Forest for the trees
Eliot,
You can't see it. You won't ever see it. You're too close to the subject to be able to separate yourself from it and as a result, it's impossible for you or anyone in your position to step back and see it for what it is.
You're talking to an avid consumer of blackjack books, software and related products. And while I'm certain your academia accomplishments are noteworthy and something you have every right to be proud of, I can promise you the fact that you are a credentialled math professor is not something that impresses me . . . and I'm your absolute best possible potential customer.
I have the same problem in my line of work and trust me, the last opinion that matters when it comes to taking a step backward and seeing things for what they are, is me. I can't possibly see what others see because my judgment is clouded with things I consider important and those thing, while important to me, may not be important in terms of making sales happen.
I once wrote a 60k word course that do date has sold 19 copies. I still believe it's the best thing I've ever written. See what I mean?
I sold $22k in courses this month. That's net. All good stuff, to be sure, but in order to pull that off meant incorporating things into my approach I would not believe mattered or would be important. Now, I know better.
In blackjack I've learned to be dispassionate about outcomes. I'm more concerned about my ability to play error free at the highest possible skill level I've achieved to day, and accept that in even my very best playing outings, the chips will fall where they may. I suggest the same dispassionate approach here to the marketing of your book.
I thought this was to be a book for the mass market. I'm willing to bet your target audience has few 25 year old Ph.d'ers. More likely, they're 25 year old Mac.D'ers who want to learn how an average guy like themselves can beat the casinos to a pulp. Know why I bought KO? Because, like the cover says, it's "the easiest card counting system ever devised." I bought it IN SPITE OF the Ph.d credential.
"Oh, I didn't realize you have to have a Ph.D to be able to pull that off. Never mind."
Are you selling to AP's or Ploppies? Imagine which market is bigger and you have your answer. Agreed, AP's appreciate and respect and seek out authors such as yourself who come bringing the numbers that matter. But a ploppy? No way.
Likewise, for what it's worth, (and you're certainly able to completely disagree), I can tell you from a consumer of blackjack products that the Ph.D tag tells me boredom is just around the corner and at this point, I'll likely still buy the book but do so only because I already know you're a good read.
But the guy off the street?
Not gonna happen.
I loved KO because it completely suprised me that it was presented in such a friendly manner. It was one of the last counting books I bought because I'd already discovered that digesting blackjack books by Ph.D'ers was way beyond my commitment level back then.
You responded to my earlier post with the math wiz kid creditials. Damn, that IS good stuff! Just like the MIT thingie romanced me into buying anything Team MIT related, that math wiz bit has the same feel and my credit card is jumping out of my wallet as we speak. Were it me - that's where I'd be taking aim.
The last thing I want to read is something with charts and graphs and math formuli from some math professor who thinks bouncing numbers around in his head is fun. Numbers aren't fun. You tell me my choice is between that and Jerry P's killer card clumping tactics that'll teach me in a weekend which tables are hot (hey, look at that empty check tray!) and which aren't (gee, they're all frowning) and guess where my dollars are headed, unfortunately.
I appreciate your insights, your opinions and your entertaining style. This, in spite of the Ph.d. Imagine!
BB
