Rick otton abc 8pm on the 6th of April
- Thread starter wbh
- Start date
wbh said:
Rick,
For your interest:
The Producer of the show was interviewed on Adelaide Local Radio earlier this week, and the vexatious subject of wrapping came up..
The interviewer (I think it was Kevin Naughton) on ABC 891AM tried to have a dig at vendor financing and, suprisingly, the Producer came out very strongly in support of the idea of Vendor Financing.
Rickwbh said:
The first of the "Reality Bites" was this week, featuring Brad Sugars- see the thread http://www.somersoft.com/forums/showthread.php?t=15025 for reactions to that program.
Your link is http://www.somersoft.com/forums/showthread.php?t=15025
This link will probably change- but the link to http://www.abc.net.au/tv/documentaries/ shows your story but Brad Sugugars' photo.
TV has taken away a few kilos in this case
funny you should mention that
I would say with these guys following me around for 18 months they got a very detailed understanding of the business and wanted to have the program go for one hour to do a more detailed report unfortunately abc only had the 10pm time slot available making it too late in their eyes. I just concluded a 5 year lease option on a water front owned by one of the abc crew
....it seems they got it anyway....
Rick otton
duncan_m said:
I would say with these guys following me around for 18 months they got a very detailed understanding of the business and wanted to have the program go for one hour to do a more detailed report unfortunately abc only had the 10pm time slot available making it too late in their eyes. I just concluded a 5 year lease option on a water front owned by one of the abc crew
....it seems they got it anyway....
Rick otton
An interesting story (from what I saw, I missed the first 10 minutes)- it seemed quite balanced. It wasn't glowing at all- just showed the building of the seminar side of the business alongside the wrapping side. Two couples who had done the boot camp were followed up- one had not done any wraps, the other had done a single wrap, earning $20K profit- though their property took a little over two months to sell, so it may have caused them some stress. The story certainly helped me to see how the seminar business fitted in with the wrapping.
A lot of forumites were seen. Rick, of course- also "The Wife" (Nivia), Robert & Tracy Forward (of course- Freestyler Events put on the first boot camp), Paul Zag- and I think I caught a glimpse of the back of my head at an intro night
I don't think that people will be crowding in to buy houses (as they did when Rick was shown on TDT) or courses- but I don't think people will be turned off it either.
A lot of forumites were seen. Rick, of course- also "The Wife" (Nivia), Robert & Tracy Forward (of course- Freestyler Events put on the first boot camp), Paul Zag- and I think I caught a glimpse of the back of my head at an intro night
I don't think that people will be crowding in to buy houses (as they did when Rick was shown on TDT) or courses- but I don't think people will be turned off it either.
Sorry, I didn't record it. The last time I saw the need to record a program was last year when the front of my head was shown- and I couln't get it working in time.Aceyducey said:Oops - missed it
Did anyone (in CBR) record it?
Geoff - how can you recognise the back of your head? I mean, you don't see it very often
I was finishing up a reno tonight, setting up the TV, so was lucky to catch it myself.
I do see the back of my head every time I get a haircut- when the hairdresser holds the mirror up- so that's nearly once a year. (I actually now have a hairdresser who lets me put on my glasses before he holds up the mirrot. It took a long time to find that).
Dear PT49,
Along with Acey - Welcome to the forum.
A post of mine that may help with a starting point:
http://www.somersoft.com/forums/showpost.php?p=45205&postcount=2
Cheers,
Sunstone.
Along with Acey - Welcome to the forum.
A post of mine that may help with a starting point:
http://www.somersoft.com/forums/showpost.php?p=45205&postcount=2
Cheers,
Sunstone.
I listened to the program, and don't think it conveyed a particularly good impression of wrapping or investing to Mr and Mrs Average. If anyone cares, Neil Jenman would be having a field day right now.
It's no reflection on Rick, people will look up Freestylers on the web, find out they're defunct and assume that the whole thing has gone belly-up like HK. It is to the ABC's discredit that they did not give a clarification of this at the end (unless there was something printed on the screen that I didn't see).
The show did not stress win/win enough and to hear some guy skiting about how they sold a $140k house for $220k was a bit much. No doubt some viewers would be hoping that they get their comeuppance.
There was no mention of the ethics or safeguards to ensure that wrapees sought independent advice, know the profit the wrapper makes and are comfortable/accepting of this. This may well be in the 'wrap pack' but the journos missed this.
Research/due diligence and the work investors must do was hardly mentioned, if at all.
The bit to do with image and wearing the right suit (and lipstick!) strikes me as being fluff, decadance and folly.
With all those thoughts the penny dropped and my naivity about what to expect from the show became obvious.
The show was called 'Selling Success'.
Though quite a good explanation of wrapping was given, this was not the show's primary theme. Rather its focus was the image-building and selling success gurus.
Hence the inordinate time given to 'image' and selling Mr Otton (not his fault, but what the journo selectively uses from the hours of footage). Last week's Brad Sugars episode was similar, with what to me is almost enforced obsequiousness and fawning from 'followers'.
I then wondered about the relationship between media shows and people who appear on them.
The show wants a story and the subject person wants the exposure.
However the subject person must take a risk. Journos can't be relied upon to fully understand the subject material. They may also selectively use material to make it tell a particular narrative. Pieces of information (though significant) that detract from this 'created reality' are disregarded and the viewer only sees what has been allowed to pass through a narrow mental filter.
Some people assume that 'any publicity is good publicity'. Thus they will happily accept the risk of being misrepresented. Some of the investment promoters might be among those willing to take this risk.
Another example was in 1989 when Wilson Tuckey revealed on 4 Corners how his group removed John Howard from the Liberal leadership. This backfired and Tuckey only ever got a minor ministry.
Many people have scruples over what they say in public. If you asked people in the street what they were earning, the answer 'none of your business' would be common. We even saw a bit of it in the question on this forum about this topic.
In his book 'Light that Time has Made', former GG Sir Paul Hasluck talks about the decline of privacy. I am not sure if this is quite right in all cases.
On one hand, people have never been more concerned about giving their address out. The proportion of home phones with silent numbers seems to be increasing. A large number of cordless phones now sold are digital types that can't be picked up on radio scanners. Staff in shops often only have their first name on name badges and people in call centres often won't give their surname.
But beyond names and numbers, people's scruples over what they will tell strangers (particularly via the mass media) about their innermost lives are crumbling.
This includes questions like who they are, who they want to be and their financial success. You'd also think that how you presented yourself to others (especially if you got image consultants) would also be considered strictly private.
But not in this game. In getting media exposure, it seems that the person who bares most wins! Media have done extremely well in convincing many successful people to tell all so that they can become famous as well.
But whether it's in the interests of the subject is doubtful. In the case of the recent exposure of Brad Sugars, Steve McKnight and Rick Otton, I would lean towards the 'noes'.
Regards, Peter
It's no reflection on Rick, people will look up Freestylers on the web, find out they're defunct and assume that the whole thing has gone belly-up like HK. It is to the ABC's discredit that they did not give a clarification of this at the end (unless there was something printed on the screen that I didn't see).
The show did not stress win/win enough and to hear some guy skiting about how they sold a $140k house for $220k was a bit much. No doubt some viewers would be hoping that they get their comeuppance.
There was no mention of the ethics or safeguards to ensure that wrapees sought independent advice, know the profit the wrapper makes and are comfortable/accepting of this. This may well be in the 'wrap pack' but the journos missed this.
Research/due diligence and the work investors must do was hardly mentioned, if at all.
The bit to do with image and wearing the right suit (and lipstick!) strikes me as being fluff, decadance and folly.
With all those thoughts the penny dropped and my naivity about what to expect from the show became obvious.
The show was called 'Selling Success'.
Though quite a good explanation of wrapping was given, this was not the show's primary theme. Rather its focus was the image-building and selling success gurus.
Hence the inordinate time given to 'image' and selling Mr Otton (not his fault, but what the journo selectively uses from the hours of footage). Last week's Brad Sugars episode was similar, with what to me is almost enforced obsequiousness and fawning from 'followers'.
I then wondered about the relationship between media shows and people who appear on them.
The show wants a story and the subject person wants the exposure.
However the subject person must take a risk. Journos can't be relied upon to fully understand the subject material. They may also selectively use material to make it tell a particular narrative. Pieces of information (though significant) that detract from this 'created reality' are disregarded and the viewer only sees what has been allowed to pass through a narrow mental filter.
Some people assume that 'any publicity is good publicity'. Thus they will happily accept the risk of being misrepresented. Some of the investment promoters might be among those willing to take this risk.
Another example was in 1989 when Wilson Tuckey revealed on 4 Corners how his group removed John Howard from the Liberal leadership. This backfired and Tuckey only ever got a minor ministry.
Many people have scruples over what they say in public. If you asked people in the street what they were earning, the answer 'none of your business' would be common. We even saw a bit of it in the question on this forum about this topic.
In his book 'Light that Time has Made', former GG Sir Paul Hasluck talks about the decline of privacy. I am not sure if this is quite right in all cases.
On one hand, people have never been more concerned about giving their address out. The proportion of home phones with silent numbers seems to be increasing. A large number of cordless phones now sold are digital types that can't be picked up on radio scanners. Staff in shops often only have their first name on name badges and people in call centres often won't give their surname.
But beyond names and numbers, people's scruples over what they will tell strangers (particularly via the mass media) about their innermost lives are crumbling.
This includes questions like who they are, who they want to be and their financial success. You'd also think that how you presented yourself to others (especially if you got image consultants) would also be considered strictly private.
But not in this game. In getting media exposure, it seems that the person who bares most wins! Media have done extremely well in convincing many successful people to tell all so that they can become famous as well.
But whether it's in the interests of the subject is doubtful. In the case of the recent exposure of Brad Sugars, Steve McKnight and Rick Otton, I would lean towards the 'noes'.
Regards, Peter
I gotta ask, did Deb make it into any footage? She was a participant in some of the interviews a few years ago
Ah no, Geoff. I was at the intro night but forgot to put my makeup on, so avoided the camera....
I thought it was an interesting programme- insightful and an honest look at the path Rick has taken since his first seminar.
However, I don't think the programme was long enough to do two yrs of filming their every move justice!
Spiderman,
The show didn't explore wraps in more detail simply because they weren't given enough time! As you would be aware, the Vendor Finance Assoc (which Rick founded) is constantly working towards improving the wrap process to make it better for both buyer and seller.
From my personal experience, buyers are strongly advised to seek independent legal advice before they sign a sales instalment contract. In fact, I think you would find the majority of wrappers will not take on a buyer unless they first see a solicitor. This is in the best interests of both parties.
Let's not forget, too, that the types of buyers that wrappers take on are those that mainstream lenders won't touch. Wrappers take on big risks themselves, and I'm sure MG can add many stories of horror stories of buyers who've done a runner or simply stopped paying. There are always two sides to every story.
As for image building, if you'd ever met Rick, I'm sure you would realise that he comes across as genuinely passionate about what he does.. I don't believe he needs the $4000 suit to impress people, but public perception is a funny thing, isn't it? If we see a flashy looking guy in an Armani suit driving a Porsche, we'd probably believe he's more successful than the guy in the next lane, wearing overalls and driving a 95 Falcon station wagon, wouldn't we? (well, not me actually as my perceptions have changed greatly over the last years!)
In a way, it is society who demands the suit and the nice car. They equate materialism with wealth and superior intelligence. Though most of us who frequent this forum know otherwise, we are still in the minority.
Anyway, just wanted to add my two cents worth
I thought it was an interesting programme- insightful and an honest look at the path Rick has taken since his first seminar.
However, I don't think the programme was long enough to do two yrs of filming their every move justice!
Spiderman,
The show didn't explore wraps in more detail simply because they weren't given enough time! As you would be aware, the Vendor Finance Assoc (which Rick founded) is constantly working towards improving the wrap process to make it better for both buyer and seller.
From my personal experience, buyers are strongly advised to seek independent legal advice before they sign a sales instalment contract. In fact, I think you would find the majority of wrappers will not take on a buyer unless they first see a solicitor. This is in the best interests of both parties.
Let's not forget, too, that the types of buyers that wrappers take on are those that mainstream lenders won't touch. Wrappers take on big risks themselves, and I'm sure MG can add many stories of horror stories of buyers who've done a runner or simply stopped paying. There are always two sides to every story.
As for image building, if you'd ever met Rick, I'm sure you would realise that he comes across as genuinely passionate about what he does.. I don't believe he needs the $4000 suit to impress people, but public perception is a funny thing, isn't it? If we see a flashy looking guy in an Armani suit driving a Porsche, we'd probably believe he's more successful than the guy in the next lane, wearing overalls and driving a 95 Falcon station wagon, wouldn't we? (well, not me actually as my perceptions have changed greatly over the last years!)
In a way, it is society who demands the suit and the nice car. They equate materialism with wealth and superior intelligence. Though most of us who frequent this forum know otherwise, we are still in the minority.
Anyway, just wanted to add my two cents worth
