Posted by Peter Arnold / Canada on March 26, 2003 at 17:23:44:
In Reply to: Re: iMO - Are we close to 200 PN signups? posted by Roger K on March 26, 2003 at 14:40:13:
Hi Roger:
Appreciate your comments.
The Internet Committee agrees with you 100% that iMO is a very worthy contender in the area of MLM Internet Marketing - and that if we had our own "exclusive" PN marketing site, it would give us a distinct advantage over the competition (we would obviously need the 200 PN signups for that).
We should keep in mind though, that by 'itself', iMarketOffice is already a very advanced and substantial "Data Management / Lead Supply Program" (with a 'Free' System, and an attractive Lead quality/price structure). In other words, iMO can also be used, simply by us promoting our 'current' PN or My4Life.com sites.
However, it would be a major benefit for us (and a substantial 'gift' from Mike/PN - who have offered to pay the freight - $5,000 'min') to be able to develop our own PN "customized" version for promotional purposes. This is because we could design it in any way we wish - flashes + audios + script - for education - to simplify - to explain and promote PN - 4Life - TF - etc.
On the other hand, I feel we must keep a balance here, and look 'beyond' iMO as well...
I believe we must continue to respect the fact that not 'everyone' is as interested in using the INTERNET to build their 4Life business as we might be. And that's perfectly fine. History has proven that the very 'best' way to build is in our Local Areas (warm market - eyeball to eyeball) - at least initially. And, it's less expensive.
The Internet, and all of the superb Automated Marketing Systems / Lead Supply Sources out there, are still only 'tools' - but powerful ones (vehicles, that allow us to reach out and take our mission to the masses, rapidly - and on a global basis). But these should "compliment"
the other menu of marketing avenues that Mike/PN
have already put in place for us (also, at no cost).
Bottom line, as I see it - iMO is very good - no question. And a "customized" iMO would be even better. But even 'without' a unique 'PN' iMO, it would 'still' be good for us.
The very best approach however, is in having a healthy "variety" of tools / systems / approaches at play -- to meet the various needs of everyone (financial, skill level, interest, experience level, etc).
Thank you Roger, for your interaction on this.
Hopefully, others will come forward with their views and comments as well. That's the only way we all get a pulse and consensus.
Sincerely, Peter A.