velvet
Member
- Joined
- Feb 14, 2016
- Messages
- 52
- Points
- 0
Hi All,
I was involved in a discussion recently on another forum... (oh dear),
where a marketer basically suggested that a customer was being a little pesky by asking for access to an OTO, (one time offer), after they had left and come back.
Now I was appalled that the marketer was so abrupt in his answer, and was basically scoffing at the client for the indignation of actually asking.
The answer was No as it happens, but that is not the point.
And I do understand that sometimes people wish to restrict how many of a certain product come to market in fear of saturation, but really given there are so many billions online today I think that is a bit of a stretch.
I am more concerned about how one would speak to the customer.
I suggested that the answer would be a polite explanation of why the product was no longer available, at the very least, and maybe a suggestion of something else similar.
It seemed that the answer given was pretty direct!
I actually would probably never even offer an OTO as such myself, as I try to create products that are evergreen in any case, and available for as long as they are viable.
It is interesting though that the payment processor that I use to create sales funnels actually refers to any additional product in a funnel as an OTO.
A loosely used term I guess.
In fact if I had for some reason discontinued a product, I might have thanked the client for their interest and loyalty, and sent them a copy anyway. That's just me.
It is just a digital product after all! Just a bunch of bits on a hard drive!
I did mention too by the way, that I personally just bypass anything that suggests some pressure of scarcity. Anything that suggests loopholes or hacks are things I tend not to look at either.
The thread went on and on, and the views were mixed pretty much 50/50.
Some suggested the marketer was ok to strictly stand by his decision to restrict the OTO to particular rules, and vaguely suggested this was him having some kind of integrity for not changing his mind and sticking to his guns.
Others were offended that the marketer was training the client to do as he wanted, and were as shocked as I was that he would so easily send a client on their way.
Here are some questions for you...
What is your take on OTO's, or scarcity in general?
From a marketer's point of view.
From a consumer's point of view.
Do you like or loath them?
Are you upset when products are pulled after a short launch?
These are both really marketing ploys, and they work, but how do you feel as a customer towards these tactics?
Would you try to treat a customer with the respect I have suggested, or do you feel they should act as you want them to or else?
cheers, Mal.
I was involved in a discussion recently on another forum... (oh dear),
where a marketer basically suggested that a customer was being a little pesky by asking for access to an OTO, (one time offer), after they had left and come back.
Now I was appalled that the marketer was so abrupt in his answer, and was basically scoffing at the client for the indignation of actually asking.
The answer was No as it happens, but that is not the point.
And I do understand that sometimes people wish to restrict how many of a certain product come to market in fear of saturation, but really given there are so many billions online today I think that is a bit of a stretch.
I am more concerned about how one would speak to the customer.
I suggested that the answer would be a polite explanation of why the product was no longer available, at the very least, and maybe a suggestion of something else similar.
It seemed that the answer given was pretty direct!
I actually would probably never even offer an OTO as such myself, as I try to create products that are evergreen in any case, and available for as long as they are viable.
It is interesting though that the payment processor that I use to create sales funnels actually refers to any additional product in a funnel as an OTO.
A loosely used term I guess.
In fact if I had for some reason discontinued a product, I might have thanked the client for their interest and loyalty, and sent them a copy anyway. That's just me.
It is just a digital product after all! Just a bunch of bits on a hard drive!
I did mention too by the way, that I personally just bypass anything that suggests some pressure of scarcity. Anything that suggests loopholes or hacks are things I tend not to look at either.
The thread went on and on, and the views were mixed pretty much 50/50.
Some suggested the marketer was ok to strictly stand by his decision to restrict the OTO to particular rules, and vaguely suggested this was him having some kind of integrity for not changing his mind and sticking to his guns.
Others were offended that the marketer was training the client to do as he wanted, and were as shocked as I was that he would so easily send a client on their way.
Here are some questions for you...
What is your take on OTO's, or scarcity in general?
From a marketer's point of view.
From a consumer's point of view.
Do you like or loath them?
Are you upset when products are pulled after a short launch?
These are both really marketing ploys, and they work, but how do you feel as a customer towards these tactics?
Would you try to treat a customer with the respect I have suggested, or do you feel they should act as you want them to or else?
cheers, Mal.
Last edited:
