Should I offer to eat my shoe?

by

Back in 1979, German film director Werner Herzog ate his shoe.

Herzog had once said that a fellow director, Errol Morris, would never finish his movie Gates of Heaven. Herzog was hoping to be proven wrong, so he added that if Morris did ever finish the movie, he, Herzog, would eat his shoe.

Morris eventually finished his movie.

So Herzog put on an event. The thing was filmed. A couple hundred people attended.

Herzog first boiled his leather shoe for five hours with garlic, herbs, and duck fat to make it somewhat edible. He then cut up the leather into tiny pieces. Over the course of about 45 minutes, Herzog chewed and swallowed much of the leather. The sole went uneaten.

I thought of this today because I was thinking of guarantees for an offer.

It is a well-known truth that a guarantee reassures undecided buyers and increases sales.

The standard is the money-back guarantee. You can get generous with it, and offer double-your-money-back. Or you can get creative. “I’ll eat my hat!”

But I don’t wear a hat. I don’t even own one. That’s why thought of Wener Herzog and his shoe.

I looked over to the shoe rack near my front door. There’s a pair of old white Converse All-Stars there. They’re made of canvas. I could boil them? Maybe season them? A bit vinegar? At least eat the laces?

But then I snapped out of my fantasy.

Guarantees are great. I encourage you to think about how to offer them for what you sell, and to get creative.

But I am not and will not be offering a guarantee for Daily Email Habit, the main offer I’ve been promoting over past few months.

It’s not simply that shoe canvas is tough, and my Converse have been through a lot, and that I don’t want to risk somebody actually requesting that I eat one of them.

My reason is simply that I actually want Daily Email Habit to be useful to the people who join.

The basic offer I’m making is to help you start and stick with the habit of sending daily emails.

What I offer is help getting you over initial hurdle of what to write about each day… guidance to making your daily emails more effective… and savings of time and brain power.

But you still have to put in the work.

I don’t want to encourage uncommitted or undedicated people to try out Daily Email Habit by promising to eat my shoe, or by offering any kind of guarantee.

As I wrote a few days ago, I’m even trying to turn people away if they don’t know what they’re getting into. Daily Email Habit only really makes sense for people who are committed and dedicated to write daily and profit from it.

If that’s you, Daily Email habit can be a great help. I have a growing wall of testimonials and case studies on the sales page from people who started their own daily email habit and who profited as a result.

If you’d like to read some of their stories, or start your own habit that can lead you to similar results, here’s where to go:

https://bejakovic.com/deh

A daily email newsletter I read and recommend

by

Today, I’d like to get you to sign up to Jason Resnick’s daily email newsletter.

6 months ago, I had never heard of Jason. That says less about him (successful and well connected) than it does about me (hermit and a half).

The way I did eventually hear about Jason was that I got on a call with one of my own customers, Chris Howes.

Chris runs Creative Strings Academy, a paid online membership of hundreds of musicians, and he has an email newsletter with over 10,000 people on it.

“Wouldn’t it be nice to have more customers like Chris,” I said to myself.

So I asked Chris to get on a call. I wanted to find out more about who he is, how his business works, what his problems are. Maybe this could help me create new offers to attract more customers like him.

Chris agreed to get on a call with me. But he told me straight up, “If you’re trying to recruit me as a coaching or consulting client, I’m already working with someone.”

That someone turned out to be Jason Resnick.

And so, out of my hermit cave, at a safe distance, I signed up to Jason’s daily email newsletter and started stalking Jason online. It turned out that:

1. Like me, Jason teaches email marketing, but he focuses on the many -ation parts of email marketing I know precious little about, like automation, and optimization, and segmentation

2. Jason’s audience is made up of online business owners with profitable businesses (along with Chris, I recognized a few other common customers and clients among the testimonials on Jason’s site)

3. Jason writes daily emails in which he shares actual email marketing tips, based on his own business as well as his work with coaching clients (as opposed to focusing on magic or golden retrievers or New Yorker cartoons, the way I tend to do)

My stalking and lurking went on for 6 months. That whole time, it was on my todo list to write to Jason to get introduced. Of course I never did.

And then, a couple weeks ago, as part of a “JV Outreach Challenge” I ran inside my Daily Email House community, I finally replied to one of Jason’s emails.

I told Jason some of the story above.

I pointed out that there’s an overlap between his audience and my audience, and that he and I seem to focus on complementary parts of the email space.

I asked if he might be down to do a cross-promotion, where we would each introduce our audience to the other’s newsletter.

Jason agreed.

And so here we are.

I’d like to recommend to you sign up to Jason’s daily email newsletter, the same way that I’m signed up.

Jason is offering a lead magnet when you sign up, a 13-point landing page checklist.

Jason’s checklist is free, it’s short, and from what I can tell, having myself never A/B tested a landing page, it’s full of good points.

So sign up to Jason’s newsletter to get the free checklist.

Or really, sign up because what Jason writes about and what I write about are complementary… because you can learn something valuable from his experience and his work with successful business owners… and because you will get to see daily emails done in a different way than you may be used to.

If you run an online business, or if you do email marketing in any way, I suggest you take a look here:

https://bejakovic.com/jason

Do you subscribe to the New Yorker?

by

You probably don’t. But I do.

I subscribe to the New Yorker because the New Yorker’s feature articles are well-written fluff, which exposes me to new ideas.

But if I’m being 100% honest, that’s not the only reason.

There’s also the New Yorker cartoons, which I find funny. In fact, the zeroth issue of my Daily Email Habit service, which I have on the sales page as an illustration of what customers get every day, features a cartoon from New Yorker.

A few years ago, the New Yorker started running a cartoon caption contest.

In each issue, there’s a new cartoon without a caption, inviting completely new caption submissions.

There’s also last week’s cartoon with the top 3 captions, inviting readers to vote among them online.

And then there’s the cartoon from two weeks ago with the winning caption, the caption that got the most “funny” votes in the past week.

(This week’s winner is for a cartoon that shows a psychiatrist’s office with two clocks sitting on the psychiatrist’s couch. The clocks have eyes, arms, and legs, and one seems to be exasperated. The winning caption reads, “I was born in New York. I grew up in New York. Then we move to California and she expects me to change.”)

Here’s a curious thing I found out in a recent New Yorker article about humor:

Even the top-rated New Yorker cartoon caption entries receive mostly unfunny ratings. (The options when voting are “funny,” “somewhat funny,” and “unfunny.”)

In other words, even when it comes to the funniest captions, most people will think it’s not funny at all. Not just not less funny than really he-he ha-ha. But totally unfunny and flat and stupid, with not even a smile resulting.

Very very interesting.

From what I have read and seen inside my own head, the sense of what’s funny, like shoe size, is highly individual.

In general, the only joke we will consider laughing at is a joke we can identify with in some way, much like the only shoe we will consider wearing is one that actually fits on our foot, however tightly.

Maybe you are not funny. Maybe you’re not trying to be funny.

But maybe you’d like to make money and have influence and have stability in your life.

I keep promoting the idea of writing daily emails as a means to all three of those outcomes.

But I know that a good number of people out there are hobbled by the thought that they aren’t writers… that they have nothing to say… or that they have no right or authority to say anything, even if they might have something to say.

Writing for sales and influence works in the same way as humor.

It’s identification first… authority and expertise second, or maybe 3rd.

On the one hand, this means that, regardless of how much of an expert you are and how much authority you have, most people will simply never be moved by what you write. Again, even the top-rated New Yorker cartoon caption entries receive mostly unfunny ratings.

On the other hand, it also means that even if you have little expertise and less authority, there will be people who read and are influenced by what you write, simply because they identify with you as a person, however tangentially. If you’ve ever been in a relationship, and felt pressured to change as a result, you’ll even find two clocks on a shrink’s couch funny if they share the same frustration as you.

All that’s to say, if you want to influence and make sales to an audience that I personally have no hope of ever influencing or selling to, you can do so, starting today, simply by virtue of being a unique person with unique interests, experiences, life conditions, and attitudes.

Which brings me back to Daily Email Habit.

Daily emails a great way to influence and sell, because they are a constant drip of you, and your unique interests, experiences, life conditions, and attitudes.

I can help you get started and stick with daily emails, even if you worry that you have nothing to say, or no right to say it. For more info:

https://bejakovic.com/deh

Insightful advice from the most famous door-to-door salesman of all time

by

I once wrote an email trying to figure out who the most famous copywriter of all time is.

(I used the number of Google search results as a proxy.)

It turns out several very famous fiction authors previously worked as copywriters. But in terms of people who actually got famous for being copywriters, it was no contest. There was only one option:

David Ogilvy.

Today, I want to write about Ogilvy again, but not as the most famous copywriter, but as the most famous door-to-door salesman.

Ogilvy of course didn’t become famous because he sold door-to-door. Still, I’m giving him preference over other famous people with door-to-door sales experience (Johnny Cash, Mark Cuban) because Ogilvy was actually a star door-to-door salesman, and because he lasted in the profession for years.

At age 21, Ogilvy came back from France where he had worked as a kitchen hand at the Hotel Majestic in Paris. He took a job in Scotland, going door to door and selling the AGA Cooker, a kind of stove + oven + toaster + heater.

Ogilvy was so successful selling this kitchen contraption that three years later, the company had asked him to write a new sales manual for other door-to-door salesman inside the AGA empire.

The result was a 15-page document, The Theory And Practice of Selling The AGA Cooker, which Fortune magazine has called “probably the best sales manual ever written.”

Since a part of my craft is to search within the deep caverns of persuasion and influence, I of course tracked down and read Ogilvy’s manual.

Today, I want to share just one insightful line with you. It comes in the second section of the manual, which is titled “Defence.”

The first section of the manual is “Attack,” which Ogilvy devotes most of his time to, and which he says should be “so thorough that the enemy is incapable of counter-attack.”

Still, in war as in sales, sometimes you gotta defend. And on the topic of defense, Ogilvy says:

“To show that you are completely stumped on any point is fatal, for it stimulates the prospect to attack, puts you on the defensive, and, worst of all, gives the impression that you do not know your job.”

Like I said, it’s an insightful line.

Because if a prospect asks a question or raises an objection, maybe they genuinely care about that point.

Or maybe they don’t. Maybe they’re just asking because they haven’t fully made up their minds, and are prodding, hoping to have something external make up their mind for them.

The worst thing you can do is to leave that question unanswered, or that objection hanging in the air.

Yes, you allow the prospect a specific line of attack. But it’s much more than that.

As Ogilvy says, worst of all, you put your entire credibility on the line, and you put everything else you have said or might say under suspicion.

Point being:

It’s never really the facts of the case that are the problem. It’s always the interpretation of it. And if you can’t control the facts — or even if you can — you’d better control the interpretation.

You might think I’m telling you to be polite and to politely answer your prospect’s questions or address their objections once they’re raised. And yes, that’s much better than not doing so.

But like Ogilvy says, there’s a better still approach.

But that’s really the topic for another email, or more likely, for an entire book.

For now, let me just remind you of my Daily Email Habit service. You can find more information about it at the link below.

And if you have any questions about it, send me an email and ask away. I’ll answer your questions thoroughly and honestly, because I’d rather have you not sign up, than sign up if Daily Email Habit is not right for you.

Here’s the link:

https://bejakovic.com/deh

Reader warns me against being a Negative Nancy

by

A long-time reader replies to my email yesterday:

===

Hey John

First – as I stated in a couple of my previous replies to your emails – I love reading yours. (I am subscribed only to two daily newsletters and one is yours)

It gives that chill vibes and interesting reading type of feelings.

And since, I like reading your emails and planning to do so as long as you write, wanted to share with you that today’s email brought a feeling of negativity (it could be me only though).

No intention to judge, just sharing the impact of your email left on me.

===

I’m not 100% sure what this reader meant to convey. If I’m reading into it, I guess he meant that negativity is negative, and negative things are negative. “Don’t be a Negative Nancy,” that kind of thing.

And yes:

It’s good idea to keep your emails light and positive. And yet…

It’s a better idea to change things up from time to time, to keep people from dismissing you by thinking they know what you’ll say next. And then…

It’s a best idea to be congruent, and to never sound like you’re trying to cover up your real thoughts or feelings, or come across as half-heartedly spinning scat into sucrose.

More on the this sensitive topic:

A few days ago, I got an unusual new subscriber to my Daily Email Habit service. I won’t name him here, because I’m not sure he wants me to.

I will say that, unlike most people signed up to DEH, this new customer is not running a typical coaching/course-selling/service-provider business.

Instead, he is a fiction author. He’s looking to sell his more of his own fiction books, and to build a tighter bond with his existing audience.

We exchanged a couple emails, and in one of them, this fiction author wrote about the unique part of writing daily emails to a fiction-reading list:

===

It’s a different beast to problem-solving markets as it disproportionately leans more on personal stories, personality, etc., which is difficult when you’ve got no pain points to leverage. Still, it has been fun to stretch myself.

===

True. People don’t really read fiction because they are looking for how-to solutions to their specific problems.

That said, people who read fiction do have problems in their lives – as we all do.

My bit of advice to the fiction author was to talk about his own problems. Not in a way of seeking pity or even asking for solutions, but simply as a means of allowing his audience to identify with him.

It took me a long while to realize the following point, because I’m a bit dense:

But the real point of telling a personal story isn’t to brag or be an exhibitionist or even to entertain.

Rather, it’s to allow other people to identify with you, to put themselves in your position in your story, and to say to themselves, “Yeah, that makes sense,” or “Yeah, that’s happened to me,” or “Yeah, that’s how I felt also.”

And so if you ever find yourself asking:

“Is this a good personal story? Should I include this bit? Is it relevant? Is it interesting? Am I just including it for the sake of ego? Is it irrelevant to the story but somehow important on another level?”

… then keep in mind that your personal story isn’t really about you, but is really about allowing your reader to have a certain kind of experience, thanks to you.

Anyways, all that’s to say:

1. Daily emails don’t always gotta be blinding sunshine and positivity

2. In fact there’s a good reason for regularly sharing frustrations and personal problems

3. Sometimes you can cram more than one point into an email

By the way, my email yesterday, which was deemed negative by at least one reader, was negative on purpose, because it was written as my answer to yesterday’s Daily Email Habit puzzle.

Yesterday’s DEH puzzle has now vanished, along with February 2025, never to be repeated.

But another new puzzle will come out tomorrow, fresh for March 2, 2025.

And if you want to use this upcoming puzzle to help you sell more of your own stuff, including even fiction books… and to build a tighter bond with your existing audience… then you may, or you may not, like my Daily Email Habit service. Only one way to find out:

https://bejakovic.com/deh

I’m not letting people resubscribe to Daily Email Habit any more

by

In reply to my email yesterday, a now ex-subscriber to my Daily Email Habit service wrote in to say:

===

Hello! Which is your paid email? This one or daily email habit? The emails have been all great, and great tips, but I don’t want to get charged $30 per month (doing taxes and realizing how many subscriptions I have 😬). I’d like to unsubscribed for the paid one and not the other.

===

First, a disclaimer:

I appreciate all customers. I appreciate the trust they put in me, the interest they have in what I offer, and the money they choose to give me.

But I gotta say this particular customer’s reply made me frown. She didn’t even know which is my personal free newsletter, and which is the paid service?

I must be doing something wrong.

I’ve also had a few Charter Members unsub from Daily Email Habit over the past month, following a very successful quasi-launch I did back in January, and say things like, “I gotta save the $20/month right now, but I will be back soon!”

Again, clearly I’m doing something wrong, because I’m not getting these people to take what they signed up for seriously, to consume it, to get value from it.

I’ve already done what I know to do to make the actual Daily Email Habit service both easy to get started with, and addicting to keep going with.

I might in the future put up some kinds of restrictions on people signing up, to make sure they are actually committed.

But right now, starting today, as this email goes out, I’ve decided to institute a new policy:

I’m not letting people resubscribe to Daily Email Habit after they unsubscribe.

It’s a policy I got from Ben Settle, who uses the same for his paid print newsletter.

This policy worked on me when I signed up to Ben’s newsletter. It made me sign up much later, only when I told myself I was really ready, and it made me take the content that Ben was sharing much more seriously.

And yes, this policy also made me stay signed up to Ben’s newsletter longer than I might have, after I’d had enough.

In part it was the threat of not being able to resubscribe… and in part it was Ben’s dismissive and shaming attitude to people who do unsubscribe.

I’m trying to soften that effect here as far as possible. I have no interest in shaming anyone, or continuing to take money from people who are not getting value from what I offer.

Quite the opposite.

I want dedicated people to sign up to Daily Email Habit, to use the service and to benefit from it, and to get much more from it than what they pay me.

That’s why I invite you to take what time you need to decide if you’re ready to start your own daily email habit, and put in consistent daily work to build up your own authority… a relationship with a list who trusts you and wants to hear from you… and a business that really can run on the back of an email a day, if you so choose.

If after all this, you do sign up to my Daily Email Habit service, and you still find it’s not working for you, of you’re not using it in spite of your best intentions and my best efforts to help you, then no problem.

Again, I appreciate your interest and your trust.

But as of today, anybody who unsubs from Daily Email Habit won’t be able to resubscribe.

I expect I will have to write subsequent emails about this to really get my point across. Still, I’ve updated the Daily Email Habit sales page to clearly state the new reality.

In any case, if you’d like to get the full info on Daily Email Habit, WHICH IS A PAID SUBSCRIPTION OFFER, DISTINCT FROM THIS PARTICULAR DAILY EMAIL NEWSLETTER YOU ARE READING NOW, then you can get that at the following page.

Read through it. Take what time you need to decide if you’re really ready to get started. And then, take a bit more time before you make any rash decisions like signing up. Here’s the link:

https://bejakovic.com/deh

A free tip to minimize unsubscribes

by

A few days ago, Maliha Mannan, who writes dailyish emails over at The Side Blogger, posted something interesting inside my little Daily Email House community.

Apparently, Maliha was trying a HARO-like service – HARO, which stands for Help A Reporter Out, basically being a service where industry experts can provide answers and quotes for reporters, in exchange for attribution or a link.

On a whim, Maliha decided to ask for a marketing specialist’s thoughts on daily email newsletters. She put her request out into the ether, and like a lightning bolt, an answer crashed upon her:

===

Hi, this is C S Sultan, an experienced marketer for over 14 years and doing email marketing for over 5 years now.

As per our data, the highest you should send in a week are 2 emails. But the best would be to send only 1. Then moment we send more that 2, the unsubscribe rate goes up by 70%.

Our email list consists of marketers, content creators, bloggers, and small-to-medium businesses.

Even so, the highest response we get is when we send a single email every week at a fix time and day (for us, usually that’s Tuesday 8AM EST for one segment, and Thursday 8AM EST for another segment).

===

So there you go. An excellent tip to keep your unsubscribe rates really low. Though I imagine if C S Sultan only emailed his list every month, or maybe not at all, he might do even better with the unsubscribes.

Of course, there are other possible goals in the world than minimizing unsubscribes. For example, maximizing opens, clickthroughs, sales, or better yet, lifetime sales.

Or, something more wooly but still important, such as maximizing the quality of people who are buying from you… maximizing the results you get for customers or clients or even readers who don’t buy from you… or maximizing your own sensation of the influence and respect you get in your niche, and the satisfaction with which you run your business and life.

For all those, here’s another free tip:

Email daily.

Yes, people will unsubscribe. But people will read also, and way more than if you just email once a week or once an ice age.

And more people will buy, more will recommend you, more will look to you for entertainment, guidance, or simply the habit that they’ve formed of taking a few minutes each day (gasp!) to consume something fun or thoughtful you’ve put out into the world. Plus you might even grow to like the process. I know I’ve gotten there.

Like Maliha wrote, maybe C S Sultan should sign up for my Daily Email Habit service. I doubt that he will.

But maybe you are not playing to lose, but are playing to win. In that case, Daily Email Habit might be a fit for you. For more info, before the next puzzle has come and gone:

https://bejakovic.com/deh

The Bejakovic principle

by

“Annual income twenty pounds, annual expenditure nineteen nineteen and six, result happiness. Annual income twenty pounds, annual expenditure ought and six, result misery.”

I recently finished reading David Copperfield, a book written some 175 years ago by Charles Dickens.

I read David Copperfield based on the strength of that quote, which is spoken by a character named Wilkins Micawber, and has become popularly known as the Micawber principle.

The Micawber principle pretty much sums up my own attitude to money, try as I have to care more about getting rich for the sake of getting rich.

But today’s email is not about money. Rather, it’s about influence.

Dickens introduces Wilkins Micawber by saying the man had “no more hair upon his head (which was a large one, and very shining) than there is upon an egg.”

Micawber’s clothes were shabby, but he carried a “jaunty sort of a stick” and a quizzing-glass (something like a monocle) on the outside of his coat. (“For ornament, I afterwards found,” Dickens adds, “as he seldom looked through it, and couldn’t see anything when he did.”)

As becomes clear throughout the book, Mr. Micawber loves pompous language… swings between despair and perfect cheerfulness in the span of a meal… and is always in debt, and is always running away from his lenders. Hence the Micawber principle, which Micawber advises others to live by, but cannot follow himself.

But let me get to the point of this email:

I hadn’t realized this before, but Charles Dickens is famous for his characters. In fact, he might be the most famous novelist of all times, in all languages, when it comes to distinct, memorable characters.

Besides Mr. Micawber, there’s Ebenezer Scrooge, Oliver Twist, Tiny Tim, the Artful Dodger — dozens and dozens of famous characters, many of who have passed into popular culture and even the English language.

So what?

So I’m telling ya, read Dickens for character… and then apply the lessons to yourself.

As Dan Kennedy said once, the basis for influence is invention.

Specifically, Dan said that people who write for great influence — he was talking about people who write for business purposes, as he does — turn themselves into personas, into fictional characters.

And by the way, Dan adds:

“The good copywriters are frustrated fiction writers and read fiction.”

So read Dickens. Or read some other fiction, which is built around distinct, memorable characters.

And then, add a quizzing glass to your outfit, even if you seldom look through it and cannot see anything when you do… and even if it’s only there in your writing, and not in reality.

Now here’s the Bejakovic principle:

“Twenty four hours, one email written and sent out, result happiness. Twenty four hours, no emails written or sent out, result misery.”

Only difference is, unlike Mr. Micawber, I manage to live by my own principle. And if you’d like my help in achieving lasting happiness, and maybe in turning yourself into a fictional character in your emails:

https://bejakovic.com/deh

The maple syrup theory of influence

by

Fascinating fact about me:

I studied math in college.

Like I said, fascinating. And it gets even more so, because I was never good at math.

Not in elementary school. Not in high school.

Somehow though, when college came, and I could choose to study what I wanted, and I never again had to take any math classes, I wound up taking math classes, and lots of them.

I think I was trying to prove something to myself. I managed it, too, because it turns out you can get a lot done with just curiosity and internal motivation, even in the absence of talent.

Anyways, one time I was taking a math class about “complex analysis” — about how to work with complex numbers, which have both a real and an “imaginary” component (ie, involving the square root of -1).

Whatever. Don’t worry about the math.

The important thing is simply that complex numbers have their own bizarre rules for how they are multiplied and divided, how you take a derivative, how you do integrals.

I never understood complex numbers, not really. But I diligently worked through the course.

I remember a specific homework problem, and the epiphany that came with it.

I was struggling to apply the rules in the textbook. But with some derring-do and with a few leaps of logic, I managed to finally solve the problem and reach the answer.

The answer was simple and elegant.

I remember a feeling of understanding washing over me. I got it, whatever this particular section was about. It made sense to me now. All the struggle and confusion and work had paid off.

Then, as a proper diligent student, I double-checked my answer in the back of the textbook.

It turned out I was 100% wrong. Not just that I’d made some screwup in the calculation, but that I was completely off track. I had misapplied and misunderstood the rules. My feeling of understanding, which had washed over me and given me such relief, corresponded to nothing in reality.

When I was a kid, like 9 years old, I had a feeling I understood myself and the world perfectly.

It was pretty late in life, in my late teens or maybe my early 20s, when I started to notice cracks in my confident understanding of the world.

Gradually, I started to develop a theory that emotions like certainty, understanding, and insight are like maple syrup.

Maple syrup can be poured over whatever you want — pancakes, French toast, waffles.

Likewise, emotions can be poured over ideas that are true, ideas are not true, or even ideas that are complete waffles, meaning some kind of undefined nonsense, like my understanding of complex analysis rules.

On the one hand, it doesn’t get more unsettling than this. I realized my most basic, certain feelings of rightness are not actually reliable.

On the other hand, it was a powerful realization.

For one thing, it was liberating.

It meant that, even if I’m sure — if it cannot, will not, won’t work, if it’s black and not white, if I am right and not wrong — I don’t really know for a fact. It pays to go get some real-world data — the equivalent of checking the right answer in the back of the textbook.

For another, I’m not the only person whose emotions work like this. I find it’s pretty universal.

And it turns out there are ways to get other people to pour their own emotional syrups — whether of desire, or of insight, or of trust — over pancakes, French toast, waffles, donuts, rice, hot dogs, sponge cake, and pretty much any basic foodstuff you may have to offer them.

You can make hot dogs sweet and sponge cake delicious, even irresistible, if you pour enough maple syrup on them.

And you can make honest, dry, uninspiring information exciting and eye-opening and urgent, much in the same way.

Perhaps you’d like some specific techniques of influence, which you can apply to get your audience to pour out their own emotional maple syrups over your offers?

You can find such techniques, delivered daily to your inbox, inside my Daily Email Habit service.

You even double-check your own answers against my answers, which like today, tend to be based on the day’s Daily Email Habit prompt.

In case you’d like to prove something to yourself:

https://bejakovic.com/deh

It can’t go on for long like this

by

I once took a class on “health economics,” which is just what it sounds like.

One thing that’s stuck with me from those lectures is how back in the 1980s, the best and brightest political scientists in the West had no clue that the Soviet Union was about to collapse.

The only guy who was confidently predicting the imminent collapse of the Soviet Union was some low-profile economist who was looking at the rates of alcoholism and alcohol-related deaths in the USSR.

I don’t remember the exact numbers, but they were sky-high. A major part of the Soviet working-age population was either chronically drunk, sick from drinking, or dying from drinking.

It couldn’t go on for long like this, that economist predicted. And sure enough, it didn’t.

I thought of this a couple days ago while forcing myself to read an article about the U.S. Army’s recruiting shortfalls.

The U.S. Army’s recruiting woes are not a topic that I am personally interested in, but I’m glad I read the article. Among many other interesting things, it taught me the following:

“According to a Pentagon study, more than three-quarters of Americans between the ages of seventeen and twenty-four are ineligible, because they are over-weight, unable to pass the aptitude test, afflicted by physical or mental-health issues, or disqualified by such factors as a criminal record.”

I wanted to get a baseline.

A bit of perplexitying told me that during World War II, “nearly half” of men were deemed ineligible to serve in the army… during the Vietnam war, that had risen to “more than half” (though many eligible men were exempted for being in college)… by 2017, the number of ineligible men and women, ages 17 to 24, had reached 71%. In the most recent study, in 2022, that number had gone up to 77%.

In other words, in the span of about 50 years, the share of the “ineligible” has gone up by more than 50%… and the share of U.S. citizens, in the prime of life, who are not significantly compromised by health, mental, or behavioral issues, is now barely 1 in 5.

I don’t know what the future of the U.S. is. But the trend certainly isn’t good. It can’t go on for long like this.

Now that I’ve dug a six-foot-deep hole for myself so far in this email, let’s see if I can clamber out.

One idea I’ve personally found very inspiring over the years comes from Dan Kennedy.

I only know this idea as it was retold by Ben Settle in one of Ben’s emails. In fact, it was this email that got me to sign up to Ben’s paid newsletter.

The idea is the “myth of security.” Because, says Dan, there is no such thing as security. Not really, not if you look close.

There’s no security in the money or investments you already have in the bank… in the job that you have now… in the business that you might own… in the current method you have of getting customers or clients… even in your personal relationships, your community, or even your nation (or your nation’s army).

All of that can disappear, from today to tomorrow, or from this year to next year. It’s happened before, and it can happen again.

The only security you have? According to Dan, it’s only in your ‘ability to produce.’ In a few more of Dan’s words:

“… you had better sustain a very, very serious commitment to maintaining, improving, enhancing and strengthening your own ‘ability to produce’, because, in truth, it is all you’ve got and all you will ever have. Anything and everything else you see around you, you acquire and accumulate, you invest in, you trust in, can disappear in the blink of an eye.”

Another valuable idea I’ve learned, this from “Sovereign Man” Simon Black, is that of a Plan B. A Plan B is a plan that works in case things go bad… and that also works and brings in value even if things stay as they are.

Dan Kennedy’s idea of a very serious commitment to your “ability to produce” falls into this Plan B category.

I don’t know what you can produce.

I’ve personally decided to focus on producing effective communication — on putting together words that can motivate, influence, and guide others, and getting better at doing that, day after day.

I figure if nothing ever changes, and things stay exactly as they are, those will be very valuable skills to have.

On the other hand, if things change drastically tomorrow, those will still be valuable skills to have — and they may prove to be the only things that still have value.

If you’d like my help and guidance in developing your own ability to produce, starting today, so you can be prepared for tomorrow:

https://bejakovic.com/deh