Archive for the ‘Entrepreneurship’ Category

Do You Profit On Purpose?

Saturday, April 11th, 2009

In my review of Secrets of the Millionaire Mind, I basically just said “this is awful, don’t buy it.” I didn’t expect that review to get much attention, but it did. There was a lot of discussion in the comments about how much your mindset matters compared to the more tangible things.

I think mastering the inner game is hugely important; I just don’t think that book was very helpful in this regard. But today I came across something that is.

Mary Anne Fischer’s site is called i Profit On Purpose, and there are a couple of double meanings here. The lowercase “i” is for “internet,” as in i[insert Apple product here], and “on purpose” refers to life purpose. So it’s about consciously creating an online business that fits with who you are.

She has a free ebook called “What Everybody Ought to Know About Making Money Online.” It had been on my list of things to read, but I didn’t get around to it until Michael Martine gushed over Mary Anne in his latest Remarkablogger newsletter.

He got an early look at her not-yet-launched program and loved it. And while I haven’t seen her program, I can tell from her ebook that she knows what she’s talking about. She talks about things like core strengths, core genius, and the “you” factor, putting it all together to help you create an online business that’s both profitable and enjoyable.

I read through it pretty quickly because I’m trying to leave town, but I saw it as a very extensive overview of the personal considerations that most people ignore when building an online business. I’m very curious to learn more, and I hear from Michael that a lot more is coming.

If you get on her list, you’ll have a chance to win a full scholarship to her program when it launches, but the deadline is 1 AM EST Sunday morning. Sorry for the short notice, but I just discovered it myself.

Let me ask a very loaded question to get some conversation going: do you think an online business should take your passions, strengths, and life purpose into account, or is it better to follow a one-size-fits-all solution?

Post to Twitter

The Lie Of The Lie Of The 4-Hour Workweek

Sunday, March 29th, 2009


Photo by azrainman

Tim Ferriss wrote The 4-Hour Workweek. Then I wrote Why We’re Failing the 4-Hour Workweek. Now Jonathan Mead has written The Lie of The Four Hour Work Week. And I in turn will respond with The Lie of the Lie of the 4-Hour Workweek.

Just like Jonathan isn’t really accusing Tim of lying, I’m not really accusing Jonathan of lying. It just makes for a nice title. Plus, it sets up my critics to call their rebuttal post The Lie of the Lie of the Lie of the 4-Hour Workweek.

Tim says that we should find a way to not have to work so much, so we can do what we want. Jonathan says we shouldn’t think of work as something to avoid, but something that’s sacred, that lets us provide value and make a difference.

I agree with much of what Jonathan said. In fact, the only thing I really disagree with is his contention that what he and Tim are saying is really all that different.

We have a semantics problem here, in that people don’t really agree on what constitutes “work.” How can Tim not consider writing and marketing a best-selling book as work? What about doing his own TV show, being a champion tango dancer, building schools in Vietnam, etc? Don’t these things take a lot of effort? Yeah, but none of it is “work” to him.

I’m guilty of using the word “work” to mean two completely different things:
1. slavery, drudgery, tedium, burden, toiling, punishment, monotony
2. freedom, purpose, contribution, self-expression, making a difference, fulfilling your dreams

People are sometimes confused when I say something like “I want to retire so I can get my work done.” It’s because we have two definitions of work that are as different as night and day.

While I don’t feel like starting a movement to get the dictionary updated, let’s see if we can paraphrase Jonathan and Tim in terms of the definitions above.

Jonathan says: “Don’t think of what you do as work1, think of it as work2.”

Tim says: “Get your work1 done in just four hours a week, so you have more time for work2.”

These sound very similar to me!

While I agreed with much of what Jonathan said, some of his commenters really got to me. I’m going to quote them anonymously not because I’m stingy with link love, but because I’m going to be mean to them. Not just for the sake of being mean, but because they’re spewing nonsense like this:

“I actually had the four hour work week for about 18 months… I got so bored that I went and found a real job that paid me much less than I was earning from my four-hour work week business just because I wanted something to do.”

and this:

“I don’t believe he works 4 hours a week. I don’t believe anyone on their death bed will be satisfied with a life like that. That isn’t authentic happiness.”

and this:

“Most people would freak out with all the ‘psychic entropy’ if they had a 4-hour workweek. I know several rich entrepreneurs who did exactly that.”

and this:

“Tim Ferriss has some interesting ideas, but the key is NOT working LESS, but instead working MORE on things you LOVE.”

and this:

“I was a stay at home mom for while and could not take it after about 6 months. The lack of people interaction was mind numbing and I missed going to the office and taking trains. Nothing like a cup of joe from a cart on the corner. For those who like to go out, meet people and feel passionately about everything they do, that lifestyle would not be ideal.”

Did anybody actually read the book? Where is everyone getting the idea that Tim prescribed a life of sitting around and doing nothing all day? Is there some law that jobless people are not allowed to ride trains, get a cup of joe from a cart on the corner, go out, meet people, and feel passionate about everything they do? Tim specifically suggests pursuing a life of excitement and service, and his life is far from boring.

What bothers me the most about these comments is the insinuation that life is inherently worthless unless you have a master giving you assignments. Newsflash: if you can’t figure out what to do with your time, THE PROBLEM IS YOU.

Say you suddenly had complete time freedom. In this world of countless wonders, unprecedented technological advances, and critical problems to be solved, could you really not figure out a way to keep yourself occupied? I can’t imagine ever being bored with life no matter how long I lived, as long as I had the freedom to do what I wanted.

If you ever run out of things to do, you’ve overstayed your welcome on this planet. If you’re bored, I’m happy to give you some sacred work to do. But really, if you have nothing to live for until your boss tells you what to live for, you’re done. You’re already emotionally dead, so as a formality, you just need to complete the process by becoming physically dead. It should be a seamless transition for you.

I agree that one’s work should be sacred. Freud said “Love and work…work and love, that’s all there is.” But Freud’s work was a lot more exciting than putting cover sheets on TPS reports. Most people aren’t so fortunate, and it’s much more of a challenge for them to make a living from work that’s meaningful to them.

The commenter who missed going to the office actually touched on a good point. What if the job you already have is meaningful to you? Great! You don’t need to avoid your work because you like it. Do your work and be happy.

I agree that a job can be great. I’ve even been there myself. But in my experience, things always change. If you like your job now, will you still like it when you have a new manager, or they transfer you to another department, or the company goes out of business? I’d rather be in control so that I know I’ll like my work every day.

And yeah, Tim and I are a little more job-averse than most. I came across a very interesting study through @phdbre and @thembti on Twitter, in which job dissatisfaction was compared among different Myers-Briggs types.

The study found that the types most likely to be very dissatisfied with their job are ISTP (like Tim), INTP (like me), and ENFJ. None of the INFJs, INTJs, ENTJs, or ESTPs were very dissatisfied with their job.

What ISTP and INTP have in common is that they’re the two types whose dominant function is introverted thinking. I’m not sure why the ENFJs are in that group. They’re called “the great communicators;” maybe there aren’t a lot of jobs for great communicators out there.

Anyway, people all want to do different kinds of work, including kinds that might not be readily available in a traditional job. And the point of the 4HWW is to put your income generation on auto pilot so your time is freed up to do what you want…which in many cases will be work, just work that doesn’t pay so much (or you’d already be able to do it).

Let’s take a look at one more comment:

“My dream job would actually require working probably 60 or more hours out the week since I would like to manage a hotel. Someone like myself would find the book and that lifestyle very unsatisfying.”

Well, if that’s her dream job, why isn’t she doing it? There must be something that’s stopping her, and I don’t know what that would be other than time or money. So if she had enough time and money to manage a hotel, then she could be doing the work she wanted to, right? THAT’S WHAT THE 4HWW IS ALL ABOUT! So why are we disagreeing?

Post to Twitter

Chasing the Right Rabbits

Wednesday, March 25th, 2009

If you chase two rabbits, both will escape. But there are so many rabbits out there!

I have a guest post on IttyBiz about this problem, called Chasing the Right Rabbits (rated I for IttyBiz-level profanity). While it might appeal to anyone with too much on their plate, it was mainly written for current or aspiring home based business owners.

I wrote it about a month ago, when I was feeling overwhelmed with all the rabbits in sight. Things are different now, and I’m more focused on a smaller number of rabbits. More on that later.

Oh, and Naomi started the #ElusiveFugitiveMicrobunnies hashtag for related conversations on Twitter. Not sure how much use that’s going to get, but it’s there.

Post to Twitter

Why Great Video Doesn’t Matter Online

Sunday, March 8th, 2009

This video is about as amateur as can be.

I’m wearing a t-shirt and jeans, and sitting on my couch. I don’t know what I’m supposed to use for the brightness, contrast, gamma, hue, saturation, or sharpness. I shot it in one take on my laptop’s built-in webcam, while I was in a hurry to go spend some time outside. The sound skips in a few places, and to top it all off, the audio becomes desynchronized from the video halfway through. I truly hope this stands the test of time as the worst video I ever did.

And yet, it’s probably still better than any video you’ve done. :) Because while anyone could create a better video if they tried, only a small percentage of all bloggers have ever recorded a single video.

There are many reasons why most bloggers haven’t taken the plunge into video yet. Not having a webcam is a pretty good reason, and I only did this video because my new laptop happened to come with one. Not wanting to face the camera is another good reason. Not wanting to take the time is another. Not wanting to use a less accessible medium is another.

But is not being good at video a good reason?

In my first video post, Scott Sweeney at Review Chicago noted that video bloggers are generally far less polished than professional broadcasters:

“Although some people pull it off, the majority of those who do video updates and posts just come off sounding unprepared or boring. Broadcasters and TV personalities go to school and learn how to come off with ease on camera, just as writers learn to deliver the written word with some flair.”

I certainly agree that on-camera professionals have developed a level of skill far beyond most video bloggers. But fortunately, I don’t think video bloggers are in competition with them.

Think about your favorite bloggers, and see how many of them are professional writers. Probably not many. (And if they are, their blog is likely to be specifically about writing.)

People don’t go to ProBlogger to read Dickens. These people are beginner and intermediate level bloggers, looking for practical and understandable information about how to make money blogging. That’s what Darren Rowse needs to deliver.

If he started sounding like something you had to read in 12th grade English class, he’d alienate his audience. They’d think “This guy is talking way over my head. I’m just looking for some good information, but I can barely understand him. Do I need to write like this to be a blogger? Maybe this isn’t for me.”

Most bloggers don’t need to be professional writers, because that’s not what most people are looking for online. For much more on this, read Skellie’s post Why Great Writing Doesn’t Matter Online and the very important follow-up, On Writing and You.

Likewise, a video blogger doesn’t need to be great at video if that isn’t what their audience wants. Nobody is ever going to struggle with deciding whether to watch Tom Brokaw or a video blogger, because these people are serving completely different purposes. Yes, Brokaw is good at what he does, but the video blogger can be good at different things.

You don’t read bloggers because you think they’re better writers than Ernest Hemingway, and you won’t watch them because you think they’re better on camera than Katie Couric. You’ll have other reasons.

Scott goes on to say:

“But, with all mediums, I think it will start to step up in quality. Instead of using a built in webcam, maybe add some production value. Solid editing, maybe even a nice DV camera for these kinds of posts.

Webcam video posts, while some are good, remind me of a low-fi Blogspot blog, where if people can add some production value to them, they will be like having your own domain/wordpress blog.”

Yes, bloggers should create quality videos when possible. Even if greatness isn’t required, there’s no reason you can’t aim a little higher than you have to. This is particularly important for blogs based entirely on video.

For me, I’ve only done two videos so far. I don’t know what my plans for video are, so for now I’m not inclined to get a better camera, learn how to edit videos, set up a production studio, take acting classes, get a teleprompter, etc. (Still, I’d like to figure out why the sound skips on my videos. Any ideas? I’m using the webcam on a Toshiba Satellite L355D.)

There was a time when Blogspot blogs were ahead of the curve, and we’re at that point now with amateur video. Just having video at all makes you stand out. But while the bar is pretty low, you can expect it to be raised over time.

“This is truly amazing, a portable television studio. No wonder your president has to be an actor, he’s gotta look good on television.”

- Doc Brown in Back to the Future, after learning in 1955 that actor Ronald Reagan would become president in the 1980s, ostensibly because of the invention of the camcorder

Post to Twitter

First Video Post

Sunday, March 1st, 2009

When I noticed that my new laptop has a built-in webcam, I decided I no longer had a reason to put off doing a video post.

This is just a short video where I say a few words about video blogging. (The sound and lighting have some hiccups. I don’t know why.)

Mentioned in the video:

Post to Twitter

Blogger’s Paradise

Monday, February 23rd, 2009

Gangsta's Paradise

(To the tune of Gangsta’s Paradise by Coolio)

As I search for new blogs like a stoner on meth
I take a look at them all
And realize there’s nothin’ left
‘Cause I’ve been subscribing to blogs for so long
That even Google Reader thinks that my mind is gone

But I ain’t never run a post that didn’t deserve it
A self-respecting spammer, you know that’s unheard of
You betta watch your homies who assisted, see if they’re twisted
Or you might find one day that your blog’s been delisted

I really hate to say I told you so
As they go, I see myself at a new plateau, fool
I’m the white hat G that little bloggers wanna be like
Down with every rule in sight
Goin’ for the A-list in my own right

We been spending most our lives
Living in a blogger’s paradise
Approving comments if they’re nice
Living in a blogger’s paradise
I got hate mail once or twice
Living in a blogger’s paradise
I’m on the net like white on rice
Living in a blogger’s paradise

Look at the situation they got me facin’
Caught up in a fad that swept across the nation
I can’t get down with the hyped-up schemes
Too many pics of AdSense checks got me chasing dreams

I’m a educated fool with ideas on my mind
But I gotta stash some cash to escape from the grind
I got a Thesis-tricked, plugin-pimped, WordPress-whacked banger
And I hate comment spam, so don’t arouse my anger, fool

Failure ain’t never more than one post away
And every niche gets more crowded, day after day
I’ve got one thousand readers now
But will I ever see two
The way things is goin’ I don’t know

Tell me why are we
So blind to see
That the blogosphere
Ain’t meant to be?

We been spending most our lives
Living in a blogger’s paradise
The haters can be cold as ice
Living in a blogger’s paradise
It’s all empty bits and bytes
Living in a blogger’s paradise
It’s like Twitter but less concise
Living in a blogger’s paradise

Content brings the traffic
Traffic brings the power
Minute after minute
Hour after hour
Everybody’s bloggin’, but most of them ain’t tryin’
Half of them are trippin’, half of them are lyin’

They say I gotta drop 2 Gs
For them to wanna teach me
If I don’t ever trust them, how can they reach me?
I guess they can’t
I guess they won’t
I guess they front
That’s why I know my blog is out of luck, fool

We been spending most our lives
Living in a blogger’s paradise
AdSense slashed my per click price
Living in a blogger’s paradise
It’s hard work and sacrifice
Living in a blogger’s paradise
The odds are worse than Vegas dice
Living in a blogger’s paradise

Tell me why are we
So blind to see
That the blogosphere
Ain’t meant to be?

Tell me why are we
So blind to see
That the blogosphere
Ain’t meant to be?

Post to Twitter

Big Discounts On Marketing And Productivity Stuff

Wednesday, February 18th, 2009

Do you have something to sell, but not enough people buying it? You may have found that marketing isn’t as straightforward as you might think. As you may have noticed in my Features Vs. Benefits Deathmatch, I’m a little confused about marketing. Maybe you are too.

A while back, Naomi Dunford announced that she was going to run a Marketing 101 course: “a not-very-expensive course that’s going to be super crazy fun.” I didn’t sign up back then, I think because I was too busy at the time and didn’t pay much attention. I probably should have signed up when I had the chance.

The course has already started, but fortunately, enough people wrote to Naomi to say “Sorry we were late, but can we still get in?” And so Naomi opened it back up (and I signed up). Here’s the schedule:

Lesson One: Figuring Out What Makes You AWESOME
Lesson Two: Who’s Supposed To BUY This Stuff Anyway?
Lesson Three: What Do I SAY To These People?
Lesson Four: Sneaky, Sneaky Tricks
Bonus Week: Networking For Wallflowers – How To Schmooze When You Suck At Schmoozing

The live calls are Wednesdays at 2 PM EST. The second one was today, so you missed the live version. But they record the calls so you can listen to them later whenever you feel like. (And unless you happen to have nothing to do at 2 PM on Wednesdays, that’s what you’d be doing anyway.)

Even though the course has already started, there’s still time to order it at half price. You’ll also get her Marketing School ebook for free when it’s released later this month. People who buy Marketing 101 as a download later will pay double, and people who buy Marketing School later will pay $49).

Anyway, if you want to sell more stuff, check out Marketing 101.

Also, I learned that Dave Navarro is raising his prices on everything next week, so check out what he has. I particularly liked his ebook What’s Holding You Back (that link currently points to a page showing all his products). In fact, I told him he should raise the price. Looks like he listened!

His “30 Hours A Day” program has gotten tons of attention, although I only went through a small part of it. What I saw though, was insanely practical for people who are serious about time management.

Take a look, and take your pick. There’s plenty of stuff here to boost your marketing and productivity, and it will cost a lot more later.

Post to Twitter

Features Vs. Benefits Deathmatch

Monday, February 16th, 2009

Neo and the Architect
Image from The Matrix Reloaded (2003)

In The Matrix Reloaded, the computer program known as the Architect takes on the form of a cold, stern old man. He is the creator of the matrix, the virtual reality program being pumped into the brain of most humans.

Because the Architect sees the world as a series of equations to be balanced, he doesn’t truly understand free will and choice. He therefore had great difficulty in creating a version of the matrix that humans would accept, and he recounted his frustration with the limitations of his logic:

“The first matrix I designed was quite naturally perfect, it was a work of art, flawless, sublime. A triumph equaled only by its monumental failure.

The inevitability of its doom is apparent to me now as a consequence of the imperfection inherent in every human being, thus I redesigned it, based on your history, to more accurately reflect the varying grotesqueries of your nature. However, I was again frustrated by failure.

I have since come to understand that the answer eluded me because it required a lesser mind, or perhaps, a mind less bound by the parameters of perfection. Thus, the answer was stumbled upon by another, an intuitive program, initially created to investigate certain aspects of the human psyche. If I am the father of the matrix, she would undoubtedly be its mother.”

He was referring to the Oracle, who discovered that nearly 99% of all humans would accept the matrix if they were given the subconscious choice of accepting it. Finally, they had a viable version of the matrix. The solution wasn’t to be more logical, but to be more human.

I think I’m having a similar issue with understanding features and benefits. Ironically, my Myers-Briggs type, INTP, is known as the Architect. That doesn’t mean I’m emotionally dead, just that I’m logical, which I hear is a curse for marketing. Can someone help me understand humans?

Specifically, how humans see features and benefits when deciding to buy something. I talked about this with James Chartrand from Men with Pens, who was tremendously helpful. Before I get to that though, let me start off with how I saw features and benefits before talking to James.

The difference between features and benefits

Let’s say you’re browsing the selections at an online bookstore, and you come across one that strikes your fancy. While deciding whether you want to buy it, you notice that the bookstore offers free shipping.

Free shipping is a feature. It’s an attribute of the bookstore’s service. Common marketing wisdom says that people don’t buy because of features, they buy because of benefits. They think “OK, it has free shipping. So what?” Benefits are what the features actually do for them, and that’s what they’re really buying.

To turn a feature into a benefit, you have to figure out what it actually means for the customer. I’ve heard you should pretend you’re talking to a child (or a little guy on your shoulder) who keeps asking “So what?” You keep answering “So what?” until you get to the real benefit.

Lets see the little guy in action:

“You get free shipping.”

“So what?”

“You don’t pay shipping costs.”

“So what?”

“You save money.”

“So what?”

“You’ll have more money than you would otherwise.”

“So what?”

“Money can be exchanged for goods and services.”

“So what?”

The little guy’s not too bright, is he? Now we’re at a point where we can branch off into many different directions. What goods and services does he care about most? Would he rather buy a BMW, or feed starving children in Africa? We don’t know.

Let’s make a guess. Many people seem to want to spend more time with their family, so let’s take that angle.

“With more money, you’ll be able to afford the same goods and services without working as much.”

“So what?”

“Since you don’t have to work as much, you can spend more time with your family.”

“So what?”

Egads! He pulled the old “So what?” trick on us! There’s nothing to stop him from using that ad infinitum. If he can pretend he doesn’t know why free shipping is good, or what money can be used for, he can pretend he doesn’t know why he would want to spend more time with his family.

Where does it end? When will he say “Yes, that’s the real benefit!” Why does he really want to spend time with his family? Does he want a Darwinian answer?

“If people like their family, they take good care of them, so their offspring live to reproduce and pass on the genes that make them like their family. So through the process of natural selection, you have evolved to like your family. By spending time with them, you’ll be fulfilling your inborn desire to enjoy their presence.”

“So what?”

Hmmm…maybe happiness is the answer.

“When you enjoy spending time with your family, you’ll be happy.”

“So what?”

What now? Do we need to get into the chemical basis of emotion to explain why we want to be happy? Do we need to go back to the Big Bang, or God?

Isn’t it a lot easier to just say “free shipping?” Why is it our place to tell people what that means for them? Allow me to quote myself from a comment I wrote a while back:

“Correct me if I’m wrong, but benefits are highly subjective, right? If we look at a steak, one person might benefit from the taste. Another person might benefit from the energy. Another person might benefit from the sensation of being full. Another person might experience a large negative benefit by being a vegetarian. Another person might think a steak is the perfect doorstop. We have no idea what the benefit is until we consider the specific person.”

I’m really more of a features guy

Why do I need to be sold on benefits? Yes, benefits are technically what we’re after. We don’t buy a steak just to bask in the glow of steak ownership, but because we want the benefits we get by eating it. However, features determine benefits, and the link is pretty clear.

Tell me the features and I can figure out the benefits (if I even care to). Tell me the benefits, and I have no way of figuring out the features. I’m not really interested in a salesman’s opinion of what a product’s benefits are to me. If he says “This product will make you happy,” how does he know? Why not just tell me exactly what it is, and let me decide what it does for me?

Everyone knows that Snickers is “packed with peanuts.” That’s the feature part of the tagline. Not as many people remember the benefit part of the tagline. But that’s OK–we know what peanuts are!

Once someone highly recommended a particular ebook to me, but I wasn’t sure about it. The sales page was pretty useless, just listing benefits. I’m sure the author thinks his ebook has many benefits, but would I agree with him? Against my better judgment, I bought it, and I was so disappointed I promptly returned it. Had the sales page listed the features (crap), I would have been able to figure out the benefits (none). But because it only listed the author’s opinion of the benefits, I couldn’t figure out the features, and therefore I couldn’t figure out the benefits from my perspective.

I guess benefits are helpful for things you don’t understand. If I’m sick and a doctor writes me a prescription for blahblahgra, that doesn’t mean anything to me. What will it do for me? What will it make me feel like, and how soon will it work? Still, I’d like to know the name of the drug, in case I ever come across something about it.

Sir James to the rescue

As you can see, I was pretty confused about this, and maybe you are too. But James Chartrand shed a lot of light on the subject for me. I’m quoting him here with permission. (You’ll have to pardon his French – figuratively, in this particular case for the French Canadian.)

“I think the problem is that you confuse benefits with goals. Let me see if I can help a bit with this, because I know it’s a tricky concept.

I want to walk in the rain. That’s my goal.

I need boots to do so. Any kind of boots? No. Rubber boots. Rubber is a feature.

Why do I need rubber? Because I want dry feet. Dry feet is a benefit. Not my goal, which is to walk in the rain.

So I go shopping for some boots. I see a pair. The tag says:

100% PVC
Red, blue or yellow
Inner Teflon liner
Wool padding

Well, that’s a bunch of features. Fucking boring, honestly. And I really don’t care. Why? Because my goal is to walk in the rain.

Then my eye catches another sign for another pair of rubber boots.

100% PVC for highest waterproof factor – your feet stay dry all the time!
Red, blue or yellow – walk in style and make sure you get noticed by the fashion crew!
Inner Teflon liner – extra waterproof prevention in case of leaks!
Wool padding – enjoy comfy, cozy feet while you walk!

That pair lists the features, but it also gives the benefits of that product. The manufacturer doesn’t know if my goal is walking in the rain, shoveling shit in a barn, emptying my basement of a flood or puddle jumping. Nor does the manufacturer care. He’s simply telling me WHY I should buy these boots by answering the question, ‘So what?’”

Well that clears up a lot! I had no idea that there was a third party here (goals). I thought anything related to “why” fell under benefits. But it works like this:

A customer has a goal. A product enables the goal. The product has features that describe it. Features have benefits that explain why the features matter.

When I see the feature “100% PVC,” I don’t know why that matters. But the benefit “highest waterproof factor – your feet stay dry all the time” tells me why it matters. Most of these features are jargon that doesn’t matter to most people, but the benefits tell you what you need to know. Even if the feature is self-explanatory, benefits give some emotional oomph.

But benefits alone aren’t enough. If it just said “your feet stay dry all the time” with nothing to back it up, you wouldn’t believe it. But it says “100% PVC,” and you might not know what that means, but it looks important enough to justify the benefit. And sophisticated boot aficionados may look for the “100% PVC” label.

Features and benefits, a match made in heaven.

I still think “free shipping” is pretty simple, but let’s benefit it up, shall we? Now I see that we don’t need to tie free shipping to a goal, as I thought before. We just need to remind the customer why free shipping is a good thing.

“Free shipping – you’ll have more money to buy all the great stuff you love!”

The feature isn’t linked to a goal, because I don’t need to know what they want to use the money for. The benefit just makes the feature more enticing by fleshing out what it means for the customer (even though they already know). Is that the right idea?

The plot thickens

But wait, there’s more to it than that. What about when someone asks “How would your product benefit me?” That’s a different kind of benefit, because it’s about what the product does for you, not why a feature matters.

When Philip Brewer wrote about how to launder money, he said that it took him a long time to understand money laundering because at first he didn’t realize that it refers to two completely different things:

1. Classic money laundering: converting dirty money into clean money. That is, hiding the illegal source of your income, without hiding the money itself. This is often done by creating a business that will claim the dirty money as legitimate revenue. For example, you can open a car wash, pour your illegal income into it, and simply pretend you washed more cars than you actually did.

2. Modern money laundering: hiding money from someone you don’t want to know about it, such as the IRS or an ex-spouse. First you make the money disappear, then you make it reappear in a way that it won’t be seen by who you’re hiding it from. You can make the money disappear in a safety deposit box or overseas bank. You can make it reappear by slowly withdrawing it over time, or by staging an invoice scam or fake casino win.

In a similar way, it appears that I’ve had a hard time understanding benefits, because the term refers to two completely different things:

1. Why a feature matters.

2. How the product will change the customer’s life.

We’ve covered the first one, but what about the second? Good sales copy is supposed to answer the “how will this change my life” question, but isn’t the answer obvious once you know enough about the product?

Going back to the boots, the customer may want more information than what’s on the sign. “Do these boots come in half sizes?” is a good question. “Do these boots have good traction on snow?” is a good question too. And “How long will these boots last?” is also a good question. But who asks “How will these boots benefit me?” Shouldn’t they know?

Forgive me, because I know every marketer in the world is going to have a heart attack when I say this, but once the customer has enough information, aren’t they the one who needs to decide how the product will benefit them? How would I know if the customer needs boots?

If they want to walk in the rain and they don’t have any waterproof footwear already, there’s probably a need there. If they want to lie in the sand at the beach, not so much. Then again, maybe they want the boots because they want to dress up like a Mighty Morphin Power Ranger. But only they know their situation. Aren’t they capable of figuring out if they need boots?

Of course, some cases are much more complicated. If someone’s car shopping, they might be confused about which of the billions of models out there best meets their needs, or what their needs even are. And car salesmen can afford to spend time helping them figure that out. But the customer still needs to provide some information, such as the fact that they want a reliable car with good safety features that can comfortably seat their family of five. It wouldn’t make much sense for someone to just stroll into a dealership, approach a salesman, point at a particular car, and ask “How will that car benefit me?”

Pop quiz: You’re thirsty. Do you want water? Yes or no? Or do you want to sit there pretending you don’t know how water will benefit you?

One main benefit

I hear a lot of people saying that a product needs to clearly present one main benefit. But why?

In some cases, this is no problem. “This pill will clear your sinuses and let you breathe easily.” Fine, but what about products that aren’t so simple?

Consider Steve Pavlina’s book Personal Development for Smart People. This book is not a solution to a specific problem. Instead, it’s about as high level as you can get, presenting the seven core principles of personal growth. The cover lists some things you can do with it, but they’re very broad, such as “achieve inspiring goals with disciplined daily habits” and “become the conscious creator of your life instead of feeling hopelessly adrift.” The focus is really on the seven principles themselves.

The book isn’t at all benefit-oriented, but it reached the Amazon top 100 before it even went to the printer. Of course, a lot of that is because of the huge audience he has at his blog. Still, I’d like to think that many people saw the value in a high level conceptual framework of personal growth, even if they couldn’t complete the sentence “I’m buying this book so I can ___________.”

Would the book have sold better if he had restricted it to one specific benefit? The cover says one of the things you’ll learn is how to “attract empowering relationships with loving, compatible partners.” What if he decided that the purpose of the book was to deliver that benefit? Well, going into the seven core principles of personal growth is a needlessly complicated way to get there. He might as well just write about relationships directly. But then, the book wouldn’t have been nearly as good, would it?

(Incidentally, have you noticed that ebooks tend to be much more benefit-oriented than printed books? What’s the benefit of Harry Potter?)

Why does everything need to be presented as a solution to an urgent problem? Sometimes abstract things have great value in themselves, regardless of their ability to achieve something tangible. Freedom, wisdom, knowledge, health, happiness, strength, relaxation, entertainment, humor, love – aren’t these things all inherently good, even if they don’t lead to something more concrete, like search engine traffic?

Besides, how often does a product actually deliver the ostensible benefit on a silver platter? As much as I liked Career Renegade, I’m sure that the author Jonathan Fields would agree that the book doesn’t instantly convert you into a career renegade just by reading it. It just provides a lot of guidance and resources to help you with the process. Not many products provide a magic solution.

Why we buy stuff

I told James that when SEO School came out, I didn’t bother trying to figure out the benefits. I just bought it right away because:

1. It’s an ebook. I like reading ebooks, unless something’s specifically wrong with them.
2. Naomi Dunford wrote it. The author is hugely important, because there’s a lot of junk out there.
3. It’s about SEO. That’s a decent topic, and while I didn’t really need it, I might learn something.
4. It has an affiliate program. I know a lot of people need to learn SEO, so it made sense to promote it.

It wasn’t any more complicated than that. I didn’t put up any irrational resistance to what was obviously a good product.

James pointed out that these are features, but I really bought the ebook for the benefits behind the features. Fine, these technically aren’t the reasons I bought it, they’re just convenient abstractions of the reasons. It’s a lot easier to say “because I like ebooks” or “because I like Naomi,” things I intuitively know are true, than to spell out the myriad of reasons behind them, some of which I might not even be aware of.

We often think in abstractions because breaking everything down to the molecular level is unnecessarily complicated. It’s much more natural to think “I want food” than to think “I want all the things food does for me, which I will now explain in great detail in case anyone needs proof of my desire for food…”

Do you need to have an inner monologue to debate the benefits of breasts, or do you just naturally like them? Feel free to substitute diamonds, shoes, ebooks, football, money, beaches, cats, your kids, or whatever you instinctively like without needing to convince yourself. Sure, you could probably come up with reasons to explain why you like these things, but you don’t need to. To you, these things obviously have intrinsic value, regardless of whether they enable you to solve a specific problem.

Bruce Springsteen did the Super Bowl halftime show. I never heard anyone ask “What’s the benefit of Bruce Springsteen?” People just knew they liked him, even without a long sales page to overcome their objections and prove beyond a reasonable doubt that he would change their life.

Why are some things so different? Why will someone gladly spend $100,000 on a college education because it’s “the normal thing to do,” blow $30,000 on a wedding reception because “it will be so wonderful,” then hesitate to buy a $12 ebook about how to reduce stress because they’re not entirely convinced about the benefits of a longer, happier life? All the time they spend trying to figure out whether they absolutely need it could be better spent buying and reading it.

The Architect would observe this person struggling with the decision to buy the ebook and say:

“Sales resistance is the most predictable of all human responses. It is interesting reading his reactions. The problem is choice. But we already know what he’s going to do, don’t we? Already I can see the chain reaction, the chemical precursors that signal the onset of emotion, designed specifically to overwhelm logic and reason. An emotion that is already blinding him from the simple and obvious truth: buying this product is the right thing to do. Why does he struggle to make his choice?”

The Oracle would respond:

“Because he didn’t come here to make his choice, he’s already made it. He’s here to try to understand why he made it.”

I have no idea what the benefits of reading this post are. I’ve certainly made no attempt to spell them out. And yet, you’re investing a certain amount of time in reading it, which is equivalent to a certain amount of cash that you’ve handed over without knowing exactly why. Don’t we sometimes buy things without caring what the benefits are, because we just intuitively know that they’re there?

Post to Twitter

How To Launch The **** Out Of Your Ebook

Tuesday, February 3rd, 2009

How to Launch the **** Out of Your Ebook

If you’ve tried to sell a product online before, you know that there’s a lot more to the process than just creating the product. People say “if you build it, they will come,” but it’s not true. Many people have trusted that advice, only to spend countless hours creating a wonderful product that nobody bought.

Why would people not buy your product, if it’s so good? Well, there are many possible reasons.

  • Did you convince your audience of your credibility?
  • Are you a good enough copywriter to create a compelling sales page?
  • Did you get powerful testimonials from well known people?
  • Did you build up enough buzz before launching?
  • Did you sign up key people as affiliates?
  • Worst of all, were you doomed from the start because you didn’t research whether there was a big enough market for your product?

The list of pitfalls goes on and on. There are so many intricacies to a product launch that it takes enormous effort to master the process. Jeff Walker learned so much about how to successfully launch a product, that he was able to sell his Product Launch Formula for $2,000 a copy. But $2,000 is probably a lot more than you want to pay, right?

There’s now a much cheaper alternative. Dave Navarro and Naomi Dunford have come out with a new ebook called How To Launch The **** Out Of Your Ebook. From the title you can tell that this is specific to writing and selling ebooks, but actually most of the information applies to any kind of online product launch. (In case you’re wondering, no, they never reveal what **** stands for.)

I’ve bought both Dave’s and Naomi’s products before, so I didn’t need much convincing. Plus, people actually hire Dave as their launch coach. I didn’t even know there was such a thing as a launch coach, but it makes perfect sense when you consider how much the launch affects your sales. Naomi saw this firsthand when she launched Online Business School with Dave as her launch coach, and made five figures in three days.

Their sales page very clearly says what’s in it, so I won’t repeat that. I’ll just tell you what I thought about it. First, the good.

The information in this ebook is essential for running a successful ebook launch, and nobody else is really talking about it. I didn’t even know that there was more to a launch than just saying “Here, I wrote this. Buy it!” It turns out, there’s a lot more than that.

This ebook contains a lot of information (113 pages), covering the entire launch process. It takes you all the way from testing your market, to actually writing your ebook, to running the launch, to making money even after the launch is over. It’s very thorough, and it includes lots of worksheets to help you stay on track from start to finish.

It’s hard to imagine this ebook not easily paying for itself when you put it into practice. And even if it doesn’t, for whatever reason, there’s no risk. Dave and Naomi will not only give you your money back, but you can actually get double your money back! (Getting your money back is completely hassle-free, but getting double your money back requires completing their worksheets and showing that you actually tried.)

Now, the bad. Yes, unfortunately there are some things I didn’t like about it. It’s still worth buying, but I have to mention these things.

First, if you’ve bought any of Dave’s or Naomi’s products before, you know that they usually make them really entertaining. Dave’s “What’s Holding You Back” was a pleasure to read, even for people who aren’t productivity junkies. Naomi’s “SEO School” was so much fun that some people probably bought it even though they don’t care about SEO.

But How To Launch The **** Out Of Your Ebook doesn’t have a lot of personality in it. This is something you would buy just for the information, not to be entertained. Maybe I’m being a little picky in expecting information about product launches to be fun, but hey, that’s what I like.

I found some parts of it far too basic. Some of it is written for people who don’t have a blog yet. If someone doesn’t even have a blog, I don’t know what they’re doing writing an ebook. Then again, I’m just speaking from my perspective. If someone is new to blogging, or not even blogging yet, they’ll find this part very helpful. Writing an ebook without knowing how to leverage a blog would surely be a disaster.

I thought it was too long, and it contained lots of really bad typos. Not to be the spelling police or anything, but typos always jump off the page at me, and this ebook has way more than its share (though the copy I have is three months old, so it might have been cleaned up since then).

Finally, there’s a glaring omission when they talk about AWeber. I can’t believe they didn’t mention using pop-overs and lightboxes to increase your newsletter subscribers. I understand that some people don’t want to do this because they consider it too intrusive, but anyone who uses AWeber needs to at least be aware of these options. Darren Rowse wrote about his amazing results with pop-overs in How to Drastically Increase Subscriber Numbers to Your Email Newsletter.

Overall, I’d say that How To Launch The **** Out Of Your Ebook provides lots of critical information for anyone who sells ebooks (or any other online products, really). If you want to maximize the success of your ebook launches, this is a much cheaper alternative than Product Launch Formula. And it’s half off the regular price until Thursday, February 5th (the sales page shows the regular price, so verify the reduced price at checkout).

Post to Twitter

Darkworker Supervisors Want Doctor’s Notes

Monday, February 2nd, 2009

I know most people aren’t on board with the Results Only Work Environment (ROWE) yet, but how about taking some baby steps?

In a Washington Post job advice column, someone wrote in to ask what to do when your supervisor wants a doctor’s note every time:

“I have been certified for Family and Medical Leave Act time off for an ongoing problem that requires frequent tests and treatments (leaving an hour early twice a month, on average). My supervisor is not happy about this and is requiring me to submit proof that I attended the appointment and that I had the appointment…Should I just be grateful that I have FMLA and jump through these hoops, or should I start tracking this as a hostile work environment? It feels hostile.”

The supervisor isn’t happy about it? WTF? Does the supervisor think the employee is happy about having an ongoing medical problem that requires frequent tests and treatments? Should the employee have been more sensitive to the supervisor’s needs when choosing to have health problems?

And the supervisor wants two doctor’s notes per visit? Double WTF. Shouldn’t one note per visit be plenty? Does the employee really need to prove both that they had an appointment scheduled, and that they showed up? Does the supervisor really think the employee would schedule doctor’s appointments and not show up (and probably be charged anyway), just to get out of work? Or that they’d show up without a scheduled appointment, just to waste time?

The columnist’s advice was to just suck it up, and sadly I have to agree. Any action the employee took would do more harm than good. Technically the supervisor is free to make the employee jump through these hoops. They could probably require live streaming video of the appointments, if they wanted to.

At the same time, just because it’s not illegal doesn’t make it a good idea. Why does the supervisor think this is the best use of their time? Do they really keep a file of the employee’s doctor’s notes, and make sure that every appointment confirmation note is eventually paired with an appointment attendance note?

Who cares if someone leaves an hour early twice a month for medical reasons? I don’t know what the job is, but this time off can’t be that disruptive. And it’s more of a trust issue than anything else. The supervisor isn’t objecting to the doctor’s appointments so much as doubting that they’re taking place.

If an employee isn’t performing well, fire them. If they are, stay out of their way. Don’t make them write to the Washington Post to ask if they should start tracking their job as a hostile work environment. What does that do for morale, and therefore job performance?

Excessive enforcement of core hours is for darkworkers. Supervisors living in darkness, come back to the light!

Post to Twitter