This Wednesday, Dec. 28, at 7PM EST, we're doing another FREE teleconference to reveal new copywriting and client-grabbing techniques you've never seen before.

In fact, Matt, Mike and I will NOT be providing the content. We'll just be asking the questions. Let me explain...

Back in September, I met a copywriter. His copy was different than any I'd ever seen. I was looking for reasons to stop reading his sales letter... and I kept getting sucked back in.

So when I discovered he was offering a coaching program, I immediately jumped on board.

Now, Mike and Matt have joined me in the program. And we're so pumped about this information that we got this "Mr. X" to give up an hour of his time on Wednesday night.

We're going to ask him how he makes his copy so compelling... how he got his very first client to give him $4,000 plus a 12% royalty... and more.

The stuff this guy's got is pure gold... and unlike anything you've ever seen or heard. I highly encourage you to get on the call.

Just go to www.FullTimeCopywriters.com and submit your first name and email for the call-in details. (If you were on our first call on Dec. 7, then no need to sign up again.)

Talk soon,
Ryan

PS - When you sign up, you'll get both the recording of our first call, plus the call-in details of this 2nd call. And, yes, we are making the recording available. To get the recording, you have to be on the list.

PS - I've just scratched out some more details about this "Mr. X" at:

www.FullTimeCopywriters.com

Ryan

I just got off this call. Here are some comments.

In your email you say:
Well, I'm sorry but I fundamentally disagree with that. In my perception the call was all about "Mr X" and his coaching program.

He claims to be teaching stuff that no one else is teaching. From what was said on the call, this seems to boil down to:

In terms of writing copy:

1) Allowing the reader to come to their own conclusions
2) Creating connection and resonance
3) Not hitting people over the head
4) Capturing the part of the market that is still on the fence
5) Selling by getting below the reader's radar
6) Copy should be multi-dimensional

Well, there's nothing new in there whatsoever! Maria Veloso teaches to get below the radar and use hypnotic techniques; Isabel Parlett ( www.parlancetraining.com ) teaches about building connection and getting on the same page as your reader without pushing; I know endless people who teach soft selling (the principles of which can be ported to copywriting).

In terms of being multi-dimensional - this seems obvious to me when you're dealing with different personality types, and different reading types.

And in my view, ALL copywriting is about getting that part of the market that is still on the fence, because those who have already decided to buy don't need much convincing.

Now, there's nothing wrong with saying that you teach those things, and nothing wrong with saying "no one else is teaching this AS FAR AS I'M AWARE". (And then someone will make you aware that in fact, other people are teaching it). But saying that you're the only one teaching it invokes resistance. Why? Because:

a) it sounds arrogant and
b) it isn't even true

Fact is, you do not have to be completely unique to position yourself as a top copywriter or coach. What I teach is not even remotely unique or new. However, the way I package it is unique as far as my target market is concerned, and I am unique and therefore deliver it uniquely. I also have my own unique blend of knowledge, experience and wisdom - some people will be attracted to it, and some won't.

In Terms of Marketing Yourself and Client Relationships

1) Choose your clients
2) Position yourself
3) Have a USP
4) Create a different proposition than "I'll write copy for you", and create a different hook Eg you can interview me
5) No money in formulaic, cookie-cutter copywriting and you quickly become a commodity

Sorry, but all of that is glaringly obvious to anyone who's studied marketing for any length of time. It applies to any service - develop a speciality, get known as the expert, develop a niche, use the aforementioned to position yourself as a top earner, create unique and curiosity provoking propositions to get people into dialogue with you, and strive for excellence instead of doing what everyone else does. (Jonathan Livingstone Seagull - all of the other seagulls probably ARE flying in the wrong direction).

Now normally I wouldn't say anything about a teleseminar. If I learnt nothing, then I would just assume that I've got to a point where I can only add icing to the cake, but my cake is already baked.

But I'm bound to point these things out when the following claims are made:

1) This is a content-only call
2) This is completely new and unique

No, it isn't, on both counts.

Jane

PS When called upon to divulge one or two "insider secrets" or parts of their process, the likes of Jim Edwards and Alex Mandossian et al. will give you, say, 3 out of their 10 tips or techniques. Without hesitation or equivocation.

One assumes that these masters of marketing know that giving away a little nets them a lot in the long-run, and they have nothing to fear by giving something away. It's like the bait on the end of your fishing line - tasty, juicy morsels that people will want more of.

Jane-

Sorry you felt that way about the call. From what I know about you, you're already an established copywriter with years of experience and loads of clients.

However, most people on the call are newbies. Men and women who've never received a dime to write copy.

Obviously, we can't please everybody. And if 99% of our listeners are rank beginners, we have to gear our content to them.

And to our listener's, the techniques taught last night were brand new to them. Sure, if they had been in the game for years, then maybe they would know that Maria is teaching something similar.

But they haven't been in the game for years. They've been in the game for weeks or months. And I can't very well scrounge the internet looking for parity in all the coaching clubs.

All I know is, the fastest way for a rank beginner to get better is to receive mentoring. So we briefly offered them a chance to get mentored, if they wanted.

At the end of the call, listeners were invited to email if they wanted more information about the coaching club. That's it. It wan't a hard sell.

It was 89 minutes of content and one minute of "inviting them to email for more information".

I can see why this bothered you. Because, for you, the content was old-hat. But for the rest of our listener's, I'm confident they got something out of it.

Matt

Matt, take a look at the above, which started this thread. It doesn't say "new copywriting and client-grabbing techniques which you've never seen before, so long as you are a newbie."

Jane's criticism is therefore reasonable.

Marcia Yudkin

Jane and Marcia,

I wrote the original post, so I'm to blame.

I apologize for my ignorance... I was not aware of other folks currently teaching what we discussed on the call last night.

So you are right - I probably should have been more balanced in what I wrote.

Mr. X talked about the coaching program because one of the listeners asked about it during the Q&A time.

I hope in the future you'll find more value in our teleseminars, Jane, even though you are quite savvy about marketing and copywriting.

Cheers,
Ryan

PS - I want to thank you, Jane, for writing. In every adversity lies an opportunity. And the opportunity here is for us to raise the bar even higher. We will make every effort to do that.

Just to clarify my points a little here.

There was nothing wrong with the teleseminar, per se. However:

1) The information was not really anything that you could act on (I've joined the dots up with my prior knowledge). There was a certain amount of obfuscation. To give the benefit of the doubt, I imagine this was more by default than design.

2) Mr X made the claim that no one else is teaching this - and he made that claim several times. In my mind it makes no difference whether you are a noob or Gary Bencivenga - the statement is still factually incorrect. In fact, in behoves us as good, honest marketers to qualify such statements with "as far as I'm aware" or "so I believe". Or put a spin on it, and say "no one else is teaching this information within this unique format, as far as I'm aware". That keeps you on the right side of advertising standards and still gets across your uniqueness without overselling. Apart from anything else, the last thing you want to end up with is unmet expectations or disappointed clients.

3) Related to point (2): There's nothing much new under the sun. And things don't have to be radically different or new to be more efficacious or desirable than rival prods/services.

4) The whole discussion was angled towards "Mr X's" coaching right from the off. I suggest you go and listen to the recording. I feel that he gave little tidbits of info, and then followed up by saying "and I teach that on my coaching course" (paraphrased). There was no other conclusion to come to other than "If I want to learn this stuff, I'd better do Mr X's coaching". And that feels manipulative to me, especially if this is angled at noobs who may not be aware that, like everything else in life, there is more than one way and more than one teacher.

All of which is in stark contrast to your first call. I only listened to about the first 40 mins (the recording was just too long). I really liked the mindset stuff, and on the portion that I listened to, I didn't hear any pitch.

5) I'm not an accomplished copywriter. At the moment, the only copywriting I'm doing is for myself, so I'm just as eager to learn as anyone else.

So my point is this:

1) There's nothing wrong with having a free call with a pitch. However, don't sell it as a call without a pitch when clearly there was going to be a pitch. If this wasn't what you had intended, then perhaps you should have scoped out the likely contents of the discussion with Mr X more comprehensively before you started. Set the correct expectations for your audience.

2) Don't make radical, unsubstantiated claims as they will draw excessive scrutiny and criticism should others feel that the claims are unlikely to be true. If you haven't been in the game long enough to know one way or the other whether other people are teaching similar things, then I'd suggest you err on the side of caution.

3) Don't make assumptions about who's on the call and what their level of knowledge is. If what you're saying is only true for noobs, then say "this level of copywriting refinement isn't taught on the standard copywriting courses such as AWAI etc. Although you can learn it elsewhere, this is better because ...."

What I learnt in my "illustrious" (!) career in IT was to UNDER-promise and OVER-deliver, not vice versa. I found that it was generally easier to keep people happy in this paradigm.


And as Michel quoted the other day, here's Gary Bencivenga's thoughts on the subject:

Jane

MM&R


I wasn't able to make the call, are you going to have a replay.

Yes, Andy. The recording will be up in a couple days' time. Just need to get it edited a little bit for "listenability".

Ryan

Hello Jane and all,

May I say that I don't agree. Jane you do make some good points however...

It`s not just me. According to the emails I've received we did give info that nobody else does.

Here`s another perspective, albeit Canadian! : )

Veloso, like you Jane, is very intelligent but where does she or anyone else talk about "Pause words or Pause phrases". Now I may not be as well read as you are Jane (I do have quite a library) but I have never seen that mentioned anywhere.

Where else does anyone suggest using the question "How do you know that?" to create a connection and relationship with the client?

Do others talk about making connection...of course. Do they say to use the above question to do so, much less explain how and why it happens. Nope!

Do others talk about positioning...of course but in the context of the example below...I ask where?

Approaching a client from the perspective of them interviewing you and explaining how that transfers power to them as opposed to feeling "sold?"

The general idea may be there but how I was talking about doing so, "to my knowledge", is not done elsewhere.

You say that this is "Glaringly Obvious"...

"No money in formulaic, cookie-cutter copywriting and you quickly become a commodity."

Could you please tell that to the plethora of people who applied to be my apprentice because it certainly was not glaringly obvious to many of them. Did they get it when it was pointed out, Yup, but was it glaringly obvious. Nope.

Was it 100% NEW. No. Sincerely Jane I do apologize if we bored you with what you already know or if you felt mislead or manipulated in any way.

Let me be clear that we were talking to a broad audience. Did we talk to long about what you might call old-hat and obvious? Despite it being new to many...perhaps.

"In context" and as it relates to how we "specifically suggested" you accomplish the techniques discussed, did we offer NEW material. YES!

And to top it off, for those that wanted to go deeper I offered to do a `Real-Life` mini-coaching session.

I`m not sure if I mentioned this or not but let me offer this tidbit...

There are four levels of readership - Skimming - Reading Intellectually - Reading Emotionally and then Being in the trance.

We best convert when we get them in `The Trance`, like when you`re reading a good book...lost in it.

As it relates to "flow" of the copy, there are several elements that prevent the reader from going into the trance.

One of them is pause words and pause phrases.

Things like:

Using `Powerwords`in an unfamilair way to the reader = a mental pause

Using words, albeit grammatically correct, to create pictures in the mind of the reader that are`out of context` = a mental pause

Using two or more pluralized words in the same sentence..sometimes = a mental pause

Using the same word in two or three sentences in a row...sometimes = a mental pause

Now when we teach this in the coaching program, No Jane I`m not manipulating, just explaining, participants really can see and understand the value of this. The flow of their copy improves dramatically and there`s several other elements not taught elsewhere that are equally as valuable.

Is it nuclear science? No. Thats the power of much of what I teach. It`s simple but not taught "ìn the context" that I teach it.

Here`s another:

Rhythm and cadence - Now is this talked about elsewhere...of course!

In this context. Not that I`m aware of. : )

Not always, but often when you have three words separated by a coma the flow and rhythm of the copy is much better if the word with the fewest syllables is first.

As a rough example:

No Painful Surgery, No Drugs, No Fear

better said as

No Drugs, No Fear, No Surgery

In my opinion, this was the type of thing we did several times on the call. Took a topic that may or may not have been otherwise taught and specifically brought a new perspective to it. Especially, as it relates to Power copy.

We could have done better. Thanks for professionally bringing that to our attention Jane. We did however, as I define it, offer great content not offered elsewhere.

I`m sure I could be more articulate here and better present my case but I must run. Pleeease Jane, try to do be gentle in your response.

Much appreciation to those that offered Thanks for the value delivered.

Shaune