The Senate is investigating deceptive sweepstakes practices. These companies target the elderly and make them think they will receive a bunch of money, but in reality they never see any of it.
The most popular of these scams is called Social Security. – Source ahajokes
After reading this article, there seems to be a lot of confusion as to what a scam is.
If I am selling brown poo to you but I tell you that it is a much more expensive blue poo and you buy expecting the blue stuff, then I scammed you.
If I have blue pooh and the street value is worth $10 but I sell it to you for $100 because I have also given you the opportunity to flush it down my golden toilet, then it isn’t a scam….
And it isn’t a scam if I don’t give you that option but you decide to buy it anyway for $100 when the street value is $10. You’ve elected to purchase the poo at the price because you thought that it would be worth it
If I told you that a friend of mine who bought my blue pooh rubbed it on his face and it cleared up his acne instantly and that it may do the same for you, that isn’t a scam either…unless I manufactured the friend or lied about what really happened.
If 100 people bought my blue pooh and only 50 people got the result my friend did and I told you that it works for some people but not for others and you bought it anyway, then I haven’t scammed you….I’ve warned you about the possibility that it wouldn’t work.
If I am selling you something based on curating the content from around the internet and doing research, then it isn’t a scam either. I have taken the time to find the information and you are saving time by using the information that I found.
On the other hand, if I am vague about something, calling it a “secret” to entice you and you get it thinking that you are getting something entirely different, then it could be that you were scammed.
Someone that takes your email address and resells it to a boiler room (or even their brother) may be a scumbag for doing it, but they certainly aren’t a scammer….unless of course, they told you on the front end that they weren’t going to share your information…and even then, you weren’t necessarily scammed…you were lied to. Big Name Companies do it all the time in banking and finance. Boiler rooms don’t just use small time operatives.
When do you think a scam is a scam?
image attribution- http://www.flickr.com/photos/41918841@N03/3937682774/
No related posts.
would it be a scam if you said: “this isn’t the same blue poo you can buy on the street” (although, in reality, it is the same) and go further to say that “this is a secret blue poo you can’t find anywhere else” (you can, but the nature of blue poo makes this difficult to verify- Especially because you can’t inspect the blue poo or compare it to the blue poo on the street until after purchase.) Could you at that point, looking at the blue poo in your hand, realize this is the same blue poo on you tube, or a thousand blogs, for free (or super cheap)? Scam may not be a 100% accurate term, but the transaction is dishonest.
I think the droid is good at pointing out that it is human nature to be susceptible to these marketing methods, and therefore, the moral responsibility lies with those who become aware of methods to abuse these tendencies dishonestly, with little regard for the very real destruction they have wrought on the lives of others. The people mentioned in the article seem to get off on plausible deniability. They can always say that it is the consumer’s job not to get scammed, but at the same time, they specifically target those people who are desperate and vulnerable and much more likely to fall victim to deceptive marketing.
Hey Kerry,
What you are talking about is ad copy and I agree with you that if the copy promises something that is exclusive to the content, then indeed, you could say that you were snookered. But you could argue that a lot of print books do that as well (4 hour workweek, for example). As well as a lot of products that aren’t in the make money online market (dating, diet, fitness, health, real estate, debt control, finance, gambling, website hacks, life hacks, etc.)
The difference of course, is that the scams that the article (and the droid) attack are in the MMO world.
To be fair to Frank Kern (the guy who the article displays constantly across the article), he teaches the same ad copy techniques that Dan Kennedy teaches, who is a direct marketer, more famous, but in a different market. And the products that I have of his don’t necessarily promise the world but off techniques to improve your ad copy. Are they found elsewhere? Sure. Does it warrant a $2k price tag? Depends on how much you value his opinion I guess. Is it a scam? Not by the definition. Nor is it draped in mystery beyond what it has to be.
Bloggers like the Salty Droid lost me when they started attacking the people personally and diving into relationships, divorces and personal life. His videos, his audios and his pictures are made to demonstrate his opinion and it is easy to attack those who are on the top. You may think that that is okay. I think that is as despicable as some of the people he profiles.
Anything can be found online these days for free. But that doesn’t mean that if you were to write a book about how to install wordpress and sell it for $10 when it can be found for free online, that it automatically doesn’t have value to someone who either doesn’t know where to look or doesn’t want to go searching for it.
Thanks for your reply, Kerry. I always love it when opinions differ because it helps bring more clarity no matter which side of the fence you are on.
Leo-
I suppose I am not interested in defending the Droid. I don’t think he really needs defending because he is what he is. But as an observer, here’s a shot at a defense: I think a lot of his readers are very angry, and the Droid provides a great place to express their anger. It is not always appropriate, but that is part of the package. I think his righteous muck raking appeals to his readers because, not in spite of the often inappropriate aspects of the blog. They want it to get personal because it is personal for them (those who feel victimized).
Recently the Droid made an appeal for more activity on the part of his community. He seems to realize the need for a more objective and restrained platform for the public scrutiny of the business practices of online gurus, etc. I do not think the Droid feels that is the calling of the Droid. The Droid is supposed to be enraged and act accordingly.
The question is does his community feel victimized because they were victimized by the ones he chooses to attack or were they victimized by someone else who ripped them off and now they have a vendetta against all the people who create products such as these.
I would be interested in seeing the percentage of people who felt scammed by the people he attacks. Those that actually bought it and what they thought they were going to get when they bought it.
The droid doesn’t attack the “syndicate” by calling them a scam out and out most of the time. Instead, he calls their products over priced and accuses them of price point manipulation. But doesn’t the market decide what a product is supposed to be priced by the actions of the buyer?
Does the market determine price in these cases? Isn’t that why they usually operate by means of “the launch”? So that there is no real chance for the market to respond to the actual quality of the product? So that by the time there are any actual reviews of the product (beyond affiliate produced reviews/sales pages), the product is already “closed”? I think the prices are set for launches based on what you can get from “hyper-responsive buyers” in order to get the “benefits” that are claimed on the sale letter/video. By the time the market would have adjusted based on the reality of product vs. claims of sales letter, the sellers have already moved on.
BTW- I do appreciate your opinion and am enjoying this exchange.
Thanks for this post Leo. Over the last week I have read/watched a tsunami of information regarding The Internet Marketing scams. In my opinion your post has a lot of sensitivity and intelligent thought in it. Very refreshing.
I like these sorts of exchanges as well. Well, the launch does obfuscate the price point but remember, these aren’t fly-by-night companies we are talking about. Stompernet, Frank Kern, Eban Pagan and all the others aren’t simply delivering one product and fading away into the night…they are continuously building their brand with product after product. So, you could say that if you put out a poor product for $2k and then launched another product 6 months from now, you should get some rather poor opinions based on the first product.
This is rarer than you would think. Frank Kern has an army of people that are non-affiliates that like his stuff and are willing to pay top dollar for it.
I can’t say much for the others because I have never bought any of their products.
So… is the current U.S. “higher education industry” a scam? Interesting thoughts here about that…
http://blogmaverick.com/2012/05/13/the-coming-meltdown-in-college-education-why-the-economy-wont-get-better-any-time-soon/
That’s actually a pretty good article. And grounded. Reminded me of the article I read about Paypal’s CEO offering high school grads 100k to start their own business rather than go to college b/c he feels essentially the same way.
http://www.fastweb.com/student-life/articles/3146-paypal-ceo-pays-students-100k-to-quit-college
Interesting follow up to these thoughts here…
http://www.openculture.com/2012/05/why_the_university_system_as_we_know_it_cant_last.html
…plus an intro to an awesome site in case you’ve not already discovered it.
Twitter: imTodd
says:
Hi Leo,
I have to mostly agree with Kerry. If you’re selling poo to people who are knowledgable enough to know the difference between “real” blue poo, and plain old brown poo, then caveat emptor is a viable fall back upon which to proclaim you “innocent” intentions.
The problem is when we know that the content of most blue poo is simply “how to make your own blue poo (by bundling brown poo), then sell it to other people who also want to learn how to make and sell blue poo”.
Ultimately, at the end of the day, there are only so many buyers who are actually sophisicated enought to really do anything with your blue poo recipe. The rest are just wasting their money … and you know it .. but you don’t care .. because .. caveat emptor.
In other words, the defense that “some” people really do take this information, and make money with it, is not really a defense. It’s all predicated on the presence, somewhere along the line, of “dumb money”. Without the dumb money, nobody makes money.
In fairness, this is not a principle that’s limited to Internet marketing. The same could certainly also be said about the stock market for instance.
In the end I think it really comes down to exactly how literal you want to be in defining the word “ethical”.
Todd Morris recently posted..Goodbye Out Of Shape Todd
Thanks Todd. I always find these types of conversations stimulating. Probably diversive…but stimulating nonetheless.