How To Come Up With UNIQUE MECHANISMS That Sell

(A Thread)

(1/9)

When you're writing copy, you NEED a unique mechanism.

The unique mechanism is split into 2 parts:

- The unique mechanism behind your PROBLEM
- The unique mechanism behind your SOLUTION

(2/9)
Basic Idea Behind Unique Mechanisms:

Imagine that your prospects has 99% of the answer...

And you're selling them the missing 1%.

You're explaining the "Real Cause" of their problem and offering a solution.

Think MICRO. Not macro.

(3/9)
Let's say we're selling a weight-loss supplement.

During your research you find out that one of the ingredients in your supplement helps activate a protein called 'AMPK'.

(AMPK is a protein that plays a role in metabolism)

(4/9)
Therefore:

CORE problem: Can't lose weight.
UM behind problem: Not enough AMPK in their body

Here's how that would look:

"The reason you can't lose weight ISN'T because of your diet or exercise regimen...

It's actually because your 'Metabolic Switch' isn't active."

(5/9)
"Metabolic Switch" is just a fancy way of talking about AMPK levels.

We're selling them that 1% of missing information that they didn't have access to before.

We're saying:

"look, you just need this ONE tiny piece of the puzzle to finally start losing weight."

(6/9)
Unique Mech Behind The SOLUTION

This part is self explanatory.

The UM behind the problem is the metabolic switch (AMPK).

Therefore, the UM behind the SOLUTION is your supp, which has an ingredient that supports AMPK - turns on your 'metabolic switch'.

(for example).

(7/9)
It takes basic research to come up with unique mechanisms.

Remember:

Imagine that your prospects has had 99% of the answer...

And you're selling them the missing 1%.

(8/9)
This system ISN'T limited to supplement copy either.

You can use this framework for ANY kind of copywriting.

I literally just used this framework to write a sales letter for @blackhatwizardd the other day.

(9/9)

More from All

You May Also Like

A brief analysis and comparison of the CSS for Twitter's PWA vs Twitter's legacy desktop website. The difference is dramatic and I'll touch on some reasons why.

Legacy site *downloads* ~630 KB CSS per theme and writing direction.

6,769 rules
9,252 selectors
16.7k declarations
3,370 unique declarations
44 media queries
36 unique colors
50 unique background colors
46 unique font sizes
39 unique z-indices

https://t.co/qyl4Bt1i5x


PWA *incrementally generates* ~30 KB CSS that handles all themes and writing directions.

735 rules
740 selectors
757 declarations
730 unique declarations
0 media queries
11 unique colors
32 unique background colors
15 unique font sizes
7 unique z-indices

https://t.co/w7oNG5KUkJ


The legacy site's CSS is what happens when hundreds of people directly write CSS over many years. Specificity wars, redundancy, a house of cards that can't be fixed. The result is extremely inefficient and error-prone styling that punishes users and developers.

The PWA's CSS is generated on-demand by a JS framework that manages styles and outputs "atomic CSS". The framework can enforce strict constraints and perform optimisations, which is why the CSS is so much smaller and safer. Style conflicts and unbounded CSS growth are avoided.