If you're new here, you may want to subscribe to my RSS feed. Thanks for visiting!
This past week, a popular internet marketer released his much anticipated, updated product. This marketer is well known for quality dealings with his customers, and the product being released was version 4.0 of a prior product. Both of these factors combined, and the result was that many of us simply zipped through the ordering process, probably not paying as much attention as we should have, and later found a nasty suprise AFTER we had confirmed the order.
Somewhere in the ordering process, an upsell was added to the invoice automatically, in the form of a monthly recurring subscription, which demanded a monthly recurring charge to our credit cards.
This is a process called FORCED CONTINUITY, and has actually been used for years in marketing.
If I’m not explaining this clearly, please see Jeff Jones‘ excellent article @ Senjo Marketing, “Should Forced Continuity Be Banned?” for a much clearer picture.
Please be aware, had we taken the time to go over the invoice like we should have, we probably would have found the upsell. That being said, it was also obvious that the upsell was snuck in, with minimal notice to us, in small print. Not exactly Black Hat, because ultimately, it was our choice to approve the order and the charge to our credit cards. However, I certainly wouldn’t call it White Hat either, as it was very sneaky, and not prominently disclosed.
We then had to go to the vendor that handled the sale, and specifically opt-out of the upsell, and verify that our credit cards were not being charged. Those who haven’t cancelled, or who will forget, or who aren’t paying attention when the upsell arrives in their mailbox and says “You’re going to be charged for this,” are going to be suprised when their credit card statements arrive soon after.
After I put all of the puzzle pieces together, I became really mad. I wasn’t the only one, as you can see in this post by Deb Gallardo @ The Story Ideas Virtuoso, “Creative Blog Writing -Speak From Your Heart, Don’t Vent Your Spleen.” Deb’s advice-
Diffusing my anger by blowing off steam in a serious discussion would have accomplished nothing except to brand me as a hothead who speaks first and thinks after the fact. Not the kind of thing you want carved on your tombstone, eh?
-is excellent. Her post talks about speaking from your heart, not just lashing out in anger. I wish I could remember to do that more often.
From an internet marketer point of view, I think the thing that troubles me the most about this income model is a point that Lynn Terry touches on @ Clicknews! in her blog post “ForcedContinuity, Responsible Marketing & Buyer Beware: Both Sides of The Accountability Fence.” As asubsciber to the list in question, I felt betrayed. The marketer has lost my trust. I’m nowfar less inclined to purchase from that marketer in the future, unless he regains my trust somehow. This marketer has damaged his reputation. From what I’ve read, he’s taking great strides to recover it, as he realizes, just like Lynn says, that
“No amount of money is worth alienating your buyers, and especially your loyal customers. Period.”
I’m not writing this marketer off, as he’s a recognized authority in his field. However, you can be sure that I’ll be doublechecking all of my invoices from now on (something I should be doing out of habit anyway), and especially anything coming from him.
Or, as Jeff Jones puts it,
“I’m not against online marketers making money by providing quality content to their customers. This is what makes our world go round. I just want to make sure the next time I go to purchase their product I don’t think twice because I don’t have the time to have my lawyer look over the sales letter.”
Be careful out there folks.
Popularity: 91% [?]


Psst!...Have you Heard the Buzz? 


5 Comments
Wulf,
This is one of those issues where I was greatly divided.
On one hand, I didn’t want to think that I was the only person who missed the forced offer. On the other, I was sorry so many people were in the same position as myself.
Thank you for taking the time to step back and look at the whole issue.
Best,
Jeff
Hi Jeff,
Thanks for your comment!
It was your explanation that gave me my lightbulb moment on the whole process.
I understand your division. I felt the same way.
However, I’m one of those people who believe that if an idea stands up to the light of truth, it’s a trustworthy idea. Or in other words, if the marketer sincerely didn’t intend to deceive, then people openly discussing it won’t harm him.
When I think of it that way, my divisiveness melts away.
Well put, Wulf…
Bravo!
I’m sure none of us that ended up will taking that offer without realizing it will ever be as trusting again of the same source.
What an expensive price to pay! All sorts of sales processes can be affected.
And the funny thing is that in this particular case he is probably now the marketer least likely to try that again.
Hi Carl,
Thanks for the comment!
Yeah, you’re right. One the one hand, it’s made us more vigilant, and that’s a good thing. On the other hand, someone had to get burned in order to show others how bad it could be. On the third hand, the next marketer who, with intent to deceive or not, attempts an income model like this, is going to get blown out of the water when we all remember THIS incident.
I sure don’t wanna be THAT guy.