Ben Settle

Sucks to be these guys…

“Oh my, oh my, what have I done! There’s something very wrong, there’s something very wrong, there’s something very wrong!”  — Church Of Satan founder Anton LaVey’s last death bed words.

“I am abandoned by God and man! I shall go to hell! O Jesus Christ!” — Voltaire, atheist, on his death bed.

“I am in the flames!” — David Hume, atheist, last words of despair on his death bed.

“I would give worlds, if I had them, if the Age of Reason had never been published. O Lord, help me! Christ, help me! Stay with me! It is hell to be left alone!” Thomas Payne, atheist, in his last hours.

“I am perplexed. Satan, get out!” — Aleistair Crowley “Englands most wicked man” on his death bed

Luke chapter 16 tried to warn ’em.

What?

Oh, I know, I know…

“askchually scientists say that’s just neurons firing off in the brain…”

Yes, no doubt the same scientists who say men can have babies, that the food pyramid is healthy, the sun is bad for you, meat will kill you, the jab will totally save your life, the earth is turning into Mordor but Bill Gates’ private jet doesn’t count, the inflation is merely transitory, and the list of lies goes on and on and on and on.

You can put your faith in the scientists if you want of course.

The point here ain’t about if your soul is on the rotisserie.

The point is the power of Vision when it comes to influence & persuasion.

Use it and save thy business from the hell of no sales.

To learn more about the paid Email Players Newsletter go here:

www.EmailPlayers.com

Ben Settle

Whenever I think of AI-generated writing I think of the movie Twins.

If you have not seen it, it’s about twin brothers who are the result of a secret experiment carried out at a genetics laboratory to combine the sperm/DNA of six fathers to produce the perfect child. The embryo split in two and what you got was Julius who was the perfect physical and mental human specimen (played by Arnold Arnold Schwarzenegger), and the other Vince who is physically and mentally almost the exact opposite… played by Danny DeVito.

Anyway, here is the part of the script I want to show you:

(Where they confront the guy, Traven, in charge of the experiment)

VINCE: This must be where you made the milkshake…

TRAVEN: We weren’t making milkshakes. We were making the most fully-developed human the world has ever seen.

VINCE: But instead of just one perfect kid, Mom had two of us — way to go, Mom.

TRAVEN: Wrong. The embryo split in two, but it didn’t split equally. All the purity and strength went into Julius. All the crap that was left over went into what you see in the mirror every morning.

VINCE: Whoa — I’m the crap?

JULIUS: It’s not true, Vince.

VINCE: No, I want to hear this. I’m left-over crap? I’m no good?

JULIUS: He’s wrong.

TRAVEN: Just look at him —

VINCE: You tellin’ me I’m a side effect!?!

And so it is with AI-created writing, art, whatever:

The dorklords and broccoli heads who obsess over it think the result is Julius but really they just got the crap left over from smarter, better, and greater minds, and then try to put it together in a way that doesn’t sound totally incoherent, stupid, and probably even insulting to the intended audience in a lot of cases — unless they are catering to the lowest common denominator, I suppose.

It’s all rather amusing to watch play out.

Just a year ago people were running around saying it would change everything.

You won’t have to write ever again!

It was as silly as the woman on TV who thought she’d never have to pay her mortgage again the night Obama got elected. Everyone is looking for that shortcut that doesn’t exist. That tool that will liberate them from doing the hard work. The piece of technology that will disguise their flaws, removing the required blood, sweat, & pain of doing the process to achieve the outcome.

No.

It doesn’t work that way.

Tools can help make writing faster and more efficient.

(I am typing this not hand writing it, for example)

But it won’t do the writing for you.

And I don’t care if we’re talking about copywriting, email writing, grant writing, fiction writing, press release writing, non-fiction writing, poetry writing, or frankly even grocery list writing — creating a collage of others’ writing ain’t the way to create anything that has genuine engagement that lasts the test of time. This is a small part of a very big discussion I talk a lot about inside my paid Email Players newsletter on a somewhat regular basis.

To learn more about it go here:

www.EmailPlayers.com

Ben Settle

While back on twitter, podcaster Ellie Schnitt declared with the passion of a 1000 pronouns:

“my favorite right wing thing is when they say nyc is sooooo scawwwyy like not to be that girl but I am the approximate size and strength of a ladybug and I don’t feel unsafe here so it’s objectively funny to be a Big Tough Country Boy and shit your diaper over the subway”

To which my reply was:

“My favorite NYC story is when @stefaniasettle saw a bum across the street of her mom’s Manhattan resell store jerking off in public, and the cops formed a protective ring around him while he did it. I like the way they do bid’niz”

Which then got some replies like:

“ok, how do you unsee a tweet?”

“My poor eye holes.”

“How can I unread this!”

Fun times on Twitter.

And yes, there is a point to this beyond my grossing you out. And that point is, creating Vision doesn’t require showing any pictures, images, or videos. If you know what you’re doing, your words fueling your reader’s imagination is a far more useful way to use an image to make sales than a gif or emoji, meme, or other picture.

Been getting low on hate mail, so let’s take for example everyone’s favorite subject:

Abortion.

Ooh!

Many years ago I remember seeing a bunch of pro-life protestors lining up along the road during morning rush hour holding up graphic pictures of aborted babies. Very disturbing and graphic, and horrifying. I remember feeling sick to my stomach. I suspect most everyone else who saw them did too. But, I also seriously doubt anyone’s opinion on the matter was swayed either way. Those against it were still against it (while feeling sick and probably angry at the protestors) and those who are okay with it were still okay with it (while feeling sick and also probably angry at the protestors).

What’d work better?

I’d argue what’d work a lot better is talking to people using just their words to create a Vision. Like, for example, when Antony Levatino testified at a House Judiciary Committee hearing about Planned Parenthood’s medical procedures after having personally performed over 1200 abortions himself.

You can read the transcript or watch it on YouTube.

But some of the highlights included such Vision as:

“Your patient today is 17 years old; she’s 22 weeks pregnant. Her baby is the length of your hand plus a couple of inches, and she’s been feeling her baby kick for the last several weeks. And she’s asleep on an operating room table.”

“…you introduce a suction catheter into the uterus. This is a 14 French suction catheter. If she were 12 weeks pregnant or less, basically the width of your hand or smaller, you could basically do the entire procedure with this, but babies this big don’t fit through catheters this size.”

“…you introduce an instrument called the Sopher clamp. It’s about 13 inches long. It’s made of stainless steel. The business end of this clamp is about 2 1/2 inches long and a half-inch wide. There are rows of sharp teeth. This is a grasping instrument, and when it gets a hold of something, it does not let go.”

“…and out pops a leg about that big, which you put down on the table next to you. Reach in again, pull again, pull out an arm about the same length, which you put down on the table next to you. And use this instrument again and again to tear out the spine, the intestines, the heart, and lungs. The head on a baby that size is about the size of a large plum.”

“…You know you did it right if you crush down on the instrument and white material runs out of the cervix. That was the baby’s brains. Then you can pull out skull pieces. And if you have a day like I had a lot of times, sometimes a little face comes back and stares back at you.”

“Congratulations. You’ve just successfully performed a second-trimester D&E abortion. You just affirmed your right to choose.”

The little face staring back is quite the eerie Vision.

And I suspect many-a-person reading it no doubt has a Vision from that now seared into their own non-liquified white goo brains they will not soon forget. Plus, there is nothing to “object” to as far as arguing with it, because, like any persuasion and influence based in Vision it makes no argument to object to.

It simply is what it is.

And while most will not have had their minds changed immediately, the experience of reading that won’t be easily forgotten. Possibly it might even change someone’s opinion in the future over time, as it takes hold, they think about it, see it in a new context, it fits into their world when it didn’t prior to reading it, and have time to digest it all. It’s happened before to some of my customers when I’ve talked about this subject using Vision — especially in my old elBenbo’s Lair Facebook group.

And should that happen to someone?

It won’t be because of any pictures since I didn’t show any.

Nor will it be from any slick “sales copy” or appeals to reason or logic or religion.

It will be because of Vision.

Their Vision, not mine, from their imagination, not mine, based on their experience, not mine – or any vision I try to impose on them with a photo, picture, gif, or anything else I could include in this email.

Speaking of email…

To read about the paid Email Players newsletter go here:

www.EmailPlayers.com

Ben Settle

Recently I got the email below from a customer I assume does not want me naming him.

(Unless given permission I just default to keeping people anon)

The context:

He read an email from some goo-roo virtue signaling to his list about how he’s different (the goo-roo version of a pick-me) from me, because he doesn’t use shaming and threats to keep people subscribed to his product the way I supposedly do, etc. But the part that stood out most was when the goo-roo quoted a rhetorical device I’ve used for my “No Coming Back” policy for Email Players.

The offending line:

“Plus, practically speaking, if the trash lets itself out why take it back in?”

Hence my customer’s question:

…it made me stop and think. Are you (truthfully) trying to shame people when you suggest that there is basically something wrong with them if they don’t act in the way you’d personally want them to?

(Eg. They’re ‘trash’ if they cancel, they’re X type of person, they’re quitters, they lack character, they have X deficiency, etc etc). Just be clear, I’m not saying you ARE trying to do this for your own benefit or manipulate people out of self-interest like the copywriter below is basically saying, but I know you’ve actually mentioned this shaming tactic several times before (like in the podcast intro) and never really thought of the possibility that you yourself might actually be doing it when it comes to your ban-for-cancellation policy. So don’t take my question the wrong way.

Just wondering if it’s really just (at least partly) a persuasive tactic/strategy to maximise your retention by tapping into shame (or fear via the threat of a lifetime ban). Looking at it from a marketing POV. As, in reality, people (pretty much everyone who has ever signed up to anything) cancel continuity products/services/etc all the time (even the ‘higher quality’, ‘better’ people who supposedly aren’t supposed to cancel). And it does deter people from canceling. But I see no problem with you running your own ship however you want.

Everyone’s entitled to that freedom, regardless.

First things last:

The garbage line is an analogy about a relationship that ends.

i.e., the trope of taking a girlfriend who leaves you back is like taking the trash back in.

That does not mean she is literally trash.

In some cases the man may even still love her but it’s for both their best interests to let it go. It would apply to the woman too, if she brought the man back, and it would be the exact same thing. And to virtue signal over it is the kind of silly self projection I have come to expect from goo-roos far and wide up in this business.

As for me supposedly shaming people or whatever:

There is no reason to shame someone I’m not allowing back.

I wouldn’t even bother. If anything, I am far more likely to wish people the best. For example, just a couple weeks ago I had a mini skirmish with a new Email Players subscriber by email. It was one of those cases where I could tell he was going to be a gigantic pain in the ass customer to deal with and told him as such, and he could tell he did not like my attitude about that … and he left, and I still told him I hope he makes lots of money and is successful, it’s just not going to be with me, obviously.

Sometimes people don’t belong in my World and vice versa.

And for either of us to accept each other back is taking the trash back in.

In fact, some of my former customers are friends.

And I am pretty sure they will tell you I don’t think they are trash..

More:

The whole “I’m not Ben Settle! I’m a nice guy! See? Look! See? Look at me! I’m someone who can be trusted unlike Ben Settle!” thing some of these guys do is admittedly as amusing when I see it as when I see blatant lies being told and spread about my offers from trolls. Especially since at the end of the day, they only make me sales in the long run, in ways I showed and proved in the March Email Players issue (about the pathology of trolls, reply guys, etc to better monetize them). So the way I see it, if it works for these guys who can’t get attention or engagement without invoking my name or taking shots at one of my businesses then all the power to them.

It all just becomes fodder for me eventually anyway – just like with this email you’re reading.

I am delighted if they want to help me, help them, help my business grow.

As for my policy being a tactic to deter people from leaving:

If that is true then I’m doing a piss poor job of it.

Especially since I constantly kick people out for the smallest of offenses.

For instance:

If someone shows me a bunch of attitude or disrespect, they got to go back. If it is clear they don’t have an actual business (a qualification to subscribe clearly listed right under the headline on the sales page — it ain’t a biz opp) I give them the boot, too. If I find getting packages into their country or dealing with their customs is too big a PITA I ban the entire country. My list of banned countries is growing bigger each month now, and that ain’t no exaggeration. I have also kicked people out who I found out refunded offers I sold as an affiliate. Brian Kurtz, for example, could hardly believe I canceled a couple people from Email Players who refunded his honestly advertised and over-delivered offer I sold as an affiliate once. I have zero tolerance for such people.

And that ain’t all:

Since buying ownership in other businesses (BerserkerMail/Learnistic/SocialLair, Low Stress Trading, the Oregon Eagle newspaper), etc… I have been curating the low class customers out even harder, banning people more aggressively, and blocking anyone who causes me even a smidgen of drama. If I find myself thinking about any customer creating headaches for me (due to their behavior – not due to no fault of their own, of course) more than two days in a row… they got to go back, and don’t think they’re the first.

Why would I do that?

Doesn’t that mean less revenue?

In the short term, definitely.

Email Players is my Mickey Mouse, so to speak (as I taught last year in the issue about World-Building) and so that is my first priority. But I also have other companies to tend to now. And that means more and more I only care about serving the hardcore boys & ghouls who use the info inside Email Players and profit from it… and could not care less about the lukewarm boys & ghouls. Frankly, I don’t even bother chasing people whose credit cards expire. People get an automated email every day their card is declined spelling out — in plain English, that even a 3rd grader can understand — what to do, how to avoid interruption, what will happen if they don’t… and they got til the first of the month to get their shyt together and figure it out.

Otherwise?

They get cleaned off the list, never to be allowed back, without a word from me.

Some will them will contact me right after – “But Ben, I didn’t realize…I’m sorry!”

Too bad, you had the info, you were briefed, and now you gotta go back.

Again, if that is trying to deter people from leaving then I’m failing miserably at it.

Just going by the number of people who have tried sneaking back in, asked to come back in, been waiting for a chance to come back in… I have zero doubt at all that if I sent all the exiled & banished an email saying they could come back to Email Players and lifted all the blocks… I’d add at least 100 paying subscribers, and probably a lot more than that. But I don’t want those people back. Nor should they want to come back – as the newsletter obviously did not benefit them and/or they were not intelligent enough to use the info and/or they did not value the info enough to use it.

There is no reason for either of us to waste any time on each other.

i.e., no reason for either to let the trash back in once it’s let itself out.

All right, so bottom line:

These pick-me goo-roos upset by my policy are doing what they always do.

And that is:

They are projecting.

Long ago I realized they do the pick-me “I’m not Ben Settle!” shtick because THEY think in terms of always gaming things, running tactics, tricking people, manipulating customers, trapping people inside, afraid to see people go, fear losing money, etc… and so they project it onto me while hiding behind fake altruism and simpish virtue signaling about how they aren’t me, don’t have my mean policy, or whatever it is they say. They simply cannot fathom someone running a business in a manner where I am perfectly happy making less sales if need be, turning people away until they are ready to buy, using brutal — arguably offensive, although not my intention — honesty at times… and not slobbering over getting the sale with silly tricks and goo-roo gamesmanship, virtue signaling, and pick-me clout chasing.

So as far as these goo-roos chasing clout and attention and engagement?

It never works.

Not long term, at least.

Goo-roos upset by my policy can posture and chest pound all they want to their lists or on Facebook or wherever they do their thing. But people know they’re full of shyt. And those who don’t realize it at first eventually find out soon enough. I know this because many of their own customers, clients, and lists tell me about them — just like the very person who emailed me above, due to him seeing one of these email goo-roos’ emails, which I never would have seen otherwise.

All of which brings us back full circle about the not taking the trash back in analogy:

That’s all it is — an analogy.

And it’s there to benefit both me and my customers.

I would also argue it benefits those who leave, too.

How?

Because most won’t waste their money or my time again on my products.

And, in the email goo-roo’s case above:

It gives him content fodder to virtue signal & pick-me about.

To read about the paid Email Players newsletter go here:

www.EmailPlayers.com

Ben Settle

“I don’t argue with doctors. You know what I’d say to them? ‘Take your clothes off and let me see what you look like.’”

So said the legendary body builder Vince Gironda.

Reminds me of what fitness bros onTwitter dismissively tell skinny reply guys:

“Post fizeek”

i.e., let’s see what you look like.

The reply guys never do, of course.

Got a lot of this in the online marketing world, too – reply guys yapping out unsolicited advice, opinions, conjecture. And I think it would be amusing to dismiss them in a similar manner:

“You send too many emails”

Post bizeek.

“You sell too much in your emails”

Post bizeek.

“Your emails are too long”

Post bizeek.

“Your books are too expensive and nobody reads anymore”

Post bizeek.

“You’re too mean”

Post bizeek.

“You need to offer an audio and PDF version of Email Players”

Post bizeek.

“You should give me lots of value for free before selling me something”

Post bizeek.

“You should let people who cancel Email Players come back”

Post bizeek.

“You should track open rates”

Post bizeek.

“If you don’t use AI you’ll be left behind”

Post bizeek.

“You need a nurture sequence”

Post bizeek.

And on and on and on it goes. I never reply back to these dorks.

But if if I ever did, I’d just say:

“Post bizeek”

i.e., show me YOUR business.

No, don’t show me your client’s business. Or that tech company that was handed $20 million in fundings’ business. Or your favorite goo-roo’s business. Or some guy who wrote a book’s business. Or that blue flame special prancing around the mastermind room talking out of his arse’s business… show me YOUR business, that you built, not someone else… and show me how your business has achieved exactly what I am trying to achieve with my business and maybe I’d listen.

Enough reply guy goop for the soul.

To read about the paid Email Players newsletter go here:

www.EmailPlayers.com

Ben Settle

In which the question of the hour is asked:

“In your experience, what are the best ways to weed out non-buyers? I sometimes delete readers who haven’t bought anything for over five years and only ask questions by email. One of the most important things I learned from you was the quality of the list, not its size. That’s why I only focus on growing the buyer list, not the reader list. I would be interested in your best practices on how to weed out non-buyers via the daily email, so to speak.”

Here are my thoughts on it:

* Do not whole cloth delete the non-buyers

* After all, you never know when they will become buyers

* The people replying are great to keep on your list for fodder (questions, trolls, ideas)

* They are also great to keep on your list because Gmail, Hotmail, Yahoo, etc see them replying to you and see you are a real person, and that can potentially help your inbox deliverability – if anything, you should want more of them

* If you want a clean list I suggest scrubbing your list

* When scrubbing your list remove the bots and catch-all addresses “help@“ or “admin@“, “swipe@” and all the other ones probably nobody is checking or engaging with

I will also say this:

This has been coming up more and more and more over the past year or so. Probably even longer, for all I know. So until proven otherwise I will just assume someone is prancing around a mastermind room somewhere teaching people to delete everyone who hasn’t opened, bought, or engaged in 30 or 90 days or whatever. I will also assume until proven otherwise it’s something people who have no clue how the long game of email or direct marketing actually works teach to others who have even less of a clue — and how unreliable tracking opens at all is in the first place.

Of course, some dork on social media will now probably say:

“Ben says not to track!”

No, Maynard.

What I am saying is that a lot of email tracking is unreliable.

Useful?

Yes, especially when looking at trends over time.

Profitable?

Of course, if you use it right.

We even have tracking and automation mechanisms (designed by my biz partner Troy Broussard — an actual scientist, who gets how for real scientific testing works from being both a Navy Nuclear Engineer and from when he was the Executive Director of Technology for Encyclopedia Brittanica running a $12 million department of developers… not to mention when he was doing all the test/tracking/automation for as many as 50 million emails per month as a consultant) baked in BerserkerMail, after all. But if you think all the major email clients from Gmail to Yahoo to Hotmail to Protonmail to Apple’s Mail and everyone in between are not making it harder — and certainly not easier — to track, by design, to protect their users from you… then, well, I don’t know what to tell you.

Go ahead and delete your whole list for all I care.

Because if you keep deleting people whole cloth you’ll get the same results either way.

My opinion.

It’s also been my experience, too, for over 20 years.

When you send emails people want to read that sell offers people want, you start seeing how many people are buying without being tracked, are not shown as opening or clicking anything yet you still see them buying… and in some cases are maybe not even on your list at all — as someone who is on your list who is also not being tracked by today’s flawed tracking software told them about you, they found you, bought, and the list goes on.

That’ll do it for today.

To read about the paid Email Players newsletter go here:

www.EmailPlayers.com

Ben Settle

Behold a tale from the free BerserkerMail Mead Hall Facebook group:

I was asked about why I only do double opt in email lists.

But before I list my reasons, a caveat:

Just because I say I do something or don’t do something does not necessarily mean everyone should or should not do whatever it is. Nor does it mean it’s necessarily the best course of action for every business in every circumstance. Unfortunately, a lot of peoples’ TikTok brains have been addled by social media grifters and now see everything someone says as an absolute — and get defensive if someone says anything contrary to what they or their favorite goo-roo says about anything at all, about any subject at all, in any context at all.

It’s amusing I have to give that caveat.

But that’s where we’re at in 2024.

All right, here why I do double opt-in…

1. Better inbox deliverability:

I put this first because apparently some email deliverability experts are saying it’s not good for deliverability or something. I don’t know that for a fact and heard that second hand. But it would not surprise me if that is the case.

2. Less likely someone accidentally subscribed or will forget they subscribed even if they did so on purpose:

They did, after all, take the trouble to double opt in and confirm they want to be there.

3. Less bots joining your list:

You won’t stop them all with double opt in, but it is a barrier. And speaking of barriers…

4. Barriers create credibility:

This is an old Dan Kennedy’ism I have been applying to many areas of my business for a very long time. Especially when it comes to curating my list. The more barriers you put up to a sale (or opt-in, in this case) the more time/money/emotion/energy (an old Jim Camp’ism about negotiation) the lead has invested in whatever you are keeping them from once they get it. This can happen on a big or small scale depending on the situation. With double-opt in it’s obviously a small scale. But it is what it is and is still a barrier.

5. Less spam complaints:

There is a much better chance a double opted in lead wants to be there, and so won’t as easily forget they subscribed and reflexively push the spam button as a result (which hurts inbox deliverability as well as could get you kicked off your ESP if it happens too often.)

6. I’m a 4 quarters vs 100 pennies kinda guy:

I far prefer a smaller but more curated list than a bigger and less curated list. And double-opt in helps me sustain a smaller but more curated list over the long run.

7. Better engagement:

This is totally anecdotal… but since co-founding BerserkerMail and for whatever reason, an awful lot of new opt-ins reply to my auto-generated message telling them to double-opt in with a “done!” or something acknowledging they double-opted in. That did not often happen before BerserkerMail. I am not even sure why that is the case as I’ve always more or less used the same message. But that can be good for inbox deliverability since it shows Gmail, Hotmail, etc (whatever service they are using) that I am a real person, not a bot, and someone they like to engage with.

There are more.

But that’ll do it, I think.

I have seen all the above play out not only in my own biz the last 22+ years, but in friends’ businesses, clients’ businesses (when I did client work), customers’ businesses and just by observation of many other businesses, including my other businesses.

Would I ever do single opt-in?

Yes.

Like, for example:

If I was paying for leads I would do single opt-in.

And certainly I would do single opt-in if I treated email list size like dik size. That way I could brag to a bunch of make money online mopes on social media about how big my list is, since it would likely help me get more of them as customers. But I don’t cater to them at all — and I actively try to repel them since they make such horrible customers for my particular offers and I legitimately cannot help them anyway. Maybe I would also do single opt-in if I sold advertising as my main business model (and it is a sound biz model for those with good list-building game imo) where people at least partially judge how much that advertising space they are paying for is worth based on list size.

There are probably other reasons I might do single opt-in.

But the point is not when or why I would do single opt-in.

But why I don’t do single opt-in.

And the 7 reasons I do double opt-in above are some of those reasons.

But mostly it boils down to this:

I focus on the relationship first and foremost and always have. Get the relationship part right and the other metrics people online fap to — not to mention sales, engagement, long term loyalty, etc — mostly take care of themselves, in my experience.

Notice I said “my” experience.

It is hard for me to imagine where selling the relationship first would not be most beneficial for a business taking the long game in mind. But the vast majority seem to think chasing metrics and algorithms and trying to game Google instead of just learning how to sell first is what works.

They can do what they want.

But curation is my main list building “tactic” if you want to call it that.

And a lot of that starts with double opt-in.

For more approaches like this see my paid Email Players newsletter here:

www.EmailPlayers.com

Ben Settle

A question about my email sequence-less ways:

“Hey Ben, quick question (not relevant to the current offer as I’m not qualified right now). Why do you not have a welcome sequence that would provide a more seamless introduction to your world? I feel that when there isn’t such a sequence in place, it takes longer to build the relationship. I’m not asking if you’ve thought of it, because I’m sure you have and decided against it. But I wonder why. Cheers!”

Answer:

Same reason Rush Limbaugh never had a “welcome sequence” of shows to listen to:

I sell the relationship in every email. Frankly, it’s what I first and foremost do sell. I don’t give a flying rodent’s puckering backside about selling the click, the open, or even the offer at first — I sell the relationship, even if that means the email is sometimes a blatant sales pitch.

Example:

A few months ago I generated my lifespan report inside BerserkerMail.

And since using BerserkerMail back in June 2021 (when I became the main “guinea pig” to warm up the IP)… and after sending over 120 million emails, getting nearly 15 million opens, generating 290,000+ clicks, earning over 20,000 unsubscribes, and getting slapped with just under 2,500 spam complaints… I realized two things:

1. It was a helluva lot easier & less frustrating to load/send/schedule those emails than it would have been with all the other ESPs I’ve used

2. My “opens” and “clicks” are clearly nothing to brag about if you go by the metrics goo-roos fap themselves blind to… although our Enterprise sender was astonished I get the engagement I do considering the sheer volume of emails I send, which is not “supposed” to work

But I couldn’t care less about either of those metrics.

What’s far more important to my business is the relationship and ROI. I’d take the Pepsi Challenge pitting the relationship I have with list vs anyone else’s in my industry any ol’ day of the week.

To me it’s ALL about the relationship.

Get that right and you almost can’t lose even if your copy is still weak, your offers are not yet the best, and your list is currently puny. At the same time, if you get the relationship wrong and it’ll be hard not to lose — even if your copy is brilliant, your offer is amazing, and your list is 1 million+ in size.

That’s not a license to sell crap or not grow a list and improve your skills obviously.

But anyone not guzzling the goo-roo kool-aid knows that.

So I sell the relationship in every email.

And other than a welcome email I’ve never used or needed a welcome sequence, “indoctrination” sequence or, worse, “nurture” sequence… nor have I had to send “good will” emails (where nothing is for sale, to show people what a swell guy you are by not selling), or do any of that amateur nonsense you see people do who have trouble connecting with another human being with their words. An exception is when doing a test drive sequence for SaaS but even that is still also selling the relationship while also demonstrating the offer.

Every email sells two things:

The relationship and the offer.

The one has to come before the other far as I’m concerned.

This is probably considered controversial or contrarian by some people.

But like practically everything I say, do, and teach… it’s merely selling 101.

For more approaches like this see my paid Email Players newsletter here:

www.EmailPlayers.com

Ben Settle

One of my Email Players subscribers — who does not wish to be named for obvious reasons — told me about a new client doing a lot of dumb things, with lots of ways he wants to help them and get paid more by them… but is not sure how to go about approaching them and offering to help.

My advice:

“it’s temping to meddle but in my experience let them hang themselves with their own rope on mistakes, when things are dire then, and only then, offer to fix”

I say this as someone who wants nothing to do with client work.

So I bring a blatantly biased contempt to the table with these things.

i.e., take with big, fat grain of chili pepper.

But, clients or customers or anyone else… I am a big fan of selling “medicine” to the “sick” (not literally – this is all figurative, I say this for the alphabet agencies who may be snooping in on this…) and those looking for a cure for something that ails them. I learned this the hard way when I graduated college and hopped into an MLM and tried selling my family and friends on things they didn’t think they needed but that I figured they would want and needed.

Total waste of time and counterproductive in every way.

Trying to (figuratively) convince someone without a headache to buy aspirin is pointless.

But a guy with a four-alarm hangover?

That one is ripe for selling to, will probably welcome it, even eagerly buy. To try to convince people they are sick when they have no symptoms, are in danger when they don’t realize it, are self-sabotaging when they think they are crushing it or whatever is a big, fat exercise in futility in my experience.

This is the problem with a lot of marketers.

They have great ideas, great products, and maybe even excellent offers.

But far too many merely have a solution looking for a problem. And it shows in their frustration, and having to constantly haunt masterminds and buy coaching for answers… when if they simply started with looking for a problem to solve first, and then built or found a product around solving the problem… there would be no need for much else other than get that offer in front of a moving parade of people with that problem.

Something related:

One good thing I’ve noticed in my Twitter replies over the past year since getting back on there is the growing number of people wanting to learn more about the fundamentals of direct marketing, copywriting, and email. Every time I post about the subject several will ask where they can learn more about the fundamentals, what books, etc.

I always take that as a good thing.

So here is a crash course in the fundamentals.

It all starts with:

1. Find a problem

2. Solve it

Ooh.

So advanced!

Maybe it’s not sexy. But just taking that to heart will solve probably 95% of your marketing and copywriting questions, frustrations, insecurities, and uncertainty. Even if you bungle on a multitude of levels, just getting the above right can keep you on track, can work if you write horrible copy, and can see you to the end even if you don’t really know what you’re doing.

My opinion:

Just applying the above would eliminate probably 99% of cold DM pitches and emails from these blue flame special more worried about how to warm up 100+ domains to send cold pitches through than just building and growing a legal opt-in list. And just living the above, as a way of doing business & living life in general, would probably create such an overwhelming rush of success for a lot of boys & ghouls up in this business they’d wonder how it could possibly be that simple and easy, and be tempted to think it was luck or there must be more to it.

But it’s not luck and it’s no more complicated than that.

Find problem – solve it.

If you want to stand out from probably every single business you compete against just do that one thing, and do it well, and work hard at it every day. While everyone else is running around shooting their solution at everyone like a shotgun, missing 99% of the time and maybe hitting the target by complete accident if they even do… you are more like a sniper with a rifle with an infrared scope, perfect wind conditions, and hitting targets looking to be shot.

That analogy always breaks apart eventually.

But you get the picture…

All right on to the business.

If you want to check out the paid Email Players newsletter go here:

www.EmailPlayers.com

Ben Settle