4 ms·

I love how "make the product" is step one. That's the easy part, right? I also think the complete premise is off target. This guy is talking about selling a ne

I love how "make the product" is step one. That's the easy part, right? I also think the complete premise is off target. This guy is talking about selling a newsletter for $25/month. Most high-quality magazines go for $25/year, or even less. And most of those magazines have large staffs generating quality (usually) content so that the customer is willing to part with that $25/year. If this guy wants to sell me a weekly newsletter for $25/month, that better be one hell of a newsletter. Unless the whole point of this article was describing how to fool people into buying a low-quality product. In which case, why not just go all the way and start pushing fake Viagra? You'll get a lot more than 300 "contacts" a day if you're spamming! What the hell happened to "Make a quality product, promote that product, sell the product, improve the product, repeat"?

jamesk2 17y ago
Yeah, making the product is hard but there are many newsletters that cost way more than $25 month. Here's a list of investing newsletters that cost more than $25/month. http://www.marketwatch.com/news/newsletters/newsletters.asp?dist=#frm http://www.marketwatch.com/news/newsletters/newsletters.asp?... There's even one that is $100 month and I've seen others that are even more. The difference between these and "high-quality magazines" is that these are extremely targeted to a specific audience with a minimum of advertising.
- natemartin 17y ago
  Then they probably have a staff working full time generating content for those newsletters? I'm not doubting that there are newsletters worth $25/month, I'm doubting that creating a newsletter worth that is a one-man job. (And especially a one-man job where that one man spends most of his time making cold calls.)
  - atree 17y ago
    Hey Nate. Sorry for the clarity issue. Running a $1M one-man operation is definitely pushing it; it's possible, but that's probably too much to put on one's shoulders. A typical $1M company probably has around 5 employees, which I should've mentioned. (The exact revenue per employee however should be based on your industry's averages to see how you fare with your competitors/industry)
    - natemartin 17y ago
      I saw your post below, thanks for explaining a bit more of the context. Sorry if I came through a bit cynical and sarcastic, reading your post I thought you were pushing a more get-rich-quick philosophy. Thanks for clarifying.

jamesk2 17y ago

Yeah, making the product is hard but there are many newsletters that cost way more than $25 month. Here's a list of investing newsletters that cost more than $25/month. http://www.marketwatch.com/news/newsletters/newsletters.asp?dist=#frm http://www.marketwatch.com/news/newsletters/newsletters.asp?... There's even one that is $100 month and I've seen others that are even more. The difference between these and "high-quality magazines" is that these are extremely targeted to a specific audience with a minimum of advertising.

natemartin 17y ago
Then they probably have a staff working full time generating content for those newsletters? I'm not doubting that there are newsletters worth $25/month, I'm doubting that creating a newsletter worth that is a one-man job. (And especially a one-man job where that one man spends most of his time making cold calls.)
- atree 17y ago
  Hey Nate. Sorry for the clarity issue. Running a $1M one-man operation is definitely pushing it; it's possible, but that's probably too much to put on one's shoulders. A typical $1M company probably has around 5 employees, which I should've mentioned. (The exact revenue per employee however should be based on your industry's averages to see how you fare with your competitors/industry)
  - natemartin 17y ago
    I saw your post below, thanks for explaining a bit more of the context. Sorry if I came through a bit cynical and sarcastic, reading your post I thought you were pushing a more get-rich-quick philosophy. Thanks for clarifying.