The $1 Concept Explained Without the Hype & Silly Numbers Variant
This one apparently figures that people start caclulating the numbers and figure out that it's just not going to work, so it claims to ignore that part. Trouble is, he still can't avoid the numbers and silly hype anyway. He also attempts to prey on those who are confused by the numbers, who then say "oh, if this guy was confused and figured it out and explains it better, it must be OK." The author goes to a great deal of trouble up front to try to allay the foolish notion that this could possibly be illegal. Silly us for thinking that, eh?
"*********************************************************************
This is the $1.00 concept explained without the hype and silly numbers!
Read the following carefully and you could be joining the many thousands
of Internet users who are currently earning quite large sums of money with
a few hours work using their computers via the Internet!
*********************************************************************"
As I have explained before, Usenet is not the internet.
"This posting has been appearing for quite some
time and has now literally got thousands of people actively involved. No
doubt like me, you may have seen it before and become a little confused
by the way it's been explained."
Definitely been confused. The numbers are so horribly complex. Please, oh please explain it better than those other guys? Maybe this time I will believe.
"However, I personally have never believed in a so called "Free lunch" and have always worked hard to support my family. But this idea is so simple involving only a modest $5.00 investment that I simply had to try it."
Oh, there's that investment thingie again. I tried getting my portfolio manager to invest in this, but he kept telling me it wasn't an investment, it was a scam. What does he know, anyway? I know you are going to explain it all so clearly any minute now.
"At first, it took me quite a while to figure it out"
I know, I feel the same way - it's so incredibly complex, all the spinning parts fitting with such precision into each other. I feel like I need an engineeering degree or something to figure it out.
" - my first impressions led me to believe that there must be someone behind it who alone is benefiting. But this isn't so, you only have to look at the various postings to realise this; the thousands of postings that are made all carry different names and addresses. So with so many people involved I became convinced that with this particular program I too could benefit."
Yes, I can see it all clearly now... all those people couldn't have been wrong or trying to scam me! Yes! Yes! This is such a definitive argument. I must try it out on that portfolio manager I have. Thank you! I'm sure I can convince him to check further into this... all his clients will want to get in on this now.
"Although many of the postings have been modified the basic principal remains the same, in my opinion the only problem has been the way the initial concept has been repeatedly changed."
The concept has changed? In what way has it changed? You'll have to explain. I'm not sure you are doing all that much better at explaining this than those other guys did. Don't you sucke... I mean help people by getting them involved to send you money, on the pretens.. er, knowledge that they will make a mint when their names get higher on the list? Wait... did you say that the basic principal (I'm sure you meant principle, because my old pricipal would never be in on anything like this in any way - he's too busy chasing kids out of the hallway during class periods) remains the same, and later in the same sentence say that the problem is that the initial concept has been repeatedly changed? Isn't that somewhat contradictory?
"With this in mind I have set out to explain what I consider to be a clearer version, in the hope there is no doubt in people's minds that it's fully understood."
Oh, good... we're getting to the point. I'm sure glad this didn't have any hype in it. It would have made it much longer. Well, I'm pretty sure I understand it already, but you can try again. I really do want to believe, believe me!
Hey, that's MY line!
"this system does work! In general, these postings lead you to believe you can make $50,000 within a month, which I think is a little over the top."
Great! At least you don't claim to have made all that money the others did. They weren't quite believable. Maybe that's why I had problems.
"But now ten days after my initial involvement, I'm beginning to get a reasonable and realistic return with a further understanding of just how big this concept is."
I thought you said you were going to skip the hype, though. Isn't this hype? Must not be, 'cause you said you weren't gonna do it, and we can all see how honest you are. Any evidence to the contrary should be disregarded, I am sure.
"I still cannot believe it - the money is coming in from all over the world. That money sure comes in useful, but what's more important is the fact I have proved this is a totally workable and legitimate system involving no risk and no major cash outlay."
Yes! Yes! I can see it all now! The money is unimportant to you! OK, now you've got my attention - you just did this to prove to us all that it works. Wow! I can see a Sainthood or a Nobel Peace Prize in this for you..."World's Wealth Shared - No One Ever Poor Again! Hero Solves World Economic Crisis! Film at 11"
"My other concern was the legal aspect, so I checked this through and was told that providing I mail one dollar to the person I am asking to put me on their mailing list, I am in fact paying for a service."
And what an incredibly useful service it is. I'm sure it falls outside that nasty ol' Postal Inspector's ruling about such things
"And that service consists of using the Internet to advertise a business. So what is this business? Well this business is to do with assembling a mailing list of people who are interested in working from home using their computers to generate an income."
Ah! I was wondering what the specific business was. It's nice to know finally what mailing list I was going to be assembling and to what use I would put it. So. I've got this legitimate mailing list. How do I use it?
"***********************************************************************
Ok...if your interested"
Wouldn't that be "you're," as in a contraction of "you" and "are," as opposed to a possesive like "your"? You seem to have the same contraction problems as that other guy. Are you sure you aren't related somehow? You're at least missing an apostrophe in there, and a letter "e" as well. Better check around for them.
"there are three basic steps: All of which are pretty simple."
That's good, because I was getting confused again. By the way, you still haven't told me how to use that mailing list of people who want to work at home using their computers. Any chance it's just a sham? No, of course not. So, who do I sell this list to? Another 'by-the-way'... nice usage of a colon in that sentence. Was there any particular reason for not using a comma, or did you just happen to have an extra colon laying around not being used and decided "What the heck, let's use it"?
"Think positive, after all, the people below became involved just like you! "
Why would I have been thinking negative (or even negatively, for that matter)? Am I missing something I should be concerned about? Wait! Who said I was involved yet? Uh.... about that list... Still hoping to hear from you on that.
"THE FIRST STEP (1).
Obtain five sheets of paper with of course stamps and envelopes."
Of course.
"Write your full name and address on each sheet"
Can I print? My writing is terrible. Or even use this fancy thing here that I want to work at home using?
", with the words: 'Please place me on your mailing list' "
I'd still like to know about that list, please.
"enclosing a one dollar bill and mail to the following five addresses:
***********************************************************************
* Jose Delgado, 13903-88 ST Edmonton Alberta, Canada TSE-3J1 3.
* Aldo Sanchez 9945 S.W. 164th Ter. Miami, FL 33157 4.
* L.M. King 2639 47th Avenue, San Francisco, CA 94116 5.
* F.Galvez, 1633 Amberwood Drive. Apt. 29 South Pasadena, CA 91030 2.
* M.Palmer, Gilfach Goch, Blaenpennal, Aberystwyth, SY23 4TN United Kingdom.
***********************************************************************"
Wow! Looks like I will have an international business! Woo-hoo!
"When you have mailed your message with the one dollar bill (Please do as everyone else does by not including cheques or money orders) to the above people, go to the:"
Yes, I understand now. that other guy confused me about using money orders or bank notes if I wanted. I know it has nothing to do with traceability.
"SECOND STEP (2).
From the addresses listed above, remove the top name and address and insert
your own at the bottom so you still have five names and addresses, only
this time your own is included."
Let me make sure I've got this right... I start with five names, take one off the top, and put one on the bottom, so I still have 5. Yep, that checks with my calculator. OK, we're on the right track now! That other guy's numbers were off a little.
"This can be done by simply amending the address section as stated with no other alterations and posting as described later. Or, you can retype the whole document adding what you feel may be important. It's entirely up to you, I'm perfectly satisfied,"
Well, if you're satisfied, who am I to argue with your obvious knowledge level?
"but I had to wait at least ten days before finding out how successful it really was."
OK, got it. By the way, what did that have to do with the first part of that sentence?
"Until nearly two weeks had gone by I began thinking "How come there hasn't been any response" but after the 10th day dozens and then hundreds of letters began arriving."
Yup. They all held on to them and mailed them simultaneously. I've heard they do that sometimes, just to make you wonder. Something about that sentence doesn't quite seem up to your normal grammatical standards, though. Are you sure you are feeling OK? By the way, about that list....
"And they are increasing as each day passes. I already have $756.00 and at the rate the mail is arriving this soon will have doubled!"
OK! I can see this is the way to be rich. Sign me up.
"I don't doubt people have earned large sums of money, and suspect the reason is due to the amount of postings made, "
The way you explain the way this thing works, that might very well have something to do with it.
"so who knows just what this money making venture is capable of. One thing is certain it's certainly working for me!!!"
Certainly. That is certain.
"NOW HERE IS WHY THE SYSTEM IS SO SUCCESSFUL!!!
The Internet is growing daily at a phenomenal rate, doubling once a year
perhaps you already know this."
I thought the other guy said once every 4 months? Maybe you ought to get together with him and check the figures. Most people would have put in some sort of a punctuation mark after the word "year," though.
"With millions of people surfing the Internet and an estimated 100.000 users scanning the newsgroups of which there are nearly 20.000."
Uh, there's only 100.000 users scanning 20.000 newsgroups? You sure this thing will work? And you certainly don't have to have 3 digit precision to the right of the decimal point with me. Two would be sufficient. I doubt very much if there are that many partial users or partial newsgroups anyway.
"This exposure is the key factor and the reason why: You me and all those who take part cannot fail not to be disappointed. Just think about it, if you became interested in this article, why shouldn't thousands of others!"
Gosh, I can't think of a single, solitary reason. Totally stumped, I am.
"At first, I posted to nearly 250 newsgroups, but due to the response soon increased this to 300, which brought in mail from Europe the Far east, Australia and America."
Ah, so the key to getting foriegn involvement is the number of groups I post to? I would have thought it was more dependent on the people reading the particular groups, but you obviously have more insight than I do, so I will defer this one to you. Wait - you're getting mail FROM America? You mean you're a foreigner? Should I be listening to you? Now, about that legitimate mailing list - are these the people I sell it to?
"So with my first dozen replies I made $12.00."
Check. 12 replies at $1, you made $12. Gotcha.
" But to simplify matters and keep the arithmetic easy, suppose I had posted to 200 newsgroups with my name at five and just had five replies which would have meant I earned $5.00. The third and final step explains the concept."
Suppose? Suppose? I thought you were experienced at this and were teaching me what you have already done! Besides, I thought you weren't going to confuse me with the silly numbers.I just wanna make money. Ok, $5 out of 200 postings. 1 in 40 return - see? I'm trying to follow you
"THIRD STEP (3).
And the reason why it's so simple yet successful for those keen to participate
and earn a realistic amount of cash. In theory you make $5.00 for every
two hundred postings with your name at five. Each person who sent you a
$1.00 now also makes two hundred postings with your name at four equating
to $50.00."
I still thought you were going to skip the silly numbers bit. You're starting to confuse me again. We already established a 1 in 40 ratio... now you're telling me that 5 "agents" posting 200 articles (in other words, 1000 articles) gets me a $50 return? What happened to 1 in 40? This looks more like 1 in 20 to me. Of course, I'm probably wrong on that. My return percentage probably goes up as my agents get more experienced.
"Your Fifty new agents also make two hundred postings each with your name at three, say ten thousand postings equating to $500.00. These five hundred agents again make two hundred postings each with your name at two equating to $10.000 or one hundred thousand postings."
Now where did my $10.000 come from? 100,000 postings? Isn't that a bit low? OH! OH! I see - you're that foreigner and you use decimals rather than commas to separate your numbers when you write things that you want us here in the US to understand! I see now. That explains everything. Darnit, you've gone and got me all confused again. These numbers do it all the time. Granting the 50 agents (even though it seems to me that it should really be 25 from my figures) each posting 200 articles (10,000 articles in other words), with a return of $500 makes a 1 in 20 return rate again. Wouldn't this be easier to follow if you stayed consistant with your math? Now those 500 "agents" post 200 articles each, making, as you say, 100,000 postings. Now you tell me I'll make $10,000 off those - we're up to a 1 in 10 return ratio (does it keep getting better, by the way?) I still swear that you said you were going to skip the silly numbers. Perhaps you should have stuck with that. Uh, what about that mailing list, by the way?
"Finally, five thousand people once again make two hundred postings with your name at one and this would equate to the mathematical statistic of $50.000 before your name drops off the list."
Wait just a ding-dong minute - we just got done getting $10,000 on our last cycle. Now you say I've only got 5,000 "agents". What happened? Did the other 5,000 quit, or did these 5,000 decide to be really generous and send $2 each last time? And 5,000 times 200 posts each equals a million posts. And there are thousands of people doing this? And this is just one of these lists? Huh. You'd think you would see more of these posts then. Must just be doing it in other newsgroups.
"Which is pretty exciting and mind boggling considering these figures are based on only two hundred postings at a time being made down the line! Most people may think these figures are ridiculous, but they do add up. After all they do say the success of the Internet is due to it's sheer capacity of over 40 million."
Yes, I see... uh, does the calculation that if you do this 6 more times, the number of people involved is almost double that 40 million that you quote cause any troubles here? And that's just if this is the only list circulating? Or do all these wealthy people just do it again and the cash just keeps appearing? That's one of the hard parts I have in understanding this. That and what I do with the list.
"Technically, you only need an average return of 2.5% from the 200 postings that each person makes in order to achieve these high figures."
2.5%? So we are back to a 1 in 40 return ratio now? I wish you'd stop jumping around like that.
"So with the Internet comprising of 40 million user's the sky really is the limit!!!"
Isn't this like saying that if A==B and B==C then A == D? Is there a correlation I am missing? I really want to know, please tell me.Also - just to let you know, I found one of your missing apostrophes - it inadvertently escaped by sneaking into the word "users" as it was being typed, making it into the word "user's", which, as we all know, is the possesive form of the singular word, "user" thereby describing an item that is owned by a single user. It's quite clear you meant the plural form of "user", which is "users". You'll want to discipline that apostrophe when you get it home.
"It's a never ending money making process "
I can see that - it just magically appears from somewhere.
"because when your name finally drops off the list, or indeed before if you really need the cash (and who doesn't)"
Sure, who doesn't? What do I do with that mailing list again?
"you simply access another newsgroup posting and begin the process over again, placing your name at Five."
Uh, "Access a newsgroup posting?" Doesn't that mean I read someone else's post?
"Please remember to upload this article to as many newsgroups, local bulletin boards, message areas and file sections as possible."
Sure, no sweat. Do it right away. Count on it.
"The financial rewards are guaranteed, but as stated, the level of success depends upon your efforts! And how much posting you do."
"Great! It's absolutely guaranteed. But it depends upon my effort. OK, I can handle that. Who's posting the guarantee, by the way? If it's you, I'll go post my 200 articles (the work you said I had to do) and wait a reasonable time (say 6 weeks, just to be generous), and because you are guaranteeing it, if I don't have my $50,000, I'll be sure to give you a ring and you can pay up out of yours. I mean, that's what a guarantee is, isn't it? Thank you for your security."
"As a personal note:"
Gosh, a personal note. How touching!
"The above figures are for demonstration purposes only with the whole concept and current success based upon the number of people participating. And the number of newsgroups and file sections you post this article to."
That sounded like some sort of a disclaimer, but it didn't seem clear enough to understand. Could you elaborate?
"Yes, it really depends on you the individual! How much money you want to make rests in your hands. Accessing newsgroups is very easy considering there are nearly 20.000 to choose from."
I see! OK. Makes sense. Oh, and there's that silly decimal notation again. I'm sure glad I finally got that one figured out! Now if I could only figure out what to do with this mailing list.
"Your success rate is determined by the amount of newsgroups accessed, you must follow through and post this or your own similar article to hundreds of newsgroups; maximise your postings and you maximise your cash intake."
Sure, that's pretty clear. Still a little hazy on the part about you weren't going to use the hype and silly numbers, though.
"GENERAL STEPS ON AUTOMATING THE PROCESS:"
Oh, good. I could never have done it manually.
"Make any necessary changes to this article as explained in step (2)"
But you said you were satisfied. Why would I change anything my mentor told me?
"and when you're satisfied, save it as a .txt file and import it into the body of your email or newsreader program. This way you only have to change the name of the newsgroup or email address for each redistribution."
Uh... nevermind.
"Valuable tip: And very important for those not too familiar with email:"
Good - I wouldn't want a worthless tip. Don't tell me - you had another one of those spare colons laying around, right? What's with the email bit, anyway? I thought we were going to post these to the newsgroups.
"By all means use a word processor to ensure the article is composed well, but to ensure people that first read it via their newsreader program see it clearly laid out. Re-format it with a simple text editor such as 'notepad,' or 'WordPad' if your using 'Windows 95.'"
OK! But how come you didn't? Is this a test? Oh, there's another missing contraction again. Maybe your keyboard's broken. Have you had it checked lately?
"Providing the text is clearly visible and does not scroll into the right margin, it should be ok!"
Yes, yes, I see... Can I use a spell and grammar checker on mine? Or should I leave it like yours?
"Using this procedure essentially means the article will be correctly displayed when viewed through other people's newsreader's. You can of course check this out for yourself before going on line, by viewing it in your own newsreader program."
Yes, my newsreader always displays my articles exactly the way they will be formatted on everyone else's screen. By the way, looks like another apostrophe has escaped by hiding in the word "newsreaders."
"Next, begin by locating the newsgroups you intend posting to, Netscape 3.0 or a similar newsreader is terrific for this, because you can highlight dozens of newsgroups all at once, enabling you to distribute your article to 1000's of locations in less than an hour or two."
Yes, it does have that capablility. It also sucks rocks in lots of other ways, too.
"Highlight all newsgroups you want to mail your letter to which as you know is done by holding down CTRL while left clicking."
Unless, of course, you have a Mac. Then it's simpler.
"This way you can select multiple newsgroups in one go, choose perhaps a dozen each time. You will then see all the newsgroups you highlighted displayed in the Newsgroups Field."
I see, I see... and will this less than twenty groups at a time avoid the automatic issuance of chain letter cancels that numerous administrative sites put out? Because I am sure that one with your tremendous knowlege and background of service to mankind would know, chain letters are shot on sight and do not fall under the "Briedbart Index equal to or greater than 20" rule. Oh, I forgot! Forgive me.... this is a legitimate service, not a chain letter. Say, that reminds me... about that mailing list....
"Next: select/highlight your newsgroups, then click "To News" place a sensible title in the "Subject" location, click on "Attachments" whereupon another box appears."
OK, got it. What's next? I'm dying to learn!
"Locate the file you are going to distribute, click on the file and then click "Open" again click OK; provided you followed these instructions, you should see your file greyed out in the "Attachments" box. Hit send... and that's it."
Somehow, that explanation didn't "flow." Can you try it again?
"Repeat the process over and over again by selecting further newsgroups in multiples of 10's"
I thought you said a dozen? I wish you'd be consistant. This is getting confusing again.
" but try to be selective with the groups by posting to high volume locations,"
What's a "location" and how do I tell if it's high volume?
"and don't choose a subject that appears too flash,"
Uh.... huh?
"this will only put people off. This is an honest and legitimate way of making a reasonable amount of money, and making it on a regular basis. But only if your message is sincere and clearly understood by others will you succeed."
Yes, I can see exactly how legitimate and honest it is, and I can understand how people might at first be confused that this was some sort of illegal pyramid chain letter scam and be put off, and how if I am sincere and clear that none of that will be a problem..
"PLEASE NOTE: This system is based on everyone being honest, but it's all too tempting not to bother mailing out envelopes with dollar bills inside."
Aw, who would do that? No one that would participate in a legal, honest and legitimate thing like this, that's for sure. Only someone who was out to cheat others to begin with would do that, and we know that as legitimate as this is, it would never attract someone like that!
"The success for all participating is dependant upon this taking place and if carried out will mean a 500% increase on your article being redistributed!"
Wow, that's certainly a remarkable statement, whatever it meant. It seems to be some sort of statistic. Do you have the raw data for that somewhere? I prefer to check these things myself, you know. Hey, what about that mailing list? I still don't know what to do with it.
"The system won't work to yours or indeed other people's advantage if you don't follow the procedure. You can however, if you wish to remain anonymous use a pseudonym -"
Why would I want to be anonymous? Isn't this legal, legitimate, honest, and ethical? Why would I want to hide myself if that's true? Gosh, I keep vaccillating between belief and confusion with this thing. Won't you please clear it up??
" but please ensure your address is correct."
Yes, I can see that hiding my real name but putting my real address in there will be most effective. Thank you for that tip.
"AS A FINAL NOTE: Many business ideas for making money, no matter how well thought out and implemented simply don't get off the ground."
That's usually because no matter how well thought out and implemented, they still were unworkable in some way, you know.
"And in most cases is due to advertising costs, but the exposure obtained through the Internet is quite honestly - pretty awesome, so please study this article carefully taking all the time you want, because the moment you begin participating you will be on track for some serious financial rewards."
Didn't quite follow the flow of that incredible run-on sentence with the spare hyphen in the middle... care to try again?
"By the very nature of the way the system works you may not see the benefits the first week."
Or the second, third, fourth, fifth, etc., from what I'm beginning to suspect.
"BUT COMMENCING THE SECOND WEEK, YOUR INTAKE OF MAIL FROM AROUND THE WORLD WILL TRULY ASTONISH YOU!"
I stand corrected. Sorry to have doubted you. Please don't shout any more. I know that, just like with that other guy, loudness==veracity.
"Please give this some serious thought, because this is one of the few money making schemes that really does work..."
I have absolutely no reason to disbelieve you, now do I?
"GOOD LUCK!!!"
Gosh! Thank you. I'll be sure to let you know if it doesn't work. I mean, after all, you did guarantee it, didn't you? I should think you'd not back away from a personal guarantee, unless you were some sort of cheap, low-down, shyster-of-a-crookNow, about that mailing list......
