next »

[profitclinic]

G'day again, gang

Another popular source of leads is buying "genealogy leads"... that is, distributor lists from failed MLM companies.

They're typically very cheap and promoted as "red hot" and "eager to join a replacement opportunity".

But is that the reality?

• These are people who've been burned by a failed MLM. "Eager" to repeat the experience? Think so?

• Many of them will have followed their charismatic upline to another MLM company — often before the failed company fails.

(In fact, this exodus can be the cause of failure of some smaller companies, who gear up for increased production, then lose a large slice of their network. This is often due to poaching by other companies, who offer the "heavy hitter" at the head of the big teams a better deal, which the smaller company can't match. Yep — happens more often than you'd believe. I once turned down an income guarantee of $350,00 a year, plus $100,000 for advertising and meeting costs — and within a year that company had vanished.)
 

• They're often people who have no clue about how to choose a reliable, well-paying MLM opportunity, or how to build a business.

• Many will have been inactive for so long that they'll barely recall joining.

• These are distributor lists, remember? These people signed up as distributors with that failed company. They did NOT sign up to be on any mailing lists of would-be sponsors from other companies!

Not only is this unethical, it's definitely illegal in most countries and qualifies as spam if you approach them using email.

Not really the "eager, red-hot" prospects the list broker promised you!

What's been your experience, if any, buying genealogy leads?

Had any remarkable successes?

John Counsel
CEO, The Profit Clinic
FREE Report: Is Network Marketing REALLY Dead? (Or does it just SMELL that way?)

[Chris Lockwood]

I haven't heard too many positive stories about buying MLM leads.

If I had them, and they were any good, it seems like I could make more money promoting an MLM to them than selling them to someone else.

What's really suspicious is when the MLM company is selling the leads to its own distributors. Duh- could those leads possibly be any good?

[PeterA]

Hey John:

It's very good to see you here at this Forum!

I've been a large fan of yours for "many" years! :-)

We miss you at the DRA (Distributor Rights Association - www.TheDRA.org ) -
as Australia's former Exec Director - but your schedule is usually very hectic, I know.

Genealogy Leads - Yes, I agree with you on this.

I used to purchase them from Tracy Biller at one time - took his courses, etc.

The process of endlessly "calling" those COLD [and often negative] leads was painful.

I quickly learned that this process was also "not duplicatable" by the masses. NO!

For me, it soon became a very unnatural - and invasive - experience. The "rejection"
factor was high too, because I really had no "permission" to be calling these [so-called]
leads.

And as time passed, I soon realized it violated the whole principle of the beautiful LAW
Of ATTRACTION.

ATTRACTION Marketing is about earning people's TRUST first - and building solid
RELATIONSHIPS with with them before discussing business.

Often, it is best combined with a good Funded Proposal - offering high value to the
lead / prospect.

The end result is - prospects will "contact YOU" -- it's a nice feeling -- it's also far more
professional, and comfortable.

It's all about the "courtship" prior to the "marriage proposal" -- yet today, it seems the
vast majority of Network Marketers are still buying [worthless] leads - cold calling them - and
"pushing their deals" at them.

No wonder prospects get annoyed - and no wonder SO many MLMrs get frustrated, and often
end up quitting.

It doesn't have to be that way. There's a much better solution.

It's just a matter of getting the necessary marketing SKILLS - and one of the best ways to do
that is with the training made available through your Tools & Systems, John - thay're
exceptional. 

Another way is through the Renegade University - an excellent source.

Anyway - didn't mean to get into a 'sermon' on this - just wanted to share some comments.

Here's to your good health, happiness and continued success, John.

Your Canadian friend / Peter A.

www.PeterArnold.biz
Peter Arnold, CLU, CFC / Founder
Business Achievers Academy / Canada




 



 

[profitclinic]

Hey Peter

Nice to catch up again.

Attraction is the only intelligent approach in any kind of prospecting in my experience and observation.

But I also find that the commercial use of the term has created some emotional responses that people find hard (or impossible) to separate in their perceptions from the people or concepts that have branded themselves so strongly with that term, or similar terms.

I prefer more generic terms that don't create a fixed perception that says "Oh, you mean __________".

Back in 1996, when I first came online, the terms "push marketing" and "pull marketing" were being used to describe the different approaches, and I've found these to be very useful for communicating, instantly and intuitively, the two opposing styles.

• "Push" marketing is where you push your message at your target audience (and anyone else in the vicinity). The inference is that the prospect is being targeted as an object. It's really all about the would-be sponsor or seller.

• "Pull" marketing is where you pull your target audience to you voluntarily. (Attraction marketing.) The inference here is that the prospect is the all-important subject. It's really all about the prospect and their interests, values, desires, etc.

I find that most people intuitively understand the difference, especially if you use them together. Terms like "attraction" and "magnetic", while reasonably clear, often have to be explained, or put into context, partly because there's no contrary term in common use. So a lot of people hearing them aren't 100% certain what they mean.

Semantics is a very important aspect of communicating. Words have semantic value and power in widely differing degrees, and the simpler and clearer the meaning, the faster and more effective the response.

So when I say to a prospect "we use pull sponsoring instead of push sponsoring", the response is invariably positive and immediate. No explanations are necessary.

On the other hand, if I say "we use magnetic sponsoring" or "we use attraction sponsoring", especially with anyone with MLM experience, there's often an assumption that we use a proprietary system belonging to people like Mike Dillard, Ann Sieg or Ellie Drake. Then we get into lengthy explanations of why they're different from what we do and confusion reins.

Neither productive nor helpful.

Now, if only I can create the widespread perception that the expression "pull versus push sponsoring" automatically means Fourth Generation™ sponsoring, I'll be very happy.

Warm regards,


John Counsel
CEO, The Profit Clinic

FREE Report: Is Network Marketing REALLY Dead? (Or does it just SMELL that way?)

[PeterA]

John - again, I agree with you on this.

In fact, here's a paragraph from one of my own Websites that touches on this very point...

----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
PUSH -vs- PULL - The OLD methodology simply has you "pushing" Biz Opps - Products and
Services directly at prospects - instead of you "pulling" your prospects to YOU "first" - because
of the special VALUE you offer them [apart from your Biz Opps - Products - Services] - to build
some TRUST with them. Call it an IN-direct path to your eventual goal if you will ((the 'courtship'
before the 'marriage proposal')). Not that the OLD ways are all 'bad' - No,  It's just that there's a
whole new [and better] ballgame now - and it's one that I myself, resisted for a long while!
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

And when we "express ourselves clearly" in this way - WE become even more ATTRACTIVE.

Right John? :-)

Warmly / Peter A

[Debbi Bressler]

----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
PUSH -vs- PULL - The OLD methodology simply has you "pushing" Biz Opps - Products and
Services directly at prospects - instead of you "pulling" your prospects to YOU "first" - because
of the special VALUE you offer them [apart from your Biz Opps - Products - Services] - to build
some TRUST with them.

Hi Peter,

So glad to see you posting here!

You are a perfect example of the above statement. Over the years, you have provided good, factual information meant to inform and help your readers.  Your caring nature and intelligent discussion of issues always comes across as the overriding reason for your articles and posts.

Positioning yourself in this way causes people to WANT to get in touch with you.  It's their idea.  You leave them wanting more.

Although I am sure you have enrolled your share of people in this manner, I have never felt you regarded your readers with dollar signs on their foreheads! 

Thanks for always adding so much to the conversation!

Debbi Bressler