I just read several posts today by Perry Marshall and Ben Settle about various methods that they have seen marketers use with regularity. Thank you both for your contribution on this.
These methods remind me of the pump-and-dump stock promoters and give some internet marketing “gurus” a black mark compared to marketers like the late Bill Mays and Ron Popeil who have a deservedly good name. Ron and Billy always promote on their TV commercials and demonstrate as Ron does below:
The problem today for some “Internet Gurus” is that they do not fully demonstrate in their medium but rely on pictures of fancy houses, cars, vacation spots and more problematically promises of cash flowing in if you only buy there stuff. If the stuff is good people will buy it. Social proof is from the users not the sellers and charlatans.
Perry’s post puts it well :
“One of my colleagues was asked to help with a site that was severely slapped – had Quality Scores of 1 – and because of his close relationship with Google, he was able to get a “real” Google rep to give him a “real” answer to why the site was slapped.
The answer:
“I would not send my grandma to this site.”
Yeah, I know, some people will retort, “What does YOUR GRANDMA have to do with anything?”
I looked at the site and I would not send my grandma there either.
The person at Google didn’t elaborate. So please permit me to elaborate.
This particular site was selling a specific business opportunity. The hype factor was through the roof, it was a pure “squeeze page” with nowhere else you could go to learn about the vendor, all the bullets were tease and the claims were extraordinary.
It had a smarmy feel.
Google didn’t like it. So somewhere in the account, a Google reviewer punched in a low quality score, and all the keyword and SEO tweaks in the world won’t change that.
I realize this is all totally subjective on Google’s part. But it tells you a few interesting things:
-Google is NOT just run by robots. They’ve got more than enough money to put real people on the assignment and they do.
-In my opinion Grandma is a GREAT criteria. Grandma doesn’t know nuthin’ about the Internet so she trusts you to tell her who’s OK to listen to. Should she sink her retirement money into that bizop? Well in Google’s opinion, if there’s more than a 10% chance of her getting screwed, then… absolutely not. Remember: If grandma doesn’t have a tech-savvy grandson, then she has to rely on Google.
-The site failed to prove what it was saying. Let’s say this bizop was totally legit. If so then they should be able to prove it. Names, cities, states, numbers. Qualifications, cautions, requirements.
-The site should have contact information, preferably including street address and phone number, and not appear to be some guy hiding behind his computer.
Might I suggest…. add “Would a Google rep send her grandmother to this site” to your bag of tricks and let’s all do our best to make the Internet a more trustworthy place.”
Ben’s post “Fonzie Rumbles With The marketing Gurus” talks about the real thing and the wannabes and their claims.
People want to see you and trust you. Give them the reasons, not overnight, to know like and trust you and you will sell anything. Now about my Pocket Fisherman…
