I'm finally focused. (I think). I'm going to start a business called The Herb Cure. My main products will be Native Remedies. They drop ship, so that makes it easy for me, although they have wholesale pricing for large orders which I may take advantage of if I get really ambitious. I have my husband's support in this so that will come in handy if we decide to expand.
For now, I am starting as basic as possible. I have a Zen Cart installed and a free template. I'm working about 5 minutes at a time on it. I sometimes wonder if employing someone else to do the design and programming wouldn't be worthwhile, but the truth is, I like this type of thing even though I pull my hair out over it. But it's good experience and someday I'll be glad I learned how to do it.
It's definitely slow, however. The regional sales rep at Megafood will be setting me up as a retailer as soon as I get the website presentable, and I'm so excited but of course the family comes first. It will be great to sell Megafood 100% whole food trace minerals to friends and family at last! We thrive on their products and I can't wait to get started.
After the website launches, we'll be buying sponsored advertising on Google for less than half the normal cost because that's what my husband does for a living now. So many things in our lives seem to be fitting together for the good lately. And I haven't even blogged about Ron Paul yet! I'll have to do that next time.
Saturday, December 29, 2007
Feeling Foolish
I'm really feeling like an idiot tonight. I've been reading so many awesome blogs out there, many of which are maintained by magnificently prolific and smart women with children and busy lives like mine. Yet they manage to say so much more in their blogs. I want to read them. I don't want to write mine.
Other bloggers seem to have so much to say -- the more I read the more I confirm to myself why I never started a blog before and why I don't often post.
Hm. Another element is perfectionism. I'd love to delete this blog and start over. Act like I know what I'm talking about. Pretend to be one of those "other" mom/bloggers. After giving myself a pep talk, I'm off to find something interesting to post about!
Other bloggers seem to have so much to say -- the more I read the more I confirm to myself why I never started a blog before and why I don't often post.
Hm. Another element is perfectionism. I'd love to delete this blog and start over. Act like I know what I'm talking about. Pretend to be one of those "other" mom/bloggers. After giving myself a pep talk, I'm off to find something interesting to post about!
Thursday, December 13, 2007
Online earnings so far...
I still think it's amazing that anybody can make money online with a little know-how. Keep in mind that I have 5 children that I homeschool, so running an online business is definitely more of a hobby, and I haven't devoted time each day to it - or even each week.
But in the last few months, I've been paid 68 cents from Google Adsense (that's just the single ad I have on this blog, which no one reads!) and a whole dollar from Squidoo. (I like Squidoo. I might make more lenses if I ever have time).
I think making dollars and cents online can be kind of an addiction. Obviously what I've done so far has little value and doesn't even pay for the power to run the servers for all those "clicks." But somehow it gives me the same little thrill I got when I was a kid and returned the cans I found on the side of the road to the grocery store for the deposit, bought a Sprite, then twisted off the cap to discover I'd won another Sprite! I felt like I was in a land flowing with milk and honey.
Oh yeah, and I also made a sale at my eCRATER store, which was entirely self-propelled because I hadn't touched it in weeks. So that was pretty awesome.
Let's see, I sold a domain name for $15 that I think actually came free with my hosting package, so that probably was my biggest profit so far. :) Pretty silly, I know. But I still think I'm learning just by watching and dipping my toes in..
But in the last few months, I've been paid 68 cents from Google Adsense (that's just the single ad I have on this blog, which no one reads!) and a whole dollar from Squidoo. (I like Squidoo. I might make more lenses if I ever have time).
I think making dollars and cents online can be kind of an addiction. Obviously what I've done so far has little value and doesn't even pay for the power to run the servers for all those "clicks." But somehow it gives me the same little thrill I got when I was a kid and returned the cans I found on the side of the road to the grocery store for the deposit, bought a Sprite, then twisted off the cap to discover I'd won another Sprite! I felt like I was in a land flowing with milk and honey.
Oh yeah, and I also made a sale at my eCRATER store, which was entirely self-propelled because I hadn't touched it in weeks. So that was pretty awesome.
Let's see, I sold a domain name for $15 that I think actually came free with my hosting package, so that probably was my biggest profit so far. :) Pretty silly, I know. But I still think I'm learning just by watching and dipping my toes in..
Wednesday, November 28, 2007
Income4Beginners Review
A while ago, my husband and I ran across a home business opportunity called Income4Beginners. We thoroughly researched it and decided to give it a try. It involves promoting a personalized link, which sells the "income-generating system" to others. It is not a pyramid scheme as there are also software products included in the package. CLICK HERE to read the full explanation.
The program costs $40, and we made our first $40 sale within a couple weeks by placing just a few craigslist ads every day. The next day I got another $40 payment.
I haven't promoted this program much because I'm working on my health products site which I'm just more passionate about. But I still think Income4Beginners is a good way to start out in internet marketing and even to make a little extra to use for other ventures.
This is my Income4Beginners link. Visitors enter their email address for a "free ebook" about the program. (For which I provided the direct link above). I prefer to skip this step and get visitors directly to the offer page.
Anyway, I wrote this review for anyone out there who is searching for information, like I did before paying my $40. It's worth it, but you do have to put some effort into promoting your link.
The program costs $40, and we made our first $40 sale within a couple weeks by placing just a few craigslist ads every day. The next day I got another $40 payment.
I haven't promoted this program much because I'm working on my health products site which I'm just more passionate about. But I still think Income4Beginners is a good way to start out in internet marketing and even to make a little extra to use for other ventures.
This is my Income4Beginners link. Visitors enter their email address for a "free ebook" about the program. (For which I provided the direct link above). I prefer to skip this step and get visitors directly to the offer page.
Anyway, I wrote this review for anyone out there who is searching for information, like I did before paying my $40. It's worth it, but you do have to put some effort into promoting your link.
Thursday, November 8, 2007
Best Health Freedom Article I've Ever Read
It's not a conspiracy to make us all ill; it's just simple economics. The big companies with all the power benefit more if we're all sick! So if the government is telling you to stay away from something as wholesome and natural as raw milk, you can bet a lot of lobbyists are real happy...
Click here to read it.
From the article:
A bit of context is in order. For most of human history, any milk we drank was raw. Up until 1900 or so, raw milk simply was called "milk." Yet we did not see massive pandemics of lysteria and tuberculosis. We also didn’t see massive epidemics of obesity, like we have now. Interestingly, there was a physical culture movement in this country, started by Bernarr McFadden, which emphasized the importance of raw milk. McFadden even recommended a "milk cure" for many serious illnesses – and in many cases, it worked. The "milk cure" had also been popular for, well, as long as there’s been writing, as a cure for tuberculosis. Weston Price’s research showed the tremendous differences in health value between raw milk and the pasteurized garbage we now consume. It used to be said that "milk is blood." Dr. Pottenger, with his famous cat experiment, demonstrated the same differences. Raw milk saved Gary North’s life. Yet, this wonderful substance is illegal in 33 states. To seek out one reason for the ban on raw milk, consider the massive lobbying efforts by the dairy industry that resulted in the passage of those laws. They knew perfectly well that the small farmers would be unable to compete once these laws were passed. In combination with the minimum milkfat law, the large dairies were able to consolidate the market and largely drive small family farms out of competition.
If asked to defend these laws, the government is denied any of the usual excuses. There is no such thing as secondhand milk, nor does drinking milk interfere with one’s ability to drive a car. There is no externality argument available to them. This makes the milk laws a powerful wedge to use in arguing for liberty – the only reasonable explanation is that these laws exist for the benefit of certain industries.
It is clear how these laws benefit the large milk manufacturers. I submit that they also serve a second master, and a far more insidious one. In the interest of benefiting the pharmaceutical companies, the government has undertaken a series of steps designed to weaken and sicken the population. Combining this with a widespread awareness of just how sick we are, together with completely backwards tips on how to fix the situation, the government encourages all of us to medicalize our problems, and treat them with the various drugs available. Just turn on the tv and watch the ads.
Click here to read it.
From the article:
A bit of context is in order. For most of human history, any milk we drank was raw. Up until 1900 or so, raw milk simply was called "milk." Yet we did not see massive pandemics of lysteria and tuberculosis. We also didn’t see massive epidemics of obesity, like we have now. Interestingly, there was a physical culture movement in this country, started by Bernarr McFadden, which emphasized the importance of raw milk. McFadden even recommended a "milk cure" for many serious illnesses – and in many cases, it worked. The "milk cure" had also been popular for, well, as long as there’s been writing, as a cure for tuberculosis. Weston Price’s research showed the tremendous differences in health value between raw milk and the pasteurized garbage we now consume. It used to be said that "milk is blood." Dr. Pottenger, with his famous cat experiment, demonstrated the same differences. Raw milk saved Gary North’s life. Yet, this wonderful substance is illegal in 33 states. To seek out one reason for the ban on raw milk, consider the massive lobbying efforts by the dairy industry that resulted in the passage of those laws. They knew perfectly well that the small farmers would be unable to compete once these laws were passed. In combination with the minimum milkfat law, the large dairies were able to consolidate the market and largely drive small family farms out of competition.
If asked to defend these laws, the government is denied any of the usual excuses. There is no such thing as secondhand milk, nor does drinking milk interfere with one’s ability to drive a car. There is no externality argument available to them. This makes the milk laws a powerful wedge to use in arguing for liberty – the only reasonable explanation is that these laws exist for the benefit of certain industries.
It is clear how these laws benefit the large milk manufacturers. I submit that they also serve a second master, and a far more insidious one. In the interest of benefiting the pharmaceutical companies, the government has undertaken a series of steps designed to weaken and sicken the population. Combining this with a widespread awareness of just how sick we are, together with completely backwards tips on how to fix the situation, the government encourages all of us to medicalize our problems, and treat them with the various drugs available. Just turn on the tv and watch the ads.
Wednesday, August 15, 2007
Men Are From Google, Women Are From Yahoo
This is actually an old article, from 12/29/2005, but it's making the rounds on the social bookmarking sites.
Do Different Genders Use The Web Differently?
by Jason Lee Miller
On the Internet, as in life, men and women have different motivations for doing what they do. According to a recent report from Pew Internet and American Life, women view the Internet as a place to extend, support, and nurture relationships and communities.
Men tend to see it as an office, a library, or a playground--screw the community, this is about function not family.
Do Different Genders Use The Web Differently?
by Jason Lee Miller
On the Internet, as in life, men and women have different motivations for doing what they do. According to a recent report from Pew Internet and American Life, women view the Internet as a place to extend, support, and nurture relationships and communities.
Men tend to see it as an office, a library, or a playground--screw the community, this is about function not family.
Monday, August 6, 2007
The New Religion
I StumbledUpon the following post on Frontline's website. It was written by a Douglas Atkin. It's just a fascinating take on brands and the way we look at common everyday products nowadays:
Frankly, advertising is not good enough to deserve the status Miller gives it. But I agree with his general drift. Consumerism has become a defining characteristic of our culture. But it was only when I interviewed my research subjects did I understand the true extent of its influence…one that would horrify many. For some people, brands are becoming the new religion…or at least giving some of the traditional institutions a run for their money. Brands are becoming credible centers of community and meaning. 45,000 Saturn car owners visited a factory in 1992 where their vehicle was made, and spent days together sharing barbeque, listening to country music and enjoying finger-painting. Did they go because they wanted to see the birthplace of a technological wonder? No, it's really quite an ordinary car. But it enjoys extraordinary devotion. Why? They told me that they identified with its worldview (that everyone, no-matter what their status, deserves respect.) And that they simply want to meet other people like themselves who share the same values and the same enthusiasms.
Brands are increasingly adopting the roles traditionally occupied by social and religious institutions…the making of meaning and community. We eat a brand's meaning when we spoon Ben and Jerry's political agenda into our mouths, or cut off an SUV in our Mini. We feel a brotherhood when we roar down the road with a pack of other Harley riders. A passenger told me that he would start a conversation with his neighbor on a JetBlue plane as they're taking off, but only when they're landing on other carriers. In other words he has the feeling that he's flying with `like-others' on JetBlue, but not with other brands.
How or why have brands been elevated to this position?
That brands can be taken seriously in this role is because our culture has allowed it. Modern society has seen the traditional forms of fellowship erode. The things that have enabled contemporary life have also undermined our collective idea of what is at its heart: geographically based communities. Mobility, modern communications and the media have chipped away at our picket-fence concept of neighborhood.
But simultaneously they have made possible non-geographically anchored equivalents. Now communities are transcending towns and villages, language and ethnicity and are evolving into groups of dispersed individuals connected by shared interests, values and identity. Community has not gone away, as some of our leaders complain. Like any successful organism, it's just adapted to changed circumstances. And communities are now forming around brands. Brands are, after all, the natural offspring of this trend. Well financed and conceived, succored by media, communications and mobility, they are becoming loci for strong communities and express credible worldviews.
Frankly, advertising is not good enough to deserve the status Miller gives it. But I agree with his general drift. Consumerism has become a defining characteristic of our culture. But it was only when I interviewed my research subjects did I understand the true extent of its influence…one that would horrify many. For some people, brands are becoming the new religion…or at least giving some of the traditional institutions a run for their money. Brands are becoming credible centers of community and meaning. 45,000 Saturn car owners visited a factory in 1992 where their vehicle was made, and spent days together sharing barbeque, listening to country music and enjoying finger-painting. Did they go because they wanted to see the birthplace of a technological wonder? No, it's really quite an ordinary car. But it enjoys extraordinary devotion. Why? They told me that they identified with its worldview (that everyone, no-matter what their status, deserves respect.) And that they simply want to meet other people like themselves who share the same values and the same enthusiasms.
Brands are increasingly adopting the roles traditionally occupied by social and religious institutions…the making of meaning and community. We eat a brand's meaning when we spoon Ben and Jerry's political agenda into our mouths, or cut off an SUV in our Mini. We feel a brotherhood when we roar down the road with a pack of other Harley riders. A passenger told me that he would start a conversation with his neighbor on a JetBlue plane as they're taking off, but only when they're landing on other carriers. In other words he has the feeling that he's flying with `like-others' on JetBlue, but not with other brands.
How or why have brands been elevated to this position?
That brands can be taken seriously in this role is because our culture has allowed it. Modern society has seen the traditional forms of fellowship erode. The things that have enabled contemporary life have also undermined our collective idea of what is at its heart: geographically based communities. Mobility, modern communications and the media have chipped away at our picket-fence concept of neighborhood.
But simultaneously they have made possible non-geographically anchored equivalents. Now communities are transcending towns and villages, language and ethnicity and are evolving into groups of dispersed individuals connected by shared interests, values and identity. Community has not gone away, as some of our leaders complain. Like any successful organism, it's just adapted to changed circumstances. And communities are now forming around brands. Brands are, after all, the natural offspring of this trend. Well financed and conceived, succored by media, communications and mobility, they are becoming loci for strong communities and express credible worldviews.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)