Very smart man: The unconscious is not what you think it is

by

I came by the following inspiring idea via Justin Murphy’s Other Life newsletter.

The idea itself comes from Bertrand Russell. Russell was what you might call an all-around very smart man. He won the Nobel Prize in Literature — he did write some 70 books and 2,000 articles — but he was really a philosopher and mathematician.

I’m telling you this because the idea in the following quote is not provable, but is the result of introspection. The fact that Russell was very smart might give it some extra weight when you read it. Anyway, here’s Russell’s idea:

===

My own belief is that a conscious thought can be planted into the unconscious if a sufficient amount of vigour and intensity is put into it. Most of the unconscious consists of what were once highly emotional conscious thoughts, which have now become buried.

===

Like I said, I found this inspiring.

In this view, your unconscious is no longer some dark ocean, which has its own impulses that toss you about like a little raft on the surface.

Your unconscious is not even some bizarre supercomputer that you can tap into via visualization, NLP, or psychocybernetics.

Instead, your unconscious is just what went on in your head previously — experiences and thoughts deposited, compressed, perhaps fused together via pressure and time.

The reason to be inspired is that what you think about today will be with you in the future. This gives you both power and responsibility, like Peter Parker, regarding what you’re doing and thinking right now.

Incidentally, a great way to think about worthwhile stuff and to do so with intensity is to write.

​​When you’re writing, you will come up with distinctions and observations you wouldn’t come up with if you try to hold on to a few thoughts in your head.

And if you’re already writing, you might as well publish it, and send it out into the world. If you figured out or discovered something good, others will benefit from it too. And that comes back to you in time. ​​Besides, writing to others will make you try harder.

All of these are are reasons why personal daily emails, like what you’re reading right now, are a great format.

And if you do decide to write daily emails, with a view to power and responsibility, then you might as well do it in the most valuable way using my most Valuable Email trick.

I’m tiptoeing the line here of giving away too much of what this training is about.

So let me just say Most Valuable Email is about putting vigor and intensity into thinking about marketing or copywriting or influence.

​​It’s about writing a fun and often shareable email about it.

​And it’s about having new skills and attitudes planted deep into your unconscious, from where they can emerge, months or years down the line, exactly when you need them.

For more on Most Valuable Email, or to get started right now:

https://bejakovic.com/mve

The best presentation Rich Schefren has ever given

by

On a road trip with a friend through Ireland this past August, I listened to a podcast that featured Moby, the bald, skinny, spectacled techno producer who’s sold some 20 million records worldwide.

Moby told an intimate story about a night before the 2002 MTV Awards.

I didn’t know, but Moby was apparently one of the biggest music stars in the world at that time.

For the MTV Awards, he was being housed in a fancy hotel in Barcelona — “one of the most elegant hotels I’ve ever been to,” he says — in one of the hotel’s four penthouse apartments. In the other three apartments were Madonna, Bon Jovi, and P. Diddy.

And yet, the night before the awards, Moby started to feel suicidal.

The reality was had been given everything — money, fame, appreciation — and yet he wasn’t happy. He had tried to drink his troubles away, but even that didn’t work.

So there Moby was, in his penthouse apartment, trying to figure out how to open up the big glass windows so he could jump out and end the misery. (He couldn’t figure out the windows either.)

This story struck me when I heard it. But really, if you listen a bit, you will hear the same story from a lot of people who go from absolutely nothing to absolutely everything.

It feels great for a while. A pretty short while.

But if it turns out that this is really all there is to it — living in the penthouse apartment, in an elegant hotel, with Madonna and P. Diddy as neighbors, with all the money and fame and achievement you could ever want — what follows is first emptiness, then craziness:

“Is it my fault? Am I such an idiot that I cannot appreciate all this? How messed up am I?”

Or…

“Was I so blind to pick the the wrong goal? Did I work like a dog all my life to get to the wrong destination, one I never really wanted?”

Or…

“Is it that there’s no sense in having any goals to begin with? Is all achievement and striving ultimately a race to disappointment?”

These are ugly questions. Maybe you started feeling uneasy just reading them. ​​It’s no wonder that people who find themselves ruminating on such questions often start to feel crazy or even suicidal.
​
Good news:
​​
The answer to all three questions is ultimately, “No, that’s not it.”

I could go into the psychology and neurology of it, what I know of it, but really, it’s much better to hear a story or three about it, and to be inspired along the way.

The best and most inspiring bunch of stories I’ve found on this topic come from business coach Rich Schefren, from a talk that Rich gave a year ago.

Rich answers all the questions above, and tells you what goals really are, and what they are for.

It was new and inspiring to me when I first heard it.

I still think about Rich’s points often.

And so I want to share his talk with you once again, and remind myself of it as well. In case you’re curious, here’s Rich on stage, giving the best presentation he’s ever given:

https://pages.strategicprofits.com/rich-diamond-day-c

How Edward Bernays manipulated me, and how he might do it again

by

I once wrote an email with the subject line, “How I manipulated you, and how I might do it again.”

​​That email was all about the strategic use of inflammatory words — like “manipulated” — to get people reading stuff they might not read otherwise.

Well, Edward Bernays manipulated me, and I guess he manipulated millions of other people, too.

Right now, I’m reading Bernays’s book Propaganda. It’s been in print for the past 100 years, and it’s still discussed today, though I suspect few people who discuss it have ever read it.

Why do people know and discuss Propaganda? Because of that title. Propaganda. It’s like manipulated. On the one hand repulsive, on the other hand fascinating.

Imagine that Bernays had titled his book Public Relations — which is really what his book is about. Would we be talking about it today, much less reading it?

The answer is no. The proof is that Bernays did in fact write a book called Public Relations. Result?

Propaganda: 2,700+ reviews on Amazon
Public Relations: 74 reviews on Amazon — and I bet most of those only came via Bernays’s Propaganda fame

All that’s to say, hooks matter. And unless you hook someone right away, then all the other thousands of words you might have written won’t matter much.

But you knew that. It’s the oldest bit of advice traded around the copywriting bonfire.

What you might not know is how to write a great hook. How to make it sensational and inflammatory — propaganda for the rest of what you have to say.

About that. As Daniel Throssell wrote recently:

​The skill of coming up with a great hook, and the skill of making it sensational, are almost exactly the same as a tiny, mechanical, supposedly “niche” copywriting skill you probably do not yet possess.

​​But it’s a skill you can find out more about, and even acquire quickly, via the following page:

https://bejakovic.com/cr

Shady and petty, or smart personal positioning?

by

In 1906, magician Harry Houdini started to research an ambitious book he planned to call The Encyclopedia of Magic.

But the more Houdini worked, the more maniacal and single-minded his focus became — to discredit Robert-Houdin, the great 19th-century magician that Houdini had originally modeled himself after, down to the name.

Even the title of Houdini’s book changed. ​​First it became Robert-Houdin’s Proper Place in the History of Magic… and then, The Unmasking of Robert-Houdin.

Robert-Houdin was a hack, Houdini was effectively saying. Robert-Houdin had managed to fool magicians into thinking he was something great and original, when he was not.

Yesterday, I wrote an email about how negotiation coach Jim Camp snubbed his mentor Dave Sandler.

Sandler was a sales trainer who had influenced much of Camp’s thinking — take a look at their published works — but Camp never seems to have given due credit to Sandler for his influence or ideas.

You might call that — along with Houdini’s attack on Robert-Houdin — petty, shady, or simply inevitable human ego that crops up even among great men.

You might call it that.

But I might call it smart personal positioning.

Hear me out:

It’s undeniable that being unique, new, distinct, never-before-seen is a tremendous advantage to your personal positioning.

The trouble of course is that you’re probably not unique, distinct, or never-before-seen, just like the other 117 billion humans estimated to have ever lived.

​​We’re all quite similar to each other, and we’re all really the outgrowth of our families, friends, neighbors, coworkers, teachers, mentors, living and dead.

That might be true. But like I said yesterday, it’s not really what the human brain responds to.

The human brain responds to contrast. That’s the basis of cognition.

And what bigger contrast is there than saying about yourself, “There was darkness upon the face of the deep… and then there was light.”

So there you go. If you’re looking to improve your personal positioning, work on being more distinct, unique, new.

That’s given.

What you might not have thought about is to make yourself distinct and unique at the expense of the people who helped you get there.

It might seem like one of those unsavory and pointless things done by people who have made it to the top… but I disagree. At least about the pointless part.

People who get to the top often do things that seem unnecessary or even self-defeating — if you’re not in their place.

Anyways, that’s just an idea for you to consider.

I realize today’s message might seem a little dark, but that’s what happens if you want to reach into all corners of human nature. Some are nice and cheery… others are dark and disturbing.

If you are willing to face the dark and disturbing corners of human nature, and maybe even figure out how to work with them to your advantage, then I have an entire sub-training all about that.

That sub-training is Round 19 of my Copy Riddles program. It deals with the dark psychological things that are present in the best sale copy, which go deeper than mere self-interest.

For more info on Copy Riddles, from Round 1 to Round 20:

https://bejakovic.com/cr

Jim Camp, plagiarist

by

Last week, Ben Settle sent out an email in which he quoted a reader who said the following about negotiation coach Jim Camp:

“… his whole system for the most part comes from Dave Sandler and he never gives him credit, ever that I’ve heard. Now I realize he has done many things to make him an expert but he has never anywhere I’ve heard even mentioned Sandler.”

Ben is a big Jim Camp fan, and has infected many of his readers, me among them, with Jim Camp’s authority.

Ben shrugged off his reader’s comment, and said he had never heard of Sandler.

​​Neither had I. But I looked Sandler up. He was a sales trainer and he died in 1995.

I found a book of 49 of Sandler’s “Timeless Selling Principles.” Most of the rules line up very well with Camp’s system. And some line up exactly.

​​Take a quick look over the specific language in the chapter headings and summaries below, and you’ll see that Jim Camp was in fact taking a lot from Sandler. ​​From the book:

* “Don’t spill your candy in the lobby” [Camp swapped in “beans” for “candy”]

* “The best sales presentation you’ll ever give, the prospect will never see” [taken word-for-word]

* “The bottom line of professional selling is going to the bank” [Camp said “bottom line of negotiation…”]

* “You must be comfortable telling your prospect that it’s OK to say ‘No.’ You must also be comfortable hearing and accepting ‘No.'” [Camp used this pretty much word-for-word, and summed it up with the title of his book, Start With No.]

In that Ben Settle email, Ben wrote, “If you learn something that’s not common knowledge from a particular source it’s good to give credit.”

I’ve read and listened to Camp a lot, but I’ve never read or heard Camp credit Dave Sandler. I’ve heard him mention Peter Drucker, Ralph Waldo Emerson, even Gloria Steinam, but never Sandler. (I checked just now, and Sandler is credited once, among 20 other mentors, at the end of Start With No.)

So now what? Is Jim Camp really a plagiarist? Or did he at least snub an influential mentor by not crediting him enough?

It might be interesting for the gossip, but on a practical level, I couldn’t care less.

As I wrote a long time ago in this newsletter, I’m less interested in attribution than in ideas that work.

Jim Camp’s system works. I know because I’ve used it and seen it work.

But is it really Camp’s system? Or Sandler’s system? Or somebody else’s who came before Sandler? Or some amalgam?

Instead of agonizing over those tough questions, I would like to give you a better, easier question to ponder:

Do you remember any of Sandler’s points above?

​​The real value in this email is those five points, not a dogpile on the topic of whether Camp gave due credit or not.

And yet, I doubt one person in a hundred will remember any of Sandler’s ideas above from this email… while many will remember that I wrote an email with the subject line, “Jim Camp, plagiarist.”

No judgment there. Such is the human brain — wired for human action and drama. You can gripe about it and fight it without effect, or you can simply accept it and work with it.

As I wrote once before, it’s your choice whether you want to be subtle or savage in how you work with it.

What is not your choice is how people’s brains work, and what kinds of messages they respond to.

​​And the most condensed and powerful type of message that people respond to… well, you can read more about that here:

https://bejakovic.com/cr

What a first-rate roper needs

by

The “big con” requires two central con men. One is the insideman; the other is the roper.

The insideman has the “opportunity” to get something for nothing, which is what ultimately seduces and dooms the mark.

The insideman stays put and waits for the roper, who goes out into the world and “ropes in” the mark.

A good roper needs to have: the gift of the gab; surface knowledge of lots of topics; the ability to pretend and act; a magic quality known as “grift sense”; and the willingness to withstand the high stress of constantly being exposed while trying to scheme and swindle himself into a mark’s confidence out in the wild.

That’s what it takes to be a good roper. But what does it take to be a first-rate roper?

David Mauerer, a professor of linguistics and author of The Big Con, asked this question to two big-con ropers back in the 1930s. here’s what one of them said:

===

Will-power is the most important asset a con man can have. Have you ever watched a grifter who stayed in one position all his life and never advanced? It is pitiful to see how much mental energy he uses up getting nowhere. If he is a smack-player, he won’t try to get up any higher in the racket. Most failures wear themselves out with futile grifting and worry about keeping out of the can. They work themselves into a fever because they haven’t the will-power to stop and organize themselves for efficiency and try to get a big mark for the big store.

===

(The “smack,” by the way, is a short-con game, as opposed to the big con, which is at the top of the confidence game hierarchy. Short-con games like the smack have lower stakes, lower earnings, and less prestige among grifters than the big con.)

Now, maybe don’t want to take any kind of business advice from criminals.

Fair enough. I can’t fault you, and I won’t try to persuade you otherwise.

Personally though, I found the above quote made me stop and think. To me at least, it applies even outside the world of confidence men.

The key words for me were continuing to “play the smack”… instead of having the will-power to stop and organize yourself so you can get to the next level.

Only you can figure out what it might take to get you there.

Maybe it’s skills… presentation… connections… attitude… experience… or an entire change in approach.

Again, only you can figure it out. And it will take will-power to get you to do so.

Anyways, if by chance you find out that it’s skills that you need, specifically copywriting skills, here’s how you can learn from the people who have made it to the absolute top of the copywriting racket:

https://bejakovic.com/cr

Why I don’t write to my “old self”

by

“… the 30-oared ship of Theseus, the Athenians constantly removed the decayed part of her timbers, and renewed them with sound wood, so that the ship became an illustration to philosophers of the doctrine of growth and change, as some argued that it remained the same, and others that it did not remain the same.”

It’s become popular online advice to say, “Write to your old self.” Solve the problems that you yourself had two months or two years ago.

I believe I first heard Rich Schefren say this years ago, but it’s become widespread since.

I don’t do it this way. I don’t write to my old self. Two reasons why:

First, find it hard to move forwards while looking backwards — it gives me seasickness.

Second, I frankly don’t remember who I was two years ago, any more than I can guess who I will be two years from now.

Instead, what I do, and what you can consider doing too, is to write to myself today. I write about what I find interesting, motivating, valuable-sounding right now.

For example, in my email yesterday, I wrote about very high-ticket back-end offers. Why? Because I sense it’s something I should be doing today, or at least in the next few months.

Of course, among the ideas I find interesting many have to do with tennis gossip, identifying plants in the wild, or my own health.

I don’t write about those. I make an effort to choose among all the many ideas I find interesting, motivational, and valuable-sounding, and I only write about those that can also be interesting to people who tend to read this newsletter.

Still, the starting point is always what I find interesting, today, now.

In case this idea resonates with you, I can tell you there are some benefits to doing it this way, at least in my mind:

It’s fresher, more honest, less preachy than writing to my old self.

It can be more valuable to readers — because I’m writing based on my current experience and emotions, rather than on fading or faulty memories.

Ultimately, by focusing on ideas that can make me better, rather than what made my old self better, it makes this newsletter better in the long term, and benefits my readers if they stick with me.

Maybe this doesn’t do anything for you. But then again, maybe it resonates with you on some level.

And if it does, and if you’d like to do something similar, then consider using my Most Valuable Email trick. It’s a way to take ideas that interest or intrigue you, play with them, and make them interesting to your readers, too. For more information on MVE:

https://bejakovic.com/mve

$90k upsell to a $39 magazine subscription

by

I found the following via Lawrence Bernstein’s Ad Money Machine site. You gotta pay for that site, and I happily do. It clues me in to wonders like the following:

For the past dozen or more years, select subscribers to National Geographic magazine (one-year print subscription: $39) have been getting a unique sales letter in the mail.

The sales letter, which comes with an attractive brochure, is making a pitch for a $90k upsell — and apparently selling out the offer year after year.

I bet you’re curious what this $90k upsell could be. I mean, it’s quite a leap from $39. ​​What could possibly be worth it?

I’ll tell you.

The offer is called “Africa by Private Jet.” It involves:

* 20 days
​
* 7 different countries

​* A private Boeing 757, refitted to accommodate just 51 expert travelers instead of the standard 233 budget sardines

​* Visits to the best big game, big ape, and big culture locations across Africa

​* Professional scientists as tour guides, an on-staff physician, and an expedition chef

​* An inaugural dinner with Jane Goodall in London (first stop of the trip) and a farewell dinner in Rome (last stop)

​* A safe, fascinating, hassle-free adventure; a feeling of importance and superiority; interesting dinner party stories for a lifetime; all backed by the good name of National Geographic Society

The sales letter made me want to go.

And it reminded me of Ken McCarthy’s Advanced Copywriting for Serious Info Marketers seminar.

One of Ken’s many messages in that seminar was that if you think a bit, you will find higher-ticket offers — which cost 2x, 10x, 100x, even 2,307x of what your front-end costs — and your best or very best customers will still happily buy.

There’s no shortcut to that bit of thinking.

But perhaps a good starting point is to conjure up an absolutely incredible experience or transformation you yourself would like to enjoy — and then just take others along with you on that trip.

Anyways, my offer today has little to do with the above National Geographic story, except the following:

Before he got to talking about upsells, Ken McCarthy spent the majority of that Advanced Copywriting seminar teaching what he believes to be the “most important, do-or-die copywriting skill.”

He first teased people in the seminar, and had them guess what they thought this skill might be. People guessed:

Stirring up curiosity?

Coming up with a big idea?

Sounding believable?

Nope. Ken had a mechanical skill in mind. And he said this one mechanical skill covers 90% of what it takes to be a copywriter. If you’d like to find out more:

https://bejakovic.com/cr

The comeback secret of a humiliated Major League pitcher

by

I read an interesting article this week about Colorado Rockies pitcher Daniel Bard, who was infected multiple times with the yips.

Bard started out a baseball prodigy. Even in his teens, he could throw at close to 100 miles per hour.

In one famous, high-pressure situation, while pitching for the Red Sox, Bard came on with the bases loaded.

He struck out Hall of Famer Derek Jeter with three pitches. Then All-Star Nick Swisher came to bat.

Bard first threw two strikes. But it was Bard’s third pitch that made history.

​​It was later called by Sports Illustrated “one of the nastiest, most unhittable pitches that the world has ever seen,” a 99-mph fastball that went straight at the center of the plate only to wildly dip into the dirt at the last millisecond.

Swisher swung through empty air and tossed his arms up in frustration. “It’s not supposed to move like that,” he said later.

All good — until one season, when Bard completely lost control where the ball was flying. He started to hit players. He sailed the ball high and hit the back stop. He threw to first base but instead the ball landed in the dirt.

The technical term for this condition is the yips. Nervousness, anxiety, whatever.

Bard had gotten tight, and no amount of deep breathing, meditation, or top-level sports psychology could help him.

That’s the inevitable intro I had to give you just to set up the following paragraph, which was the most practical and valuable I found in this interesting article.

Bard cured his yips eventually, and made it back to the Major Leagues after quitting. He even became a star pitcher once again. But the yips started to creep back in. Then the following happened:

===

In the off-season, a friend who coaches at U.N.C. Charlotte suggested that he throw a two-seam fastball from an arm slot two inches higher than his usual position. Bard had spent years tinkering with his arm slots, to disastrous effect. But he understood his body and his mind better now. Instead of instructing his body, he tried imitation, thinking of pitchers with higher arm slots and mimicking them. The ball hissed out of his hand and sank. That fastball became his best pitch.

===

In case it’s not clear, what I found interesting was this idea to mimic and imitate successful people, rather than tinker with your technique.

This can apply to whatever you’re doing.

Say copywriting.

One option is to sit down and say,

“All right, what’s the level of sophistication in this market? Should I use the if-then headline formula here? Or the how-to? Or the case-against? Or maybe it’s best to lead off with authority, to diffuse the readers’ skepticism?”

That’s the tinkering option.

The other option is mimicry. You set aside all the talk about sophistication and headline formulas and authority. Instead, you sit down, rub your hands together and say,

“Right. Say I’m John Carlton. In fact, let me put on a Hawaiian shirt. What would I focus on here? What kind of headline would I write if I were John?”

Is mimicry the optimal way to learn?

I don’t know. It prolly depends on your own psychological makeup.

But it’s almost sure that most skills are taught and learned via the tinkering approach, with almost no thought given to mimicry. That’s a shame, because mimicry can be a great way to get better, and fast, and painlessly.

But on to work:

It’s true, my Copy Riddles course does break down copy into component parts, and instructs you on what to do. It even gives you a tinker-y checklist of how to write good copy, from alfalfa to zucchini.

But the real strength of Copy Riddles is the mimicry part.

Write copy… see what A-list copywriters like John Carlton did with the same prompt… then do it all over, while mimicking, imitating, or channeling those A-list copywriters.

For more info on this approach, which has been endorsed by Major Leaguers like Gary Bencivenga, Parris Lampropoulos, and Gary Halbert, take a look here:

https://bejakovic.com/cr

I flipped the script and had it flipped on me

by

Yesterday, I reached out to a biotech company that’s doing some exciting work, which I’d written up in my health newsletter.

I wrote them an email to say I want to help them publicize their work. I said I have a newsletter in the space, and I’d like to be put on the list to get their press releases in the future.

All of which is 100% true and was said entirely in earnest.

I sent this email to the communications officer at the biotech company.

I didn’t hear back from the communications officer. But a couple hours later, I did hear back from the CEO.

He thanked me for covering their research in my newsletter… said my newsletter is great… and that he would keep me up to date with the newest results of his company’s research.

That reply came from his official company email address. A bit later, I saw that he also signed up to my newsletter with his private Gmail address.

I’m not telling you this as an effective but entirely unscalable newsletter growth strategy, though it certainly is that.

Instead, I’m sharing it as an example of “flipping the script.”

I in fact did reach out to this biotech company with the thought of getting my newsletter better known, and even with the idea of growing my list.

I wasn’t sure my email would get the CEO to sign up for my newsletter, but I had certainly hoped for something similar.

The thing is, I went about it entirely indirectly. There was no ask in my email except to be notified of the company’s future work.

In my email, I did mention the lead researcher’s name… I mentioned my own newsletter… I included a link to it.

​​It so happened that if anybody from the company clicked that link, they would see my post about the company’s latest research front and center at the top of my newsletter archive.

Maybe you think that by telling you this, I’m trying to make myself out into some kind of would-be Professor Moriarty, a scheming keyboard puppetmaster, always two steps ahead.

​​That’s hardly it. And to prove it, let me admit that I myself am susceptible to the same form of influence.

A couple weeks ago, I wrote an email about 7 Twitter content strategies, which I was sharing even though I had never successfully grown a Twitter following.

Then earlier this week, I got a reply to that email from a guy named James Carran. James wrote:

===

From someone who HAS done it, more than once, these are pretty much on the money.

The biggest thing is when you can combine more than one in a personal story. “How I built a million dollar newsletter using these 7 tips” tends to work better just now than “7 tips to build a newsletter” etc.

===

Hmmm… a compliment about my content, plus a meaningful extension, and all from somebody who’s grown multiple Twitter accounts to some number?

I was curious. I asked James what his story is. He replied:

===

I’m @getpaidwrite on Twitter, 105k there.

And at one point I was ghostwriting for 4 others. It’s definitely gotten more difficult to grow though.

===

At this point, I naturally checked on Twitter to see if James’s claims are true.

Sure enough. I saw he has 106.1K followers on Twitter… along with a link to his newsletter.

Still curious, I signed up for his daily emails.

Now, I can’t imagine what kind of direct, head-on appeal, bribe, bonus, begging, or threatening could get me to sign up for daily emails from somebody who had just replied to one of my own emails.

​​​And yet, there I was, signed up, after a total of 80 words of influence from James.

Now, maybe James set me up in this way intentionally. Probably not though. But you can still learn from it.

And you can start to think about how to create the conditions where people themselves hit upon the idea of doing just what you want them to do.

Last point:

I wrote to James to say I had signed up for his newsletter, and to ask if I could include his message in an email. He wrote:

===

Of course, go ahead!

And thank you for joining my list, that’s an honour. I’m trying to get into the swing of daily emails and improving my email marketing game. Reduce my reliance on “X”.

MVE was a huge help, bending my brain to think of how to apply it effectively from a more general writing perspective…

===

You probably know what James is referring to by MVE. But in case you don’t know yet, and you would like to know, then you can find out here:

https://bejakovic.com/mve