.
5) People here are making this more complicated than it needs to be.
6) I'm not worried about this new FTC guide or an investigation.

In order to reach your own comfort level, you're going to need a lot more than I can provide. I'm satisfied with my own position and not the least bit concerned.

Thanks

Signature

Read this SURPRISING REPORT Before You Buy ANY WSO! Click Here
FREE REPORT: Split Test Your Landing Pages the Easy Way

{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[1267609].message }}

tomw

15 years ago

Originally Posted by Steven Wagenheim

So in other words, and again correct me if I'm wrong, I have to find a way
to get somebody to my sales page (not the hard part), look at it and say,

"This person has gained my trust. I believe this product will help me and I
am going to buy it"

without...

1. Posting any results based testimonials that the product actually worked.
2. My own story telling how it worked for me.

but simply by...what?

1. Describing what the product does? Isn't that a claim in itself?
2. Asking them to trust me? Why should they?
3. Pointing out the features of the product? We all know features don't sell.

Look, I admit, I'm no million dollar copywriter. So please enlighten me.
Your answer to the problem...

Look Steve,

billions of people all around the world walk into a store everyday and buy a product. Whilst perusing the mouth-watering wares on the shelves of a boutique confectionary store, does a salesperson follow them around the aisles showing them spiral bound testimonials and recommendations for, say, a candy bar that the customer appeared to be interested in?

The whole time, does she tell them how she's worked in candy bars for 7 years? That it was her lifelong dream to create a range of, what she believes are, the finest candy bars in the world? That it is her passion? That every day she wakes up and feels wonderful because she knows she's making a difference in people's lives even if it is only for the tongue tantalising time they're eating the belgian chocolate covered fruits of her labour?

And speaking of the chocolate, she imports the very best, made using only the finest beans found at the top of the forest. They grow in an until now undiscovered knoll known only to a handful of local indigenous tribesmen. The beans are so special because these coco trees grow amongst guarana, ****, and coca plants in the shadow of a wispy waterfall that bubbles out of mystical spring on the side of a lichen covered cliff-face. Legend has it that he who drinks the water will gain immortality, if only they could scale high enough to drink.

The raw chocolate is then combined with the finest endangered exotic animal fats and the breast milk of the most beautiful, erotic-dancing and scantily-clad beach dwelling tribes women in a natural top secret ancient Inca process that the 'so called' chocolate-making gurus of the world don't want anyone to know about!

Then the chocolate is shipped to Belgium for some of the special magic that everybody knows only the Belgians can do. And it is given a special seal of five star approval from the Belgian Chocolate Bureau of Alberta, USA.

Finally, she tells the customer that because the chocolate has been infused with a natural combination of holistic energy giving, fat burning and age reducing properties they can eat as many of these finest tasting candy bars in the world without putting on weight or eventually looking looking like crap, and that instead, they'll actually lose weight and start to look younger and healthier - but wait there's more! Because of the coca they'll feel bloody fantastic every time they take a bite!

No of course not.

Why do you imagine it has to be like this online? Why do you imagine the only way to sell infoproducts is the way that YOU do?

There's more than one way to skin a cat. And there are so many ways to sell things for me to list here. If not, there'd be no need for marketing or marketers, would there?

But as you are so adamant that you will not be able to sell your wares as a result of this legislation, I think the burden of proof is on you to show me that other marketing tactics will not work and not on me to prove to you that you can indeed make a living by adapting your tactics to fall in line with legislation should it require you to adapt.

Tom

Thanks
1 reply

Signature

STOP THE TRAFFIK: PEOPLE SHOULDN'T BE BOUGHT AND SOLD
Help Us Rescue, Rehabilitate And Reunite Victims With Their Families
STOP THE TRAFFIK is a growing global movement of individuals, communities and organisations fighting to PREVENT the sale of people,
PROTECT the trafficked and PROSECUTE the traffickers.

{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[1267724].message }}

Steven Wagenheim

15 years ago

Originally Posted by tomw

Look Steve,

billions of people all around the world walk into a store everyday and buy a product. Whilst perusing the mouth-watering wares on the shelves of a boutique confectionary store, does a salesperson follow them around the aisles showing them spiral bound testimonials and recommendations for, say, a candy bar that the customer appeared to be interested in?

The whole time, does she tell them how she's worked in candy bars for 7 years? That it was her lifelong dream to create a range of, what she believes are, the finest candy bars in the world? That it is her passion? That every day she wakes up and feels wonderful because she knows she's making a difference in people's lives even if it is only for the tongue tantalising time they're eating the belgian chocolate covered fruits of her labour?

And speaking of the chocolate, she imports the very best, made using only the finest beans found at the top of the forest. They grow in an until now undiscovered knoll known only to a handful of local indigenous tribesmen. The beans are so special because these coco trees grow amongst guarana, ****, and coca plants in the shadow of a wispy waterfall that bubbles out of mystical spring on the side of a lichen covered cliff-face. Legend has it that he who drinks the water will gain immortality, if only they could scale high enough to drink.

The raw chocolate is then combined with the finest endangered exotic animal fats and the breast milk of the most beautiful, erotic-dancing and scantily-clad beach dwelling tribes women in a natural top secret ancient Inca process that the 'so called' chocolate-making gurus of the world don't want anyone to know about!

Then the chocolate is shipped to Belgium for some of the special magic that everybody knows only the Belgians can do. And it is given a special seal of five star approval from the Belgian Chocolate Bureau of Alberta, USA.

Finally, she tells the customer that because the chocolate has been infused with a natural combination of holistic energy giving, fat burning and age reducing properties they can eat as many of these finest tasting candy bars in the world without putting on weight or eventually looking looking like crap, and that instead, they'll actually lose weight and start to look younger and healthier - but wait there's more! Because of the coca they'll feel bloody fantastic every time they take a bite!

No of course not.

Why do you imagine it has to be like this online? Why do you imagine the only way to sell infoproducts is the way that YOU do?

There's more than one way to skin a cat. And there are so many ways to sell things for me to list here. If not, there'd be no need for marketing or marketers, would there?

But as you are so adamant that you will not be able to sell your wares as a result of this legislation, I think the burden of proof is on you to show me that other marketing tactics will not work and not on me to prove to you that you can indeed make a living by adapting your tactics to fall in line with legislation should it require you to adapt.

Tom

Okay, I could argue that your example of chocolate doesn't apply but
I'm not going to go down this road anymore.

I just downloaded the FTC document and I'm going to read it from cover
to cover until I understand it. And what I don't understand I am going to
go over with a friend of mine who just happens to be a lawyer.

All of this is moot because ultimately, the only thing that matters is that
whatever marketing a person does complies with the FTC...whatever
that marketing has to be.

Thanks
1 reply

Signature

My Soundcloud Music Channel

{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[1267740].message }}

tomw

15 years ago

Originally Posted by Steven Wagenheim

I just downloaded the FTC document and I'm going to read it from cover
to cover until I understand it. And what I don't understand I am going to
go over with a friend of mine who just happens to be a lawyer.

All of this is moot because ultimately, the only thing that matters is that
whatever marketing a person does complies with the FTC...whatever
that marketing has to be.

Holy crap! Progress.

Tom

Thanks
1 reply

Signature

STOP THE TRAFFIK: PEOPLE SHOULDN'T BE BOUGHT AND SOLD
Help Us Rescue, Rehabilitate And Reunite Victims With Their Families
STOP THE TRAFFIK is a growing global movement of individuals, communities and organisations fighting to PREVENT the sale of people,
PROTECT the trafficked and PROSECUTE the traffickers.

{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[1267760].message }}

Steven Wagenheim

15 years ago

Originally Posted by tomw

Holy crap! Progress.

Tom

Okay, read it...got it.

Seems pretty straight forward to me, but please correct me if any of my
interpretations are incorrect.

This is a no-no

Customer sends testimonial on how your product did (whatever) but those
results are not typical, so you have to show what the typical results are.
If you can't do this, you can't use the testimonial.

This is okay.

Nowhere in the document does it talk about the product creator himself
going on and on about how he uses this (whatever) that he created and
it just makes his life so wonderful. The guideline, from my understanding,
ONLY covers third party testimonials and NOT your own personal
experience as a product creator.

Affiliate marketers, however, are third party and thus they would fall
under the guidelines and thus, if they say on their blog "I use this and got
X results" they have to disclose not only what typical results are but also
that they are being compensated for their endorsement.

Is that pretty much this whole thing in a nutshell?

If not, please correct me as to where I am not understanding.

Thanks
1 reply

Signature

My Soundcloud Music Channel

{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[1267797].message }}

Killer Joe

15 years ago

Originally Posted by Steven Wagenheim

Okay, read it...got it.

Seems pretty straight forward to me, but please correct me if any of my
interpretations are incorrect.

Hi Steven,

Your interpretations, or anybody else's will simply be educated guesses until Case Law has determined the scope of the FTC guidelines.

Consider it lawyer job security. One group gets paid to makes guidelines and the second group now has the opportunity to earn vast sums of money by 'arguing' how the guidelines should be interpreted based on a system that rewards political contributions.

There's nothing radical in that statement, btw, that's how most of the laws in the US come to be and are defined through the court system. That's why so many of them make absolutely no sense to a layperson.

It's still very early in the game, and the first action you would see if you are out of bounds is a letter from the FTC telling you that your actions are out of tolerance. At that point you can make changes, or put the offending product/sales letter on hold.

Don't get too wrapped up in trying to hit a moving target on this one, just do your best based on what you believe to be the spirit of the law.

Everything will change to some degree or another once some Case Law is established, and that will take years.

KJ

Thanks
1 reply

Signature

{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[1267873].message }}

psresearch

15 years ago

Originally Posted by Killer Joe

Don't get too wrapped up in trying to hit a moving target on this one, just do your best based on what you believe to be the spirit of the law.

Everything will change to some degree or another once some Case Law is established, and that will take years.

KJ

Agreed.

Probably the key here is realizing these are GUIDELINES. Whether or not they are put in place as part of a grand conspiracy, get decided by political contributions, or put in place to more broadly protect consumers doesn't matter.

No matter how you slice it they are a moving target until there are enough FTC cases to review - and even THEN they are still going to be a moving target in many cases as it's just impossible for any Guidelines to cover every possible scenario.

Thanks

Signature

Work At Home Truth - Extra Income Edition | Swindles.org

{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[1268004].message }}

Marc2008

15 years ago

So let me ask the big guys on here this one. Steven and Jeremy, two people I look up to and feel are my mentors in a sense. Or anybody else can answer this really. Is this mainly going to effect the make money crowd of sellers online? Whether it be Stocks, Real Estate, Make My Online, etc..?

Thanks

Signature

Hot, new, well-written Loan Modification PLR Article Pack. One of the most profitable and highest converting CPA niches out. Get em before they are gone.

{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[1267779].message }}

Kim Standerline

15 years ago

If I recall correctly, Martin also gives a chunk of that affiliate income to charity.

BTW I saved just over £8000 a couple of years ago using moneysavingexpert. I got all the money back from an insurance I'd been sold falsely. wouldn't have known anything about it if I hadn't read about it in Martin's newsletter. If you are in the UK it's a must read

Kim

Originally Posted by Nick Brighton

Here's A perfect example of a website that has been doing it "the right way" for years before this ruling, is www.moneysavingexpert.com/

Martin (the website owner) is a trusted source of information, appearing on TV and radio regularly.

And wherever an affiliate link appears, he signals it with an asterix, and then explains to the reader that if you click that link, his company makes a direct profit.

And I recall him saying in an interview that his site generates tens of thousands of pounds per month in affiliate advertising revenue.

So perhaps it won't affect your sales to be honest, transparant and law abiding after all...

...providing you give value, people will always click your links.

He's not saying that at all, and I can assure you we have our fair share of scummy politicians in the UK unfortunately

Originally Posted by Mark-Dickenson

First of all, you act like we are all scamming people and being misleading. That is not the case

Thats because you don't live in the states. You see, many of these people in gov who write and enforce these rules/laws aren't fit to work at a McDonalds

Thanks

Signature

The Easiest Dimesale Script Ever!!

EasyMemberPro is back with Mama
How To Write And Profit From Hot Romance (Kindle Product)

{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[1268646].message }}

You think the FTC's new rules are out to get you? Then I hope they do...

Trending Topics

Infographic: How B2B marketers on LinkedIn can maximise their efforts for better audience reach

Any thoughts on golf's latest phenom...Scottie Scheffler??

What's the Best IM-Related Skill to Learn Today That Can Help in the Future?

best high quality crypto traffic.

Some interesting stats about brand comms