accidentally entered vwww instead of www without noticing! Thanks for letting me know. https://vibeflirting.com/

Oh that's funny, I stumbled upon this a few weeks ago. Maybe via X? I like it. I think maybe a hot or not feature could be dope to help guys figure out which of their pics are most popular? Beautiful lander too btw man.. can't wait to be able to make stuff like that.

So I like the example photos a lot.

The big concern I have is that you might get a date and if you look really different from your picture you're in trouble -- particularly when it involves things that you can control, like clothes.

$15 a month is cheap compared to a good tailored suit but really, the good tailored suit could be a great investment because it will help you not just look good but feel good.

As a semi-pro photographer I've thought about what kind of services guys could use in this department, my skill set can help but many guys could also use a good barber/hairdresser or a fashion consultant too so practically I'm imagining a "dream team" of 2-3 people could help somebody out to not just get a good photo but look better in general but this would probably cost a few hundred bucks not including clothes and stuff. I can see how I'd team up with a few people to serve a few customers in my town but how you make it scalable business seems tougher.

As for now though I'd really recommend photofeeler for anybody who is concerned about how they come across in photos whether it is for dating or something like LinkedIn.

I appreciate you for taking the time to not only have a look but also leave a comment. I'll continue to work on it and try to improve them. (Although, technology is moving so fast, I wouldn't be surprised if this issue resolves itself in a few months.)

Hope you're having a good day.

RJ

If this was obvious advice, the mistake wouldn't be so prevalent in among non-fiction authors.

>I suspect people who read a memoir, an auto-biography, an eulogy or about true crime may well be interested in reading about a topic rather than looking for actionable advice?

Those don't classify as the type of non-fiction problem solving books we're talking about.

All models and methods are an approximation of the world (excluding pure mathematics). That error in approximation creates problems when you don't respect the domain of validity of the theory.

Right now, what you claim as over-generalising, I argue is you taking our theory outside its domain of validity.

I agree that it breaks there, but that's only because it wasn't designed for that domain so it's kind of a strawman argument.

You severely overestimate how well known Rob was before releasing The MOM Test.

You've got the order wrong. He got "famous" because The MOM Test did well. It wasn't "He was famous and then The MOM Test did well."

The danger with your line of reasoning is that it becomes a self-fulfilling prophecy.

If one truly believes the need to be famous, they can't ever succeed.

However, our process is designed to show that's not the case and to help "normal people" succeed.

I agree but you can't fake this. You still have to follow our process because a book that doesn't have strong word of mouth and doesn't resonate doesn't give you credibility.

I.e. you can't just slap a book together and think you've got credibility. People see right through that.

This is something Tendayi Viki of Strategyzer talked to us about:

"HOW DO YOU THINK ABOUT THE BOOK AS A PRODUCT? In my line of work, credibility is very important. I can’t cold call companies and be like “Hey, you know that those innovation programs are very important? Well, we have the best one. You can buy it now for three easy payments of 599.” Reputation matters a lot. It’s so much easier if someone comes to you. If they already respect me before we start the conversation.

Now, there are two ways to do that. You can deliberately be the snake oil salesmen. But that’s why those books don’t work because it’s so obvious what the person is trying to do. They write a book so they can say “I wrote a book”.

Or, you can say “I actually have something authentic to share and let me share that.” That’s the approach I’ve taken. I know I need to build a reputation but I don’t want to build it on nothing. If people pull back the curtains, they can see substance."

Notes I want to make it clear that I'm not accusing you of saying that. I'm merely adding to your comment.

Reference https://writeusefulbooks.com/resources/Tendayi-Viki/

That sentence refers to the traditional method, not our method.

I respect your opinion, and if you're the type of person who considers that a blanket conflict of interest than our book isn't for you.

I don't consider that good or bad, it just is. Similar to how some people prefer fish over meat and vice versa.

However, I will push back against the broad stroke generalization that you either teach people for free or charge money and be considered a scam.

Our advice is solid and battle-tested. There's Rob who wrote the Mom Test and Devin who wrote The Workshop Survival guide with Rob. And then there's our community with over a 100 up and coming authors who we're helping increase the probability of success through our process. The early results are already positive and it'll only improve as we keep trying to nail our process even more.

Is YC a scam because it isn't free?

If an author is like Tai Lopez you don't get word of mouth and burn through your lead pool. That means you're constantly trying to attract fresh leads, which is why these scams eventually tend to break.

What we're doing is teaching a process that minimizes some of the common mistakes authors make. Yes, we're charging money for that.

But if you look at our process, or heck, just read this article, you should be able to see that there's value worth paying for.

If you use nothing else but this article with these 4 common pitfalls to avoid, you'll do better vs. not having read it. And this was free.

So, I don't think your argument holds any water.

This^

Thanks! I agree that our marketing is good as the CMO. Just kidding.

Strongly agree with this: >not a universal truth that you can only be successful with "huge budget".

That quickly becomes a self-fulfilling prophecy.

The true GOATS of advertising and marketing, like for example Dave Trott, beat the point that you should play games you can win into your head over and over.

If one can't compete buying a ton of ads, don't try. But making a book that's useful to a small group of people, by making a clear promise, specifying who it is and isn't for, and then aggressively iterate with beta-readers until you start to get word of mouth, changes the equation more from needing lots of money to putting in a lot of the right kind of effort.