
Selling $2,000+ Worth Of My Unfinished Book - bdunn
http://planscope.io/blog/selling-2000-worth-of-my-unfinished-book/
======
thibaut_barrere
"Money – cold, hard cash – on the other hand. That’s the ultimate form of
validation."

This is priceless especially considering how much effort goes into writing a
book or creating a SaaS product.

~~~
manmal
How do you actually contact people to ask for this? Emailing people? Or making
a signup page and see who clicks on the (faux) "buy" button?

~~~
thibaut_barrere
For my coming SaaS product (<https://www.wisecashhq.com>), I created a signup
page back in september 2011, then tweeted regularly when I worked on it and
mentioned it around (shipping end of september 2012).

It gradually got around 200 "pre-signups", and I used the list to contact
people as well and verify my assumptions.

I will write a blog post about that soon!

~~~
manmal
That's what we have done either (but with an Adwords campaign, to see how much
traffic there is to be had from Google), but I think that's no commitment to
cash, just "I'm interested". I once read here on HN that bootstrappers should
actually ask people whether they would pay X$ for that - but now being in this
situation, I wonder how to actually do that, knowing none of the future
audience in person.

~~~
ky3
> knowing none of the future audience in person

I'd seriously think about that 30x500 course if I were you. (Thibault is
alum.)

The biggest chunk of the course is devoted to making sure there's a
"commitment to cash" BEFORE spending a dime. And that includes $$$ adwords.

~~~
manmal
For our product, we know that there is commitment to cash for this category of
products, because there are other products in that area which do well as far
as we know. What we don't know is whether people pay $X for exactly our
product. We have pondered a lot over the free 30x500 course materials, but
haven't got around to join the course. We did not spend much on Adwords (<
$100) and we did already gather some addresses. But it's hard to estimate the
actual conversion rate without asking people to really pay money for it, and
without screenshots and the like.

So, yes, we thought we could validate the idea with an Ad campaign, but we did
not do it right, I think. We did not measure anything significant at all, and
what we did is gather an "I'm interested" list. You are right that perhaps the
best ways to validate a product is to ask real people - like asking quite
bluntly "Would you pay $30 per month for this product, with this certain
USP?", or even "Would you pay me $100 upfront to build this product?". That
takes a lot more guts than just setting up a landing page and an adwords
campaign, but I see that we should do it.

~~~
ky3
_You are right that perhaps the best ways to validate a product is to ask real
people - like asking quite bluntly "Would you pay $30 per month for this
product, with this certain USP?", or even "Would you pay me $100 upfront to
build this product?"._

That's not what I said. Ensuring commitment the way you mentioned doesn't
quite work because of divergence between what people say and what people do.
The latter is by far the more reliable, agreed?

The 30x500 course teaches advanced 360-degree market study where you learn
what people actually do and what they so badly wished they were doing instead.
(So yes, you'll learn how to read between the lines, among other things.) The
results of that market study forms the most robust foundation to building a
value offering that has buy-in baked-in.

p.s. The above is why you'd never hear about the need to "validate a product
[idea]" among 3x5ers. The assumptions behind that expression are just wrong to
begin with.

------
rglover
I've really enjoyed the build up to the book. I haven't pre-ordered yet
(mainly because I wanted to see how serious the author was), but Brendan has
been on top of his game. I've received maybe 2-3 emails, each containing great
little bits of information sharing info that (I imagine) will be further
articulated in the book. The best part: it's hyper-relevant. I'm coming up
with strategies for my design business and Brendan's insight has already
influenced some early direction.

Give this dude your money (I'm about to), he's doing it right.

~~~
bdunn
Thank you, sir! Looking forward to hearing your review - and most importantly,
how effective it was helping raise your rates for all the right reasons.

------
Sodaware
The lesson here: The best way to sell stuff is by selling stuff.

Look at what's involved:

* Guest posts / articles to become known as an expert

* Emailing a list of interested parties

* AdWords, preferably in a campaign that can scale

* Twitter and other social media

Learning to write good copy, or finding someone to do it for you, will have an
impact on your business. I still get a trickle of traffic (that converts well)
from an article I wrote over 6 years ago. I'd much rather spend time adding
"one more feature", but a few hours spent writing quality content will have a
much larger impact on the bottom line.

------
beaker
The copy on this article and the book page itself feels so spammy that I would
never buy the product. I respect the desire/need to make money, but I do think
a certain percentage of your potential audience will be turned off immediately
by the excessive use of this type of obvious marketing-speak (excessive use of
bold fonts, short, pointed sentences, all the vague truisms, "money back
guarantee"..). I hope this doesn't become the standard type of post on Hacker
News, I'm sorry but after clicking on that link it really feels like I've just
been spammed.

~~~
bdunn
Thanks for the comment, and I _used_ to agree with just about everything you
said.

However, there's nothing at all wrong with "marketing-speak". It's based on
psychology: people skim, bolding is used to emphasize importance, and money
back guarantees - well, they're exactly what they mean.

For most things, I personally prefer easily digestible content over blocks and
blocks of text.

~~~
shredfvz
So instead of arguing ... what % of HNers are actually clicking through to
your "no bullshit" offer?

Very few articles on the front page of HN are littered with testimonials and
sales copy.

~~~
bdunn
I've made just under $1,000 in sales today from HN. 1 in 7 people who have
clicked through to the article go to the sales page.

EDIT: I'm sure a few people people are skeptical. Here's a screenshot from
ejunkie (and I just crossed over the $1k mark):
[https://dl.dropbox.com/u/2205912/Screen%20Shot%202012-08-23%...](https://dl.dropbox.com/u/2205912/Screen%20Shot%202012-08-23%20at%204.20.01%20PM.png)

~~~
shredfvz
So you've made around 3 sales per hour since you've submitted it.

Assuming 3 sales/hr directly from HN, that is encouraging.

I don't know how anyone can verify 3 sales/hr from HN only from that
screenshot, however. Sorry my thirst is unquenched, it's just this whole deal
reminds me of ClickBank sales where fudging screenshots and hyping and
bullshitting others is fairly commonplace.

I would believe 1 in 7 __overall users __click through, but I'm still curious
who is doing it because I am a jaded, jaded marketer.

~~~
bdunn
You'll just need to take my word on it - I'm not going to post ejunkie/PayPal
creds :-)

Total uniques for the main article: 7,772 Total uniques for the sales page:
1,238 A 2% conversion rate (26 sales) isn't that far fetched. It was
converting higher with the pre-HN traffic (about 6% on average).

------
alanmackenzie
I would quite happily preorder a copy of your book but there's not enough
information to feel comfortable about parting with $39.

Is this an ebook or in dead tree format? Do you ship internationally?

~~~
bdunn
It's an ebook with worksheets and additional case studies / interviews from
freelancers who charge a lot (most notably: Amy Hoy and Thomas Fuchs).

Take a screenshot of this comment as witness, but I'm serious about refunding
_anyone_ who ends up not being able to raise their client rates. Paying for
stuff that doesn't deliver value is dumb.

~~~
lutusp
> Take a screenshot of this comment as witness, but I'm serious about
> refunding anyone who ends up not being able to raise their client rates.

Some advice -- you really, really don't want to do this. You don't need to
guarantee results to sell a worthwhile book, and IMHO you shouldn't.

Here's why:

1\. Let's say you have a profit margin of 20% on your book overall -- printing
costs, promotion, etc. versus income.

2\. Let's also say that 80% of your book's readers do increase their client
base as you claim.

3\. The problem is that the remaining 20% can take you at your word, demand a
refund, explain that the book was lost in a fire, and succeed in wiping out
your profit.

4\. Worse, someone might say your claim moved your book from the category of
an ordinary caveat-emptor purchase, to a guarantee of success, and demand
consequential damages. Very bad, and you made it possible.

It works like this: Because of the First Amendment, an author can say
virtually anything in a book -- anything. But when you make a claim about a
book's contents to motivate sales, you short-circuit First Amendment
protections -- you turn your book from a freely expressed opinion, to a method
with a guaranteed outcome. Very bad idea.

> Paying for stuff that doesn't deliver value is dumb.

Not as dumb as making an unnecessary claim that has a potentially disastrous
outcome.

Just my opinion, expressed in words, with no guarantees.

~~~
patio11
You believe something about people's behavior which is a testable proposition
about the nature of material reality, like "If you push an apple off a table
it will accelerate to the nearest cat." The scientific method exists. Have no
worries, your apples and profits are both safe, because both those theories
are _absolutely false_.

~~~
lutusp
Interesting that you would mention the scientific method, then offer no
evidence for your theory.

I said what I did because I have seen it happen countless times in a long
career that has included a lot of writing. I have the evidence. When someone
makes a performance claim about the contents of a book, the book then becomes
nearly irrelevant to the outcome, which hinges on the claim.

~~~
patio11
Money-back guarantees virtually invariably raise sales in A/B tests. I have
_never_ seen one decreases sales in a statistically significant fashion. I
have never seen a guarantee meaningfully increase refund rates. (No customer
of mine has refund rates worth mentioning. I will literally mail paper checks
to people who bought my software five years ago and my refund rate is below
~2%.) If you have data to the contrary, I bow to the data.

As it happens, I have a product launch coming up. I will offer a money back
guarantee, and I will do it in an A/B test. If I am wrong, and the guarantee
statistically significantly decreases sales, I will a) have a cow and b)
donate a cow to charity. If I am right, you don't have to do anything, because
being consistently right at this sort of prediction makes propositional bets
with authors a distinctly inferior way to increase one's income versus just
being consistently right at this sort of thing.

~~~
lutusp
> Money-back guarantees virtually invariably raise sales in A/B tests.

The original poster didn't make a money-back guarantee, as in "If you aren't
happy with my book, I will refund." Instead he made a claim about increasing
the number of clients, i.e. a performance claim ("I'm serious about refunding
anyone who ends up not being able to raise their client rates."). Here's the
law on that issue:

URL:
[http://nationalparalegal.edu/conlawcrimproc_public/FreedomOf...](http://nationalparalegal.edu/conlawcrimproc_public/FreedomOfExpression/LimitationsOfExpression.asp)

Quote: "Commercial speech holds a special place in First Amendment analysis.
It is not an unprotected category of speech, nor is it afforded the same level
of protection as non-commercial speech. In addition, there are sub-categories
within commercial speech. Truthful commercial speech is afforded protection
while false or deceptive commercial speech is not protected."

Here is another account that makes the same point:

URL:
[http://www.wisbar.org/AM/Template.cfm?Section=News&Templ...](http://www.wisbar.org/AM/Template.cfm?Section=News&Template=/CM/ContentDisplay.cfm&ContentID=107215)

Quote: "In 2004, the Federal Trade Commission (FTC) banned Kevin Trudeau from
appearing in any infomercial promoting any product except publications, which
are protected by the First Amendment, provided he did not misrepresent the
content of the publication."

What these rulings mean is that _the contents of a book are protected by the
First Amendment, but promotional claims about the book are not._

~~~
jleader
You keep talking about "commercial speech" being different from "non-
commercial speech", as if that explains your claim that "If you aren't happy
with my book, I will refund." (claim A) is a safe thing to say, but "I'm
serious about refunding anyone who ends up not being able to raise their
client rates." (claim B) isn't.

But both claim A and claim B look like commercial speech to me!

Both are promises to provide refunds under certain specified conditions. One,
claim A, offers refunds under the broad and hard to dis-prove condition of
"aren't happy with the book", while claim B offers refunds under a somewhat
narrower and slightly easier to verify condition of "not able to raise rates".
How is claim B more dangerous than claim A?

And comparing commercial speech vs. the contents of a book is irrelevant,
since neither claim A nor claim B is contained within a book.

~~~
lutusp
> But both claim A and claim B look like commercial speech to me!

One of them offer a refund without making any kind of claim, the other makes a
claim about the contents of the book and about what outcome purchasers have a
right to expect. They are treated differently under the law.

But I can see you are simply not going to get this, no matter how many cases I
quote for you, how many legal decisions.

> How is claim B more dangerous than claim A?

One of the statements offer a refund without making any kind of claim about
the book's effect. The other makes a claim about the book's effect.

Imagine you are a doctor, offering a miracle cure that is in the pages of a
book. To one group you say, "If you're not happy with my book, I will give you
your money back."

To the other you say, "My book provides a cure for cancer. If your cancer
isn't cured, I will give you your money back."

The first pitch is protected under the First Amendment because it doesn't
describe the book's contents or effect, _and therefore it doesn't matter what
the book says_. The second doesn't have First Amendment protection, because
it's commercial speech that makes a claim about the contents of the book. In
the second case, the author makes the mistake of making a claim about the book
and its contents in his promotion, outside the protection of the First
Amendment.

How is that in any way complicated?

URL:

[http://articles.businessinsider.com/2011-12-16/news/30523850...](http://articles.businessinsider.com/2011-12-16/news/30523850_1_infomercial-
coral-calcium-ftc-order)

Quote: "Trudeau insisted his First Amendment rights were being infringed, and
began advertising books rather than diet supplements in new infomercials ...
[but] the new ruling requires Trudeau to give back all the money he made from
selling books during the infomercial ban."

The reason Trudeau lost his case, even though he was selling books, is because
he didn't just sell the books, he described what the reader should expect from
them in his pitches. It was on this basis that the court ruled against him.

------
danso
Great post...it also introduced me to this book, Exceptional Ruby:
<http://exceptionalruby.com/> Buying it right now.

~~~
xyzzyb
Exceptional Ruby is indeed fantastic. If you like it, you may be interested in
Avdi's current book project "Confident Ruby":
<http://devblog.avdi.org/2012/06/05/confident-ruby-beta/>

------
manmal
I am one of those 57 buyers.. I stumbled across the book after having seen the
link in another article that was on HN. HN is the right audience for this book
indeed :)

~~~
bdunn
Thanks! Looking forward to your review.

------
brackin
Impressive stuff, although the book promotion page looks slightly off. Reminds
me of those 'free make money' ebook pop-up's I got in 2005.

~~~
bdunn
I'll followup with a post on why I used the sales letter format to sell the
book, but I can tell you this: it converts 3x better than the alternatives I
tried.

~~~
sdoering
We had a similar situation with an inhouse-ad on our site. The polished
version performed ok, but just for the fun of testing, we switched to a rough
screenshot image. It performed more than five times as good.

Just because one doesn't like it, doesn't mean it won't work. My learning was:
Always, test everything.

~~~
mootothemax
_Just because one doesn't like it, doesn't mean it won't work. My learning
was: Always, test everything._

This is a point that every single commenter on HN needs to be aware of. There
are far too many people who seem to think that just because _they_ don't like
something, it can't work, won't work, should be priced lower...

~~~
thibaut_barrere
Even further: asking people if they like the page would result in different
results compared to testing if they end up paying for the advertised product.

------
lutusp
I hate to sound old-fashioned, but this puts the cart before the horse.
Authors should have a book available for sale before accepting delivery
payments. Ask any publisher how this sort of thing usually works out.

~~~
dchurchv
Not sure I follow this. Pre-ordering books is a pretty well established
practice among publishers (yes, real ones, not just ebook authors).

Actually, it's the primary hack for getting on best-seller lists (pre-orders,
then fulfillment in strategic batches designed to show consistent sales over
time).

Or is this a more basic "No one should sell anything that doesn't already
exist" argument?

If so, I'd point out concert tickets (usually 6 months advance sale),
seminars, conferences, and most other large undertakings that need some sort
of validated audience numbers as counter-evidence.

Why not all products, as long as there's no attempt to deceive, and the
purchaser is clear that the product is not ready yet?

~~~
lutusp
> Not sure I follow this. Pre-ordering books is a pretty well established
> practice among publishers ...

The difference is the person pre-ordering can back out, and generally speaking
in pre-orders, no payment is made until delivery. It ends up being a measure
of public enthusiasm, not a way to gather revenues in advance of delivery. In
this case, people are paying for a book that doesn't exist yet.

> Actually, it's the primary hack for getting on best-seller lists

Yes, true, but see the pre-order discussion above -- generally, no money
changes hands until the book is actually available.

Also, I have to add, the ultimate best-seller-list hack is to buy copies of
your own book and put the copies back into the pipeline, endlessly, as the
Scientologists are said to do.

> Or is this a more basic "No one should sell anything that doesn't already
> exist" argument?

But that's true in general -- in the worst cases, where delivery doesn't
happen, the seller can be charged with fraud. I hasten to add I am not
comparing this hypothetical (but all too common) outcome with the book under
discussion, which for all I know is perfectly worthwhile.

~~~
dchurchv
Ok, but you didn't address my point about concert tickets et al. Obviously you
pay in advance of seeing the concert, or attending the conference, and
sometimes these things get canceled.

It's reasonable to expect money back, or worst case some sort of "raincheck"
in case of a cancelation or delay. Same applies to ebooks in my mind.

"Public enthusiasm" doesn't pay the deposit for a concert hall or conference
center, right? Why should an author not get paid in advance of the effort of
writing a book? [Hint: authors already figured this out a couple of centuries
ago - thus the publishers' advance]

So it's not really a question of money changing hands, it's just whose money,
and whose hands.

~~~
lutusp
> Ok, but you didn't address my point about concert tickets et al.

Fair enough. A concert doesn't work like a book -- the concert venue must know
who is coming, in what numbers, in order to prepare. A traditional book
publisher only needs to know enough to decide on the size of the next
"printing", to fill the supply channel incrementally, as demand warrants.

The concert happens all at once, so the audience size must be known up front.
The book publication might stretch over decades, with periodic decisions about
the size of the next printing, so the publisher only needs to know the rate of
change in demand, the "first derivative," to use the calculus term.

Two very different cases, from very different, non-comparable businesses.

~~~
dchurchv
Yes, of course, I'm not making an argument that concerts and books are _the
same_ business. That would be dumb.

I'm saying rather, there's no obvious reason to not get paid for them the same
way, as long as the audience is willing. If they're not willing, that
obviously won't work. But clearly in some cases (like the OPs), they are
willing.

So as an author, you'd have to be irrational to not want to be paid as early
as possible.

As a purchaser, you're free to vote with your wallet, and not pre-buy anything
you don't want to. But if you want what the author is proposing, and want to
give him encouragement by pre-buying, why is that somehow bad or wrong?

And my fuzzy calculus aside, the first printing for most books will also be
the last one. So better to get the volume right. If only there were a way to
accurately gauge demand before doing a printing...

~~~
lutusp
> And my fuzzy calculus aside, the first printing for most books will also be
> the last one.

This is not the norm in publishing, at least, the desirable kind. For most
publishers who promote and market books, profits don't start until the first
printing has sold out and subsequent printings begin, with (a) all book
preparation activities already complete, and (b) a public who don't need to be
persuaded of a book's value. It is at this point that an author begins to be
looked on as more than a one-trick pony.

Imagine a pre-publication advertisement: "A truly epic myth! Floods, plagues,
the anguish of being unimaginably stupid! Certain to be a best-seller if the
author ever gets done writing it! Pre-order the Bible now -- get in before the
rush!"

:)

> If only there were a way to accurately gauge demand before doing a
> printing...

In modern publishing, there's no need -- books are printed, one copy at a
time, when they are ordered. For example, my book only gets printed after
someone buys a copy. This change (electronic on-demand publishing) essentially
wipes out the traditional publishing model.

~~~
ahoyhere
"This is not the norm in publishing, at least, the desirable kind."

Ah, it's good you said that. I always thought publishers like O'Reilly and
Pragmatic Programmers were totally _undesirable._ Now I can point out why.

"In modern publishing, there's no need -- books are printed, one copy at a
time, when they are ordered."

Cite?

~~~
lutusp
>> "In modern publishing, there's no need -- books are printed, one copy at a
time, when they are ordered."

> Cite?

<http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Print_on_demand>

~~~
ahoyhere
I think we all know what Print on Demand is, but that Wikipedia page doesn't
list any proof for your assertion that it is "the coming thing." The only
publishers it lists as offering POD are specialty POD publishers.

That's hardly the sweeping industry change you described.

~~~
lutusp
Your objection is that there is little evidence in the present for an
assertion about the future -- the "coming thing". Knock yourself out.

~~~
ahoyhere
You state things in the present tense:

"In modern publishing, there's no need -- books are printed, one copy at a
time, when they are ordered… This change (electronic on-demand publishing)
essentially wipes out the traditional publishing model."

This implies that this is the way things are, now, or will be in the very near
future, for the majority. And there's no proof that "in modern publishing,
books are printed, one copy at a time."

~~~
lutusp
> This implies that this is the way things are, now, or will be in the very
> near future, for the majority.

And? It's a reasonable prediction based on current trends, and see below for
more evidence.

> And there's no proof that "in modern publishing, books are printed, one copy
> at a time."

What? That's true -- it is how "modern publishing" is distinguished from old-
style publishing. This is not to say that the majority of books are published
that way, but then I never made that claim.

In modern publishing, books are "printed" one copy at a time, when they are
ordered. How is that remotely controversial? It covers on-demand publishing as
well as e-books:

<http://www.3dissue.com/ebook-market-share/>

Quote: "Whilst the market has seen significant growth since 2008, the last 12
months in particular has shown a substantial rise. Between January 2011 to
January 2012, sales in adult eBooks grew by 49.4%, while sales in children and
young adult eBooks grew by 475.1%, according to the AAP. The good news for
digital publishers is this trend is expected to continue."

~~~
ahoyhere
Who other than you considers ebooks "printed"?

~~~
lutusp
Who other than you doesn't?

E-Book: <http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/E-book>

Quote: "An electronic book (variously, e-book, ebook, digital book, or even
e-editions) is a _book-length publication in digital form_ , consisting of
text, images, or both, and produced on, _published through, and readable on
computers or other electronic devices_.[1] Sometimes the equivalent of a
conventional printed book, e-books can also be born digital. The Oxford
Dictionary of English defines the e-book as _"an electronic version of a
printed book"_ ...

<http://speakingvolumes.us/about-our-ebooks.asp>

Quote "Sometimes the equivalent of a conventional printed book, eBooks can
also be born digital ..."

No need to repeat ... hundreds of other sites make this meaning clear.

------
kayoone
This post is great marketing for mentioned unfinished book. The HN frontpage
is probably the perfect target audience, well put!

~~~
bdunn
But by far the lowest converting traffic source :-) Thanks!

~~~
thibaut_barrere
It's definitely a low converting traffic source, but then it brings an
interesting coverage/publicity, tends to generate retweets etc (based on my
experience on <http://hackerbooks.com/>).

------
K2h
That looks interesting enough that I sent a link to a friend. Sometimes making
to HN front page does pay.

update: She bought it last week.

