Debunking the Stupid Claims of Marketing Success

– Claims of making millions of dollars through emails or ads are often misleading and fail to consider other factors such as the quality of the product or timing.
– The success of email campaigns or ads is not solely dependent on the quantity sent or the amount spent, but rather on factors like product market fit and timing.
– Companies should focus on creating reusable income-producing assets rather than solely relying on 1-1 marketing through paid social ads.Focus on creating reusable income-producing assets rather than solely relying on paid social ads for 1-1 marketing.”I’ve made companies over $xxx million via emails. I’ve made companies over $xxx million via ads. I’ve sent over [insert amount] of emails. I’ve spent over [insert amount] of dollars on ad spend. These sorts of claims are the stupidest things I read on a regular basis as headlines on LinkedIn. Let’s take them one at a time and demystify this whole ‘expert speak.’

“I’ve made companies over $xxx million via emails.” This means that you had a list to work off of, and that list wasn’t free. Also, most people who sign up are very high-intent individuals who are way more likely to convert than those who don’t or people who have already purchased. Attribution windows are 30 days, and the average time to conversion when someone signs up is 30 days. Do you really think you made it happen, or maybe the product? I’ve personally been responsible for millions in revenue via emails over my career, and I don’t think it was the quality of the emails that caused any of them. Revenue from email is about timing or some sort of offer that allows for timing to be accelerated. That’s it.

“I’ve made companies over $xxx million via ads.” That’s the point of running ads, right? To make money. That doesn’t tell me how much you spent to do it, the product-market fit of the product, how well-known the product was more broadly, or what the rest of your website looked like or the price point of the product. Most of the time, ads are about product-market fit and timing. If someone clicks on an ad, there was some degree of interest or intrigue already…

“I’ve sent over [some amount] of emails.” High five! Again, this has more to do with the size of the list or how much you love spamming people than it does the quality of the emails being sent.

This last one is my favorite… “I’ve spent over [insert super big number] on ads.” Congrats! How much of that was profitable or optimized? Do you feel really proud for having spent that much money on a 1-1 marketing relationship that wasn’t used to build an asset with reusable capabilities? Something that could have served multiple purposes and produced its own revenue stream as a standalone asset? Yeah, probably not.

I know it might sound like I’m picking on people here, but I’m not. I’m talking directly to any company or business that has ever been swayed by these headlines. Anyone can have success when paired with the right clients and backed by an amazing product with great product market fit. That doesn’t make them good at their job. The fact that right now companies continue to spend on paid social ads to deliver 1-1 marketing rather than using some of that paid social to create a reusable income producing asset makes zero sense to me. Yet that’s literally what anyone is focused on. No one sees this opportunity clearly. It’s going to be the greatest smartest transfer of budget and asset creation to have ever existed and yet no one has a clue. #ecommerce #marketing #strategy

Leave a Comment

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

Scroll to Top