[Psych Psundays] Cops and robbers

For the past couple weeks, I’ve been running a new email series I call Psych Psundays. The first week, the response was good. The second week, it was also good:

#1. “Wow. Thank you, John.”

#2. “Lovely email John – many thanks for writing it – I loved reading it. Great storytelling.”

#3. “These Psych Sundays are helpful.”

#4. “Honestly this came at the right time for me. Just started a new creative strategist role – my first time writing ad scripts – with a new supplement brand. Since this is my first time doing this, I’ve been fighting similar thoughts like “This isn’t right for me, I only know email”… big imposter syndrome stuff. Been taking the next step and fighting those thoughts, leading up to submitting my first ads, was wondering if they’d be ripped to shreds, but the only real feedback I got was “good ads 🔥”… So it’s been a trip.”

This third week, Psych Psundays continues, and threatens to bleed into Pself-Help Psundays instead.

Will this be the end of this series as readers unsubscribe in disgust?

Or will I tell you something interesting and possibly valuable?

Let’s see.

I will start by admitting that last week I rewatched the 2002 Hong Kong movie Infernal Affairs. You might know it better in the 2006 remake version by Martin Scorcese, called The Departed.

The movie tells the story of a drug kingpin and a police captain, each of whom plants a mole in the other’s organization.

The cops and criminals keep clashing, pulling away to try to outwit each other, and clashing again.

This coming together and pulling away is precisely what makes the movie tense and fun to watch, all the way to the final showdown, where everybody loses and order is restored to the universe.

Compare that to an article I read a while back about a man named Daniel Kinahan. The article asked a simple question, “An Irish drug dealer, Daniel Kinahan, commands a billion-dollar cocaine empire from the U.A.E. Why isn’t he in prison?”

The background was that Kinahan’s father, Christy, grew up middle class in Dublin, but got into the drug trade. Christy was smart, polite, and careful. Unlike everybody else in the drug business, he was not an addict himself.

Still, in the first few years of his career, back in 1987, Kinahan Sr. got caught and served a few years in prison.

After he got out, Kinahan Sr. made changes to how he was running his drug trafficking business to make it less likely he would get caught.

When his son Daniel took over, there were even more changes introduced, and the risk was reduced even further.

The result is that the Kinahans have been running one of the world’s biggest cocaine organizations, but continue to live free in Dubai, and apparently the police cannot or will not touch them.

Frankly, not much of a story there, and definitely not worth a movie.

A couple weeks ago, back in the inaugural Psych Psunday email, I mentioned I was reading a book called Games People Play. The book is a catalogue of “games” — repeated personal interactions that are played for ulterior motives and payoffs rather than the obvious reasons.

One game described in Games People Play is called “Cops and Robbers.” It’s about real-life cops and robbers, or at least some of them.

The game of “Cops and Robbers” is played for a combination of excitement and security. The excitement comes from being chased. The security comes from being caught and put back to the same place where the robber is used to being, whether that’s the local slum or prison.

But here’s the bit I found interesting. Not every criminal plays “Cops & Robbers.” From Games People Play:

“There seem to be two distinctive types of habitual criminals: those who are in crime primarily for profit, and those who are in it primarily for the game — with a large group in between who can handle it either way. The ‘compulsive winner,’ the big moneymaker whose Child really does not want to be caught, rarely is, according to reports; he is an untouchable, for whom the fix is always in. The ‘compulsive loser,’ on the other hand, who is playing ‘Cops and Robbers,’ seldom does very well financially.”

I found this distinction between “pros” and “C&R players” interesting. It’s the difference between the “Cops & Robbers” players as dramatized in Infernal Affairs, and the Kinahans, the real-life untouchables and compulsive winners, who don’t really make for a good story, but who do live rich and free.

This distinction between “pros” and “players of Cops & Robbers” goes way beyond the criminal world. If you ask me, this same distinction applies pretty much everywhere in life, including the direct response industry.

Publicly, the DR industry all about dramatic transformations and secret push-button solutions that will make you lose weight or turn you into a millionaire in the next 24 hours.

Privately, behind the scenes, the DR industry is built on the Recency-Frequency-Monetary Value formula.

Basically, it’s about selling the same thing, over and over, to people who have been buying for years, people who actually have ulterior motives than making money or losing weight quickly, even though that’s what they they are paying for.

And this is where we veer from Psych Psunday.

Psychology is good at classifying and diagnosing. For how to change, you gotta go to a different section of the bookstore, the self-help section.

For example, I once read a book called Straight-Line Leadership. At its core, it’s about the distinction between “straight-line people” and “circle people.”

It’s the exact same distinction as Games People Play makes, between “pros” and “people who play Cops & Robbers.”

The difference between Straight-Line Leadership and Games People Play is that Straight-Line Leadership tells you that you can become a straight-line person today.

You don’t have to keep quitting or “being caught” once things are going well. You can simply keep going in a straight line, onwards and upwards, like a compulsive winner.

And if you do encounter a setback (eg. you get thrown into jail, like Kinahan Sr.) you can simply come out of jail, make some changes, and get back on the straight line.

A master of direct marketing once wrote:

“One of the greatest lessons I learned about direct marketing over the years is that if it ain’t boring, you’re doing it wrong. If you’re juggling too many balls, running around frantically putting out fires all the time, if every day is a constant uphill battle to succeed… then… something ain’t right. This business, when done correctly, should be dull, boring, slow moving (even at high speed), and mostly automated.”

So there you go. To have a real shot at getting rich and free, get your kicks from somewhere other than your business.

Or don’t. Get your kicks from your business, keep playing Cops and Robbers, experiencing exciting ups and downs.

Many people do it, and there’s no shame in it.

But in that case, you can spare yourself the frustration of wondering why those ups and downs are always there, and realize they’re there because you want them on some level.

And now, a reminder that my Most Valuable Offer launches this coming Wednesday.

With Most Valuable Offer, I’m offering to give you my direct help so you can run a successful launch of a paid live workshop by the end of April, which you can then keep selling, in an automated way, until the stars fall from the sky.

For more info:

https://bejakovic.com/mvo

[Psych Psundays] Why don’t you… yes, but

I thought to introduce a new little series I could do every week, Psych Psundays.

I’m not a psychologist nor do I play one on TV, but I am interested in pop psychology. I read books about it, and I have a kind of live lab via this newsletter and other marketing I do. Plus I have a mind myself. I keep tabs on it. Sometimes I learn stuff that way too.

Let’s see if this new series could be interesting to you or not, and if it is, how long I can keep it going.

The first installation of Psych Psundays starts off with a reader question I got a few days ago:

===

Hey John, how are you? I just wanted to ask if you could recommend a resource for audience building without video based content.

I’m writing daily emails but I can barely grow my newsletter, Twitter is filled with AI and it feels hollow.

The little subscribers I’ve gotten are from communities where I shared a little value with a link in my bio.

What would you recommend?

Thanks a lot and I hope you have a great weekend.

[name]

P.S. You don’t owe me crap of course so feel free to ignore this and go on with your day!

I just thought I’d ask you because I love your daily emails, it’s actually why I started writing daily.

===

I didn’t reply to this guy.

On the one hand, I enjoyed the flattery.

On the other hand, I suspect this was an attempt at playing a game, one that I no longer enjoy.

Right now, I’m reading a book called Games People Play by a guy named Eric Berne. The book was kind of a big thing back in the 1960s. It’s basically about repeated “games” — patterns of communication that people engage in, not for the stated and obvious purpose, but for ulterior motives.

The first “game” discovered by Berne was called “Why don’t you… yes but.” It’s the game I feel my reader above is asking me to play with him. It goes like this:

First, one person brings up a problem, say, they can’t grow their newsletter.

Then other person (or persons) jump in with suggestions:

– Why don’t you get on Twitter? Yes, but Twitter is filled with AI and feels hollow

– I hear YouTube works well, why don’t you try that? Yes, but I don’t want to create video content

– Why don’t you just keep posting in communities if that’s worked for you? Yes, but that takes way too much time

– Why don’t you try running ads? Yes, but I can’t afford ads

– Why don’t you try doing list swaps? Yes, but my list is too small for list swaps

– Why don’t you just invite perfect prospects to your list one by one? Yes, but that would be so slow and anyways who would say yes

The fact is, there are 1,001 ways to grow your newsletter. There are entire (free and high-quality) websites dedicated to cataloguing those ways. I myself have written about the topic dozens of times, including earlier this month.

But none of that really matters.

Because the point of playing “Why don’t you… yes, but” is not to get a workable solution, but to keep going until all the suggestions run dry, and the original person asking for advice can say, “See, I knew they had nothing for me.”

Ok. So now I probably sound like a dick, and a conceited dick at that.

I mean, have I really told you anything new here? Or have I just put a fancy new label on something that everybody already knows and does, while singling out a poor reader who just asked a question?

Fine. Let me tell you something else I read in Games People Play, which might be genuinely new and useful to you. Says Berne:

===

While almost anyone will play this game under proper circumstances because of its time-structuring value, careful study of individuals who particularly favor it reveals several interesting features.

First, they characteristically can and will play either side of the game with equal facility.

This switchability of roles is true of all games. Players may habitually prefer one role to another, but they are capable of trading, and they are willing to play any other role in the same game if for some reason that is indicated.

===

I can tell you that, until not too long ago, I myself was a ready player of “Why don’t you… yes but.”

Like Berne says, I happily played either side. I would both bring up frustrations and dismiss offered solutions… and at other times, I would also offer advice, have that advice dismissed, and then offer more advice.

I played either side happily because it made me feel smart and righteous.

Curious thing:

I noticed recently that I don’t play this game much any more.

These days, if people offer me advice, I nod. If it’s somebody I trust and respect, I do exactly as they say. Otherwise, I just let it go.

And on the other hand, when people come to me with their frustrations, I also nod. And then I say, “That sounds frustrating. What do you think you will do?”

Maybe, maybe, this change is tied to a bigger change in me, to being more proactive, less of a “thinker” who is mainly interested in collecting information, and a little more of a “doer” who at least sometimes tries and sees what will happen for real.

So that’s my mildly inspiring takeaway for you on this Pysch Psunday.

Maybe you are a habitual player of “Why don’t you… yes, but.”

If so, it’s not any kind of lifelong condition. If you like, you can change, starting right now.

And if you are having trouble getting yourself to take action, in spite of knowing what you should do… well, maybe Eric Berne is right about the “switchability of roles.”

I could tell you how to apply Berne’s idea to become more proactive, more of a doer. Except it would kind of defeat the whole point of this email.