Dan Wardrope opts to start the intro video of his Flexxable program with a question. That is, if you’re struggling to scale your pay per lead agency, why not try Flexxable? I find this weird because opening up with the big bold headline on the program’s site is so much better IMO. I’m talking about escaping the “retainer prison” that is usual in the digital marketing space. That’s the first thing Flexxable is going to address, anyway.
I assume y’all probably not familiar with whatever a retainer is, so let’s discuss it first. Nope, it’s not some dental fixtures that you put in your teeth after the braces to get that perfect smile. I mean, it IS a dental fixture, but in a different context. In the digital marketing space, however, a retainer means a payment model where clients pay for a fixed fee at regular intervals for your service (excluding ad spend). The figures involved are dependent on what’s agreed upon by the agency and the client. To put it simply, it’s a work-for-hire contract.
On the other hand, a pay per lead model means an agency gets paid by results. The agency generates leads, usually shouldering the cost of paid ads upfront if using any, and then selling the leads to clients at a price. The difference between the selling price and the cost of generating leads is the agency’s profit margin.
Again, the main distinction here would be payment based upon the agreed price per lead. But the said model can have its variation in implementation. Dan calls it a model within a model. Either you sell leads exclusively to one client; you sell the same lead to multiple clients; you sell leads exclusively for a number of days, then open ‘em up to anyone; you get paid with leads that converts (back-end model); or using a hybrid model where you charge money upfront for setting up ads like a typical retainer contract does, but only get paid like a back-end model.
So, why would an agency want to switch from retainer to pay per lead, then? According to Dan, pay per lead is much easier to sell compared to retainer contracts. It’s also easier to scale while you can work at your own pace. To add, the clients you got here compared to retainers are much better, says Dan. High paying, well-established, and independent aka no need to hand-hold them, you just focus on getting them leads instead.
If you want your agency to make the switch now, Dan offers to help you out. It’s a self-paced course with over 87 videos and 90+ downloadable contents. It also includes access to a private group where Dan’s team can answer your questions 7 days a week and weekly Q and A calls. The price of Flexxable? There’s no figure written on the site, but something north of $7,000 is a humble estimate of Flexxable’s cost.
I don’t think Flexxable is a scam. Dan seems to walk the talk as he runs a pay per lead agency himself with Flexx Digital. And yeah, I think they really know their SEO stuff because their site is always at the top when searching for a pay per lead model in digital marketing. However, the cost being THAT expensive is a major turn off, for sure. Up there with Dan writing a review about Flexxable himself and calling it completely unbiased. F*ck outta here with that BS, you know you’ll be biased af. I don’t mind some write up about the course, don’t get me wrong, but Dan better not label it as a completely unbiased review.
Besides, I’m not really convinced with the pay per lead model in digital marketing. I think that regardless of your model, there will be clients that are real pain in the ass. If they can f*ck you over before with demanding too much work outside what’s agreed upon on the retainer contract, they can do it again in pay per lead by being too nitpicky with the lead you generate. Outside the hybrid model I mentioned earlier, you, the agency owner, also carries all the financial risk by funding the ad spend yourself. I’ll pass.