Renegade — Sat, 12 Mar 2005 09:44:01 +0000

Andre_Vas wrote: (I'm sure you CAN'T argue with a guy that makes 7.6 million a year... notice that the site structure is the same as mine)

Anyone can argue with anyone, just need to find something argue about, none the less, this thread is going to be closed...

Greg K — Fri, 11 Mar 2005 22:51:13 +0000

I just did some checking, and IMO, this thread should be closed until you comply with the posting policies for posting in this area that I pointed out in the first reply.

That right there should give you an idication of what reaction your site gets ; that it's type that will just call to the moderators to post about it even though they normally wouldn't until you followed policy.

-Greg

[Note: at time of posting, you had only posted one message not in one of your two threads]

Andre_Vas — Fri, 11 Mar 2005 22:47:46 +0000

Thank you very much... I'll go review it right now.

Greg K — Fri, 11 Mar 2005 22:43:23 +0000

Here is the thread I was refering to in my original post.

http://www.webmaster-forums.net/showthread.php?t=27213

-Greg

Andre_Vas — Fri, 11 Mar 2005 22:17:32 +0000

Fluffi wrote: [flameproofsuit]

But don't take this the wrong way, but I AM a trainee ACCOUNTANT, with ACCA, I know the implications of your kinds of schemes on the kind of people they are marketed to, and I am now finding it hard to keep my objectivity when it comes to reviewing your site. For that reason I will no longer continue to review your website. Further to that I do not believe that it is appropriate for TWF to continue reviewing this, especially given your attitude to the valid criticismn offered by members here, and the fact that is that in my experienece your site is ethically wrong! However that is merely my opinion and the TWF is free to act independently of that and I respect the opinions of the moderators here.

[/flameproofsuit]

Cheers

Fluffi

Yes! You are 100% right. This is the wrong forum to have my site reviewed.

Fluffi wrote: I know the implications of your kinds of schemes on the kind of people they are marketed to...

Would you say the same thing for: marketingtips.com/tipsltr.html ???

(I'm sure you CAN'T argue with a guy that makes 7.6 million a year... notice that the site structure is the same as mine)

If you would then this is DEFINATELY the wrong forum to have my site reviewed!

Fluffi — Fri, 11 Mar 2005 12:18:36 +0000

[flameproofsuit]

But don't take this the wrong way, but I AM a trainee ACCOUNTANT, with ACCA, I know the implications of your kinds of schemes on the kind of people they are marketed to, and I am now finding it hard to keep my objectivity when it comes to reviewing your site. For that reason I will no longer continue to review your website. Further to that I do not believe that it is appropriate for TWF to continue reviewing this, especially given your attitude to the valid criticismn offered by members here, and the fact that is that in my experienece your site is ethically wrong! However that is merely my opinion and the TWF is free to act independently of that and I respect the opinions of the moderators here.

[/flameproofsuit]

Cheers

Fluffi

Andre_Vas — Fri, 11 Mar 2005 11:59:33 +0000

I actually appreciate all your input guys.

This is great feedback!

I do hear something VERY COMMONLY:

The page is TOOOOOOOO long. Brake it up.

Well I won't brake it up actually, but what I'll do is something that I need
YOUR comments/input on.

Do you think you'll want TO stick AROUND the site longer if there was a link
that offered people "in a hurry" a quick 5 minute summary of the whole package?

So in otherwords - it takes them to a link... with a much SHOOORTER sales letter?

Please let me know....

Andre

Fluffi — Fri, 11 Mar 2005 09:47:26 +0000

Andre_Vas wrote: Sorry I forgot to mention - I'm only interested in professional
direct response marketers answers... people that have years
of copywriting experience.

This beg's the question, why are you asking 'webmasters' on a 'webmasters forum' to not review your site from a webmasters point of view, but from a 'marketing' point of view.

Sorry, I just can't see past the irony here, wouldn't you be better asking this question on a forum for people involved in marketing?

Busy — Fri, 11 Mar 2005 09:36:12 +0000

Andre_Vas wrote: Reason I say that is because:
Many people don't understand the science of "direct response marketing".

You mean spam?

Andre_Vas wrote: When you ask for their opinions - they tell you stuff like put a logo, use fancy colours, and brake up the page into navigation.

Because this stuff is important and can be the difference between a sale and an alt f4

Andre_Vas wrote: Apparently - these people obviously never picked up a book on "what sells", and actually been in the copywriting field both offline AND online for a long time.

Obvisously you've never been in customer relations. If you belive everything people put in books ... well I wont go there.

Andre_Vas wrote: You see it's very difficult to find a qualified copywriter and direct response marketer who will advice on one's website. And only they can tell you the real truth regarding your copy, design.

That's why they ask web developers that have been in the market for years watching the trends and styles of what works and what doesn't, what sells and what blows. Even then web develepers/designers ask/sample new methods/styles etc with the average Joe that knows nothing about web design. After all it is the little guy you want on your site for whatever reason.
You know the funny part of all this, on your site (no I didn't read it, just stoped at a section and saw this) Of course this entire process is covered in the tapes themselves and the "Information Marketing Bootcamp" CD's.... so rest assured, you will never find yourself not knowing what to do next. I guess you haven't got the CD's yet huh

JeevesBond — Fri, 11 Mar 2005 09:16:26 +0000

Andre_Vas, I'm a consumer I know what sells to me and that sort of thing never has. The page opens, we're presented by inordinate amounts of text, all of which seems to be the word "spam" I know there're some other words under the spam but the brain cannot interpret them.