How to use an involvement device to win customers for the long term

by

Yesterday, I got on three calls with three people who expressed interest in my new daily email prompts service.

The last of these three calls was with a media buyer named Sean (not sure he wants me to share his last name), who works at an agency in Colorado.

Sean has bought pretty much every training and course I’ve put out, starting with Copy Riddles back in 2021.

As were getting started with the call, Sean explained how it started:

===

What I really liked about Copy Riddles was that little involvement piece where you have to read the source material and come up with your own bullet that’s close to what the copywriter came up with.

And that involvement advice kept me going through the entire course. It’s probably the coolest course that I’ve done in terms of copywriting. I’ve been dabbling in the copywriting space for 20 years, since I was 15.

===

You can do something like this as well.

Instead of just giving people information, add in an involvement device. In other words, give your customers some sort of safe opportunity to actively practice, not just consume.

The reason to go to this trouble is because your customers will end up going through what you sell them, and will get more out of it as a result.

That’s good for them, and it’s good for you. By my entirely made-up math, an involvement device makes it an estimated 13.471x times more likely customers will buy something from you again. And I think Sean’s custom with my little online business is a good example of that.

If you have Copy Riddles, you know how the involvement device in that program works. And if you don’t have Copy Riddles yet:

I’ve never done a Black Friday promotion, and I won’t be changing that this year.

But I will have a “White Tuesday” special offer on Copy Riddles, starting tomorrow and lasting through Tuesday November 12.

Why White Tuesday?

I just thought it was a funny-sounding zag to everybody’s constant zigging with “Black Friday.”

I did try to find some kind of historical event to tie White Tuesday into… but I only came upon a decree from November 12, 1938, in Nazi Germany, excluding Jews from participating in the economy.

This is most definitely NOT the kind of White Tuesday I have in mind.

Instead, I just mean this event to be a fun, little, completely Nazi-free promo, hopefully with an irresistible offer to get you to try Copy Riddles if have been curious about it but have not jumped in yet. But more on all that tomorrow.

My go-to source of market research

by

Comes a question from a reader in followup to my email yesterday, about what I’m reading now:

===

Hi John.

Thanks for sharing this.

I have another question for you, something I wanted to ask from you for some time now.

What are your go-to sources/websites/forums to do market research whenever you’re working on a sales copy related project?

If this is something you teach in one of your paid offers, feel free to dismiss this.

===

I don’t mind sharing the fact that I don’t go to no scrubby forums or websites to do market research.

Instead, I get on a real, live, anxiety-inducing call.

In fact, I have three calls lined up today to do research for the daily email prompts service I’m launching.

Last week, I asked for a show of hands from people who are interested in this service. A few dozen people replied.

I reached out to some of them yesterday to see if they would get on a call with me today.

We managed to schedule a time with a few of them.

And so, later today, we’ll get on Zoom. I’ll listen, ask followup questions, and then think about what I heard.

In my experience, reaching out and talking to people is the fastest way to get information. It reveals stuff that might take forever to find out otherwise.

That’s why it’s my go to way to quickly test out an offer, see if it has legs, and gauge the primary sales appeals.

By the way, if the idea of a daily email prompt service sounds useful to you, then hit reply and tell me what you like about this idea (do tell me why, because simply replying and saying “yes” or “reply” won’t do it). If you do that, I will add you to the priority list, so you have a chance to test this service out sooner rather than later.

6 things I’m reading now

by

Comes a question from long-time reader Illya Shapovalov, on the trail of my email yesterday:

===

Hey John,

Slightly off topic:

You always find some curious and interesting things to share in your emails. Can I ask you what publications do you read or are subscribed to? I really struggle finding just interesting things to read on the Internet, something that’s not sensationalistic or opinionated like most news outlets.

===

The only non-work publication I’m subscribed to is the New Yorker. It’s a print magazine that arrives to my physical mailbox with the frequency of a baby panda birth in captivity.

As for interesting things to read on the Internet, I find most of those via Hacker News.

That’s a kind of bulletin- or news-board, curated by lots of smart people and moderated by a few, specifically to not be sensationalistic or opinionated. Much of what’s on Hacker News is tech news and articles that I frankly don’t care about, but there’s other interesting stuff always.

But why limit yourself to things on the Internet?

In my experience, books are the greatest repository of human insight and funny stories, better than courses, better than coaching programs or communities, and certainly better than blogs or websites.

Nobody asked about my book reading habits. But I’ll tell ya.

I read books in four categories, one book at a time in each category:

1. “Something from a previous century.” Currently, I’m finishing up the fourth and final volume of Plutarch’s Parallel Lives, which I started back in December 2021, almost three years ago.

2. “Religion.” This can be about actual religion, or about the human mind, or the nature of reality. I just started A Life of One’s Own, by Marion Milner.

3. “Fiction.” I’m reading David Copperfield by Charles Dickens.

4. “Work.” (Copywriting, marketing, psychology, etc.) I’m reading I’m Okay, You’re Okay by Thomas Harris, since it’s one of the upstream sources of both David Sandler’s sales system and Jim Camp’s Start With No.

Bigger point:

You can combine the enjoyable and the useful.

I read these things because I find them interesting… but also because they can provide fodder for these emails and for other projects I’m working on.

Combine the two, enjoyable and useful, and you can have something you can stick with for the long term.

Smaller point:

There are lots of places to get possible ideas for daily emails.

I personally feel it’s more important to have a way to decide among those many ideas, a litmus test to help you decide if an idea is a good topic for your email today.

If you’d like to find out what my personal litmus test is, the test I recommend to coaching students who have paid me thousands of dollars for the advice, and to hundreds of people who have bought my courses, you can find that inside my Simple Money Emails program. For more info on that:

https://bejakovic.com/sme

Smug, yet falsely modest

by

I plopped onto my couch this morning and ripped open the latest New Yorker. I skipped the first few pages by instinct — after all, they’re just ads. “Except,” I said to myself, “that’s kind of my job?”

So I flipped back to page one.

What I saw was a two-page ad for AI company Anthropic, which makes Claude, a ChatGPT competitor.

The Claude logo took up the entire left page.

On the right page, the headline read, “Late bloomer” (including the quotes).

The body copy then went on to say that Claude might not be the first AI chatbot to market. But this was by design, the ad explained, so Claude could be so good, and so safe, and so useful as it happens to be. “We build AI you can trust,” concluded the copy

In a way, this kinda sounded like the famous Avis ad, “Avis is only No. 2,” which turned being second in a market into an advantage.

Or maybe it kinda sounded like the famous Volkswagen “Lemon” ad, which flipped quality concerns into a demonstration of higher standards.

The Anthropic ad kinda sounded like that… but it failed.

Because those headlines — “Avis is only No.2,” “Lemon” — really were objections that people were throwing at Avis and Volkswagen.

Whoever wrote this ad for Anthropic could have gone that same route by saying something like “Also-ran” in the headline.

Instead, they went the board-pleasing “Late bloomer” route, which is not any kind of insult or objection, but in fact a kind of smug self-compliment.

I can’t say whether this Anthropic ad will prove to be effective in any way, and neither can Anthropic. Because this ad is a typical “tombstone ad,” with no mechanism to track response.

All I can tell you is that this headline + body copy violate a kind of core rule of effective communication.

That rule is contrast.

If you say about a person that he is smug yet effective, then there is some tension and power in that description, because of the contrast. Plus, you get bonus points for transparency.

On the other hand, if you describe someone as “smug, yet falsely modest,” then at best you’ll confuse your audience based on what they were expecting. At worst, you’ll sound repetitive, mealy-mouthed, or self-serving, which is what I felt about this Anthropic ad.

So use contrast for power. Avoid contrast for blandness.

Also, if you haven’t done so yet, consider reading my 10 Commandments of A-List Copywriters. It doesn’t have anything to do with this email, and so I won’t pretend otherwise. The only thing I will say in favor of this book is that it’s short yet cheap. For more info:

https://bejakovic.com/10commandments

The end of info products

by

THE FOLLOWING EMAIL IS CONTROVERSIAL AND MAY BE OFFENSIVE TO SOME AUDIENCES

READER DISCRETION IS ADVISED

You might be familiar with Max Sackheim’s famous ad, “Do you make these mistakes in English?”

The ad ran for decades, unchanged, and kept bringing in profitable business better than any contender.

Thousands of pages of analysis have been written about the 7-word headline of this ad and the copy that followed.

But what about the actual product this ad was ultimately selling? What about the means by which a prospect could hope to correct his or her mistakes in English? What were prospects actually exchanging their money for?

Sackheim’s copy only teases you about the product, and calls it a “remarkable invention” and a “100% self-correcting device.”

As far as I know, nobody today actually has this remarkable invention stashed away in their garage. Whatever it was, it’s clear it was sold as some kind of tool, a device, and not just information.

This is a well-known direct marketing truth that’s been around since Sackheim’s days and before, back into the age of patent medicines.

A real, tangible, external mechanism — a fat-loss potion, a dog seatbelt, a “100% self-correcting device” — sells much easier than just good info — how to lose weight, how to be a less negligent dog owner, how to speak gooder English.

Smart modern-day info marketers have gotten hep to this fact. That’s why people like Russell Brunson and Ben Settle and Sam Ovens have put their reputation and audience to work behind tools like ClickFunnels and Berserker Mail and Skool.

The thing is, creating a tool, whether physical or software, has traditionally been an expensive, complicated, and risky business.

Take a look at Groove Funnels, another tool created a few years ago by another experienced info marketer, Mike Filsaime. Groove Funnels is a bloated, buggy, frankly unusable product. I say that as somebody who invested into a lifelong subscription in Groove Funnels.

I have a couple degrees in computer science. I also have about a decade’s worth amateur and pro software development experience. But after I quit my IT job 10+ years ago, I never once considered putting this experience to use in order to develop any kind of tool I could sell.

Until now.

Because things are changing. Today even a monkey, working alone, can create and deploy a valuable app simply by querying ChatGPT persistently enough. And there are plenty of shovels available for such would-be gold miners, tools to build tools, which will do much of the in-between work for you. Just say what you will to happen, and it will be done.

Decades ago, master direct marketer Gary Halbert said that the best best product of all is… information!

But I bet if Gary were alive today, he’d be hard at work (or maybe easy at work) creating some kind of high-margin tool to sell, in the broadest sense of the word — a thing to do some or all of the work for an audience with a problem. A few reasons why:

* Again, tools are easy to sell. They fit with innate human psychology of how we want to solve problems.

* Tools can make for natural continuity income if you license them out instead of sell them outright.

* Tools can create their own moat over time. There can be lock-in or switching cost if your users build on top of your tool.

* And now, thanks to the most remarkable invention of AI, it’s possible to create tools quickly, cheaply, and with great margins.

All that’s to say, best product of all… information? I don’t think so. Not any more. Best start adapting now.

Speaking of which, I got an offer for you:

Would you say that there are any tech issues that are keeping you from starting your own email list?

If there are, write in and let me know about them.

In turn, I’ll have something for you that you might like.

Last call: Tame your ox-head

by

Today is the last day I will be promoting Subtraction Method, a free training by Tom Grundy.

Tom’s a London banker who writes great daily emails about career and life success. He was once in my Write & Profit coaching program.

True to its name, Tom’s Subtraction Method is about how to subtract the actions and ideas keeping you stuck.

The way I figure, Subtraction Method can be relevant if you feel stuck in your current job or role… if you get distracted and do too much of what’s NOT important… if you’re not making progress the way you feel you should be… and if you worry that there is something uniquely wrong with you as a result of all this.

But maybe a story can explain this better? Here’s an ancient story I read recently, which struck me:

There was a time when Alexander the Great wasn’t “Great” yet. Was a time when Alexander was just an ambitious 15-year-old at the court of his father, Philip of Macedon.

A horse dealer came to Philip, offering a horse for sale, for the fabulous price of 15 talents of silver.

“Yes, the price is high,” said the horse dealer. “But look at this magnificent animal.”

Sure enough, the horse he was selling was a huge wall of muscle. It had a huge head, too — hence its name Bucephalus, which in Greek apparently means “ox-head.”

The only problem was that Bucephalus was not only huge but wild. It kicked, bit, and reared up on its hind legs whenever anyone tried to ride it. It was powerful but more dangerous than useful.

Philip of Macedon took a look at the rampaging horse and said, “Thanks, I’ll pass.”

But Alexander (not yet Great) asked his father for a chance to tame Bucephalus.

Alexander noticed that the beast was made aggressive by seeing its own shadow playing on the ground.

And so, with the entire court of Philip watching, Alexander approached the giant horse.

Alexander spoke gently to calm Bucephalus a little. He took it by the bridle, and he turned its head towards the sun.

With its shadow no longer visible, Bucephalus, the ox-head, turned calm and manageable.

Bucephalus became Alexander’s lifelong companion. He carried Alexander across Alexander’s greatest conquests. He became part, parcel, and mechanism in the success and legend of Alexander the Great.

And maybe, maybe there’s an analogy in there that speaks to you?

The Subtraction Method is not my expertise. I don’t know exactly what Tom is going to be teaching.

But maybe Subtraction Method can tame your own wild and unruly ox-head — no offense meant — by turning it towards the source of light, and away from the shadows playing on the ground, distracting you, upsetting you, giving you doubts and fears, eating away at what you’re capable of?

Tom’s training is happening tomorrow, at 8pm CET/2pm EST/11am PST.

I won’t be sending more emails before then.

If you’d like to tame your own mind, ox-headed or not, here’s where to go:

https://bejakovic.com/subtraction

Swan song for famous forecaster

by

Today’s top headline in the New York Post:

“Renowned election guru Nate Silver reveals latest forecast for presidential election”

That’s news to me because I remember Nate Silver as a famously failed forecaster.

Silver confidently predicted the 2016 election for H. Clinton. After Trump won that election, Nate Silver waffled and said the data was right but his own weakness got in the way. The implied promise was, “I’ll be right next time.” People around the Internet shrugged and said, “That’s good enough.”

I think there are lotsa lessons to be learned from the ongoing career of famed forecaster Nate Silver. I will draw just one for you today, one I read in Lawrence Bernstein’s newsletter a few days ago:

“Rule #1 of Financial Copywriting 101: It’s better to be wrong than wishy-washy.”

This applies to any copy, not just financial.

So I’d like to make a confident prediction of my own. We won’t be hearing from Nate Silver again, at least not in front page stories for big publications like the New York Post, and not around major future contests like the 2028 presidential election.

Because Silver seems to have lost his nerve, possibly after the last Trump election he had to call. While people dearly want him to make confident predictions, he’s hedging his bets now. From the NY Post article (emphasis mine):

“Renowned election guru Nate Silver called the race for the White House a “PURE TOSS-UP” Sunday as he gave ex-President Donald Trump a SLIGHT EDGE over Vice President Kamala Harris in his latest forecast.”

Who’s got any use for wishy-washy forecasts like “pure toss-up?” My prediction is that the media will find a new Zoltar, one who is willing to confidently say what will happen and cheerfully be wrong.

Another prediction:

Tom Grundy’s Subtraction Method training will happen this Wednesday at 8pm CET/2pm EST/11am PST.

Tom will talk about how to think less pedantically, how to be okay without clinging to the latest mental-model-of-the-month, and how to do better in life as a result — emotionally and maybe even practically.

Tom’s training is free for you because you are a subscriber of my newsletter.

If you’d like to sign up for it before the polls close:

https://bejakovic.com/subtraction

“Get closer, sensor!”

by

I’m visiting my home town of Zagreb, Croatia. Frankly, it’s looking run down, ragged, and dusty.

This morning I went for a walk. I passed by a car ramp that keeps cars out of the old medical school campus. On each side of the ramp were two installed street signs, which instructed drivers, “Get closer, sensor!”

This made me think. Zagreb is full of non-functioning tech like this. Stuff that came out 10, 20, 30 years ago and seemed exciting when it appeared. But soon, the glitches became obvious (“The stupid ramp won’t open!”).

The new tech became the butt of jokes and the foil in funny anecdotes as the burghers of Zagreb sat around and drank their coffee for hours.

People chuckled and shook their heads. “All this newfangled technology… it will never replace a good old human parking lot attendant who knows your name and who lifts and lowers the ramp for each car.”

Except of course tech improves, always.

I don’t know where you live. If it’s a less dusty place than Zagreb, odds are you’ve never seen a sign that reads “Get closer, sensor!” Modern car ramps work flawlessly, 24 hours a day, without missing a beat.

But the same psychology obtains everywhere.

New generations of people, at least those over 25, still make fun of the newest tech, once the initial excitement has worn off. “Haha stupid AI, it made another blunder, it will never really replace humans!”

Except tech improves, always.

I listened to an interview with Sam Woods a few days ago. Woods is a former direct-response copywriter turned AI guru. He seems to be doing well in his new career, and not looking back with longing to his copywriting days.

Woods was asked what remains for humans in the age of AI. He replied:

===

For now, you want to get away from the labor part… you want to quickly move through the intelligence part of your job that requires you to think, and that’s where you’ll be in a good place for the next few years.

But even beyond that, you need to start moving towards what looks more and more like wisdom work, which sounds esoteric. But the easiest way to think about that is doing the right thing at the right time.

===

How do you get wisdom? How do you develop it? How do you uncover it?

I don’t know. But I know somebody who might. Because when I heard Sam Woods predict “wisdom” as the future for humans, I realized I had heard the same argument already, but months earlier. It came in one of Tom Grundy’s daily emails. Tom wrote:

===

By “wisdom” I don’t mean “IQ”.

Wisdom and IQ could not be further apart.

It is categorically not the people who can create snazzy financial models, solve partial differential equations or complete a Rubik’s Cube in 60 seconds who will thrive in a world where AI can do all this in the time it takes to click my fingers.

That much should be clear.

I mean the wisdom which helps guide us to make decisions, gives us clarity when we don’t know which way to turn and answers questions which spreadsheets, robots and computers will never be able to answer.

This wisdom comes from the deepest part of what it means to be human.

And in a world where AI will do most of the heavy-lifting, I predict this wisdom is what will set humans apart.

Those who possess this wisdom will, I believe, have a huge advantage in their working lives for many years to come. Just like the Egyptian philosophers & scholars who held the positions of influence and prestige.

Good news is, finding wisdom can be taught and learnt.

===

Next Wednesday, Tom is putting on a training he’s calling The Subtraction Method. This training is free for you because you happen to be a subscriber to this newsletter.

The promise for The Subtraction Method is that it gives you an approach that uncovers the enthusiasm, creativity, and maybe even wisdom that Tom believes are there for all of us.

Those might sound like broad, vague, even esoteric promises. But maybe that’s just the ticket in an age when specific and narrow and highly practical is something that can and will be automated.

Tom’s training will happen this Wednesday, Nov 6, at 8pm CET/2pm EST/11am PST.

I will be promoting Tom’s training until this Tuesday. In case you don’t want to miss it, it might be WISE (I know, I’m hilarious) to sign up for it now. Here’s the link:

https://bejakovic.com/subtraction

Behind the scenes of my affiliate deal-making

by

Over the past few weeks I’ve been approached to promote three affiliate offers, and uncomfortable thought it was, I turned all three down.

All three of these offers were solid. They had good info at a fair price. There’s no doubt each of them can be very valuable to the right person.

Also, all three offer owners who approached me I already had previous relationships with. I had already done some projects with them, or at least we had exchanged some non-business emails and had some sort of rapport going.

Finally, all three offer owners were paying out generous affiliate commissions. In theory, I could make some good money here.

And yet, like I said, I turned down the opportunity to promote any of the three offers.

The reason was simply I personally couldn’t get excited about them. I took a look at these offers and my personal reaction was “Hm, I see.”

I imagined writing emails to promote these offers. How? I’d have to do some jumping jacks before, in order to simulate a bit of life in my copy.

I also imagined taking myself out of the equation altogether. I imagined saying, “Hey this isn’t for me, but don’t let me get in your way, maybe it’s for you.”

That still didn’t sit right. After all, with that approach, where do I stop? Do I end up promoting $3.45 pork chops on sale at Target, because somebody somewhere might want them?

I’ve made the point many times before that I don’t look at this newsletter as a business first. I look at it as my own personal playground, an opportunity to experiment and practice, a reflection of my own interests and tastes.

I can’t blame you if you shrug off everything I’ve said above as just my perverse attitude, something that I do because I apparently don’t care enough about money to reach out and grasp it when it’s offered to me.

Still, I remembered something while thinking about this rather unpleasant issue.

Ben Settle, who I think treats his email newsletter as much more of a business than I treat mine, shared almost the same attitude in an email a couple years ago. In fact it’s possible I got my attitude from Ben.

Ben wrote that the best affiliate offer to sell, at least for him, is one that’s personally fun. And when an offer is not personally fun for him… well, here’s Ben’s report on one such campaign:

===

No matter how much time I spent writing those emails, no matter how much time I spent strategizing the campaign, and no matter how much time I spent interviewing the creator of the product (and I did) it did not matter, and the sales were lackluster at best.

The reason?

Not because the offer was bad.

It was extremely valuable, especially for the price.

No, one main reason why was because it was not fun.

===

I’m telling you this because over the next few days, until Tuesday to be specific, I’m promoting Tom Grundy’s Subtraction Method.

In fact, I’m promoting it as an affiliate, even though it’s a free training.

There was was the option to simply promote the paid workshops that Tom will be running in the coming weeks, on the back of the (free) Subtraction Method training.

But Tom and I both agreed that the best and happiest way to promote this was simply offer the free training first, one where Tom would reveal all the concepts underlying the Subtraction Method.

It’s Tom’s job to sell the group implementation workshops, following the free training, just to those who want help working through those concepts with Tom’s guidance.

Point being, the real reason I’m telling you to go sign up to Tom’s Subtraction Method is that I’m personally interested and even excited by what Tom has to teach. The promise of an affiliate payout alone wouldn’t do it.

But maybe you don’t even know what I mean by the Subtraction Method. If so, here are the details from my Al Pacino-themed email yesterday:

===

Tom’s story is that he quit his high-powered London banking job in order to seek enlightenment. Enlightenment found, Tom ended up going back to the bank.

Curious, right?

The first time around at the bank was miserable, says Tom. The second time around has been enjoyable, stress-free, and even fulfilling.

What made the difference is what Tom calls the Subtraction Method.

The Subtraction Method is not about the kind of minimalism that involves living in a hut in the backwoods of Montana, shooting and skinning rabbits, and melting snow for drinking water.

Rather, it’s about a different kind of minimalism, one that has to do with ideas and attitudes.

The end result can be that you achieve all the external success you think you want now, and you do it on such terms that you’re not eaten out from inside like Michael Corleone or Al Pacino.

Or the end result can be you don’t achieve the external success you think you want now, and you find out that that’s perfectly fine, because what you thought you wanted is not what you actually want.

Here is where I start waving my hands and waffling and mumbling a little too much. Because the Subtraction Method is not my area of expertise. Rather it’s Tom’s area of expertise.

That’s why I’d like to invite you to sign up to his training. The training is free. It’s happening next Wednesday, Nov 6, at 8pm CET/2pm EST/11am PST. I’ll be there. If you’d like to be there as well, you can register to get in at the link below:

https://bejakovic.com/subtraction

“Thank God I’ve missed my big chance”

by

A couple weeks ago, I made the mistake of looking up a clip from The Godfather on YouTube.

Since then, YouTube has been serving me up a steady diet of Al Pacino interviews, which I of course have allowed myself to be “force-fed.” At least I found out the following curious anecdote:

During the shooting of a scene in the Godfather, Pacino was supposed to jump into a moving car. But he missed the car and almost broke his ankle.

Pacino said later he was shocked by the feeling of relief that passed over him.

“Thank you God,” he said as he lay on the ground. “You’re gonna get me out of this film.”

Pacino had felt like an underling on set, unwanted and unfit for the role of Michael Corleone.

“This injury could be my release from that prison,” Pacino said later.

Of course, that’s not how it ended up. The director, Francis Ford Coppola, liked Pacino too well. That, plus a bunch of corticosteroid injections, meant Pacino stayed in the movie.

In that way, the career of Al Pacino – from young theater actor, talented, unknown, but hopeful, to massive Hollywood star and international celeb, jaded, paranoid, and alcoholic — mirrored the progression of Michael Corleone in the Godfather — from the modest, good, patriotic son with plans of a respectable career, to ruthless head of the Corleone mob family, addicted to control and power, even at the cost of everything in his family and inside himself.

Before I get you too depressed, I wanna make it clear:

This email is not about the vanity of pursuing any kind of achievement or success in life.

Over the next few days, I’m promoting Tom Grundy’s Subtraction Method training.

Tom’s story is that he quit his high-powered London banking job in order to seek enlightenment. Enlightenment found, Tom ended up going back to the bank.

Curious, right?

The first time around at the bank was miserable, says Tom. The second time around has been enjoyable, stress-free, and even fulfilling.

What made the difference is what Tom calls the Subtraction Method.

The Subtraction Method is not about the kind of minimalism that involves living in a hut in the backwoods of Montana, shooting and skinning rabbits and melting snow for drinking water.

Rather, it’s about a different kind of minimalism, one that has to do with ideas and attitudes.

The end result can be that you achieve all the external success you think you want now, and you do it on such terms that you’re not eaten out from inside like Michael Corleone or Al Pacino.

Or the end result can be you don’t achieve the external success you think you want now, and you find out that that’s perfectly fine, because what you thought you wanted is not what you actually want.

Here is where I start waving my hands and waffling and mumbling a little too much. Because the Subtraction Method is not my area of expertise. Rather it’s Tom’s area of expertise.

That’s why I’d like to invite you to sign up to his training. The training is free. It’s happening next Wednesday, Nov 6, at 8pm CET/2pm EST/11am PST. I’ll be there. If you’d like to be there as well, you can register to get in at the link below:

https://bejakovic.com/subtraction