Guru bashing the guru's a real smackdown...

Hi,

This is really interesting. It's clear for anyone to see that Jim has earnt a ton of respect over a long period with many people. That's a great thing, to be admired, and not the easiest or the most common thing in this industry.

But those things on one side, I still think he dropped the ball, unless I'm missing who his target market is. Is his target market the 'oldies'? (forgive the term.)

Are any of the people who have stood up for him here going to slap down $997?

If it isn't the oldies, then who is it?

Because in my opinion, that one statement near the start, that one piece of 'clumsy humour' (if that's what it was) scuppered the whole thing and I reckon many people who previously hadn't heard of him, never got much further than that part.

Lots of buyers can relate to the story he told about buying rubbish for $100 and feeling disappointed. But to bring that up and then (intentionally or not) mislead them right from the start is not going to endear people to his message - it just seems like more of the same and a little 'bandwagonish'. I doubt he meant to do it, but the fact is - he did. It just needs a little edit (in my opinion).

And the fact that it draws a thread title such as - 'Guru bashing the guru's a real smackdown...' demonstrates my point. It wasn't a real smackdown at all. He bashed someone called 'guru'. Is he not friends with any of these gurus?

Let's put it into context - over the last year or two there have been a slew of products called guru killer, google annihilator etc which all run on the theme of 'getting back at the big bad guy who tricked you by prospering from them.' And many IM gurus jumped on this bandwagon too, it wasn't just an underground thing, it surpassed that - and that just left an even worse taste for a lot of people.

And virtually all of those products had one thing in common - they might as well have been a box full of air - there was nothing to them at all. So people have had a gutful of the 'misleading advertising related to guru bashing.' If you're going to position yourself as 'the one who puts things right' I think you have to be very careful, because people are going to be expecting you to be using the same 'trick' - they are anticipating the 'double bluff.'

So IF Jim was aiming for any of the crowd that didn't already instantly know his name, I DO feel that that one small error was worth noting.

And whether you feel that the things he explained in the video such as this made up for it -

I feel that people are used to finding that product creators spend much more time polishing their message than they do their products. Therefore if someone drops the ball in their message, how many times do they do it in their product?

Just an observation - I have nothing against the fella and I'm not bashing him. I just saw something in there that immediately stood out and felt it was worth discussing. That's what we're here for, isn't it?

Hi,

I still feel the same and with each comment added, wonder if anyone understood the point of my two posts. I wasn't saying that he should name anyone, but I was saying that the comment -

...was ill-advised.

Is he only targetting the message at people who know him?

I doubt it. Therefore my point was that in the context of the whole message, and the fact that the comment was delivered right at the start, in the current market atmosphere, could make many viewers who DON'T know him and DON'T understand any of the background or the humour related to the comment - click away - therefore missing the main message of the videos which so many here are pointing out is a valuable one.

Regardless of how far removed his original intentions were from bait and switch, as others have confirmed here, that is the impression that many (who I would assume are his target market) were left with.

That was all I meant.