Low Hanging Fruit

One of the fundamental pieces of advice that I always bring with me in business is “Always pick the low-hanging fruit first“, this is a platitude as much as any, but there is some basic wisdom in it. Most people aspire to greatness, whether they admit this or not, and there are two major ways for a person to be recognized as great, doing something incredibly creative, or doing something incredibly complex. In recent years, this has tended to become even worse in that people take the technology approach which is: “Do something incredibly creative and complex“, which brings a whole string of new problems.

Complexity and creativity are two things that often land businesses in trouble, because people often want to be recognized for doing something revolutionary and people often view some creative as being more innovative if it also appears complex. They aspire to be the Steve Jobs of their industry before they’ve gotten their business off the ground. The idea behind the low hanging fruit is to do those things that are simple, uncomplicated, come at a low cost and risk, but promise safe, guaranteed returns before doing the things that offer greater returns but carry much higher risks.

For instance, if you are running a small manufacturing operation making pasta sauce, you can probably improve your bottom line by improving the production and distribution process incrementally, ensuring smooth operations throughout your value chain before attempting a market expansion. This accomplishes two things, first of all it ensures that you have control over the resource usage in your value chain, and secondly it removes barriers to scale. Many companies have tried to expand before they were ready to expand and it leads to a souring of relationships within their value chain due to either having to sacrifice product quality, being unable to deliver, or not being able to keep up with their inputs.

In the same way, many men who are new to the red pill tend to go after the big things, that come with equally big costs and risks first, rather than fixing the little problems. For obvious reasons, often we think that major changes give major results, and major effort has major effect. However, 10 small changes can often have much greater positive effects than one major change, for less effort at a lower risk. Furthermore, those many, small and easy changes serve to enable the big changes. Continue reading

An Update on Black Label Logic

I took some time off for the past month after putting out a blog post a week, even two posts a week for a while during my high productivity periods and I actually sat around reflecting quite a bit on what I want to do going forward with this blog.

Richard Cooper of Entrepreneurs in Cars said something on a Red Man Group pre-show that I somewhat took to heart. Since we started doing The Red Man Group, I’ve done it just about every week for 2 – 3 hours, on top of spending a lot of time crafting my essays, especially those that require a lot of research, and statistics. On top of that I’m currently writing the next Gendernomics book that I expect will be out around December.

This is a heavy time investment, I calculated that I’ve written around 400.000 words just on the blog, and around 50.000 combined in Gendernomics and Gendernomics 2. I would like to be able to put more time into writing, because it’s something I very much enjoy doing, however what Rich said was “If you get paid like a hobby, you will treat it like a hobby“, so for that reason I’ve decided to expand into more sources of revenue for the Black Label Logic Project.

However, it’s not my style to ask for money without offering additional value, so here are the 3 new value propositions from Black Label Logic.  Continue reading

Of Online Game and Omnichannels

Those of you who read my essay on doing some AB testing on Tinder, will know that I’m quite a recent adopter of online dating apps. I did try some of the sites back in 2007 or 2008, but found it to be quite a wrenched hive of scum and villainy. I’ve always been more partial to day game, social circle game or night game as methods for meeting women, because you can screen your targets much more effectively, so fatfishing is more or less non-existent in those forms of game prior to 2 am at the bar when all bets are off.

The thing I’ve found is that styles of game are a lot like workout routines, people find one they like, stick with it, defend it zealously and regard anyone who has a different routine as having it just to insult them. I’ve always found this to be a rather non-pragmatic approach both to training and game.

I tend to take the approach that you should learn as much as you can, test as much as you are able and keep what is useful. To use an example I’ve got a weight training program and I have a body weight training program, I prefer the former but I use the latter for active recovery, rehabilitation after injury and when I’m unable to access a gym. Continue reading

Gendernomics: Products and Markets

Rollo recently posted an essay where he talks about the concept of value added, more specifically about a tendency among women to conflate their sexual market value with their worth as a human being. This is largely a function of women having reduced themselves to sexual commodities, and one key characteristics of a commodity in a market is that there is little if any differentiation. For instance, if I were to purchase aluminum ingots or oil in the spot market, no company really offers a differentiated product, they are all sold based on lowest cost. In the same manner, if the only  thing being “sold” in the sexual market place is the act of sex, one could argue that such a product is largely undifferentiated.

Naturally, for the act of sex one prefers a packaging that is aesthetically pleasing, this goes for both men and women. In today’s online sexual market place, it doesn’t matter much how great your personality is, as most purchasing processes start with determining whether a product passes the hurdle rate for appearance, and then if it does one explores other product features.

Much of product design is based on an idea for a product, and then after the idea generation and prototyping phases, one comes up with the value proposition to the market. My preference is to begin with a market analysis, and then creating the product, in order to ensure that will be customers for the product. It is generally also much cheaper to conduct market research than it is to develop products. From this approach, one can develop a good sense of the market in which one will operate, and which product characteristics are important to the potential customer base. One can even identify the price ceiling, potential volumes and various other important input to the product design process.

If one compares Vodka to Whiskey for instance, the former is ethanol and water, the latter is also ethanol and water, but the process of production has a large influence on the end-product. Vodka is differentiated 90% using brand building and marketing. Whiskey is differentiated in the same manner, however, much of the marketing is based on differences in the production process. These differences range from the grain bill (malt, rye, corn, etc), malt processing (peat levels), type of distillation (pot still or column still) time spent cask aging, type of casks that the whiskey has been aged in, and single malt vs. blended. Continue reading

Gendernomics: The Tinder Picture Experiment

To give the background for the experiment, I’ve never been much into online dating because when I started practicing game, the only material was largely centered on clubs. I’ve been using day-game quite a lot over the past few years because I travel a lot for my day job and often end up spending 5 days to two weeks in a location. However, lately I’ve found it a challenge to do day game due to spending less time in a city, having fewer repeat visits and having to compress the process into a much shorter time period.

I noticed that Anthony (@beachmuscles) was having a lot of success using various online platforms including Tinder, and concluded that this could be a very useful avenue for me as well and I don’t like leaving pussy on the table. I’ve also noticed a trend where people tend to go out more in groups, or on already planned dates, as opposed to going out just to meet people, so it seems that the internet has lead to distribution and logistics innovations in the sexual market place as well.

The first issue I ran into when I downloaded Tinder was to find good pictures of myself, I’ve had photography as a hobby for years but I’ve never spent much time in front of a camera, and I don’t really have a lot of pictures of myself suitable for a dating profile. I also know that people tend to be very poor judges of their own pictures, so I figured that I had to find a way to get 3 – 5 good pictures of myself.

This was what caused me to conduct this experiment because in absence of other pictures, I used my professional headshots for my Tinder profile along with filling out the default spaces in the profile including my alma matter and my job title, then overwhelmingly got responses from women ages 30 – 35 with professional jobs and University degrees. This is hardly my ideal demographic, so being that I know a thing or two about red pill theory I formulated an experiment. It was only intended to give me insight into online dating in general, and Tinder in particular, but when I mentioned it on The Red Man Group many men requested a write up, so here we go. Continue reading

Gendernomics: Of Mirages and Meat Scales

The first book I ever read on investing was a tome entitled “The Intelligent Investor” written by Professor Benjamin Graham. This treatise outlines Graham’s philosophy of “Value Investing“, of which Warren Buffett is the most well-known practitioner. As a young man I struggled a lot with understanding Graham’s idea of investing based on “intrinsic value“, because I couldn’t quite conceptualize what it was in my mind. Was it the value of retained earnings minus debt, the book value of the company, the projected earnings per share in perpetuity discounted by net present value? As I continued to feed my mind a steady diet of finance information, this did not alleviate the confusion, rather it compounded it. However, I still found immense value in Graham’s magnum opus. The one quote that has stuck with me for a long time since reading the book is:

In the short run, the market is a voting machine but in the long run, it is a weighing machine.

This is a valuable principle, because we often run into situations where what is popular is what is easy, makes us feel good in the moment and hurts us long term, while what is hard, makes us uncomfortable and brings us growth long-term is unpopular. This is illustrated by a conversation from the Andrew Ross Sorkin movie “Too Big Too Fail” in a conversation between Michele Davis (Cynthia Nixon), Neel Kashkari (Ayad Akhtar) and Hank Paulson (William Hurt)

Neel Kashkari: Poor bastard who bought his dream house? The teaser rate on his mortgage runs out, his payments go up, he defaults.

Henry Paulson: Mortgage-backed securities tank. AIG has to pay off the swaps. All of them. All over the world. At the same time.

Neel Kashkari: AIG can’t pay. AIG goes under. Every bank they insure books massive losses on the same day. And then they all go under. It all comes down.

Michele Davis: [horrified] The *whole* financial system? And what do I say when they ask me why it wasn’t regulated?

Henry Paulson: No one wanted to. We were making too much money.

In the short term, everyone was making too much money, and despite quite a few people being aware that it was going to become a major threat to the financial system, nobody wanted to be the canary in coalmine. They were faced with a choice, where they could side with the voting machine, face no negative consequences and in fact be positively rewarded, which was a much more palatable choice than to side with the weighing machine, face a lot of negative backlash from their colleagues, and potential lose millions. This is not uncommon, as whistle-blowers, “doomsayers”, and the messengers tend to be disliked because they ruin the mood.

A good analogy would be that a high school kid’s parents are out of town, and he decides to have a party. However, as the evening progresses, the party starts to get out of hand, people show up with kegs, before you know it the living room has turned into a mosh pit and people are playing ultimate frisbee with $200 china. If the kid decides to call the cops, or his parents, he is likely to be the person who faces negative consequences, despite the fact that he was not in the moral wrong. Continue reading

The Chalice and the Crucible

So in other news this week, Dr. Jordan B. Peterson has made a controversial statement about reproductive marxism, or as he referred to it “enforced monogamy” [1].  From what I could gather from the statement, the simple premise is that which I outlined in my essay on reproductive marxism.

In nature, it appears that the natural order mating opportunities flow to men much in the same way that capital does in capitalism. It flows from those who are unsuccessful to those who are successful, and the more capital a person has, the more capital will flow to them. A man who is unsuccessful in the mating market will be left with very little, if anything at all. A man who is successful in the mating market will receive even more mating opportunities.

However, this creates instability in the system in the same way that the above average collection of wealth among a small number of highly successful businessmen creates instability in a capitalist system. The fundamental order of capitalism is competition, as constant competition ensures that resources are efficiently allocated. However, the goal of any capitalist businessman is to gain a monopoly position where the maximum amount of revenue can be generated and where above average profits will be attained. Once an oligopoly or a monopoly comes to exist, resources will no longer be efficiently allocated.  Reproductive Marxism

In any system that is a zero-sum or appears to be zero-sum, a side-effect is that the outcomes are often winner takes all, rather than being normally distributed. What this means is that wealth is distributed on a curve where the top 2 – 3% of the population control a great majority of the resources, rather than the resources being distributed roughly according to population size. It’s a fancy way of saying the top 1% control 99% of the resources, the bottom 99% control 1% of the resources. This tends to create a lot of instability within the system.

If one were to use the framework of conflict theory, one could posit that within a society one has a myriad of groups that all have different interests, some of these are deeply invested in the present social order because this social order benefits them in terms of resources. Other groups are in conflict with the present social order because it does not benefit them in terms of resources. For instance, the core argument made by Occupy Wall Street protesters was that the present system benefits at the top 1% at the cost of the 99%, economically speaking.

Much of Dr. Peterson’s work, from “12 Rules for Life“, to “Maps of Meaning” deals with the balance between mechanisms that enhance and preserve stability, and those that reduce and destroy stability. I’ve themed this the conflict between the ID and the Super-ego in Freudian terms. Where the ID, cast in Peterson’s analysis as chaos represents the natural order of things, and the super-ego order, the civilizing effect of reason on nature.

The article that somewhat inspired me to do some research, and subsequently write this essay, was a very effective piece of rhetoric, very accurately aimed at the market the author sought to influence, out of which my favorite quote is:

The idea that women will only sleep with the top men if given the chance is straight out of pick-up artist garbage pseudoscience. This ideology of “beta” and “alpha” males (the latter getting all the sex) is based on a mangled and since-retracted study about wolves, and bears no relationship whatsoever to human societies. Worse, it instills the false notion that women are largely status-obsessed sluts who will have to be basically coerced into sleeping with anyone but the most attractive men. [2]

Fortunately, yours truly cares quite little for rhetoric, I much prefer data, so what does the data say? In God We Trust, everyone else has to bring the data. In the quoted paragraphs there are 2 concrete statements we can look at.

A) The existence of Alpha males and Beta males as defined by sexual success.

B) The principle that women would rather share an alpha than own a beta.

From these, we can form a couple of hypotheses. In the case of the first statement, it’s quite simple, the basic premise is that a minority of men have a majority of the sex. This is often shorthanded as the “sexual market pareto principle” that Chris Rock verbalized as “20% of the men do 80% of the fucking“. If this is not the case, one would expect male sexual success to follow a normal distribution meaning that you have extreme outliers on both sides, and most men are somewhere around the mean. This means, simply put, that one would expect 33% of men to have less than the average of sex partners, 33% would have the average number of sex partners, and 33% would have an over-average amount of sex partners.

For the second statement, that women are and I quote “largely status-obsessed sluts” this is quite an easy set of hypotheses that would follow from the former two. In effect, if one falsifies the null hypothesis, and thus is capable of concluding that sexual success among men does not follow a normal distribution, and instead that a minority of men have a majority of the sexual success (as measured by sex partners) then one can establish not that women are status-obsessed sluts, because that would be concluding on a single cause, but that there is a sexual disparity among men, and thus that factors in female sexual selection behavior likely plays a part creating this sexual disparity. Thus, the following are the hypotheses for this essay:

Null Hypothesis: Attention from women to men follows a normal distribution

Hypothesis 1: Attention from women to men does not follow a normal distribution

Null Hypothesis: Sexual success among men follows a normal distribution

Hypothesis 2: Sexual success among men does not follow a normal distribution

Continue reading