X-Message-Number: 8715
Date: Tue, 04 Nov 1997 20:50:26 +0000
From: Kennita Watson <>
Subject: Re: CryoNet #8706 - #8707
References: <>

> From: Steve Jackson <>
> Subject: Clouding Our Minds
> 
> When I got the note from Alcor inviting me, as a member, to participate in
> one of a series of "round-table" phone discussions with other members,
> hosted by Micahel Cloud, I was happy to agree. I was glad to hear that
> Alcor was soliciting member feedback, and I thought I might learn something
> myself.

Actually, as soon as I knew Michael Cloud was involved, I knew what it
was going to be about, so I declined to participate.  I've been watching
Michael Cloud (once-upon-a-time Michael Emerling) work his slick-tongued
magic on people for about a decade now.  I've never much liked it, and
at the same time I can see why it works.  It's got a sort of pseudo-Randian
paint-yourself-into-a-corner type of psychobabblogic to it that I fall
for more often than I like to admit, so I avoid it whenever I can.

Since I knew in advance what was going on, I got to contemplate things
like "Why the round-table format?".  Great marketing idea (AKA "peer
pressure") -- I wonder if using it in a more straightforward way would 
have been as effective without being as disturbing.
> 
> I learned something, all right. When I hung up the phone, I felt angry,
> disillusioned and used.

I was afraid of that.  I only participate in such things when a) I know
they're coming, and b) I'm entirely clear in advance on whether or not I
want what's being sold (I've gotten free luggage, a free stereo, etc. for
sitting through timeshare presentations on this basis).  As a result, I'm
at leisure to be amused.  I didn't call because I'm _not_ clear on the
life membership thing.
> 
> We did a round of "introduce yourselves" and a round of "what is Alcor
> doing right and wrong?" Then Fred Chamberlain took the floor for a long,
> rambling discussion which wandered around the subject of life memberships,
> and how they were going to be good for Alcor, and how it was really all
> right if we didn't buy them, but the price was going to go up and up and up
> . . .

Rambling, huh?  I wonder if he had a bullet list of points to cover in front 
of him, and maybe skipped some and had to go back, or if he had just thought
about them and was trying to make sure he covered them before it was Michael's
turn.
> 
> Then Michael Cloud took over and started asking the members, one at a time,
> what they thought about what they had heard. Whenever someone responded
> positively, he jumped in for a close - "Can we have (some other salesman)
> call you and work out the details?"

Somebody's got to close the sale -- Michael knows when, and he doesn't mind
playing "bad cop".
> 
> When he got around to me, I told him that I was unhappy about getting a
> sales call under false pretenses....Neither he, nor Fred, nor Linda, nor
> Carlos Mondragon who was also
> present, had a reply.

They may have been briefed in advance not to get into discussions about
such things, in order not to negatively influence the other callers....
> 
> Taking members' time, on the pretext of asking for feedback, and then
> pressuring them to send in more money . . . that has no place in a
> reputable organization.

I hope they at least took the feedback....  I wonder how successful the
calls have been overall?  They're definitely an experiment; was it 
successful enough to repeat?

> That's the way cults work, or multilevel marketing
> organizations. In fact, that's exactly what this felt like.

Some MLMs actually sell good products, and not all cults are dangerous
and wacko (I could make a case for Alcor being a cult, if I had time).
But that aside....
> 
> Hey, Fred? WHOSE IDEA WAS IT to bill this as an "opportunity to give
> feedback" but turn it into a sales pitch?

Backwards.  They wanted to make a sales pitch, and came up with the 
feedback idea as a forum in which to make it.

> Now that you think about it, does
> it BOTHER you that you did that? This is the second time under your
> management, Fred, that I've seen Alcor descend to scammy, low-class
> marketing, and it worries me.  Do you think you might STOP, or is this the
> way you LIKE to reach the public?

Don't blame it on Fred -- I'm assuming that he can be accused, at worst, of
bad judgement in hiring Michael and in taking too much of his advice.  I lay 
the "scamminess" on Michael's shoulders.  He's being paid to raise money for 
Alcor, and in particular to double the number of members (as I recall), not 
to make friends.  I imagine that refusing to follow his directions would
"void the warranty", as it were, and render him not liable for failure to
meet his stated goals.
> 
> Hell, Fred, maybe you DO care about our opinions. I know you're going to
> tell us that you do, and maybe it's true. But you've made it harder to
> believe you.

Here we have it.  This is what Michael's tactics make people think of
Alcor.  How many new members did we get, over and above what we normally
would be expected to get?  Is the image hit worth the increased
membership or not?

Kennita

Rate This Message: http://www.cryonet.org/cgi-bin/rate.cgi?msg=8715