If you’ve ever wanted proof that the guys running boiler rooms are workers of iniquity, look no further than John Paul Raygoza of PushTraffic.

The short version:

• Raygoza and his thugs scammed people in desperate financial straits in amounts ranging from $4,200 to $58,000.

• They manipulated “marks” through false promises of financial gain, then denied refunds.

• They used deceptive means to capture credit card info, then charged credit cards without permission.

• They intentionally targeted and preyed upon the elderly and those with physical and learning disabilities.

It’s apparent that John Paul Raygoza was running a criminal enterprise. That’s why he got slapped with a class action lawsuit accusing his company of racketeering and RICO violations.

Fraud, false advertising, unfair competition, elder abuse, negligence… these are just a few of the items listed in the lawsuit.

“Defrauded, Lied to & Cruelly Manipulated”

Quoting from the lawsuit…

The plaintiffs are a diverse group living on four different continents united by several common factors:

(1) They all sought out a legitimate home based Internet business due to disability, retirement, unemployment or other good reasons;

(2) All were defrauded, lied to, cruelly manipulated, and deceived by defendants who promised massive returns on their investments;

(3) Not a single plaintiff earned a return on their money despite the services that may have been provided by defendants;

(4) Plaintiffs lost well over $600,000, almost all of which was financed by credit card;

(5) Plaintiffs were approached multiple times and resold on the same program often masquerading under various trade names controlled by the same group of defendants;

(6) Defendants utilized strong arm sales tactics and made unauthorized charges on credit cards;

(7) Defendants, even during the pendency of this lawsuit continue to contact plaintiffs in an attempt to sell the same bogus services yet again under yet another program name.

As mentioned above, Raygoza et al targeted people who were especially vulnerable:

Extravagant promises were made to plaintiffs by the Criminal Enterprise’s salesmen including Raygoza, Sipes, Molina, and Denton in order to gain access to their credit card and debit card accounts. Promises varied by individual but all of which falsely promised guaranteed returns on their investment. High pressure sales tactics were utilized and the elderly, ill and unsophisticated plaintiffs were targeted especially.”

A Full-On Money-Sucking Operation

This wasn’t just a boiler room… it was a full-on money-sucking operation designed to string victims along until they’d been sucked dry.

The operation was was quite successful (by monetary standards) for two or three years.

Naturally, Raygoza got drunk on his own “success,” so he decided to host a $4,997 workshop to reveal how he became a millionaire and how others could (allegedly) do the same. He recorded the seminar and sold the DVDs first for $497, then for $147.

Here’s the headline from that seminar/DVD sales letter:

A few sentences later, another equally awful headline/subhead appears:

This second one is actually really funny. I mean, “finally”… I’ve been waiting for months and months and months for Raygoza to break his vow of silence and show me how to make $3 million this year.

Last but not least, Raygoza makes a blatant attempt to convince you that he’s not a professional con man. (FYI: If somebody is working hard to convince you he’s not a con man, he almost certainly is.)

Read the copy above carefully. In case you didn’t notice…

Raygoza Is Actually Revealing His True Character!

He is basically telling you that he’s selling you a “get-rich-quick piece of shit” and that he’s a professional con man who’s out to suck you dry.

You know what they say, “Out of the mouths of con men come the most ridiculous blabberings.” Or something like that.

Anyway, Raygoza lost the lawsuit and, as Salty Droid reports, a $1 million default judgement has been entered against him.

But Raygoza’s bad behavior did not start (nor did it end) with his boiler room scamming.

A History of Criminal Behavior

Raygoza’s racketeering is not his only criminal experience. In fact, he has already been convicted of:

• Battery resulting in serious injury
• Drunk driving

Both of these convictions ought to be enough to cause any normal person pause. Drunk driving is a crime of stupidity, not necessarily malice. But battery resulting in serious injury? That doesn’t happen by accident.

But I guess Raygoza isn’t yet satisfied with the length of his rap sheet. He’s now been charged with the following (serious) crimes:

• Kidnapping with intent to ransom or extort
• False imprisonment
• Robbery
• Witness tampering
• Possession of a gun after being convicted of a felony and/or while addicted to a narcotic drug

I don’t know the story behind all these charges, otherwise I would share it here.

Now, here’s my point, which I’ve been a long time coming around to…

Internet Marketing Is a Cesspool!

You might be tempted to think Raygoza is the exception to the rule, but you’d be wrong.

Raygoza is the rule.

It took me a long time to see this because most of the “gurus” go to great lengths to make sure you never see what goes on behind the scenes.

Unfortunately, ignorance demands a steep price, especially in the Internet marketing space.

That’s why I’ve written this post as well as some others that detail the criminal and unethical activities that happen online.

Get educated. Be skeptical. Always do your due diligence.

It could save you from making some very expensive mistakes.

It might even save your life.

-Ryan M. Healy

P.S. Mike Filsaime heartily endorsed John Paul Raygoza back in December 2008.

In his email, he encouraged his subscribers to buy Raygoza’s “The Truth DVD Series.” Mike claimed, “[Raygoza] doesn’t leave any stones unturned in this DVD course.”

Ironically, the one stone he DID leave unturned was the stone called “truth.”Similar Posts:

• Boiler Room Scams: How They Work
• What Marketers Can Learn from Hitler
• Is LifeLock Selling a Lie?
• I See Dumb People!
• 7 Traits Scam Artists Have in Common

The Stop Online Piracy Act (SOPA) is dangerous to the Internet.

It is also dangerous to all online businesses and anybody who voices an opinion on the Internet. I’m guessing that includes you.

Here’s a good video that explains what SOPA is all about (hat tip to Salty Droid):

Tens of thousands of people have already spoken out against SOPA.

But now there is a new threat: the Protect IP Act (PIPA).

PIPA is as bad or worse than SOPA.

As I write this, both bills are on the table. Whether one passes or both pass, it will have far-reaching negative impacts on the Internet.

Here are two good editorials about PIPA. I recommend you read both.

• PIPA is the new SOPA

• My Call to Senator Schumer’s Office on PIPA: It’s So Much Worse Than I Thought

In the second article, Amanda Peyton describes what she discovered when she called Senator Schumer’s office (Charles Schumer is one of the co-sponsors of PIPA). She writes:

The first question I asked was “why does the Senator support this legislation?”

The guy on the other end of the phone said: “well, he’s a co-sponsor so he’s not changing his position.”

He must have known why I was calling.

Asked the same question again. This time the reply I got this time was different: “Senator Schumer is in favor of censoring the internet.”

This is the real issue. It is not about piracy. It is about censorship.

The stated reason for the bill is to stop piracy. This is because most people will be in favor of stopping piracy, so this is what is pitched to the public.

But the real reason for the bill is censorship… the ability to control what is said (or not said) on the Internet. Almost nobody in the U.S. will support censoring the Internet, which is why the real reason is kept secret.

I imagine some will find this duplicity surprising, but it’s “business as usual” in D.C.

Politicians do they same thing to drum up support for wars. They tell the public that Iraq has weapons of mass destruction; but what they really want is to preserve the status of the dollar as the world’s reserve currency.

Later the truth comes out that Iraq never had WMD. Of course, by then it is too late.

And so it goes.

If we don’t do our part to stop SOPA and PIPA now, the Internet will never be the same.

With that in mind, please share this post on Facebook and Twitter… and keep hounding your representatives. Thanks.

-Ryan M. HealySimilar Posts:

• Today We Tell Congress to Shove It
• Please Ignore Armand Morin
• Why You Should Never Claim You’re the Best
• 5 Business Predictions for 2012
• Is It Ever a Good Idea to Mix Politics and Marketing?

As I gear up to publish my 2012 business predictions, I thought I’d do a quick look-back on my 2011 predictions. How accurate were they anyway?

Here’s what I predicted for the year 2011:

1. Cloud Computing Goes Mainstream
2. Optimizing for Social Media (Rather than Search Engines)
3. Increased Focus on Reputation Management
4. More Video, More Mobile Advertising
5. Affiliates Will Get Smarter & Demand Accountability

First, I predicted that cloud computing would go mainstream. Based on what I’ve seen, I think this prediction was fairly accurate, although somewhat premature. The trend seems to be growing at a steady pace, but I’ve seen nothing that indicates widespread adoption or that we’ve crossed a tipping point.

Personally, I’m continuing to make my business as cloud-based as possible. I now use Google Docs extensively, back up my iPhone to iCloud, and use SugarSync for backing up my computers to a central cloud-based location.

My prediction about optimizing sites for social media was especially prescient. Google+ was introduced in June 2011. G+ data is now a major factor in search engine rankings, which are more fluid than they’ve ever been before.

Gone are the days of static rankings where everybody is served up similar results. What I see and what you see may be very different for the same search term.

Not only that, I hardly visit a site that doesn’t have Facebook “Like” and Twitter “Tweet” buttons automatically included on every page.

My third and fourth predictions — increased focus on reputation management; more video and more mobile advertising – seem to be mostly accurate, but hard to measure in any meaningful way. In the absence of hard data, I offer up an interesting anecdote…

On the reputation management front, a blogger named Crystal Cox was found guilty of defamation and fined $2.5 million in damages in November 2011. At first, everyone was livid about how this was a violation of freedom of speech, etc. But dig deeper and the judgment doesn’t seem so harsh.

Turns out one of Crystal Cox’s three self-given titles is “Search Engine Reputation Manager.” But get this…

She first put up multiple web sites designed to damage the reputation of one Kevin Padrick and his company Obsidian Finance Group. Once she had ranked her sites all over the first page of Google — and Padrick’s reputation had been sufficiently damaged — she then offered Padrick and his company her SEO reputation management for “only” $2,500 a month.

Can you say “extortion?”

Anyway, that’s one of the year’s biggest reputation management stories. You can read all about Crystal Cox’s shenanigans on Salty Droid if you’re so inclined.

My fifth and final prediction of the year 2011 was that affiliates would wise up and demand accountability from affiliate programs. This has not happened in spite of my efforts to publicize the issues.

Still, I continue to get emails from individuals who were not paid their commissions. And I’ve read many similar stories that are posted in public places online. While affiliates may not be catching on as quickly as I’d predicted, I plan to keep writing about these issues as they come up.

So there you have it.

Four of the predictions seem to have been accurate or mostly accurate. And one seems to have missed the mark. I’m going to try to go five for five in 2012. ;-)

-Ryan M. HealySimilar Posts:

• 5 Business Predictions for 2011
• The Fluidity of Google Search Results
• 4 Business Predictions for 2010
• 3 Fascinating Business Predictions that Made Me Think
• Affiliates Are Still Being Ripped Off

Well, of course, he is.

In case you don’t know, Salty Droid is a persona created by Jason Jones to expose some of the frauds and scams that are happening in the Internet marketing space.

I happen to agree with what he’s doing, which is why I’ve linked to his site and quoted him on this blog before. (Those posts, by the way, are some of the most popular posts I’ve ever published.)

The purpose of today’s post is to let you know about an interview Jason did with Aaron Wall, the owner of SEO Book. The interview is an hour long. You can read the transcript or listen to the MP3. (I personally chose to read the transcript.)

If you like Salty Droid, you’ll probably want to check out the interview. And if you don’t understand Salty Droid or why he uses satire to skewer gurus, then you’ll still probably want to check out the interview.

Here’s the link:

• Jason Jones Interview: Salty Droid Uncut

-Ryan M. HealySimilar Posts:

• Ken McCarthy More Dangerous Than Salty Droid?
• How to Work with Clients without Going Crazy
• Business Interviews Galore!
• A Little Direct Response Gold
• An Inside Peek at Product Creation

On October 13 of the year 2010, Jeff Walker published a blog post titled Injecting Poison into Your Brain. Given the timing of the post (just 9 days after Salty Droid published his most popular post ever, Syndicate Shit Storm), it was clearly an effort to marginalize and deflect the criticisms leveled by Salty Droid and his readers.

Originally, I wasn’t planning to address the post — even though I found it to be quite manipulative. But then I changed my mind when I saw a couple hundred uncritical comments and a few different blogs encouraging people to go read Jeff’s post. Therefore, I feel it necessary to bring some perspective to what I see as a mostly one-sided, unbalanced discussion.

Let’s get started:

Jeff’s “damage control” post begins by describing an ordinary continental breakfast in an ordinary hotel where families are watching the morning news. He writes:

On the “news” show they kept showing a “news story” about a robbery of a convenience store… and the story featured a video clip from a security camera — the video showed a thug holding a gun to the terrified clerk’s head while he screamed that he was going to pull the trigger.

It was a horrible video. It literally made me sick to my stomach.

Keep in mind, security camera footage is usually low-resolution; movements are jerky, details are hard to make out. Also keep in mind that your average security camera only records images — no sound at all.

So, let me ask you a question:

When was the last time you were walking through a hotel lobby, saw a grainy and soundless clip of a guy robbing a convenience store, and then “literally got sick to your stomach.” Methinks Jeff Walker has a very weak constitution… or he’s embellishing the story to manipulate you.

Poison In, Poison Out?

Jeff Walker writes, “If you put poison into your brain, you’re going to get a bunch of poison coming out of your brain.”

Of course, this is just a rehash of the old “garbage in, garbage out” theory. Works for computers, but not so much when we’re talking about the human brain.

Your brain is not a simple computer that unquestioningly runs whatever programs are fed into it. It’s a complex organ that can process, filter, and analyze information in nanoseconds. It also has the ability to identify and reject “garbage.”

Perfect example: I used to work in a snowboard shop. My co-workers cursed constantly. If Jeff’s theory is correct, I should’ve been cussing like a roofer within days. But I wasn’t. I worked there three years. Never adopted their language. Still haven’t adopted it to this day.

So poison in, poison out? It’s an overly simplistic theory, and a weak one at that.

For a more accurate view of how the brain operates, I prefer Brian Tracy’s observation: “You become what you think about most of the time.”

How you react to input has a much greater bearing on your life than the mere content of what you’re exposed to.

Cult Tactics 101

Jeff advocates drastic measures if friends or family don’t fully support what you’re doing:

Always protect your confidence. If people are tearing you down, then you need to avoid them. This can be tough if it’s your family, but you need to set boundaries. You need to create distance. And if your friends are tearing you down, it’s time to find some new friends.

I am mostly in agreement with the idea of limiting negativity in your life. I agree it’s good to focus on the positive, to see the good in bad situations. I also agree that you shouldn’t pay much attention to naysayers — the types of people who casually dismiss your efforts by saying “that’ll never work.”

But I wouldn’t go so far as to say you need to cut yourself off from friends and family. As Salty Droid points out on his blog:

And thus did Jeff Walker illustrate the chilling tendency of “Internet Marketing” “Gurus” to cross freely into the oh so murky water of cult tactics.

Cults — including some popular religions and network marketing organizations — will give you similar advice about “negative” friends and family members. They know that the fewer dissenting voices you have in your life, the more easily manipulated you will be. And the more easily manipulated you are, the greater access they will have to your mind — and your wallet.

My advice: Keep your friends and family close.

And if a friend, family member, or even an acquaintance says, “It won’t work because…” — and then offers a valid reason — it’s time to pay attention. As I shared in my story about how I lost $30,000 on a dumb business opportunity, it is sometimes to your advantage to heed the so-called “dream stealers.”

Sycophants Only, Please

Jeff seems to believe the secret to business success is surrounding yourself with sycophants. That way you get a positive one-sided view of everything you do. How convenient!

Personally, I believe it’s important to always examine both sides of any argument. If I hold a view of intelligent design… and my opponent holds a view of random mutation (evolution)… then I better have a thorough understanding of the arguments for/against evolution. In fact, it would be foolish to try to enter any kind of discussion if I don’t understand my opponent’s position.

But Jeff believes that by examining contrary opinions that you are somehow injecting poison into your brain.

Hmmm… I thought that was just being well-educated.

Only Idiots Don’t Buy from Jeff Walker

Of all the points Jeff makes in his blog post, this is the one that angers me the most:

If you’re getting attacked by critics (who usually have no experience or are abject failures), then the best answer is usually to ignore them. Don’t visit the places they hang out. It’s that simple. In general, the people listening to them are not your clients or prospects.

It’s almost like an intelligence test. The people who are stupid enough to listen to the bile and hatred are not intelligent enough to be your clients.

Read that last paragraph again… it’s important.

There are at least two things going on here:

1. Jeff is using an ad hominem attack to dismiss legitimate criticism. Instead of addressing the criticism directly, he calls it “bile” and “hatred.” There is nothing I dislike more than lazy ad hominem judo. Anybody can do that.

Customer: “Jeff, I’ve been a little bit concerned about what seems like blanket endorsements of all of your buddies and all your buddies’ products.”

Jeff: “You’re just a jealous hater! I feel sick to my stomach…”

2. Even worse, Jeff indirectly says that if you don’t buy from him, you’re stupid!

Or, said another way, if you’re going to approach a sales pitch with skepticism and actually examine both sides of the (sales) argument, you must be an idiot and therefore do not qualify to be Jeff’s customer.

All of which raises a question I’ve been pondering for a few weeks now: Since I bought the original Product Launch Formula course… and… the Product Launch Manager Training… and… I read opposing viewpoints in an effort to be well-educated… what does that make me?

(I’ve personally spent about $4,000 with Jeff. I also read Salty Droid’s blog as well as other blogs that aim to protect consumers. Am I an outlier or just one of many examples that shatters Jeff’s logic?)

Clearly, Jeff must have been confused when he wrote his blog post. It’s not only strangers and outsiders who are reading Salty Droid’s blog, many of them are Jeff’s own customers — real people… who’ve spent real money… with him!

The bottom line: Jeff’s “poison post” was really just disingenuous damage control and a backwards attempt at flattery to get you to buy more of his stuff. Did it work? Judge for yourself.

-Ryan M. Healy

P.S. Do you think Jeff will still feature me on ProductLaunchManager.com as he promised in his sales letter? After all, I did pay for it. (After nearly a year of waiting, the directory was finally made available to his customers in early November 2010.)

P.P.S. As I’ve said before, I like the product launch model and have run some product launches myself. They work. This post isn’t a criticism of product launches or Jeff as a person; it is a criticism of Jeff’s blog post.Similar Posts:

• Ken McCarthy More Dangerous Than Salty Droid?
• My Motive for Creating Controversy
• Traffic Patterns – What Influences Traffic
• Seth Godin, Ryan Healy & Jeff Bezos
• Is Salty Droid Even Human?

While reading comments on Salty Droid’s blog, I came across one of the most cogent, well-written, and helpful comments I’ve ever seen on his blog.

It was written by the user “Free Market Economics.” He said I could republish his comment, but that he preferred to stay anonymous. Here is his comment in full (keep in mind it was written in response to the comments of certain individuals on Salty’s blog):

It’s time to set some of the posters here straight.

“Free Market Economics” has been bandied about as a justification for what the Syndicate criminals are doing.

Allow me to school the Syndicate apologists on a few issues:

1. There is no free market economist alive who would say there should be no regulation of the markets. Even the most extreme recognize that one of the valid roles of the government is consumer protection. When a business sells a product that is fraudulent, defective, deceptive, or dangerous, it has the right, and need at times, to step in.

2. You say step away and let the market decide. We ARE the market. A market is a conversation. Further still, most of the posters on this board are people who have done business with these criminals and been burned.

3. The market correcting itself is a complicated process. If advertisers were 100% honest, the market would correct itself by lower sales. Lower sales is only part of the equation. The other part is market education and sometimes (only when necessary) government intervention. What is happening on this blog is in fact a MAJOR market correction (and a very justified one) happening right before your eyes.

If we expect consumers to just stop buying without education, you’ll wait forever. If you expect the government to step in and make things better, good luck.

We need to keep up this campaign of education of the market. And we need to alert the proper authorities.

I also think that there should be an effort to help the more honest businesses out there play the game correctly. I’m not in any way shape or form asking for peace with the syndicate. I think the evidence of their premeditated attacks on people in their moments of weakness are so well documented that they could never be trusted. People change, but people who are that calculating and insincere have more or less excused themselves from the big kids pool.

What I am saying is that while the Syndicate boys should (and almost certainly will) serve time, there are other Internet businesses that can be healed. We should make that part of our campaign.

Business is not evil. When evil people get into business it just becomes yet another vehicle for them to express their evil.

There are some excellent points in this comment:

• Consumer protection laws are essential even in a free market economy. This is why we have “lemon laws.”

• We are the market. As such, we have the right and responsibility to self-police the activities that happen within the market.

• We’ve witnessed a “bubble” in highly organized Syndicate product launches. We’re now witnessing the collapse of that bubble. This is a market correction, just like the market correction in stock prices, house prices, etc.

• Consumer behavior can’t change without education. In the absence of objective third-party publications (like Consumer Reports), certain bloggers have stepped into the vacuum.

• Business is amoral; it’s the people running the business that make it good or evil. More often than not, business is a “mixed bag” that incorporates both good and evil elements.

Do you agree? Disagree? Leave a comment and let me know your thoughts.

-Ryan M. HealySimilar Posts:

• Ken McCarthy More Dangerous Than Salty Droid?
• Why I Allow Only 14 Days for Comments
• Perpetual Students, Perpetual Debt
• The Guru-Sycophant Syndrome
• One Thousand Comments & Counting

The Salty Droid dropped a bombshell this week by publishing select portions of a private phone call between Andy Jenkins and Jeff Walker in which they say some things that are not especially flattering for their public image.

I guess it could be argued that “all PR is good PR,” but in this case I have my doubts. Here’s the recording, in case you’d like to hear it.

Andy Jenkins and Jeff Walker Riff About the
Video Boss Launch, Salty Droid and Ken McCarthy

In case you don’t have 7 minutes right now, or you’d rather not be exposed to the swearing, here are a few of the highlights:

Audio Highlight #1

• “The fact is, [Video Boss] is not a magic bullet, even though we’re going to position some of it that way.” -Andy Jenkins

My comment: Not a good idea to intentionally overhype your product or consciously deceive your customers. Even worse to admit to it on a recorded call.

Audio Highlight #2

• “I’m going to be relying on Syndicate to hit this thing really, really hard.” -Andy Jenkins

My comment: This call is from circa January 2010, so The Syndicate has been around at least since then.

Audio Highlight #3

• “The Droid I’m sure will go ballistic, but he’ll go ballistic no matter what you do. [...] He is like a little pimple on our butt. He has no reach, never will have any reach, will blow himself up. He’s non-existent. He’s less a threat to us than Mike Long was. Far less a threat to us than Ken McCarthy.” -Jeff Walker

My comment: Salty Droid has no reach? That was wishful thinking even in January 2010. (His current Alexa ranking is 18,303.) And is Ken McCarthy more dangerous than the Droid? Possibly. More on that in a minute.

Audio Highlight #4

• “Just think about this, like, with the Droid. He’s saying we’re evil because we’re charging a lot of money for our product. And that’s why we’re evil. Which is like the most ridiculous thing because it’s not like we’re like holding someone at gunpoint and saying ‘give us your money.’” -Jeff Walker

My comment: I don’t think Salty Droid’s crusade is based on charging high prices (although that may be part of it). I think it has far more to do with the anticompetitive behavior of The Syndicate, which is essentially an Internet marketing cartel — a “good ol’ boys club.”

Is Ken McCarthy More of a Threat Than Salty Droid?

During the call, Andy and Jeff mention Ken as an even greater threat than Salty Droid. This has prompted a lot of people to ask, “Who is Ken McCarthy? And what is his part in all this?”

In case you’ve never heard of Ken McCarthy before, he has been teaching Internet marketing since 1994, longer than just about anybody else online. He is also the creator of the System Seminar, an annual Internet marketing training event.

Many of today’s gurus got their first chance to speak on stage at the System Seminar. As Ken points out, “Some did good things with the opportunity. Some leveraged the exposure into criminal enterprises which I’ve had nothing to do with.”

It’s not always easy to judge a person’s character when you first meet them. Sometimes you may know a person for a few years and still not really know them. So as soon as Ken realized some of the shady things going on, he warned his subscribers. Here’s what Ken says in his own words:

1. I was one of the very first people to teach Internet marketing and thousands of people learned from me…

2. Including many of the people who became members of the Syndicate.

3. When I realized what they were up to I very publicly warned my students and customers to avoid them, thus earning the Syndicate’s undying enmity.

So why is Ken considered a threat? Probably because of his credibility and his reach. If he really wanted to, he could make life miserable for the Syndicate.

Even if he could, it’s probably not necessary. After all, for nearly two years now, the Salty Droid has been wearing the mantle of “Chief Internet Marketing Muckraker.” And since his most recent post…

The Gurus Are Now Distancing Themselves from… Themselves!

Regardless of whether or not Ken McCarthy is the bigger threat, Salty Droid’s most recent sleuthing seems to have caused the usual suspects quite a bit of consternation. In fact, at least two of them have now written blog posts trying to recast themselves as paragons of virtue.

• Mike Filsaime has published a post outlining his “best practices” that will now govern who he will (and will not) promote. (I find this post a little bit suspect since it seems to me that Mike has in the past repeatedly violated his own best practices.)

• Frank Kern has published a post challenging his subscribers to not buy any advice for a month. (According to one source, Frank then emailed his list to promote the Kajabi launch a few days later.)

Even Rich Schefren, who hasn’t promoted major launches the last couple years, felt compelled to send out an email to his list explaining why he no longer associates with the Syndicate.

But Here’s the Strangest Part…

Probably one of the weirdest parts of all this is that Mike Filsaime publicly said he would “address” Salty Droid and essentially set things straight. He stated this on his “best practices” post linked above. But then, for some strange reason, he had second thoughts and deleted all references to Salty Droid/Jason Jones.

For the record, here are two of the things Mike said publicly on his blog:

Jason Jones is a sad human being and I pitty him. And you for following him. I will deal with him soon. Jason Jones will finally hear from me. Now go run to his hate blog and warn him about me. I will expose him for the low life he his. Go now minion, go run to your powerful OZ. Jason Jones, you reading this. Get your costume on and make your post. It’s my turn. A sad human being will now be seen for what he is.

And in a separate place:

Minions of Jason Jones. I have spent the better part of the day talking to the 5% of you that are coming from his blog to try to spin this and trash me as you stated you would on his blog. We had good comments coming from people. All of a sudden a minion posted my blog on his blog and you are all coming here now to trash talk the same things you are saying there. As I said, this week I will address Jason and his hate confused followers.

Then, on the night of October 5, 2010, Mike revised his blog post and all mentions of Jason Jones mysteriously vanished into cyberspace. Even Google cache can’t find them (although they are still reproduced in the comments on Salty’s blog). Here’s what SD wrote:

The Gnome just deleted all his references to “Jason Jones” and turned off commenting. [...] I’ll still be expecting that big expose Gnome :: I wouldn’t want you to disappoint all your fans :: you rockstar you.

So is Mike’s rebuttal still on its way? Who knows. At the very least, it appears it will be delayed. (UPDATE: I stand corrected. Mike has responded, just not on his own blog. He has responded on Mike Young’s blog: 8 Things You Should Know About Mike Filsaime)

Anyway… What do you think? Is the Salty Droid a real threat to The Syndicate? Or, as Walker puts it, is the Droid simply a “little pimple on [their] butt”? Leave a comment to add your two cents.

-Ryan M. HealySimilar Posts:

• Is Salty Droid Even Human?
• How Free Market Economics Really Works
• Jeff Walker: Disingenuous Damage Control
• Why SOPA and PIPA Must Be Stopped
• Disinformation, Subterfuge, and Propaganda

As a list owner, I feel a certain responsibility to you, my dear reader. Therefore, it’s my goal to provide you with rich content mixed with occasional offers for products and services that may benefit you.

Obviously, if I endorse somebody else’s product or service as an affiliate, then that means I’ve either purchased the product myself (or at least gotten a review copy) and found it exceptional enough to endorse.

And, in fact, many of the products I endorse on my blog and via email are products I’ve purchased and continue to use to this day.

Now, what if I formed a mastermind group with my competitors and we all got together and decided that we would promote each other’s products every time, without fail, no matter what?

Don’t you think that would diminish the value of the endorsement?

Of course it would.

Why Endorsements Work

A genuine endorsement is the use of your reputation to build trust for a product, service, or person who might not have been trusted as quickly otherwise.

For instance, you don’t know Adam. But you’ve known Brian for many years and you’d trust him with your life. Brian says, “You’ve got to listen to Adam. He’s brilliant.”

Now Adam has risen in stature and importance because of Brian’s endorsement.

But if you discovered Adam was paying Brian for the endorsement, it wouldn’t mean as much. And if Brian had agreed to endorse Adam no matter what — even if he began doing unethical or illegal things — then that would REALLY be suspect.

Now let’s look at a real-world example…

Exposing the Syndicate

Let’s say twelve Internet marketing guys get together. They all agree to promote each other’s products no matter what.

Furthermore, they all agree to promote just one guy’s product each month during the next 12 months. They all promote Product #1 in Month #1, Product #2 in Month #2, and so forth. This way each guy has the full endorsement of the rest of the group during his particular promotion.

If I was a part of this group, that would mean I’d have to promote 11 products as an affiliate, one product per month, based on a predetermined schedule. In exchange, the other 11 guys would then promote MY product during one of the 12 months when it was my turn to be promoted.

The catch? I absolutely MUST promote all 11 products… without regard for the quality of the products or the integrity of the creators of those products. In other words, my endorsement is guaranteed and cannot be negotiated or revoked.

Sound a bit fishy?

That’s because it is.

Here’s the pattern that emerges as illustrated by Alexa traffic rankings (hat tip to Salty Droid for coming up with this idea)…

The Proper Role of a Teacher, Blogger, or Publisher

Part of the role of a teacher, blogger, or publisher is to provide information that helps your readers reach their goals while filtering out irrelevant offers and reducing the signal-to-noise ratio.

Obviously, if a teacher has agreed in advance to wholesale endorse and promote products that don’t even exist yet, then you can be sure he’s not doing a good job of fulfilling his role.

The truth is, there are many reasons to NOT promote another person’s product or service.

• Product/service not up to your standards.
• Product has not been created yet and cannot be evaluated.
• Reputation of product creator is questionable and/or dubious.
• And the biggest reason of all…
  The product/service is not a good fit for your list!

Remember: If you publish information or are responsible for providing guidance to a list of subscribers, then you need to always have their best interests in mind. You need to be thinking about how to best help them… and protect them.

But if you are part of an organized group of competitors who’ve pledged to promote each other, you simply can’t do what’s best for your readers.

What happens if I (as a member of the group) don’t feel like one of the products is worth promoting? Or what if one of the members of the group gets involved in some shady business dealings? What then?

The answer is… I can’t really do anything unless I want to risk losing my position in the group — and missing out on the windfall I’d receive from the promotion and endorsement of the group.

The Syndicate Is Real

It probably comes as no surprise to you that within the Internet marketing community, such a group exists. They call themselves “The Syndicate.” And industry insider Ray Edwards says they actively plot and scheme how to take your money.

There is a very real conspiracy to extract as much money from you as possible.

Right now, as I write this, there is a group of “gurus” sitting in a circle in some hotel suite.

Each one of them is talking about their own version of Method X, and how he plans to sell it to the masses.

And they are all agreeing to promote one another’s Method X.

…and that’s why you keep getting email after email from the same group of people promoting one another.

Kinda creepy, isn’t it?

But this is what happens behind closed doors.

Backlash from the Product Launch Machine

If you’ve been trying to make money on the Internet for any length of time, you’ve probably gotten sucked into the orchestrated promotional efforts of the product launch machine.

At first, it feels exciting to be a part of these virtual events. But it doesn’t take long for the launch buzz to begin to feel like a drain on your attention, your focus, and your wallet.

In some cases, this feeling leads to public outcry. For instance, after the StomperNet launch, Rick Butts advised his list to unsubscribe from anybody who promoted StomperNet.

And when Michel Fortin announced that he was unsubscribing from lists by the hundreds and purging his way to email freedom, there was a chorus of support and agreement.

Let me be clear: I’m not against selling, advertising, affiliate marketing, or even product launches. I think they are legitimate ways to sell under the right circumstances.

But I am against phony endorsements, disingenuous recommendations to buy, and syndicates designed to defraud.

-Ryan M. Healy

P.S. What’s your take on all this? Leave a comment and let me know.Similar Posts:

• Product Creation Work Group
• Ken McCarthy More Dangerous Than Salty Droid?
• Secrets of a Mega Launch
• So, Have They Actually Done Anything Wrong?
• A Simple Strategy for Creating and Launching More Products

It all started as a tweet:

Most gurus surround themselves w/ sycophants to build their egos. And most gurus don’t like me because I’m not a sycophant.

Actually, it started before that.

You see, yesterday (August 11, 2010) I was talking on the phone with a close friend. In a roundabout way, he discovered a certain guru does NOT like me… even though I’ve spent quite a bit of money on his products.

I don’t mind if a guru doesn’t like me. That suits me fine. But I wondered… Was it something I said? I’ve spent a lot of money with this guru and I don’t believe I’ve ever said anything negative about him in public.

That’s when it struck me.

Most of these gurus surround themselves with sycophants so they can perpetuate the belief that they’re little demi-gods. They remind me of King Nebuchadnezzar — a man who believed he had achieved his status through his own strength.

Twelve months later [Nebuchadnezzar] was walking on the roof of the royal palace of Babylon. The king reflected and said, “Is this not Babylon the great, which I myself have built as a royal residence by the might of my power and for the glory of my majesty?” (Daniel 4:29,30)

When a person becomes overly prideful and takes more credit for his success than he should, he’s in danger of divine correction. In the case of Nebuchadnezzar, his correction was one of the more extreme cases:

…and he was driven away from mankind and began eating grass like cattle, and his body was drenched with the dew of heaven until his hair had grown like eagles’ feathers and his nails like birds’ claws. (Daniel 4:33)

Anyway, one of the things that bugs me is how gurus like to take all the credit for their own success. They’re so full of themselves that if anybody says they’re less than all-powerful, you’re anathema.

Guru: What? You won’t bow down to me, the almighty GURU?

Me: No. But thanks for asking.

Guru: Depart from my presence!

Surrounding yourself with sycophants is a recipe for delusion. At first, you may have self-doubt. But that will be washed away by the slobber of your rabid fans faster than you can say “I’m awesome.”

The delusion will be powerful indeed.

A delusion of pride will make you do stupid things. For anybody who has read the Bible, this should come as no surprise. Proverbs 16:18,19 says:

Pride goes before destruction,
And a haughty spirit before stumbling.
It is better to be humble in spirit with the lowly
Than to divide the spoil with the proud.

Speaking of doing stupid things… and dividing spoils with the proud… have you read about The Internet Marketing Syndicate?

It’s a syndicate supported by sycophants. If you haven’t read about it yet, you should. (Be forewarned: There are swear words.)

-Ryan M. Healy

Listen to This Blog Post:

Similar Posts:

• Success Is a Patchwork Quilt
• Five on Friday, Issue #4
• Five on Friday, Issue #6
• Nothing Fails Like Success
• Jeff Walker: Disingenuous Damage Control

Late last week, on January 28th to be exact, four suspicious nominations were submitted to the recent post where I invited you to nominate your favorite Internet marketer.

After reading them, I suspected they were fake nominations. Here they are in the order they were received:

Comment #1

“TERRY KARLIN”

I would like to nominate Mike Filsaime.

His success speaks for itself. I’ve bought many of his programs through upsells.

Comment #2

“JOHN CARMICHAEL”

I am amazed that no has yet nominated the coolest IM guy ever: Frank Kern.

Frank is 100% down to earth, genuine, always over-delivers and completely devoted to customer service.

I love his videos and his laid-back attitude. His Mass Control 2.0 is awesome for any serious marketer. I was delighted to recently sign up for his monthly continuity program at only $297 per month. What a steal for such great material.

–John

For the record, “Terry Karlin” and “John Carmichael” both posted their nominations 7 minutes apart from IP address: 24.5.xx.47

But it gets better. Because then these two comments came in a few hours later:

Comment #3

“TERRY GOMEZ”

I would like to RYAN DIESS.

His Perpetual Launch model and software is sheer genius!

Through a clever piece of scripting you can make it look like you are giving a live webinar and hence capitalize on the “urgency” of a live event (cf. Jeff Walker’s Product Launch Formula) without the stress of actually delivering a live event. The software he provides completely automates the process and leads the viewers to believing whatever their active imaginations’ want. You can segment your list and mail to selected portions each week about the “event.”

His prior partnership with Perry Belcher, convicted felon, should not be held against Ryan.

Comment #4

“MARK PASSION”

My nomination for trusted, high integrity, high impact IM guy is Frank Kern.

Why? So many great products … and just view this super professional video on “The State of the Internet”: [link removed]

It’s rather long (about 30 minutes) but jam-packed with great information and just remarkable in what Frank says. It speaks volumes about his clear integrity and desire to make a difference for all of us in IM.

In a pattern nearly identical to the first two comments, “Terry Gomez” and “Mark Passion” both posted their nominations 12 minutes apart from IP address: 64.134.xxx.148

Digging a Little Deeper

It’s uncanny how similar the tone and even the words are in all of these nominations, isn’t it? Let’s examine some of the similarities.

First of all, there are the shared IP addresses. Both pairs of comments appeared on my blog the same day spaced a few hours apart.

Second of all, I find it humorous that while inventing four different people, our mystery commenter couldn’t even think of four different names. He had to use the name Terry twice: Terry Karlin and Terry Gomez.

What’s more, there’s “Kar-lin” and “Car-michael” used as last names in the first pair of comments. Obviously, the mystery commenter couldn’t use “Car-lin” and “Car-michael” — that’s too obvious. So a letter “K” was used in Terry’s last name.

Third, each of the four comments is completely anonymous. No gravatars. What appear to be fake email addresses used on all of them with the possible exception of Mark’s (he has come back to comment a few times).

Fourth: What’s most interesting of all is the similarity in word choice between John Carmichael and Mark Passion. Look at this:

“I am amazed that no has yet nominated the coolest IM guy ever: Frank Kern.” -John Carmichael

“My nomination for trusted, high integrity, high impact IM guy is Frank Kern.” -Mark Passion

Funny that both John and Mark like to use the acronym “IM” instead of spelling out Internet marketing. (Mark even uses the phrase a second time in the span of three paragraphs.)

Both John and Mark like to use a lot of superlatives. Their nominations are quite salesy and product focused.

In fact, Frank’s products are used as evidence of his character: “over-delivers,” “awesome,” “a steal,” “great material,” “great products,” “great information,” “remarkable.”

John and Mark really like the word “great,” don’t they? And is it just me, or do their comments sound more like thinly veiled sales pitches than genuine nominations?

Mark Passion’s Passion

Mark must not have liked how I flagged his comment along with the other three as being fake. He returned to my blog on Saturday night to try to defend himself. Here’s his comment verbatim.

Hi Ryan,

My entry to your excellent blog was NOT a fake!

Sorry to have to correct you, but my nomination of Frank Kern is quite legitimate. (As is that of my girlfriend for Ryan Deiss!). We wrote our nominations on the same laptop, right after each other given our joint visit to your blog. Is there something wrong with that?

I’m not sure what you hoped to achieve by publishing the IP address– Is that meant to somehow silence my voice and cancel my vote through some cloaked threat that you can hunt me down via a simple-minded IP lookup??

Please keep an open mind and please do allow everyone to link to Frank Kern’s simply remarkable “State of the Internet Address” at [link removed]

If you have some real evidence or verified data that Frank Kern should NOT be nominated, then by all means please post it publicly so that we can all see it and make up our own minds. Your censorship of the link smacks of totalitarianism. Let’s keep the web open for everyone to decide for themselves.

I’m sorry if my nomination offended you but I did follow your guidelines.

Thanks!

Mark

In addition to this response, Mark used his anonymous twitter profile (“TraderPassion”) to tweet my post.

But of course he twisted the truth to make it look as if I had christened myself “sheriff” to clean up Internet marketing. He also claimed I was preventing Frank Kern, Mike Filsaime, and Ryan Deiss from being nominated. See for yourself (click to enlarge):

None of Mark’s claims are true.

I have not anointed myself sheriff. I’m not trying to clean up Internet marketing. And I’m not preventing legitimate nominations.

I am trying to prevent fake nominations. Big difference.

In my opinion (and I could be wrong), all four of the nominations I’ve listed above are fake. And I’m not afraid to say it.

The Holes in Mark Passion’s Defense

In Mark’s defense of himself, he claims that he and his girlfriend were using the same laptop to read my blog, and that’s why the two comments came from the same IP address.

I don’t buy it.

Most females I know would not nominate a guy for his “sheer genius” and then immediately deliver a blatant sales pitch for “a clever piece of scripting” designed to fool would-be customers.

(Ladies? Can I get an amen?)

And what normal person comes out of nowhere saying, “His prior partnership with Perry Belcher, convicted felon, should not be held against Ryan.”

I also find it unusual for Mark Passion to be so passionate about promoting Frank Kern. This goes beyond a nomination. Twice he has attempted to link to Frank’s blog — the second time with the admonishment to “keep an open mind” and “please do allow everyone to link to” Frank’s blog.

Huh??

This is not the behavior of a normal person nominating someone.

Then there’s the issue of Mark’s Twitter account, TraderPassion. (Update: As of 2/2/2010, this Twitter profile has now been deleted.) Notice how Mark tries to spin the story to make the gurus look good and make me look bad.

Based on what I know about Frank’s products, it appears to me the person behind this is trying to turn this into a story about how Frank Kern, Mike Filsaime, and Ryan Deiss are really the good guys who’ve been unjustly attacked.

Frank did the same thing when he got busted by the FTC. He took the story and turned it into a selling point.

Last but not least, there’s Mark’s parting comment: “I’m sorry if my nomination offended you but I did follow your guidelines.”

Oh, yeah. That’s right. I didn’t say, “No fake comments.” So like any normal person, Mark thought it would be totally okay to pose as multiple fake customers and plug his favorite gurus’ products.

Disinformation, Subterfuge, and Propaganda

One of the problems with the Internet is the ease with which you can pretend to be someone you’re not. The temptation to be anonymous is too tempting a power for some.

If you’ve read the comments on Salty Droid, you’ll often see a dissenting voice appear. More often than not, it’s a guru engaging in some kind of subterfuge.

Back when people were finally becoming disillusioned with James Brausch (a.k.a. “Diego Norte”), James himself lead a campaign of disinformation on Crunch Gear to confuse people and make it look like he was really a good guy.

He even took the fight to a different web site and made false accusations against the author of the original post, John Biggs. Biggs then had to run a follow-up post to defend himself. The comments got so crazy on the second post that he was forced to close them. He wrote:

I’m closing comments because whatever Ponzi scheme these guys are running it’s clear they’re crazy as all get out.

Fortunately, there’s no army of interns leaving fake comments on this blog. At least not yet.

So far, it appears that the fake comments are coming from either Frank Kern, Mike Filsaime, Ryan Deiss, or one of their buddies.

Either way, it’s kind of sad that in the absence of legitimate nominations they’ve resorted to fabricating nominations so they’ll get on the list of ethical Internet marketing teachers.

Which, in case you hadn’t noticed, is a good way of making sure you’re not included on the list.

-Ryan M. Healy

P.S. Mark Passion tried to make the argument that censoring his comment “smacked of totalitarianism.” Let me point out that propaganda is a technique much favored by totalitarians. Hitler, Stalin, and Mao Tse-tung come to mind.

So when you think about it, my censorship of Mark’s propaganda is fighting fire with fire. A totalitarian technique requires a totalitarian response.

P.P.S. Contrary to the recent propaganda, legitimate comments are welcome. Post one below.
Similar Posts:

• Adsense Blogging Makeover – Complimentary Interview
• Mark Shurtleff: A Case Study in Political Corruption
• To Those I’m Thankful For
• Why I Allow Only 14 Days for Comments
• Five on Friday, Issue #7: The Twitter Edition