If you say something positive, unless you are as cute as Moo Deng, the pygmy hippo, you will not likely get much traction or eyeballs. Love and positivity are not monetizable, but hate is a different matter altogether. If you write something that can make people hate you, you might get somewhere in the race to turn eyeballs into revenue.
Based on what I know, there are three consistent ways to make people hate you in the personal finance space:
a) Claim to have $100,000 before you are 30
Getting $100,000 before age 30 is like a coming-of-age ceremony for financial influencers. For folks of my generation, this is not an easy target to reach; you need a reasonably solid job as a professional or a salesperson to have a decent shot at meeting this target. Over the years, thanks to inflation and higher starting salaries, $100,000 before 30 has become more accessible.
But the hate has not changed over the years. I got a fair bit of attention, which did quite well for book sales in 2005 and even garnered 100+ pages of discussion on YPAP BBS and EDMW forums if I recall correctly. However, the vitriol against female influencers was much higher than what I experienced with Budget Babe and MissFITFI.
I suppose commenters are more concerned by why they CAN'T get $100,000 by age 30 and seem to have some kind of defensive mechanism when faced with women who can do it. It's like gatekeepers in the computer gaming space - they are primarily incompetent male gamers.
b) Claim to be retired early
The most ridiculous public censure against someone who claims to be early retired was directed at Rebecca Lim, the TCS 8 actress, when she did an advertising campaign with NTUC Income.
Once your audience is fed up with hearing about your $100,000 net worth, your next move is to claim that you have retired early. This attracts much more vitriol, as many fellow citizens feel stressed and imprisoned by their day jobs. They last want to know someone who can retire early in Singapore.
I actually see a system of defences to deal with folks who claim to be retired early. The first is to pick on your status as a single person or someone married without kids. Reminding financial influencers that they are single makes people feel better about themselves. Investment Moats and AK71 seem to be criticised quite a bit for this.
Another approach is to examine retirement status with a fine-tooth comb. You may not be considered fully retired if you are taking your foot off the accelerator in your intense professional job. Ashish Kumar still does some debate coaching on the side, and I receive revenue as a trainer and lecturer—work that I enjoy.
Finally, people will inquire about your investment strategy. Most will only be satisfied if you can show that you can live entirely on your passive income. If you have a mix of ETFs, you need to have a safe withdrawal rate to convince people how robust your plan is.
Claiming retirement in your 50s does not receive as much brick-bats. I just want to take this opportunity to congratulate CoryLogics for retiring recently at 54.
c) Insult the national religion of Dividends Investing
Dividend investors are having a great time right now as interest rates are down again. The dividends chat groups are full of fabulous food pictures posted by folks celebrating their dividend payouts. In many ways, Dividend investing is like religion in Singapore. We have rituals like a thanksgiving through food posting on Telegram, a religious doctrine on sustainable free cash flows, and a congregation of worshippers in dividend-paying company AGMs. And dividends are a miracle of Singapore capitalism - money appearing in your bank account without you lifting a finger tax-free.
Therefore, it is perfectly logical to attract eyeballs by insulting people's religion. Just say that dividend investing is suboptimal or irrelevant. Kelvin Learns Investing is the latest guy to do this (link), which has created quite a lot of unease in the dividends chatgroups.
I just reviewed the video and found that it actually motivates dividend investing!
His arguments against dividends are weak and a rehash of Modigliani and Miller, which many of us know. He also cherry-picks examples to make his case and rarely assesses dividends as a factor in factor studies. His arguments become very persuasive when discussing the advantages of dividend investing, which was littered throughout the video. I hope everyone will not be too hard on Kelvin, as he needs eyeballs to make money and does not disapprove of dividends all that much.
My views on dividend investing obviously clash with many others, but you can read about them here.
Finally, I don't include blogs designed by financial advisors to get angry eyeballs in my discussion. That's so good; it should be a business model in an MBA textbook. The blog I miss the most is Money Maverick. Since he no longer has an FA license, it's not as maverick as before.
Financial influencers who want eyeballs should stick to my three-stage formula for getting attention on this social media space.