Now We're Going To See Who Can REALLY Write Copy?

Play up the disclaimer :


Disclaimer: These numbers do not represent the results you are likely to experience. The average user will file this e-book away in a remote corner of his or her hard drive after giving it only a cursory glance. As a result the average user is likely to make no money with this e-book. Only buy this e-book if you are prepared to make no money at all.

If nothing else, there's great potential for embedded commands. *jk*

That's my take on it... Not that I'm a million-dollar copywriter.

Hi Steven,

Personally I'm waiting for the dust to settle on this. It still confuses the heck out of me.

But it's the big boys who will suffer first, surely - the FTC will go after the money.

I think I read John Carlton himself saying this kind of hysteria shows up every few years or so... for now just pray that your competition stop using testimonials.

(Disclaimer: this may all seem hopelessly naive when the FTC bi*ch-slap my sales pages.)

In all seriousness: the Wall Street Journal's "two young men" letter never openly states that the successful one read the Journal. I think I will invest some considerable resources into mastering the dark art of implication. Not only does it render you immune from liability, but the effect tends to be stronger.

Gary Halbert said something along the lines of: "the audience doesn't care for your pathetic subtleties" (not sure if those are the exact words; I'm sure Metronicity can set me right).

But, on the other hand, Harlan Kilstein shows that you can get dramatic results by finely honing subtleties of language. In any case, I'm sure Halbert was talking about style, i.e. "English Class" writing - not presuppositions and deep structure.

Steven,

I am a copywriter, but I'm not a lawyer. However, here's my own take on the situation, based on what I've read...

Yes, it appears that if your testimonials give a specific result, you must also cite the "typical" result a consumer should expect. Note that I said "typical" -- not "average." They're two different things.

But I'm not sure that your point #2 is accurate. As far as I know, the rule says:

"... advertisements that feature a consumer and convey his or her experience with a product or service as typical when that is not the case will be required to clearly disclose the results that consumers can generally expect."

So, my question is... is the creator of a product also "a consumer"?

I don't think so.

If the FTC considered the creator to also be a consumer, wouldn't they have worded it in a more general way? For example, "If the claims made for a product are not typical..."

Furthermore, as the creator of a product, if you have to know "the typical result" at the time the product is released, it could mean long delays in releasing products to the market while research and surveying is done. That would deeply hurt new product development in all sectors -- not just IM.

The U.S. economy is already in shambles. So making things more difficult could create even more economic devastation.

But, in any case, the real problem is that the rules are vague. They may have purposely been made that way to allow the FTC the ability to interpret and twist them in any way they desire. I don't know. We'll have to wait for the FTC to clarify its position or go after the first few scapegoats to find out.

Hold on to your seats, friends, 'cause it's probably gonna be a bumpy ride...

Johnny

Quango = Quasi-autonomous non-governmental organisation.

And, to paraphrase the UK tv ad series: you know when you've been quango'ed*

@Mark: My fear is that whether you're in the US, UK or even Vanuatu probably won't matter much if you use Clickbank, 2CO or any other platform based in the US. FTC will adjudge you to be within their jurisdiction.

@Marcia: If you're right about the FTC adopting an objective standard (i.e. "what would the average person think") - and I'm sure you are - then yes, implication isn't a bulletproof solution. The difference is, it now become a matter of degree rather than black and white.

*Apologies for obscure UK cultural reference. The ads are for Tango soft drinks, with the slogan: You know when you've been Tango'ed

The FTC does cross boarder (international) enforcement. You have to follow the laws of the country you do business in. If you think about it, it makes sense. I can't market to a U.K. audience and violate all the U.K. rules that are in place to protect them, just because I'm from the U.S..

.
.

I believe some of you hit the salient points.

1. Complaint driven govt processes.

2. Vague wording. This is intentional IMO because it accomplishes
several things. First it provides lattitude which, admittedly, can
work for or against you, or them. Secondly it seems to be a natural
result when regulations are applied to a broad area with a myriad of
possibilities and situations. So it's a convenience, if you will.

Additional thoughts:

I would just think that a determining factor in the decision to
pursue prosecution would be a question of cost/benefit for them, the
FTC.

They're govt and therefore to a certain extent political. So they would
not want to look like a 1000 pd gorilla who totally annihilated some person
trying to make 100/month in affiliate revenue.

They have an image to protect just like all the rest in DC.

If there was a disgruntled customer who had an axe to grind, I believe
there would be a question regarding numbers of complaints. Then it
could either be black/white or gray in interpretation.

If we communicate with such customers in a professional manner, and
attempt to resolve the situation in a fair manner, then save those emails.
They'll become evidence and useful for supporting (and defending) your
self.

If the customer does not contact you and fires a complaint to the FTC,
then that will only work against the customer. This presumes it's an
isolated case from a difficult customer.

Edit: More thoughts and an idea.

If someone is sufficiently concerned about this, then the following could
be executed and perhaps be useful.

Create a results poll and send it to customers. Obviously, not all will reply
for reasons we all know. Then the average results will be known, and that
info can be posted somewhere in the copy.

The poll copy can be fairly worded in a way that reflects positively on the
product, etc. I'm not suggesting deceptively worded copy, but fairly and
accurately worded copy.

But it seems to me it all boils down to being a straight marketer who's selling
a good product that works as advertised. If everything's upfront, there's really
no reason to worry, IMO.

I don't see how the new laws would affect "copywriting". That's for the
legal department to work out not copywriters. Every company has to make
sure that their marketing materials comply with the law before using them,
but that's not the copywriter's job.

-Ray Edwards

Sam read the Bible and says it changed his life for the better. Are these results typical?

Jeff Paul has an infomercial showing women with large amounts of boobage interviewing clients making 10,000 - 100,000 a month with an unreadable disclaimer at the bottom of the screen. Drug companies advertise their miracle pills while claiming certain side effects such as your foot falling off and possible coma induced by taking their pill, and on and on. Will all of this stop?

Maybe telling the truth will work. Buy my package of 5 niches, 3 articles, and a pdf file, use it as I describe and results will be pleased with the results. If not , send it back for a full refund. For best results, USE AS DIRECTED.

Steve the answer isn't impossible. You use truisms and questions and some soft implications. You can get anywhere you would before but your copy will be more sophisticated. I'm looking forward to it. Chompin at the bits!

P.S. You can go under the radar if your copy doesn't result in ton loads of sales but we all know the government goes after the large money cases. They don't need to police every piece of copy. They just need to look at the very successful ones (they are going to have more complaints even if the product is good) and they'll be looking to go after IM products in particular.

Good converion rates are what copywriters sell and the make money and IM fields are one industry the FTC is after so they are in the bullseye.

There are quite a few ways to deal with the new regs...

Mainly being open and transparent. I've written a little more on the subject in my sig.

-Scott

I'm no expert copywriter, but I'll tell you what I'd like to read...



"I've received 50,000 hits and made 523 sales using just these simple joint venture techniques alone.

"That's 523 sales x $47 a pop = $24,581 in my pocket. (I think I'll surprise my wife with a trip to Hawaii.)

"Can I guarantee you'll receive the same exact results?

"Of course not. I don't know who you are nor do I know the caliber of joint venture partners you'll find. But if you're willing to put my step by step plan into action, you will see concrete results..."

Testimonials - I never read them. But that's just me.

Dave

clever and concise yet honest

The panic over this is rediculous. Its just a small change from saying *results not typical to *typical results are bla bla bla

Big deal.

For our overseas friends who see this as no big deal, think again. Our government is in a serious transitional period at the moment. Every day we see more and more evidence of capitalism under attack. The president openly speaks about redistributing wealth. I never thought I'd see such a thing here but when Michael Moore's anti-capitalism schlock garners the high praise it's been getting, you can be sure there's trouble on the horizon.

I wouldn't be at all surprised to see the FTC implement a 'drop-a-dime' program similar to what the IRS does to catch tax cheats. I'm talking about a hotline where people can anonymously call the feds and report tax cheats and then receive a 'bounty' or percentage of any money the IRS collects.

With America losing an average of 500,000 jobs per month over the past year, this program has been very popular lately. People that have been laid off are ratting out their ex-bosses in record numbers. Maybe it's a stretch to think the FTC will do this, but for my money, anything is possible.

And if the FTC decides to move only on complaints, what's to stop jealous and wicked marketers from complaining about competitors? Think about it. What better way to tie up a competitor than forcing them to spend time and money defending his or her actions? You may think I'm paranoid but there is a very anti-business sentiment brewing in the US right now.

Okay, with all of that out of the way, I think the way to deal with the testimonial issue will be with an increase in the use of social proof. For example, say you're selling a hypnosis program. Rather than have individual testimonials of how well the program works, you'll be looking to quote magazine articles, universities and other credible sources where respected individuals have documented progress using it.

This won't carry the appeal that a personal endorsement does (many of which are bogus in the first place) but it just might appease the regulators.

I've often written salesletters without testimonials and got
good results. In that case, I shift the emphasis of the writing
to showing how the mechanism of the product works, what
makes it new and exciting.

I used to write a lot of "make money" copy and was fairly
hypey, but I seldom used testimonials because the truth was
money making systems require dedication and work to make
a lot of money with them. It's the "new" angle that gets
"the guy" (my term for the buyer) to start thinking it's
the best idea he's seen lately and take the risk of trying
it out.

That may sound a little simplistic, but there have been a
lot of very successful letters out there which were not
predicated on testimonials. Instead, use risk-reversal,
an innovative product, a price/value appeal, and so forth.

I think maybe the FTC thing is meant to target people selling
wee-wee pills, diet pills, Jeff Paul infomercial type stuff.

I don't get the panicking either. Especially by copywriters.

Those that work for advertising and marketing agencies or directly for corporate clients have nothing at all to worry about. All copy goes through compliance. Copywriters working for clients of their own also have nothing to fear as presumably the responsibility for complying with the FTC belongs to those who commission them.

It's only the "writers" that create their own products and market them that are potentially at risk. Those that work within the guidelines should be fine. As for the rest...well surely they're part of the reason why the guidelines have been amended.

Tom

As Bob Silber wrote that the FTC can extradite people across borders through international treaties, I believe they can't even touch an Australian citizen or an Iranian or a Japanese or any other citizen of external nationality unless and until the person is proven to have done any "forgery" in the home courts from where the business is operational. The US can only enforce its laws on Afghanistan and Iraq, and other places where it has bases such as Pakistan. Even Pakistan does not give real importance to the US (no offence) who gives aid to it so getting a person extradited is really a task unless it goes to interpol and lodges a case in violation of a criminal offence.

I, for one reason, won't even give a damn to the FTC if I have my own product as I am from India. I firstly find the rules very unclear, vague and astonishingly one sided.

Secondly, I as an affiliate marketer will have to be cautious while promoting the products of American companies to potential customers. The only thing I will have to do is put a disclaimer stating:

"My blog makes money from promoting products through banner ads or text link ads of other people where I get a commission if someone buys it. Thus, the ads or text links may point to a product or service where I could be getting financial benefits from the same. Any recommendation stated within the content published on my blog is a personal choice of my own and each person must justify to themselves whether they must make a purchase of recommended product / service before making it. I or the content on my blog is not at all responsible for any decisions you take and they are your personal choices so please make your choices wisely."

My friend Bob Silber (yeah.. I'd call you my newly found friend ) ..

Would you be able to say whether ezinearticles.com will have to shut down its backlinking policy or disallow people to stop linking back to potential affiliate marketing urls from their ezinearticles.com articles?

That way, ezinearticles.com is set to shut down if FTC has to speak... ain't it? Not only ezinearticles.com but all article directories will have to shut down provided they keep a disclaimer on each page stating the backlinks are kept to generate financial revenues.

What about comments in blogs and posts in forums which already have affiliate marketing urls in signatures and so on so forth...? What about content that has already been posted on twitter before the ruling comes into effect and cannot be changed where you've no control over it?

I love this forum. This is a beautiful forum. I'm loving it. Wow Allen! Lovely!

Subversive marketing and indirect endorsements will still rule, as usual. Get a well known face to place alongside the product and people put the two together, even if it not directly spoken. The marketers with less money to spend will continue to use large breasted, scantily dressed women, images of grandeur and the like. Who needs great copy when you can put one small image in a potential client's mind and let them run wild with it.
They end up advertising to themselves.

From what I can fathom, there's a lot of misconception regarding this. No-one REALLY knows what the heck is goin on...

In this post, I'm gonna break down the ruling and do my best to work out that it really means! Before I do so, let me state that I'm no English graduate or billion-dollar copywriter, so please don't rip me to shreds if you disagree :-)

"Under the revised Guides, advertisements that feature a consumer and convey his or her experience with a product or service as typical when that is not the case will be required to clearly disclose the results that consumers can generally expect. In contrast to the 1980 version of the Guides - which allowed advertisers to describe unusual results in a testimonial as long as they included a disclaimer such as "results not typical" - the revised Guides no longer contain this safe harbor."

Firstly, a product creator/publisher is not a consumer. Taken from the good ol' dictionary.com, a conusmer is one that acquires goods and services for direct use rather than for resale or production in manufacturing.

The person who creates the product is the vendor. In response to Steven's initial post, I have to say I strongly disagree with point #2. I don't see anywhere that the ruling implies product owners cannot convey their own experience with their own product - meaning that including personal stories in your copy should be perfectly fine.

What these new guidelines do imply, however, is that the use of testimonials from beta testers or previous consumers whereby clear statements of financial/physical results are made are strictly illegal IF you fail to include some sort of diclaimer stating the typical results consumers are likely to experience for themselves.

I think people are looking into this too much. Don't get me wrong, I think it's wise to always be cautious but in this case I think what the FTC are saying is that they'll be coming down heavily on liars, conmen and fraudsters.

In the main, this should affect only those outrageous CPA landing pages that are never backed up with proof. It's as simple as this...

If you're going to use testimonials, don't use fake ones. If you're going to use testimonials, make sure you include LOTS of them! This way, you can include some sort of disclaimer stating typical results that users can expect to achieve:

"Results NOT Typical - Based upon the testimonials included from previous consumers and beta testers, we have taken an average of each person's earnings and concluded that the typical results users will achieve is X. However, there are also a number of users who did not return positive testimonials or indeed failed to include any form of feedback whatsoever. Therefore, we can only conclude that typical users IF taking the action steps stated within the manual will achieve X. If however, as a product owner you fail to take action and follow our step-by-step instructions to the letter and in the order they are advised, we can only suggest that you will achieve NOTHING."

The FTC are looking for honesty and integrity and people making false claims will inevitably suffer the consequences (getting their asses sued in court for millions of dollars as a way of paying them back for being assholes!).

A disclaimer such as the one above is just about as honest as you can be without guessing what users will achieve and states clearly that not everyone will achieve those results.

To be honest, not many people read the disclaimer anyway. So surely including a link at the bottom of the sales page to an earnings disclaimer stating something along the lines of the above would be fine. Therefore, I see no reason why your copy can't be just as effective as it used to be!

That's what I propose anyway. But hey, I'm 16. I ain't no lawyer! I suggest you leave it a couple of months and run it past some legal advisor who knows what he/she is talking about

Thanks,

Connor

MarkAndrews

...the thing that makes people afraid is being in the 2% used as an example. And then everyone else just complies on their own.


...and WE, the FTC, we OWN what PROOF is. No matter how backwards our "science" is...we OWN proof, and you can't do anything about it. So shut down anything that does not serve us, our purpose, or the people we report to. Or go to jail. Court proceedings? Rights? Excuse me? Just shut down your operation NOW or go to jail, you'll get a letter in a few months.

Lance K
...what if proof is illegal...

I dunno, I'm getting close to 40 years old. I was raised in Chicago as a Latvian in exile, because the Soviet Union had occupied Latvia. Russia STILL refuses to acknowledge the forceful occupation of Latvia, and turns a blind eye to the 100's of thousands of Latvian lives lost. It IS possible to overthrow great nations. It IS possible to silence populations. And it IS possible to profit from that.

That, I think is the big FEAR everyone is feeling. And, under no circumstances, are we to underestimate the idiocy of the masses, the cruelty of governments, or the willingness of individuals to comply with EVIL policies.

Especially people who provide natural products and alternative therapies feel threatened. Because they feel like big pharma is out to kill you and them.

I do, however, have a lot of faith in America and the American People. If there is a nation and population that can handle this with savvy, grace, and honor, it's America and Americans.

Ummm...BTW...anyone think I might need to move the business address of this site overseas?

Cure Tinnitus Member Community

I think that all that is happening is that the FTC is trying to prevent people on both sides of a sale from getting screwed. Seriously--these are government drones, do you really think they want to create more work for themselves? And think of just how much federal funding and work it would take to check every single website for compliance.

What you guys seem to be overlooking is that this ruling protects merchants and copywriters too. Think about it. If, somehow, you are forced to incorporate information about the "typical" result of a product or service then some jerk won't have a leg to stand on if he wants to sue you because he bought the product but didn't make a billion dollars overnight just by taking the product out of the box.

It looks to me like this ruling's goal is not so much to crack down on liars but to prevent a bunch of unnecessary lawsuits--lawsuits that somehow always make it to the FTC. These guys want to cut down on their work, not create more for themselves.

And, just my two cents, but if all that you have in your copywriting bag of tricks is a stack of (mostly faked) glowing testimonials then you probably need to go back to school And thank god, because I am getting REALLY tired of seeing pages that offer nothing but blinking headlines and five miles worth of testimonials with little to no text that references the actual product.

Come on, people: we're copywriters! We're the people who look at concrete bricks and say "now how can I make this interesting so people will buy more of them?" Aren't you up for a little bit of a challenge?

/nauseating cheerleading

Hi Martin,
Thanks for that link. Isn't that a case of a US-based business, though? As in, Enron was a US based company with some UK citizens working at the top of it?

It's worrying nonetheless, but I still can't seem to find anything which says that the FTC has jurisdiction over UK businesses not specifically doing business with US citizens?

As I say, it does seem like a silly case though. Some of the US law-making/enforcing bodies do seem to believe that they have Worldwide jurisction.

So?

Stick to features, and emphasize them.

And add this rule to your playbook;

Give away a KILLER sample of the product.

Whatever it is!

I'm a big fan of letting a products quality sell its self.

If your doing aff/cpa offers, just duplicate the numbers from the owners site. Then they should be liable, not you.

If its a report, or a piece of software; offer a limited trial or a free chapter. Dont try to force them to opt-in to get it, just give it to them!

This is what I've been doing since all this FCC hoopla started up anyways. My numbers havent changed much, So I must be doing something right.

Regardless of what will happen, the idea that you can only use the average results of customers is a joke. The fact is, 95% of people are lazy don't take action. Just look at the stats for how many people diets... are the diets labelled as a scam? No.

But in industry's like Network Marketing, it's OK to label a company as a scam if you don't get results with it. It just doesn't make sense to me.

Yeah, I don't see how they will enforce this. Are they really going to devote staff to look for sales pages that violate this policy? I think they will go after the companies that are already on their radars for other scams and complaints.

Anybody have any input on Google paid advertising? I'm constantly seeing textual ads which give very exact results. I'd hope cracks start to show there first, considering they're at the forefront of these ads.

I'm by no mean a copywriter in any respect, or a lawyer.

BY the way, how would this affect people outside the US?

Tristan don't be ridiculous. Paypal is US based. Forget the US mentality hate rant (didn't expect that from a UK brother). Just as your business has to comply with UK laws so does Paypal with US law. You are fine as I said selling to people outside the US but if what you are doing is illegal in the US the FTC has the right to lean on US based companies to cut off service to you.

Sorry, some of you have your head in the sand on this one. You will get no sympathy from the overwhelming majority of people who see this for what it is. I am with Collette on this one. Its simply a policy to cut down on the scam or near scam offers that have been run.

This is a copyWRITERS forum. If you can't write good copy under these guidelines then you really aren't a writer of any kind at all so just hire someone who can. If you can't or won't then be content with being mediocre because if you ever have a breakout product or offer you'll find yourself under the radar.

Tristan, unfortunately US copyright laws apply to copywriters and product vendors no matter where they are in the world. You could live in a straw hut in the middle of a tiny island off the coast of Hawaii, and you still can't avoid the FTC rules.

I have to say that I fully agree with Mike. It pays to be cautious in all areas of marketing, but at the end of the day you have absolutely nothing to worry about unless you're doing something illegal. As far as I'm concerned, anyone operating illegally should be eligible for punishment no matter where they live. The FTC are simply trying to aid the consumer in avoiding scams and conmen alike.

Can I just clarify my understanding?

The issue is when you are stating results in a way which may be misleading.

For example, quoting exceptional results regularly which makes them seem like average results when people cannot realistically expect them?

(Lets leave the whole, thinking for other people issue and the, 90% of people just file something and never open it so why the hell should we go with "average results"! arguments aside for now)

My view is, shouldnt the switch be from specific results based quotes to quotes along the lines of:

"This is quite possibly the best product of this nature I have ever bought. Thank you for such eye opening information. This is going to be a MASSIVE help to my business"

etc

rather than:

"This report made me $8,000,000 in about 3.5 minutes!"

I am probably being a little nieve but I wanted to see what everyone else thought?

If this is basically it then surely a shift from written quotes is coming...

We have all seen the blog based launches where social proof and user posts make up part of the proof of the product etc

I guess alot more of this will happen and alot more "love this product its amazing" type quotes will be used.

...Thank you...and is it not interesting that there is already some "flight" away from the US? That is what happens when free speech is limited, and it has happened before. Now some of the "flight" may be by unscrupulous folks, but some of it may be people like me (and cultivating integrity is a significant part of my life).

That, honestly is scary as sh**. So, I become responsible for something someone else said online, because I have a business relationship with them? Excuse me?

This is a very "rosy" concept:
Oh, so Coke and the WSJ are exempt from this ruling because "everybody knows" some vague something. OK, writers, get your government approved list of "common knowledge" out and start writing. Because everyone knows that Coke really is bad for you and is used as a pesticide, it's OK for Coke to advertise using happy healthy actors...how many millions per year does a company need to make to be above these regulations?

I'm just thinking of creating an online survey of members of CureTinnitus.org. It could be numeric and update live. That would be pretty cool. I have to think it through. Let's see McDonald's or Coke have the balls to post their "common results," or the med industry. Hey, the med industry has their copy ready...they just need to take their list of "side effects" and title them "common results." Tadaa! Done! :-)
(I'm kinda kidding there, I mean it's just so sad to see the valuable contribution the pharma industry could make to civilization lost due to their demonization of themselves through gunpoint medicine)

...and if you don't give that vaccine to your kids you'll go to jail for child abuse.

Collette, I now live in Vienna, Austria, and I am a 1st generation American (raised in Chicago). As beautiful as the city is where I live, there is a very palpable guilt and an informed fiery soulful passion here regarding what happened here during WWII...and how to live differently, more fairly, and what "warning signs" to look out for in a governmental system, if and when it slides down the slippery slope of oppression. There is also a healthy amount of cynicism here, and hey, if the US slips, whatever, it's their turn this time around...let's go have coffee.

I also told you about my experience with the Soviet Union.

I will squarely state, that among the people you find to be hucksters or flim-flam merchants, there very well may be real, honest, caring individuals with real help for the sick, the needy, the dying and the hurting.

I run Cure Tinnitus Member Community and, of all things Urine Therapy Community, so it will make sense that when you or a government gets to decide what is "flim flam," and what is not, and when American media is saturated with mind control techniques, hypnotic techniques, verbal abuse, projection, and sorely lacking in solid thought and true application of the scientific method, then allowing government control over stated "results of a product" comes off as, well, control.

I have a lot of faith in the American people, the American "Masses," and the Individual American Mind, and basic principles need to be honored, in order for a free system to work.

Interestingly, I am not discussing "profits," as a matter of fact "profits" aren't really on my agenda. What is on my agenda is being allowed to communicate truth and living in a society where others can do the same.

And I very much hope, Collette, that every single aspect that you find paranoid about my thinking or my argumentation will turn out to be nothing but passing, unsubstantiated fear -- soon to be forgotten as our civilization progresses towards sustainable bliss.

...you know...I have to let this stew a bit...but there may be some exciting opportunities as a result of this ruling...

Dainis.

Comparing a FTC ruling made in part to stop people from "propaganda" with Nazi germany (although not mentioned by name) is quite a stretch.

In answer to the original posting question:

The "Million Dollar Copywriters" should use their prodigious skills to get people elected who will overturn the idiotic, non-capitalistic, non-free-enterprise rulings of the un-constitutional FTC. That should be first and foremost. And then, if there are any copywriters out there that are in any way like (in spirit or in ability) the late Gary Halbert - they should be willing to perform test case copy against the FTC rulings.

By the way, if you just read this post, you WILL make a over ten thousand dollars today, guaranteed! (Individual results may vary, this result may not be typical, or it might, colors depend on lot number, your millage may also vary by as little as 0 or as much as a billion, You may have rights enumerated under other applicable federal, state of local laws - which could contradict each other. Please consult a lawyer, or tar and feather your local politician, if you read this far you may think I am kidding, am I?)



-DTM

My Friends all Laughed when I said I was running for FTC chairman, but when I won and then began to dismantle the agency from the inside...


Who Else Wants to Take on City Hall and Win Big?

"I can sell water to a WHALE. FTC got nothing on me."

Now, say that to yourself out loud 25 times today and you'll never have to worry about them again.

Jason

I bet our IM friends across the pond are wishing they were based somewhere. LOL

Come to sunny London and deal with the Trading Standards instead...and brussels rules here....as as long as you dont mind living under the rules of some EU autocrats

It will be interesting to see if Amazon makes changes to their buyer feedback.

Somehow I don't think so.

Amazon may well be the model to follow as it is very transparant...including negative feedback.

How many internet marketers would have the guts to include ALL negative feedback?

Ewen

If you're a copywriter, you really have nothing to worry about with the FTC, as it will be the company selling the product that needs to support their claims. The copywriter is given the information and running with it. On the other hand, if you're writing your own sales copy (for your own product/service), you are responsible for the claims you make.

I'm a government employee and I can tell you that the Feds are not going to be targeting small-time niche players. They just do not have the manpower for that and they never will. Obviously, these new rules are a result of unscrupulous bigger companies that are ripping people off. I'm sure a lot of the MLM companies will come under scrutiny, as well those "unknown-forced" continuity programs (like the recent Google Cash debacle).

I'd think it also comes down to base reality. When you sell an ebook, you have no way of knowing what the average customer makes 9in the case of an IM ebook). All you have is your testimonials. On the flip side, MLM companies track everyone's sales. The know exactly how many people you have in a downline and they know your product volume, etc. From this information, they can legitimately produce an "average" customer. Those of us that sell ebooks have no way of tracking results--it's impossible! And besides ebooks, what about books? How about a Dr. Phil "self help" book. I'm sure the back of the book cover makes all kinds of promises about how your life will improve when you buy his book, but there would be no possible way for Dr. Phil to give the FTC an average of what's going on when they buy his book.

Sure, we will have to wait and see. But we all know who the culprits are and if you really take a look at the new rules, you know the ones that are (or at least should be) worried about them. Personally, I think the latest move is a result of the countless complaints/investigations/lawsuits of the Google Cash B.S.

One man band outfits DO get shut down by the authorities.

An Australian selling an ebook on cancer therapy into the USA market
hit mainstream media in Australia about the shutdown.

Ewen

I provide a solution here:

Jeff Walker Cowers Under New FTC Rulings | dainis.info