Allena, I think more PC-savvy and internet-experienced people like we all are more or less on here are usually turned off by such long sales letters, I totally agree with you.

The “problem” are people who are really, really desperate for money/information on a certain topic/etc and don’t know where to start. When these people land on such a page with a super-long sales letter and a “live-chat” they also might be turned off at first. But these kind of pages know which buttons to push on the first screen that the visitor sees. If you know how to do that, you have at least a visitor who scrolls over the whole page or maybe even read the whole pitch (and maybe finally clicks on one of the many “Buy”-buttons).

One thing I also want to notice is the video on the bottom right corner of the page. Although it is intrusive, it does add credibility to the page: The site is not just a virtual entity projected onto our screens, there are real people behind it, there is a face we can associate with the page. This also gives us some feeling of control, because in case it turns out to be a scam, we know who is behind it and who we can blame. This is a (false?) sub-conscious feeling of trust that is being built up which should not be underestimated when it comes to more gullible people.

Hope I didn’t bore anybody. ;)
My first comment on here. Long time reader and lurker, but now I decided that this blog is too great to not comment on it. Keep up the good work Naomi! You two also Joe and Steve, this series was very well written and informing.

Also: I like when bold can signify *emphasis* but also be misconstsrued (or understood, whatever) as *sarcasm*. Maybe my sense of humor is especially juvenile today. Still thought it was funny.

Also: Those of us who know our way around the internets are so used to reading the signifiers that say: “sleaze! scam! run away!” that I think we don’t really tend to notice them all that much anymore.

These tips are a good start for people who really don’t know what’s up yet (it’s a legitimate service, someone has to help these people).

And the rest of us launch a full-on Talmudic-style nit-picking debate about the more subtle aspects of what’s “marketing tactics that don’t appeal to me” vs what’s potentially “unethical”.

Which might be interesting, if we can do it without lots of whispered expletives transmitted mainly through airquotes. Or not.

Sorry for the long comment. Naomi, kiss kiss kiss!

The “online institute” chick went on forever, like an old girlfriend who must remain nameless (or I’ll never hear the end of it) without saying anything useful, or meaningful. While the “build a niche” site had very BIG text it was more to the point and, yes, more honest.

Neither, however, was convincing. Without your commentary I would have spent less than 5 seconds on either site. The “niche” site was visually ‘unreliable’ while the “online institute” was clearly a 3 AM infomercial. Don’t be impressed that she stayed on same spot as you scrolled down the page looking for any honesty… it was a simple programmer’s parlor trick; I have a team that of programmers can do that for me.

The tabloid (um, cheap) look of the “niche” site, however, turned me off as much as the “online institute” chick (is she really a “chick”?). Professional design, or at least plagiarism (stealing?), is better than either site. Spent $30 for a more professional template and look more legitimate in minutes!

Naomi, you rock, even if you have Asian words and a semi-colon emblazoned on your back. I can think of worse things permanently written onto a body (not mine, too chicken to commit 8). I look forward to more. Thanks!

Thanks.

Thanks for the final post but I’m more excited that we’ll be receiving updates again.