We intend to send two text messages, both about obtaining money, to people and ask them to click only on one of these two messages.
If they choose the first message, they should not click on the second one, and vice versa.
Let's analyze these two messages together.
Text Message 1
Hello compatriot
Click on the link below
Enter your card number, and receive up to $100 in cash.
Text Message 2
Hello compatriot
Nine tenth of wealth lies in commerce
Click on the link, learn about business, and elevate yourself to a great amount of money.
What is your psychological analysis of people's behavior?
In your opinion, if we send these two text messages to 100 million people, how many people will click on the first link and how many people will click on the second link?
If you believe more people will click on the second link, it implies a lack of understanding of people and their behavior, suggesting a significant gap in your approach to becoming a trader.
The truth is that the number of clicks on the first message is likely several times, even tens of times, higher than the number of clicks on the second message.
Fake message or real message?
If anyone has a bit of intelligence, they should understand that the first message, offering $100 with a single click, is a lie because no one gives a hundred dollars with just one click.
The second message is likely to be true as it suggests that wealth lies in commerce, a concept we often encounter in life that businessmen are rich.
And further, it is said to learn business and then get rich.
If we assume that the first state is right, the first state gives fish and the second state teaches fishing.
And how many times we saw, heard, commented and liked this sentence on social networks:
"Instead of giving fish to each other, let's teach fishing."
A correct statement that remains merely a slogan because those who want to teach fishing have no students, and those who want to give fish, have plenty of demand.
One-time money or perpetual money?
The money mentioned in the first message, if it is really given, is given at most once.
However, the money from the second message flows continuously in life and it is perpetual.
Yet, people still choose one-time money over perpetual money.
Humiliation and contempt or dignity and pride?
The first message implies a sense of humiliation and contempt as I have to register on a website like a beggar to have money deposited into my account.
In the second scenario, by learning business, I transform into an individual with character and refinement, open to scrutiny by everyone.
But again, these do not make people click on the second message.
Your opinions can make this article very intriguing.
Now, contemplate these four questions.
- What other advantages does the second message have over the first that the author did not mention in the text?
- Despite the numerous advantages of the second message over the first, why do people still choose the first message?
- Should God will for these people to become wealthy and live honorably?
- If such a person gives money to Arad and we labels him/her a successful trader, can Arad make such a person truly wealthy and prosperous?
0
0