Business Ideas

Why I unthinkingly watched a 2-hour documentary, and how you can use this to sell more without selling

by

“‘Violets always mean man,’ said one girl to another in a Broadway florist’s recently. ‘If a girl wears violets once, it may be accident; twice coincidence; after that it means a man.'”
— New York Sun, May 7, 1905

It might mean “man” even at just two violets. For example:

Last night, I went on YouTube. On the front page, I saw a thumbnail for a 2-hour-long documentary about Gordon Ramsay. I clicked to watch it immediately.

Trust me, there’s a reason why you might care about this. And it’s because of the big question:

Why?

After all, I’ve never seen Gordon Ramsay’s TV show. I have no emotional attachment to the man or his public persona. And I don’t care about celebrity chefs or celebrity cooking.

So why did I unthinkingly click and watch this 2-hour documentary?

The reason is a podcast I’d listened to the day earlier. It was all about how Gordon Ramsay’s TV show is a great illustration of control techniques.

If you’re curious about those control techniques, I will tell you my big takeaway about them tomorrow.

My point for today is simply this:

Two seemingly independent sources can often get compliance where one source can’t, regardless of the amount of persuasive arguments.

I bet that last sentence is as clear as a marble wall. So let me give you an illustration of what I’m trying to say:

A couple of years ago, I found out about a new email newsletter. It was called Daily Insider Secrets, and it was about Internet marketing.

I signed up. And that’s how I first heard the name Rich Schefren. Rich was one of the guys behind the newsletter.

I kept reading the emails. I found them interesting. And then came the pitch:

A big campaign, trying to sell me something, using a multi-day launch, hours of video, thousands of words of copy. Many, many persuasive arguments, which I didn’t even look at. (Silly me right? It’s kind of my job. But I’m slow to learn.)

Anyways, here’s the climax:

A few months later, a copywriter whose emails I read did an interview with Rich Schefren. And I decided to watch the interview, because I already knew Rich’s name from the Daily Insider Secrets emails, which I found interesting.

Forty minutes later, after I finished watching the interview, I was pulling out my credit card to buy Rich’s offer. The same one I had completely ignored earlier. Even though Rich only mentioned it in passing during the interview.

Coincidence? I’d say “man”.

Because Rich doesn’t just do these interviews for kicks or as a way to kill time. He does them to get his name out there, in multiple formats and multiple channels. And that’s my point for you today:

If you’re trying to sell something, get your name out there, in two channels, or three, or more.

You will reach more prospects, sure. But you will also convert prospects you’ve already reached, but who wouldn’t buy from you otherwise. And you won’t even have to sell hard to do it.

Because your prospects will just think it was all just a happy coincidence. You and I will know the truth, though. We will know it was man.

Now here’s something that’s probably not going to work:

I have an email newsletter. You can sign up for it by clicking here. I don’t expect you to do it, because odds are, this is the first and only channel you’ve seen my name so far. But maybe I will get you later, in some other format.

Beware “spiritual” and “heart-centered” customers

by

Time for a personal revelation:

I went to college in Santa Cruz, California, a place filled with weed-smoking, patchouli-burning, beatific-smiling hippies. And I remember talking to my roommate at the time about the following paradox.

As a group, hippies claim to be all about peace, love, and understanding. But at an individual level, they tend to be some judgmental, closed-minded, and often nasty people.

Bah. Who knows. Maybe I was just projecting.

Anyways, I remembered this today because of something I heard Todd Herman say.

I’d never heard of Herman until today. Apparently he’s a big deal. He works with Olympic athletes and became a success in spite of his dyslexia. And now he runs successful online programs teaching you how to peakify your performance.

These are quality programs, says Herman, with low refund rates. But some people do refund, and Herman wanted to see if there are any patterns here.

So Herman tracked down the social profiles of the refunders. He wanted their Twitter and Facebook self-descriptions. He took these and dumped them all into a big file, and then put this into some software for creating a tag cloud.

And what came out? Who were the people who were buying and then returning these programs, which Herman says most everyone else is thrilled with?

Well, draw your own conclusions. But according to Todd Herman, two phrases kept cropping up in these social profile bios:

1. “Heart-centered”

and

2. “Spiritual”

This personally confirms my previous biases… but even so. If you sell anything online, it might be good for you to know, and might save you some frustration.

And now, here’s my (qualified) pitch to you:

I heard Todd Herman talk about this during his Steal Our Winners segment.

If you’ve read my blog for a while, you know that once a month, I plug Steal Our Winners. That’s because each month, Rich Schefren manages to get six or seven top-level marketers to share a tip or trick or even strategy that’s working really well for ’em right now.

In a normal month, I find at least three or four segments to be really interesting.

But not so this month. This month, I only found Todd Herman’s part interesting. Herman talked about a clever system he has for getting his customers to reveal their deep seated motivations, in their own words.

It might not sound like breakthrough stuff… but if you do do it, it will make your audience say, “Wow… it’s like you’re reading my mind. How did you do that?” And that’s good for sales… as well as your relationship with your audience.

So that’s my qualified pitch for Steal Our Winners. Most months, you get at least 3 or 4 good and genuinely new ideas. Some months though, you might only get one.

But however many good ideas you get, they won’t be worth anything unless you implement them. On the other hand, if you implement even one, it will certainly be worth much more than the low, low price of a Steal Our Winners subscription.

How low are we talking about? Actually, I don’t know. I signed up for a lifetime subscription a while ago, and the price may have gone up since.

But I do know you can try out Steal Our Winners for one month, and listen to Todd Herman’s interview if you like, for an unthinkable fee of $1 (yes, one dollar). In case you’re interested, here’s where to go:

https://www.bejakovic.com/sow​​

Marketing barter?

by

Trending on Twitter this morning:

“Fans are pointing out that actor Leonardo DiCaprio looks like Leonardo DiCaprio.”

I found this funny. The truth of course is more mundane. Apparently the New York Post said DiCaprio looked “unrecognizable in first photos of new Scorsese film.” Fans disagreed.

So I got to wondering:

Maybe clever headlines like this are standard for the Twitter “Trending” sidebar. What do I know?

All I have is a secret Twitter account, which I never use. (This morning I wound up on Twitter by following a link in an Axios newsletter.) This is in spite of hearing a lot hype for Twitter, both as a great place to get yer news and to connect with smart people. And maybe even to drum up business.

Fact is, I’ve got a bunch of marketing holes like this.

I’m not on Instagram… I only use Facebook to spy on different groups… I know little about PR… and I’ve never ever created or promoted a continuity program.

Which got me thinking about an idea:

I call it marketing barter.

Imagine your typical flea market. An empty parking lot, where you go with a little blanket and lay out what you’ve got for sale.

You then walk around, and you look at what others have for sale on their little blankets.

Maybe something catches your eye. “Hm. A vegan, American-made sleeping pill for dogs. Interesting.”

So you talk to the owner a bit. And you come up with ideas to help with his marketing. Maybe you promise to get him free publicity with a Reddit astroturfing campaign. Maybe you offer to set up and promote a funnel for autoship.

And then you ask if in exchange he would be willing to write the sales letter for your new “Power Aromatherapy For Life Coaches” course… or if not, what he would be willing to do for you in turn.

Finally, if you both agree, you exchange services.

It could be copywriting. It could be funnels. It could be stuff you’re an expert in… or it could be stuff you want to practice, but don’t have a product that’s suitable for (eg. you want to practice PR, but you don’t have a product that has wide-enough appeal or that can stand public scrutiny.)

I can hear Derek Zoolander asking:

But why barter?

Well, promoting your own stuff is hard for many people, myself included. (I started thinking about this marketing barter idea recently… after finally completing the sales letter for my bullets course. It took me almost two months to do.)

But it’s not just the futzing and fumbling that goes with promoting your own stuff.

There’s just a lot of value in having an outside opinion. We are all too close to what we sell. That’s one of the main reasons why hiring a marketing consultant or outside copywriter makes sense.

And I feel that this marketing barter idea could help with both of the above points. That’s why.

And there’s Zoolander butting in again:

But why barter? Why not just pay for marketing services if you need them?

I don’t have a great answer for that. That’s why I’m writing today’s email. I want to hear what you think, and if you have any advice for me about how I should pursue or develop this idea.

And if you’re curious how this idea progresses, or if you want another idea (or two) about marketing and copywriting, you might like to join my email newsletter (thank God, no Twitter).

F for Frank Abagnale

by

My headline today is a play on F For Fake. That was a documentary Orson Wells made about frauds, forgers, and fakers, himself included. And it ties into some real news about Frank Abagnale.

You’ve probably heard that name. Frank Abagnale is the real-life guy whose story was told by Steven Spielberg in Catch Me If You Can.

Between the ages of 16 and 20, Frank impersonated an airline pilot, a doctor, a lawyer, and a college professor. He traveled all around the world… broke the hearts of lovely stewardesses… and lived rich by passing fake checks.

Even if you don’t approve of Frank’s crimes, I bet you enjoyed the movie based on Frank’s life. And maybe you even had a bit of sympathy for his daring and boyish charm, at least as portrayed by Leonardo DiCaprio.

Except… maybe… it never happened?

I don’t mean the movie stretched the truth.

I mean, maybe Frank’s story of fraud and forgery was all a fake, from day one?

According to some guy writing for WHYY, an NPR subsidiary, it’s all a big lie. Frank Abagnale never did any of those exciting and romantic things we know him for. Well, he did pass a few bad checks, and he did stalk a stewardess for a while. But that’s about where the romance ends.

And it gets crazier because:

Apparently this was well-known back in the 70s. That’s when a few newspapers published articles to debunk Frank’s grandiose claims.

But it didn’t hurt none. Frank’s legend grew through self-promotion, and grew, and grew, until he took over Hollywood.

This is similar to the story I wrote about a few weeks ago, about psychic Uri Geller, and James Randi, the guy who debunked him. But my message for you today is less controversial than what I wrote back then.

My message today is simply a business truth:

You don’t succeed because you create and deliver a superior product or service. The world will not beat a path to your door.

Instead, you succeed because you create and deliver superior marketing.

This is true whether you’re a computer engineer, a consultant, a copywriter… or as Frank Abagnale’s story shows, even a con man. As Frank’s dad puts it in a famous scene from Catch Me If You Can:

Frank’s dad: You know why the Yankees always win, Frank?

Frank: Cause they have Mickey Mantle?

Frank’s dad: Nah. It’s cause the other teams can’t stop staring at those damn pinstripes.

And if you need ideas for superior marketing:

You might like the ideas I share in my email newsletter. Click here to give it a try.

The thinking man’s horoscope

by

Detailed and Reliable — LOW
Nurturing – LOW
Tough — LOW

Today I went through a part of Ray Dalio’s personality test. It takes 40 minutes to complete. I gave up after just 10. But based on those 10 minutes, Dalio’s test still spit out an uninspiring estimate of who I am (results above).

You’ve probably heard of Dalio. He’s a billionaire investor. A few years ago, he wrote an influential book about his way of thinking, called Principles. Well, now he has released a free online personality test, called Principles You.

Dalio got enthusiastic about personality tests a while back. He started by giving a bunch of his employees the Myers-Briggs.

“It gives you clarity of how people think!” Dalio said.

And to prove his point, he had those same employees fill out a survey after they got the test results. “How accurately does this describe the way you think?” 85% gave it a 4 or 5 on a scale of 1-5.

Impressive, except:

If you’ve been reading my blog over the past few weeks, you’ll know I recently wrote about cold reading. That’s when you tell people something about themselves without knowing anything about them.

In the very first cold reading experiment, all the way back in 1949, 39 students were all given the same personality profile. It came straight out of a horoscope.

And after reading their profile, 34 out of 39 students gave the profile either a 4 or a 5 on a scale of 1-5. That’s 87%. A finding that has been replicated since, and not just by Dalio.

But what the hell do I know?

I’m just some guy. And Ray Dalio is a billionaire.

​​Maybe his Principles You test really is more useful and accurate than a horoscope.

Either way, all I really want to suggest is that, up and down the success and skepticism ladders, people love categorizing others… and they LOOOVE being categorized themselves.

I think those two loves come from very different drives. I won’t get into that here. But I will leave you with this:

Entire businesses have been built by putting people into buckets. (Michael Gerber’s E-Myth comes to mind.) And if you need a unique mechanism… or you need a unique position in the market… then perhaps you can get started by creating a new diagnostic test. My suggestion for a name? Buckets You.

On a related note:

If you are honest, ambitious, and reliable, then you might get a lot of value out of subscribing to my email newsletter. Click here to try it out.

Eleemosynary enlightenment

by

The atmosphere around the large conference table was tense.

At one end sat a team of lawyers, dressed in three-piece suits and aggressively staring down the table.

At the other end sat a bunch of sloppy-looking beatnik types, trying to keep calm but obviously nervous.

The time was the late 1930s. The place was Hollywood. The lawyers were studio lawyers. The beatnik types were studio animators, trying to form a union. Among them was Chuck Jones, the famous director of all those Bugs Bunny and Daffy Duck cartoons.

Jones really didn’t want to be there. He certainly didn’t want to start trouble.

And then one of the lawyers stood up. He stalked down to where the animators were huddled together. And he slammed his hand down on the table.

“One thing I want to make eminently clear,” he said. “Mr. Schlesinger is NOT running an eleemosynary institution.”

Leon Schesinger was the head of the studio. That much was clear. But what about that eleemosynary? What the hell did that mean?

“I loved words always,” Jones said later. “And I knew what he was doing.”

Jones felt like he was being played, manipulated, made to feel small and dumb. Like his vocabulary was small. Which it wasn’t!

In a flash, this sense of injustice boiled up and over. And Jones, very unlike himself, stood up, slammed his own hand down on the table, and started to yell.

“What do you mean by that word!”

The lawyer took a step back. “It… it means a charitable organization.”

Jones kept yelling. “Well why in the damn hell didn’t you just say that? How dare you use a word like that? We’re supposed to be working together here to try to solve a problem!”

The other animators suddenly took courage also. A team spirit was forming, thanks to Chuck Jones’s unexpected outburst.

The meeting didn’t go anywhere. After it was over, Jones expected he would be fired for his combativeness and troublemaking. And sure enough, he was called down immediately to Leon Schlesinger’s office.

But it wasn’t what Jones expected. ​​

“I want to apologize,” said Schlesinger. “The lawyer didn’t understand we were trying to work this thing out together.”

The negotiations continued for some time after that. The animators kept together, with Jones at their head, all starting with that fight that Jones decided to pick. And eventually, Schesinger signed the contract allowing his workers to unionize.

My point for tonight is enlightenment. In other words, I don’t want to push a one-sided but misleading conclusion from the story above.

Instead, I want to throw out the idea that in complex situations, like in dealing with people, there is no single best way to proceed in all situations.

So in the interest of enlightenment, since we’ve already heard from Chuck Jones, let me leave you with some words to the other extreme. They come from that great philosopher of human nature, Dale Carnegie:

“You cannot win an argument. You can’t because if you lose it, you lose it; and if you win it, you lose it. […] Distrust your first instinctive impression. Our first natural reaction in a disagreeable situation is to be defensive. Be careful. Keep calm and watch out for your first reaction. It may be you at your worst, not your best.”

And one final thought for tonight:

If you want more complex and multi-sided negotiation and marketing advice, you might like to try out my email newsletter.

The story behind Gary Halbert’s “foreplay secret”

by

In 2004, Gary Halbert wrote a sales letter for a book he had published, titled Killer Orgasms. And in this sales letter, Gary had the following bullet:

* A little known foreplay secret (only recently revealed by a world famous female sex therapist) that gives a man a foolproof method which makes certain his woman will have an explosive orgasm… every time they make love!

If you read Gary’s book, which I’ve done, you will find no reference to a world-famous female sex therapist.

​​So where the hell did Gary get that bit? Did he just write the bullets, expecting to fill in the book later, and just forgot to include the therapist?

It turns out no.

Rather, Gary didn’t really write that bullet. Instead, he was copying John Carlton, and a sales letter John wrote back around 1997.

​​John’s sales letter was for a Rodale book titled, Sex: A Man’s Guide. Here’s the original bullet:

* The “Pre-Coital Secret” (only recently made public by a famous female sex therapist) that breaks the code on giving any woman an explosive orgasm… every time you make love! Page 114.

So what’s going on?

Sex: A Man’s Guide sold well for Rodale. But I guess it didn’t fit well into their product catalog.

So within a couple of years, Rodale was no longer publishing the Sex book. The book went on to be published by Berkley Books, which is part of the Penguin Group. As far as I understand, that almost certainly means John’s sales letter was no longer being mailed — and never would be again.

And since Gary and John were partners, Gary took John’s bullets, twisted a few words, and there was his ad. Including the world-famous-but-absent female sex therapist.

Now here’s why this story may be relevant to you:

If you’re working for a client, and you see that they are not using or abusing an asset to its full potential… then maybe that’s an opportunity for you to step in.

And no, I’m not saying to steal your client’s business. But if your client cannot or will not take advantage of a certain opportunity, and there are plenty such, then I feel there’s no moral boundary being transgressed if you jump all over it.

And maybe you can even reuse some of the marketing. Just remember to take out the incriminating therapist.

By the way, I’m writing about this because it’s near to my heart. As I wrote a while ago, a client I work for is not taking advantage of several seemingly profitable opportunities.

So should I jump all over these opportunities?

​​Maybe.

But I first need a Gary Halbert to my John Carlton. So if you’ve got skills (particularly media buying) or if you’ve got money (particularly, money that’s not going to next month’s rent or child support), then maybe you and I should talk.

The most “dangerous” idea in America?

by

“I worry that I should be doing something bigger with my life.”

I have this friend. Many years ago, he came to America on a work-and-travel visa. He stayed and he built a little business. Through this little business, he made the 4-hour-workweek a reality in his life.

Ever since, he’s been making good money each month by sending a few emails and making a few phone calls. The rest of the time, he travels the world, has fun, and chases women.

“But I worry I might be wasting my time,” he told me when we spoke. “Maybe I should be working to save the children or make the world a better place.”

My answer to him was that there’s value in thinking small, and that leading a life of modest impact is a virtue. And vice versa. I believe that thinking big is flat-out dangerous.

Maybe you find that thinking perverse or even repugnant. So let me give you a few examples to back up my case:

1. The Soviet Union. From everything I’ve read, the people who laid the groundwork for Bolshevism were the best and brightest and most humane of their generation. They thought they were building a better world. And yet the result was a monstrous machine that took decades to dismantle.

2. Google. Just today I read how the Federal Court in Australia ruled that Google has been willingly misleading consumers. Google continued to track consumers’ locations, even after they had turned location tracking off.

Of course, Google didn’t start out being a power-hungry, inhuman monolith. Not long ago, it was just two PhD students, whose motto was “Do no evil.” They were looking to improve access to information, and make the world a better place — on a big scale.

But maybe you don’t care anything about Bolsheviks or Google’s surveillance. Maybe you just want your own big business that makes big money. So let me tell you why smaller might still be a safer bet.

It’s something I heard Pete Coyne say a few weeks ago.

As you might know, Pete started out as copywriter at Agora. He then became a publisher there, which means he ran an entire division. He built up this division from scratch to over $100m.

In short, Pete is a smart guy, and somebody who knows more about building big businesses than most of us ever will.

And yet Pete said the following:

“A lot of people chase scale. They want to scale their business. And I feel there’s a lot of gross number porn out there. 7 figures… 100 million… 500 million. That’s not really a great thing a lot of times. Usually, your headaches explode with your revenue… your exposure to lawsuits and regulations goes up.”

Instead, Pete said there is a magic number for yearly revenue. Once you get to it, you’re better off spinning up a new business than trying to grow what you’ve got.

Not only will this save you headaches and lawsuits, says Pete, but you might actually net more money in the end.

And this  is not only thing I heard Pete share.

He also talked about three “monetization events.” He calls these “gray labeling,” “demographic jumping,” and “USP flipping.”

​​Each of them is a quick, low-risk way to create revenue bumps in your business. And none of them requires doing anything very different from what you’re already doing. Just make sure you don’t shoot past the magic number.

Maybe you’re getting tired of the teasing. So let me get to the point:

I heard Pete say all these things in this month’s Steal Our Winners.

Once each month, I push you to check out Steal Our Winners. Because in my opinion, it’s the best value out there if you are interested in direct marketing or have a business that uses direct marketing.

In a nutshell:

Each month, Rich Schefren interviews a bunch of high-profile marketers like Pete Coyne. Rich gets these marketers to spill valuable ideas and information. There’s no fluff or self-promotion. Just valuable ideas, most of which you can apply immediately.

And it’s all available for an unthinkable monthly price. Plus you can even get a low-risk trial month, for a $1 entry fee.

So in case you’re curious, you can find the $1 Steal Our Winners offer at the link below. And if you act fast, you can probably still get the Pete Coyne segment. Here’s the link:

https://bejakovic.com/sow

A $30,000 copywriting course?

by

Today I’ve got a business idea for you, if you’ve got an entrepreneurial mindset:

A few months ago, I speculated on a fanciful idea. What if copywriting education were free upfront, and the only income came from the money that students make thanks to the education?

Back then, I thought it was pretty impossible. It seemed to me that copywriting education can only go to one of two poles: AWAI or Agora.

AWAI is Mark Ford’s direct response business about copywriting. It works like any other direct response business — a never-ending stream of new offers. There’s always another secret to learn.

At the other extreme, there’s Agora. Not Agora the client-facing direct response business. That works just the same as AWAI.

Instead, I’m talking about Agora the copywriter training machine. That’s where Mark Ford (again) and the rest of the Agora folks bring in promising and ambitious people… teach them how to write copy… and then set them to work, capturing most of their productivity.

In other words, it seemed to me that you can either be an employee and get a great education for free (Agora)… or you can be a freelancer (or freelancer wannabe), and pay thousands or tens of thousands of dollars for your education, delivered in drips and drops of offers and upsells (AWAI).

So that brings us to today.

Because I learned something today that I didn’t know a few months ago, when I first wrote about this. What I didn’t know is that there is a business called Lambda School, which teaches you how to be a computer programmer.

So far, so meh.

The interesting thing is how Lambda School charges its students. It doesn’t charge an upfront tuition (like a regular undegrad education)… and it also doesn’t put you to work, paying you a wage and capturing your productivity (like a PhD, or work at a company).

Instead, Lambda School offers an income share agreement. I’d heard of these before, but only in the context of a traditional university. But things seem to be changing.

So here’s how Lambda School and its income share agreement work:

First, you apply to Lambda School. If you’re accepted, you sign the income share agreement, and you take the course. 6 months later, once you are a hireable programmer, you go out into the world and get a job. And then, you start paying a share of your income to Lambda School, for a total of 24 months, not to exceed $30k.

So there’s my business idea for you.

It works just like Lambda School, except it’s called AIDA School. And it teaches you copywriting and marketing. In a bit more detail:

You ask people to fill out an application to get into AIDA School. You test for basic writing skills… level of dedication… availability to commit to the course. The applicants who pass a certain threshold get in.

​​And then, you really give ’em a great education. You even help them get freelancing clients. And then you reap what you sowed, in the form of a share of their income, not to exceed $30k.

$30k per person. More than you’re likely to make selling ebooks and teasing secrets. And if you do an honest job on the teaching side, more of a positive impact also. Just remember to mention me in the first commencement speech.

And remember also to sign up for my email newsletter — if you want more business, marketing, or copywriting ideas than you would ever believe.

Profitable second-best positioning

by

BUD: I love you, Miss Kubelik.
FRAN: [cutting a deck of cards] Seven… queen.
BUD: Did you hear what I said, Miss Kubelik? I absolutely adore you.
FRAN: [handing over the cards] Shut up and deal.

That’s the ending of my favorite movie of all time, called The Apartment.

It stars Jack Lemmon as sweet and harmless accountant Bud Baxter… Shirley MacLaine as cute and clever elevator girl Fran Kubelik… and Fred MacMurray as handsome and cruel business executive Jeff Sheldrake.

The setup in a nutshell:

Fran is in love with Sheldrake… Sheldrake uses Bud’s apartment as a place to sleep with Fran on the side away from his wife… and Bud falls in love with Fran.

By the end end of the movie, after Sheldrake breaks Fran’s heart one too many times and Fran tries to commit suicide in Bud’s apartment, things are set right. ​​Sheldrake is left out in the cold and Fran winds up with Bud. Bud might not be powerful and sexy… but at least he’s sweet and he absolutely adores her.

The point being, sometimes you’re not the best, or the first. And that can be ok. You can still get the girl. Or the customer.

And along these lines, I want to propose to you the idea of second-best positioning.

A famous example of this is Avis rent-a-car.

Back in the early 1960s, Avis was the homely mule trotting behind the spry stallion that was Hertz. And rather than trying to pretend otherwise, Avis decided to own their second-best position. The result was the following ad campaign:

“Avis is only No. 2 in rent a cars. So why go with us? We try harder.”

Within a year of launching this campaign, Avis went from a loss of $3.2 million to a profit of $1.2 million. Within 5 years of this campaign running… the difference in market share between Hertz and Avis shrank from 32% to just 13%. It even looked like Avis might overtake Hertz — and need a new ad campaign.

“All right,” you might say, “good for Avis. But why wouldn’t I find a uniquely best position for myself… and instead accept the role of a homely second-best mule?”

Fair point. My only answer is that second-best can get you free promotion. And lots of high-quality leads. And almost certainly more sales than you can handle. At least if you’re selling some kind of service, and can follow the clever program outlined below.

It’s something I found in Glenn Allsop’s article, which I shared in a post a few days ago.

Did you read Glenn’s article? All the way to the end? That’s where the clever second-best biz idea was. From what I understand, it works like this:

1. You are in business offering some kind of service. Say, copywriting.

2. You decide you want to help a charitable cause. Say, the unbeaching of that tanker that’s stuck in the Suez Canal.

3. So you contact 25 of the top level people in your field, who have premier positioning. A-list copywiters, etc. They all agree to provide a free copy critique, which will be sold for top dollar to help the charitable cause.

4. You then create a page to promote this event. “The greatest copy critique event of all time! Featuring A-list copywriters! In support of the beached Suez canal tanker!”

5. With some hand-waving, this offer goes viral. Not impossible — considering the premier positioning of the 25 A-list copywriters at the heart of it.

6. The 25 premier slots sell out in minutes after the event goes live.

7. You then update your page to say, “Missed out this time, or want another critique option? Check out our $40 sales copy critique and get feedback in the next 72 hours.”

And there you go. All the opportunity a sweet, second-best copywriter can handle. At that point, you’ve just got to shut up and deal.

Do you want a copy critique? It’s something I offer from time to time. But the offer only ever goes out to subscribers of my email newsletter. If you’re interested, you can join it here.