Tl;dr version Chris Brogen created a 'webinar' which one can access for $47 which gives you Chris' take on how to best exploit Google+, unsurprisingly some haters have come out and lambasted him for it.
Its impossible to truly fathom why some people respond the way they do, we can speculate but without telepathy that is ultimately unsatisfying. As a free market type I'm all for Chris charging what ever he wants to 'teach' Google+, others can offer their own version for less (or more) and people who don't think its 'worth' it don't have to buy it. Its not like their life will be ruined because they couldn't afford it.
Most people forget that money has two values, the value placed on it by the person receiving it, and the value that the person giving it. They can be wildly different. When a third party evaluates a transaction based on their personal value of money they can often come to an erroneous conclusion as to who it favors.
So if $50 for you is a week of groceries to feed your family and sometimes you can't find that $50. It's insane to spend that kind of money on training for a product or service which will probably be completely different 2 months from now. If $50 for you is the rounding error on the tip you left for dinner, then paying it for someone to summarize Google+ for you rather than spending two or three or eight hours of your time figuring it out on your own is probably a no-brainer.
So 'charging' for information is neither 'Right' nor 'Wrong.' Tricking people into paying for something they didn't expect? That can be wrong. Mis-representing the information you're presenting? That can be wrong. But if you're up front with what you pay and what it is, and better yet if you offer money back if they aren't satisfied. Not 'Wrong' in the slightest.
Tl;dr version Chris Brogen created a 'webinar' which one can access for $47 which gives you Chris' take on how to best exploit Google+, unsurprisingly some haters have come out and lambasted him for it.
Its impossible to truly fathom why some people respond the way they do, we can speculate but without telepathy that is ultimately unsatisfying. As a free market type I'm all for Chris charging what ever he wants to 'teach' Google+, others can offer their own version for less (or more) and people who don't think its 'worth' it don't have to buy it. Its not like their life will be ruined because they couldn't afford it.
Most people forget that money has two values, the value placed on it by the person receiving it, and the value that the person giving it. They can be wildly different. When a third party evaluates a transaction based on their personal value of money they can often come to an erroneous conclusion as to who it favors.
So if $50 for you is a week of groceries to feed your family and sometimes you can't find that $50. It's insane to spend that kind of money on training for a product or service which will probably be completely different 2 months from now. If $50 for you is the rounding error on the tip you left for dinner, then paying it for someone to summarize Google+ for you rather than spending two or three or eight hours of your time figuring it out on your own is probably a no-brainer.
So 'charging' for information is neither 'Right' nor 'Wrong.' Tricking people into paying for something they didn't expect? That can be wrong. Mis-representing the information you're presenting? That can be wrong. But if you're up front with what you pay and what it is, and better yet if you offer money back if they aren't satisfied. Not 'Wrong' in the slightest.