29th Dec 2014, 05:44 PM | #1 |
Advanced Warrior War Room Member Join Date: 2008
Posts: 712
Thanks: 148
Thanked 1,334 Times in 298 Posts
|
Hi everyone, We have decided to completely rewrite the rules for our Warrior Special Offer marketplace. We are focusing on building a high quality marketplace with special deals for our community that can not be found elsewhere. Please make sure you read all of the new rules before posting your WSO. All new offers will be moderated based on these new rules. Some notable changes include: Rule #3: Free Offers If your product is free, then this is to be posted in the Warrior Forum Classified Ads sub-forum. Rule #16: Buy Buttons Must Be Present To sell a WSO in the WSO Section of the forum, your offer must have a Buy Button that takes the user to a checkout. This link cannot take the user to your website, an order form or an opt-in page. This rule does not apply to other sections, such as Warriors for Hire or Classified Ads. Rule #17: Income Claims & Guarantees Sellers that make income claims may be asked to provide proof of income prior to their offer being approved. Sellers are strictly prohibited from offering income guarantees. This will be strictly enforced to protect the Warrior community. Rule #23: Warrior Forum trademark Sellers are not to use the Warrior Forum logo, branding or name in their sales copy. The name of your product should not imply that the product is affiliated with the Warrior Forum in any way. Examples include using the Warrior Forum logo in sales copy or including the word "Warrior" in the product title. |
The Following 53 Users Say Thank You to Alaister For This Useful Post: | .X., 658, adidam, All About Results, ateam, atlanta2008, benjamenjuan, BernardR, blackjack, Cali16, Daystar11, Debbie Kennedy-Crook, ebestsellers, Faisal66, ForumGuru, George Wright, HansM, hitman13, jkennedy, John Delavera, John Rogers, KatheLucas, Kay King, kdmpublishing, Kingshouse, KMgigs, KonaGirl, luckyman2k, Mark Loftis, Mark Singletary, marketingva, Michael Cruz, Mike Anthony, Naseer Ahmed, O0o0O, PaidAllDay, richardjes, RichBeck, richwolf, robin41, Ron Douglas, sbucciarel, shelahc, Steve Carty, Terry Jett, Tim Dini, tracker411, VegasGreg, wasket71, waterotter, Woodsusa, wordwizard, writingwonder |
29th Dec 2014, 08:08 PM | #2 | |
Boom Boom Boom Boom! War Room Member Join Date: 2002 Location: Rocky Mountain High Country
Posts: 6,760
Thanks: 6,657
Thanked 15,198 Times in 7,727 Posts
|
| |
Discover the fastest and easiest ways to create your own valuable products. Tons of FREE Public Domain content you can use to make your own content, PLR, digital and POD products. | ||
29th Dec 2014, 08:57 PM | #3 | |
VIP Warrior War Room Member Join Date: 2009 Location: US of A
Posts: 11,248
Thanks: 1,830
Thanked 4,588 Times in 2,945 Posts
|
I think we could do with some clarification on the "may" part of the above rule. As in the circumstances where proof is more likely to be asked for and where it is less likely to be asked for. Also what kind of proof - given that screen shots of bank accounts etc are notorious in MMO offers and often fake. | |
| ||
29th Dec 2014, 09:41 PM | #4 | |
Advanced Warrior War Room Member Join Date: 2008
Posts: 712
Thanks: 148
Thanked 1,334 Times in 298 Posts
|
Hi Kurt, These rules apply to the WSO marketplace forums. The purpose of Rule #23 is to prevent people from misleading buyers by using the Warrior Forum name.
In regards to this we'll be judging the quality of the offers and focusing on presenting value to the community. If there is a great product and offer where the seller does provide income claims we'll ask them for some sort of proof in order to verify it and protect buyers as much as possible. At times income claims when backed up with proof is important when trying to sell certain products. In terms of the actual proof, the onus is on the seller to provide sufficient evidence for the offer to be approved. As you mentioned screenshots can be faked so we'll definitely be looking at them closely. When we do decide to approve an offer with an income claim, we'll clearly state the sort of proof that was provided by the seller and it's still up to the buyer whether they want to proceed to purchase or not. The point of this is to prevent sellers trying to artificially generate hype around their product with unverified or even falsified claims. Income guarantees or promises of any sort will not be allowed. An example of this would be a headline like "How you can make $10,000+ in the next 7 days". | |
The Following 6 Users Say Thank You to Alaister For This Useful Post: |
29th Dec 2014, 11:49 PM | #5 |
VIP Warrior War Room Member Join Date: 2002 Location: Over Yonder
Posts: 3,913
Thanks: 3,502
Thanked 5,506 Times in 2,624 Posts
Blog Entries: 1 |
Regarding #10 - paid video testimonials, does that include written ones as well? Last week there was a mention that blind offers were disallowed but I didn't see anything where that was mentioned. I know that it will be hard to explain offers in some cases without giving the secret/process away, but in many cases of blind copy the results are not good because the buyers get something they would never have bought if they had known. Mark |
The Following 2 Users Say Thank You to Mark Singletary For This Useful Post: |
29th Dec 2014, 11:52 PM | #6 | |
VIP Warrior War Room Member Join Date: 2002 Location: Over Yonder
Posts: 3,913
Thanks: 3,502
Thanked 5,506 Times in 2,624 Posts
Blog Entries: 1 |
Of course, it's hard to track these things down but it wouldn't be good for some know-it-all to claim the WF doesn't have a rule against sharing review copies - only paid copies. Mark | |
29th Dec 2014, 11:54 PM | #7 | |
Advanced Warrior War Room Member Join Date: 2008
Posts: 712
Thanks: 148
Thanked 1,334 Times in 298 Posts
|
Yeh this is a good point. This rule will apply to both written and video testimonials. I'll make the change now. Blind ads are addressed in rule #20. Rule #20: No Blind Ads Sellers must not post blind ads. This is an ad where you advise what the product is not rather than what it is. Your product should be clearly understood by both moderators and members. | |
The Following 4 Users Say Thank You to Alaister For This Useful Post: |
29th Dec 2014, 11:57 PM | #9 | |
VIP Warrior War Room Member Join Date: 2002 Location: Over Yonder
Posts: 3,913
Thanks: 3,502
Thanked 5,506 Times in 2,624 Posts
Blog Entries: 1 |
Mark | |
30th Dec 2014, 12:00 AM | #10 |
Advanced Warrior War Room Member Join Date: 2008
Posts: 712
Thanks: 148
Thanked 1,334 Times in 298 Posts
| |
30th Dec 2014, 12:03 AM | #11 | |
Advanced Warrior War Room Member Join Date: 2008
Posts: 712
Thanks: 148
Thanked 1,334 Times in 298 Posts
|
| |
30th Dec 2014, 01:05 AM | #13 |
Advanced Warrior War Room Member Join Date: 2008
Posts: 712
Thanks: 148
Thanked 1,334 Times in 298 Posts
| |
30th Dec 2014, 02:11 AM | #14 | |
Virtual Coach War Room Member Join Date: 2009 Location: NJ
Posts: 1,700
Thanks: 1,757
Thanked 1,928 Times in 877 Posts
Blog Entries: 20 |
Since it's case by case.... if a paid WSO is rejected, will the reasons why its rejected be shared in the followup email so folks know what to change? | |
| ||
The Following User Says Thank You to barbling For This Useful Post: |
30th Dec 2014, 02:32 AM | #15 | |
Advanced Warrior War Room Member Join Date: 2008
Posts: 712
Thanks: 148
Thanked 1,334 Times in 298 Posts
|
We will be providing people with feedback with the reasons why WSOs are rejected. | |
The Following 6 Users Say Thank You to Alaister For This Useful Post: |
30th Dec 2014, 05:38 AM | #16 |
VIP Warrior War Room Member Join Date: 1997 Location: Erie, PA
Posts: 9,051
Thanks: 2,899
Thanked 17,185 Times in 4,875 Posts
Blog Entries: 4 |
Alaister, As I was reading through those, I kept nodding my head and thinking, "Yes," "Nice clarification," "Yep," "Good stuff," etc. Then I hit rule #17 and the Hallelujah Chorus went off in my head. No more income promises. The single most important and positive change in policy here in years. I also liked the emphasis on civility of comments, the specific list of "spammy" offers that aren't allowed, and the restatement that WSOs must be special offers exclusively for visitors to this forum. And the multiple mentions of how to report problems and encouragement to do so. There are others, but rule #17 is the biggie. I'd have said "No guarantees of income or specific results," to avoid the "Rank #1 in Google in 4 hours" stuff, but this is still an enormous jump forward. Nicely done, gentlemen. Paul |
| |
The Following 12 Users Say Thank You to Paul Myers For This Useful Post: |
30th Dec 2014, 08:07 AM | #17 |
Banned War Room Member Join Date: 2011 Location: Arkansas, USA
Posts: 199
Thanks: 362
Thanked 247 Times in 149 Posts
|
Great changes! Two questions: 1. If we already have some free WSOs out there, do we need to either add a buy button (with a price) or do we need to pay the $20 for re-listing in classifieds.. or do you guys plan to move all free WSOs to their proper sub forum? 2. Some of the clearly defined previous text was removed in that WSO products must be created by the seller or a partner of the seller and are 100% unique to the seller. The way it reads now someone could argue that they edited some PLR to "make it their own". I just thought this might could use some further clarification. |
The Following 4 Users Say Thank You to jkennedy For This Useful Post: |
30th Dec 2014, 08:30 AM | #19 |
Banned War Room Member Join Date: 2011 Location: Arkansas, USA
Posts: 199
Thanks: 362
Thanked 247 Times in 149 Posts
| |
30th Dec 2014, 08:30 AM | #20 | |
VIP Warrior War Room Member Join Date: 2004 Location: Ohio
Posts: 15,872
Thanks: 29,227
Thanked 28,273 Times in 13,485 Posts
|
Some really positive changes in the new rules. It's obvious FL put a lot of thought into the new requirements and I think they'll help resurrect the WSO section. kay | |
Saving one dog will not change the world - but the world changes forever for that one dog *** If liar's pants really did catch on fire, watching the news would be a lot more fun. | ||
The Following 2 Users Say Thank You to Kay King For This Useful Post: |
30th Dec 2014, 01:14 PM | #21 | |
Boom Boom Boom Boom! War Room Member Join Date: 2002 Location: Rocky Mountain High Country
Posts: 6,760
Thanks: 6,657
Thanked 15,198 Times in 7,727 Posts
|
The "letter" of the rule says calling it the WARRIOR FORUM would be against the rules. However, I believe the "intent" of the rule would be that it's OK to use "Warrior" since it is a Warrior Forum Forum.... | |
Discover the fastest and easiest ways to create your own valuable products. Tons of FREE Public Domain content you can use to make your own content, PLR, digital and POD products. | ||
30th Dec 2014, 03:04 PM | #22 | |
VIP Warrior War Room Member Join Date: 2008 Location: Wisconsin, USA.
Posts: 4,730
Thanks: 5,684
Thanked 8,919 Times in 4,582 Posts
Blog Entries: 2 |
I ask because screenshots and videos can be faked in ways that are undetectable to visual inspection. There aren't many ways to provide proof I can think of that couldn't be easily faked, and of those I can think of, most aren't likely to be something many will want to do. | |
Just when you think you've got it all figured out, someone changes the rules.
| ||
30th Dec 2014, 03:47 PM | #23 | |||||
HyperActive Warrior War Room Member Join Date: 2010 Location: Sydney, Australia
Posts: 128
Thanks: 48
Thanked 241 Times in 116 Posts
|
We will be rolling these out to existing offers over the next few weeks, but they do apply to all new offers being submitted. | |||||
The Following 4 Users Say Thank You to danieljb For This Useful Post: |
30th Dec 2014, 04:22 PM | #24 |
Boom Boom Boom Boom! War Room Member Join Date: 2002 Location: Rocky Mountain High Country
Posts: 6,760
Thanks: 6,657
Thanked 15,198 Times in 7,727 Posts
|
Actually, the High Voltage forum has a WSO thread. Part of the agreement I had with Allen was that the WSO would be bumped automatically, the same with the Kindle forum. However, when you guys took over, you removed the auto-bump for these two Warrior Forum WSOs.
|
Discover the fastest and easiest ways to create your own valuable products. Tons of FREE Public Domain content you can use to make your own content, PLR, digital and POD products. | |
30th Dec 2014, 04:27 PM | #25 |
HyperActive Warrior War Room Member Join Date: 2010 Location: Sydney, Australia
Posts: 128
Thanks: 48
Thanked 241 Times in 116 Posts
|
The WSO thread about the High Voltage Forum is fine because it is a part of the Warrior Forum. The rule is about addressing sellers using terms that imply affiliation with the forum when the WSO is in no way endorsed by us.
|
30th Dec 2014, 05:55 PM | #26 | |
VIP Warrior War Room Member Join Date: 2008 Location: Wisconsin, USA.
Posts: 4,730
Thanks: 5,684
Thanked 8,919 Times in 4,582 Posts
Blog Entries: 2 |
The "pay-per-click" example could be anything (list building, SEO, video marketing, etc.). Are you going to have an expert in each topic on staff? Otherwise how can someone evaluate the quality of something they know nothing about? This raises another question. Suppose a moderator reviews a product and approves it. Can the seller say "moderator reviewed and approved" in his sales copy? | |
Just when you think you've got it all figured out, someone changes the rules.
| ||
The Following 3 Users Say Thank You to Dennis Gaskill For This Useful Post: |
31st Dec 2014, 12:14 AM | #27 |
The Telecom Boss Join Date: 2014
Posts: 28
Thanks: 14
Thanked 6 Times in 4 Posts
|
You saved the forums. Literally. These changes needed to be made. Bravo.
|
Don't be duped into tricking others for money. Click here to learn how an average person can make over 100K telemarketing for Top Tier Telecom Providers | |
The Following 3 Users Say Thank You to JNAssociates For This Useful Post: |
31st Dec 2014, 07:39 AM | #28 | |
Russell Hayes War Room Member Join Date: 2009 Location: Denver
Posts: 3,995
Thanks: 1,622
Thanked 1,972 Times in 1,063 Posts
Blog Entries: 6 |
First I'd like to commend you guys on making changes to the rules with the goal of improving the WSO market place. Alaister, we've had enough private exchanges for you to know I'm very critical thinker so take that in stride with my post. haha I totally get that the Forum wants offers to avoid the appearance of not being affiliated with products being sold by not allowing the use of the word Warrior or WSO etc. etc., in titles and copy but on the other hand screening income claims and verifying them is a type of endorsement and as such sends mixed signals to every one. Then posting on the sellers thread (I'm assuming that's what will happen), that the income claims were investigated and verified? You might not deem that as an endorsement but don't you think it's possible buyers will see it as an endorsement? I think they will. What happens when an income claim gets past the moderator but it was posted that the claim was verified and it turns out the forum got duped? Look, I'm all for improving the offers but the forum is basically acting as a fiduciary on behalf of buyers by screening income claims. How about not allowing income claims period. You'll save moderators tons of time and you'll avoid the appearance of endorsing a WSO which is what you're actually trying to avoid by not allowing the use of your trademarks in the copy and titles. Right? The word "may" in rule 17 is clearly a waffle! What this tells me is that the forum is going to pick and choose which income claims they are going to investigate. Again sending mixed signals to buyers and vendors alike! Think of it this way... Offer A has an income claim for which the forum investigated, verified, and posted or notified potential buyers as such. I'm guessing on the actual thread. Offer B which is perhaps in the same niche as offer A also has an income claim but it's not as much as offer A so it gets passed without investigation and as such there's nothing on B's offer that states it was verified. I don't know about you but as a buyer I'm not BUYING offer B because I see the forums investigation and verification as an endorsement so I'm heading over to Offer A and buying that instead. So now you've taken vendor B's money and sort of screwing him at the same time, that's how I see it. Truthfully if you want your verification of income claims to really mean something then NO ONE should get a free pass, every single income claim should be verified. Also I'd like to point out the rule 18 could use a little clarification about opt ins. Some WSO's are offers to join membership sites and new customers need to register to the site to get the access to all the content. Are you considering this a forced opt in and if not could we get a little clarification added to rule 18 please? Could you please make more clear the logic behind allowing vendors to immediately bump their WSO as soon as it falls off of page one? I think I get why it's a benefit to the forum but not to vendors. = )
| |
| ||
The Following 2 Users Say Thank You to Rus Sells For This Useful Post: |
31st Dec 2014, 07:48 AM | #29 | |
Russell Hayes War Room Member Join Date: 2009 Location: Denver
Posts: 3,995
Thanks: 1,622
Thanked 1,972 Times in 1,063 Posts
Blog Entries: 6 |
If my offer has to be subjected to this level of scrutiny you better believe I want the right to say moderator reviewed and approved because that's the truth! Again it's another form of endorsement if you ask me. lol | |
| ||
The Following User Says Thank You to Rus Sells For This Useful Post: |
31st Dec 2014, 08:19 AM | #30 |
Banned War Room Member Join Date: 2007 Location: Virginia, USA.
Posts: 16,866
Thanks: 5,852
Thanked 13,082 Times in 6,963 Posts
Blog Entries: 1 |
I agree with Rus that putting a moderation note in any of the sales threads that the income claims have been "proven" when it is nigh impossible to really prove them, would be taken as an endorsement and should it turn out to be a dodgy offer that indeed, the income claims were not based in reality, the Warrior Forum would possibly have liability for providing that endorsement... or at the very least, look complicit or discredited.
|
The Following 4 Users Say Thank You to sbucciarel For This Useful Post: |
31st Dec 2014, 09:25 AM | #31 | |
VIP Warrior War Room Member Join Date: 2009 Location: US of A
Posts: 11,248
Thanks: 1,830
Thanked 4,588 Times in 2,945 Posts
|
However the whole issue of no income claims is slippery because MMO is in itself an income claim.You could say no specific income claim but I suspect there would be people in the copy writers section chomping at the bits to imply incomes with out being specific. | |
| ||
The Following User Says Thank You to Mike Anthony For This Useful Post: |
31st Dec 2014, 09:35 AM | #32 | |
Russell Hayes War Room Member Join Date: 2009 Location: Denver
Posts: 3,995
Thanks: 1,622
Thanked 1,972 Times in 1,063 Posts
Blog Entries: 6 |
Oh the irony of having an advertising platform for making money online products that doesn't allow income claims. LOL Advertisers have rights to you know, hell they paid for the ad right? kekeke
| |
| ||
31st Dec 2014, 09:41 AM | #33 |
VIP Warrior War Room Member Join Date: 2009 Location: US of A
Posts: 11,248
Thanks: 1,830
Thanked 4,588 Times in 2,945 Posts
|
Yeah that was my point. So I think it probably would be better for the rules to focus on the kind of income claims and/or disclaimers that should or should not be allowed rather than verification. Thats going to prove impossible to truly do and not allowing any kind of income claim would be financial suicide.
|
| |
The Following User Says Thank You to Mike Anthony For This Useful Post: |
31st Dec 2014, 03:28 PM | #34 |
It's a "DRY" Heat War Room Member Join Date: 2007 Location: Arizona
Posts: 1,578
Thanks: 341
Thanked 369 Times in 219 Posts
|
I thought FREE WSO's are being MOVED to the Classifieds Ad Section... I see MANY posts on the WSO Thread today that are "FREE" Some are "bumps" from existing and past WSO's, are these NOT being MOVED too? One person has 4 threads that are nothing more than sign up for my FREE Coaching program... I realize this process may take some time, but is there NOT a mechanism to MOVE existing threads to another Section? I've run a few forums and each had a feature where an administrator could MOVE existing threads... Anyway, I think the new changes are a GREAT move in the right direction...Thanks for taking the time to IMPROVE the Warrior WSO thread... ~AzSno... |
| |
31st Dec 2014, 07:57 PM | #35 | |
Advanced Warrior War Room Member Join Date: 2011 Location: Somewhere In Time
Posts: 846
Thanks: 548
Thanked 503 Times in 346 Posts
Blog Entries: 4 |
Alaister, I am really impressed with the effort to clean things up.... Awesome work! Off the top of my head, there are several WSOs that fall into these categories...... What will become of these "old" WSOs? Will they be moved.... or deleted?
| |
31st Dec 2014, 08:03 PM | #36 | ||
Advanced Warrior War Room Member Join Date: 2011 Location: Somewhere In Time
Posts: 846
Thanks: 548
Thanked 503 Times in 346 Posts
Blog Entries: 4 |
The "slippery slope" comes in with any income claims.... Here's why..... You'd have to use net income... or bottom line... Why? The seller says he "made" $500,000....... He may have $500,000 come in the front door..... But, he conveniently "forgets" the.... $275,000 paid to affiliates..... $100,000 for paid traffic..... Plus, thousands in other expenses..... He may have $120,000 in net income...... while he says he "made" $500,000... That is a massive difference. In order to provide any remotely accurate income statements, it would take many, many hours of research and verification..... This would be similar to performing "Due Diligence" before buying a company. It would be simpler to go with "No guarantees of income or specific results" as Paul wrote. It is not a big deal if everyone is forced to follow the same rules. | ||
The Following 2 Users Say Thank You to RichBeck For This Useful Post: |
31st Dec 2014, 08:27 PM | #37 |
Mark J. Collins War Room Member Join Date: 2011 Location: Tokyo, Japan
Posts: 157
Thanks: 38
Thanked 198 Times in 149 Posts
|
In your post you mentioned specifically that the word warrior couldn't be used. If someone had a site such as marketingwarrior ]dot] com and produced a series of wso's that included the words "a marketingwarrior production".... would this be permitted? The above site is a purely made up name and if there is such a site, I am unaware of it and just using an example. But I ask because I do have a site with the word warrior(s) in the name and was thinking of offering a series of trainings that would be branded with the... "site name productions". Example: "a marketingwarrior production" Mark |
31st Dec 2014, 09:11 PM | #38 | |
Advanced Warrior War Room Member Join Date: 2011 Location: Somewhere In Time
Posts: 846
Thanks: 548
Thanked 503 Times in 346 Posts
Blog Entries: 4 |
With any trademarked name, if it is in a related Trademark Classification to my business, I would be hesitant to use it...... (Note: Link goes to a third party site listing Trademark Classifications for examples) The only reason why I could think you would want to use "a marketingwarrior production" in the IM space is to imply a connection with Warrior Forum... This will probably lead to WF sending you a "friendly" cease and desist letter... as they need to protect their Trademark... and reputation. Why not choose another name? A Solid Marketing Production A Michael Ray Jones Marketing Production A Sunmedia Marketing Production I could go on and on.... There is no shortage of options as far as names go.... Note: I am writing "you" in general... relating it to your post about the "theoretical" scenario .... Not specifically to you, Mark. :-) | |
31st Dec 2014, 10:41 PM | #39 | |
Mark J. Collins War Room Member Join Date: 2011 Location: Tokyo, Japan
Posts: 157
Thanks: 38
Thanked 198 Times in 149 Posts
|
All that said, your assumption that the only reason I would use such a reference would be for the purpose to connect myself to the WF is completely wrong and offbase. If I made a reference to my site, the reason would be to brand my products and me. Not to the WF, but to my site and line of products that were a series of marketing training and tools. I am no lawyer, but I do know a bit of business law. It is unlikely that anyone could claim exclusive rights to a word as general as warrior. That said, it may well be with in legal rights for warrior forum to disallow any reference to that word in a paid advertisement on their site. So again, I am not here to argue whether it is ok. I was ASKING A QUESTION. Can you understand the difference? If WF says I can't or they don't like or don't want... no problem. I just won't do it. And I have not made up my mind to do it even if they say ok. So your reference that I might get a cease and desist is also way out of line, because I am asking the question first, and then will move forward based on WF answer. So if they say no, don't do it, then I wouldn't do it. I am quite sure others would just jump and suffer the consequences afterwards, but that is not my style. I ask and move forward based on my understanding of what I am told. So again, for general and future understanding I just want to clarify with someone from WF... is the use of the word warrior completely off limits in any circumstances with a wso? Or only not allowed if used to make it appear that the offer is somehow directly related or specially approved by WF? Which? Mark | |
Last edited on 31st Dec 2014 at 11:53 PM. Reason: spelling error | ||
The Following 2 Users Say Thank You to NetSensei For This Useful Post: |
31st Dec 2014, 10:57 PM | #40 | |||
Advanced Warrior War Room Member Join Date: 2011 Location: Somewhere In Time
Posts: 846
Thanks: 548
Thanked 503 Times in 346 Posts
Blog Entries: 4 |
You misread my post.... I was in no way arguing.... I intentionally called it a "theoretical" scenario....
Your answer lies in Post #1.....
Whether or not they can legally enforce this exclusive use of "Warrior" outside Warrior Forum in the Marketing category is another issue.... One would have to lookup what trademarks they own in what categories. | |||
The Following User Says Thank You to RichBeck For This Useful Post: |
31st Dec 2014, 11:42 PM | #41 |
Mark J. Collins War Room Member Join Date: 2011 Location: Tokyo, Japan
Posts: 157
Thanks: 38
Thanked 198 Times in 149 Posts
| |
1st Jan 2015, 12:16 AM | #42 |
HyperActive Warrior War Room Member Join Date: 2012
Posts: 196
Thanks: 486
Thanked 184 Times in 113 Posts
|
I don't think anyone should have to prove net income that's a bit tough to determine. ClickBank has had these proof of income requirements for years and they just want screenshots to show proof that the money was made. Also you can't prove that it was made from the method shown. You could sell products as a vendor and then post it as affiliate income for example. Still these rules will stop people from just going to google images and grabbing income proof for their sales letter. Also, most launches are self hosted now so it's not like this will revolutionize our industry. It might make the WSO section a little more honest. Should stop the affiliate reviews posted in the WSO section for google rankings too. |
1st Jan 2015, 01:27 AM | #43 |
HyperActive Warrior Join Date: 2013
Posts: 199
Thanks: 8
Thanked 7 Times in 5 Posts
|
The following WSO was closed. Can you tell me what is wrong so that I can correct it. Code: http://www.warriorforum.com/warrior-special-offers/962409-get-0-00-per-website-click-facebook-like-lowest-price-internet-guaranteed-2.html Or anybody that I can contact? Is it the title of the WSO or anything else? I have complied to all rules & it's been almost an year since this was up. But suddenly today it got closed. |
| |
1st Jan 2015, 12:18 PM | #44 | |
Advanced Warrior War Room Member Join Date: 2011 Location: Somewhere In Time
Posts: 846
Thanks: 548
Thanked 503 Times in 346 Posts
Blog Entries: 4 |
If you were looking into buying a "real" business and they told you they "made" $500,000 a year, you wouldn't want to know their yearly expenses? It is the same with MMO methods.... If the seller "makes" $50,000.... $35,000 goes to Affiliates.... $5,000 goes to paid traffic... The seller can say in his sales letter and other marketing materials he "made" $50,000? In MMO, that may make sense... In the "real" business world, everyone wants net income. | |
The Following User Says Thank You to RichBeck For This Useful Post: |
1st Jan 2015, 05:05 PM | #45 | ||
HyperActive Warrior War Room Member Join Date: 2010 Location: Sydney, Australia
Posts: 128
Thanks: 48
Thanked 241 Times in 116 Posts
|
The Help Desk is the best point of contact for quick response: Freelancer.com - Powered by Kayako Help Desk Software Warrior Forum - The #1 Internet Marketing Forum & Marketplace - Announcements in Forum : Warrior Special Offers
Income claims update: Thank you all for your input regarding this. We have revised rule #17: Rule #17: Income Claims & Guarantees Sellers are not to make claims around income that has been made unless this income can be verified through Warrior Payments. Sellers are not permitted to make claims about or imply that income will result from purchasing a WSO. This will be strictly enforced to protect the Warrior community. The only time income claims will be permitted is when in reference to a product being sold on Warrior Payments, as this is the only platform we can confirm accuracy. | ||
The Following User Says Thank You to danieljb For This Useful Post: |
1st Jan 2015, 07:31 PM | #46 | |
HyperActive Warrior War Room Member Join Date: 2012
Posts: 196
Thanks: 486
Thanked 184 Times in 113 Posts
|
What if I show you $500 in adwords spending and say I made $5,000 because I didn't show you the $6,000 I spend on Bing? Case closed end of story wake up it won't work. You aren't buying a business you're buying a WSO. | |
1st Jan 2015, 07:49 PM | #47 | |
VIP Warrior War Room Member Join Date: 2009 Location: US of A
Posts: 11,248
Thanks: 1,830
Thanked 4,588 Times in 2,945 Posts
|
Thats kind of going right into the territory that Rus and I were just discussing as financial suicide for this board. Either that or that new wording needs a whole lot more clarification . | |
| ||
The Following User Says Thank You to Mike Anthony For This Useful Post: |
1st Jan 2015, 08:17 PM | #48 | |
HyperActive Warrior War Room Member Join Date: 2012
Posts: 196
Thanks: 486
Thanked 184 Times in 113 Posts
|
In other words you can't say something like: follow this method and I guarantee you will make $500 a week. I would be more worried about the fact it says it has to be verified through Warrior Payments. So if you sold a product through JV Zoo or Warrior Plus or even ClickBank you can't put an income claim in your sales letter? My results on this forum have shown me that without and income claim you're dead in the water. | |
1st Jan 2015, 08:56 PM | #49 | ||
Advanced Warrior War Room Member Join Date: 2007 Location: USA
Posts: 877
Thanks: 3,590
Thanked 2,053 Times in 978 Posts
|
In other words, if the money-making method in your WSO is about fiverrr gigs, some sort of arbitrage, CPA, offering offline services, etc., you won't be able to make any income claim because it can't be verified via Warrior Payments. Perhaps I'm missing something here, but this is per Daniel's response in another thread (bolds are mine):
| ||
If you don't face your fears, the only thing you'll ever see is what's in your comfort zone. ~Anne McClain, astronaut | |||
The Following User Says Thank You to Cali16 For This Useful Post: |
1st Jan 2015, 09:06 PM | #50 | |
HyperActive Warrior War Room Member Join Date: 2010 Location: Sydney, Australia
Posts: 128
Thanks: 48
Thanked 241 Times in 116 Posts
|
Was the income made through Warrior Payments? Yes: Then sellers can talk about their income with figures in their copy. We will verify the accuracy. No: Then sellers cannot make income claims because we cannot verify this. | |
The Following 2 Users Say Thank You to danieljb For This Useful Post: |
Bookmarks |
Tags |
offer, rules, special, warrior, wso |
| |