|
| full disclosure: i`m not a premium subscriber, occasionally watch his free stuff (i have a paid service elsewhere). i heard he lamented on some farmers more interested in gov`t money than marketing, here`s the link:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gddSB7MHeZ4
so in his premium content he advertised accountant paul nieffer giving details on the ecap money, supposedly a slough of people subscribed and then canceled after hearing the ecap details and even told him as much when they canceled. joe concluded they are more interested in free money than his marketing. so here`s the thing, he dangled paul nieffer out there to get subscribers, if he truly is laze focused on marketing, why even bother with a episode on the ecap money? isn`t it like hooters advertising scantly clad waitresses but once you come in, there`s a sign " we will discontinue scantily clad waitresses next week" then next week comes and there`s much less customers ..well "shazam! maybe they weren`t just here for the buffalo wings!" without scantily clad waitresses all hooters is, is applebees!
i think farmers were just curious about what money was in the works and that was just separate from their market interests, it wasn`t anything personal. there was so much free information about the ecap money that i wouldn`t go through the hassel of signing up to hear if the payment is $42 or $43 an acre, it`s not that big a deal. i heard 9 months before the payment came for free jim wiesmier talked about it being about $100/acre then it got pared down to about $40 the last couple moths, it was close enough to all the free information out there. no, farmers are still interested in marketing, but there`s so much free content out there that we`re over loaded with and you can get information overload too which is worse than not enough and these analysts need to understand that. | |
|
joe vaklavik
