question

This is spam. It appears to take you through a series of links to some sort of click farming site. I didn't go all the way through, so I may be wrong. But enough danger bells went off to stop me. I urge people to approach it with caution. (And, if you really want to learn about non-skeevy ways of Echo monetization, you can read the chapter in my book about it [code] http://www.amazon.com/How-Program-Amazon-Echo-Development-ebook/dp/B011J6AP2[/code])

> This is spam. It appears to take you through a series > of links to some sort of click farming site. > I didn't go all the way through, so I may be wrong. > But enough danger bells went off to stop me. I urge > people to approach it with caution. > > (And, if you really want to learn about non-skeevy > ways of Echo monetization, you can read the chapter > in my book about it > [code] http://www.amazon.com/How-Program-Amazon-Echo-De > velopment-ebook/dp/B011J6AP2[/code]) As you might expect, I, of course, respectfully disagree with this Responder's assessment. Apparently the fact that the link directs visitors to a page that requests an e-mail address to obtain further details constitutes spam. Not sure why one would draw this conclusion, however in the interest of transparency to those who may share the Responder's point of view, I have removed the request for an e-mail address. The new link now takes visitors directly to information about my own e-book on the Alexa Skill monetization topic. Hopefully, this adjustment makes things a bit more "non-skeevy".

Indeed, removing the e-mail link removes my objection to clicking through. The content is more innocuous, now, but it still conforms to "scam language'. There's a 40 second video on how much you won't believe how amazing it is. Many lists also saying how amazing it is. How risk free it is. It goes on and on and on. It ends up finishing with a "risk free" opportunity to buy the answer to everything that's been promised for $9.97. Perhaps I missed something skimming. But at no point is anything actually told without someone paying the money. I rather suspect the answer is "create a web site with a promise and charge people for the answer". But, maybe I'm being overly cynical. If you don't like my opinion, that's fine. I'm sure others in the community will chime in with their opinions. I'm particularly interested if anyone is willing to shell out the $10 and either attest or refute the poster's claims.

> I'd be happy to share how > I'm monetizing my current Alexa Skill with anyone who > has an interest in doing the same or would like to > collaborate on other monetization methods. Which skill is yours?

So, let's see if I have this correct. I make a post to the community (without malice) about how I am monetizing my Alexa Skill and how I am willing to share my experience. I include as part of the post an invitation to collaborate about Alexa Skill monetization. After reviewing my referenced link, I am (in my humble opinion) wrongly accused of by a Responder of SPAM, SPAM, SPAM. By the way, my skill is called First Aid Egghead and is a rudimentary and evolving skill entry on basic first aid treatments that I intend to extend over time. I then demonstrate, in a gesture of good faith and transparency that the Responder's SPAM perception has no basis in fact. I do this by removing an e-mail opt-in form that the Responder and perhaps others find to be objectionable. Mind you, I still don't quite get that one, as most marketing typically requests an e-mail, but okay, no worries. Now...because of the language used in my promotional piece for the e-Book that I sell, which details my own experience with monetizing my own Alexa Skill (and no it's not to "create a web site with a promise and charge people for the answer") the Responder's incorrect perception of SPAM, SPAM, SPAM becomes SCAM, SCAM, SCAM? Look...everyone is indeed entitled to his or her own opinion. However in the interest of fairness, expression of an opinion based on an incorrect perception of the facts helps no one. I'd offer that opining based on incorrect perceptions and citing one's own work, while disparaging the work of another for whatever reason is just bad form. I make no apologies for being a marketer, as it's what I've done for 20 years and will likely continue to do. At the end of the day, value to the consumer is always the determining factor.

> By the way, my skill is called First Aid Egghead and > is a rudimentary and evolving skill entry > on basic first aid treatments that I intend to extend > over time. Neat, that's an area that I don't think anyone has covered yet. As for all of the rest of the thread, a few quick points: 1. A lot of people here (myself included) would love to have a conversation about monetization techniques. Get a thread going. 2. One person (jjaquinta) doesn't speak for the entire community. If you're comfortable with the way you present yourself, then by all means, keep doing what you're doing, regardless of how he refers to your posts. It doesn't do you any good to argue with him. 3. That being said - while I don't necessarily agree with jjaquinta's knee-jerk reaction, I have to say that a lot of things about your site set off red flags for me. I expect that I'm not alone in this regard. If you'd like, I can enumerate things for you.

Thank you for an alternate perspective, and yes I concur that there's no point in sustaining conflict. Constructive feedback is always welcome and encouraged. Admittedly, old habits die hard, as opt-in forms and promotional copy with lots of hyperbole is considered "the norm" for the niche in which I typically market. So, if "red flags" are being triggered (which clearly seems to be the case) then corrective action should be taken, and I am more than open to making whatever corrections make the offer more conducive to a different market niche. I look forward to your comments and to productive discussions around Alexa Skill monetization.

Honestly, I think the biggest disconnect is that you've got the wrong audience for the materials you're linking. This forum is filled with engineers - people who want to build things - not people who are looking for a revenue stream. That's why the late-night-infomercial feel seems out of place. People in this community expect that you're going to be linking content (rather than a promise of content), because that's what interests them. A few specific points: -Your skill has been live for less than a month, and doesn't yet have any reviews. That makes it a little hard to believe that you've had the opportunity to reasonably monetize it, as you claim on your site. -The "How do you know it wasn't available?" piece of your site is a little bit condescending to this community, because it implies that we were incapable of thinking of whatever extraordinary idea you came up with. You don't cite any research showing that your technique is novel, other than to say "I thought of it, therefore it must be unique". I have a feeling this is what set jjaquinta off, since his team has legitimately been monetizing its products (and doing so in an open and transparent way). -In the development community, a large degree of "business jargon" surrounding a product is often an indicator that the product itself lacks substance. To use an anecdote to show what I mean, I'd point out that the contact email you provide in your privacy policy is " thinkandgrowcashflow@gmail.com". That seems really out of place. Anyhow, as you say, you're clearly a person that's big into marketing. It just feels to me a bit like the marketing you're doing is meant for people who are a fair bit less intelligent or perceptive than the average member of this community.

Thanks for playing "good cop", Galactoise. Well stated. I agree with all your points.

Monetization and discovery are two main problems for Skill developers for sure.

Check out Instreamatic.AI where we provide tech for Skill monetization with interactive voice ads.