Category: Uncategorized

  • #807: In Case You Missed It: March 2025 Recap of “The Tim Ferriss Show”

    AI transcript
    0:00:02 This episode is brought to you by Five Bullet Friday,
    0:00:04 my very own email newsletter.
    0:00:07 It’s become one of the most popular email newsletters
    0:00:09 in the world with millions of subscribers,
    0:00:10 and it’s super, super simple.
    0:00:12 It does not clog up your inbox.
    0:00:15 Every Friday, I send out five bullet points,
    0:00:17 super short, of the coolest things I’ve found that week,
    0:00:20 which sometimes includes apps, books, documentaries,
    0:00:23 supplements, gadgets, new self-experiments,
    0:00:25 hacks, tricks, and all sorts of weird stuff
    0:00:27 that I dig up from around the world.
    0:00:30 You guys, podcast listeners and book readers,
    0:00:33 have asked me for something short and action-packed
    0:00:34 for a very long time,
    0:00:35 because after all, the podcast, the books,
    0:00:37 they can be quite long,
    0:00:39 and that’s why I created Five Bullet Friday.
    0:00:43 It’s become one of my favorite things I do every week.
    0:00:45 It’s free, it’s always gonna be free,
    0:00:48 and you can learn more at tim.blog forward slash Friday.
    0:00:51 That’s tim.blog forward slash Friday.
    0:00:54 I get asked a lot how I meet guests for the podcast,
    0:00:57 some of the most amazing people I’ve ever interacted with.
    0:01:01 And little known fact, I’ve met probably 25% of them
    0:01:03 because they first subscribed to Five Bullet Friday.
    0:01:05 So you’ll be in good company.
    0:01:07 It’s a lot of fun.
    0:01:08 Five Bullet Friday is only available
    0:01:10 if you subscribe via email.
    0:01:13 I do not publish the content on the blog or anywhere else.
    0:01:16 Also, if I’m doing small in-person meetups,
    0:01:18 offering early access to startups, beta testing,
    0:01:20 special deals, or anything else that’s very limited,
    0:01:23 I share it first with Five Bullet Friday subscribers.
    0:01:27 So check it out, tim.blog forward slash Friday.
    0:01:29 If you listen to this podcast,
    0:01:31 it’s very likely that you’d dig it a lot,
    0:01:34 and you can, of course, easily subscribe any time.
    0:01:36 So easy peasy.
    0:01:39 Again, that’s tim.blog forward slash Friday.
    0:01:40 And thanks for checking it out.
    0:01:42 If the spirit moves you.
    0:01:43 Optimal minimum.
    0:01:47 At this altitude, I can run flat out for a half mile
    0:01:48 before my hands start shaking.
    0:01:50 Can I ask you a personal question?
    0:01:52 Now would have seen an appropriate time.
    0:01:54 What if I did the opposite?
    0:01:56 I’m a cybernetic organism,
    0:01:58 living tissue over a metal endoskeleton.
    0:02:07 Hello, boys and girls.
    0:02:09 This is Tim Ferriss.
    0:02:10 Welcome to another episode of the Tim Ferriss Show,
    0:02:13 where it is my job to deconstruct world-class performers
    0:02:14 of all different types,
    0:02:16 to tease out the routines, habits, and so on
    0:02:17 that you can apply to your own life.
    0:02:20 This is a special in-between-isode,
    0:02:24 which serves as a recap of the episodes from the last month.
    0:02:27 Features a short clip from each conversation in one place,
    0:02:31 so you can jump around, get a feel for both the episode and the guest,
    0:02:34 and then you can always dig deeper by going to one of those episodes.
    0:02:36 View this episode as a buffet to whet your appetite.
    0:02:37 It’s a lot of fun.
    0:02:38 We had fun putting it together.
    0:02:41 And for the full list of the guests featured today,
    0:02:42 see the episode’s description,
    0:02:46 probably right below wherever you press play in your podcast app.
    0:02:50 Or as usual, you can head to tim.blog slash podcast
    0:02:52 and find all the details there.
    0:02:53 Please enjoy.
    0:02:57 First up, Craig Maude,
    0:02:59 a writer, photographer, and walker
    0:03:01 living in Tokyo and Kamakura, Japan,
    0:03:03 and the author of
    0:03:05 Things Become Other Things
    0:03:06 and Kisa by Kisa.
    0:03:10 You can find Craig on Instagram and X
    0:03:11 at Craig Maude.
    0:03:15 This excerpt comes from Tim’s first interview with Craig.
    0:03:18 2009, hike to Nepal.
    0:03:20 Is that enough of a cue?
    0:03:22 Can you tell this story?
    0:03:24 Yeah, that’s an inflection point.
    0:03:25 I just got goosebumps, actually.
    0:03:29 So I really struggled with alcohol in my 20s.
    0:03:31 My teenage years, I didn’t touch anything.
    0:03:34 I was militantly straight-edge-ish.
    0:03:36 And basically, looking back now,
    0:03:38 I realize I had such a strong impulse
    0:03:41 to make sure I could get to whatever the next place was.
    0:03:43 Anything I saw that could hold me back,
    0:03:45 which included falling in love
    0:03:47 or doing drugs or anything like that
    0:03:48 that was like a retarding agent,
    0:03:50 as a teenager,
    0:03:50 I was like,
    0:03:51 immediately, I was like,
    0:03:52 okay, I don’t need this.
    0:03:53 And I got to Japan,
    0:03:54 and it was like,
    0:03:55 oh, this is a place to reinvent myself.
    0:03:57 And I started drinking,
    0:03:58 because as you do,
    0:04:00 because people drink so much here.
    0:04:00 Sure.
    0:04:03 And it turns out that I can drink a lot.
    0:04:05 I can have 15, 20 drinks,
    0:04:06 not throw up.
    0:04:07 I black out.
    0:04:08 Sure.
    0:04:10 But there’s something in my genes
    0:04:12 that allows me to just drink.
    0:04:13 And then after two or three drinks,
    0:04:14 something activates,
    0:04:17 where it’s just all we live for is more drink.
    0:04:21 And I think for most of my 20s,
    0:04:23 because I had such a low sense of self-worth,
    0:04:25 because of where I came from,
    0:04:27 because I felt this abundance of people around me
    0:04:28 that I didn’t feel I had.
    0:04:30 And I didn’t know how to ratchet that up.
    0:04:34 And I had this desire to produce culture,
    0:04:35 or to produce art,
    0:04:38 to produce literature at a level
    0:04:39 that I didn’t know how to,
    0:04:41 and I didn’t know how to bridge that gap.
    0:04:42 And what I ended up doing was,
    0:04:44 because I didn’t have mentors,
    0:04:45 because I didn’t have archetypes near me,
    0:04:47 I just drank like a fish.
    0:04:48 And I played a lot of music,
    0:04:50 because that was one thing I did have mastery over.
    0:04:52 And I played a lot of music,
    0:04:54 and I played a lot of that blacked out.
    0:04:57 And I’m really lucky I didn’t die.
    0:04:59 I mean, it would be one of these things
    0:05:00 where many, many mornings of my life,
    0:05:01 I’ve woken up,
    0:05:02 and it’s just been checking,
    0:05:04 is my face okay?
    0:05:05 Did I break my skull open?
    0:05:06 Or, you know, something like that.
    0:05:08 And I was madly in love.
    0:05:09 I fell madly, madly in love.
    0:05:11 I was 26, 27 years old.
    0:05:12 And I just,
    0:05:16 I had the most incredible love connection
    0:05:17 I’d ever felt.
    0:05:19 This like otherworldly sense
    0:05:20 of being in love with this person.
    0:05:25 And we connected so intensely
    0:05:28 and immediately went on a 40-day trip.
    0:05:30 Like a week after meeting.
    0:05:32 A 40-day trip through Tibet.
    0:05:34 We went to Tibet.
    0:05:36 I was possessed by a spirit.
    0:05:38 Like, I spoke in tongues.
    0:05:39 Wait, hold on.
    0:05:40 We hiked up to a glacier.
    0:05:43 I mean, we can’t really skip over
    0:05:44 getting possessed by spirits.
    0:05:48 I mean, it was,
    0:05:50 yeah, there was,
    0:05:52 we stayed at this one
    0:05:54 little hotel in Laza
    0:05:57 that had not always been a hotel.
    0:05:58 You know, it was this old structure.
    0:06:02 And woke up the next morning
    0:06:06 and my girlfriend was being very strange.
    0:06:07 She was being very weird.
    0:06:08 And I was like, what’s going on?
    0:06:10 She’s like, I’ll tell you when we get outside.
    0:06:10 I was like, what?
    0:06:12 You’ll tell me when we get outside?
    0:06:12 Like, what’s this about?
    0:06:14 And we go outside and she goes,
    0:06:17 okay, last night we had to get out of there
    0:06:18 because last night
    0:06:20 I woke up in the middle of the night.
    0:06:22 You were on your side of the bed
    0:06:23 cradling something
    0:06:25 that was not there.
    0:06:27 You were speaking in Tibetan.
    0:06:28 I couldn’t get you to wake up.
    0:06:32 And I was trying to speak to you in English,
    0:06:33 trying to speak to you in Japanese.
    0:06:34 You wouldn’t respond.
    0:06:36 And I finally crawled over
    0:06:37 on your side of the bed
    0:06:40 and I kind of took the air
    0:06:41 that you were holding.
    0:06:45 And I turned you on your side
    0:06:46 and you were able to like,
    0:06:47 calm down and go to sleep.
    0:06:50 And I was like, oh my God,
    0:06:50 I had this,
    0:06:52 because I had had this vision
    0:06:53 slash dream of this woman in white
    0:06:54 standing in the doorway
    0:06:56 and at the foot of the bed
    0:06:57 the night before.
    0:06:59 And I don’t know what was happening.
    0:07:01 And like, even now,
    0:07:02 I’m like full body goosebumps right now.
    0:07:05 God, this is like straight out
    0:07:06 of paranormal activity or something.
    0:07:07 I’m just like, oh God.
    0:07:08 It was so bizarre.
    0:07:10 And we had been, you know,
    0:07:11 and you have to imagine like,
    0:07:12 I don’t know if you’ve ever been in love
    0:07:13 to this degree
    0:07:15 where it just feels like
    0:07:16 everything in the world is fated.
    0:07:17 Like everything is a sign
    0:07:18 that you need to be together,
    0:07:19 that this is magic.
    0:07:20 Like only these things
    0:07:21 can possibly happen
    0:07:22 because you’re connected,
    0:07:22 you’re together.
    0:07:23 We both bought,
    0:07:25 I remember we like pulled out
    0:07:26 our books on the first day of the trip.
    0:07:27 We had both brought
    0:07:29 The Stranger by Camus.
    0:07:30 You know, it was like,
    0:07:32 it was like, oh my God, we’re fated.
    0:07:34 I went back to the hotel
    0:07:35 and I went to the manager
    0:07:36 and I was like,
    0:07:37 hey, I don’t think
    0:07:38 we can stay here tonight.
    0:07:39 He’s like, oh, what’s wrong?
    0:07:40 And I was like, well,
    0:07:41 you know, I was kind of possessed,
    0:07:42 saw this.
    0:07:43 He’s like, did you see the woman?
    0:07:45 And I was like, yeah.
    0:07:45 Oh God.
    0:07:47 He’s like, he’s like, oh,
    0:07:48 oh yeah, yeah, yeah.
    0:07:49 No, we know what’s going on with that.
    0:07:50 Here, we’ll take you
    0:07:51 to the dream reader.
    0:07:53 And so I was like, what?
    0:07:54 You’ll take me to the dream?
    0:07:55 So I ended up,
    0:07:57 I’ll try to truncate this
    0:07:57 because it can,
    0:07:58 it can kind of get a little bit long,
    0:07:59 but I mean,
    0:08:00 I’m not sure anybody listening
    0:08:01 wants you to truncate
    0:08:02 this particular story.
    0:08:04 So I mean,
    0:08:05 go wherever you want.
    0:08:07 One of the workers there
    0:08:07 is like, you know,
    0:08:08 the manager’s like,
    0:08:09 okay, take him to the dream reader.
    0:08:10 So, and I’m thinking,
    0:08:11 okay, this is a scam.
    0:08:12 I’m getting scammed.
    0:08:13 Something that’s like weird’s going on.
    0:08:16 And he takes us
    0:08:16 and we go to like
    0:08:18 the outskirts of Laza.
    0:08:19 We go to this like really
    0:08:21 kind of weird apartment block
    0:08:22 that was just made of concrete.
    0:08:22 It was maybe like
    0:08:24 two or three stories tall.
    0:08:26 And he takes us
    0:08:27 to this room
    0:08:28 on the third floor
    0:08:29 and there’s a line of people,
    0:08:30 a line of Tibetans
    0:08:31 waiting at this door.
    0:08:32 And they were all
    0:08:34 waiting to have their dreams read.
    0:08:35 So it was like,
    0:08:35 okay, this is bizarre.
    0:08:36 So we wait,
    0:08:37 we stand in line,
    0:08:37 we go inside,
    0:08:38 we sit down inside.
    0:08:40 The most beautiful,
    0:08:41 I don’t know how old she was.
    0:08:42 She was anywhere between
    0:08:45 15 and a thousand years old.
    0:08:46 Like she was just this,
    0:08:47 this creature of
    0:08:49 just the most bizarre light
    0:08:49 walks out.
    0:08:50 It was like being in the matrix,
    0:08:51 you know,
    0:08:52 the scene in the matrix
    0:08:52 where they’re like
    0:08:53 with the spoon and the bending
    0:08:55 and you’re in this random apartment
    0:08:56 and the TV’s on,
    0:08:56 you know,
    0:08:57 it was like that situation.
    0:08:58 She comes over,
    0:08:59 brings some yak,
    0:09:00 buttermilk tea,
    0:09:01 some cookies
    0:09:02 because someone’s in the dream
    0:09:03 reader room
    0:09:04 and we’re waiting for them
    0:09:05 to get out.
    0:09:06 And then our term comes up.
    0:09:07 I go in there,
    0:09:07 you go into this room,
    0:09:08 it’s all candles,
    0:09:09 Dalai Lama photos,
    0:09:10 like all this stuff.
    0:09:10 It’s like,
    0:09:11 you feel like you’re in this
    0:09:12 really holy space.
    0:09:14 And the guy from the hotel
    0:09:15 interprets for us.
    0:09:16 I tell her the dream,
    0:09:16 I tell her what happened
    0:09:18 and she gives me this blessing,
    0:09:20 puts a white wreath
    0:09:21 around my neck,
    0:09:22 gives me this little
    0:09:23 satchel of seeds
    0:09:24 and tells me to put them
    0:09:24 under my pillow
    0:09:25 when I sleep
    0:09:27 and then writes me a prayer
    0:09:28 and she says,
    0:09:28 okay,
    0:09:30 here’s these three pieces of paper.
    0:09:30 You have to take them
    0:09:31 to these three temples
    0:09:32 and they will burn them
    0:09:33 for you tonight.
    0:09:34 They’ll know what to do.
    0:09:34 Just tell them
    0:09:36 the dream reader sent you
    0:09:37 and you’ll be okay.
    0:09:37 You’ll be fine.
    0:09:38 Everything will be good.
    0:09:40 And I was like,
    0:09:42 no one’s asking me for money.
    0:09:44 And the hotel guy’s like,
    0:09:45 oh, you can leave a tip
    0:09:45 if you want or whatever.
    0:09:48 It was like $2 or something.
    0:09:49 I put $2 in the little thingy.
    0:09:51 And then we go to the temples
    0:09:52 and it ended up becoming
    0:09:54 this incredible adventure.
    0:09:55 This connects with a lot
    0:09:56 of my walking as well.
    0:09:57 Having experiences like this
    0:09:58 I think informed
    0:10:00 the sense of just give yourself up
    0:10:01 to what the day
    0:10:04 could potentially give to you.
    0:10:05 And so I ended up going
    0:10:06 to all these temples
    0:10:07 I would have never gone to.
    0:10:08 I went to the dream reader’s apartment
    0:10:10 which was like the most bizarre,
    0:10:11 beautiful place I went to
    0:10:12 in all of Tibet
    0:10:12 in that entire trip.
    0:10:14 We went to these temples,
    0:10:15 met these monks,
    0:10:16 say, hey, can you burn this for me?
    0:10:18 Oh yes, of course, absolutely.
    0:10:19 Give them like a dollar,
    0:10:21 50 cents or whatever.
    0:10:23 The whole thing cost nothing.
    0:10:24 It was clearly not a scam.
    0:10:26 It was clearly this thing
    0:10:27 that a lot of locals
    0:10:28 were participating in.
    0:10:30 And it was magic.
    0:10:31 It was just pure magic.
    0:10:31 So anyway,
    0:10:32 things like that were happening
    0:10:33 with this woman.
    0:10:35 And I screwed it up
    0:10:36 because of my drinking.
    0:10:38 I ruined the relationship.
    0:10:39 She punched me in the face
    0:10:39 at one point,
    0:10:40 very rightfully so.
    0:10:42 And she was like,
    0:10:44 hey, I can’t be with someone like you.
    0:10:45 This happened on that trip?
    0:10:47 Not on that trip.
    0:10:48 That happened a couple months later.
    0:10:49 We ended up staying together
    0:10:50 for about three months.
    0:10:51 And basically,
    0:10:51 I mean,
    0:10:53 it was about 10 years worth
    0:10:55 of lifetimes in three months.
    0:10:55 The candle that burns
    0:10:56 twice as bright.
    0:10:57 Yes.
    0:11:01 But losing her was
    0:11:02 probably the biggest
    0:11:05 psychic damage
    0:11:06 I’d ever encountered
    0:11:06 in my life
    0:11:07 as an adult.
    0:11:10 And I remember just lying
    0:11:11 in my tiny apartment
    0:11:12 in Tokyo,
    0:11:13 my six mat tatami room
    0:11:14 apartment in Tokyo.
    0:11:15 It was three in the morning.
    0:11:16 I wanted to die.
    0:11:18 It was rock,
    0:11:18 rock,
    0:11:19 rock bottom.
    0:11:20 This isn’t like
    0:11:21 a ritual story.
    0:11:22 I didn’t get up
    0:11:22 and run 40 miles
    0:11:23 or anything like that.
    0:11:24 But I was like,
    0:11:25 I’m going to start running.
    0:11:25 And I went out
    0:11:26 and I ran like 5K
    0:11:28 at three in the morning
    0:11:29 through the streets of Tokyo.
    0:11:31 And I was like,
    0:11:32 that felt good.
    0:11:33 And I was like,
    0:11:33 okay,
    0:11:34 I need to stop drinking.
    0:11:35 And to stop drinking,
    0:11:36 I’m going to run this marathon
    0:11:37 in November.
    0:11:38 I think it was like July
    0:11:38 when this happened.
    0:11:40 And I just started
    0:11:40 preparing for that.
    0:11:41 These were actually
    0:11:42 the first steps
    0:11:43 for me
    0:11:45 to deliberately address
    0:11:46 this lack of self-worth
    0:11:47 that I’ve been carrying around
    0:11:48 for all of my adult life.
    0:11:49 And that had,
    0:11:50 I think,
    0:11:50 driven me to drink
    0:11:51 the way I drank.
    0:11:52 That to give into
    0:11:54 whatever those genetic impulses were.
    0:11:55 And to start to go,
    0:11:55 okay,
    0:11:56 we’re going to run.
    0:11:57 We’re going to be someone
    0:11:57 who runs.
    0:11:58 A lot of this
    0:11:58 is also like
    0:12:00 very Atomic Habits
    0:12:00 style stuff.
    0:12:01 It’s like,
    0:12:01 who are you going to be
    0:12:02 and how are you going to
    0:12:02 set yourself up
    0:12:03 to be successful?
    0:12:04 I’m going to be a person
    0:12:05 who runs.
    0:12:05 I’m going to be a person
    0:12:07 who doesn’t drink.
    0:12:07 I’m going to be a person
    0:12:09 who charges a lot.
    0:12:10 So I was,
    0:12:12 at this time,
    0:12:12 you know,
    0:12:14 with the publishing company thing,
    0:12:14 we were producing
    0:12:15 these books
    0:12:16 that were winning awards
    0:12:17 and making absolutely
    0:12:18 no money.
    0:12:19 And so I was consulting,
    0:12:21 doing like web design,
    0:12:22 consulting,
    0:12:23 and stuff like that.
    0:12:23 And I was like,
    0:12:23 okay,
    0:12:25 I’m going to start charging
    0:12:26 absurd amounts of money
    0:12:27 for my time.
    0:12:28 The worst that can happen
    0:12:28 is people reject.
    0:12:30 And they started accepting it.
    0:12:31 And I was like,
    0:12:31 oh,
    0:12:32 little by little.
    0:12:34 All these stupid
    0:12:35 little steps
    0:12:36 from the time
    0:12:37 I was basically 27
    0:12:38 to 30,
    0:12:39 these were the most
    0:12:41 important years
    0:12:42 of tiny little steps.
    0:12:43 My time is more valuable.
    0:12:44 I’m going to be a person
    0:12:45 who runs.
    0:12:45 I’m going to be a person
    0:12:46 who can take care of himself.
    0:12:48 I still drank,
    0:12:48 even though I tried
    0:12:49 to not drink,
    0:12:50 but I started lowering it.
    0:12:51 It took me about
    0:12:53 four full years
    0:12:54 to completely get off
    0:12:55 the sauce
    0:12:57 in a really dangerous way.
    0:12:59 And it kind of,
    0:13:00 part of it culminated
    0:13:01 in going to Nepal
    0:13:03 and climbing up
    0:13:04 to Annapurta base camp.
    0:13:06 And that was after
    0:13:06 we had broken up
    0:13:07 and I felt like
    0:13:08 all the magic
    0:13:09 of my life was done.
    0:13:10 I felt like there was
    0:13:10 no way for me
    0:13:11 to experience magic again.
    0:13:12 I felt like she,
    0:13:13 and again,
    0:13:14 it’s this totally
    0:13:15 irrational sense
    0:13:16 of scarcity.
    0:13:17 The amount of scarcity
    0:13:19 I felt as an adult
    0:13:20 in my 20s
    0:13:22 is just shocking.
    0:13:23 It was this fathomless
    0:13:24 sense of scarcity.
    0:13:24 Like,
    0:13:25 the money’s not going
    0:13:26 to be there.
    0:13:27 The love isn’t going
    0:13:27 to be there.
    0:13:28 The support isn’t
    0:13:28 going to be there.
    0:13:30 And then when I lost her,
    0:13:30 I was like,
    0:13:31 I’m never going to have anyone
    0:13:33 who will ever love me
    0:13:34 like this person loved me.
    0:13:34 And like,
    0:13:35 I’m never going to be able
    0:13:36 to create like I created
    0:13:37 with this person.
    0:13:39 And I had to start
    0:13:39 proving to myself
    0:13:40 that that wasn’t true.
    0:13:42 And I climbed up.
    0:13:42 I was like,
    0:13:42 okay,
    0:13:43 I’m just going to go to Nepal
    0:13:44 and I’m going to climb up
    0:13:44 Annapurna,
    0:13:45 go to Basecamp.
    0:14:05 Metaphorically speaking,
    0:14:06 the billboard question,
    0:14:06 right?
    0:14:07 So if you were going to put
    0:14:09 a message on a billboard,
    0:14:10 could say anything,
    0:14:11 could be an image,
    0:14:13 anything at all
    0:14:14 that you would want
    0:14:16 a lot of people to see
    0:14:17 and understand,
    0:14:19 what might you put on that?
    0:14:21 I love this question.
    0:14:23 I might overthink it.
    0:14:28 And understand.
    0:14:30 So we can assume though.
    0:14:31 The and understand
    0:14:32 I threw on there
    0:14:33 with a little creative flourish,
    0:14:35 it may complicate your thinking.
    0:14:36 I’m going to build on that.
    0:14:37 And thinking about this,
    0:14:37 what comes to mind,
    0:14:38 first of all,
    0:14:40 is the category
    0:14:42 is something
    0:14:43 that will help people
    0:14:45 heal,
    0:14:46 you know,
    0:14:47 just be
    0:14:49 their whole and true selves
    0:14:50 because I think that’s where
    0:14:51 all our problems come from
    0:14:53 is the lack of that.
    0:14:54 And as much as I care
    0:14:55 about climate,
    0:14:56 I think that the key
    0:14:57 to solving climate
    0:14:58 is to heal ourselves,
    0:14:59 to heal culture,
    0:15:00 to heal the planet.
    0:15:03 And so I start with the self.
    0:15:05 And then my mind goes to,
    0:15:08 what’s a big fundamental truth
    0:15:09 that we want everyone,
    0:15:11 let’s pretend if they read it,
    0:15:12 they’ll actually get it
    0:15:13 and know it.
    0:15:14 Then I think there’s
    0:15:15 a little bit of tension
    0:15:16 between like the most
    0:15:17 fundamental truths
    0:15:20 and how actionable they are.
    0:15:21 So if we said,
    0:15:22 we are all one,
    0:15:23 which I believe,
    0:15:24 it’s like,
    0:15:25 okay,
    0:15:26 we’re all one.
    0:15:27 The universe is one big thing,
    0:15:28 we’re all connected.
    0:15:30 What do I do with that?
    0:15:30 I mean,
    0:15:32 maybe if you really ponder that
    0:15:32 and meditate on that
    0:15:33 a long time,
    0:15:33 it’ll actually,
    0:15:34 it will do you some good.
    0:15:35 But then if you move
    0:15:36 toward the spectrum
    0:15:38 of usefulness
    0:15:40 of what’s a fundamental truth
    0:15:41 that’s more useful,
    0:15:42 you might some,
    0:15:43 you know,
    0:15:44 have like some Buddhist
    0:15:45 saying like
    0:15:46 all of our suffering
    0:15:47 comes from,
    0:15:47 you know,
    0:15:48 our thoughts
    0:15:49 or our inability
    0:15:50 to accept reality,
    0:15:51 which is a little bit
    0:15:52 more useful.
    0:15:54 but maybe for the masses
    0:15:54 not,
    0:15:56 still not very actionable.
    0:15:57 And then you could move
    0:15:57 to like,
    0:15:59 feel your feelings,
    0:16:01 which I think would
    0:16:02 do a tremendous
    0:16:03 amount of good
    0:16:04 if people adopt,
    0:16:04 oh,
    0:16:05 feel your feelings.
    0:16:06 It’s a little bit easier
    0:16:07 to imagine that.
    0:16:08 Like so much
    0:16:08 of our suffering,
    0:16:09 and I say this
    0:16:10 as someone who
    0:16:11 told their first therapist,
    0:16:12 I don’t understand
    0:16:13 the point of feelings.
    0:16:14 I was like,
    0:16:15 they are just a nuisance
    0:16:16 and get in the way.
    0:16:17 so it took me
    0:16:18 a long time
    0:16:19 to appreciate that
    0:16:21 and the avoidance
    0:16:22 that so many
    0:16:23 of us go through.
    0:16:24 And then
    0:16:28 one step further
    0:16:28 might be
    0:16:30 stop drinking alcohol
    0:16:31 for six months
    0:16:32 and see how you feel.
    0:16:35 Not tonight though,
    0:16:36 it’s fine,
    0:16:36 we’re in a bar.
    0:16:37 Not tonight,
    0:16:37 nice.
    0:16:38 Starting tomorrow,
    0:16:38 starting tomorrow.
    0:16:39 Consider it.
    0:16:40 So following up
    0:16:41 just on the feeling
    0:16:42 your feelings,
    0:16:43 you said for a long time
    0:16:43 and you said this
    0:16:44 to your first therapist,
    0:16:44 right,
    0:16:45 they’re just a nuisance,
    0:16:46 I’d like to know
    0:16:48 how to rid myself
    0:16:49 of these irritations.
    0:16:51 What changed?
    0:16:53 How did you end up
    0:16:55 going on to team feelings?
    0:16:55 So,
    0:16:56 I mean,
    0:16:57 it was a long,
    0:16:58 long process.
    0:16:58 I mean,
    0:16:59 the therapy helped,
    0:17:01 the psychedelics helped,
    0:17:02 meditation,
    0:17:03 growth,
    0:17:03 learning,
    0:17:04 reading books,
    0:17:05 having friends,
    0:17:07 stopping drinking,
    0:17:08 actually,
    0:17:09 just for six months.
    0:17:10 And,
    0:17:12 I’ve gone through a lot,
    0:17:13 I’ve done a lot of work
    0:17:15 particularly in the last
    0:17:15 couple years.
    0:17:16 That’s been,
    0:17:16 you know,
    0:17:17 just super,
    0:17:18 super important.
    0:17:19 Yeah,
    0:17:19 just a note on alcohol.
    0:17:20 Look,
    0:17:20 I’m going to have
    0:17:21 some drinks tonight.
    0:17:22 I do enjoy drinking,
    0:17:22 but,
    0:17:23 yeah.
    0:17:27 But,
    0:17:28 just a PSA for people
    0:17:29 because ketamine
    0:17:30 is in the air.
    0:17:31 Ketamine’s probably
    0:17:32 in a few people’s pockets here.
    0:17:33 They’re both
    0:17:35 dissociative anesthetics,
    0:17:35 so if you want to feel
    0:17:36 your feelings,
    0:17:37 it’s a good idea
    0:17:39 not to engage
    0:17:40 with those things
    0:17:41 excessively.
    0:17:41 And if you have
    0:17:42 a history of alcohol
    0:17:44 overuse,
    0:17:45 I would also stay away
    0:17:46 from any at-home ketamine.
    0:17:47 But,
    0:17:48 in terms of books
    0:17:49 or types of therapy,
    0:17:50 did you find,
    0:17:51 if there are people
    0:17:51 in the audience
    0:17:51 who are like,
    0:17:52 yeah,
    0:17:52 you know what,
    0:17:52 actually,
    0:17:53 that makes sense to me,
    0:17:54 but I’ve never been able
    0:17:56 to find a handhold
    0:17:57 to get started.
    0:17:59 Is there any advice
    0:17:59 you might give?
    0:18:02 Probably the best thing
    0:18:03 I’ve ever done
    0:18:04 in that realm
    0:18:06 is Hoffman.
    0:18:08 Have you done Hoffman?
    0:18:08 Hoffman,
    0:18:09 I haven’t done Hoffman,
    0:18:10 but quite a few
    0:18:10 of my friends have.
    0:18:11 So there’s this thing
    0:18:12 called the Hoffman process.
    0:18:15 It’s 20 years of therapy
    0:18:15 in a week
    0:18:17 in terms of the effect.
    0:18:17 I mean,
    0:18:19 I’ve got much more out of it
    0:18:20 than I ever got in therapy.
    0:18:21 It’s a week-long retreat.
    0:18:23 There’s a few different places.
    0:18:23 The main one’s
    0:18:24 in Petaluma, California.
    0:18:26 You hand over your phone.
    0:18:27 You go
    0:18:29 and do some exercises
    0:18:32 with 36 strangers
    0:18:34 and yourself
    0:18:34 for a week
    0:18:35 and you come out
    0:18:36 a new person.
    0:18:40 So I’ve spoken,
    0:18:40 well,
    0:18:41 not directly,
    0:18:41 I’ve more listened,
    0:18:43 but had a conversation
    0:18:44 on this podcast
    0:18:45 where the Hoffman process
    0:18:45 came up
    0:18:47 and a lot of listeners
    0:18:48 have gone to the Hoffman process
    0:18:49 and I get letters
    0:18:51 literally every week
    0:18:52 from people
    0:18:54 who are thanking me
    0:18:56 for not really
    0:18:58 the proper credit
    0:18:58 because there’s someone else
    0:18:59 who brought it up
    0:19:00 for the Hoffman process.
    0:19:02 I’m very curious.
    0:19:03 You mentioned the strangers.
    0:19:05 Part of the reason
    0:19:05 I haven’t gone
    0:19:06 is I’m like,
    0:19:07 I don’t want to air
    0:19:09 all of my dirty laundry
    0:19:11 in front of 20 strangers.
    0:19:12 I don’t know these people.
    0:19:14 And I know you’re also,
    0:19:16 I think it’s fair to say,
    0:19:17 pretty introverted.
    0:19:18 I would say I am,
    0:19:19 even though I’m on stage
    0:19:20 like safely
    0:19:21 speaking into the darkness.
    0:19:24 Was that an issue
    0:19:25 at all for you
    0:19:25 or how did you
    0:19:27 get past that?
    0:19:28 It wasn’t easy.
    0:19:29 but it’s just
    0:19:30 in the context of it,
    0:19:32 it just feels very safe.
    0:19:34 One of the fascinating things
    0:19:35 is it’s strangers,
    0:19:37 you are not allowed
    0:19:38 to say your last name
    0:19:39 or what you do
    0:19:39 in the real world
    0:19:40 when you get there.
    0:19:42 So you connect with people
    0:19:43 and I realized
    0:19:45 after a few days,
    0:19:47 I relied so much
    0:19:48 on people knowing
    0:19:48 who I was
    0:19:49 or what I did
    0:19:51 that it was this veil
    0:19:52 between me
    0:19:53 and other humans.
    0:19:55 so you get to know people
    0:19:56 at such a deep level
    0:19:58 without really knowing
    0:19:59 any of the normal things
    0:20:00 that we would say,
    0:20:01 you meet someone here,
    0:20:01 what do you do,
    0:20:03 where do you live?
    0:20:05 And that,
    0:20:06 it just feels
    0:20:07 incredibly safe.
    0:20:09 But the process is,
    0:20:10 they’ve been doing it
    0:20:11 for 50 some years.
    0:20:12 It’s very evolved.
    0:20:13 It’s very well done.
    0:20:14 You take any of it
    0:20:15 out of context,
    0:20:16 it sounds weird.
    0:20:17 like I knew nothing
    0:20:17 going in
    0:20:19 and about five people
    0:20:20 brought it up to me
    0:20:22 in random conversations
    0:20:22 over a week
    0:20:23 and were like,
    0:20:23 okay,
    0:20:24 this is a message,
    0:20:25 I’m going to sign up
    0:20:25 for this thing,
    0:20:26 show up,
    0:20:27 I had no idea
    0:20:29 and then you just dive in
    0:20:31 and it’s incredible.
    0:20:32 Yeah,
    0:20:32 from what I can tell,
    0:20:34 it’s somewhat like Fight Club.
    0:20:35 It’s like first rule
    0:20:35 of Fight Club
    0:20:36 is don’t talk about Fight Club.
    0:20:37 You’re not going to find
    0:20:38 much detail
    0:20:39 on the Hoffman process.
    0:20:42 This also ties into
    0:20:42 a question I was planning
    0:20:43 on asking anyway,
    0:20:44 which is,
    0:20:45 are there any habits
    0:20:47 or beliefs
    0:20:49 that have really
    0:20:50 positively impacted
    0:20:51 your life
    0:20:52 in the last handful
    0:20:53 of years?
    0:20:54 Could also be 10 years ago,
    0:20:56 but you’ve talked
    0:20:57 about doing a lot of work
    0:20:58 in the last handful
    0:20:59 of years.
    0:21:00 Any new habits,
    0:21:01 beliefs,
    0:21:03 tools,
    0:21:04 anything come to mind
    0:21:04 that have been
    0:21:05 really helpful?
    0:21:06 Yes,
    0:21:08 but I feel like
    0:21:08 they’re the ones
    0:21:10 that everybody knows.
    0:21:11 Well,
    0:21:11 I mean,
    0:21:12 sometimes the fundamentals
    0:21:14 are worth a review.
    0:21:14 I mean,
    0:21:15 it is exercise,
    0:21:16 exercise and meditation.
    0:21:18 I dabbled in
    0:21:19 for a long time
    0:21:21 and then I got
    0:21:22 much more serious
    0:21:22 a couple years ago
    0:21:23 about both
    0:21:25 and really,
    0:21:27 really dramatic
    0:21:27 life improvement.
    0:21:28 Why did you get
    0:21:29 more serious about them?
    0:21:31 You just wake up
    0:21:32 one day
    0:21:32 and you’re like,
    0:21:33 today’s a new day
    0:21:34 or was there
    0:21:35 a breaking point?
    0:21:37 It was early COVID.
    0:21:37 I was like,
    0:21:38 what the fuck
    0:21:39 am I doing?
    0:21:40 I’m going to turn 50
    0:21:43 and I need to work
    0:21:43 a hell of a lot harder
    0:21:44 to be in shape
    0:21:45 than I was.
    0:21:47 So I just started doing it.
    0:21:47 I was at home.
    0:21:48 I had the time.
    0:21:50 So I did that.
    0:21:52 Although that’s increased
    0:21:52 and, you know,
    0:21:53 because you get the
    0:21:54 positive reward cycle
    0:21:55 and it feels great.
    0:21:57 And meditation,
    0:21:59 I’ve always found
    0:22:00 super valuable
    0:22:00 and I just,
    0:22:01 last year,
    0:22:04 on January 2nd,
    0:22:04 2024,
    0:22:07 I had meditated
    0:22:07 the day before
    0:22:08 and I was like,
    0:22:09 I could meditate
    0:22:11 every single day
    0:22:11 this year.
    0:22:13 And it was just
    0:22:14 that sort of
    0:22:15 psychological hook
    0:22:16 that you find motivating
    0:22:17 even though it’s arbitrary.
    0:22:18 And I was like,
    0:22:19 yes,
    0:22:19 I’m going to meditate
    0:22:20 every single day
    0:22:21 in 2024.
    0:22:22 That’s a goal.
    0:22:23 And I don’t normally
    0:22:24 set goals like that,
    0:22:26 but I was like,
    0:22:26 okay,
    0:22:27 let’s see what happens.
    0:22:29 And my teacher says,
    0:22:30 you can’t boil water
    0:22:31 if you keep turning
    0:22:31 off the flame.
    0:22:33 And so the consistency
    0:22:34 of meditation,
    0:22:36 I underestimated
    0:22:37 what dramatic difference
    0:22:37 that makes
    0:22:38 and how fast
    0:22:39 you can drop in
    0:22:40 if you do it
    0:22:41 every single day.
    0:22:42 What type of meditation
    0:22:44 did you decide on?
    0:22:45 Just mindfulness,
    0:22:46 meditation,
    0:22:47 breath,
    0:22:48 and awareness.
    0:22:50 Not TM,
    0:22:50 just…
    0:22:51 Just like an open
    0:22:52 monitoring,
    0:22:53 feel what you feel,
    0:22:54 see what you see.
    0:22:54 Yeah.
    0:22:56 Are you noting things
    0:22:57 or are you just
    0:22:57 observing?
    0:22:57 Sometimes noting.
    0:22:59 Sometimes noting.
    0:23:00 And I know
    0:23:01 you like to know
    0:23:01 about products,
    0:23:02 you know about this product,
    0:23:04 but I was using
    0:23:04 The Way.
    0:23:05 You probably talked
    0:23:06 about that before.
    0:23:08 The Way is a meditation app.
    0:23:08 I hadn’t used
    0:23:09 a meditation app
    0:23:09 for years.
    0:23:10 The Way,
    0:23:12 I started using The Way,
    0:23:13 Kevin sent it to me actually,
    0:23:14 around when it was
    0:23:15 still in beta.
    0:23:17 And I started doing that
    0:23:18 around that time.
    0:23:19 Yeah.
    0:23:20 The Way is fantastic.
    0:23:21 Yeah.
    0:23:22 Henry Schuchman,
    0:23:23 just an incredible guy.
    0:23:24 I mean,
    0:23:26 we’ll hope to meet him
    0:23:27 in person someday.
    0:23:33 Last but not least,
    0:23:34 Richard Taylor,
    0:23:36 the co-founder
    0:23:37 and creative lead
    0:23:38 at Academy Award-winning
    0:23:39 design studio
    0:23:41 and manufacturing facility,
    0:23:42 Weta Workshop,
    0:23:44 and Greg Broadmoor,
    0:23:46 an artist and writer
    0:23:47 who has been part of
    0:23:48 the Weta Workshop team
    0:23:49 for more than 20 years
    0:23:50 and is the creator
    0:23:52 of the retro sci-fi world
    0:23:53 of Dr. Groard Bortz
    0:23:55 and the graphic novel series
    0:23:56 One Path.
    0:23:58 But first,
    0:23:59 I do want to talk about,
    0:24:00 because this certainly
    0:24:01 is so iconic
    0:24:03 and it’s in the minds
    0:24:04 of probably most people
    0:24:04 listening,
    0:24:05 which is
    0:24:06 Lord of the Rings.
    0:24:08 And I’d like to
    0:24:09 understand
    0:24:11 what some of the most,
    0:24:12 first of all,
    0:24:14 kind of how that came to be,
    0:24:14 Richard,
    0:24:16 and then
    0:24:17 what some of the most
    0:24:18 crucial decisions were
    0:24:20 with respect to
    0:24:21 taking on
    0:24:22 a project
    0:24:24 of that scope.
    0:24:24 Because
    0:24:26 for a lot of companies,
    0:24:27 I could see that being
    0:24:28 the hug of death,
    0:24:30 where you suddenly go from
    0:24:33 reasonably moderately contained
    0:24:34 and small
    0:24:36 to sprawling,
    0:24:38 taking on so much responsibility
    0:24:40 and many companies
    0:24:41 would implode.
    0:24:41 I’ve seen it happen
    0:24:42 many, many times.
    0:24:44 So how did that come to be
    0:24:45 and what were some
    0:24:46 of the most important
    0:24:48 decisions made
    0:24:48 that allowed
    0:24:50 you to
    0:24:51 grow the company
    0:24:51 and take that on?
    0:24:53 Yeah,
    0:24:54 that’s a really
    0:24:56 big question.
    0:24:56 I’ll try and answer it
    0:24:58 in a very condensed way.
    0:24:59 We have time.
    0:25:01 I just pulled this out,
    0:25:02 right?
    0:25:03 This is Sting
    0:25:04 from the movie.
    0:25:05 This is one of my
    0:25:06 favorite things
    0:25:07 that we’ve made
    0:25:08 in the company
    0:25:10 and I keep it next to me
    0:25:11 and I pick it up
    0:25:12 and it gives you strength
    0:25:13 and it gives you
    0:25:15 a sense of wonder
    0:25:16 and it connects you
    0:25:17 back to a
    0:25:18 very happy time
    0:25:20 and it glows
    0:25:21 if there are
    0:25:22 challenging clients
    0:25:23 in the corridor.
    0:25:24 For people
    0:25:25 who can’t see that,
    0:25:26 that is a sword.
    0:25:27 Yeah.
    0:25:28 Oh, sorry.
    0:25:29 Those that can’t see it,
    0:25:30 here I’m showing
    0:25:31 all these visual aids
    0:25:32 because that’s how
    0:25:33 I think.
    0:25:33 Oh, it’s okay.
    0:25:35 I’ll drive people
    0:25:36 to the video.
    0:25:38 Yeah, I just held up
    0:25:40 the 1.48 times
    0:25:41 larger than life size
    0:25:43 sting that’s carried
    0:25:44 by Elijah Wood
    0:25:46 at his scale.
    0:25:47 I likened it
    0:25:49 to teetering
    0:25:50 towards the edge
    0:25:51 of a precipice.
    0:25:52 There’s probably
    0:25:53 a much better
    0:25:54 visual metaphor
    0:25:55 than this
    0:25:55 but,
    0:25:58 and you do this
    0:25:59 you know,
    0:26:00 frequently in one’s life.
    0:26:01 The decision
    0:26:02 to start a family,
    0:26:03 the decision
    0:26:05 to buy your first home
    0:26:05 or the home
    0:26:06 that you’ll spend
    0:26:07 the rest of your life
    0:26:07 in like the home
    0:26:08 that my wife and I
    0:26:10 bought way back
    0:26:11 on Meet the Feebles,
    0:26:11 right?
    0:26:12 the decision
    0:26:14 to X, Y, and Z.
    0:26:16 But Peter Jackson
    0:26:18 offers this opportunity
    0:26:20 and when he offered it
    0:26:21 my wife and I,
    0:26:22 Tanya and I
    0:26:24 discussed with Peter
    0:26:25 and we ultimately
    0:26:26 settled on doing
    0:26:28 the design for
    0:26:30 and the manufacturing
    0:26:32 of the armor,
    0:26:32 weapons,
    0:26:33 creatures,
    0:26:33 miniatures,
    0:26:35 special makeup effects
    0:26:36 and prosthetics
    0:26:37 like five divisions
    0:26:39 of very, very large
    0:26:39 body of work.
    0:26:41 And you teeter
    0:26:41 to the edge
    0:26:42 of the precipice
    0:26:44 and as a human,
    0:26:47 just as the human animal
    0:26:47 that we are,
    0:26:49 you’ve got a decision.
    0:26:51 You either step back
    0:26:51 from the edge
    0:26:52 and let others
    0:26:54 take up the slack
    0:26:55 and do it for you
    0:26:56 and you follow
    0:26:58 or you choose
    0:26:59 to leap
    0:27:00 and you either
    0:27:01 will then slam
    0:27:01 into the bottom
    0:27:02 of the cliff
    0:27:03 and make a mess
    0:27:04 with your guts
    0:27:05 and your brains
    0:27:05 everywhere
    0:27:07 or you will actually
    0:27:09 arrest your fall
    0:27:10 through a number
    0:27:11 of different
    0:27:12 mechanisms.
    0:27:13 Self-belief
    0:27:14 being the most
    0:27:15 important one.
    0:27:16 I have four
    0:27:17 very simple
    0:27:18 tenants
    0:27:19 that I operate
    0:27:19 by
    0:27:21 and four tenants
    0:27:21 that I try
    0:27:22 and operate
    0:27:22 our company
    0:27:22 by
    0:27:24 and the first
    0:27:24 one is love
    0:27:25 of oneself.
    0:27:27 That doesn’t
    0:27:27 mean that you’re
    0:27:28 egotistical
    0:27:29 or believe that
    0:27:30 you’re better
    0:27:30 than you are
    0:27:32 but if you
    0:27:33 can’t see
    0:27:34 in yourself
    0:27:35 your virtues,
    0:27:36 how the hell
    0:27:36 are you going
    0:27:37 to expect
    0:27:38 anyone else
    0:27:38 following you
    0:27:40 to see your
    0:27:41 virtues, right?
    0:27:41 So love
    0:27:42 of oneself
    0:27:43 is the first
    0:27:44 of those four
    0:27:44 tenants
    0:27:46 and there
    0:27:47 is mixed
    0:27:48 with that
    0:27:49 as corny
    0:27:50 as it sounds,
    0:27:51 ignorance
    0:27:51 being your
    0:27:52 greatest ally.
    0:27:53 I think
    0:27:54 all of us
    0:27:55 operate
    0:27:56 to some
    0:27:56 degree
    0:27:58 where we
    0:27:59 are blinded
    0:27:59 by the
    0:28:01 love of what
    0:28:01 we do
    0:28:02 like Bertram
    0:28:03 Russell
    0:28:03 if I’ve got
    0:28:04 the right
    0:28:04 person
    0:28:05 has a lovely
    0:28:06 quote
    0:28:07 work is more
    0:28:08 fun
    0:28:09 than fun
    0:28:10 and people
    0:28:10 that don’t
    0:28:11 understand
    0:28:11 that
    0:28:13 struggle
    0:28:13 even if
    0:28:14 you’re in
    0:28:15 a low
    0:28:16 level
    0:28:17 position
    0:28:18 that you’re
    0:28:18 not really
    0:28:19 enjoying
    0:28:20 you can
    0:28:20 still make
    0:28:21 the people
    0:28:21 that you
    0:28:21 work with
    0:28:22 really fun,
    0:28:23 right?
    0:28:23 I used to
    0:28:24 clean toilets
    0:28:25 on international
    0:28:26 aeroplanes
    0:28:27 but man
    0:28:27 the people
    0:28:28 I worked
    0:28:28 with
    0:28:29 I put
    0:28:30 a cricket
    0:28:30 ball
    0:28:31 through the
    0:28:31 window
    0:28:32 of the
    0:28:33 international
    0:28:34 terminal
    0:28:35 because we
    0:28:35 were playing
    0:28:35 cricket
    0:28:37 out on the
    0:28:37 tarmac
    0:28:38 under the
    0:28:39 planes
    0:28:39 right?
    0:28:40 You can
    0:28:41 turn anything
    0:28:41 into fun
    0:28:43 so I
    0:28:43 had once
    0:28:44 again a
    0:28:45 very corny
    0:28:45 and I
    0:28:46 couldn’t
    0:28:46 think of
    0:28:46 something
    0:28:47 better at
    0:28:47 the time
    0:28:49 but we
    0:28:51 needed 158
    0:28:52 crew working
    0:28:53 for seven
    0:28:54 and a half
    0:28:54 years on
    0:28:56 48,000
    0:28:56 separate things
    0:28:57 to deliver
    0:28:58 those five
    0:28:59 divisions to
    0:28:59 the trilogy
    0:29:00 of movies
    0:29:01 our works
    0:29:02 in 98
    0:29:03 to 99
    0:29:04 percent of
    0:29:05 the films
    0:29:06 because our
    0:29:06 works in
    0:29:07 almost every
    0:29:08 image shot
    0:29:08 other than
    0:29:09 mountains
    0:29:10 with no one
    0:29:11 in it
    0:29:11 or etc
    0:29:13 and you’ve
    0:29:14 got an
    0:29:15 inexperienced
    0:29:16 crew
    0:29:17 you’re highly
    0:29:18 inexperienced
    0:29:18 yourself
    0:29:19 right?
    0:29:19 We’d done
    0:29:20 Hercules and
    0:29:21 Xena at
    0:29:21 the time
    0:29:22 and we’d
    0:29:22 had a
    0:29:23 career of
    0:29:23 about 8
    0:29:24 to 10
    0:29:24 years
    0:29:25 doing
    0:29:26 Peter’s
    0:29:26 films
    0:29:27 Peter of
    0:29:28 course is
    0:29:29 an inspiration
    0:29:30 in his own
    0:29:30 right and
    0:29:31 highly knowledgeable
    0:29:32 so he’s
    0:29:33 helping as
    0:29:33 well
    0:29:34 I used to
    0:29:35 say no
    0:29:36 matter how
    0:29:37 fine and
    0:29:38 how pale
    0:29:39 the thread
    0:29:39 that I
    0:29:40 give you
    0:29:40 if you
    0:29:41 don’t weave
    0:29:42 it with
    0:29:42 care into
    0:29:43 the tapestry
    0:29:44 the tapestry
    0:29:45 will be in
    0:29:45 some way
    0:29:46 threadbare
    0:29:47 what I’m
    0:29:48 talking about
    0:29:48 that’s that’s
    0:29:49 sort of more
    0:29:50 of a silly
    0:29:51 poetic way
    0:29:51 to say
    0:29:52 you’re only
    0:29:53 as good as
    0:29:53 your weakest
    0:29:55 link and
    0:29:55 in our case
    0:29:56 we literally
    0:29:57 were linking
    0:29:57 right hand
    0:29:58 made chain
    0:29:59 mail 12
    0:29:59 and a half
    0:30:00 million links
    0:30:01 over three
    0:30:01 and a half
    0:30:03 years and
    0:30:04 chain mail is
    0:30:05 only as good
    0:30:05 as how
    0:30:06 well you
    0:30:07 glue the
    0:30:07 top link
    0:30:08 on your
    0:30:08 shoulder
    0:30:09 and whether
    0:30:10 the chain
    0:30:10 mail is going
    0:30:11 to fall
    0:30:11 off you
    0:30:12 so trying
    0:30:13 to get
    0:30:14 us
    0:30:15 collectively
    0:30:16 myself and
    0:30:17 my wife
    0:30:17 and our
    0:30:18 team to
    0:30:19 believe that
    0:30:19 we could
    0:30:20 do it
    0:30:21 didn’t
    0:30:21 require
    0:30:23 because there
    0:30:23 is a
    0:30:25 I’m sure
    0:30:25 it exists
    0:30:25 in other
    0:30:26 countries but
    0:30:27 it is a
    0:30:27 fundamental
    0:30:28 part of
    0:30:29 New Zealand
    0:30:30 I think
    0:30:30 it’s because
    0:30:30 we’re a
    0:30:30 young
    0:30:31 nation
    0:30:31 we’re at
    0:30:32 the back
    0:30:33 quarters of
    0:30:33 the world
    0:30:33 a long
    0:30:34 way from
    0:30:35 marketplaces
    0:30:36 where you
    0:30:36 can buy
    0:30:37 components
    0:30:38 to fix
    0:30:38 your
    0:30:39 tractor
    0:30:40 so there
    0:30:41 is this
    0:30:42 intense
    0:30:42 can-do
    0:30:43 attitude
    0:30:44 that still
    0:30:45 exists today
    0:30:46 thankfully
    0:30:47 we hire
    0:30:47 people that
    0:30:48 come with
    0:30:49 that beautiful
    0:30:50 can-do
    0:30:50 attitude
    0:30:52 and we
    0:30:52 were able
    0:30:53 to benefit
    0:30:54 and bottle
    0:30:55 that so
    0:30:56 significantly
    0:30:57 on those
    0:30:58 three films
    0:30:59 and the
    0:31:01 overjoyed
    0:31:01 nature of
    0:31:02 knowing that
    0:31:02 you’re trying
    0:31:03 to prove
    0:31:03 something
    0:31:04 prove that
    0:31:05 New Zealand
    0:31:06 could do
    0:31:06 it
    0:31:06 that we
    0:31:07 could stamp
    0:31:08 our mark
    0:31:08 on the
    0:31:09 world stage
    0:31:10 that was
    0:31:11 really important
    0:31:11 to us
    0:31:12 to do
    0:31:13 justice to
    0:31:13 Tolkien’s
    0:31:14 writing was
    0:31:15 really important
    0:31:15 to us
    0:31:16 to meet
    0:31:17 Peter Jackson’s
    0:31:18 vision was
    0:31:19 really important
    0:31:21 and to make
    0:31:21 sure that we
    0:31:22 had really
    0:31:23 good fun
    0:31:23 that didn’t
    0:31:24 mean that it
    0:31:25 wasn’t
    0:31:25 brutally
    0:31:26 challenging
    0:31:27 it was
    0:31:27 but at no
    0:31:28 point in the
    0:31:29 seven and a
    0:31:30 half years
    0:31:31 did I
    0:31:31 ever
    0:31:32 think that
    0:31:33 I didn’t
    0:31:33 want to be
    0:31:34 doing it
    0:31:35 that was
    0:31:35 really
    0:31:37 a special
    0:31:38 part of
    0:31:39 that experience
    0:31:41 work is
    0:31:41 more fun
    0:31:42 than fun
    0:31:43 what are
    0:31:43 the other
    0:31:44 tenets you
    0:31:44 mentioned for
    0:31:45 love of
    0:31:46 oneself
    0:31:47 love of
    0:31:48 what you
    0:31:49 do love
    0:31:49 of who
    0:31:49 you do
    0:31:50 it with
    0:31:50 and love
    0:31:51 of who
    0:31:51 you do
    0:31:51 it for
    0:31:53 that is
    0:31:53 as a
    0:31:53 father
    0:31:54 of a
    0:31:55 family
    0:31:55 well as
    0:31:56 a husband
    0:31:57 or
    0:31:57 partner
    0:31:58 to a
    0:31:58 loved
    0:31:58 one
    0:32:00 a father
    0:32:00 or mother
    0:32:01 to a
    0:32:01 family
    0:32:02 a president
    0:32:03 of a
    0:32:03 country
    0:32:04 a CEO
    0:32:05 of a
    0:32:05 business
    0:32:06 if you
    0:32:07 can’t find
    0:32:08 those four
    0:32:09 tenets
    0:32:09 obviously the
    0:32:10 first one
    0:32:10 love of
    0:32:11 yourself
    0:32:11 love of
    0:32:12 what you
    0:32:12 do
    0:32:12 you’ve
    0:32:13 got to
    0:32:13 love
    0:32:14 being a
    0:32:14 parent
    0:32:14 you’ve
    0:32:15 got to
    0:32:15 love
    0:32:15 being
    0:32:16 a
    0:32:16 lover
    0:32:17 a
    0:32:17 husband
    0:32:18 a
    0:32:18 wife
    0:32:18 a
    0:32:19 partner
    0:32:20 you
    0:32:20 have
    0:32:21 to
    0:32:21 love
    0:32:22 the
    0:32:22 people
    0:32:22 that
    0:32:22 you
    0:32:22 do
    0:32:23 it
    0:32:23 for
    0:32:23 it
    0:32:24 is
    0:32:24 so
    0:32:25 easy
    0:32:25 to become
    0:32:26 cynical
    0:32:27 about
    0:32:27 your
    0:32:28 audience
    0:32:28 or
    0:32:28 your
    0:32:29 fans
    0:32:29 or
    0:32:30 your
    0:32:30 family
    0:32:31 or
    0:32:32 the
    0:32:32 person
    0:32:33 working
    0:32:34 above
    0:32:34 you
    0:32:34 right
    0:32:35 but
    0:32:35 that’s
    0:32:36 who
    0:32:36 you’re
    0:32:36 trying
    0:32:37 to
    0:32:37 capture
    0:32:38 up
    0:32:38 in
    0:32:38 your
    0:32:38 passion
    0:32:39 for
    0:32:39 what
    0:32:39 you
    0:32:39 do
    0:32:40 and
    0:32:40 you
    0:32:40 know
    0:32:40 the
    0:32:41 other
    0:32:41 one’s
    0:32:41 very
    0:32:42 obvious
    0:32:42 so
    0:32:42 that’s
    0:32:43 how
    0:32:43 I
    0:32:43 think
    0:32:43 of
    0:32:43 things
    0:32:44 very
    0:32:44 simply
    0:32:44 and
    0:32:45 that’s
    0:32:45 after
    0:32:46 30
    0:32:47 plus
    0:32:47 years
    0:32:47 of
    0:32:48 working
    0:32:48 it
    0:32:49 started
    0:32:49 to
    0:32:49 congeal
    0:32:50 that
    0:32:50 that’s
    0:32:51 thinking
    0:32:51 about
    0:32:51 all
    0:32:52 these
    0:32:52 things
    0:32:52 that you
    0:32:53 might
    0:32:53 think
    0:32:53 about
    0:32:54 that’s
    0:32:54 the
    0:32:55 things
    0:32:55 that
    0:32:55 drive
    0:32:55 you
    0:32:56 forward
    0:32:56 I
    0:32:56 think
    0:32:56 I’ve
    0:32:57 settled
    0:32:57 on
    0:32:57 those
    0:32:58 four
    0:32:58 simple
    0:32:59 and
    0:32:59 try
    0:32:59 not
    0:32:59 to
    0:33:00 be
    0:33:00 a
    0:33:00 dickhead
    0:33:01 is
    0:33:02 maybe
    0:33:02 the
    0:33:02 fifth
    0:33:03 there
    0:33:05 are
    0:33:06 thousands
    0:33:06 of
    0:33:06 self
    0:33:07 help
    0:33:07 books
    0:33:07 I’ve
    0:33:07 actually
    0:33:08 only
    0:33:08 read
    0:33:08 one
    0:33:08 of
    0:33:09 them
    0:33:09 I
    0:33:09 can’t
    0:33:10 remember
    0:33:10 the
    0:33:10 title
    0:33:11 even
    0:33:12 someone
    0:33:13 said
    0:33:13 to
    0:33:13 me
    0:33:14 once
    0:33:14 you
    0:33:14 only
    0:33:15 need
    0:33:15 one
    0:33:16 page
    0:33:16 a
    0:33:16 one
    0:33:17 page
    0:33:17 book
    0:33:18 on
    0:33:19 self
    0:33:19 help
    0:33:20 and
    0:33:20 it’s
    0:33:20 simply
    0:33:22 and
    0:33:22 there’s
    0:33:22 only
    0:33:22 one
    0:33:23 line
    0:33:23 and
    0:33:23 it
    0:33:23 just
    0:33:24 says
    0:33:24 just
    0:33:24 don’t
    0:33:24 be
    0:33:24 a
    0:33:25 dickhead
    0:33:26 right
    0:33:26 and
    0:33:26 if
    0:33:26 you
    0:33:27 put
    0:33:27 that
    0:33:27 against
    0:33:28 almost
    0:33:28 anything
    0:33:29 in
    0:33:29 life
    0:33:30 it’s
    0:33:30 actually
    0:33:30 correct
    0:33:31 if
    0:33:31 we
    0:33:32 understand
    0:33:32 collectively
    0:33:33 what
    0:33:34 being a
    0:33:34 dickhead
    0:33:34 means
    0:33:36 and
    0:33:36 no
    0:33:37 doubt
    0:33:37 I
    0:33:38 fall
    0:33:38 foul
    0:33:38 of
    0:33:38 that
    0:33:39 and
    0:33:40 invariably
    0:33:40 am
    0:33:41 sometimes
    0:33:42 you know
    0:33:42 we all
    0:33:42 are
    0:33:43 we can’t
    0:33:43 it’s
    0:33:44 very hard
    0:33:44 to not
    0:33:44 be
    0:33:45 but you
    0:33:45 try
    0:33:46 really
    0:33:46 hard
    0:33:47 not
    0:33:47 to
    0:33:47 be
    0:33:48 hey
    0:33:48 Greg
    0:33:48 yeah
    0:33:49 yeah
    0:33:49 trying
    0:33:50 always
    0:33:53 have I
    0:33:53 answered
    0:33:53 your
    0:33:54 question
    0:33:54 well
    0:33:54 enough
    0:33:54 I’ve
    0:33:55 sort
    0:33:55 of
    0:33:55 been
    0:33:55 a
    0:33:55 bit
    0:33:56 fringed
    0:33:56 around
    0:33:56 the
    0:33:57 outsides
    0:33:57 of it
    0:33:57 no
    0:33:58 you
    0:33:58 did
    0:33:59 I’ll
    0:33:59 have
    0:33:59 probably
    0:34:00 just
    0:34:00 one
    0:34:00 or
    0:34:00 two
    0:34:00 follow
    0:34:01 ups
    0:34:01 related
    0:34:01 to
    0:34:01 that
    0:34:02 but
    0:34:02 before
    0:34:02 I
    0:34:02 get
    0:34:02 to
    0:34:03 that
    0:34:03 you
    0:34:03 mentioned
    0:34:03 the
    0:34:04 can
    0:34:04 do
    0:34:04 attitude
    0:34:05 of
    0:34:05 a
    0:34:06 fairly
    0:34:06 remote
    0:34:06 country
    0:34:07 right
    0:34:07 and
    0:34:07 the
    0:34:08 resourcefulness
    0:34:09 that
    0:34:10 engenders
    0:34:11 and
    0:34:11 and
    0:34:11 and
    0:34:11 I’m
    0:34:11 wondering
    0:34:12 if
    0:34:12 there
    0:34:12 are
    0:34:12 any
    0:34:12 other
    0:34:13 advantages
    0:34:14 that
    0:34:14 you
    0:34:14 can
    0:34:15 think
    0:34:15 of
    0:34:16 of
    0:34:16 doing
    0:34:17 this
    0:34:17 whether
    0:34:17 it’s
    0:34:18 the
    0:34:18 workshop
    0:34:18 or
    0:34:19 lord
    0:34:19 of
    0:34:19 the
    0:34:19 rings
    0:34:19 or
    0:34:19 the
    0:34:20 combination
    0:34:20 of
    0:34:20 the
    0:34:20 two
    0:34:21 in
    0:34:22 New
    0:34:22 Zealand
    0:34:23 are
    0:34:23 there
    0:34:23 advantages
    0:34:24 that
    0:34:24 you
    0:34:24 can
    0:34:24 think
    0:34:24 of
    0:34:25 Tim
    0:34:26 when
    0:34:26 I’m
    0:34:26 talking
    0:34:27 I’m
    0:34:27 talking
    0:34:27 about
    0:34:28 where
    0:34:28 to
    0:34:28 workshop
    0:34:29 we
    0:34:29 were
    0:34:29 a
    0:34:30 small
    0:34:32 component
    0:34:32 of
    0:34:32 the
    0:34:33 overarching
    0:34:34 endeavour
    0:34:35 of
    0:34:35 making
    0:34:35 lord
    0:34:35 of
    0:34:36 the
    0:34:36 rings
    0:34:36 right
    0:34:37 we’re
    0:34:37 very
    0:34:37 proud
    0:34:37 of
    0:34:37 the
    0:34:38 piece
    0:34:38 we
    0:34:38 played
    0:34:38 and
    0:34:39 we
    0:34:39 did
    0:34:39 a
    0:34:39 lot
    0:34:39 on
    0:34:40 it
    0:34:40 but
    0:34:40 the
    0:34:41 art
    0:34:41 department
    0:34:41 the
    0:34:42 costuming
    0:34:42 department
    0:34:42 the
    0:34:43 props
    0:34:43 department
    0:34:43 the
    0:34:43 camera
    0:34:44 department
    0:34:44 the
    0:34:44 grips
    0:34:45 department
    0:34:45 the
    0:34:46 directing
    0:34:46 department
    0:34:47 etc
    0:34:47 etc
    0:34:48 the
    0:34:48 miniatures
    0:34:49 there
    0:34:49 was
    0:34:50 phenomenal
    0:34:50 number
    0:34:50 of
    0:34:51 people
    0:34:52 all
    0:34:53 focused
    0:34:53 on
    0:34:53 the
    0:34:53 same
    0:34:54 mission
    0:34:54 and
    0:34:55 I’ve
    0:34:55 actually
    0:34:55 said
    0:34:56 in the
    0:34:56 past
    0:34:56 Lord
    0:34:56 of
    0:34:57 the
    0:34:57 Rings
    0:34:57 wasn’t
    0:34:57 made
    0:34:58 by
    0:34:58 a
    0:34:59 director
    0:34:59 it
    0:35:00 wasn’t
    0:35:00 made
    0:35:00 by
    0:35:00 a
    0:35:01 film
    0:35:01 studio
    0:35:01 it
    0:35:02 wasn’t
    0:35:02 made
    0:35:02 by
    0:35:02 a
    0:35:02 film
    0:35:03 crew
    0:35:03 it
    0:35:03 was
    0:35:03 made
    0:35:03 by
    0:35:04 a
    0:35:04 nation
    0:35:04 of
    0:35:05 people
    0:35:05 coming
    0:35:06 together
    0:35:06 in
    0:35:06 that
    0:35:07 moment
    0:35:08 to
    0:35:09 try
    0:35:09 and
    0:35:10 make
    0:35:10 Lord
    0:35:10 of
    0:35:10 the
    0:35:10 Rings
    0:35:11 in
    0:35:11 New
    0:35:12 Zealand
    0:35:12 for
    0:35:12 the
    0:35:12 world
    0:35:13 that
    0:35:13 speaks
    0:35:13 to
    0:35:14 the
    0:35:15 phenomenal
    0:35:15 number
    0:35:16 of
    0:35:16 people
    0:35:16 that
    0:35:17 Peter
    0:35:17 and
    0:35:17 his
    0:35:18 producer
    0:35:19 drew
    0:35:19 into
    0:35:19 the
    0:35:20 collaboration
    0:35:20 of
    0:35:21 making
    0:35:21 Lord
    0:35:21 of
    0:35:21 the
    0:35:21 Rings
    0:35:22 I mean
    0:35:22 the
    0:35:23 government
    0:35:23 the
    0:35:24 military
    0:35:26 our
    0:35:26 tourism
    0:35:27 department
    0:35:28 I think
    0:35:29 everyone
    0:35:29 felt
    0:35:30 you would
    0:35:30 have to
    0:35:31 have been
    0:35:31 pretty
    0:35:32 cynical
    0:35:32 at the
    0:35:32 time
    0:35:33 to
    0:35:33 have
    0:35:33 not
    0:35:34 felt
    0:35:34 a
    0:35:34 certain
    0:35:35 level
    0:35:35 of
    0:35:35 pride
    0:35:36 in
    0:35:36 what
    0:35:36 Peter
    0:35:36 was
    0:35:37 trying
    0:35:37 to
    0:35:37 do
    0:35:37 in
    0:35:37 our
    0:35:38 country
    0:35:39 and
    0:35:39 get
    0:35:39 behind
    0:35:40 it
    0:35:40 and
    0:35:40 a
    0:35:40 lot
    0:35:40 of
    0:35:41 people
    0:35:41 benefited
    0:35:42 because
    0:35:42 of
    0:35:42 it
    0:35:43 the
    0:35:45 driving
    0:35:45 desire
    0:35:46 to
    0:35:47 that
    0:35:47 term
    0:35:48 punch
    0:35:48 above
    0:35:48 your
    0:35:48 weight
    0:35:49 I don’t
    0:35:49 specifically
    0:35:50 like
    0:35:50 that
    0:35:50 term
    0:35:50 but
    0:35:51 that’s
    0:35:51 a
    0:35:51 well
    0:35:52 used
    0:35:52 one
    0:35:52 that
    0:35:53 speaks
    0:35:53 to
    0:35:53 it
    0:35:53 New
    0:35:54 Zealanders
    0:35:54 do
    0:35:55 have
    0:35:55 a
    0:35:56 burning
    0:35:57 desire
    0:35:57 to
    0:35:57 try
    0:35:58 and
    0:35:59 achieve
    0:35:59 great
    0:36:00 things
    0:36:00 regardless
    0:36:01 of
    0:36:01 where
    0:36:01 we
    0:36:02 may
    0:36:03 come
    0:36:03 from
    0:36:04 and
    0:36:04 the
    0:36:04 scale
    0:36:04 of
    0:36:05 our
    0:36:05 country
    0:36:06 that
    0:36:06 should
    0:36:06 not
    0:36:07 restrict
    0:36:07 you
    0:36:07 at
    0:36:08 all
    0:36:08 and
    0:36:08 you
    0:36:08 only
    0:36:09 need
    0:36:09 to
    0:36:09 look
    0:36:09 at
    0:36:09 our
    0:36:10 sports
    0:36:10 teams
    0:36:11 see
    0:36:11 that
    0:36:12 whether
    0:36:12 it’s
    0:36:12 our
    0:36:13 national
    0:36:13 ballet
    0:36:14 orchestra
    0:36:15 contemporary
    0:36:16 dance
    0:36:16 poets
    0:36:17 writers
    0:36:18 painters
    0:36:19 artists
    0:36:19 in
    0:36:20 general
    0:36:20 never
    0:36:21 mind
    0:36:21 the
    0:36:21 film
    0:36:22 industry
    0:36:22 or the
    0:36:22 creative
    0:36:23 industries
    0:36:24 we
    0:36:24 we
    0:36:24 have
    0:36:25 technology
    0:36:26 companies
    0:36:26 in
    0:36:26 New
    0:36:26 Zealand
    0:36:27 that
    0:36:27 are
    0:36:27 competing
    0:36:28 with
    0:36:28 the
    0:36:28 best
    0:36:28 in
    0:36:29 the
    0:36:29 world
    0:36:30 rocket
    0:36:30 lab
    0:36:30 comes
    0:36:31 to
    0:36:31 mind
    0:36:32 that
    0:36:32 are
    0:36:32 doing
    0:36:33 astounding
    0:36:34 things
    0:36:34 on
    0:36:35 a
    0:36:35 fraction
    0:36:35 of
    0:36:35 the
    0:36:36 budget
    0:36:36 you know
    0:36:36 the
    0:36:37 robots
    0:36:37 that
    0:36:37 we’re
    0:36:38 building
    0:36:38 in
    0:36:38 our
    0:36:39 workshop
    0:36:39 right
    0:36:39 now
    0:36:40 probably
    0:36:40 at
    0:36:41 a
    0:36:42 500th
    0:36:42 to
    0:36:42 a
    0:36:43 thousandth
    0:36:43 of
    0:36:44 the
    0:36:44 investment
    0:36:45 cost
    0:36:45 of
    0:36:45 some
    0:36:45 of
    0:36:45 the
    0:36:46 robots
    0:36:46 that
    0:36:46 we’re
    0:36:47 seeing
    0:36:47 online
    0:36:48 but
    0:36:48 we’re
    0:36:48 pulling
    0:36:49 it
    0:36:49 off
    0:36:49 we’re
    0:36:49 getting
    0:36:50 there
    0:36:50 slowly
    0:36:50 but
    0:36:51 getting
    0:36:51 there
    0:36:51 with
    0:36:52 five
    0:36:52 people
    0:36:53 and
    0:36:53 you know
    0:36:53 the
    0:36:54 money
    0:36:54 that
    0:36:54 we
    0:36:54 can
    0:36:55 save
    0:36:55 from
    0:36:56 projects
    0:36:56 we’re
    0:36:56 doing
    0:36:57 it’s
    0:36:57 that
    0:36:58 attitude
    0:36:58 I
    0:36:59 think
    0:36:59 that
    0:37:00 plays
    0:37:00 a
    0:37:00 big
    0:37:00 part
    0:37:00 of
    0:37:01 it
    0:37:01 Peter
    0:37:02 Jackson
    0:37:02 mustn’t
    0:37:03 be
    0:37:03 missed
    0:37:03 in
    0:37:04 this
    0:37:04 equation
    0:37:05 to
    0:37:05 his
    0:37:06 self
    0:37:06 belief
    0:37:07 and
    0:37:07 his
    0:37:08 just
    0:37:08 sheer
    0:37:10 drive
    0:37:10 I’ve
    0:37:11 never
    0:37:11 ever
    0:37:12 seen
    0:37:12 Peter
    0:37:13 quiver
    0:37:14 in
    0:37:15 uncertainty
    0:37:16 to
    0:37:17 fluctuate
    0:37:17 in a
    0:37:18 sense
    0:37:18 of
    0:37:18 uncertainty
    0:37:19 that
    0:37:19 he
    0:37:19 isn’t
    0:37:20 sure
    0:37:20 of
    0:37:20 what
    0:37:20 he’s
    0:37:21 doing
    0:37:21 that
    0:37:21 is
    0:37:22 an
    0:37:22 amazing
    0:37:23 thing
    0:37:23 to
    0:37:24 work
    0:37:24 around
    0:37:25 because
    0:37:25 if
    0:37:25 your
    0:37:26 leader
    0:37:26 is
    0:37:27 confident
    0:37:27 then
    0:37:28 you know
    0:37:29 and there’s
    0:37:29 a lovely
    0:37:30 quote
    0:37:30 the
    0:37:31 emperor
    0:37:32 will not
    0:37:32 remember
    0:37:33 you
    0:37:33 for
    0:37:33 your
    0:37:34 medals
    0:37:34 or
    0:37:34 your
    0:37:35 diplomas
    0:37:35 he
    0:37:35 will
    0:37:36 only
    0:37:36 remember
    0:37:36 you
    0:37:37 for
    0:37:37 your
    0:37:37 scars
    0:37:38 and
    0:37:39 I
    0:37:39 think
    0:37:40 there
    0:37:40 is
    0:37:41 a
    0:37:42 mentality
    0:37:42 of
    0:37:42 that
    0:37:42 very
    0:37:43 much
    0:37:43 in
    0:37:43 our
    0:37:44 country
    0:37:44 you
    0:37:44 just
    0:37:45 gotta
    0:37:45 knuckle
    0:37:46 down
    0:37:46 and
    0:37:46 do
    0:37:46 it
    0:37:47 right
    0:37:47 grit
    0:37:48 is
    0:37:48 a
    0:37:49 important
    0:37:49 component
    0:37:50 in
    0:37:51 the
    0:37:51 journey
    0:37:52 not
    0:37:52 the
    0:37:53 accolades
    0:37:53 at
    0:37:53 the
    0:37:53 end
    0:37:54 it’s
    0:37:54 the
    0:37:55 task
    0:37:55 of
    0:37:55 getting
    0:37:55 there
    0:37:56 that
    0:37:56 is
    0:37:57 seen
    0:37:57 as
    0:37:57 equal
    0:37:58 in
    0:37:58 accomplishment
    0:37:59 as
    0:37:59 winning
    0:38:00 baubles
    0:38:05 and
    0:38:05 now
    0:38:05 here
    0:38:05 are
    0:38:06 the
    0:38:06 bios
    0:38:06 for
    0:38:06 all
    0:38:06 the
    0:38:07 guests
    0:38:08 my
    0:38:08 guest
    0:38:09 today
    0:38:09 is
    0:38:09 a
    0:38:10 dear
    0:38:10 friend
    0:38:10 I’ve
    0:38:10 wanted
    0:38:11 to
    0:38:11 have
    0:38:11 him
    0:38:11 on
    0:38:11 the
    0:38:11 podcast
    0:38:12 for
    0:38:12 a
    0:38:12 very
    0:38:12 long
    0:38:12 time
    0:38:13 Craig
    0:38:14 Maud
    0:38:14 Craig
    0:38:15 Maud
    0:38:15 M-O-D
    0:38:16 he is
    0:38:17 a
    0:38:17 writer
    0:38:17 photographer
    0:38:18 and
    0:38:18 walker
    0:38:19 we’ll
    0:38:19 talk
    0:38:19 about
    0:38:19 that
    0:38:20 a
    0:38:20 lot
    0:38:20 living
    0:38:20 in
    0:38:21 Tokyo
    0:38:21 and
    0:38:22 Kamakura
    0:38:22 Japan
    0:38:23 he
    0:38:23 is
    0:38:23 the
    0:38:23 author
    0:38:23 of
    0:38:24 Things
    0:38:24 Become
    0:38:25 Other
    0:38:25 Things
    0:38:26 and
    0:38:26 Kissa
    0:38:26 by
    0:38:27 Kissa
    0:38:28 K-I-S-S-A
    0:38:29 don’t worry
    0:38:29 about it
    0:38:29 we’ll get
    0:38:30 to it
    0:38:30 he also
    0:38:31 writes the
    0:38:31 newsletters
    0:38:32 Roden
    0:38:33 and Ridgeline
    0:38:33 and has
    0:38:33 contributed
    0:38:34 to the
    0:38:34 New York
    0:38:34 Times
    0:38:35 the
    0:38:35 Atlantic
    0:38:36 Wired
    0:38:36 and
    0:38:36 more
    0:38:37 he has
    0:38:37 walked
    0:38:38 thousands
    0:38:38 of
    0:38:39 miles
    0:38:39 across
    0:38:39 Japan
    0:38:40 in
    0:38:40 every
    0:38:41 conceivable
    0:38:41 place
    0:38:42 and
    0:38:42 since
    0:38:43 2016
    0:38:44 he has
    0:38:44 been
    0:38:44 co-running
    0:38:45 walk and
    0:38:46 talks
    0:38:46 with
    0:38:46 Kevin
    0:38:47 Kelly
    0:38:48 perhaps
    0:38:48 the
    0:38:48 most
    0:38:49 interesting
    0:38:49 man
    0:38:49 in
    0:38:49 the
    0:38:49 world
    0:38:50 in
    0:38:50 various
    0:38:51 places
    0:38:51 around
    0:38:51 the
    0:38:52 world
    0:38:52 the
    0:38:53 Cotswolds
    0:38:53 Northern
    0:38:54 Thailand
    0:38:55 Bali
    0:38:56 Southern
    0:38:56 China
    0:38:57 Japan
    0:38:58 Spain
    0:38:58 which
    0:38:59 includes
    0:38:59 the
    0:38:59 Portuguese
    0:39:00 and
    0:39:00 French
    0:39:00 Caminos
    0:39:01 and
    0:39:01 much
    0:39:02 more
    0:39:02 today’s
    0:39:03 episode
    0:39:03 is
    0:39:04 wide
    0:39:04 ranging
    0:39:05 and
    0:39:05 I
    0:39:05 had
    0:39:05 so
    0:39:05 much
    0:39:06 fun
    0:39:06 with
    0:39:06 this
    0:39:06 we
    0:39:06 ended
    0:39:07 up
    0:39:07 discussing
    0:39:07 Craig’s
    0:39:08 early
    0:39:08 life
    0:39:09 his
    0:39:09 path
    0:39:09 to
    0:39:10 Japan
    0:39:10 his
    0:39:11 struggles
    0:39:11 with
    0:39:12 self-worth
    0:39:12 and
    0:39:13 alcoholism
    0:39:13 and how
    0:39:14 he
    0:39:14 overcame
    0:39:15 both
    0:39:15 of them
    0:39:16 creative
    0:39:16 development
    0:39:17 his
    0:39:18 writing
    0:39:18 experiments
    0:39:19 his
    0:39:19 initial
    0:39:20 experiences
    0:39:20 with
    0:39:20 walking
    0:39:21 and
    0:39:21 writing
    0:39:21 and
    0:39:21 so
    0:39:22 much
    0:39:22 more
    0:39:22 I
    0:39:23 really
    0:39:23 think
    0:39:23 you
    0:39:23 will
    0:39:23 get
    0:39:24 a lot
    0:39:24 out
    0:39:24 of
    0:39:24 this
    0:39:25 conversation
    0:39:25 as I
    0:39:25 did
    0:39:25 I
    0:39:26 took
    0:39:26 copious
    0:39:26 notes
    0:39:27 and I
    0:39:28 also
    0:39:28 decided
    0:39:29 to keep
    0:39:29 some
    0:39:29 of the
    0:39:29 behind
    0:39:30 the
    0:39:30 scenes
    0:39:30 banter
    0:39:31 before
    0:39:31 the
    0:39:31 interview
    0:39:32 in
    0:39:32 the
    0:39:33 recording
    0:39:33 that
    0:39:33 you’re
    0:39:33 going
    0:39:33 to
    0:39:33 hear
    0:39:34 which
    0:39:34 I
    0:39:34 thought
    0:39:34 might
    0:39:35 be
    0:39:35 fun
    0:39:36 for
    0:39:37 shits
    0:39:37 and giggles
    0:39:37 just
    0:39:38 for the
    0:39:38 fun
    0:39:38 of it
    0:39:38 why
    0:39:38 not
    0:39:39 you
    0:39:39 can
    0:39:39 find
    0:39:39 Craig
    0:39:40 mod
    0:39:40 at
    0:39:42 craigmod.com
    0:39:42 that’s
    0:39:42 the
    0:39:43 hq
    0:39:43 for
    0:39:44 everything
    0:39:44 craigmod
    0:39:46 c-r-a-i-g-m-o-d
    0:39:47 dot com
    0:39:47 you can
    0:39:47 find him
    0:39:47 on
    0:39:48 instagram
    0:39:48 at
    0:39:49 craigmod
    0:39:49 and
    0:39:50 on
    0:39:50 blue sky
    0:39:51 as well
    0:39:52 craigmod.com
    0:39:56 today my
    0:39:57 guest is
    0:39:58 ev
    0:39:58 williams
    0:39:59 and what
    0:39:59 a story
    0:40:00 he has
    0:40:00 ev
    0:40:01 is the
    0:40:01 co-founder
    0:40:02 and chairman
    0:40:02 of
    0:40:02 mosey
    0:40:03 a new
    0:40:03 social
    0:40:04 network
    0:40:04 that helps
    0:40:04 you connect
    0:40:05 in person
    0:40:06 with the
    0:40:06 people you
    0:40:07 care
    0:40:07 about
    0:40:08 most
    0:40:08 over the
    0:40:09 past 25
    0:40:09 years
    0:40:10 ev
    0:40:11 co-founded
    0:40:11 several
    0:40:11 companies
    0:40:12 that have
    0:40:12 helped
    0:40:12 shape
    0:40:13 the
    0:40:13 modern
    0:40:13 internet
    0:40:14 including
    0:40:15 blogger
    0:40:15 medium
    0:40:16 and
    0:40:16 twitter
    0:40:16 ev
    0:40:17 is also
    0:40:17 the
    0:40:17 co-founder
    0:40:17 of
    0:40:18 obvious
    0:40:18 ventures
    0:40:19 an
    0:40:19 investment
    0:40:19 firm
    0:40:19 that
    0:40:20 focuses
    0:40:20 on
    0:40:20 world
    0:40:21 positive
    0:40:21 companies
    0:40:22 addressing
    0:40:23 major
    0:40:23 systemic
    0:40:24 problems
    0:40:24 ev
    0:40:25 grew up
    0:40:25 on a
    0:40:25 farm
    0:40:25 in
    0:40:26 clarkes
    0:40:26 nebraska
    0:40:26 has
    0:40:26 has
    0:40:27 two
    0:40:27 sons
    0:40:27 and
    0:40:27 lives
    0:40:28 mostly
    0:40:28 in
    0:40:28 the
    0:40:28 bay
    0:40:29 area
    0:40:29 this
    0:40:30 particular
    0:40:30 episode
    0:40:31 this
    0:40:31 conversation
    0:40:32 was recorded
    0:40:32 live
    0:40:33 in
    0:40:33 austin
    0:40:34 texas
    0:40:35 at
    0:40:35 the
    0:40:36 dignation
    0:40:37 relaunch
    0:40:38 that’s
    0:40:38 dignation
    0:40:39 dot show
    0:40:40 for the
    0:40:40 show
    0:40:40 itself
    0:40:41 and
    0:40:41 that is
    0:40:41 where
    0:40:42 dig.com
    0:40:43 was
    0:40:43 relaunched
    0:40:44 it was
    0:40:44 recently
    0:40:45 acquired
    0:40:45 by its
    0:40:46 original
    0:40:46 founder
    0:40:46 my good
    0:40:46 friend
    0:40:47 kevin
    0:40:47 rose
    0:40:48 and
    0:40:48 reddit
    0:40:49 co-founder
    0:40:49 alexis
    0:40:50 ohanian
    0:40:50 formerly
    0:40:51 arch
    0:40:51 nemeses
    0:40:52 but they
    0:40:52 have
    0:40:53 joined
    0:40:53 forces
    0:40:54 and
    0:40:54 invited
    0:40:54 me
    0:40:54 along
    0:40:55 for
    0:40:55 all
    0:40:55 the
    0:40:55 fun
    0:40:55 and
    0:40:56 surprises
    0:40:56 as
    0:40:57 they
    0:40:57 celebrated
    0:40:58 the
    0:40:58 relaunch
    0:40:59 go to
    0:40:59 dig.com
    0:41:00 and sign
    0:41:00 up to get
    0:41:01 early access
    0:41:01 when the
    0:41:02 invites
    0:41:02 go out
    0:41:03 one more
    0:41:03 time
    0:41:04 dig.com
    0:41:04 that’s
    0:41:06 dig.com
    0:41:06 you can
    0:41:07 find
    0:41:07 mosey
    0:41:08 that is
    0:41:09 ev’s
    0:41:10 newest
    0:41:10 creation
    0:41:10 at
    0:41:11 mosey.app
    0:41:12 that’s
    0:41:12 available on
    0:41:13 ios right
    0:41:13 now
    0:41:14 you can
    0:41:14 find
    0:41:14 obvious
    0:41:15 ventures
    0:41:15 at
    0:41:16 obvious.com
    0:41:16 and you
    0:41:17 can find
    0:41:17 him
    0:41:17 on
    0:41:18 twitter
    0:41:19 that is
    0:41:20 also known
    0:41:20 as
    0:41:20 x
    0:41:21 at
    0:41:21 ev
    0:41:22 at
    0:41:22 e
    0:41:27 today
    0:41:28 i am
    0:41:28 interviewing
    0:41:29 two people
    0:41:29 i would
    0:41:30 consider
    0:41:31 decathletes
    0:41:31 of
    0:41:32 creativity
    0:41:33 the first
    0:41:33 is
    0:41:34 richard
    0:41:34 taylor
    0:41:35 he is
    0:41:35 co-founder
    0:41:35 and
    0:41:36 creative
    0:41:36 lead
    0:41:36 at
    0:41:37 weta
    0:41:37 workshop
    0:41:38 which
    0:41:38 he runs
    0:41:38 with his
    0:41:39 wife
    0:41:39 and
    0:41:39 co-founder
    0:41:40 tanya
    0:41:40 roger
    0:41:41 weta
    0:41:41 workshop
    0:41:41 is a
    0:41:42 concept
    0:41:42 design
    0:41:43 studio
    0:41:43 and
    0:41:44 manufacturing
    0:41:44 facility
    0:41:44 that
    0:41:45 services
    0:41:45 the
    0:41:45 world’s
    0:41:46 creative
    0:41:46 and
    0:41:46 entertainment
    0:41:47 industries
    0:41:47 and
    0:41:47 what
    0:41:47 you’ll
    0:41:48 see
    0:41:48 is
    0:41:48 just
    0:41:48 how
    0:41:49 much
    0:41:49 they
    0:41:49 do
    0:41:50 believe
    0:41:50 it
    0:41:50 or
    0:41:50 not
    0:41:50 it’s
    0:41:51 started
    0:41:51 by
    0:41:51 them
    0:41:52 assembling
    0:41:52 things
    0:41:52 and
    0:41:52 making
    0:41:53 things
    0:41:54 on top
    0:41:54 of
    0:41:54 their
    0:41:55 bed
    0:41:55 we’ll
    0:41:55 get
    0:41:55 to
    0:41:56 that
    0:41:56 they’ve
    0:41:56 been
    0:41:57 recognized
    0:41:57 with
    0:41:57 five
    0:41:58 academy
    0:41:58 awards
    0:41:59 four
    0:41:59 bafta
    0:41:59 awards
    0:42:00 three
    0:42:00 theo
    0:42:01 awards
    0:42:01 and more
    0:42:02 than 30
    0:42:02 other national
    0:42:03 and international
    0:42:04 accolades
    0:42:05 their practical
    0:42:05 and special
    0:42:06 effects
    0:42:06 have helped
    0:42:07 define the
    0:42:07 visual
    0:42:07 identities
    0:42:08 of some
    0:42:08 of the
    0:42:09 most
    0:42:09 recognizable
    0:42:10 franchises
    0:42:10 in film
    0:42:11 and television
    0:42:12 you will
    0:42:12 you will
    0:42:12 know
    0:42:12 some
    0:42:12 of
    0:42:13 them
    0:42:13 including
    0:42:13 the
    0:42:14 lord
    0:42:14 of
    0:42:14 the
    0:42:14 rings
    0:42:14 planet
    0:42:15 of
    0:42:15 the
    0:42:15 apes
    0:42:16 superman
    0:42:16 mad max
    0:42:17 thor
    0:42:17 megan
    0:42:18 and love
    0:42:19 death
    0:42:19 and
    0:42:19 robots
    0:42:20 if you
    0:42:20 haven’t
    0:42:20 seen
    0:42:20 love
    0:42:20 death
    0:42:21 and
    0:42:21 robots
    0:42:21 check
    0:42:21 it
    0:42:21 out
    0:42:22 there
    0:42:22 are
    0:42:22 some
    0:42:23 amazing
    0:42:23 amazing
    0:42:24 shorts
    0:42:25 in addition
    0:42:25 to that
    0:42:25 they do
    0:42:26 a few
    0:42:26 other
    0:42:26 things
    0:42:27 get ready
    0:42:27 for
    0:42:27 this
    0:42:27 what a
    0:42:28 workshop
    0:42:28 offers
    0:42:29 tourism
    0:42:29 and retail
    0:42:30 experiences
    0:42:30 consumer
    0:42:31 products
    0:42:31 and interactive
    0:42:32 studio
    0:42:32 public
    0:42:33 sculptures
    0:42:34 and private
    0:42:34 commissions
    0:42:35 they’ve also
    0:42:35 done
    0:42:35 augmented
    0:42:36 reality
    0:42:37 and
    0:42:37 video
    0:42:38 games
    0:42:38 and all
    0:42:38 sorts
    0:42:38 of
    0:42:38 things
    0:42:39 richard
    0:42:39 now
    0:42:39 focuses
    0:42:40 much
    0:42:40 of
    0:42:40 his
    0:42:40 time
    0:42:40 on
    0:42:41 their
    0:42:41 immersive
    0:42:42 experiences
    0:42:43 which I’ve
    0:42:44 had the chance
    0:42:44 to experience
    0:42:45 first hand
    0:42:45 I recommend
    0:42:45 them
    0:42:46 very highly
    0:42:47 such as
    0:42:47 the
    0:42:48 Thea
    0:42:48 award-winning
    0:42:49 Gallipoli
    0:42:50 the scale
    0:42:50 of our
    0:42:50 war
    0:42:51 Weta
    0:42:51 Workshop
    0:42:52 Unleashed
    0:42:53 and the
    0:42:53 giant
    0:42:54 atrium
    0:42:54 installation
    0:42:55 Aura
    0:42:55 Forest
    0:42:56 at
    0:42:56 edge
    0:42:57 of the
    0:42:57 sky
    0:42:58 next
    0:42:58 we have
    0:42:59 Greg
    0:43:00 Broadmoore
    0:43:00 Greg
    0:43:00 is an
    0:43:01 artist
    0:43:01 and writer
    0:43:01 who has
    0:43:02 been part
    0:43:02 of the
    0:43:02 team
    0:43:03 at
    0:43:03 Weta
    0:43:03 Workshop
    0:43:04 for more
    0:43:04 than 20
    0:43:04 years
    0:43:05 his design
    0:43:06 and special
    0:43:06 effects
    0:43:06 credits
    0:43:07 include
    0:43:07 District
    0:43:07 9
    0:43:08 King Kong
    0:43:09 Godzilla
    0:43:09 The Adventures
    0:43:10 of Tintin
    0:43:11 and Avatar
    0:43:12 and he is
    0:43:12 the creator
    0:43:13 of the
    0:43:13 satirical
    0:43:14 retro sci-fi
    0:43:14 world
    0:43:15 of Dr.
    0:43:16 Gordbortz
    0:43:17 featuring a
    0:43:18 myriad of
    0:43:18 collectibles
    0:43:19 a world
    0:43:19 touring
    0:43:20 art exhibition
    0:43:21 four books
    0:43:22 and a game
    0:43:22 for Weta’s
    0:43:23 pioneering
    0:43:23 spatial
    0:43:24 computing
    0:43:24 platform
    0:43:25 most recently
    0:43:26 Greg built
    0:43:26 Weta’s
    0:43:27 video game
    0:43:27 division
    0:43:28 and directed
    0:43:28 multiple
    0:43:29 Dr. G
    0:43:29 video games
    0:43:30 for Magic
    0:43:30 Leap
    0:43:31 he’s currently
    0:43:31 working on
    0:43:32 the graphic
    0:43:33 novel series
    0:43:33 One Path
    0:43:34 set in a
    0:43:34 brutal
    0:43:35 prehistoric
    0:43:35 world
    0:43:36 where dinosaurs
    0:43:36 and cave
    0:43:37 women are
    0:43:37 locked in a
    0:43:38 grim battle
    0:43:39 for supremacy
    0:43:40 so these
    0:43:41 two guys
    0:43:42 have their
    0:43:43 hands in a
    0:43:43 lot
    0:43:45 they
    0:43:46 apply
    0:43:46 creativity
    0:43:47 to more
    0:43:48 things than
    0:43:48 I can count
    0:43:49 and they do
    0:43:50 it with
    0:43:50 incredible
    0:43:51 endurance
    0:43:51 how do they
    0:43:52 do it
    0:43:52 that’s what
    0:43:52 we’re going
    0:43:53 to explore
    0:43:54 and as you
    0:43:55 listen to
    0:43:55 this or as
    0:43:56 you watch
    0:43:56 it
    0:43:56 you’re going
    0:43:57 to hear
    0:43:57 a lot
    0:43:58 of moving
    0:43:58 around
    0:43:59 as they
    0:44:00 pull things
    0:44:00 from their
    0:44:01 offices
    0:44:02 from their
    0:44:02 workshops
    0:44:03 from around
    0:44:04 where they’re
    0:44:04 sitting
    0:44:05 so it will
    0:44:07 sound quite
    0:44:08 hyperactive
    0:44:09 and I suppose
    0:44:10 that is
    0:44:11 totally appropriate
    0:44:13 given the
    0:44:14 nature of what
    0:44:15 we’re discussing
    0:44:16 so I’ll leave it
    0:44:17 at that
    0:44:18 you can find
    0:44:19 Weta Workshop
    0:44:19 at
    0:44:21 WetaNZ.com
    0:44:21 slash
    0:44:22 US
    0:44:23 that’s
    0:44:25 WetaNZ.com
    0:44:25 of course
    0:44:26 and on
    0:44:27 Instagram
    0:44:27 at
    0:44:28 Weta Workshop
    0:44:29 you can find
    0:44:30 Greg at
    0:44:31 Greg Broadmoor
    0:44:31 that’s
    0:44:33 B-R-O-A-D-M-O-R-E
    0:44:34 Greg Broadmoor
    0:44:35 dot com
    0:44:35 and on
    0:44:36 Instagram
    0:44:36 at
    0:44:36 Greg
    0:44:37 underscore
    0:44:38 Broadmoor
    0:44:40 hey guys
    0:44:40 this is
    0:44:40 Tim again
    0:44:41 just one
    0:44:41 more thing
    0:44:42 before you
    0:44:43 take off
    0:44:43 and that
    0:44:43 is
    0:44:44 five bullet
    0:44:45 Friday
    0:44:46 would you
    0:44:46 enjoy
    0:44:46 getting a
    0:44:47 short email
    0:44:47 from me
    0:44:48 every Friday
    0:44:48 that provides
    0:44:49 a little
    0:44:49 fun
    0:44:50 before
    0:44:50 the weekend
    0:44:51 between
    0:44:51 one and a half
    0:44:52 and two million
    0:44:53 people subscribe
    0:44:53 to my free
    0:44:54 newsletter
    0:44:55 my super
    0:44:55 short newsletter
    0:44:56 called
    0:44:56 five bullet
    0:44:57 Friday
    0:44:58 easy to sign
    0:44:58 up
    0:44:58 easy to
    0:44:59 cancel
    0:45:00 it is
    0:45:00 basically
    0:45:01 a half
    0:45:01 page
    0:45:02 that I
    0:45:03 send out
    0:45:03 every Friday
    0:45:04 to share
    0:45:04 the coolest
    0:45:05 things I’ve
    0:45:05 found or
    0:45:06 discovered
    0:45:06 or have
    0:45:07 started
    0:45:07 exploring
    0:45:08 over that
    0:45:08 week
    0:45:08 it’s
    0:45:08 kind of
    0:45:08 like
    0:45:09 my
    0:45:09 diary
    0:45:09 of
    0:45:09 cool
    0:45:10 things
    0:45:10 it
    0:45:10 often
    0:45:11 includes
    0:45:11 articles
    0:45:11 I’m
    0:45:12 reading
    0:45:12 books
    0:45:12 I’m
    0:45:13 reading
    0:45:14 albums
    0:45:14 perhaps
    0:45:15 gadgets
    0:45:16 gizmos
    0:45:16 all sorts
    0:45:17 of tech
    0:45:17 tricks
    0:45:18 and so on
    0:45:18 they get
    0:45:19 sent to me
    0:45:19 by my
    0:45:20 friends
    0:45:20 including a lot
    0:45:21 of podcast
    0:45:22 guests
    0:45:23 and these
    0:45:23 strange
    0:45:24 esoteric
    0:45:24 things
    0:45:25 end up
    0:45:25 in my
    0:45:25 field
    0:45:26 and then
    0:45:27 I test
    0:45:27 them
    0:45:27 and then
    0:45:28 I share
    0:45:28 them
    0:45:29 with you
    0:45:29 so
    0:45:30 if that
    0:45:30 sounds
    0:45:30 fun
    0:45:31 again
    0:45:31 it’s
    0:45:32 very
    0:45:32 short
    0:45:33 a little
    0:45:33 tiny
    0:45:33 bite
    0:45:33 of
    0:45:34 goodness
    0:45:34 before
    0:45:34 you
    0:45:34 head
    0:45:35 off
    0:45:35 for
    0:45:35 the
    0:45:35 weekend
    0:45:36 something
    0:45:36 to
    0:45:36 think
    0:45:36 about
    0:45:37 if you’d like
    0:45:38 to try it out
    0:45:39 just go to
    0:45:39 tim.blog
    0:45:40 slash
    0:45:40 Friday
    0:45:41 type that into
    0:45:41 your browser
    0:45:42 tim.blog
    0:45:43 slash
    0:45:44 Friday
    0:45:44 drop in your
    0:45:45 email and you’ll
    0:45:45 get the very
    0:45:46 next one
    0:45:47 thanks for
    0:45:47 listening

    This is a special inbetweenisode, which serves as a recap of the episodes from last month. It features a short clip from each conversation in one place so you can easily jump around to get a feel for the episode and guest.

    Based on your feedback, this format has been tweaked and improved since the first recap episode. For instance, listeners suggested that the bios for each guest can slow the momentum, so we moved all the bios to the end. 

    See it as a teaser. Something to whet your appetite. If you like what you hear, you can of course find the full episodes at tim.blog/podcast

    Please enjoy! 

    This episode is brought to you by 5-Bullet Friday, my very own email newsletter.

    Timestamps:

    Craig Mod: 03:16

    Ev Williams: 13:49

    Richard Taylor: 23:57

    Full episode titles:

    Craig Mod — The Real Japan, Cheap Apartments in Tokyo, Productive Side Quests, Creative Retreats, Buying Future Freedom, and Being Possessed by Spirits

    Ev Williams — The Art of Pivoting (e.g., Odeo to Twitter), Strategic Quitting, The Dangers of Premature Scaling, Must-Read Books, and More

    Richard Taylor and Greg Broadmore, Wētā Workshop — Untapping Creativity, Stories from The Lord of the Rings, The Magic of New Zealand, Four Tenets to Live By, and The Only Sentence of Self-Help You Need

    See Privacy Policy at https://art19.com/privacy and California Privacy Notice at https://art19.com/privacy#do-not-sell-my-info.

  • #225 Outliers: Henry Singleton – Distant Force

    AI transcript
    0:00:06 Henry Singleton has the best operating and capital deployment record in American business.
    0:00:12 If one took the top 100 business school graduates and made a composite of their triumphs,
    0:00:15 their record would not be as good as Singleton’s.
    0:00:20 That’s a quote by Charlie Munger on Today’s Outlier.
    0:00:37 Welcome to the Knowledge Project Podcast.
    0:00:39 I’m your host, Shane Parrish.
    0:00:40 In a world where knowledge is powered,
    0:00:45 this podcast is your toolkit for mastering the best of what other people have already figured out.
    0:00:47 If you want to take your learning to the next level,
    0:00:51 consider joining our membership program at fs.blog.com.
    0:00:56 As a member, you’ll get early access to episodes, no ads, including this,
    0:01:01 exclusive content, hand-edited transcripts, access to the repository,
    0:01:03 which has highlights from all my favorite books.
    0:01:06 Check out the link in the show notes for more.
    0:01:11 When the stock market crashed in the 1970s, most CEOs panicked.
    0:01:13 Henry Singleton saw opportunity.
    0:01:19 While other business leaders were caught out of position and desperately trying to save their companies,
    0:01:24 Singleton quietly executed a strategy so unconventional that Warren Buffett later admitted,
    0:01:27 I wish I had had the courage to do it myself.
    0:01:32 That single decision created the most successful conglomerate in American history.
    0:01:35 Singleton is the greatest businessman you’ve never heard of.
    0:01:45 The chess prodigy-turned-mathematician-turned-CEO generated a 20.4% annual return over nearly three decades at Teledyne.
    0:01:51 Even Warren Buffett was in awe, calling it the best operating and capital deployment record in American business, bar none.
    0:01:54 Plenty of CEOs are smart.
    0:01:55 Singleton was different.
    0:01:56 He thought differently.
    0:02:01 When acquisitions were cheap in the 1960s, he bought 130 companies.
    0:02:04 When prices became irrational, he stopped on a dime.
    0:02:10 Rather than chase growth for its own sake, he pivoted to buying back over 90% of Teledyne’s shares,
    0:02:13 a move that Wall Street analysts couldn’t even comprehend.
    0:02:16 He ignored conventional wisdom at every turn.
    0:02:21 When other executives obsessed over quarterly earnings, Singleton focused on cash.
    0:02:25 When they built centralized bureaucracies, he gave real authority to local managers.
    0:02:29 When they chased headlines, he refused to give interviews.
    0:02:36 Today, we explore how this insanely private man built one of the greatest business success stories of the 20th century,
    0:02:43 not by following formulas, but by thinking clearly about value while others reacted to yesterday’s news.
    0:02:49 Whether you’re making business decisions, managing investments, or simply trying to think more clearly about complex problems,
    0:02:54 Singleton’s approach offers a powerful alternative to following the crowd.
    0:03:01 Stick around until the end, and we’ll pull out some timeless lessons that you can use from Singleton’s playbook.
    0:03:04 And check out our website for key takeaways from the episode.
    0:03:07 It’s time to listen and learn.
    0:03:12 This podcast is for entertainment purposes only.
    0:03:20 What do you get when you mix a chess prodigy, a mathematician, a brilliant engineer,
    0:03:24 and an investment savvy that literally made Warren Buffett jealous?
    0:03:28 In the investment world, there are legends, and then there are legends.
    0:03:32 Henry Singleton belongs firmly in the second category.
    0:03:34 Italicized, bold, underlined.
    0:03:39 He is the kind of person who appears in a field about once a generation.
    0:03:45 He, more than perhaps anyone so far in this series, deserves the label of outlier.
    0:03:50 Warren Buffett once said that Henry Singleton had the best operating and capital deployment record
    0:03:52 in American business, bar none.
    0:03:54 And the numbers back that up.
    0:04:00 From 1963 to 1990, Teledyne, the company that Henry Singleton helped build from scratch,
    0:04:06 delivered annual returns of 20.4%, while the S&P 500 managed a mere 8%.
    0:04:15 If you’d invested $10,000 in Teledyne in 1963, by 1990, you’d have over $1.8 million.
    0:04:22 What made Henry Singleton remarkable wasn’t just his returns, but how he got them.
    0:04:27 He ignored the institutional imperative that compels people to imitate what others are doing.
    0:04:32 He knew that if he wanted different results, he needed to do something different.
    0:04:35 But he wasn’t just being contrarian for its own sake.
    0:04:37 He was creating advantageous divergence.
    0:04:40 Singleton was indifferent to criticism.
    0:04:43 He avoided management conferences and consultants.
    0:04:45 He didn’t offer guidance to Wall Street.
    0:04:48 Instead, he followed the numbers ruthlessly.
    0:04:54 He thought deeply about strategy and wasn’t afraid of dramatic pivots when circumstances changed.
    0:05:00 Throughout the 1960s, Teledyne aggressively acquired more than 130 companies.
    0:05:05 But by 1969, Henry Singleton saw the acquisition prices head soar beyond rational value.
    0:05:11 Therefore, he slammed on the brakes, stunning Wall Street by making zero new deals.
    0:05:15 He shifted his entire focus to internal management and cost control.
    0:05:19 At the time, his decisions left Wall Street scratching their heads,
    0:05:24 until years later when a strategic genius became apparent and they scrambled to copy him.
    0:05:28 The media was mystified too, partly because Henry rarely gave interviews.
    0:05:32 What kind of CEO wouldn’t want publicity, especially with his track record?
    0:05:34 But Henry wasn’t doing it for attention.
    0:05:35 He wanted to win.
    0:05:37 To him, business was entertainment.
    0:05:40 It was a fun but ultra-competitive game.
    0:05:44 His objective, as he put it in a rare 1967 Forbes interview,
    0:05:48 was to increase our rate of earnings faster than they do,
    0:05:51 where they meant every other company in America.
    0:05:55 Without a doubt, he succeeded like no one else.
    0:05:57 Now, let’s see how.
    0:06:03 Henry Singleton was born on a small ranch in Texas, where his family raised cotton and cattle.
    0:06:07 Those rural beginnings gave him a lifelong love of land.
    0:06:10 Decades later, he’d become one of America’s largest landowners.
    0:06:14 But it was clear early on that the Texas soil wouldn’t define his future.
    0:06:16 His extraordinary mind would.
    0:06:20 From an early age, Singleton showed remarkable mathematical abilities.
    0:06:25 These talents led him to MIT, where even amongst America’s brightest technical minds,
    0:06:26 he stood out.
    0:06:32 In 1939, he was on a three-man team that won the William Lau Putnam Prize,
    0:06:34 an elite math competition.
    0:06:37 It was MIT’s first time winning this award.
    0:06:37 His teammate?
    0:06:42 None other than the future Nobel physicist and outlier Richard Feynman.
    0:06:44 Imagine competing against that pair.
    0:06:47 The victory wasn’t just for academic bragging rights.
    0:06:51 It proved Singleton could solve problems that stumped almost everyone else,
    0:06:54 a talent that would define his business career.
    0:06:57 But Singleton wasn’t just a theoretical thinker.
    0:07:01 He had another passion that shaped his strategic mind, chess.
    0:07:07 He became remarkably skilled, reaching a 2100 rating, just 100 points shy of master status.
    0:07:11 A colleague at Teledyne, Tech Wilson, played chess with him regularly.
    0:07:17 During these games, Singleton often sat with his back to the board, keeping the entire game in his head.
    0:07:22 Wilson would call out his moves and Singleton would respond without seeing the physical pieces.
    0:07:25 During one of these blindfolded games, Singleton suddenly said,
    0:07:28 Tech, you told me the wrong move, three moves back.
    0:07:32 His spatial awareness and memory were astonishing.
    0:07:37 He could detect a discrepancy in a complex game that he couldn’t even see.
    0:07:41 This ability to visualize complex systems, think multiple moves ahead,
    0:07:47 recognize patterns, and maintain mental discipline would become hallmarks of his business approach.
    0:07:52 After graduating MIT, Singleton’s first business role came in the 1950s
    0:07:57 as a research associate at General Electric, where he worked on communication theory.
    0:08:02 In 1951, he was recruited by Simon Ramo to join Hughes Aircraft in Los Angeles,
    0:08:07 applying emerging digital technologies to aircraft control systems.
    0:08:12 I had the pleasure of demonstrating a pilot training fire control simulator to Howard Hughes
    0:08:13 one day, Singleton later recalled.
    0:08:18 Howard would only come by to see us at night and always unannounced.
    0:08:22 He would ask what we were doing, and he always understood everything when we explained it to him.
    0:08:24 He was a very fine man.
    0:08:26 Just an aside here, just for a second.
    0:08:28 Talent attracts talent.
    0:08:31 Look at the people Singleton is already spending time with.
    0:08:33 Richard Feynman, Howard Hughes.
    0:08:39 He was playing chess with Claude Shannon at MIT, who would go on to become a board member at Teledyne.
    0:08:43 Not only was Singleton special, but he was also hanging around special people.
    0:08:49 Singleton’s career continued upward when he moved to North American Aviation in 1952,
    0:08:52 leading a group working on internal navigation systems,
    0:08:57 technology that would guide missiles, and aircraft with unprecedented precision.
    0:09:02 But it was at Lytton Industries, which he joined in 1954, where Singleton truly began to shine.
    0:09:08 By 1958, he had risen to vice president and general manager of the Electronics Equipment Division.
    0:09:13 During this period, he developed a revolutionary internal guidance system
    0:09:17 that included both the internal platform and its supported electronics.
    0:09:21 What made his system special was its two-degree-of-freedom gyroscope,
    0:09:24 smaller, lighter, and cheaper than existing systems.
    0:09:28 Tech Wilson, who worked with Singleton at Lytton and later joined him at Teledyne,
    0:09:33 said that Henry was the father of aircraft internal guidance as we know it today.
    0:09:35 While his engineering achievements were impressive,
    0:09:39 Singleton was simultaneously developing another crucial skill set.
    0:09:43 He was studying the stock market and the inner workings of corporations.
    0:09:49 In the 1940s and early 1950s, Singleton would spend days in brokerage houses in New York
    0:09:53 and elsewhere watching the ticker tape and thinking about capital efficiency.
    0:09:55 He observed how shares were valued and traded,
    0:10:00 how companies with steady growth rates were rewarded with ever-increasing price-to-earnings multiples.
    0:10:02 He wasn’t just a brilliant engineer.
    0:10:06 He was also a student of business history and capital markets,
    0:10:10 studying outliers like Henry Ford and companies like General Motors.
    0:10:14 He analyzed how successful corporations grew through acquisitions,
    0:10:19 examining companies like Lytton, TRW, and Golf & Western, early conglomerates.
    0:10:24 Singleton was methodically building a mental playbook for his future empire.
    0:10:27 Most mornings, I start my day with a smoothie.
    0:10:30 It’s a secret recipe the kids and I call the Tom Brady.
    0:10:35 I actually shared the full recipe in episode 191 with Dr. Rhonda Patrick.
    0:10:38 One thing that hasn’t changed since then, protein is a must.
    0:10:43 These days, I build my foundation around what Momentus calls the Momentus 3,
    0:10:46 protein, creatine, and omega-3s.
    0:10:53 I take them daily because they support everything, focus, energy, recovery, and long-term health.
    0:10:57 Most people don’t get enough of any of these things through diet alone.
    0:10:59 What makes Momentus different is their quality.
    0:11:02 Their whey protein isolate is grass-fed.
    0:11:06 Their creatine uses Creopure, the purest form available.
    0:11:09 And their omega-3s are sourced for maximum bioavailability.
    0:11:12 So your body actually uses what you take.
    0:11:18 No fillers, no artificial ingredients, just what your body needs, backed by science.
    0:11:23 Head to libmomentus.com and use code KNOWLEDGEPROJECT for 35%
    0:11:24 off your first subscription.
    0:11:30 That’s code KNOWLEDGEPROJECT at livemomentus.com for 35% off your first subscription.
    0:11:35 By 1960, Singleton had reached a crossroads.
    0:11:39 Despite his success at Lytton, he was passed over for the CEO position.
    0:11:41 And rather than settle, he made a bold decision.
    0:11:48 At the age of 43, he and colleague George Kosmetsky, who taught business management at MIT,
    0:11:52 decided to invest their resources to start a new electronics company.
    0:11:53 At 43.
    0:11:56 I think about this all the time when people say they’re too old to start a company.
    0:11:58 You’re not too old.
    0:11:58 Go build.
    0:12:05 With an internal capital of 450,000, they launched what was originally called Instrument Systems.
    0:12:10 Their first acquisition was a small electronics company, which gave them a manufacturing facility
    0:12:11 and a small team of employees.
    0:12:15 In October 1960, the company name was changed to Teledyne.
    0:12:20 Tela, meaning at a distance, and dyne, meaning power.
    0:12:23 A name that Henry decided on after much thought.
    0:12:28 Teledyne’s stock went on the market in 1961 with Arthur Rock, who had later become famous
    0:12:31 for backing Intel and Apple, helping in the IPO.
    0:12:33 The early days weren’t easy.
    0:12:35 Cash was tight, and Singleton had to get creative.
    0:12:40 One technique he used was borrowing against the physical inventories of the companies that
    0:12:41 they had acquired.
    0:12:47 As Russ Kiernan, whose optics company was acquired by Teledyne in 1963, recalled,
    0:12:52 Henry knew Kiernan Optics had sizable inventory of expensive equipment and tooling.
    0:12:58 We priced each individual item and were able to raise a considerable sum for the corporation.
    0:12:59 This made us all feel good.
    0:13:04 That is, until we learned our facility had to make monthly payments on the loan.
    0:13:10 Those early financial gymnastics reflected Singleton’s scrappy approach to business building.
    0:13:14 He understood that sometimes you have to get uncomfortable to create something great.
    0:13:18 Singleton was also refreshingly direct in his business dealings.
    0:13:24 For example, during negotiations to acquire Kiernan for stock, the Teledyne share price declined
    0:13:26 slightly after they had agreed on terms.
    0:13:30 Kiernan requested a renegotiation, but Henry quickly responded,
    0:13:33 you wouldn’t be making that request if the price had gone up.
    0:13:35 That was the end of that conversation.
    0:13:40 Singleton’s no-nonsense approach extended to all aspects of business.
    0:13:46 When Kiernan later asked if Teledyne’s legal team could handle dissolving his original corporation,
    0:13:49 Singleton simply said, oh, we can dissolve it ourselves.
    0:13:54 Kiernan thought this was a bit strange, but proceeded with the task, having his secretary do the research
    0:13:56 and obtain the necessary forms.
    0:14:03 They accomplished the dissolution quickly at a total cost of just $37 in forms with no legal team needed.
    0:14:10 It was a valuable lesson in eliminating unnecessary expenses that he never forgot during his 18-year career with Teledyne.
    0:14:18 While building Teledyne in the early days, Singleton maintained the technical focus from his years at Hughes and Lytton.
    0:14:25 While rivals hesitated, Henry Singleton stood at the edge of a massive wave he believed would reshape global technology,
    0:14:26 semiconductors.
    0:14:33 Not only was he right, but this would also be one of the biggest technological trends, and he surfed it.
    0:14:37 This reminds me of something that Brad Jacobs said in our episode.
    0:14:38 I think it was 190.
    0:14:44 One of the most valuable pieces of advice he ever got from his mentor, Ludwig Jesselsen, was,
    0:14:51 You can mess up a lot of things in business and still do well as long as you get the big trend right.
    0:14:56 And Charlie Munger talks about this idea of surfing in poor Charlie’s Almanac, and here’s what he says.
    0:15:04 When technology moves as fast as it does in a civilization like ours, you get a phenomenon that I call competitive destruction.
    0:15:08 You know, you have the finest buggy whip factory, and all of a sudden in comes this little horseless carriage.
    0:15:12 And before too many years go by, your buggy whip business is dead.
    0:15:14 You either get into a different business or you’re dead.
    0:15:15 You’re destroyed.
    0:15:17 It happens again and again.
    0:15:22 And when these new businesses come in, they are huge advantages for the early birds.
    0:15:25 When you’re an early bird, there’s a model that I call surfing.
    0:15:31 When a surfer gets up and catches the wave and just stays there, he can go on a long, long time.
    0:15:37 But people get long runs when they’re right on the edge of the wave, whether it’s Microsoft or Intel or all kinds of people,
    0:15:40 including National Cash Register in the early days.
    0:15:43 This surfing model comes up over and over again.
    0:15:46 Timothy Eaton rode the wave of small department stores becoming large.
    0:15:49 Estee Lauder rode the wave of women getting freedom to look good.
    0:15:54 Cornelius Vanderbilt rode the wave of steamships until he spotted a better one with railroads.
    0:15:58 A lot of advantages come from just getting the major trend right.
    0:16:02 And Henry Singleton would nail the semiconductor trend.
    0:16:09 As he explained in a Forbes interview, we went into semiconductors in 1960, even though we were in the midst of a business crisis at the time.
    0:16:18 We did it because of our conviction that it was necessary for a long-term future growth and not because of any conviction that we would immediately make huge amounts of money.
    0:16:27 This conviction paid off in 1965 when Teledyne won a major contract against much larger competitors like IBM and Texas Instruments.
    0:16:38 This digital system could read information about navigation, mission history, and maintenance needs, essentially creating the black box technology that became standard in aviation.
    0:16:44 The victory sent Teledyne’s stock soaring from $15 to $65 a share in just one year.
    0:16:51 This jump gave Singleton the inflated currency he needed to accelerate his acquisition strategy.
    0:16:53 And accelerate it, he did.
    0:16:58 By the end of the 1960s, Teledyne had purchased 130 companies.
    0:17:00 But these weren’t random grabs.
    0:17:03 They were strategic moves to build a technological ecosystem.
    0:17:08 At first, Singleton acquired companies related to Teledyne’s military and government business.
    0:17:13 But as they grew, he expanded to other industries to reduce reliance on government contracts.
    0:17:15 In a later Forbes interview, he reflected,
    0:17:25 Teledyne is like a living plant with our companies, the different branches, and each putting out new branches and growing so that no one business is too significant.
    0:17:30 Among the acquisitions were companies like Ryan Aeronautical, which made an unmanned aircraft.
    0:17:38 Kiernan Optics, which produced the windows for the Apollo spacecraft through which astronauts saw Earth from space for the very first time.
    0:17:46 And specialty metal companies like Vasco Metals and Waochang, which made critical materials for aerospace and defense.
    0:17:56 What made Singleton’s acquisition strategy truly remarkable wasn’t just the number of companies that Teledyne bought, but how he found them and what he did with them afterwards.
    0:18:03 While many conglomerates of the era were grabbing anything they could get their hands on, Singleton was methodical.
    0:18:05 He wasn’t looking for flashy names.
    0:18:13 He wanted solid, profitable businesses with strong market positions and technical expertise that could complement Teledyne’s existing operations.
    0:18:17 The companies Teledyne acquired typically shared a few common traits.
    0:18:26 They were well-managed, operated in specialized technical niches related to electronics or semiconductors, and had healthy profit margins.
    0:18:32 Importantly, they operated in fields that Singleton, with his technical background, could understand and evaluate.
    0:18:39 A good friend of mine says there are riches in niches, and this is something that Singleton used to his advantage.
    0:18:41 But where did he find these gems?
    0:18:54 Often, they were small, family-run businesses started by veterans who had returned from World War II, gone to college on the GI Bill, and built successful enterprises based on technical skills they had developed during or after their service.
    0:19:02 By the 1960s, many of these founders were reaching a point where they were considering succession plans or seeking a capital partner to grow further.
    0:19:10 These entrepreneurs had built impressive specialty businesses, but often lacked access to capital markets that could fuel their next phase of growth.
    0:19:18 This created a perfect opportunity for Teledyne, which could offer them liquidity, resources, and a place with a larger technological ecosystem.
    0:19:23 Once acquired, companies typically retained their original management teams.
    0:19:28 Singleton recognized that these founders knew their businesses far better than he ever could.
    0:19:35 Instead of imposing a heavy corporate hand, he gave them autonomy, while providing financial discipline and strategic guidance.
    0:19:37 As one former Teledyne executive put it,
    0:19:43 Henry believed that people were the most important factor in business, and they had to be given a chance to do their job.
    0:19:45 Why bother them if they’re doing their job, he would say.
    0:19:55 This approach created a web of technically advanced companies, each operating largely independently, but connected through Teledyne’s financial control.
    0:19:58 In some cases, companies were combined where synergies existed.
    0:20:01 Others were renamed for brand unity.
    0:20:11 But many continued to operate just as before, with the same management and same products, except now that Teledyne handled tax filings, regulatory compliance, and capital allocation.
    0:20:17 Each company was its own profit center, left alone until problems arose.
    0:20:20 Singleton explained how things work like this.
    0:20:27 We go to an extreme in splitting businesses up so that we can see problems which would be passed over in companies where the units are larger.
    0:20:31 By our plans, no one business all by itself will become too large.
    0:20:33 Let’s pause here for a second.
    0:20:38 You can see how Singleton’s model of running Teledyne influenced Berkshire Hathaway’s approach.
    0:20:47 Acquire a company, maintain a separate profit and loss statement, leave management alone, and have them send profits back to headquarters for reallocation.
    0:20:57 Warren Buffett was an admitted Singleton admirer, and we can see how Teledyne’s decentralized structure with centralized capital allocation became central to Berkshire Hathaway’s playbook.
    0:20:59 There are differences, however.
    0:21:04 What made the Teledyne system so powerful was how knowledge flowed between companies.
    0:21:10 When Teledyne acquired a business, they gained technical expertise, industry relationships, and market insights.
    0:21:16 These companies often served as launching pads into adjacent markets that Teledyne might not have otherwise entered.
    0:21:21 Their own managers would even spot and recommend additional acquisition targets in related fields.
    0:21:27 An engineer in one Teledyne company might develop a component that could be used by another Teledyne business.
    0:21:34 A sales team might discover a market need that could be filled by combining technologies from multiple Teledyne units.
    0:21:39 This cross-pollination allowed Teledyne to expand in ways that competitors couldn’t match.
    0:21:46 For many founders who sold to Teledyne, the acquisition represented both the culmination of their life’s work and a new beginning.
    0:21:56 They received Teledyne stock that would appreciate dramatically while their businesses gained resources and connections that allowed them to grow far beyond what might have been possible alone.
    0:22:03 One of the most significant acquisitions in Teledyne’s history came in 1966 with the purchase of Vasco Metals.
    0:22:12 Not only was it the largest acquisition Teledyne had made to date, but it brought something even more valuable than its profitable specialty metals business, George Roberts.
    0:22:18 Roberts incidentally authored Distant Force, the book on which much of this episode is based.
    0:22:21 The book is about $1,400 and hard to find, so heads up.
    0:22:36 The other book that I used a lot of for this episode was Outsiders by Will Thorndyke, which if either of these books interest you, I’d encourage you to check out our membership, which gives you access to the repository, housing all my highlights from every book used in this series and more.
    0:22:39 Roberts and Singleton shared history.
    0:22:43 They had become roommates in the U.S. Naval Academy in 1935.
    0:22:50 Their past diverged after, with Roberts pursuing metallurgy, while Singleton focused on electronics and computing.
    0:22:56 With the Vasco acquisition, Roberts joined Teledyne as president, while Singleton took the role of CEO and chairman.
    0:22:58 This marked a pivotal transition.
    0:23:05 With Roberts handling the day-to-day operations, Singleton could focus on what he did best, capital allocation.
    0:23:10 This partnership worked brilliantly because of their complementary skills.
    0:23:16 Roberts was a detail-oriented operator with deep technical knowledge in metallurgy and manufacturing.
    0:23:21 Singleton was a visionary strategist with a gift for financial analysis and capital deployment.
    0:23:25 Together, they created a leadership dynamic few companies could match.
    0:23:37 Their different backgrounds helped Teledyne expand beyond electronics into material science, aerospace components, and industrial products, diversifying while maintaining focus on specialized, high-value products.
    0:23:41 As Jack Hamilton, who ran the specialty metals division, put it,
    0:23:46 We specialized in high-margin products that were sold by the ounce, not the ton.
    0:23:52 By 1970, Teledyne was a technological juggernaut.
    0:24:01 In just a decade, it had grown from a small electronic startup to a diversified glamourate with over 130 companies under its umbrella.
    0:24:04 If you thought they were indiscriminate in their acquisitions, you’d be wrong.
    0:24:08 Not only did they know what to acquire, but more importantly, they knew what to avoid.
    0:24:13 George Roberts summed up a key capital allocation principle by saying this,
    0:24:17 The only way you can make money in some businesses is by not entering them.
    0:24:24 They strategically acquired important, technically-oriented subcontractors who served the prime contractors.
    0:24:28 That way, if a large contract were abandoned, it wouldn’t hurt Teledyne too much.
    0:24:35 And they purchased these companies using Teledyne’s highly valued shares, often trading at 40 to 70 times earnings.
    0:24:38 They more than doubled the share count in the late 60s.
    0:24:43 But the financial results that followed more than made up for the share dilution.
    0:24:47 They increased sales by 374% in the same period.
    0:24:50 Net income increased by over 400%.
    0:24:52 Then suddenly, the game changed.
    0:24:55 And when it did, Singleton stopped making acquisitions on a dime.
    0:24:58 It was as if he’d seen something others hadn’t.
    0:25:03 There was a whole team of people at Teledyne who had been taking care of the acquisitions,
    0:25:07 helping find these companies, working through the acquisition process, integrating them.
    0:25:10 And they were just laid off all at the same time.
    0:25:13 Singleton had made a complete strategic pivot.
    0:25:18 All the focus that used to go towards acquisitions now went to internal management and cost control.
    0:25:24 Through the 70s, Singleton and Roberts pruned underperforming divisions, streamlined operations,
    0:25:26 and focused on cost control and free cash flow.
    0:25:32 When I asked Charlie Munger to describe Singleton over dinner one night, he looked at me and said one word,
    0:25:33 rational.
    0:25:36 Singleton wasn’t following a rigid playbook.
    0:25:40 He was intelligently adapting to changing conditions.
    0:25:42 Singleton went on to explain it like this.
    0:25:45 I believe in maximal flexibility.
    0:25:53 So I reserve the right to change my position on any subject when the external environment relating to any topic changes too.
    0:25:54 He went on to say,
    0:26:04 I do not define my job in any rigid terms, but in terms of having the freedom to do what seems to me to be in the best interest of the company at any time.
    0:26:10 Now, if you’re listening to that, like me, it sounds a lot like Charlie Munger, who said there was no master plan at Berkshire.
    0:26:12 We were just opportunistic.
    0:26:20 And as you’ve probably already noticed, there’s a lot of parallels to Singleton, Buffett, and Munger, Berkshire Hathaway, and Teledyne.
    0:26:22 So what had changed?
    0:26:29 The conglomerate boom of the late 60s had driven acquisition prices to levels that Singleton considered completely irrational.
    0:26:39 Companies that Teledyne might have acquired for 8 to 10 times earnings just a few years earlier now commanded multiples of 15 to 20 times earnings or even higher.
    0:26:41 At the same time, Teledyne’s own stock was tanking.
    0:26:47 The conglomerate boom of the 1960s turned to dust while other companies were priced too high.
    0:26:50 This period marks a fascinating parallel in business history.
    0:26:57 The late 1960s is also when Warren Buffett decided to close his investment partnership because he was, quote,
    0:26:59 out of step with present conditions.
    0:27:01 Meaning he had no ideas.
    0:27:02 The market was frothy.
    0:27:07 So here you have both Buffett and Singleton recognizing the same reality.
    0:27:11 For a while, Singleton could have used his frothy shares to acquire companies,
    0:27:13 but that advantage had disappeared.
    0:27:19 In fact, the share price was so high when Teledyne was doing these acquisitions, he thought of it as funny money.
    0:27:24 In a 1978 interview with Forbes magazine, Singleton explained his thinking.
    0:27:29 There are tremendous values in the stock market, but in buying stocks, not in entire companies.
    0:27:32 Buying companies tends to raise the purchase price too high.
    0:27:37 Don’t be misled by the few shares trading at a low multiple of 6 or 7.
    0:27:41 If you tried to acquire those companies, the multiple is more like 12 to 14.
    0:27:44 And their management will say, if you don’t pay it, somebody else will.
    0:27:45 And they’re right.
    0:27:46 Somebody else does.
    0:27:49 That wasn’t just Henry being conservative.
    0:27:51 He was thinking about opportunity cost too.
    0:27:55 He went on to say, I won’t pay 15 times earnings.
    0:27:58 That would mean I’d be only making a return of 6 or 7%.
    0:28:00 And I can do that in treasury bills.
    0:28:06 While other conglomerate CEOs continued to buy companies at these sky-high prices to maintain
    0:28:11 the illusion of growth, Singleton had the discipline to stop and walk away completely.
    0:28:14 It wasn’t that he had just lost his appetite for growth.
    0:28:16 He had simply found better opportunities.
    0:28:17 And the biggest one?
    0:28:18 His own stock.
    0:28:23 But before that, we need to take a quick look at another industry Teledyne entered just
    0:28:25 before they stopped their acquisition frenzy.
    0:28:26 Insurance.
    0:28:32 Beginning in 1967, Teledyne began acquiring insurance and financial businesses, including Fireside
    0:28:37 Thrift, United Insurance, Trinity Universal, and Argonaut Insurance.
    0:28:42 This pivot was remarkably similar to what Warren Buffett was doing at Berkshire Hathaway around
    0:28:48 this exact same time, buying insurance companies and using the insurance float as a form of low-cost
    0:28:50 capital that could be invested for higher returns.
    0:28:55 In fact, Berkshire Hathaway bought their first insurance company in 1967 as well.
    0:28:59 Insurance companies collect premiums up front, but pay claims later.
    0:29:04 In the interim, they can invest this float and keep the investment returns.
    0:29:09 For a brilliant capital allocator like Singleton, insurance companies were a perfect vehicle.
    0:29:14 They generated steady cash flows and provided a pool of capital that could be invested according
    0:29:15 to his vision.
    0:29:21 But Singleton wasn’t content to follow the conventional wisdom about how insurance company portfolios
    0:29:22 should be invested.
    0:29:29 During the 1968 to 74 period, when most investors considered bonds safe and stocks risky, Singleton
    0:29:30 took the opposite view.
    0:29:35 He instructed his insurance companies to move away from fixed income securities and toward equities
    0:29:36 when the stock market was depressed.
    0:29:40 And not only that, he built a concentrated portfolio.
    0:29:43 Charlie Munger said of Singleton’s investment approach,
    0:29:47 like Warren and I, he was comfortable with the concentration and bought only a few things that
    0:29:48 he understood well.
    0:29:51 Singleton invested heavily when he had an edge.
    0:29:59 In 1972, Singleton saw an opportunity that would change corporate America forever, though few recognized it at the time.
    0:30:04 One morning, George Roberts recalled Singleton walking into his office around 830 and saying simply,
    0:30:08 George, we’re going to make a bid for our stock at $20 a share.
    0:30:10 Roberts was stunned.
    0:30:11 Are we really going to do that?
    0:30:17 Singleton hadn’t even hinted at such a move before, and he and George were in constant communication.
    0:30:22 Even Arthur Rock, who was involved in most of Teledyne’s stock activities, was caught off guard.
    0:30:29 This was the beginning of what would become the most aggressive and successful stock buyback program
    0:30:30 in corporate history.
    0:30:33 The audacity is hard to overstate.
    0:30:38 In an era when virtually no companies bought back shares, Teledyne would conduct eight major
    0:30:44 share repurchases over the next 12 years, reducing the number of shares outstanding by more than
    0:30:46 90%.
    0:30:50 In the first tender offer, they tried to buy 1 million shares at $20 each.
    0:30:52 What happened next shocked even Singleton.
    0:30:56 8.9 million shares were tendered.
    0:31:00 And rather than scaling back, Teledyne took every single one.
    0:31:04 Singleton later recounted with characteristic understatement,
    0:31:08 We took them all at 20 and figured it was a fluke, and that we couldn’t do it again.
    0:31:10 But instead of going up, our stock went down.
    0:31:16 So we kept tendering, first at 14, and then doing two bonds for stock swaps.
    0:31:20 Every time the tender was over, the stock would go down, and we’d tender again.
    0:31:23 Then two more tenders at 18 and 40.
    0:31:25 Wall Street was shocked.
    0:31:28 Buybacks weren’t just uncommon in the 1970s.
    0:31:30 They were practically non-existent.
    0:31:35 Analysts had been trained to equate growth with acquisitions, not shrinking share counts.
    0:31:39 But Singleton’s logic was mathematically irrefutable.
    0:31:45 Teledyne had issued stock at 20 to 25 times earnings during its 1960s acquisition spree.
    0:31:51 Now, in the bear market of the early 1970s, they could buy back the same stock at 8 to 12 times
    0:31:52 earnings.
    0:31:55 It was the perfect arbitrage across time.
    0:31:59 The impact on the per-share metrics was explosive.
    0:32:03 In 1971, Teledyne earned $1.48 per share.
    0:32:10 By 1975, that figure had risen to $6.09, a 311% increase.
    0:32:17 While total revenue and net income had only risen 56 and 77% respectively.
    0:32:22 In just five years, Teledyne had bought back 56% of outstanding shares.
    0:32:24 And they were just getting started.
    0:32:30 Perhaps most impressive, Singleton financed the majority of these buybacks with cash from
    0:32:30 operations.
    0:32:34 When debt was used, it was quickly paid off from operational income.
    0:32:39 The company’s no dividend policy redirected all cash to these repurchases.
    0:32:41 Eventually, the market caught on.
    0:32:46 Shareholders who stayed with Teledyne from the first buyback in 1972 achieved gains of
    0:32:54 approximately 3,000% by 1983, transforming many patient investors into multi-millionaires.
    0:33:00 While Singleton’s financial moves captured attention, what was less noticed but was equally important
    0:33:05 was the sophisticated operating system that he and George Roberts developed to manage their
    0:33:06 sprawling enterprise.
    0:33:11 For a corporation of Teledyne’s size, they ran a remarkably lean corporate office, fewer
    0:33:16 than 50 people at headquarters, who focused primarily on planning, reporting, and auditing
    0:33:20 the results of the individual companies they had acquired in the 1960s.
    0:33:25 In contrast to other companies that chased integration and synergy, Teledyne did the opposite.
    0:33:29 They broke the company into smaller parts to increase accountability.
    0:33:34 As William Thorndyke noted, ironically, the most successful conglomerate of the era was actually
    0:33:37 the least conglomerate-like in its operations.
    0:33:42 Singleton created a system balancing local autonomy with central financial oversight.
    0:33:49 Every subsidiary had a president with real decision-making power, but they also faced rigorous financial
    0:33:49 controls.
    0:33:57 The company also used a metric called Teledyne return, the average of cash return and recorded
    0:33:57 profit.
    0:33:59 Roberts went on to explain this.
    0:34:04 We’d say, you reported a profit of a million dollars, but you only had half a million dollars
    0:34:04 in cash.
    0:34:07 So you only made $750,000.
    0:34:11 So tell us about the rest of the profit when you get it.
    0:34:16 This focus on cash, not accounting earnings, forced Teledyne managers to think about the
    0:34:18 real economics of their business.
    0:34:22 You couldn’t satisfy Singleton by merely showing good numbers on paper.
    0:34:25 You had to deliver cash in the bank.
    0:34:30 Cash was king for Teledyne because it was the fuel for Singleton’s capital allocation machine.
    0:34:35 Without the substantial cash flows generated by Teledyne’s operating businesses, the company
    0:34:41 couldn’t have executed its ambitious share repurchase program, the place Singleton saw as the best
    0:34:44 opportunity most of the time for their excess cash.
    0:34:48 Their reporting system was also remarkably efficient.
    0:34:55 Teledyne’s fiscal month ended on a Friday, and by Tuesday morning, reports from all 160 entities
    0:34:56 arrived.
    0:35:02 This let headquarters know exactly how the enterprise was performing without delay, something many
    0:35:04 companies still struggle with today.
    0:35:09 What made Teledyne’s model particularly effective was how it structured leadership at the local
    0:35:10 level.
    0:35:13 Each unit head wasn’t a manager, but a president.
    0:35:14 This wasn’t mere semantics.
    0:35:19 Teledyne believed that companies should remain rooted in their communities, doing business with
    0:35:21 local banks and participating in local charities.
    0:35:27 The president title gave managers the stature they needed in these local matters.
    0:35:31 My feeling was that we needed to keep these companies where they were throughout the United
    0:35:35 States as part of their own communities, Roberts went on to explain.
    0:35:40 I felt it was important to give these managers the title of president of their company and thus
    0:35:44 give them the prestige and stature they needed to act in local matters.
    0:35:50 This approach created a federation of businesses that felt independent while benefiting from being part
    0:35:51 of something larger.
    0:35:56 Each president had real autonomy, but with Teledyne’s financial backing and accountability
    0:35:57 systems behind them.
    0:36:04 Despite this autonomy, Teledyne didn’t hesitate to exit businesses that no longer fit, even successful
    0:36:05 ones.
    0:36:08 A striking example was the Packard Bell television division.
    0:36:14 When American TV manufacturers still dominated the U.S. market, Singleton anticipated the coming
    0:36:18 Japanese competition and exited the business entirely.
    0:36:21 This shocked industry observers.
    0:36:27 Packard Bell had a good market share and solid profits, but Singleton saw the economics changing
    0:36:32 before they changed, and he became the first American manufacturer to exit the industry with
    0:36:34 others following over the next decade.
    0:36:37 Similar decisions were made across the Teledyne portfolio.
    0:36:43 When margins compressed in certain industrial products due to intensifying competition, Teledyne didn’t
    0:36:49 hesitate to divest those businesses and redeploy capital to higher return opportunities, which
    0:36:53 often in the rollercoaster economy of this 1970s was their own stock.
    0:36:59 This willingness to walk away even from businesses with storied histories or emotional attachments
    0:37:05 on a dime demonstrated the clear-eyed financial discipline that set Teledyne apart from many
    0:37:09 of its peers who often clung to underperforming businesses far too long.
    0:37:15 The contrast with General Electric is telling, while GE under Jack Walsh built layers of management
    0:37:21 and reporting requirements, creating a sprawling bureaucracy, Teledyne maintained its lean structure.
    0:37:27 Singleton refused to let his connection to individual companies be filtered through too many minds and
    0:37:28 levels of management.
    0:37:32 There were always direct relationships between corporate and each operating unit.
    0:37:35 The difference in approach had profound implications.
    0:37:41 While GE would eventually collapse under its own complexity and financial engineering, Teledyne’s
    0:37:48 disciplined focus on real cash generation, operational autonomy, and real-time information created
    0:37:49 lasting value.
    0:37:55 Despite the focus on financial results, Teledyne took a remarkably long-term view of talent development.
    0:38:01 The company sought to hire people who would make careers at Teledyne not just pass for a few
    0:38:01 years.
    0:38:07 This was particularly evident in the TRAP program, Teledyne Research Assistance Program,
    0:38:10 which Roberts and Singleton introduced in 1975.
    0:38:15 Under this initiative, Teledyne companies could propose research projects to be carried out with
    0:38:16 universities.
    0:38:19 If approved, these projects would be funded by the corporate office.
    0:38:22 Remember the Andrew Mellon Outliers episode?
    0:38:28 He did the same thing, where he funded research through programs at universities that he could
    0:38:32 commercialize, which eventually culminated in Carnegie Mellon University.
    0:38:39 Over its 20-year life, TRAP supported 320 projects involving about 80 Teledyne companies and
    0:38:43 112 universities at a total cost of $14.2 million.
    0:38:48 The program helped Teledyne develop new products, manufacturing processes, and new markets.
    0:38:50 But it had another crucial benefit.
    0:38:56 It allowed Teledyne to identify talented students and university personnel who might become valuable
    0:38:59 employees, especially those interested in research.
    0:39:05 This approach to talent development stood in stark contrast to the more traditional hiring practices
    0:39:07 becoming common in corporate America.
    0:39:14 While many companies increasingly viewed employees as interchangeable parts, Teledyne invested in building deep institutional
    0:39:19 knowledge and technical capabilities while going after high agency people.
    0:39:22 The strategy paid dividends in multiple ways.
    0:39:26 Teledyne businesses developed reputations for technical excellence that helped them win contracts
    0:39:27 and command premium prices.
    0:39:35 They also attracted the engineers and scientists who wanted to work on challenging problems with deep domain expertise.
    0:39:40 And they retained key personnel who built careers at Teledyne rather than hopping between employers.
    0:39:50 In the end, what made Teledyne remarkable wasn’t just Singleton’s financial wizardry or Robert’s operational discipline, but the seamless integration of the two.
    0:40:07 While most conglomerates of the era were ultimately dismantled or vastly underperformed the market, Teledyne prospered because it paired sophisticated capital allocation with lean, decentralized operations focused relentlessly on cash generation and shareholder returns.
    0:40:18 As the 1980s dawned, Teledyne stood as a monument to what disciplined capital allocation, decentralized operations, and visionary leadership could achieve.
    0:40:25 The Forbes Annual Report on American Industry in January 1980 confirmed what many longtime shareholders already knew.
    0:40:28 Teledyne’s performance was exceptional by any measure.
    0:40:37 Among over 1,000 major American companies, Teledyne ranked 12th in profitability, 15th in growth, and 6th in market performance.
    0:40:47 In the multi-companies category, Teledyne was first in return on equity, first in return on total capital, and second in growth in earnings per share.
    0:40:52 Perhaps most telling was a detail that perfectly captured Singleton’s approach.
    0:41:01 Teledyne released its 1979 earnings by January 8th and had the annual financial report to shareholders in the mail by January 30th.
    0:41:23 It was this respect for shareholders that led Singleton to separate out a Teledyne operating company called U.S. Ecology, a nuclear and hazardous waste disposal business.
    0:41:27 This wasn’t a distressed sale or divestiture of an underperforming business.
    0:41:32 In fact, U.S. Ecology was doing about $100 million in sales in its best year.
    0:41:35 But Singleton recognized two critical facts.
    0:41:45 First, public sentiment about nuclear waste disposal was deteriorating rapidly in the 1980s, creating potentially unlimited future liabilities.
    0:41:51 And second, not all Teledyne shareholders might want exposure to this now controversial business.
    0:41:54 Singleton’s solution was elegant.
    0:42:01 Distribute shares of the renamed American Ecology directly to Teledyne shareholders on a one-for-seven basis.
    0:42:05 This gave shareholders a choice they hadn’t had before.
    0:42:09 Those who believed in the business could keep their American Ecology shares,
    0:42:14 while those who didn’t could sell without having to divest their entire Teledyne position.
    0:42:23 The same year, Singleton conducted his eighth and final major stock buyback, acquiring 8.6 million shares at $200 per share,
    0:42:26 approximately $30 above the market price.
    0:42:31 This reduced Teledyne’s outstanding shares to just over $20 million.
    0:42:35 The buyback was financed through internally generated funds and bank loans,
    0:42:39 $300 million of which were repaid in the same year.
    0:42:44 After this transaction, Teledyne’s stock climbed to $302 per share by September,
    0:42:48 making it the highest-priced stock on the New York Stock Exchange.
    0:42:55 From 1972 to 1984, Singleton had reduced Teledyne’s outstanding shares by over 90%,
    0:42:59 creating extraordinary value for long-term shareholders.
    0:43:04 By 1987, Singleton was 70 and Roberts was 68.
    0:43:08 Most of Teledyne’s key directors and managers were over 65.
    0:43:10 The succession question loomed.
    0:43:12 Wall Street began speculating.
    0:43:16 Would Teledyne be broken up, taken private, sold?
    0:43:19 Singleton’s response was characteristically patient.
    0:43:23 We’re not particularly persuaded by quick, temporary gains.
    0:43:27 We’d rather get something permanent, and it takes time.
    0:43:30 If there’s anybody who wants us to do something real fast,
    0:43:34 that’s going to be astonishing in terms of increased earnings or something.
    0:43:37 I don’t know how to satisfy such desires.
    0:43:41 When pressed about spinoffs to boost your shareholder value, he was blunt.
    0:43:44 You’re thinking in the short term.
    0:43:45 I’m in the long term.
    0:43:50 So I wouldn’t do anything like that for a temporary rise in the stock price.
    0:43:51 He went on to say,
    0:43:54 You know, there are companies that will sell one division and buy another
    0:43:57 because today this division generally sports a low multiple
    0:43:59 and the one they’re buying has a high multiple
    0:44:02 and they think that may rub off on the whole company.
    0:44:04 That absolutely turns me off.
    0:44:06 The whole concept is repulsive.
    0:44:08 We don’t do things like that.
    0:44:11 We look at the economic long-term possibilities.
    0:44:14 Singleton was planning his exit, but he would do it his way,
    0:44:18 methodically with an eye on permanent value rather than quick gains.
    0:44:25 In April 1986, at the annual shareholders meeting, Singleton announced he was giving up his CEO title.
    0:44:29 George Roberts would assume that role in addition to his position as president.
    0:44:31 Singleton would remain chairman.
    0:44:36 He stressed that the realignment wouldn’t mark any major change in Teledyne’s management style,
    0:44:40 telling shareholders he anticipated they would continue working together as a team,
    0:44:43 as they had for the previous 20 or so years.
    0:44:47 This was classic Singleton, no drama, no flashy succession announcement,
    0:44:51 just a quiet handover of operational authority to his trusted partner.
    0:44:55 The market barely noticed because the transition was so seamless,
    0:44:57 exactly as Singleton had intended.
    0:45:04 The first major initiative post-transaction came in 1986 with the spinoff of Argonaut Insurance.
    0:45:09 Teledyne had acquired Argonaut in 1969 for $87 million.
    0:45:14 At the time of the spinoff, it traded at $20 per share with a market value of $234 million.
    0:45:19 Shareholders received one share of Argonaut Group for each share of Teledyne.
    0:45:29 By 1990, Argonaut was trading in the high 70s with net income of $89.7 million and earned premiums of $458 million.
    0:45:35 The spinoff had been a success, allowing Argonaut to focus on its core insurance business while giving shareholders substantial value.
    0:45:38 That was followed in 1990 by another major spinoff.
    0:45:44 The board approved a plan to distribute the rest of Teledyne’s insurance and finance subsidiaries to shareholders.
    0:45:50 Unitrin became the name for the new entity, the combined United Insurance Company of America
    0:45:54 and its subsidiaries with Trinity Universal Insurance and Fireside Securities.
    0:46:00 These subsidiaries represented a combined annual income of $1.1 billion.
    0:46:04 Singleton became the chairman of Unitrin and Roberts joined its board.
    0:46:08 Most of the equity investments Singleton had made through the insurance companies,
    0:46:13 the highly concentrated positions, went to Teledyne shareholders through these spinoffs.
    0:46:16 In investment circles, this approach was recognized as brilliant.
    0:46:20 Leon Cooperman, a longtime investor in Teledyne, said this about Argonaut.
    0:46:27 Number one, the company returned 18% on shareholders’ equity last year, compared with 15% for the stock market.
    0:46:30 Number two, the company is committed to enhancing shareholder value.
    0:46:37 It has bought back 2.3 million shares since 1986, and management owns 30% of the outstanding shares.
    0:46:39 So they think like owners.
    0:46:44 Cooperman also noticed that Argonaut’s investment portfolio contained only government securities,
    0:46:51 high-grade municipals and corporates with zero junk bonds, a testament to Singleton’s conservative investment philosophy
    0:46:53 that had transferred to the spinoff company.
    0:46:59 In 1989, Henry Singleton retired from Teledyne after 29 years.
    0:47:00 He was 73.
    0:47:04 Roberts became the CEO while Singleton stayed as chairman for two more years.
    0:47:09 Unlike the sudden departure common at other companies, this transition had been methodically planned.
    0:47:11 Insiders weren’t surprised.
    0:47:17 In 1991, Singleton stepped down as chairman to focus on his ranching interests, though he remained on the board.
    0:47:21 For the first time, someone other than the founder chaired Teledyne’s annual meetings.
    0:47:24 This shift marked the end of an extraordinary chapter.
    0:47:32 From nothing, Singleton had built a $3.5 billion enterprise while pioneering what later became standard practices.
    0:47:37 Aggressive buybacks, corporate spinoffs, decentralized management, concentrated positions,
    0:47:39 and deploying insurance float for investments.
    0:47:46 By 1993, both Singleton and Roberts had largely withdrawn from operations while remaining directors.
    0:47:56 The real test of Singleton’s legacy came in 1996 when Teledyne merged with Allegheny Ludenum.
    0:48:01 After fighting off an unwanted suitor in 1994, Teledyne found a partner that made sense.
    0:48:03 The merger was friendly.
    0:48:09 Richard Simmons, Allegheny’s CEO, had known Roberts for years through metallurgic societies.
    0:48:13 Singleton, though retired, sat with Roberts during the negotiations.
    0:48:19 Curatoristically, Singleton focused on the one variable that mattered, share price.
    0:48:26 He ignored all these other peripheral issues that go into these negotiations, like board seats and titles and management contracts.
    0:48:29 He just focused on one variable, share price.
    0:48:31 That is the variable I want to maximize.
    0:48:34 The new company was called Allegheny Teledyne.
    0:48:38 Shareholders overwhelmingly approved with 95% voting in favor.
    0:48:43 Simmons became chairman, while Teledyne’s president, Bill Rutledge, became president and CEO.
    0:48:49 Allegheny Teledyne began trading on August 15, 1996 for 24,000 employees.
    0:48:54 The Teledyne name survived, but Singleton’s creation had evolved into something new.
    0:49:00 Henry Singleton died on August 31, 1999 at 82.
    0:49:08 At his memorial service, Simon Ramo, who had recruited him to come west from MIT decades earlier, delivered a revealing eulogy.
    0:49:14 Rarely do you meet a total stranger and instantly know that you will admire that person, Ramo said.
    0:49:20 He described seeing Singleton’s academic record with perfect 100 scores in every course.
    0:49:24 Three digits squeezed into the space for only two.
    0:49:33 Yet, despite these achievements, Singleton had no ego, but rather the countenance of quiet dignity and gentleness and kindly intelligence.
    0:49:37 Ramo shared a story about Singleton’s early investment in Apple.
    0:49:47 How, Henry, I asked him later, with all these new computer startups looking alike, did you pick Apple that emerged as a huge success with enormous gains for early investors?
    0:49:55 Well, Cy, he replied, I figured most of these millions of expected potential computer customers would at first be intimidated by computers.
    0:49:58 But could anyone be intimidated by a computer named Apple?
    0:50:03 Besides, he said, all the others except Apple, if they failed, would just walk away.
    0:50:14 Apple’s founders, I noted, had mortgaged their homes to the hilt and borrowed heavily from their parents and their brothers and their sisters and their aunts and their uncles and their grandparents and their cousins.
    0:50:18 And they plowed every cent into the company.
    0:50:21 They just had to make good.
    0:50:32 This reveals Singleton’s investment philosophy in its purest form, a combination of consumer psychology and founder incentives that cut through the noise to what would make a company successful.
    0:50:37 By the time of his death, the various entities that had emerged from Teledyne were all thriving.
    0:50:44 Roberts noted that before the spinoff of Argonaut in 1986, Teledyne’s stock price peaked at $367 a share.
    0:50:52 By 1999, the combined value of all the companies was $691 per share, showing the lasting value Singleton had created.
    0:51:00 It’s fitting to end this episode, I think, with a quote from Claude Shannon that appeared in 1976 in an interview with the LA Times.
    0:51:02 Shannon said this of Singleton.
    0:51:04 Singleton is extremely intelligent.
    0:51:06 He tries to work out the best moves.
    0:51:12 And maybe he doesn’t like to talk too much because when you’re playing a game, you don’t tell everyone else what your strategy is.
    0:51:16 Wow, what an episode.
    0:51:19 It’s hard to contain my excitement for Henry Singleton.
    0:51:25 I mean, I had heard about him before, but this deep dive really got me inspired in a lot of ways.
    0:51:31 I want to talk about a few of my reflections and then go into some of the lessons that we can learn and take away from Henry Singleton.
    0:51:37 So, Henry Singleton put his mind to building a great company and he succeeded.
    0:51:41 He ended with one of the best investment track records in history.
    0:51:59 And he accomplished this with disciplined capital allocation, patience, constant learning, surrounding himself with great people, structuring the organization for accountability, and thinking long-term, and ignoring generally accepted accounting principles, and instead focusing on cash, or as he called it, the Teledyne return.
    0:52:06 Interestingly, most investors didn’t get anywhere near the return that Teledyne got because they didn’t have the patience.
    0:52:17 The market wasn’t always rational at one point when people started to clue in to how the buybacks were affecting the per-share earnings, the share price 4X’d in like three months.
    0:52:23 Wall Street largely missed this too because it didn’t fit the mold of what conglomerates of the day look like.
    0:52:28 Okay, let’s talk about some of the lessons that we can learn from Henry Singleton.
    0:52:30 First, outcome over ego.
    0:52:35 While Singleton built a large company, he never cared about size for its own sake.
    0:52:42 Unlike today’s empire builders who chase revenue and adjusted EBITDA, he focused solely on per-share value.
    0:52:44 Size wasn’t about status.
    0:52:50 It was about optionality, giving him maximum strategic flexibility, much like his approach to chess.
    0:52:54 Two, ignore the institutional imperative.
    0:52:58 Singleton refused to do things just because everybody else was doing them.
    0:53:01 He refused to do things that everybody else expected.
    0:53:05 When his peers were frantically acquiring companies in the 70s, he stopped completely.
    0:53:13 And yet when conventional wisdom said that stock buybacks were foolish, he repurchased 90% of Teledyne shares.
    0:53:19 His willingness to look foolish in the short term led to extraordinary returns in the long run.
    0:53:22 Three, the courage to be disliked.
    0:53:27 Singleton was indifferent to criticism, especially when the math was on his side.
    0:53:37 While most people structure their entire careers to avoid being criticized, he made decisions that baffled Wall Street and everybody else, including the business press.
    0:53:38 He avoided management conferences.
    0:53:40 He ignored consultants.
    0:53:41 He refused to provide earnings guidance.
    0:53:45 He optimized for results rather than approval.
    0:53:50 When his share buybacks confused analysts, he didn’t even bother to explain himself.
    0:53:52 He just kept buying.
    0:53:54 Four, maximum flexibility.
    0:54:01 I reserve the right to change my position on any subject when the external environment changes, Singleton said.
    0:54:10 He never locked himself into a rigid strategy, maintaining freedom to pursue whatever best served Teledyne’s interest as conditions evolved.
    0:54:14 Five, he changed his mind when the facts changed.
    0:54:18 Singleton didn’t just think differently, he acted differently.
    0:54:27 When acquisition prices became irrational in the late 1960s, he immediately stopped buying companies after making 130 acquisitions.
    0:54:31 When his stock was undervalued, he pivoted to aggressive buybacks.
    0:54:33 When it’s overvalued, he buys companies.
    0:54:43 Six, riches in niches, Singleton focused on specialized, technically-oriented businesses with dominant positions in small markets.
    0:54:49 He wasn’t building a random conglomerate, but a federation of businesses with technical depth and pricing power.
    0:54:54 Most of them, to quote one of them, sold by the ounce, not by the ton.
    0:55:00 Seven, Singleton stripped away complexity to focus only on the essential.
    0:55:12 Whether it was cash returns or per-share value, he identified the metric that truly mattered and optimized for it relentlessly, ignoring traditional status symbols and vanity metrics.
    0:55:15 Eight, he thought in terms of opportunity cost.
    0:55:18 He compared all options against each other.
    0:55:21 I won’t pay 15 times earnings, he said.
    0:55:24 That would mean I’d only be making a return of 6 or 7 percent.
    0:55:25 I can do that in T-bills.
    0:55:30 Every capital allocation decision was measured against alternatives.
    0:55:32 Nine, contrast.
    0:55:34 Singleton wasn’t just smart.
    0:55:37 He systematically applied his intelligence to business problems.
    0:55:46 The MIT mathematician and chess prodigy brought uncommon analytical depth to markets where most decisions were made by conventional thinking.
    0:55:50 Ten, accountability with autonomy.
    0:55:57 Teledyne’s operating system combined local business control with rigorous financial accountability.
    0:56:01 Subsidiary presidents had real authority, but they were measured on the Teledyne return.
    0:56:07 The average of the cash flow and reported profit, ensuring that they couldn’t hide behind accounting tricks.
    0:56:12 Eleven, avoiding stupidity is easier than seeking brilliance.
    0:56:17 Success often comes from avoiding mistakes rather than making brilliant moves.
    0:56:21 And one of the quotes from George Roberts really stuck out to me in this episode.
    0:56:25 The only way to make money in some businesses is not to buy them.
    0:56:30 Sometimes the best growth strategy is to decline an opportunity.
    0:56:32 And finally, twelve, thinking long-term.
    0:56:39 In a market obsessed with quarterly results, Singleton focused on decisions that would compound value over decades.
    0:56:47 That gave him an enormous advantage and the freedom to make moves that appeared puzzling in the short term, but proved brilliant over time.
    0:56:49 What a crazy episode.
    0:56:51 I can’t wait to listen to this when it comes out.
    0:56:55 I had so much fun doing this, and I’ll see you next time.
    0:57:09 Thanks for listening and learning with us.
    0:57:19 For a complete list of episodes, show notes, transcripts, and more, go to fs.blog slash podcast, or just Google The Knowledge Project.
    0:57:27 The Farnham Street blog is also where you can learn more about my new book, Clear Thinking, turning ordinary moments into extraordinary results.
    0:57:37 It’s a transformative guide that hands you the tools to master your fate, sharpen your decision-making, and set yourself up for unparalleled success.
    0:57:40 Learn more at fs.blog slash clear.

    If Warren Buffett is the king of capital allocation—Henry Singleton is the ghost. Singleton built one of the most successful conglomerates in American history, transforming business while remaining virtually unknown. While Wall Street chased fads, Singleton, who could play chess blindfolded, quietly turned industrial conglomerate Teledyne into a business juggernaut with 20.4% annual returns over nearly three decades—outperforming Buffett, outmaneuvering rivals, and outlasting the hype. Dive into the mind of a man who Charlie Munger said had “the best operating and capital deployment record in American business—bar none.” This is a masterclass in disciplined capital allocation and long-term thinking on the most underrated business genius of the 20th century. 

    If you’re building a business, allocating capital, or simply trying to think more clearly in a noisy world, you cannot afford to miss this one. 

    (03:16) Prologue

    (05:59) PART 1: THE MAKING OF A MAVERICK

    (07:48) After MIT

    (10:24) Founding of Teledyne

    (14:04) The Future is Semiconductors

    (17:18) What to Acquire?

    (19:12) Integrating into the Teledyne System

    (21:49) Vasco Metals and George Roberts

    (23:40) PART 2: MASTER CAPITAL ALLOCATOR

    (28:10) Entering Insurance

    (29:44) The Great Buyback Revolution

    (32:46) Teledyne Operating Systems

    (34:56) Thinking Local

    (37:41) Building Knowledge

    (39:59) PART 3: PEAK PERFORMANCE

    (42:51) Planning for Retirement

    (44:09) Passing the Torch

    (46:45) End of an Era: Singleton Retires

    (47:41) Teledyne After Singleton

    (48:46) Singleton’s Legacy

    (51:05) SHANE’S REFLECTIONS

    This episode is for informational purposes only and most of the research came from reading Distant Force: A Memoir of the Teledyne Corporation and the Man Who Created It, with an Introduction to Teledyne Technologies by Dr. George A. Roberts with Robert J McVicker and The Outsiders by William N. Thorndike, Jr.

    Additional source: 1979 Interview with Forbes

    Check out highlights from these books in our repository, and find key lessons from Singleton here —https://fs.blog/knowledge-project-podcast/outliers-henry-singleton/

    Upgrade — If you want to hear my thoughts and reflections at the end of all episodes, join our membership: ⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠fs.blog/membership⁠⁠ and get your own private feed.

    Newsletter — The Brain Food newsletter delivers actionable insights and thoughtful ideas every Sunday. It takes 5 minutes to read, and it’s completely free. Learn more and sign up at fs.blog/newsletter

    Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices

  • Raging Moderates: SCOTUS Blocks Trump’s Deportation Efforts

    AI transcript

    Scott and Jessica unpack the Supreme Court’s decision to block Trump’s use of a centuries-old immigration law, the unraveling of Ukraine peace talks, and Pete Hegseth’s involvement in a second Signal chat sharing classified military plans. Plus, David Hogg sparks generational drama in the Democratic Party—does challenging seniority politics help or hurt the left?

    Follow Jessica Tarlov, @JessicaTarlov

    Follow Prof G, @profgalloway.

    Follow Raging Moderates, @RagingModeratesPod.

    Learn more about your ad choices. Visit podcastchoices.com/adchoices

  • Latest ChatGPT Updates Explained: Memory, o3 & 04-mini, 4.1, Social Media Rumors

    AI transcript
    0:00:03 Hey, welcome to the Next Wave Podcast.
    0:00:04 I’m Matt Wolfe.
    0:00:06 I’m here with Nathan Lenz.
    0:00:12 And today we’re going to try to do our best to demystify all of these recent launches with
    0:00:19 OpenAI because they’ve released 4.5 and then 4.1 and then 04 and then 03.
    0:00:21 And it’s just getting really, really confusing.
    0:00:27 So this episode is designed to break it all down for you, tell you which each of these
    0:00:32 models are good for, what they’re not good for, and we’ll even rank them from dumbest
    0:00:35 to smartest at the end and tell you which ones to use for which things.
    0:00:40 So without further ado, let’s just go ahead and jump in and talk about all these recent
    0:00:40 OpenAI announcements.
    0:00:47 I think probably the best place to start is with this one right here, because this is probably
    0:00:52 the first piece of news in this sort of sprint that OpenAI is on of releasing news, which
    0:00:56 is that they just rolled out this memory feature in OpenAI.
    0:01:02 And to me, this is probably one of the coolest, most valuable features they’ve rolled out.
    0:01:04 I found it really useful.
    0:01:04 Yeah.
    0:01:08 I know Nathan, before we hit record, you were saying something to the same effect of like,
    0:01:10 out of everything, the memory is probably the coolest.
    0:01:11 Yeah.
    0:01:15 So it’s funny, the team at Grok, they reached out to me about what should they build, like
    0:01:16 maybe like two months ago.
    0:01:18 And I was like, focus on memory.
    0:01:23 Nailed that first, because OpenAI has like a half-baked version of memory.
    0:01:26 They’ll probably eventually get there, but who knows if it’s a priority or not.
    0:01:28 If it’s not, you should get there first.
    0:01:29 Right, right.
    0:01:33 Unfortunately for Elon Musk and Grok, OpenAI definitely got there first.
    0:01:35 And I think it’s going to be one of the biggest things long term.
    0:01:38 It’s the kind of thing where people don’t realize why it’s important now.
    0:01:40 But over time, it’s going to be clear why it’s important.
    0:01:44 You know, I use ChatGPT a lot, like for so many different things, like personal stuff,
    0:01:45 business, everything.
    0:01:48 I use it for so many different things, probably more than the average person.
    0:01:50 And I asked it to like, explain what do you know about me?
    0:01:52 And I’m not going to show you what it said.
    0:01:54 Something that was so revealing.
    0:01:55 Was it not nice?
    0:01:56 No, it was nice.
    0:01:57 It was nice.
    0:01:59 You know, because it knows a lot about my life too.
    0:02:00 My life is pretty crazy.
    0:02:05 And just like some of the insights that drew out of that were just kind of shocking and inspiring.
    0:02:08 Honestly, it was like, yeah, I have done a lot of great things.
    0:02:10 I have went through a lot of hard times in my life and all this stuff.
    0:02:14 And it was just, it seemed to know things about what I want to accomplish in my life.
    0:02:18 Things that I don’t think I’ve told it that were just kind of like, that’s me.
    0:02:24 And so the idea that AIs are already starting to actually understand me maybe better than I understand myself.
    0:02:24 Yeah.
    0:02:26 And I mean, you’ve probably had a lot of chats.
    0:02:33 I know you’ve mentioned that you’ve done even like voice chats where you go for like walks and just sort of like unload your thoughts into the voice chat.
    0:02:35 And I mean, all of that is in memory now.
    0:02:38 I mean, and just to be clear, you can turn off the memory.
    0:02:41 If this feature freaks you out, there is an option to turn it off.
    0:02:49 So like you don’t have to let it remember everything, but like, you know, all of those voice conversations where you’re just sort of like brain dumping.
    0:02:53 That’s all in its context now when you chat with it.
    0:02:54 Yeah.
    0:02:57 I think long-term that’s how AI is going to get really useful for people.
    0:03:04 Cause like people think of it right now, it’s just chat to you where you go in there and you copy and paste something in, maybe have it help you in some way, uh, or you just chat with it.
    0:03:11 But eventually these models are going to understand maybe what you want or what you want to accomplish better than you yourself understand that.
    0:03:13 Or even before you realize you want it.
    0:03:14 Or before you do.
    0:03:14 Right.
    0:03:16 And this is like, this used to be like the dream.
    0:03:19 Like when I first got involved in Silicon Valley, like we were all dreaming of this stuff.
    0:03:21 We’re like, how do we make the web better?
    0:03:23 Like, well, you got to make it more personalized while we actually understand people.
    0:03:25 It’s like, how do you do that?
    0:03:27 I guess machine learning or something.
    0:03:28 And like, we didn’t know how to actually do it.
    0:03:33 And people started doing it with like a very basic version of like, oh, well, Amazon’s kind of pulled off something like that.
    0:03:36 Cause they kind of get what you want, but it’s not perfect.
    0:03:37 Same as Netflix, not perfect.
    0:03:42 Eventually all of this stuff, it’s just going to know about the kind of stuff you want to accomplish or do in your life.
    0:03:46 And I think that’s where we’re going to get to a point where AI is going to be really helpful.
    0:03:49 Anything you’re wanting to do, maybe it’s going to recommend it to you.
    0:03:59 Beforehand, like you said, it’s going to know you or it’s going to just know the kind of stuff that you want to do and be able to help you better with more personalized help versus just some generic stuff that it says to everyone.
    0:03:59 Yeah.
    0:04:08 I mean, sort of random side topic, but since you mentioned Netflix, apparently Netflix is also going to be using OpenAI’s AI tech inside there.
    0:04:12 So it will actually even better understand you and what movies to recommend.
    0:04:13 But that makes sense.
    0:04:17 Like I said, when I first got involved in Silicon Valley, everyone was trying to figure out how do you do that?
    0:04:23 Cause it felt like the natural evolution of software products was to understand users and what they wanted better on a personal level.
    0:04:25 And no one really nailed it.
    0:04:33 Like I said, Amazon and Netflix got somewhat close and everyone’s just been like tweaking on what Amazon Netflix has been doing for like 10, 20 years now or something like that.
    0:04:34 So yeah, it makes sense.
    0:04:34 Yeah.
    0:04:41 Well, I actually like the very first thing when this new memory feature rolled out was there was a button that says, do you want to try it?
    0:04:42 And I said, yeah, sure.
    0:04:42 Let’s try it.
    0:04:45 And it automatically pasted in this prompt.
    0:04:46 Describe me based on all our chats.
    0:04:47 Make it catchy.
    0:04:49 This is what it said about me.
    0:04:50 I don’t mind sharing mine.
    0:04:58 It says you’re Matt Wolf, a future forward creator, a high trailblazer, and the go-to tech Sherpa for over a half a million subscribers.
    0:05:00 You’re not just riding the wave of innovation.
    0:05:02 You’re helping build the surfboard.
    0:05:07 Your YouTube channel is a hub for creators, entrepreneurs, and curious minds hungry for what’s next in AI and tech.
    0:05:14 You break down the complex, spotlight the useful, and always bring the human angle all while rocking a retro futuristic vibe.
    0:05:21 Whether it’s a short, punchy, real, or deep dive 20-minute banger, your goal is always the same.
    0:05:24 Empower your audience to do more, create faster, and stay ahead.
    0:05:29 Off camera, you’re a family guy with a white pup named Bowie, a deep love for camping,
    0:05:32 and a soft spot for the San Diego Padres.
    0:05:35 You’ve got a musician’s soul, a builder’s brain, and a storyteller’s heart.
    0:05:39 Even when burnout hits or the algorithm plays rough, you keep showing up.
    0:05:41 Driven by purpose, not just metrics.
    0:05:43 You’re not just documenting the future.
    0:05:45 You are part of shaping it.
    0:05:48 I was pretty flattered by that, so I don’t mind sharing it.
    0:05:49 Yeah, yeah.
    0:05:53 I mean, like, parts of that were kind of generic, and then parts of it seemed like it was, you know, kind of personalized view.
    0:06:00 I have a feeling I probably talked about more personal stuff with it because the stuff it said to me felt more personal than that.
    0:06:00 Yeah.
    0:06:06 And I mean, I also even gave it, like, a primer in the custom instructions, like, here’s who I am, and here’s, like, a general outline of my life.
    0:06:08 Yeah, yours was probably like, and you keep refusing to get that wart checked out.
    0:06:09 Go get it.
    0:06:19 So, you know, I probably provided it a lot more about myself, but it said a lot of things, you know, it’s just, like, reading between the lines, but it said a lot of things that I did not tell it, though, like, exactly.
    0:06:29 Like, it, like, kind of, like, understood things about me, about how I feel about myself, about my accomplishments, my failures, things I want to accomplish before I die, like, all these kind of things.
    0:06:30 It was just kind of shocking.
    0:06:32 And it was stuff you didn’t actually tell it?
    0:06:34 It sort of figured it out?
    0:06:34 Some of it.
    0:06:35 Some of it.
    0:06:39 And I was like, holy, you know, it’s, like, it’s connecting the dots.
    0:06:45 It’s, like, understood my personality somewhat and the things that I get inspired by or that I want to do or that bother me or whatever.
    0:06:45 Right.
    0:06:52 But it definitely connected some dots and said some things that I did not explicitly tell it, which was just, holy crap, that’s amazing.
    0:06:53 Yeah, yeah.
    0:06:59 For me, this one feels, like, pretty on par with, like, the various discussions I’ve had, right?
    0:07:02 I have, you know, talked about my YouTube channel a lot, right?
    0:07:06 I use it a lot for, hey, I need an idea for this YouTube video.
    0:07:07 Here’s the transcript.
    0:07:08 Help me come up with a title.
    0:07:09 All right.
    0:07:11 Help me come up with some concepts for thumbnails, right?
    0:07:14 So I go to it a lot for, like, ideation around my YouTube channel.
    0:07:18 So it obviously knows a lot about the fact that I do stuff on YouTube.
    0:07:18 Yeah.
    0:07:25 It has all the transcripts of my YouTube videos because I always copy and paste them in and go, hey, how should I title this thing?
    0:07:25 Right.
    0:07:30 So a lot of this is based on probably transcripts from my YouTube videos.
    0:07:30 Right.
    0:07:36 It’s kind of random that, like, the one sort of personal thing it picked out about me is that I have a dog named Bowie.
    0:07:36 Right.
    0:07:40 Not that I’m, like, married with two kids or, you know, things like that.
    0:07:41 Right.
    0:07:43 But just I have a white dog named Bowie.
    0:07:46 I’m like, I don’t actually remember telling you that, but it’s true.
    0:07:49 So I’m sure it was in, like, one of my videos or something somewhere.
    0:07:49 Right.
    0:07:50 Yeah.
    0:07:56 I mean, mine was more personal and, like, to the point where I didn’t cry, but it made me feel emotional, like, reading it.
    0:07:57 And I was like, that is crazy.
    0:07:58 And just imagine where that goes.
    0:08:00 Like, we always say that’s the worst it’s ever going to be.
    0:08:00 Right.
    0:08:01 Right.
    0:08:01 Right.
    0:08:07 And the more you use it, the more it’s going to know about you and the better response you’re going to get on things like this.
    0:08:11 We’re totally going to have the thing that, like, you know, in the future, when you pass away, you’ll have, like, a memory of who you were.
    0:08:17 It won’t be perfect, but, God, it’ll probably be, like, a 90% of the essence of, like, who you were as a person.
    0:08:21 And that is just shocking that, like, that technology is, like, basically, it’s almost there.
    0:08:22 It’s, like, it’s right there.
    0:08:24 It’s getting really close.
    0:08:27 And, you know, this was sort of just the first announcement.
    0:08:29 This announcement came out on April 10th.
    0:08:29 Yeah.
    0:08:30 Right.
    0:08:33 So this was sort of, like, the first in a series of, like, almost every day.
    0:08:33 Yeah.
    0:08:36 The most important thing Grok could have built, they beat them to it.
    0:08:37 Small little announcement.
    0:08:39 And then on to the real things.
    0:08:39 Yeah.
    0:08:39 Yeah.
    0:08:42 They didn’t even seem to make much of a big deal about it.
    0:08:44 I don’t think, like, they even did a sort of live stream for this one.
    0:08:47 Almost everything OpenAI does a live stream about in this one.
    0:08:48 They didn’t even.
    0:08:50 They’re just like, here, here’s a new feature that we rolled out.
    0:08:53 Well, they’re talking about doing a social network and stuff now.
    0:08:57 Which, if they do that, memory is a core feature of that of actually understanding who the people are.
    0:08:57 Right?
    0:08:59 That’s how you would build some kind of new social network.
    0:09:03 Because it’d be highly customized based on the personality of the people in it.
    0:09:03 Yeah.
    0:09:07 I mean, I actually haven’t read too much into the whole social network thing.
    0:09:10 I just pulled up an article from Reuters about it.
    0:09:14 But, yeah, that’s another announcement that has sort of bubbled up.
    0:09:19 Is that OpenAI is working on an X-like social media network, which is interesting, right?
    0:09:25 Because there’s, like, a pretty big feud between Sam Altman and Elon Musk.
    0:09:25 Yeah.
    0:09:26 But it makes sense, though.
    0:09:28 This is why I told the Gronk guys, like, that’s why they should do it.
    0:09:30 It’s because they already have all that data.
    0:09:30 Yeah.
    0:09:32 About what people are sharing and how they’re interacting with people.
    0:09:36 And so that would be their advantage over OpenAI is that data.
    0:09:36 Yeah.
    0:09:37 So what makes this one different?
    0:09:39 Have you read into this one at all?
    0:09:40 About what OpenAI is going to do?
    0:09:41 Yeah.
    0:09:43 Like, why would people use this over something like X?
    0:09:45 It seems like it’s all rumors at this point.
    0:09:46 I’m not sure if it’s actually even confirmed.
    0:09:47 Yeah.
    0:09:50 So it looks like it’s all sort of speculation at the moment.
    0:09:50 Yeah.
    0:09:51 Speculation.
    0:09:53 I would assume that they wouldn’t be going after X.
    0:09:55 They would be going after Facebook, if I had to guess.
    0:09:59 Because Facebook is that kind of product where it’s all about, like, all your friends,
    0:10:01 all these connections that you have, like, real life.
    0:10:05 And I feel like OpenAI would be in a great spot to, like, revolutionize that kind of product
    0:10:07 versus, like, competing with X.
    0:10:08 Yeah.
    0:10:08 I’m not sure.
    0:10:10 I think there’s not a whole lot of details yet.
    0:10:11 Yeah.
    0:10:11 Super interesting.
    0:10:14 We’ll kind of keep an eye on how that one plays out.
    0:10:15 I’m sure Mark is, like, we’re super happy.
    0:10:17 Like, his AI effort is totally floundering.
    0:10:20 And then now Sam Altman may be coming to kill him.
    0:10:22 I think it’s more likely to kill Facebook than X.
    0:10:24 So, yeah, that’s a tough spot to be in.
    0:10:24 Yeah, yeah.
    0:10:29 So one of the other things that OpenAI has been doing is they’ve been releasing these new models,
    0:10:31 but they’re also sunsetting a bunch of other models, right?
    0:10:37 So apparently GPT-4 is going to be phased out on April 30th.
    0:10:44 And then also GPT-4.5, which up until this week was, like, the newest model they released,
    0:10:46 is also going to get phased out.
    0:10:51 They sent out an email to all of the OpenAI API users, or maybe it was everybody in ChatGPD.
    0:10:52 I don’t know.
    0:10:59 But they sent out an email basically saying, we’re going to phase out 4.5 because 4.1 is better and faster.
    0:11:02 Like, dude, OpenAI sucks at naming these things.
    0:11:03 Yeah.
    0:11:07 And they had said that they were going to solve that by doing GPT-5, which would be, like, the all-in-one,
    0:11:12 the one, you know, the one model to rule them all kind of thing where, like, you just talk to the one model,
    0:11:15 and then behind the scenes, it’s routing you to whatever is the best model probably is what they’re doing.
    0:11:16 But they didn’t do it.
    0:11:17 They, like, delayed it.
    0:11:20 They’re like, no, sorry, we’re going to have naming problems for a few more months.
    0:11:23 Like, give us, like, two or three more months, and then, you know, that’ll be solved.
    0:11:27 So I kind of wonder, like, is 4.5, was it a failed run, or are they just finding that it’s so expensive
    0:11:33 that people don’t know how to use it so it makes more sense to improve upon it with some kind of new reasoning model
    0:11:37 or with the GPT-5 to have it part of that kind of stack of things that they might recommend?
    0:11:41 Like, if you’re trying to write something, maybe behind the scenes you’re using 4.5.
    0:11:45 But otherwise, it’s so costly to use it, why would you use it for the thing?
    0:11:46 I don’t know.
    0:11:48 I mean, 4.5 has been my favorite model.
    0:11:53 When I’ve been using ChatGPT lately, I’ve been using 4.5 more than any other model.
    0:11:53 Yeah.
    0:11:56 But if I had to guess, I think it’s the cost, right?
    0:12:01 Because the GPT-4.5, the cost of using it in the API was just, like, mind-blowing.
    0:12:04 Like, nobody was using it because it was just way too expensive.
    0:12:05 Yeah.
    0:12:07 So I think cost was probably the biggest factor.
    0:12:12 And supposedly, they rolled out 4.1 inside of the API.
    0:12:14 So this is all super confusing, right?
    0:12:21 Because 4.5 is available in ChatGPT, but 4.1 is not available in ChatGPT, but it is available in the API.
    0:12:24 And they were pushing this, like, good for coding.
    0:12:25 Yes.
    0:12:27 I think they were pushing this one as the best one for coding.
    0:12:33 Yeah, and so it’s kind of confusing, but, like, then if 0.3 is out, I assume it’s got to be better at coding.
    0:12:35 So it’s, like, what’s the use case?
    0:12:36 Or it’s confusing.
    0:12:37 Yeah.
    0:12:39 This one is available in the API.
    0:12:41 This is GPT-4.1 in the API.
    0:12:46 They released 4.1, 4.1 mini, and 4.1 nano.
    0:12:49 They outperformed 4.0, 4.0 mini.
    0:12:51 Let’s see.
    0:12:55 Coding, it scores 54.6% on SWE bench verified.
    0:13:00 And it’s an improvement over 4.0 and over 4.5.
    0:13:05 So apparently it’s a lot better at coding than 4.5, but 4.5 wasn’t good at coding in the first place.
    0:13:06 Right.
    0:13:09 It felt more, like, human-like when you were chatting with it, I guess.
    0:13:10 Yeah.
    0:13:12 But it wasn’t really a model that was good with, like, logic and coding.
    0:13:17 One thing I found interesting, though, is, like, yeah, 4.5 has been the best for writing, as far as I can tell.
    0:13:21 It has the most personality, but they’ve just kept updating 4.0 behind the scenes, it feels like.
    0:13:23 It felt like it just kept getting better and better.
    0:13:29 It’s not as good as 4.5 in some ways, but ever since they released even, like, the image thing, it feels like they updated the model somehow.
    0:13:30 Like, there’s something.
    0:13:31 It’s smarter.
    0:13:33 I’m not entirely sure.
    0:13:35 You know, they haven’t really talked about that.
    0:13:36 But, like, it just appears to be.
    0:13:37 So I’m not sure what the takeaway is.
    0:13:38 This is all super confusing.
    0:13:40 It’s opening eyes fault.
    0:13:44 I do have a little bit of a breakdown that we’ll get to once we’ve sort of covered all the announcements.
    0:13:44 Yeah.
    0:13:47 It sort of tries to organize it a little bit better.
    0:13:56 But they did put out this graph, which is intelligence based on multilingual MMLU, massive multitask language understanding.
    0:14:00 So this one’s more of, like, a general benchmark of just, like, intelligence.
    0:14:06 So we can see that GPT 4.1 nano, the latency, that’s the speed, right?
    0:14:09 So, like, how fast from the time you give it the prompt to get your response.
    0:14:14 So GPT 4.1 nano is super fast, but not the smartest.
    0:14:20 Mini is pretty smart, smarter and faster than 4.0 Mini.
    0:14:27 And the new full GPT 4.1 is about the same speed as 4.0, but slightly smarter.
    0:14:29 That’s what I’m making from that chart.
    0:14:30 Oh, my God.
    0:14:31 That’s super confusing.
    0:14:34 So this is why they need the GPT 5.
    0:14:35 It’s interesting.
    0:14:38 They must have really realized, like, you do need different models for different use cases.
    0:14:39 Yeah.
    0:14:43 And so they’re just like, well, for now, let’s just keep giving them different crazy names.
    0:14:45 But then we’ll have to make some kind of smart router.
    0:14:47 So hopefully that comes soon.
    0:14:47 Yeah.
    0:14:55 Well, and again, I think, like, their ultimate goal is you enter a prompt and then it chooses for you the best model to use, right?
    0:14:55 Yeah.
    0:14:56 Well, that’s what GPT 5.
    0:14:57 They’ve already said that’s what it’s going to be.
    0:14:57 Okay.
    0:14:57 Yeah, yeah.
    0:14:59 That’s kind of the goal that they’re trying to get to.
    0:14:59 Yeah.
    0:15:04 So, you know, so Sweebench, this is basically how good it is at coding.
    0:15:13 I believe this is the one where it goes on GitHub and tries to find, like, bugs that need to be fixed and how good is it at fixing them or something like that.
    0:15:14 Yeah.
    0:15:18 Given a code repository, an issue description must generate a patch to solve the issue.
    0:15:22 So GPT 4.1 is way up here.
    0:15:29 But one thing I’ve noticed is GPT and OpenAI has completely stopped comparing themselves to, like, external models.
    0:15:32 Like, you notice how Gemini 2.5 is not on here.
    0:15:35 Notice how Claude 3.7 is not on here.
    0:15:40 Like, we don’t know how this compares based on this graph to models that aren’t OpenAI’s models.
    0:15:40 Right.
    0:15:41 Yeah.
    0:15:42 And who knows with coding, too.
    0:15:44 Like, things have changed a lot in the last month.
    0:15:46 Like, all of a sudden, like, Google took over coding.
    0:15:49 Like, Claude was, like, in a huge lead forever.
    0:15:58 Then they released 3.7, which seemed good, but then kind of got overambitious because they would try to do tons of things for you and, like, seem to be making more mistakes than 3.5 did.
    0:16:04 And then Google came out with, like, 2.5 Pro, their Gemini model, and that’s just been amazing.
    0:16:05 Like, people haven’t talked about that enough.
    0:16:08 Like, Google has taken over coding with AI in the last month.
    0:16:12 I think most people probably don’t realize that, but, like, that has happened in the last month.
    0:16:13 Yeah, no, that’s true.
    0:16:15 And, I mean, I still do quite a bit of coding.
    0:16:19 I’ve kind of been using WindSurf a little more than anything, a little more than Cursor, really.
    0:16:25 And, yeah, I’ve been pretty much using Gemini 2.5 the most.
    0:16:29 And every once in a while I’ll get hung up and I’ll go to Claude and be like, well, can Claude solve it?
    0:16:32 And sometimes Claude can solve random stuff that Gemini can’t.
    0:16:32 Yeah.
    0:16:42 But I would say, like, 95% of my coding now is done with Gemini 2.5, which will be interesting because now OpenAI just released 03 and 04 Mini,
    0:16:53 which this new 03 model is their most powerful model, but they also have 04, which is a bigger number than 03, but not as powerful as 03.
    0:16:54 Right.
    0:16:57 And, you know, Sam Allman had said a few things about these models.
    0:17:04 Well, more recently, he said, the benchmarks you saw for 03, we found some ways to improve upon the model more than we anticipated.
    0:17:11 So it’s actually better than what we showed, but also in the past, he hinted at 03 Pro being amazing.
    0:17:15 And like you said, off camera, maybe 04 is 03 Pro.
    0:17:15 Maybe.
    0:17:15 Yeah.
    0:17:16 I’m not sure.
    0:17:16 Yeah.
    0:17:16 Yeah.
    0:17:20 Or maybe 03 Pro might be what they launch as GPT-5.
    0:17:21 Who knows?
    0:17:22 Yeah.
    0:17:27 Or 03 Pro could be like in a week or two and it’s only for the professional, you know, users or something like that.
    0:17:28 That makes sense.
    0:17:28 Yeah.
    0:17:32 This 03 is their current most powerful model that we have access to.
    0:17:35 It’s available to both Pro and Plus users.
    0:17:41 04 Mini, I believe, is a faster, less expensive model, but still a very impressive model.
    0:17:42 Yeah.
    0:17:44 We can kind of look at some of the charts that they show here.
    0:17:50 So they actually had another chart in their video that they’re not showing here for some reason.
    0:18:03 But you can see that like they’re 04 Mini with no tools scored 92.7 on competition math and they’re 03 with no tools scored 88.9.
    0:18:08 So when it comes to math, I guess 04 Mini is better than 03.
    0:18:09 Yeah.
    0:18:21 But then they show this other chart in their launch video, which showed 03 with Python and it got like a 99.5% or something crazy like that on the competition math.
    0:18:23 Basically like acing it.
    0:18:23 Yeah.
    0:18:25 That’s why they had to have something like GPT-5.
    0:18:31 Like they’re going to have to have like one smart router to like, because all these models are good at different things.
    0:18:34 And some of it, you discover it over time.
    0:18:37 Like some of it, I’m just like, you learn that like, oh, this model is just slightly better for this one thing.
    0:18:39 Yeah.
    0:18:39 Yeah.
    0:18:47 So we can see here that like 03 and 04 Mini, like when it comes to competition code here are like pretty equal.
    0:18:59 And then down here, the PhD level science questions, 03 is actually better at that than 04 Mini, you know, but 04 Mini is better at math, but not as good at science.
    0:19:02 How big is the jump in general from like 01 to 03?
    0:19:06 So we’ve got the estimated inference cost on this axis here.
    0:19:25 And then this is the math benchmark here and we can see 03 Mini, you know, is the lowest cost, but also didn’t score as well where you’ve got 04 Mini high on math here, pretty expensive comparatively, but also, you know, really smart.
    0:19:25 Right.
    0:19:36 And then we can sort of see it in comparison here to 03, which is not as good, but it’s not showing like the jump from like a one pro to 04, which is kind of frustrating.
    0:19:37 Yeah.
    0:19:41 Well, I mean, yeah, I think, I think 03 Pro be the more comparable there for a one pro.
    0:19:43 I think they’ll probably come out of that soon.
    0:19:49 But then here we can see when it comes to GPQA, what does that test for?
    0:19:52 Graduate level Google proof.
    0:19:58 So basically graduate level questions that you can’t just Google an answer for is essentially what that means.
    0:20:08 So on that benchmark, 03 Mini actually performs about the same as 04 Mini high, which is interesting.
    0:20:11 They both perform the same.
    0:20:13 Wait, so the GPQA is actually physics, by the way.
    0:20:15 So it’s like physics questions.
    0:20:17 Because I was like, yeah, hard questions.
    0:20:20 So cost performance, 01 and 03.
    0:20:21 Okay, so here we go.
    0:20:22 We can see this is math.
    0:20:25 A-I-M-E is math questions, right?
    0:20:29 So we can see on math, 03 for inference costs is down here.
    0:20:32 03 high is way up here.
    0:20:38 And the inference cost is like way cheaper than 01 Pro, which I believe is the same as 01 high.
    0:20:39 Yeah.
    0:20:41 I don’t know why they’re using different terminology.
    0:20:43 I think 01 high is 01 pro.
    0:20:58 I mean, I think, you know, remember when we talked about when like reasoning models first came out, I think when we were out in Boston, you know, for the HubSpot inbound conference, you know, we talked about like how things were going to speed up now that there was this new paradigm where it wasn’t just throwing more data at it, but you also could throw more compute power to.
    0:21:01 And so we probably would see things improve dramatically faster.
    0:21:09 It feels like we’re now seeing that because instead of the model getting, you know, twice as good in like, you know, two years, it’s like now it’s like what, like in three months or something.
    0:21:10 Yeah.
    0:21:10 Oh yeah.
    0:21:15 The, the amount of time between like each of these new releases is just like compressing.
    0:21:16 This is so fast.
    0:21:17 I mean, here’s one that’s really impressive.
    0:21:21 That same GPQ a here, here’s the curve of Oh three.
    0:21:24 Look at where Oh one pro is basically down here.
    0:21:34 The cost is like the highest possible cost and it’s dumber than Oh three low model or about on par with the Oh three low model here.
    0:21:42 And the Oh three high is still maybe slightly cheaper than Oh one medium, but like, look at the jump when in intelligence way up here.
    0:21:43 Wow.
    0:21:43 Pretty wild.
    0:21:47 The speed at which these leaps are happening is pretty crazy.
    0:21:48 Yeah.
    0:21:50 When we first started the show, we were talking about like how big of a change.
    0:21:55 It just wasn’t, I think people probably thought that was hype and it’s actually happening now.
    0:21:59 And I think people still don’t understand it’s actually happening and like how big of a deal it is.
    0:22:02 Like Sam Altman was interviewed at Ted the other day.
    0:22:02 Oh yeah.
    0:22:03 I saw that.
    0:22:03 Yeah.
    0:22:09 And he was talking about how, I think he said that they have 500 million weekly active users now.
    0:22:17 And then the Ted guy said, backstage, you told me that your numbers doubled in the last month since the whole Ghibli thing came out.
    0:22:22 He was like, that was supposed to be off record, but yeah, you know, yeah, it’s, it’s going well.
    0:22:28 I mean, so possibly open the eye is what in the ballpark of maybe 700 plus million users.
    0:22:31 I mean, that is just Silicon Valley has never seen this before.
    0:22:38 And it’s so wild that Sam Altman used to run YC, like the big incubator for Silicon Valley, that he ends up producing the biggest startup of all time, possibly.
    0:22:40 I just wonder why he would want that to be off record.
    0:22:43 That’s something that would probably attract investors pretty quickly.
    0:22:44 Didn’t know those numbers.
    0:22:45 Yeah.
    0:22:51 But I think he is in a game with Google and Grok and Anthropic and everyone of like, you want to hype things up.
    0:22:54 But also you have to keep some cards secret, right?
    0:22:57 Like you don’t want them to know exactly everything.
    0:23:00 I mean, there’s probably some misdirection and all kinds of stuff going on.
    0:23:00 Yeah.
    0:23:00 Yeah.
    0:23:02 It’s wild how fast it’s improving.
    0:23:09 And one thing that I found interesting is in the interview, he alluded to this being possibly like the most pivotal year for AI.
    0:23:13 Like basically saying, and he’s also kind of like saying the best is yet to come kind of thing.
    0:23:16 And also talking about the next big thing is scientific discoveries.
    0:23:16 Yeah.
    0:23:21 And the biggest talk on X over the last week that I’ve seen a lot of the rumors that were going around in some of them
    0:23:26 were even shared, like there was like positive things being said by scientists too, kind of alluding to this being possibly true,
    0:23:34 is that they’ve had early access to the new open AI models and possibly some new discoveries have been made.
    0:23:39 Or at least experiments that they were not able to come up with that are now helping them possibly discover new things in science.
    0:23:40 Yeah.
    0:23:45 So possibly this is like having like really, really material impact on science for the first time ever.
    0:23:46 Yeah.
    0:23:46 No.
    0:23:48 In fact, let me pull up an article.
    0:23:50 I was actually reading this earlier.
    0:23:52 It’s on the information here.
    0:23:56 Open AI’s latest breakthrough AI that comes up with new ideas.
    0:23:56 Yeah.
    0:23:59 Now AI is getting good at brainstorming.
    0:24:05 This came out a few days ago before this new, you know, O3 and O4 mini came out.
    0:24:09 If the upcoming models dubbed O3 and O4 mini perform the way their early testers say they do,
    0:24:15 the technology might soon come up with novel ideas for AI customers on how to tackle problems such as designing
    0:24:20 or discovering new types of materials or drugs that could attract fortune 500 customers,
    0:24:23 such as oil and gas companies and commercial drug developers.
    0:24:28 in addition to research lab scientists, the apparent improvements highlight the benefit of AI models
    0:24:32 focused on reasoning, which the chat GPT maker debuted in September.
    0:24:37 But yeah, basically saying that these new models, the people that got early access have been saying
    0:24:43 like this is helping us design and discover new materials and drugs, which is that’s kind of the
    0:24:44 holy grail of what people want AI to do.
    0:24:45 Yes.
    0:24:49 I mean, it looks like we’re already there and we’ve just like scratched the surface of what this new
    0:24:51 paradigm with reasoning models can do.
    0:24:55 But it seems like the next several years, it’s going to keep accelerating and possibly,
    0:24:57 you know, revolutionizing science.
    0:24:59 So it’s like just, you know, it’s exciting.
    0:24:59 Yeah.
    0:25:00 Yeah.
    0:25:03 And one of the things about these new models that we haven’t even touched on yet is that
    0:25:05 they’re all being built multimodal, right?
    0:25:09 So theoretically, you can give them videos, you can give them audio, you can give them text,
    0:25:13 you can give them all the modalities, images, anything.
    0:25:17 And it will actually be able to understand what’s going on within those.
    0:25:21 But also they all have search now and they’re all getting the ability to use tools.
    0:25:24 And so this chart I found pretty interesting.
    0:25:27 This is one that they showed in their live stream, but they didn’t actually put on their
    0:25:27 website.
    0:25:33 You can see that when they gave Oh, for many tool use and it was using Python to help with
    0:25:38 the math, it scored 99.5 on the competition math.
    0:25:43 So like, yeah, basically acing competition math, when you give it access to be able to
    0:25:48 use tools, it’s getting to that point where like these benchmarks aren’t good enough anymore.
    0:25:53 We need new benchmarks for like, can AI find new discoveries for us?
    0:25:54 Like, how do we make those kinds of benchmarks?
    0:25:56 Right.
    0:25:58 We’re getting more and more to a situation too.
    0:26:01 Like when the Oh one came out, it took people a while to realize how good it was or like what
    0:26:02 it meant.
    0:26:03 You know, Sam Altman said this.
    0:26:08 He said, his son is never going to grow up in a time where he’s smarter than AI.
    0:26:12 Like for a child who’s being born right now, who’s young, that’s just not going to be possible
    0:26:13 in their lifetime.
    0:26:14 So like, that’s where we’re at.
    0:26:18 Like these models, not in every single way, not in an entirely general way, every single
    0:26:23 possible way, but in a lot of ways, they’re already more intelligent than most people.
    0:26:25 And that’s just going to continue and accelerate.
    0:26:29 So I’m constantly thinking about like, what does this mean for me personally in my business?
    0:26:31 And like, what am I going to, how am I going to use it?
    0:26:33 I saw Greg Eisenberg tweeting about this the other day.
    0:26:36 If he’s telling the real story, if he was just trying to like set up something for social
    0:26:40 media, but he’s talking about how to be kind of in a rut because things are changing so fast.
    0:26:42 And I feel like there’s so many different things you could do.
    0:26:46 And it’s like, what do you do in an environment where things are so dynamically changing?
    0:26:48 We’ve never experienced this in human history.
    0:26:53 It’s not clear how anyone exactly takes advantage of this because maybe by the time you do something,
    0:26:54 it’s already changed again.
    0:26:54 Yeah.
    0:26:55 Yeah.
    0:26:58 We’re entering completely new territory that nobody’s been in yet.
    0:27:04 And even all the people that are trying to predict when things are going to happen or what’s going to happen next are all just making predictions.
    0:27:07 Like they don’t even necessarily know what’s coming or where this is going to lead.
    0:27:08 Yeah.
    0:27:12 I’ve been preaching this for a while, but like, I really feel like major corporations are
    0:27:13 not taking this seriously enough.
    0:27:18 Like, you know, being a corporation who has too many meetings and overly like moves very
    0:27:18 slow.
    0:27:20 That’s a bad spot to be in.
    0:27:24 I think people don’t realize how smart Elon Musk has been in this area where he’s like
    0:27:26 really like made things more lean and like move fast.
    0:27:31 Every big company should be doing that because otherwise, how do you survive in an environment
    0:27:33 where things are dramatically changing?
    0:27:33 Yeah.
    0:27:33 Yeah.
    0:27:37 Did you see Toby Lucky’s statement from Shopify?
    0:27:38 Yeah.
    0:27:38 Yeah.
    0:27:42 I mean, he’s basically saying what you said, but the big point that he made is if you guys
    0:27:48 want to hire anybody else in Shopify, you must prove that what you’re hiring for can’t be
    0:27:49 done with AI first.
    0:27:50 Right.
    0:27:54 If you can prove AI cannot do it, then okay, you can make the hire, but you must prove to
    0:27:56 me that AI can’t do it first.
    0:27:56 Right.
    0:28:00 And it’s also super clever because he’s also kind of like baking in AI into the culture
    0:28:03 of the company where it’s like, look, if you’re involved in the company, you have to be thinking
    0:28:06 about how you could be using AI to make the company better.
    0:28:06 Yeah.
    0:28:10 Because otherwise, how could you do that test if you’re not like actually using AI and like
    0:28:11 actively understanding what it can do?
    0:28:13 So that’s super brilliant.
    0:28:16 And I don’t think he’s coming from a place of like, AI is going to replace all of you.
    0:28:20 I think he’s coming from a place of like, this company can be so much more efficient
    0:28:24 and so much better and get things done so much more smoothly if we’re all leveraging
    0:28:25 AI together.
    0:28:28 He’s talking about like an AI first company, like even though, even though they’re a large
    0:28:32 org restructuring already to be an AI first company.
    0:28:34 And most companies are not realizing this.
    0:28:38 I mean, I, I think almost all major companies should be reorganizing right now ahead of time,
    0:28:42 but you know, like people always, you know, they’re more reactive and proactive, like especially
    0:28:46 big organizations, like all the companies, they will realize this like five or 10 years from
    0:28:47 now.
    0:28:50 And then some of them will not survive because of that, but it’s gonna be a wild time.
    0:28:51 Yeah.
    0:28:53 So I want to bring this one home with this.
    0:28:54 Yeah.
    0:28:59 So I actually asked open AI is deep research to sort of break down all of the models,
    0:29:04 like help get past the confusion, do the deep research on which models are good at what,
    0:29:09 and then give me like a ranked order of basically which was the dumbest to the smartest of all of
    0:29:11 the available models right now.
    0:29:21 It actually took, let’s see, 16 minutes for even a chat GPT to figure out, um, its own dang models
    0:29:25 with how confusing it all is, but here’s the breakdown.
    0:29:32 So GPT 3.5 is great at basic conversations, but substantially lower reasoning and knowledge
    0:29:32 than the others.
    0:29:38 Then GPT four, which came out in March, 2023 was a big leap from 3.5.
    0:29:44 And then you have GPT four turbo slash GPT four Oh, which apparently are sort of tied.
    0:29:51 Then you have GPT 4.1 nano, which is one that came out this week, which is a very small, but
    0:29:57 surprisingly capable model, 80% of GPT fours ability, basically.
    0:30:02 Then you have a GPT 4.1 mini slash GPT four Oh.
    0:30:04 So GPT four one mini was one that came out this week.
    0:30:08 GPT four Oh is the one that’s sort of been the default model for a while.
    0:30:15 inside of chat GPT, but GPT four one mini, it says matches or exceeds GPT four Oh’s intelligence.
    0:30:17 So both are kind of tied.
    0:30:24 Then you have GPT 4.5, which was the one that they codenamed Orion GPT 4.5.
    0:30:26 I know it’s been available in the $200 a month plan.
    0:30:30 I can’t remember if it was available in the $20 a month plan, but that one’s been one that
    0:30:32 was sort of more human.
    0:30:37 like, I guess it’s good at writing stories, good at when you just want to have like a
    0:30:37 chat with an AI.
    0:30:42 That was the one that I always felt like was the best at having like a very human like conversation.
    0:30:44 Then you have open AI’s Oh one.
    0:30:49 This was their first reasoning model where it actually sort of thought through after you gave it the prompt.
    0:30:53 And so during inference, it sort of did that sort of chain of thought thinking.
    0:30:55 This was the first model we saw that was doing that.
    0:31:05 Then you have Oh four mini, which was, I believe one that also came out this week is a little bit better than just the standard Oh one.
    0:31:09 So it’s a new efficient reasoning model when run in high compute mode.
    0:31:15 It’s extremely capable, likely outperforming Oh one and approaching the top models in STEM benchmarks.
    0:31:26 Then you have GPT 4.1 full, which is another one that came out this week, which is open AI’s latest GPT model only available in the API right now, not available in chat GPT.
    0:31:37 And this one’s more tuned for coding and following instructions, but this is why it’s a little bit confusing because we can see GPT 4.1 is actually a smarter model than GPT 4.5.
    0:31:42 So even though the numbering scheme went backwards, it’s actually a more powerful model.
    0:31:49 And then you have open AI Oh one pro, which for the longest time was open AI’s top dog model.
    0:31:54 If you got into chat GPT and you had the $200 a month plan, Oh one pro was the best of the best.
    0:31:58 It just kind of crushed anything you threw at it.
    0:32:02 It was really good at coding took forever to get into the API, but that was their best for a long time.
    0:32:06 And then you have open AI Oh three, which was also one that was just released this week.
    0:32:08 It is available in chat GPT.
    0:32:13 It’s available both in pro and plus so 20 and $200 a month plans.
    0:32:19 This one is their new best, most powerful model they’re making available right now.
    0:32:20 That’s open AI Oh three.
    0:32:28 And then this list says their most intelligent, best possible model you can use is Oh three with tool use turned on.
    0:32:35 So allowing Oh three to use tools like Python and things like that to help it with its, you know, math and coding and logic and things like that.
    0:32:38 When you use Oh three with tools, it’s their best model.
    0:32:40 And then also GPT 4.1.
    0:32:44 They’ve also sort of tied with it depending on the use case.
    0:32:46 So insanely confusing.
    0:32:46 Yeah.
    0:32:50 But this is the order it ranked it in based on all the deep research.
    0:32:50 Yes.
    0:32:54 I mean, so thankfully, like people won’t have to worry about this soon.
    0:32:57 So like, hopefully in like two months, you won’t have to worry about this GPT five, hopefully be out.
    0:32:59 It’ll manage all that for you.
    0:33:00 You just talk to one model.
    0:33:05 But right now, I think their descriptions actually are pretty good in line with my experience.
    0:33:11 Like, I think there’s like three models people really would the average people would use right now, like for Oh, that’s what most people would use.
    0:33:13 Like I said, that model keeps getting better.
    0:33:13 Yeah.
    0:33:16 And if you’re just using ChatGPT free, that’s what you’re using.
    0:33:17 You’re using 4.0.
    0:33:17 Yeah.
    0:33:18 4.0 is great.
    0:33:19 It just kept getting better.
    0:33:23 They haven’t really like made a big fuss about it, but it seemed to have just kept getting smarter in some way.
    0:33:25 I don’t think that’s entirely reflected in the benchmarks.
    0:33:28 4.5 still seems to be the best for writing.
    0:33:31 So if you’re wanting to edit something or write something, 4.5 is the best.
    0:33:33 That one’s also getting phased out.
    0:33:34 So use it while you can.
    0:33:36 Use it while you can.
    0:33:38 I think it’ll still be there in five.
    0:33:39 I had to guess behind the scenes.
    0:33:48 And then O3, which I haven’t used yet, based on the benchmarks and my understanding how the models work, I would assume that’s going to be the best if you have any complicated questions.
    0:33:52 Like if there’s something that you’re thinking like, oh, the model might give me too surface level of an answer.
    0:33:54 It’s not taking the time to think it through.
    0:34:00 If you’re asking something complex, you probably want to hand it to O3 and give it the time to really think through its response to you.
    0:34:03 And that’s also probably the one I would imagine you’re going to go to for coding as well.
    0:34:04 Yeah, probably so.
    0:34:06 You know, I haven’t had a chance to test any of it with coding yet.
    0:34:12 There’s one last thing that we didn’t actually bring up about the new models that they just released, and that’s the context window.
    0:34:12 Yeah.
    0:34:15 One of these models is actually a 1 million token context window.
    0:34:17 Is it a real one?
    0:34:20 Like I remember that was a part of the whole fiasco with Meta as well.
    0:34:21 It was like they said like 2 million context window.
    0:34:27 And then apparently at all the benchmarks, it would like start to like fall apart after like 128K context or something.
    0:34:28 I don’t know.
    0:34:33 I actually kind of trust OpenAI’s word on this a little bit more than I trust Meta’s word on it.
    0:34:33 Yeah, me too.
    0:34:34 Me too.
    0:34:35 Because that was just ridiculous.
    0:34:36 Like people tested it.
    0:34:40 It’s like they were hyping up like 2 million contacts or 4 million or whatever it was they hyped up.
    0:34:43 And then the people tested it.
    0:34:47 And as soon as it went beyond like 128K contacts, like the model just like became really dumb.
    0:34:49 Yeah, I heard the same thing.
    0:34:55 I mean, I’m sure there’ll be some diminishing returns like O1 Pro even like, you know, that’s why I was using a repo prompt is like, yeah, it could take a lot of context.
    0:35:02 But you do want to kind of be careful about what you give it because if you give it more exactly what it needs, you do tend to get better results back.
    0:35:09 But yeah, these context windows are getting to a point where like context length is not going to be an issue for very much longer.
    0:35:09 Yeah.
    0:35:13 Like you’re going to be able to plug in entire code bases and it’s going to be able to read the whole dang thing.
    0:35:20 Yeah, and it is interesting that like Sam Altman kind of admittedly, well, he’s at number one, like people were asked about like DeepSeek and he’s like, well, it hasn’t impacted our growth at all.
    0:35:22 So not really too worried about it.
    0:35:28 But also he was saying that like moving forward, it’s probably more about the things they build on top of the models.
    0:35:31 He thinks they’re going to continue to be in the lead.
    0:35:35 He said, but that lead is going to narrow and it’s going to be like a small lead in the future.
    0:35:37 So it’s all about what they build on top of it.
    0:35:41 You know, it did seem early on that like Open the Eye was going to be incredibly ahead of the game.
    0:35:44 But now it feels like there’s going to be lots of people who are pretty close to them.
    0:35:45 So here we go.
    0:35:50 So as of April 2025, here’s the context window sizes for OpenAI’s latest models.
    0:35:55 So it was the GPT 4.1 series, the one that’s only available in the API.
    0:35:56 Yeah.
    0:36:03 That one is a 1 million token context window, which includes GPT 4.1, 4.1 Mini and 4.1 Nano.
    0:36:05 So those are a million tokens.
    0:36:08 GPT 4.0 is still 128,000.
    0:36:11 O3 Mini supports up to 200,000.
    0:36:16 O3 Full, likely maintaining or exceeding 200,000.
    0:36:18 But it doesn’t actually say here.
    0:36:22 O4 Mini released along O3 is a reduced version of a successor.
    0:36:27 Specific context window sizes for O4 Mini have not been detailed.
    0:36:31 So yeah, the O3 and O4, they haven’t actually said what the context window was.
    0:36:38 But the new 4.1, which is the one that’s going to replace 4.5, is the million token context window.
    0:36:42 So yeah, that’s pretty much a breakdown of all the OpenAI news that came out over the last few days.
    0:36:46 There was one smaller update that’s just like a quality of life thing.
    0:36:53 If you are generating images inside of OpenAI, they created this library page where you can see all the images that you’ve generated in just like one spot.
    0:36:56 You know, kind of cool quality of life thing that they’ve added as well.
    0:36:59 Yeah, there’s another move towards killing Mid-Journey possibly.
    0:37:00 Yeah, very true.
    0:37:02 Yeah, you know, Mid-Journey 7 came out.
    0:37:06 Like people were expecting it was going to be way better at understanding images.
    0:37:08 And it’s like slightly better.
    0:37:08 Yeah, yeah.
    0:37:10 It is still the most beautiful model.
    0:37:11 And it got slightly more beautiful.
    0:37:12 Yeah.
    0:37:15 It more consistently beautiful and, you know, and things like that.
    0:37:20 But it seems like they did not nail the thing where, oh, the characters are going to be completely consistent.
    0:37:22 Like you can like reuse the characters.
    0:37:22 Yeah.
    0:37:24 As far as I can tell, they did not nail that.
    0:37:26 Yeah, I played around with V7 a little bit.
    0:37:29 I was actually about to make a video on it and didn’t even release the video.
    0:37:32 Like I only want to put out videos about stuff that I’m excited about.
    0:37:36 And like I was playing with it while recording and like it wasn’t really exciting me.
    0:37:38 I’m like, it doesn’t feel like that big of a leap to me.
    0:37:43 Yeah, the only cool part of it was the turbo thing where you can like rapidly try ideas.
    0:37:44 That’s cool.
    0:37:44 Yeah.
    0:37:45 And you can do voice mode.
    0:37:51 And so that was actually the only cool thing about version 7 was you could just press a voice mode button and just start chatting.
    0:37:54 And as you’re chatting, it starts creating the images super fast.
    0:37:55 That was cool.
    0:37:57 Yeah, I actually didn’t play with that mode.
    0:37:58 So that’s one I’ll have to mess with a little bit.
    0:37:59 That’s the actually cool part of it.
    0:38:00 Like everything else is like whatever.
    0:38:01 Yeah.
    0:38:03 I didn’t find it that impressive.
    0:38:03 Yeah.
    0:38:05 Ideogram has gotten really, really good.
    0:38:08 The various Leonardo models have gotten really, really good.
    0:38:08 Yeah.
    0:38:11 Obviously, OpenAI’s model is really, really good.
    0:38:18 Like all of these models have sort of caught up to each other where like mid-journey is just sort of in the mix with them as opposed to being the leader, you know?
    0:38:19 Yeah.
    0:38:29 But like I said in the past, I think people don’t understand like with OpenAI’s models, you know, with the reasoning models, they’re going to be able to actually understand what’s going on in the images and the videos they create.
    0:38:29 Right.
    0:38:32 Like that’s going to be the unlock, just like making something beautiful.
    0:38:35 I’m sure you can do that, but do you understand what the hell is in the thing you just created?
    0:38:36 And can you modify that?
    0:38:38 That’s the thing that’s interesting.
    0:38:42 And I think, I think OpenAI is like the one who’s like by far the leader in that right now.
    0:38:43 Yeah.
    0:38:43 Yeah.
    0:38:44 They’re on the forefront of it for sure.
    0:38:45 Yeah.
    0:38:52 But yeah, I mean, I think that’s a pretty good breakdown of everything that’s been happening in the world of OpenAI this week.
    0:38:52 Yeah.
    0:38:58 We went off on a few little tangents, but, you know, hopefully we brought it all home by sort of showing you the ranking of intelligence.
    0:39:02 And I think Nathan, you did a good job of saying like, all right, these are the three models you’re probably going to use.
    0:39:14 So, you know, hopefully you found this informative and helpful trying to declutter your mind on all of these different OpenAI models because it’s still confusing to us.
    0:39:17 I mean, we’re paying attention to it every day and we still get confused.
    0:39:19 So, you know, hopefully this helped a little bit.
    0:39:23 And thank you so much for tuning in to this episode.
    0:39:24 Hopefully you enjoyed it.
    0:39:27 If you like it, make sure that you subscribe ideally on YouTube.
    0:39:30 That’s where we’re really trying to primarily grow the show.
    0:39:35 But if you prefer audio, we’re available on Spotify and iTunes and wherever you listen to podcasts.
    0:39:38 Thank you once again for tuning in and hopefully we’ll see you in the next one.
    0:39:39 Goodbye.
    0:40:01 Bye.

    Episode 55: Confused about all the new OpenAI model names like 4.5, 4.1, o3, 04-mini, and the new “memory” feature? Matt Wolfe (https://x.com/mreflow) and Nathan Lands (https://x.com/NathanLands) are here to demystify the whirlwind of recent ChatGPT updates so you know exactly what matters and how to use the smartest AI for your needs.

    In this episode, Matt and Nathan break down the latest OpenAI announcements—what the new “memory” feature actually does, how it could make ChatGPT your most personal assistant, and how each of the new models stacks up. They dissect the confusing model lineup, explain what’s getting sunset, reveal how to match the right model to your workflow (from writing to coding), and discuss rumors of OpenAI’s potential entry into social media. By the end, you’ll know which model is “dumbest to smartest,” what’s coming next, and how these rapid-fire advances might reshape tech and business faster than anyone expected.

    Check out The Next Wave YouTube Channel if you want to see Matt and Nathan on screen: https://lnk.to/thenextwavepd

    Show Notes:

    • (00:00) Demystifying OpenAI’s Recent Launches
    • (08:51) Personalized Social Network Plans
    • (11:02) GPT5 Delay and Concerns
    • (15:00) SWE Bench and External Comparisons
    • (16:12) Gemini 2.5 Preferred for Coding
    • (22:03) Startup’s User Surge Stuns Silicon Valley
    • (23:57) AI Advances in Brainstorming
    • (28:54) Ranking AI Models by Capability
    • (31:05) Advanced AI Models Overview
    • (35:13) Sam Altman on OpenAI’s Future Lead
    • (36:23) OpenAI’s Context Window Updates

    Mentions:

    Get the guide to build your own Custom GPT: https://clickhubspot.com/tnw

    Check Out Matt’s Stuff:

    • Future Tools – https://futuretools.beehiiv.com/

    • Blog – https://www.mattwolfe.com/

    • YouTube- https://www.youtube.com/@mreflow

    Check Out Nathan’s Stuff:

    The Next Wave is a HubSpot Original Podcast // Brought to you by Hubspot Media // Production by Darren Clarke // Editing by Ezra Bakker Trupiano

  • The Board Game Billionaire: From a $10k Kickstarter to $100M/Year Business

    AI transcript
    0:00:03 We launched this thing saying, all right, let’s aim for $10,000.
    0:00:07 We hit our $10,000 goal in seven minutes.
    0:00:10 And in the first 48 hours, we had $2 million.
    0:00:14 After that is when the story gets really interesting.
    0:00:24 Okay, well, good.
    0:00:26 Sam, do you want me to kick it off?
    0:00:28 Yeah, well, yeah, I do.
    0:00:30 First of all, Sean, how did you guys even come to the same world?
    0:00:31 Craig.
    0:00:35 So we invited Craig to the event because Craig’s one of my favorite people.
    0:00:37 Even though he doesn’t play basketball, we were like, Craig, you got to be there.
    0:00:39 You’re the exemption.
    0:00:43 You’re not the basketball guy, but we just want you there for sure.
    0:00:44 And we told him what it was.
    0:00:48 He got excited and he goes, I have somebody who I think should come.
    0:00:49 And we were like, okay, great.
    0:00:50 Who’s the plus one?
    0:00:53 And he was, I guess, how long have you guys been friends?
    0:00:55 It’s got to be a decade now.
    0:00:58 It’s so funny because he called me up and he’s like,
    0:01:00 okay, I have the weirdest invitation ever.
    0:01:04 It’s a basketball event, but I’m not going to be playing basketball.
    0:01:08 And I was like, okay, that’s as weird as it gets.
    0:01:11 And then we started talking and I’m so glad I went.
    0:01:11 It was amazing.
    0:01:15 Yeah, that’s actually a big leap of faith for you because, you know, we know Craig.
    0:01:17 So obviously, you know, there’s a personal connection there.
    0:01:19 What did he say that made you get off the couch for that?
    0:01:23 I mean, he honestly didn’t give me many details.
    0:01:29 But in general, Craig is one of those people on this list I have where if he says to try
    0:01:31 something, I just try it and don’t ask questions.
    0:01:34 There’s only like four people on that list, but he’s on there.
    0:01:35 So I’m so glad I did it.
    0:01:36 Exactly.
    0:01:41 And ever since we met you at that event, I was like, okay, we have to have you on because
    0:01:42 you blew us away.
    0:01:44 Just to give people context.
    0:01:44 All right.
    0:01:45 So there’s a room full of people.
    0:01:46 Imagine 25.
    0:01:51 We tried to invite the 25 most interesting, ambitious people that we could find who also
    0:01:53 love to play basketball in this case.
    0:01:57 And the room is like, I mean, it’s basically like 30% billionaire.
    0:02:00 And so there’s a lot of successful people in that room.
    0:02:02 And I would say you blew us away the most.
    0:02:04 You gave this talk that really kind of inspired us.
    0:02:06 And I would say you blew us away for three reasons.
    0:02:12 Number one, your business is like a giant dragon, but it looks like a playful, cute dragon.
    0:02:16 And so, you know, people don’t look at it and think, wow, this is a juggernaut.
    0:02:18 You have a board games company.
    0:02:22 If anybody’s ever seen the games like Exploding Kittens, that’s your game.
    0:02:28 And not only is that your game, you were telling us, we were like, so like of the top games,
    0:02:30 like, you know, is yours number one?
    0:02:36 And I don’t know if I want to paraphrase you exactly, but you go, we have number one, two,
    0:02:39 four, and five of the top five sold games in the world.
    0:02:41 And I just thought that was incredible.
    0:02:47 So you have this huge business, but you have this artist spirit where you’re the nicest
    0:02:49 guy and you’re creatively driven.
    0:02:51 It didn’t seem like you got into this for the money.
    0:02:53 You got into this to have fun.
    0:02:58 And you gave this talk at night, this little presentation, a little 10 minute presentation
    0:02:59 that blew us all away.
    0:03:01 So that’s why I wanted you to be here.
    0:03:02 You can respond to that.
    0:03:04 And then Sam, I want to hear your impressions too, before we jump in.
    0:03:10 Well, first of all, even before, like, I would just love to say that is so flattering.
    0:03:16 Like I showed up to that event, like about as fish out of water as it gets.
    0:03:19 And imposter syndrome, like, you know, dripping out my ears.
    0:03:24 It was just, this room is filled with incredible people.
    0:03:26 And Sean, I think it was you.
    0:03:36 I think the very first few minutes, I remember I asked you, like, why are we here?
    0:03:37 Like, what is this thing?
    0:03:39 And you had the best answer ever.
    0:03:43 You said, everyone in this room is smarter than I am.
    0:03:46 I’m going to spend the next three days learning as much as I can.
    0:03:47 I hope you’re here for the same reasons.
    0:03:49 And I was just like, holy crap.
    0:03:51 I have found my tribe.
    0:03:52 Here’s where I want to be.
    0:03:53 This is so great.
    0:03:55 There was one moment when I was with you in the sauna.
    0:04:01 And you asked me and maybe Austin Reeve or someone like that.
    0:04:04 You’re like, can I get your guys’ opinion on something?
    0:04:09 And you, like, express, like, you know, opinions on an investor conversation, something.
    0:04:10 You’re like, can you just give me your take on this?
    0:04:12 And we gave you our opinions.
    0:04:17 And you asked the question in a way where I thought I was helping you.
    0:04:19 And then I was like, how big is your business?
    0:04:20 And then you said the numbers.
    0:04:24 And my reply was, why are you asking me this question?
    0:04:27 Like, you are, you, it’s so funny.
    0:04:32 You win the award for most humble person because you’re acting like you are in this room of big
    0:04:35 shots when, like, of all the people there, you were the big shot.
    0:04:40 Are you able to give any numbers, whatever you’re comfortable with, to give the audience
    0:04:42 a sense of how big Exploding Kittens is?
    0:04:45 Like, if it’s valuation, game sold, revenue, anything you want.
    0:04:51 I have to be a little careful because we have investors who like to keep it under wraps.
    0:04:51 But I’ll tell you this.
    0:04:54 We sell, we did this math.
    0:04:55 This was so ridiculous.
    0:05:01 We sell a game every 6.4 seconds around the clock.
    0:05:08 And our first, like, we started our company on Kickstarter in 30 days.
    0:05:09 We were trying to raise $10,000.
    0:05:11 We raised almost $9 million instead.
    0:05:16 Our first, um, our first print run was 700,000 units.
    0:05:18 And that was mind-blowing.
    0:05:21 Like, how the hell do you print 700,000 games?
    0:05:29 And for scale, I’ll tell you, that is today, like, so, such a tiny print order for us.
    0:05:33 Like, I wouldn’t even consider printing that many because they’d sell out so fast, it wouldn’t
    0:05:34 even be worth our while.
    0:05:40 One of the coolest things was when you took us, we went to Target and Walmart and we were
    0:05:44 walking around the store and you took us to the games aisle of a Target and you were just
    0:05:45 kind of breaking it down.
    0:05:50 Like, this shelf, a shelf that I’ve walked by hundreds of times, don’t really pay much.
    0:05:51 You know, I don’t even think about it.
    0:05:53 I just, I either buy something or I don’t.
    0:05:55 I don’t think about the business of the shelf.
    0:06:01 And you talked about this sort of like, you know, this sort of six foot, six foot, uh, space.
    0:06:07 And it was like, this shelf is like, I mean, I won’t use your numbers, but I’ll just give
    0:06:11 a generic idea of like, this shelf is like hundreds of millions of dollars.
    0:06:16 And every inch of this shelf for Target, the way they think is like sales per square inch
    0:06:17 or something like that.
    0:06:18 And you were describing how that works.
    0:06:22 And then you were like, yeah, you know, I’m trying to figure out our Walmart sales.
    0:06:26 So I’m going to go work as a Walmart associate for the next few weeks, just to get kind of
    0:06:28 an on the ground look and not like a marketing stunt.
    0:06:30 You were like, no, I genuinely want to know.
    0:06:33 So if you said you were going to do that right after our event, did you end up doing it?
    0:06:35 Yeah, they postponed it.
    0:06:40 This, honestly, this, this tariff thing right now has turned everything into quite turmoil,
    0:06:44 but, uh, it looks like it’s going to now be scheduled for September.
    0:06:48 So, uh, I’ll be going to Arkansas to work at Walmart for a bit.
    0:06:50 Um, but the whole reason it’s, you’re right.
    0:06:51 It’s not a stunt.
    0:06:55 Like my goal isn’t like, Hey, I want to tell the world about this and, and, and get publicity.
    0:07:01 Like in order to sell products at any retail location, you have to understand the customer
    0:07:04 and you have to understand when they’re walking into a space, what are they looking for?
    0:07:06 And what turns them off and what turns them on?
    0:07:09 And if they pick up a game and then put it back, why did they put it back?
    0:07:13 And it’s not so much of it is contextual.
    0:07:14 It’s not necessarily the game, right?
    0:07:17 It’s not necessarily, I looked at this game and it wasn’t for me.
    0:07:20 It’s, I looked at this game and then something else caught my eye.
    0:07:25 So I put this down and I picked it up and, and those are the stories I need to hear in
    0:07:26 order to be as successful as possible.
    0:07:31 And I just figured finally, like the only way I’m going to get this is by living there and
    0:07:35 spending as long as it takes to talk to people and figure out like, why’d you put that game
    0:07:35 down?
    0:07:36 Why’d you pick that one up?
    0:07:38 Why’d you walk in here to begin with?
    0:07:40 And, uh, yeah, I just think I have so much to learn.
    0:07:42 I’m really excited to do it.
    0:07:45 How big is the company, uh, in terms of employees and how old is it?
    0:07:48 Company is, we just had our 10 year anniversary.
    0:07:49 So we just turned 10.
    0:07:53 We got about a hundred employees, a little less.
    0:08:00 Um, and, um, yeah, we’re, we’re based out of Los Angeles, although we’ve got offices, uh,
    0:08:04 in Canada and in Europe and kind of all over the place.
    0:08:07 Everywhere we have a distribution center, we also have an office.
    0:08:09 So give us the origin story.
    0:08:11 So how do you, how did you do this?
    0:08:13 Why did you, why did you decide to create a board game?
    0:08:18 And then how did you do this Kickstarter that blew everybody’s socks off?
    0:08:21 You, you set out to raise 10 K and said, you raised 9 million or something like that.
    0:08:28 And then now it’s this company that’s making, you know, I don’t know exactly how much
    0:08:31 you’re making, but you don’t have to confirm or deny, but I’ll just put it out there.
    0:08:33 I think you’ve built a billion dollar games company.
    0:08:38 And in a space that I think most people, the cool part is most people think you either are
    0:08:39 going to choose something for the money.
    0:08:46 I got to go do this sweaty B2B, you know, business, HR tech, whatever, or I’m going to
    0:08:46 have fun.
    0:08:47 I’m going to build something cool.
    0:08:48 That’s fun.
    0:08:50 That won’t give people delight and joy.
    0:08:51 And you got both.
    0:08:52 You did both.
    0:08:54 You did the fun thing and you ended up with the money prize too.
    0:08:56 That’s why I love about your story.
    0:08:58 And so how the heck did this happen?
    0:08:59 Can you just tell us the kind of origins?
    0:09:00 Sure.
    0:09:00 Yeah.
    0:09:01 It’s a bizarre story.
    0:09:08 So, um, I used to work, I’ve been designing games my whole life, but the most notable place
    0:09:09 I worked was at the Xbox.
    0:09:14 I was the chief design officer there building games for the Xbox for ever.
    0:09:24 Um, and I remember one day, so one day I, uh, my, my brother, he’s got two kids and I love
    0:09:24 them.
    0:09:28 My niece and nephew, they’re the best and, uh, Zeke and Kiki.
    0:09:29 And I, I walked over to their house.
    0:09:31 I was so excited to see them.
    0:09:37 And, um, they were playing Xbox when I walked in and I was like, Hey, how’s everybody doing?
    0:09:41 And they like, didn’t even look up, like didn’t even acknowledge my existence.
    0:09:45 And to add insult to injury, they were playing a game that I designed.
    0:09:50 And I was like, Oh, I’ve broken something so fundamental here.
    0:09:52 Like this just feels wrong.
    0:10:01 And within two weeks, I resigned from Xbox and thought, whatever I do next, it has to
    0:10:04 capture what I remember in my childhood, right?
    0:10:08 Like when I think about playing games, you know, other than the NES, there really weren’t
    0:10:09 any consoles at all.
    0:10:14 So we were playing around a table and we were cheating and kicking each other under the table
    0:10:19 and throwing food and, and making all those like alliances and, and betraying each other
    0:10:20 and all this fun stuff.
    0:10:21 I don’t even remember what the games were.
    0:10:26 I remember the relationships and it’s because we like looked each other in the eye and we,
    0:10:32 and we like could lie right to each other’s faces or, you know, secretly conspire to make,
    0:10:33 you know, my younger brother lose.
    0:10:35 That was a favorite activity.
    0:10:40 But I remember all these really fun things that were, I think, very formative for me.
    0:10:44 And so when I resigned, I thought I want to return to that.
    0:10:46 And certainly the first step is really simple.
    0:10:52 I’m just going to design this very simple card game and see, like Kickstarter exists.
    0:10:53 I’ll put this thing up on Kickstarter.
    0:10:56 I’ll try to raise just a little tiny bit of money.
    0:10:58 What’s a little bit like $10,000?
    0:11:02 You thought $10,000 and $10,000 wasn’t an arbitrary number.
    0:11:06 I like, I called up a printer and I said, look, I want to do this thing.
    0:11:07 What’s the minimum print run?
    0:11:11 And he said, you got to print out, you know, I think it was like 400 units.
    0:11:13 And I was like, okay, well, how much does that cost?
    0:11:15 And it came out to just about $10,000.
    0:11:16 And I was like, cool, there we go.
    0:11:23 And this was really all because of you felt some type of guilt about your family being using screens?
    0:11:25 Yeah, I felt like I was on the wrong path.
    0:11:28 I felt like I was part of the problem instead of part of the solution.
    0:11:29 Was that a big thing?
    0:11:31 Like, were you getting wealthy from that?
    0:11:34 I mean, chief design officer sounds like you’re, that’s a big deal.
    0:11:37 If you had asked me then, the answer would have been yes.
    0:11:40 Now my scale is a little bit different.
    0:11:44 And so when you, when you do this, you’ve never made a card game before, right?
    0:11:46 You’ve never, there’s not something you grew up doing.
    0:11:48 You’re a beginner at this stage.
    0:11:49 Totally.
    0:11:52 Literally my first try, but the stakes are so low, right?
    0:11:57 Like if I’m just going to be making a few hundred units, even if the thing is totally broken, that’s okay.
    0:11:59 People, you know, they’re going to pay 20 bucks for this thing.
    0:12:02 They know this is my first time ever trying this.
    0:12:03 Like, this will be easy.
    0:12:03 Right.
    0:12:07 And I showed the game to a bunch of friends.
    0:12:09 And one of those friends was Matthew Itman.
    0:12:14 And he is the creator of the Oatmeal, the online comic.
    0:12:16 It’s like the funniest guy I know.
    0:12:19 And he’s like, he’s the audience whisperer.
    0:12:25 Like he knows how to command a crowd and he knows how to get their attention and he knows how to keep them engaged.
    0:12:28 And just this incredible, brilliant mind.
    0:12:31 And I showed him this game and he said, what’s it called?
    0:12:36 And I said, it’s called Bomb Squad because we got a deck of cards and there’s a few bombs in the deck.
    0:12:37 And those are the bad ones.
    0:12:41 We try to avoid the bombs and all you’re trying to do is get through the deck and not draw a bomb.
    0:12:43 And he said a few things.
    0:12:46 He said, one, this is the best game I’ve ever played.
    0:12:49 I would really, really like to work on this with you.
    0:12:50 Will you please let me work on this with you?
    0:12:53 And I was like, yes.
    0:12:54 Like, hell yes.
    0:12:58 If the Oatmeal ever asks you if he can work on a game with you, your answer is yes.
    0:12:59 Like, holy crap.
    0:13:00 What an opportunity.
    0:13:01 And he said, cool.
    0:13:07 The second thing is we can’t call it Bomb Squad because it’s too obvious.
    0:13:09 Like bombs are bad.
    0:13:10 Of course you’re scared of the bomb.
    0:13:10 There’s bombs in the deck.
    0:13:11 You’re scared of the bombs.
    0:13:12 It’s called Bomb Squad.
    0:13:12 Who cares?
    0:13:14 You’re going to forget that in five seconds.
    0:13:22 What if instead the thing that you were most scared of were cute, adorable, fuzzy little kittens and we’ll call the game Exploding Kittens instead?
    0:13:26 And that’s really the origin story.
    0:13:32 Like that one simple conversation happened to meet the right person at the right time and we decided to collaborate on this thing.
    0:13:39 And then we had the discussion with the distributor and he’s like, Matt said, we’re going to make, we’re going to do more than 400 units.
    0:13:40 And I was like, I don’t know.
    0:13:40 I don’t know.
    0:13:42 This is, this is totally risky.
    0:13:44 Neither of us have ever made a game before.
    0:13:48 And so a friend of mine, a guy named Dan Shapiro, he runs Glowforge.
    0:13:50 He gave me this incredible advice.
    0:13:58 When I was talking to him about what number to set our Kickstarter campaign, he said, look, when this campaign runs, you have no control.
    0:14:04 Like there’s going to be store, hopefully stories written about your campaign, but you don’t control any of them.
    0:14:07 They get to set the narrative and you just sort of hold on.
    0:14:13 But what you can control are the stories that are like tried to raise X instead raised Y.
    0:14:15 Hit their goal in X minutes, right?
    0:14:18 All of these statistics, data driven stories.
    0:14:25 You control those by setting that one number that you have control over, setting that at the appropriate place.
    0:14:26 And he was totally right.
    0:14:34 And so we set it at 10,000 knowing this is probably a little low, but it is the truthful minimum that we need for our order minimum.
    0:14:36 And now we can control those stories.
    0:14:38 Were any of you guys like famous back then?
    0:14:44 I know what the oatmeal is, but is that like big enough where you’re like, where he’s like, dude, I’ll blow this up.
    0:14:45 Just like tell me when.
    0:14:50 It turns out the answer is yes, but none of us really knew it at the time.
    0:14:56 So like we launched this thing saying, all right, let’s aim for $10,000 because of Matt.
    0:15:01 Matt made a single post saying, hey, oatmeal fans, for the first time ever, I made a game.
    0:15:02 I’m really proud of it.
    0:15:03 I hope you like it.
    0:15:03 Here it is.
    0:15:08 And we hit our $10,000 goal in seven minutes.
    0:15:11 And it’s because of Matt, 100% of Matt.
    0:15:13 He made one post, hit $10,000.
    0:15:21 And then within the first 12 hours, maybe it was closer to 24, it’s 10 years ago, we raised a million dollars.
    0:15:23 A hundred percent because of Matt.
    0:15:26 And in the first 48 hours, we had $2 million.
    0:15:28 A hundred percent because of Matt.
    0:15:38 After that is when the story gets really interesting because 48 hours in, all the oatmeal fans that are going to back this thing have backed it, right?
    0:15:39 They’ve seen his post.
    0:15:45 They know they’re interested in this thing or they decide they’re not interested in this thing and they’ve either purchased it or not.
    0:15:46 And that’s it.
    0:15:48 The sales price on that is $2 million.
    0:15:50 Amazing.
    0:15:52 Like we are off to the races.
    0:15:54 We can do anything now.
    0:15:54 We’ve raised $2 million.
    0:15:58 And Matt and I sat down and we’re like, okay, we now have a choice.
    0:16:02 Either we can say, we have raised $2 million.
    0:16:07 That is one of the most successful Kickstarter campaigns in history in the games category.
    0:16:11 And we can just kind of ride this thing out knowing that we’re not going to raise much more than that.
    0:16:14 Maybe we’ll get to 2.5 and we’ll declare that a huge victory.
    0:16:17 Or we can bet it all.
    0:16:24 Like what if we just went absolutely crazy and deployed every marketing strategy either of us have ever heard of?
    0:16:27 And we shook hands and said, let’s do it.
    0:16:32 Like let’s try as big and as bold as this thing can possibly be.
    0:16:36 And on Kickstarter, they’ve got these things called stretch goals, right?
    0:16:37 We’ve made our game.
    0:16:41 But if we get, I don’t know, we’ve raised $10,000.
    0:16:44 If instead we raise $20,000, everybody gets a free carrying case.
    0:16:48 $50,000, we’re going to add 10 more cards into the game.
    0:16:49 Stretch goals, right?
    0:16:52 They’re trying to motivate people to back the project.
    0:16:58 I sat down and I thought, this whole thing is crowdfunding.
    0:17:05 And all of those stretch goals, every strategy I’ve read, every YouTube video I’ve watched, everything is based on funding.
    0:17:10 Like they ignore the crowd part and they’re just like laser focus on funding, funding, funding, funding.
    0:17:12 And I was like, I think that’s backwards.
    0:17:16 I think instead we’re going to ignore the funding because we’ve already got $2 million.
    0:17:19 And let’s just focus on the crowd part.
    0:17:25 And instead of doing traditional stretch goals, all of our stretch goals were based on the crowd.
    0:17:28 So we’re like, look, we don’t care about money anymore.
    0:17:29 Don’t give us any more money.
    0:17:30 We don’t want any more money.
    0:17:34 Nothing we talk about from now on is going to be about money because the funding doesn’t matter.
    0:17:36 Let’s have a party and everyone is invited.
    0:17:39 So we’re like, look, we’re going to do those same things.
    0:17:42 We’re also going to give you a carrying case and 10 extra cards and all that fun stuff.
    0:17:44 But it’s not based on how much money you give us.
    0:17:46 It’s based on how much fun you have.
    0:17:53 So show us a picture of 10 Batmans in a hot tub, whatever the hell that means.
    0:18:02 Show us a picture of that or show us a picture of 100 people dressed up as cats or show us the craziest, most interesting things you can come up with.
    0:18:05 And every time you do that, we’re going to make the game better and you’re not going to pay us more.
    0:18:09 We’re just going to make the game better because this is fun and we’ve already raised enough money.
    0:18:10 Let’s have a party.
    0:18:16 And we did that for the next 28 days and we watched our numbers just skyrocket.
    0:18:19 I’m going to focus on the crowd part here, right?
    0:18:23 Like we had, I don’t know, let’s say we had a thousand backers at that point.
    0:18:29 By the end of this thing, we had 219,000 backers for this campaign.
    0:18:34 That is so far in first place of any Kickstarter campaign in history to date.
    0:18:37 It’s been 10 years and no one’s even come close to that record.
    0:18:43 And it’s because we said the funding is completely irrelevant.
    0:18:44 All that matters is the crowd.
    0:18:46 The funding was a really nice side effect though.
    0:18:49 But it was eight and a half million dollars that you got, right?
    0:18:50 Well, yeah, there was that too.
    0:18:52 So wait, give us an example.
    0:18:53 So you said 10 Batman in a bathtub.
    0:18:56 What were the other things that you did to get the crowd to do?
    0:19:01 Yeah, so one of our characters in our game is called Taco Cat, which is my favorite character, right?
    0:19:02 Taco Cat is a palindrome.
    0:19:04 Spell Taco Cat backwards and you’ve still got Taco Cat.
    0:19:08 So we had this adorable character and we said, look, we don’t actually know what Taco Cat is,
    0:19:13 but show us 25 pictures of real Taco Cats and we’ll make the game better.
    0:19:16 When you say show us, do you mean like post in the comment section?
    0:19:17 Post, yeah.
    0:19:21 So it was basically just like an online message board that you were using.
    0:19:26 Whatever social media platform you wanted, we just said, you know, tag us on it.
    0:19:27 And that’s all we care about.
    0:19:28 And so that was the virality.
    0:19:33 They were posting an image that didn’t make any sense in the feed and they’d tag you guys.
    0:19:35 That got people curious to go check you out.
    0:19:36 Is that what was working?
    0:19:38 Why have you stuffed your cat into a burrito?
    0:19:39 What is happening here?
    0:19:41 And on and on those pictures went.
    0:19:47 One, we had this veterinarian who worked in an animal shelter and she showed us,
    0:19:51 all she did was she had a picture of her holding this adorable cat and a piece of paper.
    0:19:57 And the piece of paper showed that she had legally changed the cat’s name to Taco Cat for real.
    0:20:00 And we’re like, all right, that’s about as real a Taco Cat as it gets.
    0:20:01 So we gave credit for that one as well.
    0:20:04 And it just, it went on and on and on like that for 30 days.
    0:20:08 Every time we thought, here’s a challenge way too hard.
    0:20:10 They absolutely smashed them.
    0:20:12 And then we would just, our challenge was every day.
    0:20:16 How do we come up with five new challenges that’s going to keep everyone entertained?
    0:20:21 New York City founders, if you’ve listened to My First Million before,
    0:20:23 you know I’ve got this company called Hampton.
    0:20:26 And Hampton is a community for founders and CEOs.
    0:20:29 A lot of the stories and ideas that I get for this podcast,
    0:20:32 I actually got it from people who I met in Hampton.
    0:20:34 We have this big community of 1,000 plus people and it’s amazing.
    0:20:39 But the main part is this eight-person core group that becomes your board of advisors
    0:20:41 for your life and for your business and it’s life-changing.
    0:20:48 Now, to the folks in New York City, I’m building a in-real-life core group in New York City.
    0:20:50 And so if you meet one of the following criteria,
    0:20:54 your business either does 3 million in revenue or you’ve raised 3 million in funding
    0:20:57 or you’ve started and sold a company for at least $10 million,
    0:20:59 then you are eligible to apply.
    0:21:02 So go to joinhampton.com and apply.
    0:21:05 I’m going to be reviewing all of the applications myself.
    0:21:09 So put that you heard about this on MFM so I know to give you a little extra love.
    0:21:10 Now, back to the show.
    0:21:15 You have these little one-liners that are like,
    0:21:18 what if instead of the funding, we focused on the crowd?
    0:21:21 It’s like this simple idea that then you run with them.
    0:21:22 So it’s like that.
    0:21:27 If I was going to describe you, I’d say he takes silly ideas very seriously.
    0:21:31 Take a simple idea and take it seriously.
    0:21:34 I think yours is take a silly idea and take it seriously.
    0:21:35 You do that with your games.
    0:21:36 You do that with your marketing campaigns.
    0:21:39 And you did this when we were at the event.
    0:21:41 We do this thing where we put everybody on the hot seat.
    0:21:45 And let’s say somebody’s like a real estate mogul.
    0:21:48 We’ll just, instead of saying, hey, tell us about your business.
    0:21:52 We’ll just say, all right, so how do you make a billion dollars in real estate?
    0:21:53 Well, what’s the secret?
    0:21:55 And like in your case, it’s like, what’s the secret?
    0:21:58 How do you make hit game after hit game after hit game?
    0:22:02 In a hits business that normally sounds like something that’s just a game of chance,
    0:22:03 but you’re doing it again and again and again.
    0:22:04 You must know something.
    0:22:06 And you said a great line.
    0:22:09 Can you describe your philosophy around games?
    0:22:11 Because you said it in a one-liner that just stuck with me.
    0:22:11 Yeah.
    0:22:13 Oh, I love that you focused on this one.
    0:22:16 So the line is, games should not be entertaining.
    0:22:19 Games should make the people you’re playing with entertaining.
    0:22:26 And that simple line, which is a very silly line, like I remember the first time we pitched
    0:22:30 it to our investors, we’re like, we’re not going to make entertaining games.
    0:22:31 And they’re like, never say that again.
    0:22:34 Like never put that in any piece of writing ever.
    0:22:39 And instead we put it as the first line on our webpage because games should not be entertaining.
    0:22:44 If you’re making an entertaining game, you’re trying way too hard and it’s you versus the audience,
    0:22:47 which means when you’re done entertaining them, they’re going to go away and never come back.
    0:22:51 If instead your goal is, I’m just making a tool set.
    0:22:56 My tool set is going to make the people that you are playing with the entertainment.
    0:22:59 Suddenly you’ve got an engine.
    0:23:01 Suddenly, every time they play, it’s different.
    0:23:02 Suddenly they constantly want to come back.
    0:23:04 They want to play it over and over again.
    0:23:05 They want to take it to new friends’ house.
    0:23:08 You make a piece of cardboard, right?
    0:23:09 A deck of cards.
    0:23:12 You’ve turned that into a viral engine.
    0:23:14 And that’s the secret to success in the board game industry.
    0:23:21 But that sort of is like going to the Met and seeing a Picasso and being like, dude, it’s just like scribbly lines.
    0:23:22 Like this is unimpressive.
    0:23:33 You dismissing it as just a, it doesn’t explain why your company is potentially worth billions of dollars and makes potentially hundreds of millions of dollars a year in revenue.
    0:23:43 What is actually happening because we’ve had all these rich and successful billionaires on the pod and I’ll meet them and I’m like, oh, you’re really nice.
    0:23:45 And then I start thinking like, well, no, this guy’s a shark.
    0:23:47 Like you must be a shark to be this successful.
    0:23:57 So like, what else are you not, what are you not telling us that has allowed this company to become a potentially, allegedly multi-billion dollar company?
    0:23:58 Yeah.
    0:24:01 Well, one is you have to do it consistently, which is hard, right?
    0:24:06 But how do you tell if your game is a tool set to make people entertaining?
    0:24:10 And like, unless you have the, the litmus test, right?
    0:24:16 Unless you can quantify the data that you’re putting in those boxes, like then it’s just a theory.
    0:24:29 And I remember we started taking submissions from external inventors and I just eventually started rubber stamping them with, here’s why we’re rejecting you because this, you’re trying too hard to be entertaining.
    0:24:36 And it was incredible, like hundreds of these submissions and every, every game designer was making the same mistake where they’re like,
    0:24:41 I am building an entertaining thing and I kept having to remind them we’re not buying entertaining things.
    0:24:45 And eventually we found like one or two inventors we could work with.
    0:24:49 And then I had to design all the others, which is totally cool because I know what I’m looking for.
    0:24:51 But how do you test it?
    0:24:56 Like, how do I know that I’m hitting that mark way before the thing hits the market?
    0:24:58 Because by then we could have already screwed it up.
    0:25:04 So I figured out one bit of quantifiable data that lets me back up that claim.
    0:25:08 When I say a game is not entertaining, it makes the players entertaining, I can back that up.
    0:25:18 And the way I can back it up is in our testing procedure, we have this group of 400 families called the Kitty Test Pilots.
    0:25:21 And all we do is we send them games all day long and we ask for feedback.
    0:25:24 And it used to be we would send them this crazy Google form.
    0:25:26 We’re like, how long did you play?
    0:25:27 How many players?
    0:25:28 How old are they?
    0:25:29 What was your favorite part?
    0:25:30 What was the part you hated?
    0:25:31 What part needs work?
    0:25:34 You know, on and on and on, like 30, 40 questions.
    0:25:37 And I realized, like, nobody’s reading these.
    0:25:40 Like, I don’t even care about what this is.
    0:25:47 And by the time I finish reading their answers to this questionnaire, I haven’t actually learned anything about whether or not this game has made the players entertaining.
    0:25:53 And so we now send out a questionnaire and it has one question on it.
    0:25:54 Just one.
    0:25:55 Start to finish.
    0:25:55 One question.
    0:25:58 And that question is, do you want to play again?
    0:26:09 And I have found that that question is the most direct heat-seeking missile to answer the question, have you made the players entertaining?
    0:26:15 Because if a game is entertaining, you have extracted almost all the entertainment from it on your first time through.
    0:26:18 But if the players are entertaining, you want to play again.
    0:26:25 And we only now ship games where 100% of that question’s answer is yes.
    0:26:28 We get even a single no, we dive into that person.
    0:26:34 And we watch the videos and we figure out what happened there because they should want to play again.
    0:26:36 And if they don’t, we’ve got something to fix.
    0:26:51 I think the most successful people, Sean, have you ever studied like personality tests and like, oh, and read about disagree, agreeableness and how the people who are most successful rank very low on agreeableness?
    0:26:51 Right.
    0:26:53 Disagreeable is a positive trait for founders.
    0:27:00 Yeah, because like the very simple example is you just are on, you don’t accept how things are done.
    0:27:00 You disagree with that.
    0:27:01 Therefore, you want to make your own.
    0:27:08 Oftentimes, people who rank high on disagreeableness are jerks.
    0:27:12 You, Alon, do not, you are not a jerk.
    0:27:15 You are objectively a sweet person.
    0:27:31 But you seem like you are hiding this disagreeableness because, like, for example, you have incredibly high standards or you just made a survey where a lot of staff might be like, well, we have to ask 10 questions.
    0:27:32 We can’t just ask one question.
    0:27:33 But you’re like, no, no, no.
    0:27:35 You see, this makes sense for this reason.
    0:27:38 Do people enjoy working with you?
    0:27:44 Because, like, I guess I’m fascinated on how your ability to be disagreeable, but also polite.
    0:27:45 And it seems very effective.
    0:27:47 It depends on who you ask.
    0:27:51 So I think, I think my team likes working with me.
    0:27:54 At the very least, very few people ever quit.
    0:28:02 But if you were to ask our printers, if you were to ask our distribution partners, I think they hate working with me.
    0:28:04 Like, despise it.
    0:28:08 And the reason is because I am absolutely a perfectionist.
    0:28:11 Like, what I do for a living is make little boxes of joy.
    0:28:22 And if you open a box and there’s something obvious wrong with it or the card quality is not where it should be or, like, in Exploding Kittens, you don’t know which card is an Exploding Kitten.
    0:28:23 It has to be a surprise, right?
    0:28:27 And that means the backs of every card have to be identical.
    0:28:38 And if I can detect one degree off in the Pantone registry of this card versus this one, I’m sending the entire, I don’t care how many millions are in that shipment.
    0:28:43 I’m sending every single one of them back, and I’m not paying a penny, and you are going to reprint them for me.
    0:28:46 So they hate me, and I get it.
    0:28:53 But also, I don’t think the company would be where it is today if I said, yeah, we’ll just ship it that way, and the next run will be better.
    0:28:54 I love that.
    0:29:00 You also have an approach to marketing that I think is very different than most founders.
    0:29:03 It was really inspiring to me when I started to hear these stories.
    0:29:07 Can you talk about some of the unconventional hustle things?
    0:29:10 Because if I’m listening to this right now, I’m like, okay, cool.
    0:29:13 So he was like, had a cool, like a sick job at Xbox.
    0:29:14 He quit.
    0:29:20 First game, first hit Wonder, hit Exploding Kittens, which is like the number one game in the world for I don’t know how many years now.
    0:29:24 Oh, his buddy happened to be the oatmeal guy, so he had instant distribution.
    0:29:26 Must be nice, right?
    0:29:28 I’ll just be YouTube comment guy for a second.
    0:29:33 Yo, must be nice to be, you know, to have connected, powerful friends.
    0:29:34 That’s why I’m not successful, right?
    0:29:36 That’s, I think, where most people land and stuff like that.
    0:29:40 What they don’t know is that first there’s all this, that person’s not just your friend.
    0:29:45 There’s actually like luck that you create along the way to create those types of opportunities.
    0:29:51 So either you could talk about that or you could talk about some of the hustle tactics you guys did,
    0:30:00 like the vending machine, like the other stuff you guys have done that where you were not just like handed the keys to the castle,
    0:30:02 but you actually like scraped your way there.
    0:30:03 Yeah, yeah.
    0:30:09 I mean, look, the company you’ve just described is a company that would disappear in eight months, right?
    0:30:11 Like there’s no longevity to that at all.
    0:30:16 So once you have a hit game, which requires a lot of luck, but also a lot of skill.
    0:30:23 Once you’ve gotten that, now the skill really has to kick in because now you have to make sure that thing doesn’t disappear.
    0:30:26 Now you have to make sure your next 10 games are also successful.
    0:30:29 You need to make sure your profit margin on each game is where it should be.
    0:30:31 You need to make sure you build a community on and on and on.
    0:30:33 So I’ll give you a few examples.
    0:30:36 And they’re all kind of marketing.
    0:30:44 Like once you have a company, once you have any degree of success, you have to be able to double down on that and get your audience to care passionately.
    0:30:50 So we used to go to this convention in Seattle called PAX, Penny Arcade Expo.
    0:30:53 And we’re a tiny company.
    0:30:54 We got no money for marketing, right?
    0:30:56 We’ve had this one successful Kickstarter campaign.
    0:31:02 We spent literally every penny actually producing the product and building the company.
    0:31:03 And now our bank account is empty.
    0:31:09 And we show up to this thing and we’ve got like no ability to get people’s attention.
    0:31:15 And advertising is expensive and they literally rent out like every square inch of the walls in there.
    0:31:18 And so anything you want to do costs money, which we don’t have.
    0:31:20 So I had this idea.
    0:31:24 And this convention is to impress other game makers or vendors to carry your game.
    0:31:25 Exactly.
    0:31:27 All of the above, right?
    0:31:29 So you’re getting, you’re building a fan base.
    0:31:31 You’re building other relationships.
    0:31:33 You’re trying to get distribution.
    0:31:34 You’re trying to get into retail stores.
    0:31:38 The only thing we had ever sold is a single product on Kickstarter.
    0:31:39 And now we’ve got nothing left.
    0:31:41 By the way, people don’t know these exhibits.
    0:31:44 If you go to one of these, you become an exhibitor.
    0:31:48 Your booth, like the big games, they’re spending hundreds of thousands of dollars just on the booth.
    0:31:56 And you’re like, you also signed up to be a booth, but you’re just a fold-out picnic table in section F over, you know, past the bathrooms.
    0:31:57 That’s right.
    0:32:00 And you’re just sitting there hoping somebody walks by your shitty table.
    0:32:02 And you’re like, how am I supposed to compete with that?
    0:32:09 It’s like Michael Scott in the job fair episode where he’s like, you literally just have a table and you’re trying to convince people to do, to come to you.
    0:32:15 I got the crappy sign that I printed on my little inkjet printer and that’s in the folding table and that’s it.
    0:32:18 And so the very first year, I was very proud of this.
    0:32:23 I knew we had to have marketing space and I couldn’t find any that we could afford.
    0:32:28 And so I made, I made these little kittens.
    0:32:31 I cut them out, little, adorable, cute little kittens with our logo on it.
    0:32:35 And the kitten was holding a bomb and it said exploding kittens and there was a fuse.
    0:32:41 And I secretly put one of those inside every urinal in the convention center.
    0:32:43 So you had to pee on them to extinguish the bomb.
    0:32:47 And it like mobbed our booth.
    0:32:50 Like everyone wanted to see who made these things.
    0:32:55 So much so that the organizers came to us and they said, you can’t do this.
    0:33:00 And I was like, well, show me the part of my contract where it says I can’t do this.
    0:33:02 I understand you don’t want me to do this, but show me where I can’t.
    0:33:09 And they said, all right, well, we’re not going to prohibit you from doing this because you’re right.
    0:33:12 You found a space that is just nowhere in our guidelines.
    0:33:17 But we’ll tell you this, next year, we’re going to start charging for that space.
    0:33:20 So I think, I haven’t checked because we haven’t been back to PAX,
    0:33:25 but I think they now charge for urinal advertising space thanks to this little stunt we pull.
    0:33:29 Do you want to go get them out of there or are you expecting me to do that?
    0:33:30 We did not extract a single one of those.
    0:33:31 It’s actually genius.
    0:33:33 The second year is when you did the vending machine thing.
    0:33:35 The vending machine thing is insane.
    0:33:35 Yeah, okay.
    0:33:39 So the vending machine was trying to solve the problem on a more permanent basis.
    0:33:42 Because like I do this urinal thing and they shut it down.
    0:33:44 And honestly, it just wasn’t big enough.
    0:33:46 Like that got us a few hundred people every day.
    0:33:47 But how do I get thousands?
    0:33:49 How do I get tens of thousands of people every day?
    0:33:56 So I looked at our little folding table and thought, you know, people come up to this thing
    0:33:57 and they give us money.
    0:33:58 They give us 20 bucks.
    0:33:59 They get a box and they walk away.
    0:34:04 And they have no memory of that transaction because all that really is is a vending machine, right?
    0:34:09 You go, you put money in the vending machine, you push a button, you get your soft drink and you walk away.
    0:34:15 And you have no lasting memory of the interaction you just had because there’s nothing remarkable about it.
    0:34:21 So I thought, all right, if we’re going to be a vending machine, what if we were the world’s coolest vending machine?
    0:34:24 Like the most spectacular vending machine the world has ever seen.
    0:34:28 And so I took an old refrigerator box I had in my garage.
    0:34:38 So this big eight foot tall cardboard box and we cut some holes in it and we built, sorry, we covered it with fur and these giant googly eyes.
    0:34:39 So it looked like a cat.
    0:34:41 We built an eight foot tall fur covered cat.
    0:34:50 And it had a, we cut out a hole for a screen where we could like put a display and it had little buttons and it had a little credit card reader.
    0:34:52 It had everything a vending machine should have.
    0:34:58 And the experience was you walk up to this thing, you put in your money, you push a button and a game comes out.
    0:35:00 Very, very simple.
    0:35:07 We’re not talking anything crazy expensive or really anything that remarkable yet other than, okay, it’s fur covered.
    0:35:08 It looks like a cat.
    0:35:08 That’s kind of adorable.
    0:35:10 Nobody’s ever seen a vending machine like this before.
    0:35:14 And that attracted a crowd, but then we had to push it over the top.
    0:35:21 So I put in an extra button and the extra button said, random item, $1, way cheaper than a game.
    0:35:22 What the hell does that mean?
    0:35:25 And so enough people were willing to try this experiment.
    0:35:27 What happens if I put a dollar in this and push random item?
    0:35:37 And so they’d put a dollar in and push random and out comes a pineapple from the vending machine or a hot burrito or a bag of rocks or a plumber’s.
    0:35:40 And it’s just you behind it, just sticking your hand out with a pineapple or what?
    0:35:41 This was the thing.
    0:35:42 This is what we didn’t tell anybody.
    0:35:49 Everyone assumed this is the world’s most sophisticated vending machine because it can deliver 2000 different objects.
    0:35:58 And people literally brought up chairs and they built little bleachers around this thing just to watch it for hour after hour after hour to see what the hell is going to come out of this thing.
    0:36:03 And basically for the listener, it looks like just a box, but the box backed up to like a curtain.
    0:36:07 And behind the curtain, I would imagine you had a whole team of people like…
    0:36:09 So there’s the punchline.
    0:36:12 Instead of it being a vending machine, it was just a vending machine costume.
    0:36:14 There was no robotics in there.
    0:36:15 There’s no computers.
    0:36:16 There’s nothing.
    0:36:21 There’s eight of us sweating our asses off for 10 hours a day backstage.
    0:36:29 And every time someone pushes that random item button, we are literally pulling a random item and throwing it out the front of the machine.
    0:36:35 And we had our line got so long that it blocked our aisle.
    0:36:39 It blocked all the other super expensive, you know, million dollar booths.
    0:36:42 Nobody could walk up to those anymore because our line was so long.
    0:36:43 It went out the door.
    0:36:45 It went out of the convention center.
    0:36:47 It went down the street.
    0:36:53 And the line for our silly little fur-covered vending machine was longer than the line to get into the convention itself.
    0:37:03 And all of that’s just because, like, we had no money and we had to think creatively about, like, what does it mean to build a community around a transaction?
    0:37:05 And that’s what we came up with.
    0:37:07 Sean, have you ever read about Dr. Feynman?
    0:37:09 Richard Feynman?
    0:37:10 Richard Feynman.
    0:37:10 Yeah, sorry.
    0:37:11 Have you read about him?
    0:37:13 Yeah, a little bit.
    0:37:13 Why?
    0:37:14 What comes to mind here?
    0:37:17 He would, like, get super hands-on with a problem.
    0:37:19 And question everything.
    0:37:26 And he would start at the very foundation of that question and basically not accept any truth before him.
    0:37:29 He would have to, like, question each one in order to solve a problem.
    0:37:33 And one big example of this is he helped create the atomic bomb.
    0:37:37 And so, like, they, like, questioned all these, like, previously thought rules that he broke.
    0:37:41 And Alon kind of has that same thing.
    0:37:47 And I admire this because I work really hard to have this, but I still don’t have it entirely.
    0:37:49 It’s not, this doesn’t come naturally to me, and I don’t excel at it.
    0:37:58 But I think that for everyone listening, this skill set is really important, which is how do you, how do you be really creative?
    0:38:06 And the framework being you question everything at the very beginning and don’t assume anything that you’ve ever been told is true.
    0:38:06 Is that right?
    0:38:08 Yeah, I think that’s accurate.
    0:38:11 And also, never take no for an answer.
    0:38:15 Like, it makes no sense to ever have someone shut you down for any reason.
    0:38:18 So, the vending machine is a great example.
    0:38:23 It’s one of my favorites of we, so we install this thing in a convention center.
    0:38:29 And we’re handing out pineapples and watermelons and ridiculous objects.
    0:38:33 And we’re putting googly eyes on them and giving them mohawks and all kinds of fun stuff.
    0:38:36 And we got to a convention in Indianapolis.
    0:38:48 And they said, you can’t do this because we cannot let you ship the produce backstage to your space on the convention floor.
    0:38:49 And I said, why?
    0:38:53 And they said, because you’ve exceeded what they called like a casual purchase.
    0:38:59 And now you have to, the only way that we can accept that much produce is to a registered grocer.
    0:39:03 And you’re not a registered grocer, so you can’t do this anymore.
    0:39:08 And I remember thinking, like, my whole team was like, okay, well, here’s a dead end.
    0:39:12 We need to think through, like, what objects can we do instead?
    0:39:14 And I got so frustrated.
    0:39:17 I was like, you’re just accepting a dead end here.
    0:39:18 And I don’t think we need to.
    0:39:24 And it turns out, it’s easy, trivial to become a registered grocer.
    0:39:28 I went to a website, and you fill out a form, and you pay like a hundred bucks.
    0:39:31 And today, Exploding Kittens is a registered grocer in Indiana.
    0:39:33 You know where else we’re a registered grocer?
    0:39:35 14 other states, because it’s that easy as well.
    0:39:43 And so every convention we go to, we can now accept the shipments backstage, because Exploding Kittens is also a grocery store.
    0:39:45 I love that.
    0:39:53 You know, when we were doing our event, Mr. Beast is there, Jimmy Donaldson, and his production document,
    0:39:57 so, like, his training document for his team, like an older one, but it had leaked online.
    0:40:04 And it’s really fascinating to read this, because here you have a guy who wrote this probably when he was 22, 23, 24 years old, right?
    0:40:06 So it’s kind of like he’s an expert at 24.
    0:40:09 But he is an expert in YouTube.
    0:40:11 He’d actually been doing it for over a decade.
    0:40:13 He’s the most successful YouTuber on the planet.
    0:40:16 And he’s like, I know how to make videos that people watch.
    0:40:19 So one of the things that he talks about in there, he goes, push past the no.
    0:40:30 Just because you receive an initial no from somebody absolutely does not mean that it’s a no forever, that it’s a no under any circumstance, that there’s a no without some caveats.
    0:40:37 And if you come back and you just say, I asked, you know, they said no, that’s not an acceptable answer in our org, right?
    0:40:41 So he’s like, you know, I wanted the pyramids for a video, the Egyptian pyramids.
    0:40:44 And they were like, his team told him no.
    0:40:45 And he goes, what do you mean?
    0:40:46 Like, who told you no?
    0:40:47 Egypt told you no?
    0:40:47 Who’d you call?
    0:40:48 What did they say?
    0:40:49 Why’d they say no?
    0:40:51 Did you call the other guy?
    0:40:52 Who’s the other guy?
    0:40:52 Give me the number.
    0:40:53 Let’s call them.
    0:40:53 Do they have kids?
    0:40:54 Let’s FaceTime their kids.
    0:40:55 Let’s see if that works.
    0:41:00 They’re like, what are the different ways that we could do this just to accept an initial no?
    0:41:05 It’s basically out of the, it was a culturally unacceptable at the company.
    0:41:06 Yeah.
    0:41:12 I think that trait, more than anything, is what I’ve seen in successful business owners.
    0:41:14 And I don’t know if it can be taught.
    0:41:20 It’s more just that, like, when you hear the word no, there are two possible reactions.
    0:41:22 One is, damn it.
    0:41:24 And the other is, I didn’t hear that properly.
    0:41:25 Let me dig deeper.
    0:41:28 And it has to be instinctual.
    0:41:32 Like, every time you hear the word no, you have to think, okay, I didn’t hear that properly.
    0:41:33 Let me dig deeper.
    0:41:34 Over and over and over again.
    0:41:34 I love that.
    0:41:39 It’s not just being a jerk and saying, you know, just pushing on them, but being curious
    0:41:45 or being, like, clever or being playful and trying to figure out, like, if I had a trillion
    0:41:46 dollars, maybe you’d say yes.
    0:41:50 Okay, so, like, let’s just agree it’s not physically impossible to do this.
    0:41:53 Okay, once it’s not physically impossible, that means now there is a way.
    0:41:55 Let’s just see what that way might look like.
    0:41:56 It’s so good.
    0:42:00 Maybe the better way to phrase it is when someone tells you no, instead of assuming that that’s
    0:42:02 the answer, assume you ask the wrong question.
    0:42:05 Hey, Sean, we did this thing.
    0:42:08 I was talking to David, the guy who hosts the podcast Founders the other day.
    0:42:12 And we did a show called The Anti-Business Billionaires.
    0:42:19 And there’s, like, a handful of people out there who are these billionaires who, they shockingly
    0:42:20 don’t care about revenue and profit.
    0:42:25 And they’re, like, very passionate about whatever it is they’re making.
    0:42:28 The guy who started Patagonia is one of them, where, like, he just doesn’t seem like he cares
    0:42:28 about money.
    0:42:33 Or the guy who started Dyson, James Dyson, he’s another guy where, oddly, he’s obsessed with
    0:42:34 making vacuums.
    0:42:37 Do you care at all about revenue and profit?
    0:42:42 Or do you just see it as a, like, do you care about business?
    0:42:43 I didn’t originally.
    0:42:50 Now, once I figured out how to look at business as another game that can be won, I suddenly
    0:42:52 started caring passionately about business.
    0:42:57 Like, I used to think, all right, I don’t actually want to be CEO of this company.
    0:42:58 What I want to be is lead designer.
    0:42:59 I’m going to hire a CEO.
    0:43:01 And we tried that for a while.
    0:43:07 And what I realized is, like, everyone we hired into that spot was playing the game the wrong
    0:43:07 way.
    0:43:10 And I want to play instead.
    0:43:12 And so now, I actually love strategy meetings.
    0:43:14 I love business meetings.
    0:43:18 I love when we go in and talk about the next 10 years and, or how we’re going to solve this
    0:43:22 very particular problem about this convention or this next game launch or this next partnership,
    0:43:26 because that is such a fun game.
    0:43:31 And I was, like, in high school, I loved physics.
    0:43:37 Physics was my favorite topic until I realized I need to switch to computer science.
    0:43:40 And the reason I needed to switch was because for physics, everything they were teaching
    0:43:42 us, the answer was in the back of the book.
    0:43:45 If you had a problem, you could just flip to the back of the book.
    0:43:52 And I realized that computer science was very different because computer science was, like,
    0:43:53 the cutting edge.
    0:43:56 Like, there were no answers in the back of the book at all.
    0:43:57 You had to figure everything out as you go.
    0:44:00 And that was really exciting for me.
    0:44:03 That was, like, a life-changing moment when I was 16.
    0:44:05 That’s what business is to me.
    0:44:08 There are no answers at the back of the book.
    0:44:12 And if you want to win this game, you’ve got to figure out what the rules are, invent your
    0:44:15 own where you need to, and get to that finish line before anybody else.
    0:44:16 Look at Sean’s hands.
    0:44:17 And look at…
    0:44:22 I just realized that whenever we do this, you got us.
    0:44:22 Yeah.
    0:44:24 You got me.
    0:44:27 Like, you know, when you’re talking to a girl and she puts her hair behind her ear, there’s
    0:44:31 like some indicator of, like, of attraction.
    0:44:34 When you’re talking about this, I’m like, ah, this is beautiful.
    0:44:37 I mean, just the way you’re describing this, like, there’s no answers in the back of the
    0:44:37 book.
    0:44:38 Like, dude, that’s inspiring.
    0:44:39 I love that.
    0:44:40 I love that stuff.
    0:44:43 I also think there’s other things we can learn from you.
    0:44:46 So, you know, I’ve learned from you on the marketing side.
    0:44:51 And maybe we’ll just close the loop on the marketing idea, which is, it’s one thing to
    0:44:54 hear the idea of the vending machine and be like, oh, wow, that’s a great idea.
    0:44:58 I’m interested in what is the mindset that creates that idea?
    0:45:00 What are the questions that you ask?
    0:45:01 How do you brainstorm?
    0:45:07 What are you doing differently that’s leading you to crazy answers like that that actually
    0:45:07 work?
    0:45:12 So, like, I don’t know if you can describe it or if this is like asking, you know, Steph
    0:45:13 Curry had to shoot a jump shot.
    0:45:13 He’s like, I don’t know.
    0:45:14 I just kind of flick my wrist.
    0:45:18 It just goes in when actually a thousand little things are happening that he’s not even attuned
    0:45:18 to.
    0:45:22 But like, you know, for example, you said something like, what if?
    0:45:28 And like, I know what if questions are just like a great, like a great tool in the tool belt
    0:45:29 for a creative thinker.
    0:45:31 It’s very different than we should.
    0:45:34 It’s just like the language changes everything.
    0:45:36 What are some other things you do when you brainstorm?
    0:45:39 Like, I love parameters.
    0:45:41 I hate blue sky brainstorming.
    0:45:46 Like, the idea that like, hey, let’s sit down and create a game is the most terrifying
    0:45:48 experience in the world for me.
    0:45:51 Or let’s sit down and brainstorm anything and we don’t know what it is.
    0:45:54 So what are the parameters for the last handful of meetings that you’ve had?
    0:45:55 Yeah, so okay.
    0:46:02 Let me back up and say like, you asked about marketing for a convention, right?
    0:46:07 I told you the story about the vending machine, but I also told you the parameters are baked
    0:46:07 into there.
    0:46:11 Like, we didn’t start by saying, what’s the coolest experience we can have at a convention,
    0:46:12 right?
    0:46:16 We started by saying, this is a vending machine transaction.
    0:46:17 There’s our parameters.
    0:46:20 What is the coolest vending machine experience we can craft?
    0:46:24 But you also said, how do we get tens of thousands of people to come without spending money?
    0:46:28 That’s sort of an unreasonable target.
    0:46:30 Unreasonable is totally reasonable.
    0:46:37 Like, it’s fine to set your goals that high, as long as you understand the parameters of
    0:46:37 the problem.
    0:46:40 If I were to sit down and say, how do we get 10,000 people to come to our booth?
    0:46:42 I’m not going to get anywhere.
    0:46:45 Like, I just have no chance of success there.
    0:46:50 But if I sit down and say, I am going to build a vending machine that must attract 10,000
    0:46:51 people, now I’m running.
    0:46:56 Now, I’m busy for the next 10 months building that thing, because I know what that is.
    0:47:00 Dude, that’s shockingly a useful tip, because I do the other thing, right?
    0:47:02 Just say, how do I get this?
    0:47:03 How do I get the 10,000?
    0:47:04 How do I get 10,000 people to come?
    0:47:05 Yeah.
    0:47:05 Yeah.
    0:47:09 No, I, there are people who are great at it.
    0:47:11 Like, you know, you mentioned Mr. Beast.
    0:47:13 Jimmy, he is exceptional at that.
    0:47:18 Like, if you were to tell him, just, like, I listened to your interview with him, right?
    0:47:22 And you’re spitting out random nouns, and he’s coming up with incredible ideas.
    0:47:25 He is exceptionally talented at that thing.
    0:47:26 I suck at it.
    0:47:29 I need to know exactly the shape of the box.
    0:47:32 And I will build you the coolest contents for that box in history.
    0:47:39 But unless I understand what that box is capable of holding, I just, I have no chance of success.
    0:47:44 So, it sounds like one way to put it is, creativity loves constraints, and you use the constraint.
    0:47:49 You start with the constraint rather than starting with the, just the desired outcome, right?
    0:47:50 The desired outcome is there.
    0:47:52 It’s part of the, it’s part of the, the, the, the goal.
    0:47:53 It’s the parameters.
    0:47:58 But you, you actually start with a constraint in order to get yourself to think a little bit differently.
    0:48:02 Do you have any other examples of kind of like this constraint style of thinking?
    0:48:08 We’re asked to build a board game for a few different NFL teams.
    0:48:09 And what does that mean?
    0:48:13 How do you get an NFL audience to play with a board game?
    0:48:19 And if you were to just leave it there, you kind of don’t have a chance.
    0:48:21 You’re basically saying, build a good game.
    0:48:21 Go.
    0:48:26 And me, personally, I’m going to suck at that task.
    0:48:29 But what we started to do was-
    0:48:30 And you’re like the best in the world at doing this.
    0:48:30 Yeah.
    0:48:33 So, if you’re going to suck at it, we’re all going to suck at that.
    0:48:33 There’s no chance of success.
    0:48:34 I promise you.
    0:48:35 Zero chance of success.
    0:48:39 So, instead, we sat down and we said, okay, what is football?
    0:48:41 Like, what are the best moments?
    0:48:45 And I started writing this list.
    0:48:52 And my list was the magical moment where a player catches the ball against all odds.
    0:48:54 Everyone’s covering them.
    0:48:55 It’s impossible.
    0:48:56 It’s impossible.
    0:49:00 Somehow, it was a perfect throw, a perfect catch, and off they went to score.
    0:49:04 And I personally really focused on that.
    0:49:05 Do you even care about football?
    0:49:11 Football matters very little to me, but only because it is very hard for me to watch people
    0:49:14 having fun without wanting to do that same thing myself.
    0:49:15 Well, that’s pretty funny.
    0:49:20 But the reason I’m asking is because this is your perspective as a total outsider, where
    0:49:22 you just created the rules.
    0:49:24 Yeah, yeah, yeah.
    0:49:26 It’s watching other people, right?
    0:49:27 Like, my family is obsessed with it.
    0:49:29 So, I watch them watch football.
    0:49:30 And I’m like, oh, that moment there.
    0:49:31 Okay, that moment there.
    0:49:33 And so, we eventually built this game.
    0:49:35 It’s called Catchables.
    0:49:42 And all it is, we made these cute little foam figures, and we had an increasing series of challenges defined by the other players,
    0:49:48 because the other players have to provide the entertainment, where you have to throw an object, this little character, in the air, and just catch it.
    0:49:49 So simple.
    0:49:50 Throw it, catch it.
    0:49:50 Really easy.
    0:49:52 But now players are going to start throwing cards at you.
    0:49:54 You have to do a blindfolded.
    0:49:55 You have to spin around before you catch it.
    0:49:56 You can only use one hand.
    0:49:57 You can only use two fingers.
    0:50:00 And like, what if I give you 10 of those cards at the same time?
    0:50:06 Now that very simple throw and catch has become really, really entertaining for everyone to watch.
    0:50:12 You defy the odds, and at the last moment, pull it off, despite everyone’s expectation, and the crowd goes wild.
    0:50:13 This sounds so trivial.
    0:50:15 This is actually pretty groundbreaking.
    0:50:19 So let’s give a specific example that’s not related to you.
    0:50:22 So Sean works in the e-commerce industry.
    0:50:26 Let’s just say that Sean sells shoes.
    0:50:31 Sean owns a shoe company, and let’s say growth has stagnated, and he comes to a meeting, and he goes,
    0:50:34 our company needs to improve.
    0:50:35 We have to be better.
    0:50:42 What would be interesting constraints in order to make Sean’s company better, and make the meeting productive?
    0:50:43 Yeah.
    0:50:48 What you’d want to do with a shoe company, I’ve never worked in shoes before, so bear with me.
    0:50:53 But I will, anything you throw at me, I’m going to try to tie it back to a community.
    0:51:01 I’m going to try to tie it back to how do I, by wearing these things, form more lasting, reasonable, exciting connections with other people?
    0:51:09 What if you started printing out beautiful, incredible shoes that you’d be proud to wear?
    0:51:18 You’d love every single shoe that you make, but everyone has half a secret message on it, and somebody else has the other half of that.
    0:51:21 Get your shoe next to them to read it, right?
    0:51:29 Like, suddenly, you have a reason to go not only tell your friends to buy some or buy more yourself, but suddenly, you have a reason to go seek them out in the world.
    0:51:32 You’re walking through a crowded airport, and you see someone with those shoes.
    0:51:33 Walk right over to them.
    0:51:34 Put your foot next to theirs.
    0:51:36 Let’s check if we’re the match.
    0:51:37 Yeah, exactly.
    0:51:46 So, now, there’s a very low percentage hit there, and so you’d have to probably redesign it to have a much higher percentage hit, and that’s very achievable.
    0:51:58 But, again, the first thing I’m going to do is define a constraint and say, a successful shoe equals a reason to look for more of those shoes out in the world, because then more of those shoes are going to sell.
    0:51:59 That’s pretty great.
    0:52:09 Just yesterday, I was with my wife, and we’re walking out somewhere, and this woman had a little Trader Joe’s bag, and she goes, hey, sorry to bother you, but is that that bag that everyone’s going crazy about online?
    0:52:12 In my mind, I’m like, people are going crazy about Trader Joe’s bags nowadays.
    0:52:12 Like, what?
    0:52:14 What’s going on?
    0:52:20 And I guess there’s a little, I guess there’s a certain design of a Trader Joe’s bag, and it’s not even, like, limited edition or luxury.
    0:52:26 I don’t know what the full story is, but it kind of highlighted to me, it’s like, man, you could take any moment.
    0:52:39 It’s like the moment in between the moments, and if you do something interesting there, you give people a reason to feel special, a reason to connect, a reason to collect, a reason to do one of those things.
    0:52:47 It’s like, damn, how much wasted surface area is there in my businesses where we’re not just by applying creativity, we create magic.
    0:52:49 We create, it’s alchemy, right?
    0:52:55 We create value for people if we just were a little more intentional versus just going on autopilot.
    0:52:58 And I think 99% of the time, I’m just on autopilot in my businesses.
    0:53:00 I totally get it.
    0:53:02 And I’ve been there as well.
    0:53:07 Can I tell you a story about, I’m so proud of a particular solve for that problem.
    0:53:07 Okay, go.
    0:53:12 So my daughter, Exploding Kittens is not the number one selling game in the world.
    0:53:14 It’s number two best selling game in the world.
    0:53:16 Number one is a game called Hurry Up, Chicken Butt.
    0:53:21 Hurry Up, Chicken Butt, I designed with my daughter.
    0:53:27 And she, when she turned four, I was so excited because, you know, most of the games are like ages four and up.
    0:53:30 And when she turned four, we went out and we bought all the games, right?
    0:53:33 We got Candyland and we got Zingo, all the games.
    0:53:40 And we took them home and we started playing and I immediately noticed a problem, which was I am having a miserable time.
    0:53:41 She’s happy.
    0:53:42 She’s playing with her dad.
    0:53:44 She’s getting to see bright, flashy colors.
    0:53:46 Like all this stuff is designed for kids.
    0:53:49 But I am bored out of my mind.
    0:53:55 And what the results in is when we’re done playing the game, one, I’ve let her win because I got to let her win.
    0:53:59 Because if I try at all, I’m going to crush this poor four-year-old.
    0:54:02 And two is when we’re done, she says, hey, daddy, can we play again?
    0:54:04 And all I’m thinking is, oh, God, no.
    0:54:06 I am so miserable.
    0:54:07 The last, I did it.
    0:54:08 I did my time.
    0:54:09 We played the game.
    0:54:11 I’m going to go do something fun now.
    0:54:17 And I remember having that reaction and it must have shown on my face.
    0:54:18 And my daughter said, what’s wrong?
    0:54:21 And I said, I think this game is broken.
    0:54:24 And she said something brilliant.
    0:54:26 She said, let’s fix it.
    0:54:34 And like fireworks started going off in my head because I was like, yeah, let’s fix it.
    0:54:35 Like, why are we not fixing this?
    0:54:41 And I spent the next month, we split the work.
    0:54:45 My daughter started drawing pictures, like all the fun games, everything fun that she wanted in a game.
    0:54:48 And I started writing this list of what success looks like.
    0:54:54 And for me, it was, my daughter has to beat me without me letting her win.
    0:54:57 And I have to look forward to playing again.
    0:54:59 The game cannot be luck-based.
    0:55:04 I have to watch my daughter get better at this game every time we play.
    0:55:05 I have to feel like she’s learning something.
    0:55:07 And there cannot be any losers.
    0:55:10 She can win, but nobody can lose.
    0:55:11 So those are your constraints.
    0:55:12 Those are my five.
    0:55:15 And by the way, did you start with just things you hated?
    0:55:17 Yeah, for sure.
    0:55:17 Yeah, yeah.
    0:55:20 I’m saying this like, oh, overnight, I came up with these five things.
    0:55:21 But the list was like 25 things long.
    0:55:24 And I narrowed it down to those five, which were the most important.
    0:55:26 I’m writing this book on creativity right now.
    0:55:27 And Jerry Seinfeld has this great quote.
    0:55:30 He says, irritation is what causes innovation.
    0:55:34 He created comedians in cars getting coffee because he just hated going.
    0:55:37 He was so sick of going on late night talk shows and doing the same thing every time.
    0:55:40 He’s like, all right, a talk show that has none of those things.
    0:55:43 In fact, my irritation is going to be my source of innovation.
    0:55:47 It sounds like for you, all of those things you talked about were sources of personal irritation
    0:55:47 for you.
    0:55:49 Every one of them, for sure.
    0:55:49 Every one.
    0:55:53 There were the things that everybody was doing wrong and was the industry standard.
    0:55:56 Nobody had raised their hand and said, this is broken.
    0:56:00 Like, this is not fun for half the players who play this game.
    0:56:02 That half being the adults.
    0:56:07 Did you present those five things to your daughter or did you, were you the one?
    0:56:08 No, she didn’t care about those things.
    0:56:10 So you were the one, you were the one.
    0:56:15 What I’m trying to get at is, can you present those five things to people at your company
    0:56:17 and they be just as creative in effect?
    0:56:18 Like, could they make hit games?
    0:56:22 Like, is this a, is this a transferable skill, a teachable skill?
    0:56:23 Absolutely.
    0:56:24 Yes.
    0:56:28 As long, again, it’s not, you’re not teaching problem solving.
    0:56:34 You’re teaching problem identification and then creative people will be able to solve
    0:56:34 those problems.
    0:56:39 But if you try to solve, if you try to teach how to be creative, you never get anywhere.
    0:56:44 All you’re really teaching is how to identify a problem, how to know what success looks like,
    0:56:47 and then you just hire creative people to work within those constraints.
    0:56:51 But then do you, as the leader, define if you have a hit?
    0:56:52 Yes.
    0:56:55 Well, hurry up chicken butt is an easy way.
    0:57:00 It’s an easy definition because, again, as soon as it went out to testing party, this was
    0:57:04 one of those games where when we sent it out to testing, not only was it 100% yes, I want
    0:57:04 to play again.
    0:57:06 Nobody sent the games back.
    0:57:08 This is a huge problem for us.
    0:57:09 Like, we send them out.
    0:57:12 We want you to send them back so we can tweak them and then send them back out again.
    0:57:14 Nobody would send that game back to us.
    0:57:16 It was ridiculous.
    0:57:18 We lost so many copies of that game.
    0:57:19 So bridge the gap there.
    0:57:20 So because I play this game.
    0:57:22 I play it literally with my daughter, who’s five.
    0:57:24 I bought it after we met and I was like, hurry up chicken butt.
    0:57:26 And we play it at home with my son and my daughter.
    0:57:27 It’s a great time.
    0:57:29 But I’ve seen the end output.
    0:57:31 And now you’ve described your initial conditions.
    0:57:35 Is there anything else interesting in how you kind of figured out how you bridge that gap?
    0:57:38 So we go through tons and tons and tons of versions.
    0:57:39 And I sit with my daughter.
    0:57:43 I’m like, look, I want, I know we want a game.
    0:57:45 And she’s like, I want to run around.
    0:57:46 Cool.
    0:57:48 That’s going to be part of the game, running around.
    0:57:49 I want to act silly.
    0:57:50 Cool.
    0:57:52 That’s going to be part of the game, acting silly.
    0:57:55 And then the back of my mind, I’m like, I need tension, right?
    0:58:01 Like a game without any form of tension is a broken game because you need something to push
    0:58:01 you forward.
    0:58:04 In most games, it’s competition with the other players.
    0:58:05 But here, that’s not going to be present.
    0:58:09 So I need something else to insert the tension, the pulse of the game.
    0:58:12 And we did that with an electric timer, right?
    0:58:13 It’s essentially hot.
    0:58:15 The way the game works is it’s hot potato.
    0:58:18 You’ve got this adorable, cute little chicken that clocks and eventually screams.
    0:58:20 And you pass the chicken around.
    0:58:25 And if you’re holding the chicken when it screams, you have lost a point and everybody else proceeds.
    0:58:30 But the tricky part, it actually works where the person before you wins the whole game.
    0:58:32 Again, no losers, only winners.
    0:58:37 Are you like Pixar where you have like your five or eight trustworthy people in a room and
    0:58:38 you’re just banging this out?
    0:58:39 Absolutely, yes.
    0:58:44 And how long are the meetings and how many meetings were there between idea to iteration
    0:58:46 one to final iteration?
    0:58:47 Okay.
    0:58:47 So we sit down.
    0:58:53 We’ll meet for like two hours and we’ll just discuss parameters, what success looks like.
    0:58:54 Let’s brainstorm in that space.
    0:58:59 And we’ll usually come up with like, I don’t know, let’s say five or six interesting things
    0:59:00 to explore.
    0:59:02 Then everybody goes off and does their own thing.
    0:59:04 Everyone’s got an assignment.
    0:59:05 Play with this one.
    0:59:07 And we’re going to come back and we’re going to try all these games.
    0:59:13 And in this case, we actually had like, I don’t know, 15 or 16 different ideas that we were
    0:59:14 playing around with.
    0:59:15 And they all sucked.
    0:59:20 Like they all, everything fell apart in one regard or another, except for this one.
    0:59:22 That’s not true, except for four games.
    0:59:24 Four games made it out the door.
    0:59:27 Two were almost immediate failures.
    0:59:32 And two of them, one was hurry up chicken butt and the other is called the best worst ice
    0:59:35 cream, which is like, I think it’s ranked number eight in the world right now.
    0:59:36 So it’s up there.
    0:59:41 I only look at the top five because that’s the scoreboard I like to keep, but it’s doing
    0:59:41 great.
    0:59:45 And could this, could this apply?
    0:59:48 Let’s say I owned a B2B SaaS software.
    0:59:51 Could, could I use this process in my company?
    0:59:53 I’m tempted to say yes.
    1:00:00 I look, I don’t know definitively the answer, but I believe that the best ideas come out of
    1:00:01 constraint and defining success.
    1:00:09 And I can’t imagine there’d be many creative based endeavors that would not benefit from that
    1:00:09 approach.
    1:00:14 You just did a game with Tim Ferriss and I think he was a part of creating it.
    1:00:20 I’m just curious, like, what was that like and what were the main things you taught Tim?
    1:00:24 And then did Tim teach you anything or did you sort of modify any of your process?
    1:00:27 Because Tim is such an interesting guy that maybe he, he could bring a little bit of a
    1:00:29 different, different approach to what you were doing.
    1:00:30 Yeah.
    1:00:34 So I went on Tim’s podcast, uh, like two years ago.
    1:00:38 He just wanted to know what’s the game industry like, what are you, what is it that you would
    1:00:39 do for a living?
    1:00:43 And so we talked for a while and at the end of it, after we finished recording, he said,
    1:00:45 I’ve always wanted to make a game.
    1:00:47 Can we talk about making a game?
    1:00:48 And I was like, absolutely.
    1:00:51 That’s like when Matt asks you if he can be your partner.
    1:00:52 The answer is yes, right?
    1:00:53 Yes, yes, yes.
    1:00:54 Let’s do it.
    1:01:00 And so we started talking and he is obsessed with, uh, one of my games called, um, Poetry
    1:01:01 for Neanderthals.
    1:01:03 And it’s a really simple, really fun game.
    1:01:05 It’s in the top five.
    1:01:09 Um, and, uh, he just loves, loves, loves that game.
    1:01:10 He plays it with all his friends.
    1:01:11 He plays it all the time.
    1:01:14 He’s constantly sending me pictures of him playing that game with his group of friends.
    1:01:18 And he keeps saying like, I need a game at least this good.
    1:01:24 And so the first few meetings were me just going over to his place with suitcases full
    1:01:28 of games, like all my favorites, but they all tried to scratch that same itch.
    1:01:30 Like, I know what’s great about Poetry for Neanderthals.
    1:01:32 There’s a creativity component.
    1:01:36 It’s heavily players entertaining other players and it’s fast, funny.
    1:01:38 Uh, you can learn it in one minute and you play it in 10 minutes, right?
    1:01:42 Like I knew, I knew that was his version of what success looks like.
    1:01:48 And so, uh, we started playing a bunch of games like that and we started honing in on
    1:01:52 what the process, what things he liked the most, what games he liked the most, which ones he
    1:01:52 didn’t.
    1:01:57 And it fast became clear, okay, none of these are right.
    1:01:59 Like not a single, I must’ve shown him a hundred different games.
    1:02:01 And the answer was, yeah, none of these.
    1:02:06 At one point we were on this walk, we’d been walking for like six hours.
    1:02:11 And at one point I was like, okay, let’s start as basic as it gets.
    1:02:13 What if we started with rock, paper, scissors?
    1:02:15 Tim happens to like rock, paper, scissors.
    1:02:20 And I was like, okay, rock, paper, scissors is actually no fun at all until you play it a
    1:02:21 bunch of times.
    1:02:25 Playing rock, paper, scissors once is stupid, but playing it again, now we’re playing a game
    1:02:27 because now I’m thinking, what did he do last time?
    1:02:28 What am I going to do this time?
    1:02:30 But he knows that I know that he knows that I know, right?
    1:02:35 Like all that stuff starts to kick in at game two and it’s not present at all in game
    1:02:35 number one.
    1:02:39 So I was like, what if we start there really, really basic.
    1:02:44 And instead of three activities, rock, paper, scissors, what if we had 25?
    1:02:47 And what if there was a hierarchy between all of those things?
    1:02:50 And what if we’re all playing at the exact same time?
    1:02:53 And we just started with crazy statements like that.
    1:02:54 Like, I don’t know what that game is.
    1:02:58 I don’t know how those things make sense, but his eyes lit up and my eyes lit up and it was
    1:02:59 like something.
    1:03:00 Okay.
    1:03:04 And what if also we made it rhythm based and we ran to the house and we just started
    1:03:06 scribbling on cards fast as we could.
    1:03:08 My buddy, uh, Ken Gruhl was there too.
    1:03:10 He was an incredibly talented designer.
    1:03:15 And between the three of us, we just started crafting cards as fast as we could.
    1:03:19 And the first version of the game, of course sucked, but it was at least something.
    1:03:24 It was at least like, Hey, we are playing a game where every single person playing this
    1:03:26 game has a task.
    1:03:28 You have to do this symbol.
    1:03:29 You have to do a peace sign.
    1:03:34 You have to pretend you’re a ballerina and you have one second to do the right thing.
    1:03:38 And we started playing around with, all right, that’s a little too easy.
    1:03:39 What if we made that harder?
    1:03:41 What if we had to switch roles?
    1:03:43 What if every role had a color and now we have to skip all the red ones?
    1:03:45 What if we had to go twice as fast?
    1:03:46 What if we had to whisper?
    1:03:47 What if we had to shout?
    1:03:48 What if, what if, what if, what if?
    1:03:52 And we started writing all these cards fast and furious until we eventually got to this
    1:03:56 thing where we had been playing for like four hours.
    1:03:59 And I looked around the room and I was like, okay, anybody want to play?
    1:04:01 And both of them were like, hell yes.
    1:04:03 And so we kept doing that.
    1:04:07 And then we started to invite other friends over and they started playing and we said, do
    1:04:08 you want to play again?
    1:04:09 And they said, yes.
    1:04:14 And so we, we just kept doing this thing, rinse and repeat, remove a card, write a new card.
    1:04:18 I use these blank cards where I can create them super fast.
    1:04:20 I buy these like, I buy these like by the truckload on Amazon.
    1:04:22 Well, you did that when we were at Sean’s event.
    1:04:26 You basically, you were literally on your hands and needs like dealing out cards.
    1:04:27 That’s right.
    1:04:28 And then you were like, you know, I don’t like this one.
    1:04:32 And you pulled out like a blank card and you had a pen and you like wrote new rules.
    1:04:36 I live and breathe those cards because you know, it’s beautiful about those cards.
    1:04:38 They’re not just cards.
    1:04:42 Like, obviously you can use them to make any game you want, but like, let’s say you need
    1:04:44 a six-sided die, right?
    1:04:45 And you don’t have a six-sided die.
    1:04:47 You’ve got six cards, right?
    1:04:50 One, two, three, four, five, six on the cards and shuffle them up and draw one.
    1:04:51 Now you got a six-sided die, right?
    1:04:54 Like, if you need a board, you can make it out of a grid of cards.
    1:04:56 If you need a spinner, you can make that out of cards.
    1:05:01 Like, I walk around, my backpack is so much heavier than it should be because it’s loaded
    1:05:04 with blank cards because I never know when the next idea is coming.
    1:05:06 You have this great quote.
    1:05:08 You said, I took a week-long skydiving course.
    1:05:10 And at the end of it, I asked the instructor, do you ever get bored of this?
    1:05:13 And the guy said, do you ever get bored of having sex?
    1:05:15 And I thought, that’s exactly it.
    1:05:17 This is how I feel about games.
    1:05:19 That’s how I feel about this job.
    1:05:22 It’s not the thing with an expiration.
    1:05:24 It’s a little dopamine factory for me.
    1:05:28 And the people who get to have these experiences, I don’t know how you can get bored of that.
    1:05:29 And it’s just eternal.
    1:05:31 So that was a quote that you had.
    1:05:32 And I read that.
    1:05:35 It’s like, I want to feel that way about just anything in my life.
    1:05:36 I know, right?
    1:05:36 I know.
    1:05:41 You know, like you see kids play with bubbles and you’re like, I wish I felt any way about
    1:05:42 this kid, how this feels about bubbles.
    1:05:45 And I see this and I’m like, Elon’s the-
    1:05:46 He found out bubbles.
    1:05:47 He’s got the answer.
    1:05:49 This guy has, this is the answer to life.
    1:05:50 Go ahead.
    1:05:55 I was at an airport and our flight had just been canceled.
    1:05:57 It was so terrible because everyone was miserable.
    1:06:02 Last flight out, they’re starting to hand out hotels, but they’re like, hey, the flight might
    1:06:02 come back.
    1:06:05 So everyone’s got to stay in the terminal for hours and hours and hours.
    1:06:06 And every hour they delayed us again.
    1:06:07 And it was awful.
    1:06:08 And everyone is miserable.
    1:06:10 Everyone is miserable.
    1:06:14 And they’re frowning and they’re grumpy and they’re screaming at the poor gate agent.
    1:06:15 And it’s awful.
    1:06:20 Except for this group of six kids sitting in the corner, giggling and laughing.
    1:06:22 And I could not help myself.
    1:06:23 I had to walk up and see what they were doing.
    1:06:26 And of course, they’re playing exploding kittens.
    1:06:29 And I remember thinking like, this is it.
    1:06:34 Like this, all the chemicals going through my body right now, like this is why I have this
    1:06:35 job.
    1:06:36 This is the greatest feeling in the world.
    1:06:40 And I just want to keep delivering this every opportunity I have.
    1:06:42 That’s so good.
    1:06:48 I was going to say, you know, my, I have these kind of people I admire for different reasons.
    1:06:52 So it’s like, you know, you can admire a great athlete for how they, how disciplined they
    1:06:55 are, how they train their body, how they just, they just never give up.
    1:06:56 Right.
    1:07:00 Or you can admire Elon for, you know, thinking big and sort of defying the odds and, and, and
    1:07:03 really going all in on his bets and being like, Hey, you know what?
    1:07:05 I, I need to have that all in mode.
    1:07:12 And you’re to me on this, like on that very short list of people, because you build things
    1:07:17 for the joy and from a, like a, from a place of joy, you’re like a more pure artist, I think
    1:07:17 as your career.
    1:07:21 I see you as, you know, you’re not like a CEO who’s got a ballpoint pen.
    1:07:22 You’re an artist with a brush.
    1:07:28 And then, and then the second part of it is like the limitless thinking in terms of there’s
    1:07:29 kind of nothing out of bounds.
    1:07:30 Like, yeah, okay.
    1:07:34 I can register myself as a grocer or we can, we can create this vending machine that what
    1:07:36 if it distributed any item, right?
    1:07:41 Like I would be scared to go there because how, and what if, what if things go wrong?
    1:07:42 And I think you just think about things a little bit differently.
    1:07:43 That inspires me.
    1:07:49 And then the last bit is like the simplicity, like figuring out when you look at something
    1:07:50 like, Oh, the game is fun.
    1:07:53 Not because the game itself is fun because it makes the players fun.
    1:07:59 It’s like, Oh, that explains charades and Pictionary and all the games I grew up playing
    1:08:01 thousands of times and not just once or twice.
    1:08:06 It’s because of that core insight or, you know, instead of doing focus groups and surveys,
    1:08:08 you’re like one question, you want to play the game again.
    1:08:09 That, that’s simplicity.
    1:08:14 So like, to me, those are the three big things that you do that I’m like, I would, if I can
    1:08:20 get, you know, 10% of what you’re doing there, I level up if I do that.
    1:08:22 I love to hear that.
    1:08:25 And, but I’ll also say it doesn’t just have to apply to games.
    1:08:31 Like we, um, I remember during COVID, all of our plants shut down.
    1:08:38 And once, once we, once stuff comes in, uh, from China, we have to, it goes into these giant
    1:08:43 warehouses and it has to be unboxed and then repackaged with all the correct labeling.
    1:08:45 And then off it goes to all the retailers.
    1:08:48 And during COVID, no one could go into those facilities.
    1:08:51 Like they just wouldn’t allow anybody in.
    1:08:53 And that was going to tank our business.
    1:09:00 We were, there’s no way for us to survive zero sales for, you know, six or 12 or two years,
    1:09:00 right?
    1:09:01 Like no way to do it.
    1:09:06 And so, uh, most games companies shut down for at least a little while there.
    1:09:13 And I remember thinking like there, this is a no, like this absolutely people are telling
    1:09:13 me no.
    1:09:18 So, you know, to use the earlier quote, like, so I must be asking the wrong question.
    1:09:23 And instead of calling these warehouse owners over and over again, saying, when are you opening
    1:09:23 your doors?
    1:09:24 When are you opening your doors?
    1:09:26 I finally asked a different question.
    1:09:29 It was, what are you doing with your parking lots?
    1:09:33 And the answer was nothing because nobody’s at work.
    1:09:34 So our parking lots are empty.
    1:09:35 And I was like, cool.
    1:09:40 Can I park three 18 wheeler trucks in your parking lot?
    1:09:42 And they said, sure, why not?
    1:09:48 And so I brought the games over in these 18 wheeler trucks and I had one person per truck
    1:09:52 go inside and repackage our games because all I needed was the space.
    1:09:54 It occurred to me, I didn’t need the warehouse.
    1:09:55 I just need the square footage.
    1:09:59 And they’ve got that in their parking lot and there’s no restrictions there.
    1:10:01 There’s only restrictions inside the facility.
    1:10:06 And the reason I bring that up is because that’s just a game, right?
    1:10:08 Like that’s just somebody saying, here’s a roadblock.
    1:10:12 Everybody else is saying, ah, a roadblock.
    1:10:13 I can’t get through this roadblock.
    1:10:15 It’s time to shut down my business.
    1:10:18 When the reality is, just ask a different question.
    1:10:21 There’s a different way through this roadblock if you’re willing to play the game.
    1:10:25 I used to have this high school cross country coach that was like, I’m going to teach you
    1:10:29 all about running and everything, but I’m really trying to teach you about this other pastime
    1:10:31 that we have called life.
    1:10:37 And that’s sort of how I feel about you and this podcast is you came to talk a little bit
    1:10:44 about business, a little bit about creativity, but we’re really learning a good way to live.
    1:10:46 That makes me so happy.
    1:10:54 To be passionate, to be passionate about certain things we’re doing, to look positively in things
    1:10:57 that could potentially be negative and to solve problems in creative ways.
    1:10:59 You’re awesome.
    1:11:00 We appreciate you.
    1:11:02 Thank you so much for saying that.
    1:11:03 Hey, where should people follow you?
    1:11:06 Because I’m following you on TikTok where you’re doing like, it’s amazing.
    1:11:07 I don’t understand.
    1:11:08 Have you seen his TikToks?
    1:11:10 No, I’m not 12, so I don’t use TikTok.
    1:11:12 Well, you should.
    1:11:17 I need to live more like him and be positive thinking.
    1:11:18 Here’s what’s happening.
    1:11:23 Basically, the world’s best game designer is on TikTok teaching people how to design games,
    1:11:26 little simple tricks and tips in like 30 second nuggets.
    1:11:31 And it’ll get like two views because TikTok’s algorithm doesn’t know yet who they’re messing
    1:11:31 with.
    1:11:36 And I can’t believe it’s like, you couldn’t pay.
    1:11:38 I could not pay you for this type of information.
    1:11:40 Dude, you only have 177 followers.
    1:11:43 I just started doing this.
    1:11:44 Here’s what I realized.
    1:11:51 Like, I teach these classes at my company once a week and we’ll tackle whatever topic.
    1:11:52 Here’s how we write instructions.
    1:11:53 Here’s what we put on the front of the box.
    1:11:55 Here’s what we put on the back of the box.
    1:11:57 Here’s game design, like all over and over and over again.
    1:11:59 And we don’t record any of them.
    1:12:04 And I kind of realized like, this is all going to just disappear.
    1:12:05 Like nobody’s recording it.
    1:12:06 I have no motivation to record it.
    1:12:12 So I hired a social media team and all they are, it’s like hiring a trainer at a gym.
    1:12:21 They come over once a week and they force me to have a camera on me and give the same class that I gave at the company just for free online.
    1:12:27 And so we’ve been recording them and posting them and it’s, yeah, like you said, nobody knows they’re there yet.
    1:12:38 But if you’ve ever wanted to learn how to make a game or more importantly, how to apply those lessons to anything in the whole wide world, because it’s all applicable, I’m going to just keep posting these things.
    1:12:45 Are you going to give your team some constraint like, you know, without any money and only teaching creativity lessons?
    1:12:47 Without making me dance on TikTok.
    1:12:51 Yeah, like get this to 500,000 views per video.
    1:12:52 Yeah, I should absolutely do that.
    1:12:54 Is that what the constraints would be?
    1:12:56 Basically, that’s what the constraints would be.
    1:13:02 It would be, yeah, it would be how to stay like true to what I want to deliver, right, without dancing.
    1:13:05 But yeah, how to increase the viewership on this.
    1:13:08 And to be fair, nobody has been tasked with that yet.
    1:13:15 My goal for the last, like, I don’t know, it’s been probably like two months has just been, let me just create the content, put it in a place.
    1:13:21 And then once it’s there, then it’s probably worth promoting, because now there’s enough there to make it worthwhile.
    1:13:24 You’re badass.
    1:13:24 You’re awesome.
    1:13:27 You got the googly eyes from us.
    1:13:29 All right, shout out.
    1:13:30 Where should people follow you?
    1:13:31 Just shout out your handles.
    1:13:36 Yeah, if you just search for, the kind of hub of everything is just Ilan Lee on YouTube.
    1:13:38 That’s where I’m putting the long form stuff.
    1:13:43 And then from there, it links out to all of the TikToks and Instagrams and everything else where you can find it in shorter form.
    1:13:44 Awesome.
    1:13:45 Thanks for coming on, dude.
    1:13:47 It’s such a pleasure.
    1:13:48 Thanks for having me.
    1:13:49 And yeah, just a huge fan.
    1:13:53 I’m so, so grateful that you wanted to chat with me.
    1:13:54 What a thrill.
    1:13:55 Of course.
    1:13:59 By the way, look at how many games are behind them, just within sight right there.
    1:14:00 Isn’t that ridiculous?
    1:14:02 Yeah, that’s one of two shelves.
    1:14:04 There’s another one over there that’s equally packed.
    1:14:07 We’ve got 90 games now?
    1:14:08 60, sorry.
    1:14:13 We have 60 games, but 90 total because there’s like weird expansions and variations and stuff.
    1:14:16 Yeah, it’s stupid.
    1:14:18 It’s just, it doesn’t make any sense to me anymore.
    1:14:20 Love it.
    1:14:21 All right.
    1:14:21 Thank you, man.
    1:14:21 That’s it.
    1:14:22 That’s the pod.
    1:14:24 I feel like I can rule the world.
    1:14:27 I know I could be what I want to.
    1:14:30 I put my all in it like no days off.
    1:14:32 On the road, let’s travel, never looking back.
    1:14:37 Hey, Sean here.
    1:14:39 I want to take a minute to tell you a David Ogilvie story.
    1:14:40 One of the great ad men.
    1:14:43 He said, remember, the consumer is not a moron.
    1:14:44 She’s your wife.
    1:14:47 You wouldn’t lie to your own wife, so don’t lie to mine.
    1:14:48 And I love that.
    1:14:49 You guys, you’re my family.
    1:14:51 You’re like my wife and I won’t lie to you either.
    1:14:52 So I’ll tell you the truth.
    1:14:57 For every company I own right now, six companies, I use Mercury for all of them.
    1:15:01 So I’m proud to partner with Mercury because I use it for all of my banking needs across
    1:15:03 my personal account, my business accounts.
    1:15:06 And anytime I start a new company, this is my first move.
    1:15:07 I go open up a Mercury account.
    1:15:09 I’m very confident in recommending it because I actually use it.
    1:15:10 I’ve used it for years.
    1:15:12 It is the best product on the market.
    1:15:18 So if you want to be like me and 200,000 other ambitious founders, go to mercury.com and apply
    1:15:19 in minutes.
    1:15:22 And remember, Mercury is a financial technology company, not a bank.
    1:15:26 Banking services provided by Choice Financial Group and Evolve Bank and Trust Members, FDIC.
    1:15:28 All right, back to the episode.

    Want your own $100M side project? Get our guide to win your first 100 customers: https://clickhubspot.com/wfp

    Episode 699: Sam Parr ( https://x.com/theSamParr ) and Shaan Puri ( https://x.com/ShaanVP ) talk to Elan Lee ( https://x.com/elanlee ) about growing Exploding Kittens from a $10K Kickstarter campaign to $100M dollar company. 

    Show Notes: 

    (0:00) Humble Success: Exploding Kittens Insights

    (8:07) The origin story – From 10k to $9M on kickstarter

    (16:17) Focus on the crowd, not the funding

    (20:41) Games should not be entertaining

    (23:52) The Kitty Test pilots

    (27:57) $0 marketing hacks

    (38:49) Pushing past the ‘no’

    (41:07) Business as a game

    (45:32) Creativity loves constraints

    (54:28) Irritation is the source of innovation

    (59:13) Designing a game with Tim Ferriss

    (01:04:08) Do what never makes you bored

    Links:

    • Exploding Kittens – https://www.explodingkittens.com/ 

    • Paxsite – https://www.paxsite.com 

    • Elan on TikTok – https://www.tiktok.com/@mrelanlee 

    Check Out Shaan’s Stuff:

    Need to hire? You should use the same service Shaan uses to hire developers, designers, & Virtual Assistants → it’s called Shepherd (tell ‘em Shaan sent you): https://bit.ly/SupportShepherd

  • 668: How I Built an $80k/year Side Hustle in an Obscure Niche

    AI transcript
    0:00:06 Today’s guest built an $80,000 a year side hustle around a fairly obscure hobby, and
    0:00:08 today is breaking down the steps he took to get there.
    0:00:12 This is the Side Hustle Show, where we’ve been helping people make extra money since
    0:00:13 2013.
    0:00:15 If that’s what you want to do, you’re in the right place.
    0:00:19 Today, you’ll learn how to build an audience from scratch and build enough trust to get
    0:00:21 strangers on the internet to pay you.
    0:00:28 From KinzerCoins.com and the Ancient Coin Hour on YouTube, Dean Kinzer, welcome to the
    0:00:29 Side Hustle Show.
    0:00:31 Thank you so much, Nick, for having me on.
    0:00:35 Huge fan of the show and hope to contribute and hope to teach somebody something today.
    0:00:42 Well, I love me a hobby-based business or turning a hobby into an income stream, and this is
    0:00:47 a really unique one around ancient coin collecting, like biblical era, Roman Republic type of stuff,
    0:00:49 where it’s like, I guess it makes sense.
    0:00:49 It’s metal.
    0:00:50 It doesn’t necessarily go away.
    0:00:53 These things still exist, and you can trade them, and you can sell them.
    0:00:56 And so where does this thing start, or how’d you get into it?
    0:01:02 Well, okay, so the reason I named it KinzerCoins is my dad was a coin collector and a collector
    0:01:03 of many things.
    0:01:07 He also was a coin dealer and a baseball card dealer on the side.
    0:01:11 So we used to, as kids, go to shows routinely with him.
    0:01:17 As I grew up, he started, me and him kind of, I grew up and moved on and stuff, but when
    0:01:22 his health started failing, I had to work through his estate, and I started working through his
    0:01:22 estate.
    0:01:29 And I got to these coins, like a tribute penny of Tiberius with Livion the reverse, and it
    0:01:32 just really didn’t make sense to me that I would just be selling this.
    0:01:34 This is 2,000 years old.
    0:01:35 It’s not like a wheat penny.
    0:01:37 This means something.
    0:01:41 So instantly, I’m like, how do you find out more about this?
    0:01:44 I knew a little bit, but not from when I was a kid.
    0:01:46 I was interested in Americans.
    0:01:51 So I ended up joining a Facebook group, one of the best medieval and ancient coins.
    0:01:53 It has about 10,000 members.
    0:01:54 And so I started connecting.
    0:01:59 And really, the journey began as soon as I started connecting to people on Facebook.
    0:02:02 And so I began to learn about the coins.
    0:02:08 Ancient coins are a very interesting subject because Americans largely don’t know about
    0:02:08 them.
    0:02:12 Europeans are active because it’s Europe.
    0:02:13 That’s where they come from.
    0:02:18 But Americans, it seems like once they cross the pond, it stopped being a part of their kind
    0:02:20 of lexicon or their understanding.
    0:02:25 And so my whole goal is to take these ancient coins and make them relevant to Americans.
    0:02:29 And that’s the idea behind the side hustle.
    0:02:31 So full-time, I do operational work.
    0:02:39 And part-time, I try to educate and sell ancient coins that are readily available and probably
    0:02:42 one of the most interesting hobbies that I’ve ever been a part of.
    0:02:43 Yeah.
    0:02:45 So you’re making money in a few different ways.
    0:02:47 You have coins for sale through the site.
    0:02:51 So I imagine you’re making a margin on those and whatever you’ve been able to source.
    0:02:53 We can talk about that.
    0:02:57 The YouTube channel has grown quite a following, 40,000 plus subscribers on YouTube.
    0:02:59 So I imagine you’re making money from that.
    0:03:04 Real quick, do you mind sharing the additional revenue streams or how this business works?
    0:03:06 I play in retail, so I sell coins.
    0:03:10 The reason that I have a podcast is because what I noticed, and a lot of your listeners
    0:03:15 might notice, is that when you have hobbies of this nature, the information that’s out
    0:03:18 there, particularly in digital form, is slow or none.
    0:03:25 So when I went to YouTube to look about ancient coins or went to just anywhere, there wasn’t
    0:03:29 a lot of information and it wasn’t in a way that I could understand it.
    0:03:35 And so I created the podcast for beginning collectors so that they can understand A, what ancient coins
    0:03:41 are about, B, who to buy them from and who to trust and C, not to get tricked because a lot
    0:03:42 of people get tricked by ancient coins.
    0:03:48 There isn’t a quick and dirty way to find out if something’s real or not, but over time
    0:03:51 and with some learning, we can definitely teach you.
    0:03:51 Yeah.
    0:03:52 So I do that.
    0:03:58 And then I do auction representation, which is another way of people getting involved in
    0:04:02 auctions that don’t necessarily want to lift the paddle or don’t feel strong enough about
    0:04:05 their interest that they know what a good deal is.
    0:04:09 And so they’ll come to me and ask me to auction for them or to buy something at auction for them.
    0:04:12 So those are really kind of the three services that I offer.
    0:04:16 Okay. So auction representation, meaning you will go out and try and source coins for other
    0:04:17 collectors.
    0:04:22 A lot of times collectors will have an idea of something, but they don’t know how it is
    0:04:25 in actual person, like what that coin is.
    0:04:26 Like I want an Alexander the Great of this.
    0:04:28 So I’ll do the research.
    0:04:29 I’ll hunt it down.
    0:04:30 I’ll give them options.
    0:04:36 And then I will represent them at the auction, either in person or online to help them get
    0:04:37 that at the best possible price.
    0:04:38 Okay.
    0:04:40 So yeah, that’s absolutely what I do.
    0:04:40 Yes.
    0:04:42 And you just charge a flat fee for that?
    0:04:43 You take a percentage of…
    0:04:43 Just a percentage.
    0:04:44 Yep.
    0:04:45 Small percentage.
    0:04:45 Okay.
    0:04:46 Yeah.
    0:04:48 5% or something small, whatever it is.
    0:04:49 How much do these things cost?
    0:04:50 Like what?
    0:04:54 I’m trying to think of like, well, 5% of 50 bucks or 5% of 5,000.
    0:04:54 Okay.
    0:04:58 So ancient coins are interesting because they come in all shapes and sizes.
    0:05:01 One of the great things about ancient coins is they can be very affordable.
    0:05:05 For example, if you’re interested, coins from the era of Constantine the Great, what they
    0:05:13 call late Roman bronzes, about 300, 400 AD, around the time of the legalization of Christianity
    0:05:15 through Constantine and all that kind of stuff.
    0:05:17 They made most of their coinage through bronze.
    0:05:18 Okay.
    0:05:25 And because there are, they made hundreds of thousands or millions of each one of these types.
    0:05:27 So there’s an abundance of bronze coins.
    0:05:33 So you can buy a coin of Constantine the Great for $20 and it’ll be in good condition and
    0:05:35 you’ll be very happy with your purchase.
    0:05:43 Or you can buy a coin that Brutus celebrated his killing of Julius Caesar in 42 BC that retailed
    0:05:46 for about two and a half million pounds or $4 million.
    0:05:48 So that’s really the stretch.
    0:05:50 You can get really cheap or you can get really expensive.
    0:05:56 You can buy the coinage of Alexander the Great cheaper than you can buy a lot of American coins.
    0:06:02 It’s just a really interesting kind of imbalance almost in terms of historical value.
    0:06:05 But there, I love them so much, I can’t stop talking about them.
    0:06:07 Yeah, it’s super interesting.
    0:06:12 And it sounds like approaching it from the perspective, I know a little bit about this.
    0:06:16 My dad was involved, but I’m not the world’s leading expert on this stuff.
    0:06:20 So it’s kind of this learning alongside the audience in a lot of ways.
    0:06:20 That’s right.
    0:06:25 So going back to this Medieval Coins Facebook group, what’s going on in there?
    0:06:28 Like, were you trying to build up a reputation?
    0:06:32 I’m trying to think of the person who might be in a similar boat who’s entering a different
    0:06:36 niche, but they’re kind of like, I know a little bit about it, but I’m not confident enough
    0:06:39 to stand up on the podium and say, hey, everybody, listen to me.
    0:06:44 Well, the great thing, okay, so this Facebook group, and I’m sure there’s all kinds of these
    0:06:45 for different hobbies.
    0:06:45 Yeah, yeah.
    0:06:51 The Facebook group that I found is like this eclectic group of lawyers, doctors, scholars,
    0:06:54 you name it, gas station attendants, whatever it is.
    0:06:59 And it’s this huge group of people that have expertise in all of these different areas.
    0:07:01 So you can reach out.
    0:07:06 And I got to tell you, ancient coins, they covered about half of the world over 2,000 years.
    0:07:08 So there’s a lot of different types.
    0:07:10 There’s a lot of different meanings.
    0:07:16 And so, fortunately, you have a place where you can find those types of people that know
    0:07:18 about it, because everybody kind of has their own specific niche.
    0:07:23 And so even within ancient coins, there’s people that only collect Roman provincial coins,
    0:07:28 only collect Greek, only collect a certain emperor, only collect all the emperors.
    0:07:28 Okay.
    0:07:30 So there’s a bunch of different ways to do it.
    0:07:34 It’s like the state quarters, except for emperors.
    0:07:34 Yeah.
    0:07:40 One thing that’s interesting is there’s already a little bit of an ecosystem built around this
    0:07:46 in the fact that you found a Facebook group that had 10,000 members versus coming in completely
    0:07:50 cold and trying to shout into the void of the internet, hey, I think this stuff is cool.
    0:07:51 Anybody want to follow me?
    0:07:52 Anybody want to pay attention?
    0:07:58 Does the podcast, YouTube channel happen in parallel to this initial Facebook group stuff?
    0:07:59 What’s going on there?
    0:08:03 So I went to the Facebook group for a couple months, and once I found out that there was
    0:08:08 no point of reference for me learning, other than just the historical aspects of it, that’s
    0:08:10 when I decided if there’s a void, I’m going to try to fill it.
    0:08:15 So actually, I partnered with somebody who’s been in numismatics much longer than me, Josh
    0:08:20 Benevento, who’s my guest host, also a Grammy-winning opera singer.
    0:08:21 So talk about unique.
    0:08:21 Okay.
    0:08:27 But the combination between us, he’s more of a technical expert, and I’m more of a talking
    0:08:28 head.
    0:08:32 But between the two of us, we’re able to get a lot of information out.
    0:08:38 And the other thing that we do on the podcast is we bring in authors, we bring in people that
    0:08:44 own auction companies, people that own dealerships, so that they can explain their perspective and
    0:08:47 the ways to deal with them in a way that’s helpful to a new buyer.
    0:08:51 Somebody who’s new in the industry, we’re trying to connect you to the people that maybe you
    0:08:56 wouldn’t find for a couple of years and get their perspective and some of the things that
    0:08:58 they think are beneficial for you to learn.
    0:09:01 So in a lot of cases, we’ve done some legwork for you.
    0:09:05 And that’s the point is to teach you about this thing so you can get involved.
    0:09:08 Describe the first few months of the podcast.
    0:09:10 Is it crickets?
    0:09:12 Is it an instant hit?
    0:09:16 Is there a moment where you’re like, hey, there’s there’s clearly an audience for this?
    0:09:18 You know, we’ve really tapped into a nerve here.
    0:09:23 Well, the first thing I noticed was that nobody would watch, even the people that I know in
    0:09:27 the business, so it took a little bit of time and you really have to figure out what purpose
    0:09:28 are you trying to serve?
    0:09:34 You know, if you’re trying to talk to an existing community of collectors, that’s going to be a
    0:09:36 totally different discussion point.
    0:09:42 So there’s another guy in the business who does a podcast that talks mostly about auctions and
    0:09:44 that’s what he cares about and that’s what he’s involved in.
    0:09:46 So those people will learn about auctions there.
    0:09:51 But to me, it’s hard to continue down that path when you don’t know enough about the business.
    0:09:55 So that’s why we focus on training or we’re teaching people.
    0:09:59 Are you primarily targeting people who somehow came across this hobby, but are just like seeking
    0:10:04 education or like, yeah, you’re trying to like sell people on, hey, you should have ancient
    0:10:06 coins as part of your investment portfolio.
    0:10:07 That’s right.
    0:10:07 That’s right.
    0:10:08 Who’s the audience?
    0:10:10 He said, well, you got to figure out what purpose do you serve?
    0:10:11 Yeah.
    0:10:15 So I’ll flip that around and say, what purpose does the podcast serve for you?
    0:10:20 So in terms of people that love history, there is an abundance of that, right?
    0:10:25 I mean, there are channels on YouTube that have millions of subscribers and a huge following.
    0:10:30 You know, one of the things that you can do with ancient coins is you can hold the history
    0:10:31 in your hand, right?
    0:10:33 Ancient coins don’t need to necessarily be in a slab.
    0:10:34 You can hold them.
    0:10:40 So to me, the natural connection is all of these history lovers who collect something that’s
    0:10:47 not related to it, Pokemon, Funko Pops, whatever that is, and try to translate it to connect
    0:10:51 their history love to something that they can physically and tangibly hold.
    0:10:52 And that’s the point.
    0:10:53 Got it.
    0:10:55 So there’s already point collectors in the world.
    0:10:56 There’s already history lovers in the world.
    0:11:02 Like, how can I get at the center of that Venn diagram and help them learn about it?
    0:11:02 Right.
    0:11:05 There’s tons of dealers that already kind of deal to collectors.
    0:11:07 I want to deal to the new collectors.
    0:11:09 I want to find new collectors.
    0:11:11 So you’re doing the show.
    0:11:12 You’re starting to engage in this group.
    0:11:16 At what point does the business make its first dollar?
    0:11:19 Like, do you have that, you know, first sale story?
    0:11:19 Yeah.
    0:11:21 So it was surprising.
    0:11:27 So really what, like most collectors, your collection turns into your inventory to sell.
    0:11:29 And that’s really kind of the thing.
    0:11:38 And so I actually opened up a store, and probably two weeks after, I sold Mithridides VI Tetradrachm.
    0:11:42 Mithridides VI is famous because he’s the poison king.
    0:11:43 There’s a book written about him.
    0:11:46 He ingested poison every day for his whole life.
    0:11:50 And then when he was tracked down by the Roman army, he tried to kill himself with poison,
    0:11:53 and he had built up such a tolerance that he couldn’t.
    0:11:55 Sounds like straight out of The Princess Bride.
    0:11:57 It’s such a great story.
    0:12:00 He fought three wars against the Romans, died with an Amazon woman next to him.
    0:12:02 Just a really neat, really neat story.
    0:12:08 But I sold his coin, and it was, when they’re really nice, they’re really nice, $12,000.
    0:12:10 And it totally caught me.
    0:12:12 I had no intention of selling it.
    0:12:14 Somebody, I put a price on it, and somebody bought it right away.
    0:12:18 I shipped it off to him, and I’d never heard a thing from him since.
    0:12:19 Okay.
    0:12:21 Was this one of your dads?
    0:12:22 How did you come into possession of it?
    0:12:24 Oh, I bought it independently on my own.
    0:12:26 I found a really good deal.
    0:12:28 That’s another great thing about the Facebook marketplaces.
    0:12:30 There’s a Discord.
    0:12:33 There’s a lot of different places where you can acquire these coins from different collectors,
    0:12:35 and sometimes that gives you an advantage.
    0:12:39 Having that inside scoop, rather than paying retail like everybody, helps you get a little
    0:12:43 bit of margin if you’re interested in selling, which is a helpful use.
    0:12:43 Yeah.
    0:12:48 Could you tell if it was somebody who was a follower of yours from the YouTube channel?
    0:12:50 I mean, it’s only three days into putting up the store.
    0:12:55 I don’t know where they came from, but it was probably about the happiest day I’ve ever
    0:12:58 had because it was so surprising.
    0:13:02 I assume it came from YouTube, one of the few followers at that time.
    0:13:02 Okay.
    0:13:05 They were from California, so they would have no tie to me directly.
    0:13:05 Yeah.
    0:13:15 More with Dean in just a moment, including the low-risk way he’s sourcing inventory and
    0:13:18 how he puts himself in position to make lots of sales right after this.
    0:13:23 Nobody does selling better than our sponsor, Shopify.
    0:13:25 That’s why it’s the number one checkout on the planet.
    0:13:28 We do use Shopify now.
    0:13:32 A lot of the third-party platforms and stuff just integrate a lot better with Shopify.
    0:13:37 It has made a huge difference in our ability to be more flexible on our site.
    0:13:43 That was Randall Pulfer from Episode 661, and he’s just one of many Side Hustle Show guests
    0:13:45 who rely on Shopify to power their online sales.
    0:13:51 One of the things I think is really cool about Shopify is ShopPay, which basically streamlines
    0:13:52 the checkout process.
    0:13:57 If any of your customers have purchased from the millions of other Shopify stores, that can
    0:14:02 boost conversions up to 50%, meaning a whole lot less abandoned carts and a whole lot more
    0:14:04 sales going, it’s no secret.
    0:14:07 Businesses that sell more, sell on Shopify.
    0:14:11 Upgrade your business today and get the same at checkout used by dozens of successful Side
    0:14:12 Hustle Show guests.
    0:14:19 Sign up for your $1 per month trial period at Shopify.com slash Side Hustle, all lowercase.
    0:14:24 Go to Shopify.com slash Side Hustle to upgrade your selling today.
    0:14:27 Shopify.com slash Side Hustle.
    0:14:30 Do you say data or data?
    0:14:31 I think I’m a data guy.
    0:14:37 And one thing I love about Mint Mobile is I can get all the data I need for one low monthly
    0:14:37 price.
    0:14:38 That’s right.
    0:14:42 Our sponsor, Mint Mobile, is here to rescue you from overpriced wireless in their jaw-dropping
    0:14:44 monthly bills and unexpected overages.
    0:14:50 All Mint Mobile plans come with high-speed data or data, your choice, and unlimited talk and
    0:14:53 text delivered on the nation’s largest 5G network.
    0:14:57 You can use your own phone with any Mint Mobile plan and bring over your existing phone number
    0:14:59 and all your existing contacts.
    0:15:03 Join me in ditching overpriced wireless and get three months of premium wireless service
    0:15:06 from Mint Mobile for just $15 a month.
    0:15:08 No matter how you say it, don’t overpay for it.
    0:15:12 Shop data plans at MintMobile.com slash Side Hustle.
    0:15:15 That’s MintMobile.com slash Side Hustle.
    0:15:21 Upfront payment of $45 for three-month, five-gigabyte plan required, equivalent to $15 per month.
    0:15:26 New customer offer for first three months only, then full-price plan options available.
    0:15:28 Taxes and fees extra.
    0:15:29 See Mint Mobile for details.
    0:15:37 Okay, so almost building your own miniature eBay of sorts or your own mini Facebook marketplace
    0:15:39 specializing in this stuff.
    0:15:41 And so there’s a sourcing component.
    0:15:43 You mentioned, well, I could source on Facebook marketplace.
    0:15:48 Like any other places that you like to go to, you know, buy low and then sell high through
    0:15:48 your own site?
    0:15:53 Yeah, so what I would say is, first of all, for anybody who’s like, I’m going to get into
    0:15:57 ancient coin collecting, I’m going to go straight to eBay and buy a bunch of stuff.
    0:15:58 Do not.
    0:16:02 That’s lesson one of one that I teach on the podcast.
    0:16:04 Now, there are great dealers on eBay.
    0:16:07 You have to get to know them, but eBay is fraught with fakes.
    0:16:12 And so that’s pretty much the starting point, because even as a new collector, I bought fakes on
    0:16:12 eBay.
    0:16:14 So we steer people away.
    0:16:17 There’s a couple of different marketplaces that are great places.
    0:16:22 One of the things about ancient coins that people should recognize is that if you buy from
    0:16:25 a dealer, they should give you a lifetime guarantee.
    0:16:31 Meaning if somebody found out this to be fake over time, you’re able to return it for full
    0:16:33 price at any point during your ownership of the coin.
    0:16:37 So that’s a steadfast reason why you trust them, right?
    0:16:39 And there’s a couple of marketplaces.
    0:16:43 One that comes to mind, BeCoins, which is a marketplace for collectors.
    0:16:47 They have something like 250,000 people that participate on that website or something.
    0:16:52 But that’s a marketplace in which you can try to find and investigate.
    0:16:56 There are other companies that just do shows.
    0:17:01 And so in that case, these companies are inactive during the non-show time period.
    0:17:07 So they will offer or give you an opportunity to sell their stuff while they’re not at shows
    0:17:07 and consign.
    0:17:09 So you don’t even have to buy the inventory.
    0:17:15 So like a drop ship or something like that, there are places within the ancient coin business
    0:17:17 that will work with you to do that.
    0:17:20 So you don’t even have to do the upfront investment.
    0:17:21 Okay, interesting.
    0:17:26 So yeah, a drop ship or consignment relationship with other distributors, other dealers, you
    0:17:30 could just rip this page out of the playbook and pivot to almost any other different niche
    0:17:35 if you have the chops like Dean has to build up your own traffic sources.
    0:17:37 You just slap up a page, nobody’s going to find it.
    0:17:41 But if you can build up a little bit of an audience and a following and some relationship
    0:17:45 and trust building and all this other stuff that’s really hard to do, then you can start
    0:17:49 to drive your own traffic and not have to have that upfront inventory risk.
    0:17:49 That’s right.
    0:17:55 The best recommendation I can give to anyone who’s trying to do this is network, get to
    0:17:59 know people in the industry, even if they’re not somebody that you would normally be friends
    0:17:59 with.
    0:18:05 Always just try to get an understanding, try to get involved because a lot of this stuff people
    0:18:09 have tried, a lot of the stuff people have made mistakes on, but a lot of people would
    0:18:12 really help you succeed if you gave them the chance.
    0:18:16 And I have found that more often than not, that people are willing to do what it takes
    0:18:18 to help you get ahead sometimes.
    0:18:18 Yeah.
    0:18:24 I remember as a kid begging dad to take us to this like baseball card show that was at the
    0:18:25 mall at the next town over.
    0:18:31 And it sounds like these things are still going on for pretty much any kind of collectible,
    0:18:33 but including coins.
    0:18:37 And so you guys have just like your own little wing, your own little section of like the general
    0:18:40 coin show exhibition hall type of thing.
    0:18:42 And here’s my ancient coin people.
    0:18:50 So like in a major show like the ANA, which is in Chicago, it’s in Rosemont at their giant
    0:18:50 theater.
    0:18:51 Right.
    0:18:53 So there’ll be, you know, a thousand dealers.
    0:18:56 So we’ll be kind of put in the corner.
    0:18:59 Ancients are kind of a niche in coins.
    0:19:03 So they’re not like upfront or anything like that usually goes to Americans and shipwrecks.
    0:19:07 But yeah, we definitely have a section that’s usually by world coins.
    0:19:07 Okay.
    0:19:11 But I’m trying to bring us to the front because I like us the most.
    0:19:13 Okay.
    0:19:18 The reason I bring it up is like somebody gave this bit of advice, like if the industry or
    0:19:22 the niche is big enough to have its own convention, then it’s big enough, right?
    0:19:25 If it has multiple, like, you know, maybe it’s too big, right?
    0:19:25 How do you niche it out?
    0:19:30 And so it’s interesting to see like, oh no, if we can, and then these types of events attract
    0:19:31 buyers as well.
    0:19:35 So you’re selling through there, your existing inventory and collection.
    0:19:40 So there’s this physical product, you know, buy low, sell high component to the business
    0:19:41 that is pretty interesting.
    0:19:42 Yeah.
    0:19:47 And I will tell you that ancients do only have one show on their own in New York and
    0:19:51 the rest of the year, there’s, they’re just a tag along for the main conventions.
    0:19:56 So when you’re playing retailer, either through these events or through your own website, is
    0:20:00 there, I mean, you’re, you’re dictated by what the market value is and market prices, but
    0:20:04 like, is there a target margin that you’re shooting for on each transaction?
    0:20:05 Yeah.
    0:20:05 Yeah.
    0:20:09 So the great thing and the interesting part about ancient coins is American coins, for
    0:20:15 those people who know, are very regimented and very detailed collecting.
    0:20:17 So they are very specific on grades.
    0:20:21 They know exact quantities that were produced, how many are in each grade.
    0:20:25 They know a lot and they know how much it costs.
    0:20:28 There is no such thing as a price guide in ancient coins.
    0:20:28 Yeah.
    0:20:31 Well, you’re, you’re kind of building it or you’re, you’re building it as you go.
    0:20:32 Right.
    0:20:37 And so there, there are certain forums that you can look at that give you auction history.
    0:20:42 There’s a couple of different places where you can kind of average out what, what you think
    0:20:43 when an auction and stuff like that.
    0:20:49 But to me, the, the market is more about what you can get for something, especially in ancient
    0:20:53 coins, because a lot of times you’ll have one of only a handful.
    0:20:58 So it’s more about how you marry the customer to the product.
    0:21:02 In certain instances where it’s just like straight runners, anybody will buy it.
    0:21:07 But like, if you found something very specific, like, you know, let’s, let’s say a Jake Paul
    0:21:11 or somebody came up to us and said, I want a coin of the Alexander the Great, you know, that’s
    0:21:14 certainly something you would do very specific to him.
    0:21:16 You try to find something meaningful.
    0:21:20 And that’s really the, the great part about it is because there’s so many opportunities for
    0:21:24 people to connect, whether it’s through religion, whether it’s through spirituality,
    0:21:28 astrological, whatever it is, there’s ways to connect people to these coins.
    0:21:33 And so kind of the higher end stuff, I always look to marry to a customer, something that’d
    0:21:38 be meaningful to them, something that, that represents something powerful to them.
    0:21:38 Okay.
    0:21:41 So what I’m hearing is there’s no blue book value.
    0:21:45 There is, there is, there’s lots of price elasticity or price flexibility rather.
    0:21:46 There is.
    0:21:51 And this is another reason why it’s so interesting is because it’s what you get for it.
    0:21:52 Yeah.
    0:21:56 If you can craft a story, this is another baseball card story related to dad.
    0:21:59 You’re looking up at the Beckett magazine to be like, and I’d be like, dad, look, this
    0:22:00 one’s worth 15 bucks.
    0:22:03 He’s like, you show me somebody willing to pay you 15 bucks for it.
    0:22:04 Then you could say it’s 15 bucks.
    0:22:05 It’s like, fine.
    0:22:08 Just, you know, go around bursting kids’ bubbles all day long.
    0:22:09 That’s right.
    0:22:11 But yeah, there’s still, baseball cards are still a big deal.
    0:22:13 I mean, I like the, uh, what’s it called?
    0:22:18 The substantialness, the, the, you know, the heaviness of gold or silver or something about
    0:22:18 it.
    0:22:19 That’s magical to me.
    0:22:19 Yeah.
    0:22:23 And people trying to fill out a collection, almost by definition, it has some sentimental
    0:22:28 value to them where even you look at some of these, oh, people auctioned off, you
    0:22:30 know, a Michael Jordan jersey.
    0:22:30 It’s like, that’s right.
    0:22:32 Was that worth $3 million?
    0:22:36 Well, it was to the person who bought it and they’re hoping somebody else will, will pay
    0:22:38 that much down the road or not.
    0:22:40 But they’re just like, well, I want to hang this up in my man cave.
    0:22:45 One of the things that people really get excited for, and I always caution people against this
    0:22:48 is they try to collect every emperor from the beginning.
    0:22:50 They think that’s a good way to collect.
    0:22:55 I will tell you that over the 1500 years of the empire, it is very hard to collect all of
    0:23:00 the emperors, particularly when some of them have died in very short order, pretty much
    0:23:02 after they took the crown.
    0:23:02 Yeah.
    0:23:05 Not a lot of coins were minted in that window.
    0:23:07 So go back to the margins.
    0:23:09 Like, you know, if you doubled your money, is that a win?
    0:23:11 If you 10 extra money, like, is there a sweet spot for you?
    0:23:16 For my business, generally, I like to gross margin 30, 40 percent.
    0:23:19 That’s just based on my business expertise.
    0:23:23 You know, it probably, as I fool with it, it might adjust up or down.
    0:23:28 But that’s always kind of where I felt like you take home enough after that to feel good
    0:23:28 about it.
    0:23:30 So that’s about where I’m at.
    0:23:31 Okay.
    0:23:31 That’s helpful to know.
    0:23:34 Not necessarily trying to hit a 10x home run on these flips.
    0:23:35 Oh, no, no.
    0:23:38 You’ll sit on inventory forever if you try to do that.
    0:23:39 Absolutely.
    0:23:39 Okay.
    0:23:40 Let’s talk about turn.
    0:23:42 What’s the inventory look like today?
    0:23:47 Is there a rule of thumb, like, oh, I want to have a two-month supply or something like
    0:23:48 that?
    0:23:48 Right.
    0:23:52 So inventory is a very interesting subject with this hobby because there are certain things
    0:23:55 that move quick and certain things that don’t.
    0:23:58 I would say that for beginning collectors, I have a lot of packaged items.
    0:24:04 So, like, somebody can get a box of four Constantine coins, the whole collector set.
    0:24:05 And those tend to move.
    0:24:11 And then kind of the single one-off coins tend to move, meaning like a cheapy Constantine-era
    0:24:15 coin for $60, it’ll move pretty quickly.
    0:24:22 As you start to get into the more expensive silver and gold items, they don’t move as quickly.
    0:24:26 So my recommendation to anybody that’s interested in this is start small.
    0:24:31 You can definitely make bigger margins on some of the higher-end stuff, but you’re going to
    0:24:31 sit on it.
    0:24:33 And you’re going to sit on it for a while.
    0:24:37 That’s just because this particular buyer has a certain interest.
    0:24:38 Maybe they’re Sicilian.
    0:24:39 Maybe they’re not.
    0:24:41 Maybe they’re from, you know, Macedon.
    0:24:41 Maybe they’re not.
    0:24:45 There’s a lot of different reasons that people find interest in coins.
    0:24:48 But you generally stick to the ones that move.
    0:24:53 So, like, Athenian Owl, Alexander the Great, and then some of the package stuff moves.
    0:24:57 But then as you get into more, I guess, elite territory, you have to be careful because,
    0:25:01 like I said, unless you have a buyer direct, you can sit on it.
    0:25:03 And that hurts, especially in a small business.
    0:25:04 Yeah, yeah, yeah.
    0:25:06 You’ve got all this cash tied up in inventory.
    0:25:06 Yeah.
    0:25:10 The one thing that I’ve always learned in my full-time jobs is cash is king.
    0:25:13 And that’s, you can’t buy more inventory until you move that one item.
    0:25:18 And so, you might be inclined to sell something at cost or below to get cash.
    0:25:23 And that’s one of the drawbacks of having high-end stuff, is that you still have to have cash,
    0:25:24 no matter what, to buy the next thing.
    0:25:27 Yeah, this was a huge issue in the car business.
    0:25:32 That was my one and only corporate job and going around to these parts departments at Ford dealers.
    0:25:36 And, of course, the dealer owner, you know, wants to play this balance of taking care of
    0:25:41 their customers, like having that part on hand, but also not having every part on hand.
    0:25:44 Because it’s like, well, not anybody’s going to come in and request this thing today.
    0:25:50 So, it’s like, you know, this balance of keeping the inventory that turns quickly and all this.
    0:25:55 I remember talking with Rob, the flea market flipper, and I was like, how much, you know,
    0:25:58 how much stuff do you have sitting in the warehouse or in the storage unit right now?
    0:26:02 Like, just waiting to be listed or, you know, waiting to be sold.
    0:26:04 And it was hundreds of thousands of dollars worth of inventory.
    0:26:08 But it’s like, yeah, you got to, at a certain point, you got to move it and go on to the next,
    0:26:09 go find the next thing.
    0:26:15 You either got to find a capital investor and prove that you can move material out of fat,
    0:26:18 or you’re going to have to fund it yourself, which is really hard and expensive.
    0:26:20 Tell me about the YouTube channel.
    0:26:24 So, I don’t have the, you know, podcast stats, but I can see from the YouTube channel,
    0:26:26 we’ve got 40,000 plus subscribers over there.
    0:26:29 But the most popular videos are only like 1,000 views.
    0:26:31 So, it’s like, you don’t have to go huge.
    0:26:36 Yeah, I feel like because they’re longer, longer form, I do better on shorter videos.
    0:26:38 Longer form takes a long time.
    0:26:42 And it’s an investment to listen to somebody talk about ancient coins for an hour if you don’t
    0:26:45 have anything off, you know, if it’s not a direct tie.
    0:26:48 But definitely, when we launch, they definitely come out.
    0:26:50 I definitely get a lot of comments and stuff.
    0:26:53 But it’s been spread out pretty thinly.
    0:26:57 But we’re hoping that we have another real breakthrough coming up here soon.
    0:27:02 Like I talked about with networking, you know, the key is to get to know the players in the industry.
    0:27:07 I talk to whoever I can to try and figure out how to make this thing work.
    0:27:09 Because if you’re on your own, you’re never going to make it.
    0:27:11 You got to talk to people.
    0:27:13 You got to get to know what works and what doesn’t work.
    0:27:14 That’s the key.
    0:27:19 Has that been the primary growth driver of the show and the channel is guesting to the extent
    0:27:23 that there is like other ancient coin podcasts to go and hang out on or other channels to
    0:27:24 collaborate with?
    0:27:26 No, but I’m trying.
    0:27:31 So, basically, what I’m doing is I’m taking my buddies in the Americans and the world and
    0:27:32 we’re trying to combine.
    0:27:35 So, there’s a bunch of podcasts on American coins.
    0:27:37 There’s a bunch of podcasts on world coins.
    0:27:41 So, what I’m trying to do is try to marry those as well.
    0:27:46 There’s not like millions of people lining up to watch American coin podcasts, but strength
    0:27:50 in numbers, I think, helps us out in this kind of endeavor.
    0:27:52 So, I reach out to everybody.
    0:27:54 Yeah, yeah, I love that strategy.
    0:27:57 If it’s like, hey, you’re talking about, would your audience be interested in one episode
    0:28:00 on this divergent thing?
    0:28:02 It’s like, it’s on the shoulder of what you’re already talking about.
    0:28:04 We can have an interesting conversation.
    0:28:09 I mean, that was one of the things that really helped drive growth of the Side Hustle Show
    0:28:12 was guesting on all these personal finance podcasts.
    0:28:15 Hey, at a certain point, all these podcasts about saving money and budgeting and investing,
    0:28:16 there’s only so much you could save.
    0:28:18 Why don’t we talk about making more money?
    0:28:20 You know, so it was like a natural fit.
    0:28:21 Hey, have you done a Side Hustle episode?
    0:28:23 Have you done a small business episode?
    0:28:26 And so, that was kind of what helped drive the growth of the show.
    0:28:29 So, I think that makes a lot of sense in this case, too.
    0:28:30 Yeah, and same with history.
    0:28:34 I mean, you just got to find stuff that, well, I did a podcast maybe last week with a, it’s
    0:28:37 called Antiquity Side Quest or something like that.
    0:28:43 It’s just a history podcast, and so they asked me specific questions about history and then
    0:28:44 ancient coins and how they tie together.
    0:28:49 So, you know, a lot of times I’ll just do these kind of Q&As about ancient coins from people
    0:28:51 that like history and want to know about it, you know?
    0:28:53 Yeah, no, that makes perfect sense.
    0:28:57 Go where the audience already is or go, maybe this is a Charlie Munger thing.
    0:28:59 The first rule of fishing is fish where there’s fish or something.
    0:29:01 It’s like, oh, okay, this works.
    0:29:06 More with Dean in just a moment, including his quest to be the quote-unquote tallest in his
    0:29:10 niche, his paid newsletter strategy, and what he might do differently if he were starting
    0:29:11 over from the beginning.
    0:29:14 All that and more coming up right after this.
    0:29:19 Lots of scrappy side hustlers start their business with just their personal phone number.
    0:29:20 I’ve been there.
    0:29:24 I remember checking customer voicemails between classes in college, but at a certain point,
    0:29:27 you can’t be limited to just your cell phone and notes app to get your work done.
    0:29:32 With our sponsor, OpenPhone, you can stay connected while powerful AI features help keep your business
    0:29:33 on track.
    0:29:34 What’s OpenPhone?
    0:29:39 It’s the number one business phone system to help you separate your personal life from
    0:29:40 your growing business.
    0:29:44 For the cost of just a few coffees, your team can have a dedicated phone number to manage
    0:29:47 calls and texts all from a single platform.
    0:29:50 Think of it like having a shared inbox for your phone number.
    0:29:52 You worked hard for those leads.
    0:29:53 Don’t let them slip through the cracks.
    0:29:59 Join the 50,000 businesses that trust OpenPhone to streamline their customer communications.
    0:30:04 Right now, OpenPhone is offering Side Hustle Show listeners 20% off your first six months
    0:30:08 when you go to openphone.com slash side hustle.
    0:30:16 That’s O-P-E-N-P-H-O-N-E dot com slash side hustle for 20% off six months.
    0:30:18 OpenPhone.com slash side hustle.
    0:30:23 And if you have existing numbers with another service, OpenPhone will port them over at no
    0:30:24 extra charge.
    0:30:34 When you’re growing your business and your team, you need a hiring partner that can help
    0:30:35 you rise to the challenge.
    0:30:37 You need Indeed.
    0:30:42 Our sponsor, Indeed, is the hiring platform where you can attract, interview, and hire all
    0:30:43 in one place.
    0:30:46 Here’s our recent guest, Skylar, from episode 645.
    0:30:48 What’s your recruiting look like?
    0:30:49 I would use Indeed.
    0:30:51 Indeed was really, really helpful at first.
    0:30:56 Plus, with Indeed sponsored jobs, there’s no monthly subscriptions, no long-term contracts,
    0:30:58 and you only pay for results.
    0:30:59 How fast is Indeed?
    0:31:04 In this 60-second commercial, 23 businesses just hired their next team member.
    0:31:06 There’s no need to wait any longer.
    0:31:09 Speed up your hiring right now with Indeed.
    0:31:15 Side Hustle Show listeners get a $75 sponsored job credit to get your jobs more visibility.
    0:31:18 Indeed.com slash Side Hustle Show.
    0:31:23 Just go to Indeed.com slash Side Hustle Show right now and support our show by saying you
    0:31:25 heard about Indeed on this podcast.
    0:31:28 Indeed.com slash Side Hustle Show.
    0:31:30 Terms and conditions apply.
    0:31:32 Hiring, Indeed, is all you need.
    0:31:36 Anything going on on the social media side?
    0:31:38 Did you end up starting your own Facebook group?
    0:31:42 You know, I see there’s some of the short form stuff that’s getting traction.
    0:31:43 What else is going on there?
    0:31:49 I’m on every platform except X, and as I get more time, I’ll dedicate more specific videos
    0:31:52 to like TikTok where they’re specific to TikTok.
    0:31:54 But yeah, I’ve been covering all the socials.
    0:31:58 I have, as an entrepreneur, I’ve experimented going out.
    0:32:03 I have outsourced social media for periods of time and then insourced because you’ll find
    0:32:07 that of all the things you’re doing, that probably takes more time than any of it, whether it’s
    0:32:09 the editing or anything like that.
    0:32:13 And so you only have so much time and you’re probably not a professional editor, so you probably
    0:32:13 have to outsource.
    0:32:19 But to me, in this world, and that’s why I jumped on Ancient Coins is because the social
    0:32:23 media presence is so low that it’s easy to become the tallest person.
    0:32:28 So that’s why I’ve been gung-ho trying to get the message out there because I’m the one.
    0:32:31 There’s other people that are trying, that’s for sure.
    0:32:36 But that’s my main goal is to try to get as much exposure as possible and hopefully make
    0:32:37 some sales in between.
    0:32:38 Yeah, that’s an interesting line.
    0:32:39 I want to pause in that.
    0:32:43 Pick a niche where it’s easy to become the tallest person or the most visible person.
    0:32:44 Yeah.
    0:32:48 And you might find you’re going to have to go one or two layers deeper than what you initially
    0:32:48 thought.
    0:32:49 That’s right.
    0:32:53 But if you can be, like John Lee Dumas has talked about being the best, worst, and only
    0:32:58 in your niche, you know, when he started the worst daily entrepreneur podcast, but also
    0:32:59 the best because he was the only game in town.
    0:33:01 I’ll give you a listener’s idea.
    0:33:03 I can tell you that there’s nobody doing stamps.
    0:33:06 If you want to be the first, do stamps.
    0:33:07 You’ll be the first one.
    0:33:08 Do the same thing for stamps.
    0:33:09 Okay.
    0:33:09 Okay.
    0:33:10 It’s a challenge.
    0:33:14 That hobby is very, it’s really gone small.
    0:33:17 I mean, it’s real small now, but it’s kind of like this.
    0:33:18 Maybe you can bring it back.
    0:33:19 Maybe you can make it survive.
    0:33:20 Yeah.
    0:33:24 Niche within a niche of collectibles, ancient stamps, probably not so much a thing.
    0:33:25 Those didn’t survive.
    0:33:30 But the one thing I will tell you is, is that with these hobbies and, you know, having experienced
    0:33:32 it firsthand, there is a generational gap.
    0:33:35 People from my era kind of moved on and didn’t do that.
    0:33:38 So there’s like a whole series of people that are aging out of this interest.
    0:33:43 And so the, the kind of key people in this industry are aging out.
    0:33:47 So that not only gives you the opportunity just in social media, because that’s not what
    0:33:50 they’re into, but also in the sales because they’re aging out.
    0:33:54 And I, this can’t be the only opportunity like that for sure.
    0:33:57 Do you see that as a, as like a longevity risk for the business where it’s like, just
    0:34:01 I’m riding this like slow downhill wave in interest?
    0:34:02 No, I want to turn it on its head.
    0:34:07 I don’t want it to die because history is the most important thing to me.
    0:34:11 And I feel like this is an area where I can plant my flag and hopefully prevent that kind
    0:34:12 of thing from happening.
    0:34:17 Because so much of this is in people’s heads, this history, this great knowledge.
    0:34:19 And as time goes on, those people disappear.
    0:34:22 And so it’s, it’s incumbent on us to keep it alive.
    0:34:23 Yeah.
    0:34:25 The only fear there is, oh, let’s be an equal.
    0:34:30 I want to ride a, a trend that’s increasing versus one that fewer and fewer people are looking
    0:34:31 for.
    0:34:31 Yeah.
    0:34:32 Yeah.
    0:34:33 Well, we will, we’ll make it increase.
    0:34:34 That’s the point.
    0:34:35 Let’s make it increase.
    0:34:36 With a subject like this.
    0:34:38 I don’t know how you cannot.
    0:34:42 That’s why it’s so crazy to me because as somebody who’s been involved in collecting
    0:34:46 for so long, there are certain things that are like, yeah, that makes sense.
    0:34:47 And this makes sense.
    0:34:54 It just makes anybody that loves history, who loves iconography, who loves any of this stuff,
    0:34:59 all the money that Americans spend on collecting to me could be almost better served in this area
    0:35:02 because it’s such a fascinating and incredible area.
    0:35:04 I mean, it touches everything.
    0:35:05 Architecture.
    0:35:07 It’s just everything.
    0:35:07 Sorry.
    0:35:08 I get excited.
    0:35:10 No, that’s, that’s okay.
    0:35:11 That’s why, why you’re the guy.
    0:35:13 You doing anything to collect emails for this?
    0:35:14 Oh yeah.
    0:35:15 Yeah, absolutely.
    0:35:20 And I do send out a subscription email and I do offer a subscription service because some
    0:35:22 material I get is first to the market.
    0:35:26 And so it gives collectors, particularly high end stuff and opportunity.
    0:35:33 So that, that’s another avenue that I’ve experimented with or trying because the demand for high end
    0:35:35 goods that are hard to find is pretty high.
    0:35:39 So that’s, that’s an opportunity that I saw in that field.
    0:35:40 We’ll see how that plays out.
    0:35:40 Sorry.
    0:35:45 So there’s, there’s a free email newsletter and then there’s like a paid tier, like a subscription
    0:35:47 notification service.
    0:35:47 Yep.
    0:35:54 And so I, uh, I get a occasional group of 10 or 15 hard to come by coins and I’ll release
    0:35:58 them to the subscription for service first before I release them to the general public.
    0:36:01 So they get advanced notice because some ancient coins are so desirable.
    0:36:03 They don’t even last one second on the website.
    0:36:10 There are people that will fly halfway across the country to find a specific coin that day.
    0:36:13 I mean, they’re very passionate about it for sure.
    0:36:13 Yeah.
    0:36:18 If you can find such a passionate audience to serve, I think that’s an interesting place
    0:36:18 to be.
    0:36:21 How much do you charge for the subscription or the notification service?
    0:36:24 I do $9.95 a month or all at once.
    0:36:26 I also include a discount in that.
    0:36:28 So that way you make it feel like it’s worth it.
    0:36:33 So I give you a discount over all your purchases, but it’s nice to have the advanced cash, but
    0:36:38 you just have to make sure that you come through on the subscription side or people will get upset.
    0:36:41 I’m sure if they get nothing in return for their expense.
    0:36:44 So that’s probably something you have to pay close attention to.
    0:36:45 Yeah.
    0:36:47 How many takers on that?
    0:36:53 A handful so far, but I just released my second list of 20 coins to the public to let them
    0:36:54 know what’s available.
    0:36:57 So hopefully I’ll see some subscribers after that.
    0:36:57 Yeah.
    0:37:00 This is always the, what do you keep behind the paywall?
    0:37:03 How do you give people a sneak preview without giving away everything?
    0:37:08 Or you’re like, if you like more of that, then come on in and pay for it.
    0:37:10 Well, and it’s hard when you, it’s a side hustle, right?
    0:37:14 Because then you not only have a regular social media, but then you have a secondary social
    0:37:18 media where you have to keep those people who are paying happy on top of it.
    0:37:20 You know, that’s additional, but it’s worth it.
    0:37:21 I think.
    0:37:22 Yeah.
    0:37:24 This is an interesting, the paid tier.
    0:37:29 We’ve done episodes on paid newsletters and it is like, there’s this element of curation.
    0:37:33 Like that’s the value add in a lot of cases where it’s like, let me filter out everything,
    0:37:37 all the, all the noise for you and just send you the signal.
    0:37:40 And it’s like, Hey, look, I’m, I’m Dean.
    0:37:41 I’m the ancient coin guy.
    0:37:43 And here are my 10 best finds of the week.
    0:37:46 Or here’s something unique that, that we managed to source.
    0:37:47 That’s right.
    0:37:47 Yeah.
    0:37:51 And I’m going out and hunting these down in advance so that nobody else in the marketplace
    0:37:52 can get them.
    0:37:56 That I think adds value because most people will buy the higher end stuff.
    0:38:00 It shows, uh, but if they don’t go to shows or they don’t go to all of them, they miss
    0:38:01 and they miss a lot.
    0:38:07 One of the guys that I’ve worked with sells out like 80% of his stock when he comes in and
    0:38:12 people will fly in the day before just to see what his stock is before the show, get a pre-screening.
    0:38:15 So that’s how popular that stuff is, you know?
    0:38:19 And do you find you have sellers now reaching out to you directly because they know you can
    0:38:19 move it?
    0:38:20 Yep.
    0:38:20 That’s right.
    0:38:22 That’s another great aspect of it.
    0:38:27 So, so if they find somebody that’ll sell stuff for them, you’ll find that you’ll get more
    0:38:30 inventory than you won’t know what to do with, but you don’t have to buy it.
    0:38:30 Right.
    0:38:31 And that’s the best part.
    0:38:35 The, the, the, the expense on your side can be really challenging.
    0:38:39 So if people are interested in signing to you, that’s, that’s a good sign.
    0:38:39 Yeah.
    0:38:41 No, this is, it’s really interesting.
    0:38:42 It’s ringing bells.
    0:38:46 We had a woman who was, she became known as like the go-to person for this like collectible
    0:38:47 doll.
    0:38:50 I forget the brand, but that was, that was her business.
    0:38:56 I, if you have these dolls, I’ll sell them for you on eBay and send you the 70% and I’ll take
    0:38:57 my 30%.
    0:38:59 It was, it sounds very similar.
    0:39:01 Like if you have these ancient coins, I’ll help you sell them.
    0:39:04 I’ll help you monetize them and I’ll send you your percentage.
    0:39:04 That’s right.
    0:39:06 Yeah, that’s right.
    0:39:07 It works really well.
    0:39:10 What’s the email service that you’re using for that email list?
    0:39:12 I have everything through Squarespace.
    0:39:17 So then I have my email service through that domain, which I will tell you, you know, as even
    0:39:21 as somebody who’s done a few podcasts, having your own domain, your email address with your
    0:39:24 own domain probably makes you look a little bit more official, I think.
    0:39:25 Oh, for sure.
    0:39:26 In some cases.
    0:39:26 Yeah.
    0:39:28 So I recommend that.
    0:39:28 It’s cheap.
    0:39:32 And Squarespace is running the e-commerce side of Kinzer Coins too.
    0:39:36 I found that I was pretty able to make a pretty nice website without trying really, meaning
    0:39:38 I didn’t need a whole lot of education beforehand.
    0:39:43 It took me three hours to put together a workable website that, yeah, that’s great.
    0:39:47 I mean, and it’s so, it’s cheap, you know, we’re, we’re old enough to remember when people
    0:39:51 would spend a month putting together a website and spend a hundred thousand dollars or whatever.
    0:39:53 And now it’s so cheap.
    0:39:53 Yeah.
    0:39:54 Yeah.
    0:39:55 These tools, these tools make it easy.
    0:39:56 So that’s good.
    0:40:01 What is like starting over a couple of years into this Kinzer Coins journey, anything you
    0:40:03 would do differently to accelerate the journey?
    0:40:04 Yeah.
    0:40:09 So despite all my business knowledge of working my full-time day job, I didn’t figure out
    0:40:12 the consigning thing until I had invested my own money.
    0:40:16 So I will reiterate that for those of you who want to start a business.
    0:40:19 It’s better to spend other people’s money than your own.
    0:40:22 And that can kind of help, especially as you’re launching.
    0:40:27 Now, if you make enough profits spinning, then you can really start to buy some fantastic
    0:40:31 inventory, but I would not invest all of my money in my own stuff.
    0:40:34 I would try to figure out ways to work with people to get that.
    0:40:38 I think I probably would have not spent as much money on ads.
    0:40:43 I might’ve gone with an outsource option or I might’ve been just more thoughtful about
    0:40:43 it.
    0:40:47 Both are spends when you don’t really have a lot of spend in the business.
    0:40:53 Those are probably your two biggest and they probably are, if they’re mismanaged, you can
    0:40:54 go underwater pretty quick.
    0:40:55 Yeah, totally.
    0:40:55 Yeah.
    0:40:55 Yeah.
    0:40:57 Keep things lean for sure.
    0:40:57 Yeah, that’s right.
    0:41:00 And there’s people out there that are willing to help.
    0:41:02 Like I mentioned before, you just got to find them.
    0:41:05 And if you don’t know who they are, ask the person that does, you know, I mean, you never
    0:41:07 hurt anybody’s feelings by asking questions.
    0:41:08 That’s right.
    0:41:10 People love to help you out.
    0:41:11 What’s been the biggest surprise?
    0:41:12 It’s harder than I thought.
    0:41:14 That’s shameful as I say that.
    0:41:17 It is hard, but not in a way that you can’t do it.
    0:41:20 It’s just, it’s, sometimes it’s like, oh man, I wish this would work.
    0:41:23 And sometimes it doesn’t, but it makes the wins even that greater.
    0:41:24 So it’s a challenge.
    0:41:25 It’s a battle, right?
    0:41:30 You, you battle in your head, you battle these ideas, but I mean, it’s so fun.
    0:41:34 I mean, you know, I get a lot of satisfaction out of ancient coins because it lights people
    0:41:39 up in a way that most things don’t, but connecting people to stuff that they really want is very
    0:41:39 satisfying.
    0:41:44 You know, to me, I love that so much that, that it’s really worth it.
    0:41:48 I mean, you know, I wish I, I wish I had thought a little bit more about that at the beginning,
    0:41:50 but I think that’s the best part, honestly.
    0:41:54 There’s part of me that wants you to be like, oh, it was super easy.
    0:41:57 I put up these three videos and boom, boom, boom, you know, I was off to the races.
    0:41:58 I wish.
    0:42:02 So there’s another part of me who really appreciate you sharing, like, look, it’s work.
    0:42:03 It takes real work to build a business.
    0:42:04 I’ll decide.
    0:42:04 There’s both sides of it.
    0:42:05 All right.
    0:42:06 Where do you want to take it?
    0:42:08 What’s next for the business this year?
    0:42:11 I would like to partner at the very least with a museum.
    0:42:13 I hope that I get the opportunity.
    0:42:15 I’d like to do another event.
    0:42:21 We had an event last week at South by Southwest where I was a pop-up, believe it or not, coins
    0:42:23 at a pop-up at a cool hangout.
    0:42:25 But the host wanted to try it, and I think it was successful.
    0:42:27 I may do that again.
    0:42:32 I think there’s an event in Miami at the F1 that I might go to to do something like that.
    0:42:34 But more outreach, more ideas.
    0:42:37 I’d like to, you know, cross six figures.
    0:42:41 Can I pause you and say, like, what do you mean by in-person events?
    0:42:44 Like, how do you get on the agenda at South by Southwest or something like that?
    0:42:47 Well, that’s networking.
    0:42:52 I got found and was put on a podcast, and then I’ve just been harassing them until they make
    0:42:54 me a part of the traveling team.
    0:42:57 And that’s really what it was.
    0:42:58 Okay.
    0:43:00 So what did that pop-up look like?
    0:43:00 What did you do?
    0:43:04 Oh, I created a—there was a little space, so I put up tables.
    0:43:09 I invited two of the premier coin dealers down to meet me there, and we created a space with
    0:43:13 ancient coins, with Japanese samurai coins, and with shipwreck coins.
    0:43:18 So people would come in, and they would be surprised, and what is this?
    0:43:21 And then we would tell them stories about stuff, and people ate it up.
    0:43:22 They loved it.
    0:43:27 You know, we have a series of coins that are from Bactria, which was modern-day Afghanistan
    0:43:28 and Pakistan.
    0:43:32 We had a lot of people from Pakistan that came there and were super interested in those coins.
    0:43:36 You know, a lot of people who were interested in Julius Caesar and stuff like that.
    0:43:41 But it’s an interesting place, but people found it very comfortable and really got into it.
    0:43:43 So that’s another opportunity, right?
    0:43:44 Yeah.
    0:43:49 Is that something you sell tickets to, or this is just like, how do I piggyback on—there’s
    0:43:53 already thousands of people at this event, so I just want a little table on the side to
    0:43:54 try and bring a few people into my world.
    0:43:55 Be a vendor.
    0:43:56 Talk to people.
    0:43:57 That’s how you get them in the door, right?
    0:43:59 You got to reach out and talk to people.
    0:43:59 Okay.
    0:44:01 And then you mentioned museum partnership.
    0:44:02 Do you have anything specific in mind for that?
    0:44:10 Well, a friend of mine did a get-together with the Chicago Art Museum where they did sculptures
    0:44:11 and stuff like that.
    0:44:16 And that’s a space that I think is a really neat collaboration because a lot of these
    0:44:18 museums have—they have their own collections.
    0:44:20 They have their own ancient pieces.
    0:44:25 And to tie that together with collectors, I think, is a valuable experience.
    0:44:30 So I would like to be in the business of trying to arrange those kind of things to get people
    0:44:32 in and interested in the hobby.
    0:44:34 It’s just another avenue in which you can.
    0:44:39 You know, obviously, like at the Met, they have an incredible coin collection.
    0:44:42 Some of the most rare coins on display.
    0:44:45 Well, they obviously have coins that are not on display.
    0:44:49 And so there’s opportunities, you know, to showcase some of the stuff they don’t have
    0:44:54 on display or do a study based on something that they’ve found.
    0:44:56 Just a lot of—it’s neat.
    0:44:57 Part of history, right?
    0:44:57 Okay.
    0:45:00 That gives a little more context of like, well, no, no, no.
    0:45:02 People might already be on this museum’s mailing list, for example.
    0:45:04 Well, they’re obviously into history.
    0:45:09 If I could get the museum to promote a little pop-up, even if it’s just like an educational
    0:45:14 talk on like 10 stories around coins that are still in existence today, like that makes
    0:45:17 a lot of sense as a way to get in front of more of the target audience.
    0:45:18 So very cool.
    0:45:24 Ancient coins touch a lot of places because so much of the work is handmade and it’s a sculpture,
    0:45:29 essentially, that’s made and made by some of the artists that made the same—made the
    0:45:30 sculptures back in that time.
    0:45:32 just incredible artists.
    0:45:38 So it falls in really a really neat area of art and, you know, numismatics or the collection
    0:45:39 of coins.
    0:45:41 So it brings an eclectic group for sure.
    0:45:47 The Ancient Coin Hour on YouTube and, of course, the Ancient Coin Hour podcast.
    0:45:49 You can find Dean over there.
    0:45:51 KinzerCoins.com is your home base.
    0:45:56 If you want to see what kind of coins are available and at what prices and the stories behind those,
    0:45:58 cool website to check out.
    0:46:02 Let’s wrap this thing up with your number one tip for Side Hustle Nation.
    0:46:05 My number one tip is network, network, network.
    0:46:06 Get involved.
    0:46:07 Get to know people.
    0:46:11 Try—don’t isolate yourself because you’ll do better in business if you connect to people
    0:46:16 and connect to Nick and connect people in the Side Hustle Nation, all that kind of stuff.
    0:46:17 There are people out there to help you.
    0:46:18 It’s so true.
    0:46:22 This shirt is a little bit faded, but, you know, it says, you know, collaboration over competition
    0:46:25 and I think that’s the name of the game here.
    0:46:25 It’s like, how do you—
    0:46:26 100%.
    0:46:28 How do you become the tallest in your space?
    0:46:32 Well, you know, he’s going to have to stand on the shoulders of others if that’s eventually
    0:46:33 where you want to go.
    0:46:33 That’s right.
    0:46:36 A couple takeaways from me before we wrap.
    0:46:40 Number one, you know, we often talk about filling demand versus creating demand.
    0:46:44 It sounds like in this niche, there’s a little bit of market education in creating demand and
    0:46:48 that fuels the content and the interest and so it plays really nicely.
    0:46:54 We talked about going where the buyers are, fish where there’s fish, you know, to these coin
    0:46:57 shows, these collectible shows, even to these museums or other events where there’s
    0:47:01 thousands of people, like, how do I get, you know, on that agenda?
    0:47:05 And even if it’s just a small display or an educational talk, talked about lots of different
    0:47:10 ways to monetize the business through the consignment sales, staying lean, how do we do
    0:47:11 this in a low-risk way?
    0:47:17 And then the old JLD line about being the best, worst, and only, like, how do we niche down to
    0:47:19 be the go-to voice in a space?
    0:47:22 I think that’s something that Dean is doing really well.
    0:47:22 Thank you.
    0:47:25 If you are new to the show, thank you for tuning in.
    0:47:25 Welcome.
    0:47:30 We’ve got hundreds of actionable episodes, just like this one, in the archives to help
    0:47:30 you make some more money.
    0:47:36 If you’re wondering where to start, I want to invite you to build your own personalized playlist
    0:47:37 at hustle.show.
    0:47:42 How it works is you answer a few short, multiple-choice questions about your side hustle interests,
    0:47:43 your side hustle goals.
    0:47:45 You can do it right from your phone.
    0:47:46 It takes just a couple minutes.
    0:47:50 And then we’re going to recommend eight to ten episodes that are going to be most relevant
    0:47:50 to you.
    0:47:52 You can add those to your device.
    0:47:55 Tune in when you’re on your next drive or when you’re out walking the dog, you’re at the gym,
    0:47:56 whatever it is.
    0:48:00 Again, that’s hustle.show for that custom curated playlist.
    0:48:03 Big thanks to Dean for sharing his insight.
    0:48:06 Big thanks to our sponsors for helping make this content free for everyone.
    0:48:11 You can hit up sidehustlenation.com slash deals for all the latest offers from our sponsors
    0:48:12 in one place.
    0:48:15 Thank you for supporting the advertisers that support the show.
    0:48:16 That is it for me.
    0:48:18 Thank you so much for tuning in.
    0:48:21 Until next time, let’s go out there and make something happen.
    0:48:22 and I’ll catch you in the next edition
    0:48:23 of the Side Hustle Show.

    When you think of side hustles, flipping 2,000-year-old Roman coins probably isn’t the first thing that comes to mind.

    But for Dean Kinzer, what started as a nod to his dad’s hobby turned into a $86k/year side hustle, one built around history, storytelling, and a very specific type of collector.

    Dean runs KinzerCoins.com and The Ancient Coin Hour on YouTube, where he shares his love for ancient coins and educates others who are curious about the space.

    Here’s how he did it.

    Tune in to Episode 668 of the Side Hustle Show to learn:

    • how Dean turned a collector’s passion into real income
    • why ancient coins are the ultimate niche product
    • the low-risk strategies he used to build an $80k side hustle

    Full Show Notes: How I Built an $80k/year Side Hustle in an Obscure Niche

    New to the Show? Get your personalized money-making playlist here!

    Sponsors:

    Mint Mobile — Cut your wireless bill to $15 a month!

    Indeed – Start hiring NOW with a $75 sponsored job credit to upgrade your job post!

    OpenPhone — Get 20% off of your first 6 months!

    Gusto — Get 3 months free of the leading payroll, benefits, and HR provider for modern small businesses!

  • Prof G Markets: Global Pushback on Tariffs + Can the FTC Beat Meta?

    AI transcript
    0:00:04 Support for the show comes from Mercury, the fintech that more than 200,000 entrepreneurs
    0:00:05 use to simplify their finances.
    0:00:08 When banking can do more, your business can do more.
    0:00:11 With Mercury, you can watch your revenue climb with every invoice you send.
    0:00:14 You can stay current with contractors with built-in bill pay.
    0:00:17 You can unlock the credit you need to scale faster.
    0:00:20 Check it out for yourself at Mercury.com.
    0:00:22 Mercury, banking that does more.
    0:00:25 Mercury is a financial technology company, not a bank.
    0:00:31 Banking services provided by Choice Financial Group, Column N.A., and Evolve Bank & Trust, members FDIC.
    0:00:38 The I.O. card is issued by Patriot Bank, member FDIC, pursuant to a license from MasterCard.
    0:00:43 Support for the show comes from Public.com.
    0:00:46 If you’re serious about investing, you need to know about Public.com.
    0:00:49 That’s where you can invest in everything, stocks, options, bonds, and more,
    0:00:53 and even under 6% or higher yield that you can lock in with a bond account.
    0:00:59 Visit Public.com slash PropG and get up to $10,000 when you transfer your old portfolio.
    0:01:01 That’s Public.com slash PropG.
    0:01:06 Paid for by Public Investing, all investing involves the risk of loss, including loss of principal.
    0:01:11 Brokered services for U.S.-listed registered securities, options, and bonds in a self-directed
    0:01:16 account are offered by Public Investing, Inc., member FINRA, and SIPC.
    0:01:19 Complete disclosures available at Public.com slash disclosures.
    0:01:22 I should also disclose I am an investor in Public.
    0:01:25 www.importg.com.
    0:01:28 Avoiding your unfinished home projects because you’re not sure where to start?
    0:01:31 Thumbtack knows homes, so you don’t have to.
    0:01:35 Don’t know the difference between matte paint finish and satin?
    0:01:38 Or what that clunking sound from your dryer is?
    0:01:41 With Thumbtack, you don’t have to be a home pro.
    0:01:42 You just have to hire one.
    0:01:48 You can hire top-rated pros, see price estimates, and read reviews all on the app.
    0:01:49 Download today.
    0:01:51 Hey, Prof G listeners, it’s Ed.
    0:01:55 If you’re hearing this message, it’s because you’re still listening on the Prof G Pod feed,
    0:02:00 which means you are missing half of our episodes, which are on the Prof G Markets feed.
    0:02:05 So for all of the content, head over to the Prof G Markets podcast and hit follow.
    0:02:08 We’ve also left a link in the description to make it easier.
    0:02:10 You’ll see it’s a different logo.
    0:02:12 Prof G Pod is turquoise with Scott’s face.
    0:02:15 Prof G Markets is green with me in Scott’s face.
    0:02:17 Thank you, and I’ll see you over on the other feed.
    0:02:21 Today’s number, 476.
    0:02:27 That’s how many S&P 500 companies Warren Buffett could buy with the cash pile he’s sitting on.
    0:02:28 True story, Ed.
    0:02:30 This morning, I was taking a dump, and I immediately got up.
    0:02:31 I got startled by something.
    0:02:34 And for a brief moment, I was in between the basin and the floor.
    0:02:37 And I realized, Ed, I’m an astronaut.
    0:02:39 And I am here for feminism.
    0:02:41 And hear me roar.
    0:02:44 And we’re all one, Ed.
    0:02:45 We’re all one.
    0:02:57 I’m an astronaut, Ed.
    0:02:58 I’m an astronaut.
    0:03:01 Can you believe the amount of shit these women are getting?
    0:03:02 I’m so here for this.
    0:03:03 Ed, how are you?
    0:03:04 I’m doing well, Scott.
    0:03:05 I like your shirt.
    0:03:09 For those who are not watching on YouTube, Scott is wearing a Harvard Club of New York shirt.
    0:03:12 I assume this is a political statement.
    0:03:13 Well, you know me.
    0:03:14 I don’t like to draw attention to myself, Ed.
    0:03:18 Yeah, I wore a Canada shirt around.
    0:03:19 It was amazing.
    0:03:24 When I got bored last time I was in New York, I’d put on my Canada, my big Canadian leaf, whatever the maple leaf thing.
    0:03:27 And I’d walk around Soho, and people would go like, hey, thank you.
    0:03:28 We appreciate your support.
    0:03:31 That’s my Canadian accent, whatever that was.
    0:03:34 Sounded like a dead language of twins speak to each other.
    0:03:38 But yeah, it literally took Donald Trump to make me like Harvard.
    0:03:41 And I can’t stand Harvard.
    0:03:43 You know what I hate the most?
    0:03:45 Even Princeton douches aren’t this bad.
    0:03:47 You know what I just fucking hate?
    0:03:49 I’ll say someone will come up like, where did you go to college?
    0:03:50 And someone goes, I went to college in Boston.
    0:03:52 No, they say in Cambridge.
    0:04:02 You went to Harvard and you want everyone to know it, but you want to pretend to be humble because it’s so fucking awesome to have gone to Harvard that you pretend that it’s like you really shouldn’t rub your success.
    0:04:05 I want to strangle them.
    0:04:07 I want to send them to space.
    0:04:10 By the way, I think Katy Perry was replaced up there with someone else.
    0:04:14 I just, you know what the best thing about that Blue Origin thing was?
    0:04:16 This is a true story.
    0:04:19 You know, they’re trying to pretend it’s for all mankind, right?
    0:04:25 First off, that was a giant leap backwards for women when they, did you hear them screaming on the way down?
    0:04:30 Just free falling right there until those drugs.
    0:04:34 It’s like, oh, okay.
    0:04:37 Yeah, it’s a woman’s world.
    0:04:38 It’s a woman’s world.
    0:04:45 But when they were about to take off on launch, you know, they try to make it all dramatic and they’re like, T minus two minutes.
    0:04:53 And there’s all these newscasters, broadcasters, like desperate to get anyone to watch anything so they can sell more opioid-induced constipation meds.
    0:04:55 And they’re like, and this is just in.
    0:04:59 Katy Perry is actually going to sing when she’s up there.
    0:05:04 And literally on cue, when they said that, the guy in the control room goes, warning, one minute.
    0:05:08 And I’m like, one minute.
    0:05:09 They’re like, here’s your warning.
    0:05:11 She’s going to be singing in one minute.
    0:05:15 What did you think of the Blue Origin launch and these very brave women?
    0:05:18 I genuinely couldn’t give a fuck.
    0:05:21 I had no interest in the Blue Origin launch.
    0:05:23 I love how everyone’s shitting on them.
    0:05:25 But I wasn’t watching it when it happened.
    0:05:27 I didn’t watch any of the press releases.
    0:05:30 I couldn’t care less.
    0:05:37 I just think it’s insane that they still think that just by hawking these celebrities, they’re going to win everyone over.
    0:05:42 I mean, apparently they’re planning another one and they’ve got another batch of celebrities, only it’s men this time.
    0:05:45 I bet a few of those guys are going to come up with reasons they can’t do it.
    0:05:47 This is a bad luck.
    0:05:47 Absolutely.
    0:05:57 I mean, this is probably the worst celebrity PR event since the Imagine video during COVID.
    0:06:00 I think that probably, I went back and I watched that again.
    0:06:01 I was just thinking that.
    0:06:04 Imagine there’s no heaven.
    0:06:08 It’s easy if you try.
    0:06:12 That was the worst I’ve ever seen.
    0:06:17 It’s actually shocking if you go back and watch it, just how cringeworthy.
    0:06:19 I mean, it makes, it really makes your skin crawl.
    0:06:23 This was not quite at that level, but it was close.
    0:06:25 And I think, I think people just need to get into their heads.
    0:06:28 We don’t really care about these celebrities anymore.
    0:06:32 It doesn’t make us like you that Katy Perry is friends with you.
    0:06:34 I think we’re having a series of small revolutions.
    0:06:41 And I think of Black Lives Matter as basically in the Me Too movement, as righteous movements
    0:06:47 where systemic racism or abuse of power by men in corporations, people have just had enough.
    0:06:51 But in each of those instances in this one, they go after rich people.
    0:06:54 They’re not talking about racism in small and medium-sized companies.
    0:06:58 They’re not talking about systemic racism across the middle class.
    0:07:02 They’re talking, they go after, it’s sort of almost like a vehicle to go after rich people.
    0:07:10 And I think that essentially people are just so fed up with how much prosperity has been crammed into the top 1%.
    0:07:14 When they see someone who is rich, like if you’re rich, be rich and quiet.
    0:07:16 Go up in a fucking dildo if that’s what you want.
    0:07:17 Pay the money, fine.
    0:07:18 Have at it.
    0:07:29 But to try and capture social status and portray, to rebrand vanity and rebrand wealth as any sort of like virtue,
    0:07:32 people are just like, we’ve had it with these people.
    0:07:33 We’ve literally, we’ve had it.
    0:07:38 We don’t, I think these folks surround themselves in bubbles where they think they are super interesting
    0:07:42 and that what they do is inspiring and everything they do can be couched as something inspiring.
    0:07:47 And then the rest of the world goes, okay, if you’re rich and you can go up in a rocket
    0:07:52 and you’re in your betrothed to the third wealthiest man in the world, good for fucking you.
    0:07:54 But we don’t need to hear about it.
    0:07:54 Keep it to yourself.
    0:07:55 Your thoughts, Ed.
    0:07:57 Should we start this show?
    0:07:58 I’m sorry.
    0:07:58 I’m sorry.
    0:07:59 Bring us back.
    0:08:00 Get to the headlines.
    0:08:02 Let’s start with our weekly review of Market Vitals.
    0:08:11 The S&P 500 declined.
    0:08:13 The dollar struggled to recover from its three-year low.
    0:08:17 Bitcoin was volatile and the yield on 10-year treasuries fell.
    0:08:19 Shifting to the headlines.
    0:08:25 Gold hit a record high, surpassing $3,300 per ounce for the first time in history.
    0:08:32 Goldman Sachs projected prices could soar to $4,500 by the end of 2025 in a worst-case risk scenario.
    0:08:37 The Trump administration announced new restrictions on chip exports by NVIDIA and AMD,
    0:08:42 which will cost the companies $5.5 billion and $800 million, respectively.
    0:08:48 The news sent shares of both companies down around 7%, which dragged the Nasdaq 2% lower.
    0:08:54 And finally, Jerome Powell called tariffs a challenging scenario for the Federal Reserve,
    0:08:58 warning they will likely lead to higher prices and rising unemployment.
    0:09:02 A day later, Trump responded on Truth Social, and he said,
    0:09:02 quote,
    0:09:05 Powell’s termination cannot come fast enough.
    0:09:10 So, Scott, let’s get your thoughts here, starting with gold.
    0:09:16 I just want to quickly highlight some additional data I found here from the Bank of America Fund
    0:09:17 Manager Survey.
    0:09:22 They survey all the top hedge funds, all the top pension funds, money managers all around the world.
    0:09:25 And just some of the results here.
    0:09:31 So, half of fund managers say they believe long gold is currently the most crowded trade in the world
    0:09:37 right now, more crowded than long Magnificent Seven, which has been the top trade for the past
    0:09:38 several years.
    0:09:46 And then also, 42% of managers said they believe gold will be the best-performing asset class in 2025.
    0:09:54 So, quite striking, this reversal in the market trends away from tech, away from stocks, and towards gold.
    0:09:55 Your thoughts?
    0:10:00 So, the uncertainty index in the United States has hit a – it’s at the highest it’s been since the 80s.
    0:10:05 So, people are feeling more uncertain about the U.S. economy right now than when we had a virus killing.
    0:10:09 You know, they killed a million people and there was lockdowns and they closed schools.
    0:10:11 People are more uncertain today than they were during COVID.
    0:10:16 And there’s always a flight to quality or a fight – not even a flight to quality, a flight to hard
    0:10:21 assets where if shit gets real, I can take my gold bars and head to my bunker, right?
    0:10:26 It’s – it is kind of – the gold is really sort of an uncertainty index.
    0:10:30 And the reason why the trade is so crowded is not only because of uncertainty but because of greed.
    0:10:34 Because if you look at economic history, if you look at every recession, let’s go through each of them
    0:10:37 and how gold performed relative to the S&P 500.
    0:10:41 From 73 to 75, the return to gold returned 73%.
    0:10:43 The S&P was down 37.
    0:10:48 From 1980 to 82, the S&P lost 27% of its value.
    0:10:50 Gold was up 120%.
    0:10:52 90 to 91 – I remember this.
    0:10:54 This is when I got out of grad school and couldn’t find a job.
    0:10:58 The S&P returned negative 3%.
    0:10:59 Gold was up 7.
    0:11:02 2001, market down 13.
    0:11:03 Gold up 5.
    0:11:08 2007 to 2009, actually from 07 to 2011, gold doubled.
    0:11:14 And then in 2020 during COVID, Q1, the S&P was down 34%.
    0:11:18 Year-to-date for the whole year was up 16, but gold was up 30%.
    0:11:20 Now, is this a giant buy signal?
    0:11:24 I don’t know, buyer beware because a lot of that – I mean, it was just such an obvious
    0:11:26 and smart – things seem so obvious in hindsight.
    0:11:30 A couple weeks ago, when he announced his tariffs, really think, okay, this is going to create
    0:11:31 uncertainty.
    0:11:31 It’s stupid.
    0:11:33 He’s declaring war on everyone all at once.
    0:11:35 What would be a good trade?
    0:11:37 And this feels like obvious in hindsight now.
    0:11:38 I don’t know.
    0:11:44 Basically, when a trade is super crowded, you get scared because that means it’s probably
    0:11:45 a bit overvalued.
    0:11:47 I mean, the run-up here has been pretty significant.
    0:11:51 One thing that’s quite interesting, though, is what’s happening to Bitcoin, because remember,
    0:11:53 Bitcoin is supposed to be the same thing.
    0:11:54 Nah, it’s correlated.
    0:11:54 Right.
    0:11:54 Yeah.
    0:11:59 It’s supposed to be, you know, like the ultimate gold, even safer than gold.
    0:12:06 But you look at the price of Bitcoin, it fell in concert with the S&P right after the tariff.
    0:12:08 It’s down 10% year-to-date.
    0:12:11 The S&P is down 10% year-to-date as well.
    0:12:14 It’s basically tracked with the stock market.
    0:12:18 And then you look at gold, which is up 26% so far.
    0:12:24 So this really, I mean, there have been so many moments where it’s been Bitcoin’s big opportunity
    0:12:27 to step up as the new digital gold.
    0:12:32 I mean, I think the first example I would think of would have been Russia invading Ukraine,
    0:12:39 where we had another sort of uncertain doomsday global warfare scenario on our hands.
    0:12:41 The stock market tanked, gold rallied.
    0:12:44 But then you look at Bitcoin, and it was just tracking with the stock market.
    0:12:46 Here, we’re seeing the same thing again.
    0:12:51 I’m not saying Bitcoin isn’t digital gold.
    0:12:54 I think you can make the argument that it could be.
    0:12:59 But at least right now, today, in 2025, the market does not view it as that.
    0:13:06 But let’s move on here to what happened with these chip makers and this new order from the
    0:13:11 Trump administration, which is restricting these H20 chips for NVIDIA.
    0:13:15 I want to just clarify what this actually means for NVIDIA, because, you know, the headlines
    0:13:21 are saying that NVIDIA is taking a $5.5 billion hit, which is a little bit misleading.
    0:13:29 So that $5.5 billion number, that is the number that NVIDIA cited in this regulatory filing,
    0:13:36 saying this is what we expect to be charged with this new H20 chip restriction.
    0:13:41 But it’s a backward-looking number, because it’s only describing all of the money they’ve
    0:13:43 already spent on these H20 chips.
    0:13:50 What it doesn’t include is all of the revenue they’re about to lose on not selling all of
    0:13:51 those chips to China.
    0:13:58 And that number is closer to around $15 to $16 to $17 billion.
    0:14:04 And so that’s why you saw this huge decline in NVIDIA stock, which brought the rest of the
    0:14:05 tech markets down with it.
    0:14:12 Because this new order from the administration, it essentially wipes out all of NVIDIA’s China
    0:14:13 revenue.
    0:14:18 And last year, China accounted for around 13% of NVIDIA’s total revenue.
    0:14:21 And today, it’s going to be zero.
    0:14:25 So, you know, when you read that headline, you know, or you read the executive order, which
    0:14:33 says, we’re putting a restriction on this specific chip at NVIDIA, this specific H20 chip, that’s
    0:14:35 not really what’s happening.
    0:14:40 What they’re basically saying is China is now off limits for NVIDIA.
    0:14:46 And what I’ve been wondering in the wake of this order is what on earth is going through Jensen
    0:14:47 Huang’s head right now?
    0:14:53 Because you might recall, you know, why does this H20 chip even exist?
    0:14:59 The reason that that was created was it was Jensen Huang’s response to a Biden administration
    0:15:03 order, which said that we can’t be selling our most advanced chips to China.
    0:15:10 And so Jensen Huang and NVIDIA responded by creating this slower, less capable chip.
    0:15:12 And that was their attempt to fall in line.
    0:15:14 It was designed specifically for China.
    0:15:17 And now, two years later, the government is saying, actually, never mind.
    0:15:20 We’re not going to let you sell these chips at all.
    0:15:23 So this is really a logistical nightmare for NVIDIA.
    0:15:28 And I do find it hilarious to think about how Trump was touted for so long as the pro-business
    0:15:32 candidate and all these CEOs believed it and they were super excited.
    0:15:38 But so far, what we’re seeing is that this is pretty much the most anti-business president
    0:15:39 America has ever seen.
    0:15:42 So it will be interesting to see how Jensen deals with it.
    0:15:46 I just read recently that he actually just flew to China and met with Chinese officials.
    0:15:51 But this is definitely a big problem for Jensen Huang.
    0:15:54 And that’s why you’re seeing this big devaluation in the stock.
    0:15:59 I was initially in favor of the chip bans to China because I thought, OK, these are the
    0:16:03 same chips that are used in missiles to help guide them real time or drones.
    0:16:05 But what did they do?
    0:16:06 They came up with a workaround.
    0:16:09 They came up with essentially DeepSeek.
    0:16:09 DeepSeek.
    0:16:15 So there’s an argument that, OK, all you’re doing is inspiring them to come up, make their
    0:16:18 own investments and then come up with their own chips and develop their own industry.
    0:16:24 So, you know, if there’s a company that could give back some gains and be fine, it’d be Nvidia.
    0:16:29 But just the amount of time they’re spending trying to navigate this bullshit as opposed to
    0:16:35 making a better chip, you can just see there’s this is this is the Republican argument.
    0:16:39 Government needs to get out of the way with stuff like this.
    0:16:46 And this is creating just a lot of unnecessary time and energy and waste.
    0:16:52 But the export ban hands the Chinese air market over to domestic competitors, including Huawei.
    0:16:53 So it’s kind of a gift.
    0:17:01 Again, I keep thinking that all of this kind of kind of bubbles up to medium and long term gains for for
    0:17:02 China.
    0:17:07 I think I used to think that China’s hit a pretty big speed bump the last five or seven
    0:17:09 years that America was pulling away.
    0:17:14 I think over the next, actually, everyone talks about our ability to ruin China’s China’s economy.
    0:17:19 I think in two or three years relative to US performance, China is going to and maybe India.
    0:17:20 It’ll be interesting to see what India does.
    0:17:24 But I think China is going to China’s going to perform.
    0:17:30 Yeah, I think to your point, if you’re very worried about China, then creating this all
    0:17:34 out ban on sending any AI chips to China is probably reasonable.
    0:17:40 What’s funny just is that this was supposed to be the tech industry’s guy.
    0:17:49 But then we keep seeing these policies that can only spell just disaster from a supply chain
    0:17:51 perspective for many of these big tech CEOs.
    0:17:54 And so how is Jensen going to deal with it?
    0:18:02 Is he going to continue to fall in line and be quite polite and gracious towards the president?
    0:18:04 Or is he going to start getting upset?
    0:18:06 And we saw this trip to China.
    0:18:10 Maybe that’s an indication that he’s about to move in the other direction.
    0:18:12 I think that’s the thing that we want to keep an eye on.
    0:18:17 How do you manage your public relationship with the president?
    0:18:20 I think at first we saw they all decided we’re going to kowtow to him.
    0:18:22 We’re going to show up to the inauguration.
    0:18:25 We’re going to donate to the inauguration fund, et cetera, et cetera, et cetera.
    0:18:31 But I can see that beginning to change in the next few months or so once they all realize this
    0:18:37 guy isn’t really making through on the promises that he that he told us.
    0:18:37 I agree.
    0:18:40 And we’ll talk more about this in predictions.
    0:18:42 But I think the worm has turned.
    0:18:50 I think that essentially there’s an enormously ripe opportunity for people in both the Republican
    0:18:52 Party and in corporations to stand up and go.
    0:18:58 Basically, what the Harvard president did said, you know, look, look, boss, what you’re doing
    0:19:02 is wrong and we’re not going to put up with it and we’re not going to try and kiss your ass
    0:19:08 and massage and figure out a way to couch, you know, to call your your, you know, your
    0:19:13 quote unquote 40 chess of eating the pieces somehow genius.
    0:19:13 We’ve had it.
    0:19:17 You’re you’re they’re going to find a polite starts way to say you’re a fucking idiot and
    0:19:18 we’re not down with this.
    0:19:22 And it’s been striking the silence from these guys.
    0:19:29 All 500 S&B CEOs think this is just fucking stupid, bad for America, bad for everybody.
    0:19:36 Zero of them have spoken out because what Trump has done is create an incentive system where
    0:19:39 for short term shareholder value, just stay quiet and nod and announce that you’re building
    0:19:42 a five hundred billion dollar plant that you’re always planning to do and credit him and give
    0:19:43 him a million bucks.
    0:19:44 That has changed.
    0:19:51 There’s now an enormous consumer opportunity to stand up and and, you know, be an American
    0:19:53 and show some leadership.
    0:19:57 I think at a certain point, once your once your market cap is eviscerated as much as many
    0:20:00 of these companies are, you don’t really have a choice.
    0:20:02 You know who’s perfect for this?
    0:20:02 Who?
    0:20:05 Because they are an aggressive brand.
    0:20:07 They’re an American brand.
    0:20:08 Palantir.
    0:20:10 I don’t think it’s Palantir.
    0:20:12 I think Palantir is so overvalued right now.
    0:20:15 To your point, it needs to be a company that’s been gotten the shit kicked out of it and doesn’t
    0:20:16 have a lot to lose.
    0:20:20 I think this would be the gangster move for Nike.
    0:20:20 Great point.
    0:20:23 I think because they came out.
    0:20:23 They came out.
    0:20:24 First off.
    0:20:25 The all-American company.
    0:20:25 Yeah.
    0:20:28 Well, Elliott Hill doesn’t have a lot to lose.
    0:20:29 Stocks at a 12-year low.
    0:20:31 He’s in a honeymoon phase.
    0:20:32 He’s the new CEO.
    0:20:35 They have a history of being unafraid around politics.
    0:20:39 They were very smart around capturing a moment with Colin Kaepernick.
    0:20:44 If they weaponized Whedon Kennedy, or some of the most creative people in the world, and
    0:20:52 said, there’s something about America and competition and fair play and having people from different
    0:20:57 backgrounds and the power of immigrants to become American in sport, they could come up
    0:21:02 with something really moving that highlights what’s going on here is not American.
    0:21:07 And look at it through the lens of sport and look at it through the lens of a great American
    0:21:08 company like Nike.
    0:21:11 And to your point, they don’t have a lot to lose at this point.
    0:21:18 There has never been a bigger, a more ripe opportunity for a Fortune 500 CEO to stand up and
    0:21:22 say, all right, you know, the men have shown up.
    0:21:24 And they’re saying the quiet parts out loud.
    0:21:27 I mean, they know that everyone else agrees with them.
    0:21:31 And those are usually the people who are rewarded, who are the people who are the first ones to say it.
    0:21:32 It’s a smart move economically.
    0:21:36 The wealthiest 10% control 50% of the consumer economy now.
    0:21:42 And what percentage of those people do you think are waiting for someone to stand up and
    0:21:43 call bullshit on all this bullshit?
    0:21:49 There’s an enormous opportunity for a consumer brand to come out and be the good guys here.
    0:21:55 Also, enormous risk in being the second, third, fourth, or fifth one to come out and say, like…
    0:21:57 Yeah, the juice is squeezed.
    0:21:59 The first guy who does this, the juice is squeezed.
    0:22:04 The Harvard president, this was the best brand move of 2025 year to date, probably.
    0:22:05 It was Harvard.
    0:22:07 All of a sudden, they look like the good guys in Columbia.
    0:22:11 But if all the other Ivies start to follow suit, they look weak.
    0:22:12 I wouldn’t say they look weak.
    0:22:13 They just don’t look as good.
    0:22:14 Yeah.
    0:22:22 So the first CEO who stands up and says, okay, come after me, have at it, sees a massive
    0:22:26 inflow of goodwill from foreign and domestic manufacturers and consumers.
    0:22:31 And the person that goes, the half-life here, the drop-off will be enormous.
    0:22:39 And numbers two, three, four, five, and six get 10% of the credit that the first person gets.
    0:22:41 And no one’s done it yet.
    0:22:47 Even a guy like Jamie Dimon’s been kind of like dancing around, being like, just in case you want me as treasury secretary, I’m here.
    0:22:49 And I don’t want to say anything to offend anybody.
    0:22:51 You know, enough already.
    0:22:51 Enough.
    0:22:52 Absolutely.
    0:22:58 Let’s move on to Jerome Powell, his comments, and then Trump’s response.
    0:23:01 I just find this hilarious because you actually look at Jerome Powell’s comments.
    0:23:03 They were incredibly tame.
    0:23:05 And I’ll just read you what he said here.
    0:23:06 He said, quote,
    0:23:08 These are very fundamental policy changes.
    0:23:11 There isn’t a modern experience of how to think about this.
    0:23:16 The level of the tariff increases announced so far is significantly larger than anticipated.
    0:23:23 We may find ourselves in the challenging scenario in which our dual mandate goals are in tension.
    0:23:33 Very uncontroversial thing to say, you know, calling it like it is, but calmly and without being aggressive or pugnacious.
    0:23:43 And then Trump goes on this tweet storm or his truth storm saying, quote, Powell’s termination cannot come fast enough, exclamation point.
    0:23:48 It’s actually threatening that he’s going to fire the Fed chair.
    0:23:52 Now, many people are arguing whether that’s even possible.
    0:23:55 Technically it is, but he needs to have a reason.
    0:24:00 You can only fire a member of the board of the Fed for cause.
    0:24:04 So he needs to have proven that he’s done something legitimately wrong.
    0:24:11 But beyond that, just kind of remarkable to see the president threatening the chair of the Federal Reserve.
    0:24:13 Scott, your reactions?
    0:24:17 It’s very difficult to predict the actions of the Mad King at this point.
    0:24:23 But you do get the sense based on him blinking last week that he does listen to the markets.
    0:24:33 And if you want to talk about waking up to a 3,500, maybe even an 8,000 point drop in the Dow, fire Chairman Powell.
    0:24:48 Because a key component and accepted general best practice across Western economies is you have to insulate the head of the bank, the central bank and the Fed or whatever the equivalent institution is.
    0:24:50 So you have to separate it.
    0:24:56 You have to give it protection or immunity from political pressure because these guys are all so horny for power.
    0:25:00 The economy – most people are voted out of office.
    0:25:02 The number one reason is people are dissatisfied with the economy.
    0:25:11 And the easiest way to juice the economy is just to call the chairman and say, I’m going to fire you unless you cut interest rates by – I need you to announce five cuts.
    0:25:12 The market will go up.
    0:25:17 That could be disastrous, though, for the economy.
    0:25:32 And these people are supposed to just look at all the data and do their best job and decide interest rates and take into account the million points of light they observe and do what is best for the economy over the medium and long term, not based on what is going to get this guy reelected.
    0:25:35 The scary part is I think his term is up next year.
    0:25:35 Is that right?
    0:25:36 When?
    0:25:37 2026, yeah.
    0:25:39 So the scary part is who does he put in?
    0:25:40 Does he put in Ask Clown Lutnik?
    0:25:42 I mean, does he put in Stephen Miller?
    0:25:43 Does he put in Kid Rock?
    0:25:46 We’re cutting interest rates to 0%.
    0:25:47 Let America bloom.
    0:25:48 Let our companies run.
    0:25:52 And it’s like, OK, now we have 22% inflation.
    0:26:02 I mean, Chairman Powell, arguably, if you consider him technically part of the administration, is the most competent person in the administration or has the best reputation.
    0:26:07 So I think the next Democratic president is going to give him the National Medal of Freedom.
    0:26:08 Yeah.
    0:26:10 It really is just inflation 101.
    0:26:16 Like, you look at any society or an economy where you’ve had runaway hyperinflation.
    0:26:17 You look at Zimbabwe.
    0:26:19 You look at Venezuela.
    0:26:20 You look at all these other—
    0:26:21 Weimar Germany.
    0:26:22 Weimar Germany.
    0:26:24 All these other situations.
    0:26:29 And basically what happens is the central bank loses its independence.
    0:26:31 It becomes captive to the dictator.
    0:26:35 The dictator says, you know, I want to juice the economy.
    0:26:38 They start printing money like crazy to meet all these short-term demands.
    0:26:40 And then suddenly you have runaway inflation.
    0:26:43 This is not unlike that.
    0:26:48 And Trump is literally threatening him and ordering him to cut rates.
    0:26:50 He’s calling him too late Powell.
    0:26:56 And this is coming at a time when inflation is set to explode because of what we’re seeing with the tariffs.
    0:27:07 Like, it’s kind of funny how stereotypical the situation is when you look through history and why runaway inflation happens in the first place.
    0:27:10 Now, we’re not at that point.
    0:27:17 And the good news is we have a great Fed chair who is, you know, rational, sensible, but most importantly, very strong, clearly.
    0:27:21 I don’t think he’s going to reverse any decision just because Trump told him to.
    0:27:26 But again, the implication here is pretty massive.
    0:27:37 You know, if Trump was successful in removing Powell, it would be a huge hit to the stock market, as you say, also to the treasury markets.
    0:27:41 I mean, what we’d see in the yield, we wouldn’t be at four and a half percent.
    0:27:44 We’d be hitting five, six, probably seven percent.
    0:27:48 I mean, it would totally eviscerate our credibility in the debt markets.
    0:27:57 So I have a friend who lives in London who has a company doing independent research on media and technology.
    0:27:59 And his name is Richard Kramer.
    0:28:02 He runs this niche, very high quality research firm.
    0:28:03 I think it’s called Aret.
    0:28:06 I don’t know if it’s like some name that’s hard to pronounce.
    0:28:10 Anyways, he sent me an email saying the following.
    0:28:17 Did you see the B of A survey, global fund managers’ interest in investing in U.S. is at a 30-year low?
    0:28:19 So what does that mean?
    0:28:26 It means we’re going to have to raise our, you know, we’re going to have to raise the interest rates we pay for money to come in.
    0:28:28 And that’s going to be inflationary.
    0:28:34 This is really, I’m like, I’m trying to work through all the second order effects here.
    0:28:40 Can you imagine what’s going to happen to the earnings of export and import dependent companies?
    0:28:43 We haven’t even seen the earnings yet, and it’s going to be in a few months from now.
    0:28:47 Like, we haven’t even been able to price any of this in yet properly.
    0:28:48 Yeah, they don’t know what to order.
    0:28:50 They don’t have to stop all shipments.
    0:29:02 They can’t just flip a switch and massively reconfigure their supply chain and start getting, you know, start getting outdoor furniture from overnight from Chile as opposed to China.
    0:29:17 It’s just, yeah, I got to think there’s, you’re going to hear the term uncertainty and impact from tariffs in almost, it’s going to be a more common used phrase than AI in earnings calls over the next three months.
    0:29:19 Everyone’s going to be like, they’ll blame me.
    0:29:20 And some of it will be untrue.
    0:29:22 Some of it will just be coming to start performing well.
    0:29:24 But they’ll blame everything.
    0:29:27 It is going to be, literally everyone’s going to blame everything on this.
    0:29:33 We’ll be right back after the break with a look at how the world is pushing back on tariffs.
    0:29:39 If you’re enjoying the show so far, be sure to give the Prof G Markets feed a follow wherever you get your podcasts.
    0:29:49 Support for the show comes from public.com.
    0:29:50 All right.
    0:29:53 And if you’re serious about investing, you need to know about public.com.
    0:29:54 That’s where you can invest in everything.
    0:29:56 Stocks, options, bonds, and more.
    0:30:04 They even offer some of the highest yields in the industry, including the bond account’s 6% or higher yield that remains locked in, even if the Fed cuts rates.
    0:30:08 With Public, you can get the tools you need to make informed investment decisions.
    0:30:17 Their built-in AI tools called Alpha doesn’t just tell you if an asset is moving, it tells you why the asset is moving, so you can actually understand what’s driving your portfolio performance.
    0:30:24 Public is a FINRA-registered, SIPC-insured, U.S.-based company with a customer support team that actually cares.
    0:30:29 Bottom line, your investments deserve a platform that takes them as seriously as you do.
    0:30:36 Fund your account in five minutes or less at public.com slash Prof G and get up to $10,000 when you transfer your old portfolio.
    0:30:39 That’s public.com slash Prof G.
    0:30:47 Paid for by public investing, all investing involves the risk of loss, including loss of principal, brokered services for U.S.-listed registered securities, options, and bonds,
    0:30:52 and a self-directed account are offered by Public Investing, Inc., member FINRA, and SIPC.
    0:30:55 Complete disclosures available at public.com slash disclosures.
    0:30:58 I should also disclose I am an investor in public.
    0:31:04 Support for the show comes from Groom’s.
    0:31:08 If you’re looking for a new tasty nutrition solution, then look no further than Groom’s.
    0:31:12 It’s a convenient, comprehensive formula packed into eight gummies a day.
    0:31:16 Groom’s isn’t a multivitamin, a greens gummy, or a prebiotic.
    0:31:19 It’s all of those things, and then some at a fraction of the price.
    0:31:25 Their daily packs contain eight gummies because you just can’t fit the amount of nutrients they do just into one gummy.
    0:31:33 Generic multivitamins only contain around seven to nine vitamins, but Groom’s have more than 20 vitamins and minerals, plus more than 60 whole food ingredients.
    0:31:37 They actually provided us with a bit of science to explain what makes Groom’s different.
    0:31:48 Basically, 30% of the population has a gene that messes with how they absorb vitamins, but Groom’s is methylated, which is a fancy way of saying their vitamins like B12 and folate can be absorbed by your body.
    0:31:54 Methylating is an expensive option for a lot of other companies, but Groom’s is looking out for you.
    0:31:59 Plus, they’re vegan and free of nuts, dairy, and gluten, and they’re made with no artificial colors or flavors.
    0:32:03 Get up to 45% off when you go to Groom’s.co and use code PROFG.
    0:32:07 That’s G-R-U-N-S dot C-O.
    0:32:11 Using code PROFG for 45% off.
    0:32:16 Support for the show comes from Found.
    0:32:21 When you’re a small business owner, making sure your bookkeeping and taxes stay in order comes at a cost.
    0:32:22 I’m not talking about your money.
    0:32:23 I’m talking about your time.
    0:32:30 Hours and hours you could have spent actually growing your business, but the reality is it doesn’t have to be that way thanks to Found.
    0:32:34 Found is a banking platform that doesn’t just consolidate your financial ecosystem.
    0:32:38 It automates manual activities like expense tracking and finding tax write-offs.
    0:32:43 Found can make staying on top of invoices and payments easy, and small businesses are loving Found.
    0:32:45 One Found user said this,
    0:32:47 Found is going to save me so much headache.
    0:32:49 It makes everything so much easier.
    0:32:51 Expenses, income, profits, taxes, invoices even.
    0:32:54 That’s just one of their 30,000 five-star reviews.
    0:33:02 You can open a Found account for free at found.com slash PROFG, spelled F-O-U-N-D dot com slash PROFG.
    0:33:05 Found is a financial technology company, not a bank.
    0:33:08 Banking services are provided by Piermont Bank, member FDIC.
    0:33:10 Don’t put this one off.
    0:33:13 Join thousands of small business owners who have streamlined their finances with Found.
    0:33:23 We’re back with PROFG Markets.
    0:33:28 The trade war is officially on, and Trump’s strategy for the U.S. is clear.
    0:33:30 Shock and awe tariffs.
    0:33:32 But other countries aren’t sitting still.
    0:33:35 They’re responding with strategic moves of their own.
    0:33:38 China is leading the economic pushback.
    0:33:42 China’s central bank told state-owned banks to cut their U.S. dollar purchases.
    0:33:49 It also ordered its airlines to stop deliveries of Boeing jets, and they curbed their rare earth
    0:33:51 exports to the U.S.
    0:33:53 But it’s not just China.
    0:33:57 Canada is starting to boycott U.S. goods, such as American whiskey.
    0:34:00 Brazil passed a bill to impose their own tariff countermeasures.
    0:34:07 And in Denmark, the largest grocer in the country is putting Black Star labels on European products
    0:34:20 So, Scott, the world appears to be coalescing against a common enemy here in the U.S.
    0:34:27 Any thoughts on how this might all play out and what we as investors should do about it?
    0:34:31 I mean, there’s just some of the most basics of strategy.
    0:34:40 If you’re 5% of the world’s economy or world’s population, but you have a quarter of its economic
    0:34:45 growth or a quarter of its prosperity, you are highly levered to the upside.
    0:34:51 And some of that comes from this most basic of advantages as a species.
    0:34:54 You have leveraged the most basic species, and that is cooperation.
    0:34:57 And generally speaking, the U.S. believes in free trade.
    0:34:58 We make outstanding products.
    0:35:01 So, we say to people, okay, well, for the most part, we’ll compete.
    0:35:04 And we win on a regular basis.
    0:35:13 And to declare war on everyone all at once is just, okay, that absolutely makes no sense.
    0:35:19 In addition, his second really big strategic error was underestimating the competition.
    0:35:27 While we have issued tariffs based on some junior economic analysts and fed it into chat GPT,
    0:35:34 and he’s claimed that 75 nations are lining up to talk to us, we don’t have, in this administration,
    0:35:39 we don’t have the human capital to the brainpower to even begin those conversations distinct to the
    0:35:44 fact it’s a lie and all of these nations are lining up to exit relationships with the U.S.
    0:35:46 What they’re doing is they’re having conversations with each other.
    0:35:49 There are more, it’s really interesting.
    0:35:55 Donald Trump’s actions are actually going to inspire, in my opinion, some growth over the medium and long term.
    0:35:58 Because I think every, I think he is going to say, all right, enough of this shit.
    0:36:04 The best way to fight back is for us to put our shit aside and deregulate and to bring down trade barriers.
    0:36:10 You’re just going to see all these strange bedfellows to say, hey, Brazil, we’re Denmark.
    0:36:18 Why don’t we lower all of our trade barriers and, you know, you buy more, I don’t know, more cobbler shoes and we buy more steak or whatever.
    0:36:21 I don’t know what it is that Denmark, what did the Danish produce?
    0:36:22 A Zenpeg.
    0:36:23 Oh, is that right?
    0:36:25 Is that where Nova Nordisk is?
    0:36:25 Yep.
    0:36:26 Oh, there you go.
    0:36:33 But I mean, just as an example here, I mean, we’re seeing, we’re beginning to see that in very niche categories.
    0:36:46 For example, Cote d’Ivoire, which produces 40% of the world’s cocoa, they’re now throttling their prices on the US and now forming a partnership with the EU.
    0:36:56 So, I mean, just small examples like that, where you have little nations that are kind of like, wait, what are these tariffs and why are you trying to hurt us?
    0:36:59 And the natural response is to go find allies somewhere else.
    0:37:07 But then you look at China’s actions, which are probably the most dangerous to our economy.
    0:37:12 I mean, I mentioned that boycott of Boeing jets.
    0:37:18 I mean, China has historically accounted for a quarter of Boeing sales.
    0:37:20 Our biggest exporter, by dollar, by Boeing.
    0:37:22 Largest exporter.
    0:37:26 They’re also curbing these rare earth minerals.
    0:37:32 And these are the materials we use to create jets, to create satellites, to create batteries.
    0:37:37 And they control 90% of the global production supply of rare earth minerals.
    0:37:42 And it does sort of beg the question, like, can we actually win this?
    0:37:53 I mean, even if China is our enemy, even if we do want a trade war, if we decide that’s something we actually want, are we actually going to win that?
    0:37:56 Especially if they start teaming up with everyone else.
    0:37:59 Is this like even a winnable war?
    0:38:00 We’re a services economy.
    0:38:05 We talk about Boeing and big manufacturers and, you know, Jack Daniels.
    0:38:07 At some point, it’s going to jump the shark.
    0:38:14 And the biggest IPOs in the world of companies not headquartered in the U.S., they’re going to say, we’re not using Goldman or JP Morgan or Morgan Stanley.
    0:38:16 We’re going to go with Deutsche Bank.
    0:38:17 HSBC.
    0:38:21 Yeah, we’re going to go with other investment banks.
    0:38:22 We don’t need this bullshit.
    0:38:26 And by the way, David Solomon and Jamie Dimon, grow a fucking pair.
    0:38:28 Say something, for God’s sakes.
    0:38:30 And that’s the opportunity.
    0:38:37 David Solomon, who I know, if he just came out and said, this is just fucking insane, I think he would get a torrent of business.
    0:38:43 Their best business, the business they’ve all tried to evolve, is wealth management because it’s much more predictable.
    0:38:50 They can produce between 50 and 100 basis points a year on AUM from wealthy people by managing their taxes, being thoughtful.
    0:38:52 And by the way, I know firsthand they do a great job.
    0:38:53 They do a great job.
    0:38:58 And it’s a better business because it’s not subject to all these fluctuations from the market.
    0:39:03 If they want more AUM, they should come out and say, this is bullshit.
    0:39:04 Canada is our friends.
    0:39:07 The EU is – they are our friends.
    0:39:08 These are our allies.
    0:39:09 You know what’s going to happen?
    0:39:17 A bunch of really super wealthy people are going to say, oh, my God, I’d like to invest in a company run by a guy who has fucking testicles.
    0:39:30 There is such a huge opportunity for one of these guys to stand up and say enough is enough and couch it as we have wonderful relations with companies and people in Europe.
    0:39:42 JP Morgan does a huge amount of business in Europe and in Asia, and they are going to see Trump full of bluster and anger and threaten to weaponize the DOJ against him.
    0:39:45 And then like a cat chasing a fucking red dot, he’ll go on to the next thing.
    0:39:52 And that company is going to get more business over the next 12 or 24 months because you know what, Ed?
    0:39:54 The North remembers.
    0:39:55 The North remembers.
    0:39:58 And right now, the North is everyone else.
    0:40:01 They will remember who actually stood up to this shit.
    0:40:05 There is never – it’s never the wrong time to do the right thing.
    0:40:27 Just on that point that we’re sort of declaring war on everyone else and what a ridiculous idea that is, this reminds me I’ve been thinking about this amazing joke by one of my favorite comedians, Norm MacDonald, where he’s talking about the German strategy in World War I and in World War II.
    0:40:32 There is one country that worries me, though, not Iraq, not Iran, not North Korea.
    0:40:37 The only country that really worries me is the country of Germany.
    0:40:41 I don’t know if you guys are history buffs or not, but –
    0:40:52 In the early part of the previous century, Germany decided to go to war.
    0:40:54 And who did they go to war with?
    0:40:56 The world.
    0:41:00 That had never been tried before.
    0:41:09 And so you figure that would take about five seconds for the world to win, but – no, it was actually close.
    0:41:26 Then about – then about 30 years pass, and Germany decides again to go to war, and again it chooses as its enemy – the world.
    0:41:31 Yeah, I just – I love that clip.
    0:41:32 Yeah, and now Germany’s the good guys.
    0:41:36 But, I mean, is that not what’s happening in America right now?
    0:41:39 We have chosen the world, as Norm puts it, as our enemy?
    0:41:42 Yeah, take on everyone all at once, including universities.
    0:41:43 I mean, they’re taking on everyone.
    0:41:45 Who is he not at war with right now?
    0:41:47 Let me think.
    0:41:49 Universities, every foreign nation.
    0:41:54 I mean, it’s just – okay, who’s next?
    0:41:54 What’s next?
    0:42:00 We’re all kind of waiting for – we’re waiting for one of two things.
    0:42:07 We’re waiting for it to get much, much worse, or we’re waiting for someone to show up.
    0:42:12 I don’t think I’ve ever seen a vacuum of leadership like this.
    0:42:15 I don’t – the Democrats seem neutered.
    0:42:17 There’s no one who’s emerged.
    0:42:20 I did a podcast.
    0:42:23 I was on Governor Newsom’s podcast yesterday or two days ago.
    0:42:23 Oh, wow.
    0:42:44 And I basically said, I think someone should announce they’re running for president and start – if someone announced today they were running for president, they’d be the leader of the Democratic Party, and they would be on TV every day making – hitting a series of softballs out of the park, just responding to all this ridiculous shit.
    0:42:46 They need a new guy.
    0:42:47 Are you going to do it?
    0:42:48 Yeah, that’s right.
    0:42:51 A chicken in every pot, a Cialis in every cupboard.
    0:42:53 It’s slowly – I mean, this is how movements start.
    0:42:55 It starts as a meme.
    0:42:57 It’s sort of like, ha-ha, that would be kind of funny.
    0:43:02 But it’s – I’m increasingly hearing calls to Scott Galloway for president.
    0:43:09 I think we need a non-ironic actual response from you on this question right now.
    0:43:12 Would you ever actually consider running for president?
    0:43:13 I have considered it.
    0:43:21 I had a company and some individuals call me and say, if you put up 10 million, we’ll put up 10 million, and you won’t – you’re not running for president.
    0:43:22 You’re running for change.
    0:43:23 And that it’s not about winning.
    0:43:32 It’s about shaping the messaging and having an influence on America, the same way Andrew Yang made UBI more palatable in the redistribution of income.
    0:43:34 I mean, that was Andrew’s real victory here.
    0:43:35 And I’m a narcissist.
    0:43:37 I have all the qualities to be president.
    0:43:37 I’m white.
    0:43:38 I’m male.
    0:43:39 And I’m a narcissist.
    0:43:39 And I’m rich.
    0:43:42 So those are the primary considerations.
    0:43:45 The other thing, though, is you have to be – you have to like people.
    0:43:45 I don’t have that.
    0:43:49 You would not be good at the meet and greets.
    0:43:51 I agree with you.
    0:44:05 And just to be very honest, I am – I’m 60, and the idea of lightning striking, and I end up probably not winning, but maybe end up with an – you know, get two or three percent, which is enough to leverage myself into some sort of cabinet role.
    0:44:17 I want to hang out with my wife and kids and do amazing things and go to F1 and be irresponsible when I want to be irresponsible.
    0:44:22 And I don’t – the reality is I don’t feel that same sense of patriotism.
    0:44:28 If I was more patriotic, I think I would decide to give up eight years and try and do something more meaningful.
    0:44:38 But I’ve also decided – I think, Ed, I think the two of us right now, especially you because you’re younger and you’re kind of coming into your sweet spot, I think we can have a lot of impact from outside the tent.
    0:44:46 And that is be unbridled, try and entertain, try and educate, and try and help get great leaders elected.
    0:44:52 I think there’s a lot of really good people who would be a lot more qualified and enjoyed a lot more than me.
    0:45:04 And when I really ask myself, why am I receptive to calls to run for office, it’s too much of my ego and my narcissism and not enough of a vision and a calling to help the country.
    0:45:06 And that is – that means I shouldn’t run.
    0:45:19 And – but what we can do is we can absolutely take our time, treasure, and talent to help some of the amazing people who are out there and see what man or woman rises to the moment and get behind them.
    0:45:22 What about if you got offered a position, like a cabinet position?
    0:45:25 Would you take, like, sort of go the Howard Lutnick route?
    0:45:28 Would you take commerce secretary, something like that?
    0:45:32 I just think there’s so many people who would be so much better than me.
    0:45:35 Did you ever meet Gina Riomundo, the former head of commerce?
    0:45:39 She was just so good, so intelligent.
    0:45:42 I just think there’s so many – Michael Bennett should be secretary of education.
    0:45:46 Vivek Murthy would be an outstanding head of HHS.
    0:45:49 Yes, I just think there’s so many incredible people.
    0:45:51 I think our job is to prop those people up.
    0:46:00 So I think people are mistaking some fame and some ability to articulate ideas over actual operational excellence.
    0:46:10 So I think I’m self-aware enough to know that, okay, how could – if you’re really loyal to the country, if you really want to see America be America again,
    0:46:13 then part of that is saying, how can I be most effective?
    0:46:26 And so, no, I think our job, Ed, I’m going to run you for something such that I can get you to help me engage in massive tax avoidance when I’m 80
    0:46:29 and just doing nothing but counting my pennies and yelling at people.
    0:46:31 I’ll get you to become a senator.
    0:46:39 But until then, the two of us and the good people here at Prop G are going to help great Americans get elected and make America America again.
    0:46:39 I love that.
    0:46:44 We’ll be right back with a look at the Meta Antitrust Trial.
    0:46:49 If you’re enjoying the show so far, hit follow and leave us a review on the Prop G Markets feed.
    0:46:58 Hi, folks.
    0:46:59 This is Kara Swisher.
    0:47:06 This week on my podcast, On with Kara Swisher, I’m speaking with philanthropist, businesswoman, and women’s rights advocate Melinda French Gates
    0:47:10 on how she’s refocused after her divorce from tech mogul Bill Gates.
    0:47:15 We talk about why investing in women in politics and business is playing the long and smart game,
    0:47:18 and we discuss her new memoir, The Next Day.
    0:47:22 My mom used to say to me as I was growing up, set your own agenda or someone else will.
    0:47:27 I know society is better off when women are in positions of power.
    0:47:34 I really enjoy this conversation because it’s an interesting moment where women in technology are having much more of an important impact
    0:47:38 than men who are still moving fast and breaking things.
    0:47:42 Have a listen to On with Kara Swisher wherever you get your podcasts.
    0:47:50 We borrow money from Chinese peasants to buy the things those Chinese peasants manufacture.
    0:47:53 That is not a recipe for economic prosperity.
    0:47:58 Vice President J.D. Vance defending the Trump administration’s tariffs on China.
    0:48:00 Hit China squarely below the belt.
    0:48:02 And China hit back with memes.
    0:48:03 Cue music.
    0:48:12 Americans on assembly lines, at sewing machines, in fields, eating chips, drinking coke,
    0:48:16 looking ill-prepared for factory work, to put it politely, which the memes are not.
    0:48:21 China’s argument since this trade war began is that America cannot win it.
    0:48:24 China is tougher, more resilient, and better prepared.
    0:48:32 On Today Explained, as this trade war escalates, we ask, what if that’s true?
    0:48:54 Right now, in courtrooms across the country, but mostly in and around D.C., the future of the tech industry is on trial.
    0:48:56 That sounds hyperbolic, but it’s true.
    0:49:03 Google just lost a case that will change the way that the ad business works on the Internet and maybe change Google forever.
    0:49:10 And Meta is on trial about whether it’s going to have to spin off Instagram and WhatsApp, some of the most important parts of Mark Zuckerberg’s empire.
    0:49:16 On The Vergecast this week, we discuss why this is happening, where it might go, and what the new Internet might look like.
    0:49:19 All that on The Vergecast, wherever you get podcasts.
    0:49:29 We’re back with Prof G Markets.
    0:49:34 After nearly six years of investigation, the Meta antitrust trial is finally underway.
    0:49:40 The case is focused on whether Meta’s acquisitions of Instagram and WhatsApp violated competition laws.
    0:49:42 Mark Zuckerberg has already taken the stand.
    0:49:51 Potential upcoming witnesses include former COO Sheryl Sandberg, ex-CTO Mike Schrupfer, and executives from rival social media platforms.
    0:49:54 The trial is expected to last up to two months.
    0:49:58 I’ll just kick this off and highlight what’s at stake here for Meta.
    0:50:08 You know, if the FTC wins this case, and they could, it would be a huge deal for the company and for big tech at large.
    0:50:12 We are increasingly seeing more momentum on the antitrust front.
    0:50:21 Google, in fact, there was just a judge just ruled that Google was operating a monopoly on the ad market and the server market.
    0:50:24 And that’s the second time that’s happened in less than a year.
    0:50:33 Of course, we covered back in August when Judge Meta in Washington, he declared that Google was a monopoly in the search market.
    0:50:34 So this is becoming a trend.
    0:50:39 Now, what would happen to Meta if the FTC won?
    0:50:47 The most likely remedy that people are talking about is that Meta would have to sell WhatsApp, and they’d also have to sell Instagram.
    0:50:52 And that is a huge deal because WhatsApp is one of their most popular products.
    0:50:54 They have almost 3 billion users.
    0:51:00 But also, Instagram now makes up more than half of Meta’s ad revenue.
    0:51:05 It was 50.4% coming from Instagram ads in 2025.
    0:51:11 So this would essentially dismantle the world’s largest social media company.
    0:51:22 So, Scott, first, just any initial reactions on what’s happening with the Meta antitrust trial and perhaps what’s happening with Antitrust at large with this new ruling on Google?
    0:51:25 The two greatest tax cuts in the modern economy would be the following.
    0:51:27 Well, OK, the third.
    0:51:30 Number one would be the ass clown gets reined in somehow.
    0:51:42 But distinct to that, one, if the Chinese and the American leadership were to kiss and make up, they have the ultimate supply chain of things we don’t want to produce at that cost.
    0:51:47 We have IP and an incredible consumption economy and innovation.
    0:51:52 It would lower everyone’s costs in the world by 10 to 20 percent.
    0:51:56 The second biggest oxygenation of the economy would be if we broke up big tech.
    0:52:00 And that is because of the monopoly power they’ve established.
    0:52:20 If one firm owns 50 percent or controls 50 percent of e-commerce, Amazon, one firm 90 percent of search, Google, one firm 70 percent of all social media, Meta, they’re able to extract monopoly rents, whether it’s the percentage they charge third-party retailers on their platform, whether it’s search words, whatever it is.
    0:52:24 And the rents, and I’ve always said this, the greatest rents they’re charging are non-economic.
    0:52:26 Think about the rents.
    0:52:28 And you don’t know this because you don’t have kids.
    0:52:48 The rents that Meta has raised on parents in the form of stress and strain because they’re so powerful and they have so much data and they have such mendacious leadership and we allow them to get away with these things because of the idolatry of the dollar and this worship of technology.
    0:52:54 If you took those four companies and broke them into 11 or 12, who wins?
    0:53:05 Society wins because they’re too powerful and they’ve made our discourse more coarse and they haven’t been able to resist radicalizing young men on YouTube or depressing young girls on Meta.
    0:53:07 Society wins.
    0:53:08 The rents go down.
    0:53:09 Shareholders win.
    0:53:14 Can you imagine Instagram trades or Meta trades at about 7.7 times revenue?
    0:53:17 Can you imagine what an independent Instagram would trade at?
    0:53:19 A pure play Instagram?
    0:53:23 That company would trade at 15 to 20 times revenue.
    0:53:34 WhatsApp, instead of being a body bag of data to inform the core dying platform of Facebook, they would try and turn it into what it is, a truly the largest global telco.
    0:53:36 And they’d start monetizing it.
    0:53:46 These companies, independent of one of each other, would create more competition, more shareholder value, more tax revenue, because I believe they’d be more profitable.
    0:53:53 They would increase wages because there’d be more companies trying to rent human labor.
    0:53:56 I mean, if you want to be in social media and make a shit ton of money, what are you going to go to, Pinterest?
    0:53:58 No, you go to Meta.
    0:54:01 Pinterest basically gets everyone that Meta doesn’t.
    0:54:03 You know, what, you’re going to go to Snap?
    0:54:10 I think those two firms are in business because Meta has made the conscious decision not to put them out of business so they can pretend they have competition.
    0:54:11 I’m serious.
    0:54:16 I think somebody came in and said, oh, we can put Pinterest out of business in six months.
    0:54:18 We’re going to launch Insta boards.
    0:54:26 And Zuckerberg said, no, talk to Nick Clegg or whoever else has their finger on the pulse of DC and goes, no.
    0:54:33 They’re shitty, their business model sucks, and it gives people the illusion we have actual competition.
    0:54:38 Just don’t – just let them have their little $4 or $5 billion a year and their $8 billion market caps.
    0:54:39 Meanwhile, we have a trillion-dollar market cap.
    0:54:44 Just let them survive to create the illusion of competition.
    0:54:51 The only people that lose in a breakup – it’s almost impossible to find a breakup that didn’t end up working for everybody.
    0:55:00 The only people that lose are the person who controls the voting shares, the super shares, who’s decided they want to sit on the iron throne of all seven realms, not just Westeros.
    0:55:02 Yeah, a lot there.
    0:55:05 I mean, what would it take for them to win the case?
    0:55:16 One, they need to prove that Meta suppressed the competition via these acquisitions, and the emails there are incredible, and I’ll go over a few of them in a second.
    0:55:21 And two, they also need to prove that Meta is indeed a monopoly.
    0:55:25 And those are two different arguments they need to prove.
    0:55:34 So on the first argument, the case is incredibly strong, and it’s all because of these emails that they found from Zuckerberg and Sandberg and all these other executives.
    0:55:35 I’m just going to read off some of them.
    0:55:46 So Mark Zuckerberg in 2012, quote, “Instagram and PATH are nascent, but the network’s established, the brands are already meaningful, and if they grow to a large scale, they could be very disruptive to us.”
    0:55:57 From an internal executive, quote, “In the time it has taken us to get our act together on this, Instagram has become a large and viable competitor to us, which will increasingly be the future of photos.”
    0:56:04 Sheryl Sandberg, quote, “Instagram was growing so much faster than us that we had to buy them for $1 billion.”
    0:56:15 And then, this is the best one, Mark Zuckerberg in 2008, in regards to the Instagram acquisition, he says, quote, “It is better to buy than to compete.”
    0:56:26 “And that is basically case closed right there. That is the FTC’s smoking gun, is that email from Zuckerberg in 2008.”
    0:56:37 “They can definitely prove that Meta was suppressing the competition by just buying up these other companies. The trouble is proving whether or not Meta is actually a monopoly.”
    0:57:02 “That is a harder argument to make, because, you know, as you mentioned, there are all these other platforms now. There’s TikTok, there’s Snapchat, there’s Pinterest, there’s YouTube. Even iMessage, which is technically competing with WhatsApp, and Meta shared this number, they shared that 20% of the total time spent on social media platforms today, 20% is accounted for by Meta.
    0:57:28 So, at 20%, it is definitely harder to argue that this is a monopoly. And I think if the FTC loses this case, it’s going to be on that front. They’re going to be able to prove very fair and square, yes, Meta suppressed the competition by buying these companies, but did they also do that and successfully become a monopoly? And that’s going to be a little bit harder to prove.”
    0:57:42 “And one final point here: I just want to quickly highlight this incredible article in the Wall Street Journal that takes you through the negotiations between Andrew Ferguson at the FTC and Mark Zuckerberg.”
    0:57:59 “So, the FTC actually offered to settle this case with Meta for $30 billion. But after Trump appointed this new guy, Andrew Ferguson, as the new chair of the FTC, Mark Zuckerberg called him, and he gave him a counteroffer.
    0:58:23 So, a 99% discount on the original settlement offer. And apparently, on that call, Mark Zuckerberg was very confident that Trump was going to back him up. You know, he had just traveled to Mar-a-Lago multiple times. He just donated a million dollars to the inauguration fund. He went to the inauguration. He, as you point out, he appointed, uh, this former Trump advisor to the Meta board. And he just donated a million dollars to the inauguration fund. He went to the inauguration.
    0:58:36 He, as you point out, he appointed, uh, this former Trump advisor to the Meta board, Dana White. He’d just done this 180 on the content moderation policy. I mean, he had his full-on MAGA rebrand.
    0:59:02 And then, Andrew Ferguson, they have the conversation, and he says no. So, then, Zuckerberg goes to the White House, and he starts pleading with Trump to drop the case. And Trump was apparently considering it. But it wasn’t until April 8th, when both Andrew Ferguson of the FTC and Gail Slater of the DOJ, they both go to Trump, and they say, “No, Mr. President, you have to let this trial go through.”
    0:59:15 And Trump was convinced. He gave them his blessing. And now, here we are. Zuckerberg is back in court, back in the suit and tie, uh, and it looks as if Meta may be broken up at this point.
    0:59:34 So, it’s an amazing story of Zuckerberg’s failed attempts at kissing the president’s arse. Um, but it’s also an amazing story of strength from Ferguson, from Gail Slater, who, as we have said on this podcast before, are actually highly competent litigators, highly competent regulators.
    0:59:47 And I think if there’s anything that Trump has gotten right in this administration, it would be hiring those two to run the FTC and the DOJ, because they are proving that they are not to be fucked with.
    1:00:05 And we’ll call balls and strikes. So far, I think we should commend the president on sticking to his guns here. The thing that’s sad is that Mark Zuckerberg, and I’ve said Mark and Cheryl, I think there’s few people you could point to that have made more money while doing more damage to America than Mark Zuckerberg or Cheryl Sandberg.
    1:00:16 But there’s just no getting around it. They’re both incredibly talented executives. And I would argue that Zuckerberg is probably the, really probably one of the business geniuses of the last 50 years.
    1:00:30 But when one of the most brilliant business minds has decided and is convinced that he can buy his way out of regulation by giving money to the Trump administration and traveling there, what does that say about our nation?
    1:00:36 And by the way, he still may be right. We’ll see. I hope the president sticks to his guns here.
    1:00:59 But the brightest business mind, you know, in a generation puts a bunch of hardcore MAGA people on his board, shows up at the inauguration, gives money and says, OK, regardless of my violating laws, regardless of the fact I suppress competition, regardless of the fact that I’m loving huge taxes every day emotionally and mentally on our youth and on their parents.
    1:01:05 I think I can buy my way out of this in today’s America. I hope he’s wrong. I hope he’s wrong.
    1:01:15 Let’s take a look at the week ahead. We’ll see earnings from Tesla, from SAP and Alphabet. Scott, do you have any predictions?
    1:01:29 Well, it goes back to what we were saying. I think there’s an enormous opportunity and I do think the worm has turned and that, I mean, let me save you. At business school, we have ethics, we have leadership and we have sustainability courses.
    1:01:42 And they each cost, every course costs $7,000. Let me save you $21,000. Ethics. Think about right and wrong. Think about what you’re doing might be wrong or right. Like there is a right and a wrong. OK, that’s the ethics course.
    1:02:02 Do the right thing even when it’s hard. Boom. You’re done with leadership. And the sustainability, thinking about doing the right thing, doing the right thing when it’s really hard, you might make money out it. You might actually make money out it. Boom. You’re done. I just saved you $21,000.
    1:02:17 My prediction is the following. I think there’s such an enormous vacuum for leadership here that someone is going to step into it and reap enormous rewards, both in terms of their status, their leadership, what goes on their tombstone, and also shareholder value.
    1:02:21 I just think there’s so many people lining up against this guy. He’s losing his power.
    1:02:33 A hundred third graders can line up against a big, angry sixth grader. If they’re unified, and this guy has given us reason to be unified, someone is going to step into the void of leadership here.
    1:02:39 And the person I’m reminded of, or the situation, is a gentleman named Martin Niemöller.
    1:02:47 And Martin is credited with this fantastic quote that loosely is reduced to first they came for.
    1:02:53 He was a prominent Lutheran pastor in Germany in the 20s and 30s.
    1:03:00 He was actually very kind of pro-Nazi and supported radically right-wing political movements.
    1:03:07 After Hitler came to power in 1933, however, Niemöller became an outspoken critic of Hitler’s interference in the Protestant church.
    1:03:17 He spent the last eight years of Nazi rule in prisons and concentration camps, and he’s best remembered for his post-war statement, which begins,
    1:03:21 First, they came for the socialists, and I did not speak out because I was not a socialist.
    1:03:28 Then, they came for the trade unionists, and I did not speak out because I was not a trade unionist.
    1:03:33 Then, they came for the Jews, and I did not speak out because I was not a Jew.
    1:03:38 Then, they came for me, and there was no one left to speak for me.
    1:03:40 And that is so powerful.
    1:03:57 And I think that when on a very crude and economic level, when you don’t speak out on behalf of our wonderful allies and other companies and speak out on behalf of your own company, just wait, folks.
    1:04:01 In the long run, it’s just really bad for you not speaking out.
    1:04:17 And even on a more substantive level, when we allow people to be rounded up because they have the wrong tattoo or because they’re illegal, undocumented workers, and send them to a hellscape prison, just be careful when the knock comes on your door.
    1:04:20 This is a threat to everybody.
    1:04:23 And so, I’m hopeful.
    1:04:28 I think America has a ton of great leaders, and I think this has gotten so bad.
    1:04:35 My prediction is in the next one, two, four weeks, we’re going to see some prominent leaders, and we can’t guess.
    1:04:37 Who knows where they come from, right?
    1:04:40 This Harvard president has shown real leadership.
    1:04:46 But I think that there’s going to be several people step into this void of leadership and realize that I need to speak up.
    1:04:54 This episode was produced by Claire Miller and engineered by Benjamin Spencer.
    1:04:56 Our associate producer is Alison Weiss.
    1:04:57 Mia Silverio is our research lead.
    1:05:00 Isabella Kinsel is our research associate.
    1:05:01 Dan Shallon is our intern.
    1:05:03 Drew Burrows is our technical director.
    1:05:05 And Catherine Dillon is our executive producer.
    1:05:09 Thank you for listening to Prof G Markets from the Vox Media Podcast Network.
    1:05:15 Join us on Thursday for our conversation with Ryan Peterson, only on Prof G Markets.
    1:05:49 Prof G Markets from the Vox Media Podcast Network.
    1:06:00 I mean, I remember when, was it the Challenger disaster?
    1:06:02 That’s one of those things, remember where you were.
    1:06:05 I was in the shower in my fraternity, and this guy came in.
    1:06:09 And first he gave me a head.
    1:06:10 It was that kind of fraternity.
    1:06:13 And then, I don’t know.
    1:06:15 Why do I find that funny?
    1:06:17 You always find that funny.

    Scott and Ed discuss gold hitting a record high, the Trump administration’s new restrictions on chip exports, and Jerome Powell’s comments on tariffs. Then, they unpack how other nations are pushing back against the tariffs, highlighting Trump’s key strategic missteps—including his underestimation of global rivals. Finally, they dissect the key moments from the Meta antitrust trial so far, with Scott laying out the economic upsides of breaking up the company, and Ed outlining how the FTC could actually come out on top.

    Subscribe to the Prof G Markets newsletter 

    Order “The Algebra of Wealth,” out now

    Subscribe to No Mercy / No Malice

    Follow the podcast across socials @profgpod:

    Follow Scott on Instagram

    Follow Ed on Instagram and X

    Learn more about your ad choices. Visit podcastchoices.com/adchoices

  • Former FBI Agent: If They Do This Please RUN! Narcissists Favourite Trick To Control You! They’re Controlling You Like A Puppet!

    中文
    Tiếng Việt
    AI transcript
    0:00:02 I was in the FBI for 25 years.
    0:00:05 I have sat with spies and enemies of this country,
    0:00:08 and I learned a lot about human behaviors.
    0:00:12 Imagine being able to read other people and circumstances faster.
    0:00:15 It gives you a tremendous advantage in your life.
    0:00:16 I want to hear everything.
    0:00:19 So one of the first things I teach is…
    0:00:21 Joe Navarro is a former FBI agent
    0:00:23 turned world-renowned body language expert.
    0:00:25 He helps people decode body language
    0:00:27 to improve communication, trust, and influence.
    0:00:30 One of the things that I’ve found in negotiations
    0:00:34 is we, as humans, communicate quite a lot with our faces.
    0:00:36 For instance, we push this together
    0:00:38 when we don’t understand something.
    0:00:40 And then the minute we hear something we don’t like,
    0:00:43 blood actually begins to leave the lips,
    0:00:44 and then we begin to tighten them.
    0:00:47 Another behavior is that when there’s a lack of confidence,
    0:00:50 insecurities, people immediately…
    0:00:53 So once we understand these behaviors,
    0:00:55 you can take command of any situation.
    0:00:58 Confidence. Is this something that you’re born with?
    0:01:00 Or do you think confidence can be trained?
    0:01:02 It can absolutely be trained.
    0:01:04 So the FBI actually teach confidence.
    0:01:06 And there’s a lot of strategies.
    0:01:09 One of them is the most powerful gesture that we can use.
    0:01:11 And you see Musk do this a lot.
    0:01:13 But what I tell people is that
    0:01:16 the easiest way to learn confidence is to…
    0:01:20 Joe, we actually videoed my interaction with you when I met you.
    0:01:21 And I’ve got the video here.
    0:01:25 So one of the things you immediately did was…
    0:01:26 Don’t do that.
    0:01:27 It’s a no-no.
    0:01:29 Quick one before we get back to this episode.
    0:01:31 Just give me 30 seconds of your time.
    0:01:33 Two things I wanted to say.
    0:01:37 The first thing is a huge thank you for listening and tuning into the show week after week.
    0:01:38 It means the world to all of us.
    0:01:41 And this really is a dream that we absolutely never had
    0:01:43 and couldn’t have imagined getting to this place.
    0:01:47 But secondly, it’s a dream where we feel like we’re only just getting started.
    0:01:49 And if you enjoy what we do here,
    0:01:53 please join the 24% of people that listen to this podcast regularly
    0:01:55 and follow us on this app.
    0:01:56 Here’s a promise I’m going to make to you.
    0:02:01 I’m going to do everything in my power to make this show as good as I can
    0:02:02 now and into the future.
    0:02:04 We’re going to deliver the guests that you want me to speak to.
    0:02:08 And we’re going to continue to keep doing all of the things you love about this show.
    0:02:09 Thank you.
    0:02:10 Thank you so much.
    0:02:11 Back to the episode.
    0:02:19 Joe, zooming out, if someone asked you in the street
    0:02:22 and they wanted a two-sentence answer,
    0:02:26 who are you and what have you spent your life doing?
    0:02:28 How would you answer that question?
    0:02:31 With one word, teaching.
    0:02:35 I think I’ve spent my whole life teaching.
    0:02:41 Even when I was in the FBI, starting in 1984,
    0:02:45 a lot of my job was obviously being an FBI agent,
    0:02:50 investigating crimes, chasing after spies and so forth.
    0:02:54 But, you know, I hired on in 1978.
    0:02:57 But as early as 84, I was already teaching.
    0:03:03 And I love it when people get it and they see a behavior.
    0:03:10 They understand the underpinnings, the foundation of why we do certain things.
    0:03:12 I’ll give you an example.
    0:03:18 Sometimes you’ll come to a horrible scene and people immediately gasp.
    0:03:21 They take an air and then they cover their mouths.
    0:03:27 Or there’s one point difference on the scoreboard and people are like this and they don’t understand.
    0:03:41 This is back where we were surrounded by lions and tigers and we learned to cover our mouths so as not to broadcast our breath so that they couldn’t see where we were or find us.
    0:03:47 And so the human body has a few shortcuts.
    0:03:49 I should say the human brain.
    0:03:51 They’re called heuristics.
    0:03:53 And so one of them is to freeze.
    0:03:59 So when we hear a loud sound or we see a predator or a dog, we freeze.
    0:04:06 Obviously, whoever ran 300,000 years ago was bitten.
    0:04:09 And so we have these shortcuts.
    0:04:16 And it’s always fascinating to me to share why we have these behaviors and why we.
    0:04:20 And you realize you just inhaled so you can hold your breath.
    0:04:25 And then we cover our breath so we don’t broadcast for the predators to smell us.
    0:04:27 You spend your time writing books.
    0:04:33 You spend your time teaching in various different contexts these days, whether it’s on stage or in other environments on the Internet.
    0:04:39 What is it that you’re giving people?
    0:04:45 That’s a profound question that I don’t think I’ve been asked.
    0:04:53 I think the simplest answer is knowledge, knowledge that perhaps they didn’t have time to acquire.
    0:04:57 I grew up very poor.
    0:04:59 I was a refugee from Cuba.
    0:05:06 And I lived in an area of Miami, which was mostly elderly people.
    0:05:08 So I was by myself a lot.
    0:05:13 So I would go through garbage bins collecting things to read.
    0:05:20 It’s that knowledge that I was fortunate enough to acquire, the love of reading.
    0:05:25 And I run into a lot of people who haven’t had that benefit.
    0:05:29 Maybe they don’t have a love of reading and of learning.
    0:05:32 I see myself as, OK, I have this knowledge.
    0:05:41 I have sat with terrorists, spies, bazooka-yielding enemies of this country.
    0:05:44 And other people never had that opportunity.
    0:05:48 And I learned a lot from that and from my reading.
    0:05:51 So why not share it?
    0:05:53 Make their life a little easier.
    0:05:59 When you say make their life a little easier, if I am to receive your knowledge, how would my life be better?
    0:06:01 How would I be more productive?
    0:06:03 That’s a great question.
    0:06:15 Imagine being able to aperceive things way ahead of time because you can read other people and circumstances faster.
    0:06:22 Most people see a behavior and have to sit there and wonder, are they upset with me?
    0:06:27 Are they, as the Brits would say, my wife is a Brit, are they taking the piss or something?
    0:06:30 Just any number of things.
    0:06:40 But imagine being able to look at something and decipher it infinitely faster so that you can devote yourself to other things.
    0:06:47 Where most of us break down the face into the forehead, the eyes, the ears, and so forth.
    0:06:53 But imagine being able to assess the whole face, the shoulders, the hands, everything all at once.
    0:06:57 And draw inferences from that information.
    0:07:01 It gives you a tremendous advantage.
    0:07:06 And also, in negotiations, being able to read others.
    0:07:11 And at the same time, we forget that others are reading us.
    0:07:14 And what is the perception that we want to convey?
    0:07:21 And if I were to attain all of the knowledge that you have to offer, and I were to implement it,
    0:07:24 What areas of my life do you believe would improve?
    0:07:31 First, within yourself, for instance, being able to assess yourself.
    0:07:41 So if, let’s say, you have anger issues and so forth, or you’re quick to trigger, well, how do I deal with that?
    0:07:44 Well, first, you assess, you know, what is going on?
    0:07:46 Your stomach gets upset.
    0:07:47 Chest tightens.
    0:07:49 Your emotions get up.
    0:07:50 So what do I do then?
    0:07:52 Most people aren’t taught that.
    0:07:54 So there’s part of that.
    0:07:58 There’s how to communicate, for instance, more effectively with your children.
    0:08:12 A simple thing that, for instance, and nobody teaches this, well, I do, is that, you know, if you stand in front of your child like a drill instructor with your neck stiff,
    0:08:22 you’re going to get a very different reaction than if you stand at an angle slightly further away from the child and tilt your head.
    0:08:36 That the communication you will experience with that child is so much different just by tilting your head than if you are standing directly in front of them, that you can enhance communication.
    0:08:40 And then you say, well, what application is that for real life?
    0:08:48 Well, you can actually change the amount of face time you get from somebody else.
    0:08:53 Let’s say you only had two minutes and you want to stretch that by just tilting your head.
    0:09:05 We’ve demonstrably shown that you can change the amount of face time that somebody is willing to give to you just because we show that we’re relaxed
    0:09:11 and that we’re not coming at you with an agenda that we’re willing to listen.
    0:09:15 It can be transformative if you apply that knowledge.
    0:09:25 Now, some people look at knowledge and they don’t do much with it, but you can use it at home, you can use it at work, you can use it in negotiations.
    0:09:35 For instance, one of the things that I teach is the value of time, and time is actually, can be used as a nonverbal.
    0:09:41 So when I talk about nonverbals, I’m really talking about anything that communicates but is not a word.
    0:09:47 Well, you can use time as a nonverbal to say I’m in charge.
    0:09:50 Whoever dominates and controls time controls.
    0:10:00 And so even if I change the delivery of my message to slow things down, you’re already taking charge in that negotiation.
    0:10:08 It’s a beautiful thing to witness when you execute it properly.
    0:10:11 So there are a lot of applications.
    0:10:18 And, you know, and obviously, like you, you basically study human behavior.
    0:10:23 You are a business person, but you’re actually really in the people business.
    0:10:37 And once we understand the needs, and some are biological, the wants, the desires, the preferences, the preferences of others,
    0:10:39 how do they like that information delivered?
    0:10:41 How do they like their coffee?
    0:10:42 All of that.
    0:10:45 But then what do they fear?
    0:10:49 Most people don’t tell you I have fears.
    0:10:52 They say, well, you know, I’m concerned about that or that.
    0:10:56 I don’t know if that’s a good investment or we’ll have to do some due diligence.
    0:10:59 But that’s the brain only recognizes fear.
    0:11:12 And so once you understand that, it gives you such amplitude to then pursue whatever it is that you’re interested in doing more effectively.
    0:11:15 And your career.
    0:11:15 Yeah.
    0:11:20 So you’ve been an, you were an FBI agent for more than 30 years?
    0:11:24 Well, I was in law enforcement for 30 years.
    0:11:32 I was in the FBI for 25 years, principally working in the area of counterintelligence.
    0:11:35 But, you know, in the FBI, you never wear one hat.
    0:11:37 I was also a pilot.
    0:11:39 So I flew surveillance.
    0:11:40 I was a SWAT team commander.
    0:11:47 So I did SWAT stuff and actually worked with the SAS from London.
    0:11:53 And then I was in the behavioral analysis program.
    0:12:00 So we used that skill set to work on catching spies.
    0:12:03 What is the behavioral analysis program?
    0:12:21 In the 89, 90, the FBI developed a very secret program to analyze not people that were dead, but actually, how do we use human behavior to catch spies, to catch terrorists?
    0:12:25 And then once we catch them, how do we get into their heads?
    0:12:32 How do we get them to tell us what they’re up to, what their purpose is, and so forth?
    0:12:35 So we created this program.
    0:12:53 I, along with five other agents out of 12,000, were selected from the FBI to become part of this new behavioral analysis program, which was supposed to be classified, except it was accidentally leaked.
    0:13:05 And our job was to look at the threats, national security threats, and then see how we can use our knowledge of human behavior to then attack that.
    0:13:14 So when you say much of your work was to catch spies, most of us have only ever heard of spies from watching James Bond and other things like that.
    0:13:18 So we don’t actually understand the sort of reality of spies.
    0:13:30 So if I just play completely dumb for a second, other countries send people into other countries, like the United States or the UK or Australia, Canada, to do what?
    0:13:35 So every nation state has interests.
    0:13:37 A lot of it is obtained through diplomacy.
    0:13:42 A lot of it is now obtained through what we call espionage.
    0:13:45 So it’s nothing like television and the movies.
    0:14:01 Some nations, especially hostile nations, send what we call hostile intelligence officers, usually masquerading as a diplomat, but often masquerading as students or scientists or businessmen.
    0:14:14 And their job is to acquire knowledge in specific areas, military knowledge, science and research, intentions and plans, military intentions and plans.
    0:14:25 Or they may have interest in, for instance, what is going to be the wheat production in Argentina this year, because it may affect the price of grain across the world.
    0:14:30 So there’s commercial espionage that goes on.
    0:14:39 And so every nation defends itself by trying to identify, well, who is here trying to spy?
    0:14:41 So that’s what we do.
    0:14:44 That’s counterintelligence.
    0:14:46 That’s espionage.
    0:14:48 And it’s nothing like the movies.
    0:14:52 We don’t jump from buildings.
    0:15:00 Although we do that sometimes, but it’s not as glamorous as the James Bond stuff.
    0:15:02 So have you caught spies before?
    0:15:03 I have.
    0:15:05 I’ve arrested spies, multiple spies.
    0:15:11 Give me the most interesting example of a spy that you identified in court.
    0:15:12 And what were they here doing?
    0:15:13 And which country did they come from?
    0:15:18 Well, as it turns out, it was an American, because we also have what we call turncoats.
    0:15:36 So in the case of Roderick James Ramsey, he was an individual who, in 1989, I was asked to go interview because we thought he was a witness to something that had happened in Germany.
    0:15:41 He had a former army sergeant, had been kicked out of the army.
    0:15:50 The military wanted to find out if he knew anything about some missing documents, if he had seen anything.
    0:16:01 During my interview of him, which, again, I thought he was a witness, he was smoking a cigarette at his house.
    0:16:11 And I just mentioned an individual’s name that had been at that base, but who had been under investigation by German authorities.
    0:16:17 In fact, by the Bundeskriminalamt, which is the equivalent of the FBI.
    0:16:21 There’s no reason why he should react to that.
    0:16:22 It’s just a name.
    0:16:25 But when I mentioned the name, his cigarette shook.
    0:16:35 And I knew enough about human behaviors to know that that physiological change had to be caused by something significant.
    0:16:38 Why would a name affect him?
    0:16:44 And so the scientific method talked to him for 20 more minutes about something else.
    0:16:46 And then I mentioned that name again.
    0:16:49 And sure enough, his cigarette shook again.
    0:16:54 And at that point, I was convinced that there was something nefarious there.
    0:16:56 As it turns out, the Germans arrested Conrad.
    0:16:58 Conrad was there.
    0:16:59 Clyde Conrad.
    0:17:03 That was the name of the person that had been under suspicion.
    0:17:08 The guy that I was interviewing, Rod Ramsey, was not.
    0:17:17 And so I left that interview, and then I persuaded my supervisors to continue to talk to Rod Ramsey.
    0:17:27 And that led to a 10-year investigation and the arrest of three, four, five, six, seven additional individuals.
    0:17:33 So that Rod, Roderick Ramsey guy with the shaking cigarette was a, he was spying on America?
    0:17:37 What that he was doing, and that’s a good question, and forgive me for not explaining.
    0:17:44 While he was in the army, he and Clyde Lee Conrad were stealing military secrets.
    0:17:45 From?
    0:17:47 From the U.S. Army.
    0:17:57 They were taking U.S. Army secrets and then selling it to the Soviet Union through the Hungarian Intelligence Service.
    0:17:58 So he was a traitor of the United States.
    0:17:59 So he was a traitor.
    0:18:08 And that is often the biggest problem for any nation state, is the traitors from within.
    0:18:13 And they had elevated espionage to an industrial level.
    0:18:21 I mean, to the point where they actually no longer even use 35-millimeter cameras to photograph the documents.
    0:18:28 They were actually videotaping them so that they could expedite the thousands of pages.
    0:18:44 It was the most damaging espionage case in the history of the United States because they had compromised the United States nuclear go codes in Germany.
    0:18:50 And that left all of Western Europe exposed.
    0:18:52 Nuclear go codes?
    0:18:53 Yes.
    0:18:54 What is that?
    0:19:03 All of our nuclear assets around the world are controlled by two things.
    0:19:13 There is what’s called a permissive action link, which is like a last-minute safety lock on each device.
    0:19:24 And then there is the go code that says there is authority to use this weapon.
    0:19:34 So Ramsey was able to steal the actual nuclear go code.
    0:19:36 It’s a card.
    0:19:40 It’s made out of a special material, which I cannot describe.
    0:19:45 It’s made out of special metals and plastics and other things.
    0:19:56 And the inherent danger in what they did was that not that they could initiate a launch.
    0:20:01 That can only be initiated at the national command authority level.
    0:20:25 But if this were compromised and given to, let’s say, the Russians at the time, the Soviet Union, this is before 1989, then a foreign hostile intelligence service could take that and replicate it, but put the wrong numbers in there.
    0:20:37 And by putting the wrong numbers in there, if it’s in a pyramid structure and it’s put high enough, right?
    0:20:41 Let’s say you control all of the East Coast.
    0:20:52 Maybe you don’t want to spy for Russia, but for $100,000, let’s say you were willing to slip this in there and take the one that’s there out.
    0:20:57 Okay, so maybe that helps your conscience in some way.
    0:21:04 Then you basically, if it’s a pyramid sort of schema, you can paralyze everything below that.
    0:21:10 Okay, so someone could have changed the codes, put a fake one in, which meant that it wouldn’t work anymore.
    0:21:18 At the highest level, then nothing would work if you had it accessed at the highest level.
    0:21:19 Did they go to jail?
    0:21:20 Oh, yes.
    0:21:21 Yeah.
    0:21:23 The shaking cigarette guy went to jail.
    0:21:24 33 years.
    0:21:28 Let me just finish it by saying this.
    0:21:34 This case put a ball of Western Europe in danger, as well as the United States.
    0:21:47 The general who testified in this case said that had hostilities broken out, the defeat of the West would have been assured within three days.
    0:21:50 That’s how devastating this was.
    0:21:54 Yeah, let that sink in.
    0:21:56 Those are his words.
    0:22:04 The defeat of the West would have been assured because of the damage these individuals had done.
    0:22:10 Not all cases are as significant in terms of catching spies.
    0:22:15 So I was reading about another one where you caught a man because of the way he held some flowers.
    0:22:17 Yeah.
    0:22:23 The, you know, a lot of times it’s just based on the behavior.
    0:22:27 You know, you see how often somebody looks at their watch.
    0:22:28 Right.
    0:22:32 But maybe when they’re operational, they look at their watch more often.
    0:22:39 And they filmed this guy who we thought was what we call an illegal.
    0:22:52 And in the parlance of espionage, an illegal is someone who magically appears in the United States and pretends to be an American, has always been an American, like the series, The Americans.
    0:23:06 But we had some clues from one of our sister services from another country and said, we think this individual may be someone who you need to look at that is pretending to be an American.
    0:23:11 We’re looking at the, we bring the whole team together, all six of us.
    0:23:21 And we’re looking at the, at the movie and, you know, and it was filmed just serendipitously, it was filmed on Valentine’s Day.
    0:23:26 And so we see him entering a flower shop and leaving the flower shop.
    0:23:31 When he exited, I said, definitely, he’s not an American.
    0:23:36 You know, everybody looked at me like, excuse me.
    0:23:38 And I said, he’s not from here.
    0:23:41 And he said, how?
    0:23:45 And he says, look how he’s carrying the bouquet.
    0:23:48 Americans carry the bouquet, bouquet up.
    0:23:52 Eastern Europeans carry it bouqueted down.
    0:23:57 And, and continued to carry it that way.
    0:24:00 So I, I did what’s called a presumptive.
    0:24:09 So we stopped him one day and, and I said, you know, I’m with the FBI and, and I said, do you want to know how we know?
    0:24:17 And that was the, the, the first trigger I was looking for to see how he reacts to it.
    0:24:19 And he fell for it.
    0:24:21 And he said, go on.
    0:24:25 Most people would say, get out of here, go away.
    0:24:30 And, and I said, it was how you carried the flowers.
    0:24:36 His chin came down, his eyelids went heavy.
    0:24:43 As he was evaluating everything he had done, you know, they, he had practiced everything.
    0:24:46 His, his English was immaculate.
    0:24:49 You know, he sounded like a Midwesterner and all that.
    0:24:59 After a, a few hours of having nice, really a nice chat, he agreed to work with us and admitted everything.
    0:25:00 What did he admit?
    0:25:04 That he had been sent here by a foreign government.
    0:25:13 That his job as a, as an illegal was to be in the United States, act as an American.
    0:25:22 And most people don’t understand, well, why would a country, a nation state, spend so much money training these people to be like an American?
    0:25:28 And what they don’t understand is their purpose here is for when hostilities break out.
    0:25:39 They can report on, for instance, train traffic, what trains are carrying munitions, what airports are being used for what purposes.
    0:25:56 Many times, as he later told us, they’re giving caches of explosives so that they can then blow up certain things that no missile would be able to, to do.
    0:26:00 So that’s their role in, in, in hiding in America.
    0:26:02 It’s not to commit espionage.
    0:26:06 It’s to be here in, in case hostilities break out.
    0:26:09 So you flipped him to working with the FBI?
    0:26:10 Correct.
    0:26:12 And does that mean he doesn’t get punished?
    0:26:21 Well, he doesn’t get punished because he didn’t commit any crime other than immigration violation.
    0:26:28 But what he was able to reveal to us was nothing short of breathtaking.
    0:26:30 Which nation was this?
    0:26:31 I cannot say.
    0:26:40 But obviously, they would have to have enough money and enough interest to carry out an operation like this.
    0:26:52 If you had to hazard a guess how many people that live amongst us have been sent from a foreign nation and are spies, how many do you think it is?
    0:26:55 Well, let’s define that.
    0:27:17 You know, if they’re hostile intelligence officers, it can be anywhere from 3% of the diplomatic staff to as many as, at one time, the Soviet Union, 85% of their staff were conducting espionage.
    0:27:21 I think numbers, so you have those.
    0:27:33 Now, if you’re referring to, like, how many illegals, I would say at least you would have at least two dozen in the UK, maybe a dozen in France.
    0:27:43 And, you know, you would have a whole host, a constellation of them in the United States, simply because we span five time zones.
    0:27:45 I believe the UK only spans one.
    0:27:57 I think I asked this in part because I was reading something that said much of the illegal immigrants that had come across the southern border of the United States, many of them were Chinese.
    0:28:11 And there was an article about questioning whether that was potentially an intentional act to get illegal Chinese people into the United States for some future purpose.
    0:28:15 You know, big claims require big evidence, and I haven’t seen that.
    0:28:22 In my experience, the Chinese intelligence service prefers to use students and scientists.
    0:28:27 We have approximately 80,000 Chinese students here at any one time.
    0:28:39 I know that, for instance, in the early 80s and early 90s, they would be given allowances.
    0:28:47 It always impressed me that they were given small allowances for meals, but large allowances for photocopying in the library.
    0:28:50 We call that a clue in the FBI.
    0:29:03 So they’d be given $150 for eating, but they would be given thousands of dollars so that they could copy as much as they could from the libraries.
    0:29:16 It is much easier for them, for any nation, to send people here, students, and, for instance, go into engineering or any of those things.
    0:29:25 On this subject of body language, it’s highly contested because some people say body language does give us clues.
    0:29:27 Some people say it doesn’t give us clues because there’s cultural differences.
    0:29:31 Is body language important?
    0:29:34 Well, let me address what you just asked.
    0:29:43 Well, number one, body language is supremely important because we are born without the capacity to talk.
    0:29:49 And so we have to read the baby in front of us.
    0:29:55 To argue that body language, A, doesn’t matter or it’s subject to interpretation,
    0:30:06 I would argue that that would be a minuscule sentiment around the world amongst people who really have studied this.
    0:30:08 And I’ll say why.
    0:30:20 So a baby is born without the capacity to speak, but the mother quickly learns through nonverbals whether that child is colicky,
    0:30:30 whether or not that child needs just to be reassured, whether they’re cold or hot and so forth.
    0:30:39 There’s a lot of junk out there, and that is probably the cleanest word that I can use about body language,
    0:30:41 that this means that or whatever.
    0:30:50 But we’re exquisitely prepared to communicate at any time, whether or not we’re comfortable or uncomfortable,
    0:30:54 whether we’re confident or not understanding.
    0:31:02 We had to evolve that precisely because we were always surrounded by predators.
    0:31:08 For instance, Stephen, when you have doubts or you want follow-up to questions that I ask,
    0:31:11 you use your eyes exquisitely.
    0:31:12 You furrow your glabella.
    0:31:15 One eye rises, the other one lowers it.
    0:31:16 You’re an easy read.
    0:31:19 And so I follow it up with information.
    0:31:21 You didn’t have to teach me that.
    0:31:26 Now, what I would argue is, am I seeing constraint?
    0:31:30 Am I seeing contempt or disdain?
    0:31:31 Well, that’s a silly argument.
    0:31:36 We didn’t evolve to have perfect answers.
    0:31:41 Evolution is about approximation for success.
    0:31:49 In other words, if I can be accurate 75% to 80% of the time, that’s actually good enough.
    0:31:52 It’s good enough.
    0:32:00 And so what I teach is, do you see comfort or discomfort, psychological, physical, and so forth?
    0:32:07 Do I see, as in psychology, we say, is it positively valenced or negatively valenced?
    0:32:09 Balanced, you see?
    0:32:11 You’re furrowing your glabella.
    0:32:13 What does a valenced mean?
    0:32:20 Valence really means it’s balanced or how much electricity goes this way or this way.
    0:32:22 What’s the valence of it?
    0:32:24 So if something’s positively valenced, what does that mean?
    0:32:28 Positively valenced, you’re going to see gravity-defying behaviors.
    0:32:30 You’re going to see emphasis.
    0:32:37 You’re going to see a lot of humor and alacrity and broad gestures and so forth.
    0:32:42 If it’s negatively valenced, it’s, you know, restraint.
    0:32:46 You’re going to see the furrowing of the glabella.
    0:32:51 You’re going to see the tightening, the diminution of the lips.
    0:32:53 You’re going to see a lot of facial touching.
    0:32:55 I don’t know, right?
    0:32:57 All these pacifiers.
    0:33:04 And so I would argue that stop looking for perfection.
    0:33:14 In fact, Dr. Ambadi at Harvard, unfortunately she passed away, she found that we as humans
    0:33:20 are going to be accurate 75% of the time in our assessment of each other.
    0:33:24 That’s an extraordinary number.
    0:33:26 Her research is ample.
    0:33:28 You can look up her research.
    0:33:35 It was all done on the auspices of looking for what she called thin-slice assessments.
    0:33:40 Thin-slice assessments, all of your viewers should know.
    0:33:50 Because it showed us that from as little as three milliseconds, we actually get a pretty
    0:33:52 good assessment of each other.
    0:33:55 And we write 75% of the time with three milliseconds.
    0:33:56 Yes.
    0:33:58 So they did several experiments.
    0:34:07 They had people go in and watch a teacher, for instance, by just opening the door to the
    0:34:10 classroom, watching her for a few seconds and closing the door.
    0:34:17 They rated that teacher the same as people who had sat in that classroom all semester long.
    0:34:20 In terms of…
    0:34:22 Are they a nice teacher?
    0:34:24 Are they a warm teacher?
    0:34:27 Are they an empathetic teacher?
    0:34:29 Are they a competent teacher?
    0:34:29 And so forth.
    0:34:35 It’s as you rub your face, because there’s a lot of incredulity there.
    0:34:43 You have to appreciate this experiment was done over and over and over in many areas.
    0:34:45 I was thinking, as you said it, I was thinking, fucking hell.
    0:34:52 Like, I was thinking, if someone reads you that quickly, I was thinking about how easy it is
    0:34:54 to leave a bad first impression.
    0:35:04 Well, you know, when I started studying body language, which was formally in 1971, had no
    0:35:07 appreciation for schoolwork.
    0:35:11 So I created my own study program.
    0:35:19 So when I started taking a look at body language in 1971, I remember people saying, you know,
    0:35:24 the first 20 minutes are the most important for making an impression.
    0:35:27 Then years later, it was 15 minutes.
    0:35:33 By the 1980s, somebody had said, well, it’s the first four minutes.
    0:35:34 Well, time out.
    0:35:37 That’s ancient information.
    0:35:44 We now know that that assessment is made in the first three milliseconds.
    0:35:46 That’s faster than your blink rate.
    0:35:58 And you can begin to do things poorly and badly and begin to negatively affect others in that
    0:36:04 amount of time because the subconscious is assessing others more quickly.
    0:36:07 And by the way, I didn’t mention this.
    0:36:16 We are, even before we’re born, we are assessing the world around us to the point that for survival
    0:36:26 purposes, a baby in utero begins to assess the world around by the amount of noises and by the
    0:36:35 cadence and manner of speech of the mother, so that when that baby is born, and you can look up the research,
    0:36:48 the baby will be born mirroring the native tongue so that, as researchers found, a baby with a German
    0:36:56 mother will cry differently, will cry differently, the lilt, L-I-L-T, the lilt of that baby will be different than a French
    0:36:57 baby.
    0:37:09 That which dominates so that we can fit better.
    0:37:15 And this goes right from that to business because synchrony is harmony.
    0:37:21 The faster we can synchronize, the faster we can harmonize.
    0:37:24 And so we are pre-programmed.
    0:37:30 So if your viewers are interested in that, they can look at the research that’s been done on the
    0:37:32 lilt of crying babies.
    0:37:35 How does one synchronize?
    0:37:41 So if synchrony equals harmony, i.e., if we synchronize with each other, then we’re going to be
    0:37:43 harmonious in business or in life or whatever.
    0:37:44 Right.
    0:37:46 How do I synchronize with somebody when I meet them?
    0:37:54 The first thing is, at a distance, if I saw you walking down the hallway and you say,
    0:37:57 hey, Joe, you know, and I say, Steve, how are you?
    0:37:57 Right?
    0:38:00 I’m mirroring you.
    0:38:05 You know, this goes back to the work of Carl Rogers in the early 1960s.
    0:38:15 And he found that synchrony puts us in, sort of locks us in, into this binding, psychological
    0:38:21 binding of where you greet with your hand and arch your eyebrows, hey, well, that sends powerful
    0:38:22 messages.
    0:38:27 So if I do it, can you imagine if you greeted me like this and I went, yeah, how you doing?
    0:38:28 Yeah.
    0:38:32 It’s like, we’re totally out of harmony.
    0:38:33 We’re totally out of synchrony.
    0:38:38 So we begin with the nonverbals.
    0:38:41 We begin, for instance, with the clothing.
    0:38:47 You know, if you go to a meeting, you know, we would probably dress the same way or approximate
    0:38:49 each other.
    0:38:53 We would probably have this, look at us right now with our hand gestures.
    0:38:59 We’re literally mirroring each other’s hand gestures to the point where our thumbs are
    0:39:01 precisely the same way.
    0:39:01 Why?
    0:39:03 Because we’re comfortable with each other.
    0:39:09 We would lean in if we are in good synchrony.
    0:39:23 And to the point where you can actually work with individuals to calm them down or to see things
    0:39:30 your way or to appreciate, let’s say, in negotiations, to begin to be more receptive.
    0:39:35 People are more receptive if they can mirror your behaviors.
    0:39:39 So people are more receptive if they can mirror your behaviors.
    0:39:46 So if I let you mirror my behavior, then you’re going to be more receptive to what I have to say.
    0:39:46 Is that what you’re saying?
    0:39:52 In general, we cannot be mimicking each other like it’s a game.
    0:39:54 Yeah, yeah, yeah.
    0:39:55 It becomes ridiculous.
    0:40:02 But there’s no way we can negotiate if you’re screaming and I’m stoic.
    0:40:03 Yeah.
    0:40:05 It just, it doesn’t happen.
    0:40:12 For instance, you and I probably are doing a pretty good job of just mirroring each other
    0:40:15 in the conversation.
    0:40:21 We are likely, more likely to be successful, have more face time, and achieve more if we
    0:40:30 can talk to each other this way than if all of a sudden I decide to sit sideways, kick my
    0:40:34 feet up, and lean on my elbow.
    0:40:41 That gesture alone, even though it’s a comfort display, doesn’t put us in synchrony.
    0:40:49 And everything that I have ever found was, even when I was talking to terrorists, even when
    0:40:56 talking to terrorists who absolutely hated me, hated a lot of other things, if I could just
    0:41:05 get them grounded to the point where we are talking basically the same way and using the
    0:41:11 same words, if they say, my family, don’t say wife and kids.
    0:41:13 Use family.
    0:41:15 Don’t use terms of art.
    0:41:17 You know, if they say, well, what’s the price?
    0:41:22 Don’t come back and say, well, the points on this.
    0:41:24 That’s not what they asked.
    0:41:30 That’s a great way to demonstrate that you’re not listening.
    0:41:38 And the other thing I always emphasize is that for years people said, well, try to reduce
    0:41:43 everything that’s emotional so that it doesn’t interfere.
    0:41:46 That’s not how we evolved.
    0:41:48 That is absolutely not how we evolved.
    0:41:54 We evolved to deal with emotions because emotions keep us alive.
    0:42:02 When our amygdala senses a threat, it is there to deal with that.
    0:42:06 And anything negative rises to prominence.
    0:42:09 That’s one of the first things I teach.
    0:42:13 If it’s really negative, it rises to prominence.
    0:42:15 We assess for it first.
    0:42:16 We deal with that first.
    0:42:23 And often in business, what we see is, you know, somebody had a hard time finding your
    0:42:24 location.
    0:42:25 They had a hard time parking.
    0:42:32 Then they had to go to your receptionist who was on the phone and took about seven minutes
    0:42:34 to even say good morning.
    0:42:37 And when they did, they did it with no alacrity.
    0:42:39 Then they have to go through security.
    0:42:45 Then they have to take the elevator that’s crowded and then finally get to your office.
    0:42:55 And you want them to jump right into the meeting without all that negativity that has been accrued.
    0:42:58 That’s not how humans evolved.
    0:43:02 That is absolutely not how our species evolved.
    0:43:11 Our species evolved to deconflict that, to diminish that by first dealing with that.
    0:43:17 That’s where storytelling in part came from, where we came and said, you know, I chased it.
    0:43:21 I was able to attack me, then I attacked back, you know.
    0:43:27 And then we go through that whole storytelling, which has mythical proportions and mythical aspects
    0:43:29 as archetypes.
    0:43:36 And if you subscribe to Jungian psychology, one of the arguments that I always use is this.
    0:43:44 How many of you have been in an argument and then 30 minutes later, you remember all the clever lines
    0:43:45 you should have said?
    0:43:46 We all have.
    0:43:51 And that’s because the emotional brain hijacks neural activity.
    0:43:57 If you want the best out of people, if you want the best out of a relationship, vent that.
    0:43:58 Get that out.
    0:44:01 Give it time.
    0:44:02 Okay.
    0:44:09 And yes, you’re going to have to invest that time and then move forward so that you can deal
    0:44:14 with the transactional, the business and so forth.
    0:44:20 You’ve referenced a few times different types of body language that I’ve exhibited that help
    0:44:22 you understand what I’m thinking and going through.
    0:44:23 Yes.
    0:44:25 I think a second ago, you referenced glabula.
    0:44:30 And this brings me to something I read in your work about eyebrow knitting.
    0:44:31 Yeah.
    0:44:32 What is eyebrow knitting?
    0:44:38 So this little area between your eyes is called the glabella.
    0:44:47 And the glabella is great because at about, well, I’ve seen it in babies as early as three
    0:44:48 or four days.
    0:44:52 But very early on, we begin to furrow.
    0:44:59 In other words, we push this together when we have doubts or we don’t like something or we
    0:45:00 don’t understand something.
    0:45:03 So we furrowed the glabella.
    0:45:10 Some people call it eyebrow knitting because we have nicer eyebrows nowadays, not bushy like
    0:45:11 the old days.
    0:45:14 They don’t come together like they used to.
    0:45:28 So a lot of those expressions of, I don’t understand, we use with the squinted eyes, the furrowed glabella.
    0:45:33 You know, sometimes we’ll touch our face or scratch our face.
    0:45:39 Babies at 47 seconds, which I have directly observed.
    0:45:48 If you shine a light at a newborn baby, it will furrow the chin that they don’t like it.
    0:45:57 And in my presentations, I have a matching one of a 47-year-old man and a 47-second-old baby,
    0:46:01 both doing the same thing when they hear things they don’t like.
    0:46:07 So we begin to communicate quite a lot, actually, with our faces.
    0:46:09 What about eyelid touching?
    0:46:10 Yeah.
    0:46:18 So for a long time, including in some of my writing, the theory was a lot of people cover
    0:46:21 their eyes, touch their eyes when they hear bad news.
    0:46:25 You said, hey, Joe, can you help me move this weekend?
    0:46:27 Oh, geez, Steve.
    0:46:28 Right?
    0:46:30 You see a lot of that.
    0:46:36 And I started to think about that about five or six years ago.
    0:46:40 And so I took some classes in anatomy, human anatomy.
    0:46:49 And I’m pretty much convinced now that a lot of the facial touching, including the touching
    0:46:56 of the eyes and so forth, has to do with the innervation of the fifth cranial nerve and the
    0:46:57 seventh cranial nerve.
    0:47:04 Now, some of your viewers may find this interesting, that nerve, which goes to our forehead and
    0:47:12 actually goes into our eyelids and so forth, and the seventh, which is the facial, is very
    0:47:16 short in distance to that part of the brain where it is received.
    0:47:22 And so I think, you know, I’ve postulated, I wrote for Psychology Today, that a lot of the
    0:47:32 reasons why we touch our face and why we touch our eyes, oh, no, is because that pressure
    0:47:38 immediately goes to the brain and helps to relieve stress.
    0:47:40 And because the nerve is so short, right?
    0:47:44 We could massage our feet and achieve the same, but it’s very far away.
    0:47:52 So I think a lot of facial touching, including eye touching, we do because of its ability
    0:47:56 to, anytime there’s stress, we pacify ourselves.
    0:47:58 And by the way, it’s very interesting.
    0:48:02 In 1974, I was bored at the university.
    0:48:07 So there was a lab where you could actually watch children and study them at play.
    0:48:11 And they had some children there that were born blind, so they had never seen.
    0:48:13 And I was just blown away.
    0:48:20 The first time I saw a blind child who had never seen, heard some news that was not very
    0:48:24 good and immediately covered their eyes, having never seen.
    0:48:30 And that’s when I realized, OK, we are 2.4 million years old.
    0:48:33 This is hardwired in our DNA.
    0:48:38 This is part of our paleo circuits, as Dr. David Gibbons later taught me.
    0:48:41 And it has to do with how it feels.
    0:48:43 And that’s why we touch our faces so much.
    0:48:49 So it’s typically a negative emotion and a form of self-soothing for that negative emotion.
    0:48:50 I think that’s a good synopsis.
    0:48:55 But also keep in mind how often we touch our faces when we’re having a nice time.
    0:49:00 Like when I’m reading, I find myself turning pages because I read very fast.
    0:49:07 I turn with my left hand, but I pacify or soothe myself by touching my, you know, it’s a
    0:49:08 penzive pose.
    0:49:11 Women will play with their hair.
    0:49:18 All day long, our brain is asking us to do things to contribute to that.
    0:49:24 But when there’s something stressful, then, for instance, we go from like in negotiations, when
    0:49:29 somebody throws a number we don’t like, we’ll go from touching our face to scratching our
    0:49:37 face because the brain is saying, hey, do something more powerful that will keep me in what we call
    0:49:39 homeostasis.
    0:49:45 So to answer your question, yes, but it also applies to when we’re really enjoying a moment.
    0:49:46 What about our lips?
    0:49:49 You talked a second ago about like pursed lips and stuff.
    0:49:50 What kind of clues do the lips give away?
    0:49:51 Yeah.
    0:49:56 So for me, the lips are the seismograph.
    0:50:00 The lips are like the emotional seismograph of the body.
    0:50:09 When we are comfortable and confident, our lips are full of blood, their color changes.
    0:50:15 The minute we hear something we don’t like, blood actually begins to leave the lips and they
    0:50:18 become narrower and then we begin to tighten them.
    0:50:24 You know, if somebody says something I don’t like, I might go, hmm, right?
    0:50:34 Or we begin to bite the lip because we’re stressed or we pluck it, pull on it, do all sorts of things
    0:50:35 to soothe it.
    0:50:43 But the lips get very, show a lot of nervous emotion when we’re under stress.
    0:50:46 So they’re very much, as is the jaw.
    0:50:53 Like for instance, if you said something I might not agree with, I probably shift my jaw because
    0:50:57 when you shift your jaw, it puts pressure on the TMJ.
    0:51:05 And that alone says to the brain, go somewhere else, don’t, don’t, you know, don’t struggle
    0:51:06 too much with that.
    0:51:12 So we’re always doing something physical to counter anything that the brain might be undergoing.
    0:51:16 Tell me about the super sternal notch.
    0:51:21 So the super sternal notch, it has other names.
    0:51:28 You could call it the little neck dimple, this little area right at the bottom of your throat.
    0:51:31 It’s a deep indentation.
    0:51:36 This is the most vulnerable part of the human body.
    0:51:43 All air, food, nutrients, blood, electricity, oxygen, everything goes through there.
    0:51:49 And what happens is, and one of the things that I found was that there was nothing in the
    0:51:56 literature in 1975, 76, I’m looking and I’m noticing that when people are nervous, they
    0:52:00 immediately cover their neck, they touch their neck.
    0:52:06 You know, in the literature, you hear about, oh, she, you know, clutched her pearls, right?
    0:52:12 Rubbing that men tend to do it more robustly because of testosterone.
    0:52:17 Women tend to more directly touch the super sternal notch.
    0:52:23 And what I found is, when there’s a lack of confidence, insecurities, fear, apprehensions,
    0:52:28 or concerns, that people will go, oh, my God, did you see that, right?
    0:52:29 Oh, it’s gone.
    0:52:30 It’s bad.
    0:52:36 And, you know, why is it all directed at this little area of the neck?
    0:52:41 And why do men clutch their necks and massage their necks when they’re, it’s the worst thing
    0:52:46 you can do in negotiations, by the way, is touch your neck, because what you’re transmitting
    0:52:47 is weakness.
    0:52:52 Somebody whose confidence is never touches the neck.
    0:52:53 You just don’t.
    0:52:55 You don’t go anywhere near the neck.
    0:53:01 And you don’t ventilate, because what you’re saying is you’re getting to me, ventilating behaviors.
    0:53:05 Wait, sorry, when you say ventilate, you mean giving yourself air?
    0:53:05 Yeah.
    0:53:06 So it could be-
    0:53:14 So ventilating behaviors are behaviors of weakness, because your body temperature has changed at
    0:53:15 one to fiftieth of a second.
    0:53:19 And what you’re revealing is something negative is getting to you.
    0:53:21 So you don’t do that.
    0:53:26 But here’s the behavior, the neck touching, neck covering, covering of the supra sternal
    0:53:27 notch.
    0:53:29 And there’s another behavior.
    0:53:32 You know, earlier we talked about we were surrounded by predators.
    0:53:39 And one of the behaviors we did was to cover our mouths or hold still when we hear a noise.
    0:53:42 The third behavior is to cover the neck.
    0:53:49 To cover the neck, because large felines always go for the neck.
    0:53:55 And so the brain didn’t, doesn’t have a closet full of ties.
    0:53:58 It has about four choices.
    0:54:04 And those four behaviors are exquisite.
    0:54:11 It’s proven over time that if we cover our mouth, cover the neck, don’t move, they work
    0:54:11 pretty well.
    0:54:14 So we don’t have to choose a lot of colors.
    0:54:21 And the other thing sometimes you’ll see people do is when you see this here in Florida, and
    0:54:26 we certainly saw it in November after the hurricane, people come to see their house and they cover
    0:54:28 their head, hands are up here.
    0:54:30 Oh, my God.
    0:54:32 You know, why do we do that?
    0:54:35 Again, large felines.
    0:54:37 These are shortcuts.
    0:54:42 This is heuristics that have prevailed and say, oh, no, right?
    0:54:48 And you say, well, we’re no longer surrounded by them.
    0:54:49 Well, go to India.
    0:54:52 There were 238 attacks last year.
    0:54:55 It is in our DNA.
    0:55:01 It is performed out of necessity to keep us alive.
    0:55:03 So we have these reactions.
    0:55:12 But so I look at the, certainly I look at the lips and the neck as good places for information.
    0:55:15 I was just thinking then about why, yeah, you hold your head.
    0:55:18 But you also hold your head when you see something that’s fallen over.
    0:55:21 So if you see like a building falling down and an earthquake, you immediately.
    0:55:31 The other day, it was an old car and it was parked on a road that was at an angle and they forgot to set the brake.
    0:55:34 And I’m watching it slowly slide.
    0:55:39 And I found myself, I teach this stuff with my hands up here.
    0:55:45 And unfortunately, it was across the street and I couldn’t get to it fast enough.
    0:55:46 And it didn’t do any damage.
    0:55:53 But you realize these shortcuts are with us for a purpose.
    0:55:57 Much of the work you do as an FBI agent is some form of negotiation.
    0:56:02 And you spend a lot of time teaching people how to be good negotiators as well.
    0:56:03 You mentioned negotiation a second ago.
    0:56:05 I’m a business person.
    0:56:10 I do lots of negotiations, whether it’s with clients or suppliers or interviews.
    0:56:13 You know, I’m interviewing people all the time, which I consider to be a negotiation.
    0:56:16 How do I improve my negotiation skills?
    0:56:18 What are the things I should be thinking about as I go into the negotiation?
    0:56:21 Well, you know, they warned me.
    0:56:23 You ask profound questions.
    0:56:26 And you’re right.
    0:56:33 In the FBI, I mean, when you’re trying to convince someone to tell us the truth and put themselves
    0:56:37 in jeopardy, that is nothing but negotiations.
    0:56:40 You may look at it as interviewing.
    0:56:47 But like you said, even a conversation, you know, I look at negotiations in the same way that
    0:56:57 I look at interviewing, it’s in the simplest form, it’s effective communication with a purpose.
    0:57:01 So you say, well, that’s highly simplistic.
    0:57:03 I’ve never heard that.
    0:57:03 Well, think of it.
    0:57:05 Well, what is the purpose?
    0:57:07 OK, well, we’ll get to that in a minute.
    0:57:11 Either you have something I need or want or that.
    0:57:18 But there has to be communication and there has to be an understanding of what I mean and
    0:57:21 what I intend and so forth.
    0:57:24 So for me, it’s a reminder.
    0:57:32 When I first came into the FBI, an old timer said to me, interviewing isn’t about the confession.
    0:57:34 And I looked at him like, what?
    0:57:36 Excuse me?
    0:57:38 What do you mean not about the confession?
    0:57:40 He says, you’ll get the confession.
    0:57:44 Interviewing is about FaceTime.
    0:57:51 If you can get people to talk to you for two hours, three hours, four hours.
    0:57:55 In one case, I interviewed an individual for 12 hours.
    0:58:03 They’ll tell you everything you need to know, but you got to keep them in the room.
    0:58:11 And so I always view negotiations of number one is how do I communicate with you in a way that
    0:58:11 you’ll want to talk to me?
    0:58:20 You’ll want to talk to me for however long it takes to get to that purpose, which is the
    0:58:21 transaction.
    0:58:32 Now, if I’m evaluating you for your services or if I’m negotiating for prices, I want to hear
    0:58:47 what you have to say and I want to say and I want to lay out what I’m interested in achieving and then reconciling or working around whatever discrepancies or issues that there may be.
    0:59:02 I think when we look at negotiations that way, we can say, well, that means I got to do a lot of stuff up front, which is who am I communicating with?
    0:59:03 Who am I going to negotiate with?
    0:59:05 What’s the negotiating style?
    0:59:06 Are they stoic?
    0:59:07 Do they come in?
    0:59:09 Do they throw things down?
    0:59:21 I mean, I’ve been in negotiations where opposing counsel came in and literally walked into the room, didn’t even say good morning, just threw the things down and said, I want to hear the numbers.
    0:59:28 Okay, then how do we begin to deal with that?
    0:59:34 Because someone that comes in and is aggressive and so forth, you’ve got to deal with.
    0:59:35 What do you do?
    0:59:38 Do you rise to their aggression or do you try and bring them down to your position?
    0:59:40 Great question.
    0:59:43 The worst thing you can do is rise to that.
    0:59:48 You begin to dominate them by taking control of time.
    0:59:53 Whoever controls time controls.
    0:59:58 And so they come in, they throw the things down.
    1:00:05 So usually, you know, we’ll start with, well, good morning to you too.
    1:00:09 Yeah, yeah, let’s cut to the chase.
    1:00:17 And then the whole team I’m working with knows we’re going to slow things down.
    1:00:23 We are not going to be working at that pace because if you work at that pace, they’re taking control.
    1:00:25 And so we slow things down.
    1:00:29 And there’s several strategies.
    1:00:39 You can become, all of a sudden, you can become very visual and say, all right, we’re going to, you know, write this down and we’re going to put this here.
    1:00:45 We’re going to put, you know, and then this is the difference of, you know, there’s a lot of strategies.
    1:00:55 But the first thing is we’ve got to get that person to understand that we negotiate, hopefully, as equals.
    1:01:10 But if the perception is always that that person is negotiating as the bully or is always in charge, you’re never going to have equity.
    1:01:21 Now, I’ve had a lot of clients that have said, hey, you know, I’ve tried all your strategies and, you know, this guy I’m dealing with is just, he’s crass.
    1:01:22 He’s just a bully.
    1:01:29 He comes in and he’s stuff like, and so one of the questions I always ask is, is he the only source?
    1:01:33 Is he or she the only source, number one?
    1:01:39 And number two is how long are you willing to tolerate this person?
    1:01:42 Because we fail to look at that.
    1:01:43 He gives you headaches.
    1:01:45 You don’t sleep well every time you go to this.
    1:01:47 I’m thinking of one client in particular.
    1:01:55 You come away with a nervous stomach and, you know, how long are you willing to tolerate that?
    1:01:59 If you’re willing to tolerate it, then, you know, he’s not going to change his style.
    1:02:05 Then you come in and we change our exposure.
    1:02:09 So we’re not going to expose all of our staff to that kind of negativity.
    1:02:15 We send in our first person and say, look, here are the numbers and we work with that.
    1:02:20 But there are ways to dealing with the very toxic.
    1:02:26 But we don’t allow them to get away with everything nor think that they’re in charge.
    1:02:28 And we do it in subtle ways.
    1:02:32 And we sort of derail their agenda.
    1:02:41 Maybe their agenda, based on past meetings, was to come in and just throw these things at us very quickly.
    1:02:44 Then we have to adjust to that.
    1:02:49 So there has to be rehearsed strategies for dealing with that.
    1:02:59 One of the things your work made me think about is how important it is to literally, like, write down the goal of my negotiation before I go into the negotiation.
    1:03:03 Or else you might get swept up in the emotion of it and the sort of heat of the moment.
    1:03:09 Yeah, you wouldn’t be the first one to find yourself in a meeting negotiating.
    1:03:14 And all of a sudden, you’re, you know, it’s like, what are we actually negotiating for?
    1:03:25 And so that’s why I like the simplicity of effective communication with a purpose as a form of negotiations.
    1:03:39 Because many times we go into negotiations and the chief financial officer is there.
    1:03:46 Sometimes we go in there and, you know, your first assistant is always there also.
    1:03:51 But you also have in-office counsel that is in attendance.
    1:03:52 What’s their role?
    1:03:54 And what is my role?
    1:03:58 You know, something so simple as, what are you going to do?
    1:04:03 Look straight ahead the whole time your attorney is speaking?
    1:04:06 Or are you going to look at him?
    1:04:17 Well, we know from the research that by looking at the person who’s actually talking on your side actually potentiates the gravity of what he’s saying.
    1:04:32 That at the most emphatic points that when that attorney makes, and you did this earlier, you want to steeple because steeple is the most powerful gesture that we have to convey confidence.
    1:04:34 Steepling is in this little hand gesture.
    1:04:38 Steepling is this former German chancellor, Angela Merkel, did this a lot.
    1:04:41 You see Musk do this a lot.
    1:04:46 You see Steve Jobs used to, a lot of pictures of Steve Jobs doing that.
    1:04:52 But, you know, you reserve that for that point in time when you want to emphasize.
    1:04:57 And so the worst thing you can do is just to sit there dormant.
    1:05:03 And in fact, we have research and it’s called the still face experiments.
    1:05:08 And that is that the worst thing you can do is sit at a meeting and hold a still face.
    1:05:12 You’re perceived as a threat.
    1:05:14 You’re perceived as less trustworthy.
    1:05:16 You’re perceived as insignificant.
    1:05:19 Corner of your mouths are down.
    1:05:21 I roll to the right, Stephen.
    1:05:23 That’s how you’re perceived.
    1:05:27 And that’s and that’s what happens.
    1:05:35 The experiments, which were done first with babies, found that if you take a baby and it’s called a still face experiments.
    1:05:41 If you take a baby and you look away and look back and and smile, the baby’s content.
    1:05:43 You can do that several times.
    1:05:46 But on the last one, you turn around and you hold very still.
    1:05:48 The babies become.
    1:05:51 Incontrollable.
    1:05:53 They they they have fits.
    1:05:55 They’re really troubled by that.
    1:06:00 So the experimenter said, well, yeah, but what age is that leave us?
    1:06:02 So they decided to do it with adults.
    1:06:05 Adults do the same thing.
    1:06:11 If you and I are talking and we’re exchanging faces, the worst thing I can do is then sit there.
    1:06:16 You see, you find it disconcerting.
    1:06:17 Yeah.
    1:06:19 And what the brain perceives is a threat.
    1:06:22 And you lose trustworthiness.
    1:06:26 Because you can’t read what this person’s thinking either way.
    1:06:29 I’d rather you be unhappy than at least I can put that in a box.
    1:06:31 Well, that’s one way to look at it.
    1:06:36 I’m not sure that anybody knows the the precise reason for it.
    1:06:48 But what we do understand is that the still face, which if you’re in a virtual call, you want to nod, you want to tilt your head, you want to make different gestures.
    1:06:50 But the worst thing you can do is hold still.
    1:06:59 And then in negotiations, when you’re talking to the team and saying, look, when we’re going in there, you know, I don’t want anybody to just sit there.
    1:07:07 I want expressions, and when someone is speaking, you know, you’re looking at them in the same way that the other side would do.
    1:07:09 But you have to plan.
    1:07:19 Now, the other thing I find with negotiators, one thing I did in the FBI is I always planned my interviews in exquisite detail.
    1:07:22 Who would enter the room first?
    1:07:24 Who would say what?
    1:07:25 Where I would sit?
    1:07:27 Who gets offered water and when?
    1:07:31 Because I need to be in control.
    1:07:34 Who’s going to say what?
    1:07:37 These are things people don’t think about.
    1:07:44 But at the levels with the people that I deal with, you have to have a certain amount of advantage.
    1:07:56 You have to have a certain amount of psychological leverage to say, look, you may be the world’s largest manufacturer of this, and I’m just starting out.
    1:08:00 But I am not down here.
    1:08:12 And so I would appreciate if you would begin to value me, and I do that by doing certain things in the manner that I walk in.
    1:08:32 You take command of the situation, and it looks aesthetically pleasing, oh, isn’t it nice?
    1:08:36 He’s offering me something to drink.
    1:08:41 Or the assistant or someone says, would you like some tea?
    1:08:42 How would you like it?
    1:08:43 And so forth.
    1:08:58 And what we’re actually witnessing is the transformation of you have now become the dominant person by becoming the archetypal, the father or mother figure.
    1:09:00 Because you’re offering something.
    1:09:01 Because you’re offering it.
    1:09:05 And you’re in control of the food and the brain.
    1:09:15 You know, people often wonder, well, why was it in Stockholm, Sweden back in the 70s that the Stockholm syndrome took hold so fast with those bank robbers,
    1:09:26 where they had such an effect on their victims that within hours the victims were defending the bank robbers.
    1:09:27 It was very simple.
    1:09:32 They became the father figure, and the hostages became the children.
    1:09:34 So I actually don’t know that story.
    1:09:44 What happened was there was a bank robbery in Stockholm, and the bank robbers went in, held the victims hostage.
    1:09:47 Eventually, they were rescued.
    1:09:56 But what they found was that in a matter of hours, the victims were rising to the defense of the criminals.
    1:10:00 And it became known as the Stockholm syndrome.
    1:10:10 And what it showed us was the robbers became the archetype of the parent, and the hostages became the children.
    1:10:15 And in an instant, they became subservient.
    1:10:17 Is that what happens in domestic abuse cases as well?
    1:10:18 Yes.
    1:10:19 You nailed it.
    1:10:21 You nailed it beautifully.
    1:10:26 You’re the first person to get that right away.
    1:10:31 And that’s why you often see this in domestic abuse cases.
    1:10:33 And you say, how can she just got beat up?
    1:10:38 How can she defend him, usually the case?
    1:10:44 And you realize, oh, my God, we have like a Stockholm syndrome where he’s the provider.
    1:10:46 He’s the only one working or this or that.
    1:10:58 But, you know, getting back to negotiations, I think it’s one of those things that I insist that if you go into negotiations, that you be treated at least as an equal.
    1:11:06 And that the minute people start to look down on you, it makes for a very difficult conversation.
    1:11:19 So when you’re thinking about walking into the room and all these where you sit, if you’re walking into the room to interview a terrorist, are you trying to walk into the room first or are you trying to walk into the room last?
    1:11:22 Do you send your team in to walk in first, then you show up last?
    1:11:25 And what are you thinking about seating positions?
    1:11:26 Right.
    1:11:32 So one of the things that I always insisted is I would walk into the room first.
    1:11:35 So they would already be in there?
    1:11:36 No, no, no.
    1:11:39 We would walk to the room.
    1:11:39 Oh, with them.
    1:11:40 With them.
    1:11:43 And then I would just make them wait there a minute.
    1:11:44 I’d open it.
    1:11:48 I’d take a look and I’d say, oh, just want to make sure the room is safe and there’s nobody in here.
    1:11:51 You know, I’ve walked into people before.
    1:11:55 That begins to establish my dominance.
    1:12:01 And then I would say, why don’t you take a seat right there?
    1:12:08 You know, people ask me, well, why, you know, why are you being so nice to these criminals?
    1:12:13 Well, first of all, I go back to what that old timer said.
    1:12:14 I want FaceTime.
    1:12:17 I don’t care what it takes to get FaceTime.
    1:12:19 But I also want to be in charge.
    1:12:30 And if by being nice to him and pointing to the nice chair there achieves that, then so much for me.
    1:12:35 And then I always try to sit in a way that I sit higher.
    1:12:47 Now, in the case of Ramsey, we’d literally get the room ahead of time and we would change the furniture so that I always set about an inch to two inches higher than he did.
    1:12:49 He never noticed that.
    1:12:52 Ramsey was the guy whose cigarette was quivering.
    1:12:53 Was quivering.
    1:12:58 In the end, we ended up doing 37 interviews.
    1:13:03 And they were all done in hotel rooms, mostly in the Orlando area.
    1:13:11 And we would go in ahead of time and we would just arrange the furniture or bring in furniture.
    1:13:13 But I always sat higher than him.
    1:13:14 He never understood that.
    1:13:26 He always sat on the couch, which somehow about that much was shaved from the couch so that it always sat a little lower.
    1:13:32 And so he was always literally slightly looking up to us.
    1:13:36 And then we controlled when we would take breaks.
    1:13:42 And I, you know, and I was always attentive and I would say, you know, would you like something to drink now?
    1:13:45 I said, well, this is such a good subject.
    1:13:53 Why don’t we take the break now and you, you have the drink now and then we’ll, so we can continue.
    1:14:04 What he didn’t realize was that I was establishing control over him by sort of dictating.
    1:14:10 It would be no, you know, I’m sure your listeners might be saying, boy, that’s manipulative.
    1:14:19 Yeah, but in the transactional phase, it’s no different than you saying to your crew, I need to take a break right now and go to the restroom.
    1:14:20 Okay, take a break.
    1:14:22 I don’t think that much of it.
    1:14:33 But over time, what happens is he begins to relinquish a lot of that forcefulness that he’d love to exhibit.
    1:14:38 He’d love to be in charge, but I’m not permitting it.
    1:14:43 And sometimes he would say, well, I could use a smoke break right now.
    1:14:48 And I’d say, hang on a second, because what you just said was really interesting.
    1:14:52 And my partner, Mrs. Terry Moody, I loved her.
    1:14:53 She was a great partner.
    1:14:57 She looked at me like, really, you’re going to push it that much further?
    1:15:08 But it worked to the point where, I mean, here’s a guy who had his attorney’s phone number on him at all times, and he never used that.
    1:15:12 You mentioned the height of the chairs.
    1:15:15 What does height matter in this context?
    1:15:27 Because I was thinking as well about Zoom, and the interesting thing about now, about Zoom, we were talking about this before we started recording, and the fact that most of our conversations are happening digitally now, is we don’t often think about height.
    1:15:45 And I’m sometimes on a call with one of my colleagues or partners, and I’ll often ask them before the client or whoever we’re doing business with joins the call to adjust the height, because they are like looking down into the lens, or they’re looking up into the lens, which I think is also suboptimal.
    1:15:54 A good term, there’s a good term, there’s a lot to be said about height, just as there is a beauty dividend, right?
    1:16:09 So the beauty dividend, and you can look this up, the beauty dividend, well-researched, basically says you’re going to earn 8% per year the rest of your life, just if you are good looking.
    1:16:15 That’s the beauty dividend, you can go online and look at all the studies and the statistics that go with it.
    1:16:19 But there’s also a height dividend, and it is universal.
    1:16:42 If you look at Americans that are 6 feet 2 inches, so a little taller than me, accounts for about 3% of the population, unless you go to the Fortune 500 companies, and then they account for 39% of all CEOs at 6’2″.
    1:16:49 Whoa, that, my friend, is an order of increase.
    1:16:54 And you say, are taller people smarter?
    1:17:01 No, no, it has to do with the benefit of being tall.
    1:17:09 There is a dividend, and so we tend to see that across the world.
    1:17:15 The word dividend, for anyone that doesn’t know, basically means a benefit or a reward, one could think of it as.
    1:17:15 An advantage.
    1:17:17 You have an advantage.
    1:17:22 So with Ramsey, what was the dividend by you making your charge just an inch taller?
    1:17:23 What were you doing, Tim?
    1:17:25 You were taking away his power a little bit, making you more powerful?
    1:17:29 I had to because he had all the cards.
    1:17:31 He was the spy.
    1:17:38 He had all the evidence in his head or in his possession, or the Russians had it.
    1:17:40 The Russians weren’t going to give it to us.
    1:17:41 They’re the enemy.
    1:17:45 They said, too bad, mates, but we’ve got all your secrets.
    1:17:49 They had so many secrets that they measured it in weight, not just in pages.
    1:17:53 The other problem I was dealing with was his IQ.
    1:18:01 He had the second highest IQ that the army ever recorded since World War II.
    1:18:06 He could talk on any subject, quantum physics to whatever.
    1:18:15 When you have a superior intellect, in his case, which was true, or you’re dealing with someone,
    1:18:18 let’s say, who is malignant narcissist.
    1:18:23 So they account for about 2% of the population, but about 20% of CEOs.
    1:18:33 So your malignant narcissist who overvalues themselves and tends to devalue others,
    1:18:39 and in my case with him, he had narcissistic traits, which I could deal with,
    1:18:46 but his superior intellect was breathtaking, and he had perfect recall.
    1:18:53 So in a way, it was frightening, because all he had to do was transport himself to another country,
    1:18:57 and he could sell all the secrets that he had memorized.
    1:19:04 So I had to play a certain role, but I also couldn’t let him take charge of the investigation,
    1:19:12 and not one that had put England, Germany, all of Western Europe in jeopardy,
    1:19:15 as well as Canada and the United States.
    1:19:22 I could not afford, the United States government couldn’t afford to have him be flippant
    1:19:30 with the knowledge that he knew, especially once we knew that he had compromised the nuclear go codes.
    1:19:32 Do you mind if I pause this conversation for a moment?
    1:19:35 I want to talk about our show sponsor today, which is Shopify.
    1:19:38 I’ve always believed that the biggest cost in business isn’t failure,
    1:19:41 it’s the time you waste trying to make decisions.
    1:19:44 Time spent hesitating, overthinking, or waiting for the right moment.
    1:19:49 When I started my first company at 20 years old, I had no experience and no money.
    1:19:54 What I did have was an idea and the willingness to move fast, and that made all the difference.
    1:19:56 If you’ve been thinking about starting your own business,
    1:19:59 Shopify makes this entire process so much easier.
    1:20:03 With thousands of customisable templates, you don’t need coding or design skills,
    1:20:05 you just need a willingness to start.
    1:20:08 Shopify connects all your sales channels from your website to social media,
    1:20:12 and it handles the back-end payments, shipping, and taxes too,
    1:20:15 so that you can stay focused on moving forward and growing your business.
    1:20:19 If you’re ready to start, visit shopify.com slash Bartlett,
    1:20:22 and sign up for a £1 per month trial period.
    1:20:24 That’s shopify.com slash Bartlett.
    1:20:26 What about posture?
    1:20:29 Because that’s kind of one way to make yourself taller.
    1:20:30 Yeah.
    1:20:32 Are there any clues in someone’s posture,
    1:20:37 and how important is sort of playing with our posture to create a different impression?
    1:20:39 Yeah, absolutely.
    1:20:43 Not just posture, but territory.
    1:20:52 So I look at posture as, you know, when we look confident, shoulders back, our breathing.
    1:20:57 To me, posture starts with the brain, how calm we are in our breathing.
    1:21:04 I was, again, in Valencia at this event, and a lady came up to me, and she says,
    1:21:08 you’re getting ready to go on the stage, how can you not be nervous?
    1:21:10 And I said, well, I am nervous.
    1:21:11 I’m just hiding it.
    1:21:18 I’m acting like I’m in control, but I’ve learned to do that,
    1:21:21 because you don’t want to look like a nervous FBI agent.
    1:21:22 Trust me.
    1:21:25 You want to look cool, calm, and collected.
    1:21:31 In negotiations, you don’t want to look needy.
    1:21:34 You don’t want to look desperate.
    1:21:43 And at the same time, you don’t want to come across as you’re indifferent.
    1:21:51 And sometimes that demeanor, that posture, those gestures, the totality of it has a lot of meaning.
    1:21:58 Now, you have to keep in mind, a lot of successful businessmen I’m running into are actually on the spectrum, right?
    1:21:59 So, the autism spectrum.
    1:22:02 And so, they don’t make as much eye contact.
    1:22:05 They may have behaviors that are irregular.
    1:22:11 I have one I deal with who has Asperger’s, and so he sometimes jerks.
    1:22:16 And so, there’s a lot of discomfort, I find, from others in reading him.
    1:22:17 I don’t have any problem.
    1:22:22 I just see it, okay, this is his normal behaviors, and we get around.
    1:22:26 But you can tell a lot about a person.
    1:22:31 And when you’ve invested in things, you’re doing your diligence, and you’re talking to people.
    1:22:35 Yeah, you can look at the numbers all day long.
    1:22:49 But you also are looking at the nonverbals and saying, you know, are they communicating confidence, or are they communicating desire, or need, or any kind of frailty?
    1:22:53 I was just reflecting on a few of the interviews I’ve had recently.
    1:22:55 We’ve been interviewing for one particular very, very senior role.
    1:22:58 And there were two final stage candidates.
    1:23:04 And I was just reflecting, as you were saying, how one of the final stage candidates was extremely calm and sat back in their chair.
    1:23:07 And the other one was very much leaning forward.
    1:23:11 And upon reflection, the second candidate wanted the job a lot more.
    1:23:17 But the first candidate was probably more experienced, more confident, and had higher self-worth.
    1:23:29 And their ability to be so relaxed in that environment, and kind of own the chair in my boardroom, was actually, it actually made me kind of want them more.
    1:23:33 Because they were signaling to me that they had lots of options.
    1:23:34 They weren’t intimidated.
    1:23:35 They weren’t scared.
    1:23:37 They weren’t nervous about this opportunity.
    1:23:41 You know, that’s an interesting observation, Stephen.
    1:23:46 And it’s very good that you observe the discrepancy.
    1:23:51 One of the things that I look for is, what is their role going to be?
    1:23:54 I don’t mind that somebody is nervous.
    1:24:03 I, myself, early on, coming from a humble background, was often nervous.
    1:24:14 I tend to focus on the things that most organizations don’t put into their plan to look for.
    1:24:17 One of them is problem solving.
    1:24:22 Give me a list of the problems you have solved.
    1:24:28 Most people, when they hire, they never ask that question.
    1:24:30 They tell, you know, I can do Excel.
    1:24:32 I know Microsoft.
    1:24:33 That’s great.
    1:24:40 Please tell me what problems you have solved at your last job.
    1:24:44 And, you know, how efficiently did you do it?
    1:24:49 How do you know if they solved the problem or they were on a team where someone else solved the problem?
    1:24:58 Because one of the things that I said, you know, look for is, is how many instances they tell and how they describe it.
    1:24:59 Because here’s what’s interesting.
    1:25:10 The person who solves the problem goes into the detail and feels the emotion of the person that’s telling the story.
    1:25:17 Only conveys it, only conveys it, but doesn’t know the emotion that is attached to solving it.
    1:25:31 So when you, when that little child finally figures out how to, you know, you give them a trick lock where would things have to go this way or this way and then the little thing opens.
    1:25:39 When they come back and tell you that, you see the gravity defying behavior, the arching of the eyebrows, the bright eyes and say, and I solved it.
    1:25:40 I solved it.
    1:25:41 I got in there.
    1:25:41 Yeah.
    1:25:47 The problem, the person that’s just telling you this story doesn’t know the emotion that goes with it.
    1:25:59 The other thing that, you know, I, I, I look for is, and they may be nervous or whatever, is how good are, are they at observing?
    1:26:09 This is the one question that, um, has, uh, actually saved a lot of companies.
    1:26:14 When I say, make sure that from now on you ask, how good are you observing?
    1:26:15 And they’ll say, well, observing what?
    1:26:17 Everything that matters.
    1:26:21 People, events, opportunities.
    1:26:23 Right.
    1:26:25 If you come to me and say, well, I can code this.
    1:26:26 Okay.
    1:26:27 That’s great.
    1:26:32 But in the position that you’re going to be in, you’re going to be managing people.
    1:26:34 How good are you at observing people?
    1:26:42 The great thing about companies that, that seek this is, all right.
    1:26:45 So when you go and you business your, you go see your subsidiary.
    1:26:48 What do you, what are you looking for?
    1:26:49 What are you observing?
    1:26:55 Well, when I look at the books, how about the attitude of the people?
    1:26:56 Are people content?
    1:26:57 Are they happy?
    1:26:59 Or do they all look like they’re constipated?
    1:27:03 I mean, I’ve been into companies that the minute I walk in, I go, oh, geez, you’ve got
    1:27:04 management problems here.
    1:27:08 And the guy goes, who, did somebody tell you?
    1:27:14 I said, well, you know, I’d have to be clinically stupid not to recognize that all these people
    1:27:18 are walking around with their heads hung low, that they make no eye contact.
    1:27:22 Nobody, they pass each other in the subway and they don’t talk to each other.
    1:27:23 You got management issues here.
    1:27:30 And, you know, and it’s like they hired for this skill.
    1:27:39 But is that really what you need when you actually need somebody that is a great observer?
    1:27:41 What about confidence?
    1:27:42 Is this something that you’re born with?
    1:27:45 Or do you think confidence can be trained into somebody?
    1:27:49 I think confidence can absolutely be trained.
    1:27:55 Coming from Cuba, where we lost everything, arriving as a refugee, having nothing.
    1:28:01 And then all of a sudden, the FBI asked me to become, I mean, I didn’t apply to the FBI.
    1:28:05 The FBI actually came to me and asked me to apply.
    1:28:08 And then all of a sudden I said, are you guys serious?
    1:28:12 It’s like, you know, I’m 23 years old.
    1:28:19 You know, I’m barely learning how to shave and with no confidence whatsoever.
    1:28:22 And they teach you to be confident.
    1:28:25 You can teach confidence.
    1:28:35 And what I tell people is the easiest way to learn confidence is to be confident about one thing.
    1:28:43 I don’t care if it’s you stack papers better than anybody else.
    1:28:52 I don’t care if it’s the way you make your bed, any small thing.
    1:28:56 Show me that you’re confident.
    1:28:59 Show me that that’s better than anybody else’s.
    1:29:08 And the minute you can be confident about one thing, now you can be confident about two things.
    1:29:11 And then you can be confident about three things.
    1:29:15 This nonsense that I often see people say, well, just come in and be confident.
    1:29:17 I think that’s nonsense.
    1:29:25 I think you have to learn and your physiology has to learn to be confident about one thing.
    1:29:31 You know, with me, I was confident in playing football, okay?
    1:29:32 I was fast.
    1:29:33 I could do certain things.
    1:29:35 I was confident about that.
    1:29:41 I knew that in basketball, I could shoot a three-pointer, okay?
    1:29:47 Confident about that, but not confident about a host of other things.
    1:29:53 To be in a room full of executives, I remember when I had no confidence.
    1:29:56 So how do I work on that?
    1:30:03 You cannot, unless you’re a world-class actor, you cannot walk into a place and all of a sudden
    1:30:06 pretend you’re confident.
    1:30:10 I tell people, learn to be confident about one thing.
    1:30:11 And sometimes it’s knowledge.
    1:30:21 I always, there is no meeting I go into that I am not well-read on that subject.
    1:30:27 If you want to achieve confidence, know everything that you can about a particular subject.
    1:30:30 And that gives you so much great confidence.
    1:30:34 And I’ve seen young people come right out of college and they’re sitting there, you know,
    1:30:42 their elbows are in, they’re almost mousy looking, they’re nervous, they’re looking about constantly,
    1:30:43 they don’t know where to look.
    1:30:50 And, you know, and I, and I tell them, know your subject, know your subject.
    1:30:57 Because the minute they begin to talk about that, they begin to flower and, and, and change.
    1:31:04 So competence in a particular area or vertical creates confidence, which then kind of permeates.
    1:31:06 Yes.
    1:31:10 And, and that’s what the military, in the, you know, the military, the, you know, the, like
    1:31:15 the British military, that’s what they, they take young people, 17, 18, 19 years old.
    1:31:19 And they say, you know, we’re going to change you into a warrior.
    1:31:20 Well, how’s that?
    1:31:29 By running, by, by getting you to climb up that rope, by doing any number of things where
    1:31:32 you can come, can come away and feel that confidence.
    1:31:38 You talked in a video that I watched for Wired about a variety of different ways we can exhibit
    1:31:40 and be more confident and show confidence.
    1:31:45 One of them is really looking at the leaders in your life who are confident and trying to
    1:31:47 sort of replicate some of those confident behaviors.
    1:31:48 Right.
    1:31:51 The other one was about your voice.
    1:31:56 Use a deeper voice and do not rise at the end of the sentence as if it’s a question.
    1:31:56 Right.
    1:31:58 So let me talk about those.
    1:32:03 Don’t try to reinvent what’s successful.
    1:32:08 A confident person doesn’t have to talk fast and doesn’t talk high.
    1:32:10 Right.
    1:32:13 I remember the first arrest I made and I said, stop, this is the FBI.
    1:32:16 My voice was, nobody was going to stop.
    1:32:18 Nobody, nobody.
    1:32:22 And the guys that were with me said, Joe, you got to work on your voice.
    1:32:24 You have to have a command voice.
    1:32:25 Well, a command voice is down.
    1:32:26 Like?
    1:32:29 Like, stop right there.
    1:32:31 I’ll give you an example.
    1:32:36 You talk to most executives and you say, no, that’s not acceptable.
    1:32:37 It’s too high.
    1:32:40 No is always said down.
    1:32:41 No.
    1:32:43 Are we going to?
    1:32:44 No.
    1:32:48 That sounds like a complete sentence.
    1:32:51 Do you get them to practice saying no?
    1:32:52 Absolutely.
    1:32:54 I did it, you know, for 10 years.
    1:33:02 Every, every February, the guy that Brian Hall, who encouraged me to write my, one of my books
    1:33:06 called Louder Than Words, invited me to go to Harvard.
    1:33:09 And I’ll never forget, I had a complete Harvard class.
    1:33:11 I think there was 76 students.
    1:33:17 And I had them all saying the word, no, no, no.
    1:33:18 Going down and lower.
    1:33:22 He had stepped out of the room to take a call.
    1:33:26 When he came back, he thought I had a cult going on.
    1:33:27 I said, no, Brian.
    1:33:32 I’m just, I’m teaching them the right way because these are going to be future executives
    1:33:37 that you don’t say, no, no, no, no, no, no.
    1:33:40 Now, that sounds like a complete sentence.
    1:33:41 No.
    1:33:41 No.
    1:33:43 That’s not how it’s going to work.
    1:33:45 And it’s always lower.
    1:33:47 So we work on the words.
    1:33:55 More importantly, we work on the, on the gestures, how much territory you occupy, because the territory
    1:33:57 that you occupy, if you’re here.
    1:33:59 Sort of like shriveled and tight.
    1:34:00 You’re shriveled.
    1:34:03 You want to, you don’t want to be excessive.
    1:34:08 You don’t want to look like a clown, but you, you, you want to have the space that you’re
    1:34:09 entitled to.
    1:34:14 And then I think it’s very important to learn to speak in cadence.
    1:34:19 When you speak in cadence, and I do it, is people listen.
    1:34:27 They have time to process what you’re saying, but they can also attach the emotion that goes
    1:34:27 with it.
    1:34:29 Who spoke in cadence?
    1:34:31 Churchill.
    1:34:33 Martin Luther King.
    1:34:44 I have a dream that one day this nation will rise up and live out the true meaning of its
    1:34:45 creed.
    1:34:52 We hold these truths to be self-evident that all men are created equal.
    1:34:53 Powerful.
    1:34:58 Can you imagine if he stood up there and said, I have one dream that one day might, it’s like
    1:34:59 who would listen to that?
    1:35:03 But he was a preacher, and he knew how to command an audience.
    1:35:08 And when Churchill said, we will fight them in the air, we will fight them on the beaches,
    1:35:16 we shall fight on the landing grounds, we shall fight in the fields and in the streets, we shall
    1:35:19 fight in the hills, we shall never surrender.
    1:35:27 The cadence is not just seductive, it is powerful.
    1:35:30 And a lot of executives don’t know how to use it.
    1:35:38 They just, I’ve been to presentations where people just let go.
    1:35:40 They’re not even listening to what’s being said.
    1:35:47 And yet, somebody begins to talk to them in cadence and says, this is our offer.
    1:35:49 It is not final.
    1:35:53 But for the moment, it is our best offer.
    1:35:56 Now, you’re paying attention.
    1:36:00 You’re paying attention, not just to what I said, but the emotion behind it.
    1:36:06 That’s a lot better to say, well, this is not our last offer, but, you know.
    1:36:12 There’s a real authority when you slow things down just that little bit and provide the gaps.
    1:36:17 Which goes back to what I said, who controls time, controls.
    1:36:26 You’re establishing control over the theater of the negotiations.
    1:36:28 They don’t teach that.
    1:36:30 Your hand gestures as well.
    1:36:34 You’ve got very complementary hand gestures to what you’re saying.
    1:36:38 Even as you’re speaking to me, you just went, who controls time?
    1:36:40 Controls.
    1:36:42 And so it’s, I’m wondering how our hand gestures.
    1:36:48 And my fingers are spread out, establishing how much we care about something.
    1:36:51 When we fear, our fingers come together.
    1:36:53 And when we fear a lot, our thumbs tuck in.
    1:36:58 I’ve seen people in negotiations give up a lot of information because all of a sudden,
    1:37:00 they tuck their thumbs in.
    1:37:01 I say, okay, they’re scared.
    1:37:04 Because dogs tuck their ears in.
    1:37:13 Humans tuck their, the hands, no matter how dark you are, your hands, the palm of the hands
    1:37:14 are very visible.
    1:37:20 That evolved with us because they’re expressive.
    1:37:27 So even in low light, we can use our hands to communicate.
    1:37:31 The more confident we are, the further our fingers are.
    1:37:33 I care.
    1:37:38 Imagine if I said, I care about you versus I care about you.
    1:37:40 It’s a big difference.
    1:37:42 So in the first example, you kind of had your fingers together.
    1:37:43 In the second, you spread them out.
    1:37:47 This, I care about this.
    1:37:50 And so they potentiate the message.
    1:37:56 And the human brain evolved also to look for the hands.
    1:38:00 Because the hands, number one, can be used as a weapon.
    1:38:08 But number two, they are also emblematic of the emotions that we feel.
    1:38:10 And eye contact.
    1:38:11 Yes.
    1:38:13 A lot’s been said about eye contact and the importance of it.
    1:38:15 What should I understand about eye contact confidence?
    1:38:24 Eye contact in some ways is, I mean, we could spend about 40 minutes on it because, and as
    1:38:28 a teacher, I can tell you because you want to have good eye contact.
    1:38:33 For instance, if you’re dealing with a woman, you don’t want it to go, you know, normal eye
    1:38:34 contact is here.
    1:38:37 You don’t want it going down to here to the breasts.
    1:38:38 Okay.
    1:38:39 So you want to stay looking at the face, right?
    1:38:46 So you want to keep it in the face, but you also don’t want to intimidate unless you want
    1:38:47 to intimidate.
    1:38:51 So you have to employ things like eye gaze behavior.
    1:38:55 You have to employ things such as looking away.
    1:39:00 Now, you and I both look away as we’re thinking about examples and different things.
    1:39:05 You can use eye contact for emphasizing.
    1:39:12 Look how often we use eye contact or our eyes to communicate opinions.
    1:39:15 Maybe with your partner, you said, what do you think?
    1:39:22 And immediately they’ll look, he or she may look at your partner, not yours specifically,
    1:39:25 but somebody you live with, and they go, no.
    1:39:30 So with our eyes, we often give our opinions.
    1:39:35 So in negotiations, it’s an important area.
    1:39:40 One of the things I think a lot about is about rapport building very, very quickly.
    1:39:46 You know, someone that does this podcast a lot, I, sometimes I overthink it a little bit,
    1:39:48 especially when I’m meeting people like you, because I’m like, oh my God, this guy’s going
    1:39:50 to be reading everything about me and da-da-da-da-da-da.
    1:39:50 Yes.
    1:39:55 So sometimes I’m like, I think I overthink it when I meet someone like you, a body language
    1:39:57 expert, someone who’s good at behavioral science.
    1:39:58 And I want to talk about rapport building.
    1:40:01 We actually videoed our interaction today.
    1:40:06 So when, when I walked in and I’ve got the video here, let me have a look at this, see
    1:40:09 if there’s a, we’ll put it on the screen for anyone that’s watching, but I just want you
    1:40:14 to analyze my interaction with you when I met you and tell me how it could have been better.
    1:40:15 All right.
    1:40:15 Hello, Joe.
    1:40:16 Nice to meet you.
    1:40:20 So first of all, you were waiting for me with arms akimbo, which is I’m in charge.
    1:40:21 I’m the big guy.
    1:40:23 And so your arms were here.
    1:40:25 Yeah, I got it.
    1:40:25 Okay.
    1:40:26 But, you know.
    1:40:28 I actually do remember that.
    1:40:29 I remember thinking, get your hands off your fucking hips.
    1:40:30 No, no, no.
    1:40:32 But, but, but it’s fine.
    1:40:33 This is your domain.
    1:40:36 I expect this from you in your domain.
    1:40:43 But one of the things you immediately did was you immediately went around the table and
    1:40:46 you went forward to shake my hand.
    1:40:47 Right?
    1:40:54 So one of the things that I say is how much people matter to us is determined by how fast
    1:40:55 we act.
    1:40:56 Okay.
    1:41:03 So the fact that you actually went from there to here and you did it immediately, it demonstrates
    1:41:04 that you care.
    1:41:14 As early as 11 months, a baby will recognize individuals or even inanimate objects that care
    1:41:17 just based on how quickly they move.
    1:41:18 Towards them?
    1:41:19 Towards them.
    1:41:20 Okay.
    1:41:21 To do something for them.
    1:41:22 Okay.
    1:41:24 It’s called a pro-social act.
    1:41:27 And babies as young as 11 months recognize that.
    1:41:32 So this is something that I, it doesn’t surprise me because you’ve been successful.
    1:41:39 You know, success is, for me, is measured on how well people get along with others.
    1:41:42 Thank you for the work.
    1:41:42 Appreciate you.
    1:41:42 Thank you.
    1:41:43 No, no problem.
    1:41:44 You’re very, very smart.
    1:41:46 You look like someone who, uh, who worked in the FBI.
    1:41:49 I, uh, it’s the FBI uniform.
    1:41:51 This is the…
    1:41:53 Well, uh, will I be mic’d or it’s just this?
    1:41:54 Just that one.
    1:41:55 Just that one.
    1:41:55 Perfect.
    1:41:57 Okay.
    1:42:03 You said something charming about how I was dressed, which I, uh, appreciated.
    1:42:07 Uh, this is always a good reminder to me of how old I look now.
    1:42:17 And, uh, and, uh, the only note that I would, I would add is I would have remained standing a
    1:42:26 little longer and then made sure that, you know, as I’m sitting, then you sit at the same time.
    1:42:27 Okay.
    1:42:29 So invite you to sit and sit with you.
    1:42:36 At the same, at the same time, rather than allow me to all now, if you can see in that instance,
    1:42:41 I’m actually still over you while you’re already, uh, seated.
    1:42:43 That is in negotiations.
    1:42:47 That would be, as we say, contraindicated.
    1:42:48 What does that mean?
    1:42:49 It is.
    1:42:50 It’s a no, no.
    1:42:51 It’s a big word.
    1:42:53 It’s a big word for Steve.
    1:42:54 Don’t do that.
    1:42:58 What about taking notes?
    1:43:01 This is something that I’ve started doing actually in the last six months when I’m in meetings
    1:43:06 in my companies in the UK, um, is I have an iPad now.
    1:43:10 And when someone’s speaking, it actually helps me because of the way that I think and process
    1:43:11 and learn.
    1:43:14 And it helps me also to not be listening to speak.
    1:43:18 I, if they say something and I immediately have an idea that I’m worried I’m going to lose
    1:43:24 instead of, you know, that kind of behavior, I can write down what I’m about to say.
    1:43:25 And it gives me more time to listen.
    1:43:30 But one of the things I noticed in your work is you say that in terms of showing someone you
    1:43:33 care, taking notes is a really effective way to do that.
    1:43:37 Well, what I, what I would say to you is what I would tell the therapist.
    1:43:44 One of the biggest mistakes therapists have started making is they sit there and because
    1:43:49 a lot of them are earning a lot less money and they don’t have a secretarial pool like
    1:43:58 they used to, they now type their observations as they’re talking to their client.
    1:43:59 I think that’s a big mistake.
    1:44:07 And from my, the studies that my company did in surveying, not the therapist, but their
    1:44:11 clients, the ones that were willing to talk, it’s terrible.
    1:44:18 What I tried to emphasize is have material in front of you.
    1:44:25 And if there’s a particular note, write a little something, or if you have somebody with you
    1:44:31 that’s going to be the note taker, I don’t want to miss anything.
    1:44:33 If you’re writing, you’re not observing.
    1:44:37 And observing is actually more important than writing.
    1:44:43 Now, if you started talking and mentioned, if you had mentioned the super sternal notch,
    1:44:48 I might have, okay, is that super or supra sternal notch?
    1:44:49 Okay, that’s a worthy note.
    1:44:51 And then I come back and revisit.
    1:44:59 But if I’m writing all the time, I, you know, I have young people tell me, well, you’re just
    1:45:00 an old timer.
    1:45:01 This is how we’ve grown up.
    1:45:09 I can tell you that from an evolutionary standpoint, we cannot outdo our DNA.
    1:45:15 We just cannot simply, for instance, schools come in and say, you know, well, you can’t
    1:45:17 hug the students anymore.
    1:45:18 Okay.
    1:45:25 Don’t expect, you know, why, you know, why do we have depressed students?
    1:45:29 Why do we, there’s any number of things, but I can tell you this.
    1:45:36 We evolved to hug, to touch, to greet each other, you know, your best mate, all that stuff.
    1:45:43 When we used to wrestle with our buddies, right, that, that play, that play wrestling, all that
    1:45:46 is, is, is covert touching.
    1:45:50 It’s because our species needs it.
    1:45:52 Humans need to touch.
    1:45:55 There are certain things that humans need.
    1:45:58 And one of them is this facial interactions.
    1:46:03 When you’re focused on writing, you’re actually taking away from that.
    1:46:06 How do you think about handshakes then?
    1:46:09 Because handshakes are how we kind of touch strangers in a socially acceptable way.
    1:46:11 Is there a good way to handshake?
    1:46:12 There is.
    1:46:14 And there’s bad ones.
    1:46:19 So I always say when you shake hands, the fingers are down, right?
    1:46:22 A lot of people put their finger up.
    1:46:25 And so when they shake hands, let’s see if we can reach each other.
    1:46:30 And so when they go like this, now you have their finger in this erogenous.
    1:46:32 This is an erogenous area of your body.
    1:46:33 This is what you kiss.
    1:46:34 The veins.
    1:46:35 Yeah.
    1:46:39 Well, the, the, the inside of the wrist is an erogenous area.
    1:46:43 And so now you have this man’s finger here and it’s, and it’s just weird.
    1:46:47 So the fingers are low and the pressure is applied equally.
    1:46:50 So you don’t try to.
    1:46:51 Donald Trump hit the squeeze.
    1:46:51 Yeah.
    1:46:57 Don’t, don’t, don’t do a Donald Trump handshake or don’t, don’t jerk the hand.
    1:46:58 Don’t squeeze it too tight.
    1:47:01 Don’t play jujitsu.
    1:47:04 People my age have arthritis.
    1:47:06 I’m never impressed.
    1:47:11 I’ve had, you know, men come in and they’re big and burly and they squeeze my hand and it’s
    1:47:12 like, are you serious?
    1:47:14 What about the cupping where they, right.
    1:47:21 So cupping of the hand is okay with really people, you know, but most people don’t like
    1:47:23 to have their hands engulfed.
    1:47:25 If you want to touch somebody else’s hand.
    1:47:31 So you shake the hand and then you touch the upper arm and the, all of that.
    1:47:36 For anybody that likes matcha, for anybody that likes lattes, one of my companies has just
    1:47:38 launched canned matcha lattes.
    1:47:42 And I was speaking with the founder, Marissa, and she said that creating this product has
    1:47:43 been no easy feat.
    1:47:48 They tried launching in 2021, but as is often the case in business, the development process
    1:47:50 turned out to be extremely complex.
    1:47:55 So they’ve spent the last four years testing and refining every single detail to create this
    1:48:02 which is a perfect Ted matcha vanilla latte and a perfect Ted matcha strawberry latte.
    1:48:06 So what we have here in these cans is barista quality matcha straight from the can.
    1:48:12 And it tastes like it’s just been made from your favorite cafe, naturally sweet and naturally
    1:48:13 creamy in a can.
    1:48:17 And the reason why I’ve invested in this company and I drink matcha is because matcha as an energy
    1:48:21 source gives me lasting energy without the big crashes that I get from other products.
    1:48:25 You can grab their ready to drink canned matcha lattes at Waitrose, Tesco’s, Holland and
    1:48:25 Barrett.
    1:48:27 And here’s a little incentive for you.
    1:48:32 If you go to perfectted.com and use code diary40, you’ll get 40% off your first order.
    1:48:33 Please don’t tell anybody.
    1:48:34 Keep that to yourself.
    1:48:36 That’s code diary40.
    1:48:39 You’ll get 40% off on perfectted.com.
    1:48:41 So go use that before they change it.
    1:48:44 I’ve got another video for you here.
    1:48:50 So he starts out with an arm down, but he’s touching his neck, covering his neck.
    1:48:56 He’s crimping the left side of his face and he’s massaging his forehead and his neck.
    1:49:02 So, I mean, we look at it and we say, okay, these are all emblematic of psychological discomfort.
    1:49:08 Now, why that is, we see his blink or eyelid flutter.
    1:49:10 He’s touching his face.
    1:49:12 Why is that?
    1:49:13 I don’t know.
    1:49:16 It’s not, now there’s a cathartic exhale.
    1:49:18 Looks like he’s reading one of my books.
    1:49:23 What I would tell you is, is these are all the behaviors you wouldn’t want from a leader.
    1:49:27 You would certainly, you see that from a follower, but not a leader.
    1:49:30 You’ll never see a general do any of that.
    1:49:35 Certainly not in the U.S. Army or the British Army.
    1:49:43 All the behaviors that he’s doing, which are pacifying or indicators of some sort of psychological
    1:49:48 discomfort are also all the behaviors that we equate with lack of confidence.
    1:49:53 Leaders are often exceptional.
    1:49:56 And you say that exceptional individuals are made, not born.
    1:50:02 And that’s a good thing because that puts this level of excellence within reach of you and me.
    1:50:06 And you’ve identified several traits that make someone an exceptional person.
    1:50:06 Yeah.
    1:50:08 One of those is self-mastery.
    1:50:17 Self-mastery, whether it was Alexander the Great who sought the learnings of, let’s see,
    1:50:22 Socrates taught Plato, who taught Aristotle, who, Alexander.
    1:50:28 So Aristotle taught Alexander the Great, and he pursued the knowledge.
    1:50:32 Thomas Edison, one of the greatest inventors in America, 1,300 patents,
    1:50:37 left school at age six, sought the knowledge.
    1:50:43 I mean, as humble as I came from, we were so poor, I literally had to go to garbage cans to
    1:50:46 steal books and magazines to learn.
    1:50:55 You can create your own apprenticeship program, and you can learn to master a skill or a knowledge
    1:50:58 or an athletic move, whatever.
    1:51:02 Someone who is self-mastered, what have they accomplished?
    1:51:06 They have accomplished something that nobody can take from them.
    1:51:10 Nobody can take that from me.
    1:51:11 What is it?
    1:51:18 All that knowledge, all that skill, all that experience, nobody can take from me.
    1:51:19 Why is the word self in there?
    1:51:22 Self-mastery.
    1:51:29 Because so much of it, nobody, you know, we were talking earlier, and I said, I try to
    1:51:35 read two books a week, so that way I can have read about 1,000 books every decade.
    1:51:37 Nobody’s telling me to do that.
    1:51:39 And so it’s self.
    1:51:40 Why?
    1:51:42 Because I wanted to know.
    1:51:49 Because, you know, why did Leonardo da Vinci want to know the eddies, water eddies in the
    1:51:52 water, or the length of a woodpecker’s tongue?
    1:51:54 Who cares?
    1:51:55 It doesn’t matter.
    1:51:58 It was self-imposed.
    1:52:07 And we, in this world, are the beneficiaries of Leonardo da Vinci’s interest in water eddies,
    1:52:14 which then helped him to draw hair of the Mona Lisa, were the beneficiaries of that.
    1:52:23 I think self-mastery is more important than, I think, what a university can teach you.
    1:52:29 A university can teach you how to think, but it doesn’t teach you mastery.
    1:52:35 So is this, because I’m hearing, like, obviously learning and the pursuit of knowledge, and then
    1:52:41 there’s this other part of self-mastery, which feels like self-awareness, being aware of oneself.
    1:52:46 Well, I think you’re an example of self-mastery.
    1:52:57 It’s the only word around in the universe of languages that encapsulates being able to take
    1:53:02 what is available and making it a part of your life.
    1:53:09 And so whether it was my grandmother teaching me how to talk to people, or my mother, or my father,
    1:53:15 my mother showing me how to actually shake hands, my sister showing me how to dance.
    1:53:19 This is all part of self-mastery.
    1:53:21 Now, I could have rejected all of that.
    1:53:22 And a lot of people do.
    1:53:27 A lot of people reject science or reject, oh, I don’t want to learn how to dance.
    1:53:28 I don’t want to learn to do that.
    1:53:29 Okay.
    1:53:31 That’s your option.
    1:53:40 But there’s an exquisite elegance in being able to look at the world around you and learn
    1:53:44 from it, which you have done, and say, I’m going to put that to work.
    1:53:48 Why should I reinvent what other people have experienced?
    1:53:54 I’m going to adopt that which I like and prefer, and then I’m going to put it to good use.
    1:53:57 The second one is observation, which I think we’ve talked about.
    1:53:59 Observation.
    1:54:10 You know, the great example is a parent who can observe the immediate needs of children and so forth.
    1:54:17 And I see people now that they’re so, I was at the airport yesterday coming here, and there
    1:54:24 was a family that the whole time they were waiting, not once talked to each other, nor were they
    1:54:25 aware of what the others were doing.
    1:54:33 I find that difficult because when my daughter was growing up, I never took my eyes off of her.
    1:54:41 I see people on their devices, as this whole family was, and they’re missing out on a lot
    1:54:43 of things, a lot of information.
    1:54:47 The great inventions are made through observation.
    1:54:48 The Velcro.
    1:54:50 Do you know the story of Velcro?
    1:54:57 In the middle of World War II, a Swiss guy goes up in the mountains and comes back hiking,
    1:54:58 right?
    1:55:03 And he looks at his socks and he says, man, these chiggers, these little…
    1:55:04 Is it a plant?
    1:55:09 Yeah, it’s just the little seedlings that they give off that stick to things.
    1:55:11 Here in America, we call them stickers.
    1:55:14 There’s all sorts of names.
    1:55:19 And he looks at it under a microscope and he notices that they don’t just stick out, they’re
    1:55:20 actually curbed.
    1:55:23 And in curving, they get stuck on everything.
    1:55:28 So he says, I’ll just invent this.
    1:55:35 Now, what’s interesting, we talk about observation, is he had seen this one time.
    1:55:37 How many millions of people had seen it?
    1:55:43 But it’s the observer that can capitalize on it.
    1:55:48 And that’s why I tell executives, when you hire, hire good observers, because they’re going
    1:55:49 to save you.
    1:55:54 They’re the ones that are going to say, hey, I’m seeing some trends here that are bad.
    1:55:56 So observation is key.
    1:56:03 And then we transition right into the next one is, most people think communication is just
    1:56:12 about words, and communication is principally, most effectively, and most influential, a nonverbal
    1:56:15 across every culture.
    1:56:27 And the misconception that words triumph over nonverbals, go to a funeral.
    1:56:34 Go to a funeral and see how well words work versus putting your arm around somebody and
    1:56:36 let them sob on your shoulder.
    1:56:39 It’s the primary means by which we communicate.
    1:56:42 It’s the primary means by which we show we care.
    1:56:46 And it’s the primary means by which we show empathy.
    1:56:48 The fourth one is action.
    1:56:53 And for me, it really links to both the second point, which is observation, but also to your
    1:56:57 story about Velcro, because there must have been many people that thought, oh my God, that
    1:56:58 thing’s sticking to me.
    1:56:59 And they did nothing.
    1:57:02 Maybe even some people who thought, oh, that could be useful.
    1:57:07 But then the hard part often is doing something about it.
    1:57:07 It’s the action.
    1:57:12 It’s doing something, as I talk in the book, be exceptional.
    1:57:18 Do something that is pro-social or beneficial, but don’t wait, right?
    1:57:25 The worst thing we can do, if you want to let people know that you don’t care, take your
    1:57:25 time.
    1:57:27 And this happens all the time.
    1:57:34 You go to a counter, you walk up to a counter and say, hey, you know, I’d love some help with
    1:57:38 this, you know, and then they just, well, I don’t know.
    1:57:41 Let me check in the back.
    1:57:44 And they take their time walking to the back.
    1:57:47 And then they take time walking back.
    1:57:50 You might as well be shouting, I don’t care.
    1:57:54 What I tell managers is, that’s your responsibility.
    1:58:00 Why did you hire someone who can’t move at the speed of light?
    1:58:04 Because movement is equated with caring.
    1:58:09 So if that’s their attitude, you might as well have a sign that says, I don’t care.
    1:58:13 Now, you could say, well, you know, maybe they have a mobility problem.
    1:58:15 Fine, fronted.
    1:58:17 I’d say, you know what?
    1:58:22 It’s going to take me a minute because I just had my hip replaced, but I’m going to address
    1:58:23 it right now.
    1:58:27 We can forgive.
    1:58:34 But when we don’t show we care by action, that is so immediate.
    1:58:37 And the fifth one is psychological comfort.
    1:58:41 And you write in the book that this is the most powerful strength humans possess.
    1:58:42 Absolutely.
    1:58:50 What’s interesting about humans in the years that I’ve studied them is that humans don’t
    1:58:50 seek perfection.
    1:59:00 The baby doesn’t care if it’s sucking its own thumb or the twin sister’s thumb.
    1:59:02 They interchangeable.
    1:59:04 Humans don’t seek perfection.
    1:59:08 What we seek is psychological comfort.
    1:59:11 And whoever provides that is the soonest winner.
    1:59:13 It is as simple as that.
    1:59:17 If you can, you’re too young.
    1:59:25 But I remember when computers came out and they were in ugly boxes and they were in ugly stores
    1:59:30 and they were behind the counter and they were ugly.
    1:59:38 Steve Jobs comes around and says, no, we’re going to put them on these lab tables like we have
    1:59:41 and we’re going to make them accessible.
    1:59:51 So this mysterious device that is such a ugly word that you forget that people hated computers so much.
    1:59:53 They used to come in at night and cut the cords.
    1:59:57 That’s how scared people were of computing.
    2:00:07 And he went from 4% shares of the computer market to whatever it is now, 67 or whatever the number is.
    2:00:08 Why?
    2:00:10 Psychological comfort.
    2:00:13 And I tell this to businessmen.
    2:00:20 When you’re negotiating, what you’re negotiating for is can you create enough psychological comfort
    2:00:30 that the other person can live with that so that I can feel, okay, maybe I didn’t get everything I wanted,
    2:00:35 but for this period in time, I can live with that psychological comfort.
    2:00:41 I can go back to the board and report that this was the best that I can do and so forth.
    2:00:44 Aim for psychological comfort.
    2:00:49 And how does one go about creating psychological comfort in any context?
    2:00:52 You started it today.
    2:00:56 You welcomed me in and then you said, what would you like to drink?
    2:00:57 Would you like some water?
    2:00:58 Would you like some tea?
    2:00:59 Would you like some coffee?
    2:01:04 That begins the process of psychological comfort.
    2:01:06 We’re in a quiet environment.
    2:01:10 Less noise, more psychological comfort.
    2:01:11 Less lighting.
    2:01:13 It doesn’t hurt the eyes.
    2:01:23 Anything that starts at a biological, physical, physiological, and then cognitive level.
    2:01:25 So, psychological comfort.
    2:01:27 We’re negotiating.
    2:01:29 So, you want to offer $3,000.
    2:01:32 I think I’m worth $6,000.
    2:01:35 So, how do we achieve that?
    2:01:42 Well, I’m going to let you tell me your side of why you can only provide $3,000.
    2:01:44 And I’m going to provide you my side.
    2:01:45 Okay.
    2:01:54 The fact that we actually get to tell our story begins the process of psychological comfort.
    2:02:01 Now, in the end, I may have to abide by that because there’s only so much money.
    2:02:05 And if it’s not in the budget, it’s not in the budget.
    2:02:12 But there may be some things that you can add to say, look, this is all we have at this time.
    2:02:16 But we’re going to reevaluate this in three months.
    2:02:23 And if we can then, depending on earnings, get you another $500 a month, we will do it then.
    2:02:30 We do it incrementally, but always thinking about what provides psychological comfort.
    2:02:42 Being harsh, being indignant, not being attentive to needs, wants, desires, and even preferences
    2:02:44 creates psychological discomfort.
    2:02:50 In 2009, you wrote a book called Narcissists Among Us.
    2:02:51 Yes.
    2:02:57 And earlier on, you said that roughly 2% of people are narcissists, but then 25% of CEOs?
    2:02:58 22%.
    2:03:02 As high as 22% of CEOs have narcissistic traits, yes.
    2:03:03 Okay.
    2:03:12 And if someone’s dealing with a narcissist, what do they have to do in order to manage that situation?
    2:03:17 Because according to those numbers, roughly like 98% of people aren’t narcissists, but probably
    2:03:19 will deal with them in their lifetime.
    2:03:21 And then, you know, a significant amount of people work with them.
    2:03:31 Even though they account for 2% of the population, we will work with or for somebody like that.
    2:03:35 So what we have to keep in mind, well, what do we mean by narcissist?
    2:03:40 We’re not talking about the person that looks in the mirror and likes to splash on cologne
    2:03:41 and comb their hair.
    2:03:48 This is a person that overvalues themselves, but has to devalue others.
    2:03:57 This is a person who only thinks about themselves and doesn’t care of what suffering or what’s going on
    2:04:06 through your life, wants you to be loyal, but is not loyal to you, is disinterested in your personal affairs,
    2:04:09 but wants you to be interested in theirs.
    2:04:12 There is your malignant narcissist.
    2:04:20 Oh, and by the way, they inherently tell lies, but expect you to tell the truth to them.
    2:04:29 Now, the effect is, well, if they’re only 2% of the population, but we see them in a lot of corporations,
    2:04:33 we’re going to work for them, then, you know, how do we get along?
    2:04:37 Well, first is recognizing that they’re going to devalue us.
    2:04:43 Now, sometimes they devalue you by not inviting you to meetings or sharing information,
    2:04:49 but many times it’s by the way they treat you, yelling at you, being disparaging.
    2:04:51 I mean, I have some things that are horrific.
    2:04:55 So what do we do when we have people like that?
    2:04:58 Number one is recognize what you’re dealing with.
    2:05:06 And that’s why I wrote the dangerous personalities, because I have these robust checklists in there,
    2:05:08 which have been tested many times.
    2:05:16 So you can see, oh, wow, out of 125 things, this person has 75 of these traits.
    2:05:19 You’ve got a problem.
    2:05:20 But now here’s the thing.
    2:05:26 When we live with somebody like this, let’s say you, you know, they can be very charming,
    2:05:31 but then they turn on you and they become who they really are.
    2:05:35 Then how do you deal with that?
    2:05:42 What I can tell you is that the arc of the trajectory does not favor you,
    2:05:50 that these individuals are so caustic, they’re so toxic, that eventually they will victimize
    2:05:56 you physically, mentally, emotionally, physiologically, or financially.
    2:05:57 You’ll be victimized.
    2:06:03 The question then is, and I tell this to a lot of executives who work for these individuals
    2:06:08 who they’re bullied and this stuff is, how long are you willing to tolerate it?
    2:06:13 If you can set a number and say six months or a year, okay, but then do something,
    2:06:16 because you will pay a price.
    2:06:19 You know, there’s a great book called The Body Keeps the Score.
    2:06:22 The body will definitely keep the score.
    2:06:27 You will pay a price for being in the proximity of a toxic individual.
    2:06:34 And if you become that person’s chew toy, you will suffer immensely.
    2:06:39 And so I say, you know, there’s no pill to cure them.
    2:06:42 There is nothing you can do to make them like you.
    2:06:44 Expect no loyalty.
    2:06:46 Try to get out as soon as you can.
    2:06:50 And that’s the only advice that, you know, obviously I’m not a clinician.
    2:06:54 But I think most clinicians, if they’re honest, will say, you got to get out of there.
    2:06:57 It’s, this is not tolerable.
    2:07:01 Don’t try and win in any respect.
    2:07:02 Don’t try and…
    2:07:04 I don’t think you can win.
    2:07:07 First of all, these individuals are severely flawed of character.
    2:07:09 They have no introspection.
    2:07:11 They see themselves as perfect.
    2:07:16 They don’t see any imperfection in themselves.
    2:07:25 And so because they’re flawed of character, you cannot expect normal behaviors from them.
    2:07:28 And so why expose yourself to them?
    2:07:32 They will be like that all their lives.
    2:07:39 There’s a particular chapter where you say, one is bad, two is terrible, three is lethal.
    2:07:44 Oh, you know, people, I get this question all the time.
    2:07:46 Well, can you have multiple traits?
    2:07:46 Yes.
    2:07:52 You can have, you can be pathologically narcissistic.
    2:07:54 So you overvalue yourself.
    2:08:12 And you can also have traits of the paranoid personality where that you are very rigid in your thinking and you’re always suspicious of everybody’s intentions.
    2:08:14 In history, you look at Hitler.
    2:08:19 Hitler was pathologically, he was a malignant narcissist.
    2:08:21 He was clinically paranoid.
    2:08:22 Who did he fear?
    2:08:30 Minorities, the Roma, the was then called the gypsies, and of course, the Jewish people.
    2:08:33 That’s that is clinical paranoia.
    2:08:35 And he was a psychopath.
    2:08:38 OK, let’s just lay that out there.
    2:08:40 What is psychopathy?
    2:08:45 Psychopathy is where you have no remorse, no empathy, no conscience.
    2:08:49 You can do whatever you want and you sleep well at night there.
    2:08:55 That’s your Robert Hare, the researcher, is the best one that defines psychopathy.
    2:08:58 Hitler had it all.
    2:09:02 There’s a thin line probably there between like narcissism and self-belief.
    2:09:07 Because when you’re describing narcissism, you’re talking about like over-importance, like really believing one’s important.
    2:09:10 And it sounds somewhat like someone who is extremely self-believing.
    2:09:21 Well, by the way, narcissism, which has been studied since the 1950s, we now have a narcissistic society like we never did before.
    2:09:24 We see it in the way we talk about ourselves more than anything.
    2:09:30 We get on TikTok and other forums and we espouse all sorts of things.
    2:09:34 And so we’re way more narcissistic now than in the 1950s.
    2:09:36 They look at even the words we use.
    2:09:40 Now we use the word me and I more than we did in the 1950s.
    2:09:42 We used to say we and ours.
    2:09:44 Now we say me and I.
    2:09:54 And the true narcissist has a belief system that is so corrupt, they’re truly flawed of character.
    2:10:06 And they not only have the traits of narcissism, but they truly believe how they see themselves as infallible, as I only have the answers.
    2:10:10 I’m the person that can make us great again.
    2:10:12 And I know what you’re going to ask me next.
    2:10:13 No, I’m not going to ask you that.
    2:10:13 Thank you.
    2:10:15 Thank you.
    2:10:29 But if the traits fit, then, you know, what I tell people is, as you, whether you’re going into an organization or if you’re looking at who’s leading your country, ask yourself, do they have these traits?
    2:10:34 And if they have the traits, then it’s not a difficult equation.
    2:10:42 Psychology is, especially when it comes to people flawed of character, is not that difficult, is do I want to work for somebody that values me?
    2:10:46 Or someone that devalues others?
    2:10:46 Or someone that devalues others?
    2:10:47 And you start with that.
    2:10:57 In all these decades of you doing all these incredible things, hunting terrorists, spies, aerial surveillance, working in partnership with the SAS, interviewing people, chasing down terrorists.
    2:11:01 How has it changed you as a human being?
    2:11:07 How has it shifted your perception of human behavior and what it is to be a human and meaning and all of these bigger questions of life?
    2:11:10 I’ve never been asked that question.
    2:11:15 So thank you for asking a most profound question.
    2:11:24 I guess the best answer is that I learned a piecemeal, and I’m glad I learned piecemeal.
    2:11:31 And by that, I mean that my first homicide was just a regular homicide that I responded to.
    2:11:38 My first suicide, which was a police officer, was, you know, it was in increments.
    2:11:46 I think if I had been presented with everything that I had been presented with all at once, I think I would have had a mental breakdown.
    2:11:51 I’m glad that it was episodic, that I was able to learn from each.
    2:12:00 And what I have learned is, number one, that who were most of the people that I talked to?
    2:12:02 The majority were witnesses or victims.
    2:12:07 And these were nice people.
    2:12:08 They were kind people.
    2:12:12 Some of the nicest people were these poor farmers out in Arizona.
    2:12:13 They grow cotton.
    2:12:15 They don’t earn very much.
    2:12:17 They’re good people.
    2:12:22 You learn that everything you’re doing in law enforcement is really for them.
    2:12:32 You know, later on when I got into counterespionage, and now you’re dealing with nation states and the equities of different nations.
    2:12:35 And, yeah, each country has their own priorities.
    2:12:43 But you realize that when you’re dealing with extremists, and they have their own belief system.
    2:12:46 And there’s nothing really you can do to change them.
    2:12:49 But we also have our belief systems.
    2:12:55 And you have to realize, okay, I can’t fix all the problems.
    2:13:06 As a law enforcement agent, I can only attend to that which I can help or resolve or so forth.
    2:13:14 I couldn’t find all the suspects that either raped or killed or bombed.
    2:13:24 And I was at Brigham Young University when she was a girl was abducted by a serial killer.
    2:13:32 And to this day, I am in pain that I was on duty that night when she was abducted.
    2:13:35 I still feel it.
    2:13:39 And these things, they weigh on you.
    2:13:47 But I’m also very, you know, when I get with students, I mentor people.
    2:13:49 I mentor a lot of executives.
    2:13:51 But I also mentor young people who are curious.
    2:13:57 And I see the eagerness in which they pursue life and knowledge.
    2:14:00 And that gives me great hope.
    2:14:03 Why are you still in pain about being on duty that night?
    2:14:06 Because you can’t get it out of you.
    2:14:09 I can’t get the smell of…
    2:14:17 Sometimes you go to a crime scene and the smell is so bad that you can’t wash the smell away.
    2:14:19 You have to burn your clothes.
    2:14:22 Forensic examiners know this.
    2:14:30 There’s just some things that you can, you know, the first person I saw killed was in Cuba.
    2:14:39 And you just can’t, there’s, you know, biologically, you have the hippocampi.
    2:14:40 You have two of them.
    2:14:43 And that retains everything negative you ever experience.
    2:14:47 That’s why you can’t take a pill for post-traumatic stress.
    2:14:54 Because the hippocampi makes sure that the first time you burn yourself, touching that stove doesn’t occur again.
    2:15:00 So all things negative are retained, sometimes forever, but usually around a decade.
    2:15:10 But I’m also enlightened by the fact that people still pursue good things.
    2:15:19 You know, I hear from people who work with dogs or who work with the handicapped with no expectation of any reward.
    2:15:22 And I think most people have a good heart, a kind heart.
    2:15:35 And so I tried to focus on those people that I met, which gave me the examples for Be Exceptional.
    2:15:40 That woman in Brazil who, at the age of six, became blind.
    2:15:41 She went on to have 12 children.
    2:15:44 She had more, but only 12 survived.
    2:15:48 And who could still do needlework blind by feeling.
    2:15:52 I will never forget that experience either.
    2:15:59 To sit in her presence was a bestowed pleasure upon me.
    2:16:13 To understand a woman who could sense people moving in and around her just by how the hairs on her hand moved as they interacted with the space around her.
    2:16:16 It was a great experience.
    2:16:21 What day of your career are you most proud of or were you most happy?
    2:16:24 Oh, wow.
    2:16:34 Well, I was, I’ll tell you, I was, I was really happy when I graduated from the FBI Academy.
    2:16:46 Imagine at any time, at any time, at any one time, there’s 27,000 applicants to the FBI and they will only accept 220 maybe or so a year.
    2:16:49 So I was, I was elated.
    2:17:04 I was also very happy the day I left the FBI because at that point I had done it all and I wanted to do other things.
    2:17:09 I wanted to write, which is very difficult to do when you’re in the Bureau.
    2:17:12 And I wanted to continue teaching.
    2:17:13 Yeah.
    2:17:20 So I think those two events were, when it comes to a career, was good times in my life.
    2:17:29 Joe, my audience are very much people that want to learn, that love stories, that want to change their life, improve their lives so that they can achieve the objectives they have.
    2:17:31 So you’ve written a lot of books.
    2:17:32 I think it was 15 in total.
    2:17:37 Well, 14 published, the 15th comes out next year.
    2:17:46 So my last question then is, of everything in the 14, pending 15 books that you’ve written and everything you’ve learned,
    2:17:55 what is the most important thing that I didn’t ask you about that would be helpful to somebody who’s looking to improve their life,
    2:17:59 their communication skills, their body language, to be more effective in the pursuit of their goals?
    2:18:01 That I should have asked you about.
    2:18:15 Well, I hate to ruin this for you, but I think you asked, really, in however many minutes or hours we’ve been doing this, a lot of great questions.
    2:18:23 And I think in your questions, the essence is, what is the importance of connecting?
    2:18:28 You know, your audience is, are all in the people business.
    2:18:35 I mean, unless they’re working as a, they write code, but even they, we’re all in the people business.
    2:18:43 And what your questions really circled around is, what’s the importance of connecting?
    2:18:46 What’s the importance of connecting properly?
    2:18:49 And then how do we maintain those connections?
    2:19:00 And we’ve talked about this, the importance of nonverbals to communicate, I trust you, I value you, I care about you, and all that.
    2:19:12 But then creating that psychological comfort that allows us to then have this long time together, that relationships are invaluable.
    2:19:15 I think that’s the greatest lesson.
    2:19:18 Every time I go anywhere, I say, we are in the people business.
    2:19:29 And I think you are exemplary in demonstrating what you can achieve, if only you have that.
    2:19:31 That’s a great compliment.
    2:19:33 Thank you so much.
    2:19:38 We have a closing tradition where the last guest leaves a question for the next guest, not knowing who they’re leaving it for.
    2:19:41 And the question that’s been left for you is…
    2:19:46 Hmm, interesting.
    2:19:52 What do people say that they like about you?
    2:19:55 I think that one is easy.
    2:20:02 And it’s easy because I hear it so often, and they say, you’re so approachable.
    2:20:08 I think they see pictures of me, you know, where I’m looking sternly, or they think an FBI agent.
    2:20:15 And wherever I go around the world, they say, well, you look so average, you look approachable.
    2:20:19 And I’ve always tried to make myself approachable.
    2:20:29 Whether you’re a student, whether you are the security guard, or whatever, I am always accessible.
    2:20:30 I’m always approachable.
    2:20:32 And I treat everybody the same.
    2:20:34 Joe, thank you.
    2:20:36 It’s a really interesting time that we’re living in.
    2:20:38 We talked about it a bit before we started rolling.
    2:20:41 We’re more digital than ever before.
    2:20:43 We’re living behind screens.
    2:20:46 And connection is somewhat of a lost art.
    2:20:55 And that’s why people are so, I think, in part, so keen to learn more about how to connect better, how to not be misunderstood, and how to communicate how they truly feel.
    2:20:59 Because it’s not something that now comes naturally to this digital from birth generation.
    2:21:02 And that’s something that I think your work does so profoundly.
    2:21:10 It kind of brings us back to what it is to be human, that through line of anthropology and understanding our evolution and where it all came from as well is the reinforcer of everything that you say.
    2:21:12 And it’s incredibly important.
    2:21:14 And it’s so incredibly resonant.
    2:21:19 I’ve seen it across the videos that you’ve been in and the interviews that you’ve done.
    2:21:20 They’re just so unbelievably resonant.
    2:21:23 And that’s because people are so thirsty for this information.
    2:21:32 And many of the problems I think we often find in our lives stem from being ineffective at communicating to someone else how we feel and what we truly think.
    2:21:35 Maybe because we haven’t learned, but also maybe we’re learning another behavior.
    2:21:41 And maybe we’re becoming more individualistic and more withdrawn and more trapped behind screens.
    2:21:42 So I really applaud you for the work that you’re doing.
    2:21:44 And I highly recommend people go and read these books.
    2:21:45 There’s a lot of them.
    2:21:51 But I’m going to link them all below and with a little synopsis so you can decide which one best suits you.
    2:21:53 I read a few of them.
    2:21:55 One of my favorites is the exceptional one.
    2:21:55 It’s so accessible.
    2:21:59 But they’re all very good at different things depending on what it is you’re looking for in your life.
    2:22:10 Whether it’s body language, whether you’re just the type of person that wants to hear more about hunting terrorists or understanding psychopaths or generally more things about the FBI.
    2:22:11 And the life that you’ve lived.
    2:22:12 So I’ll link them all below.
    2:22:15 Is there anything we’ve missed?
    2:22:29 Well, my wife would tell me, please be nice and say that if they can mention my, I now have a YouTube channel to address a lot of these things.
    2:22:37 Just go to joenavarro.net and there’s a link there to my YouTube channel, which you would think I would know.
    2:22:40 We’ll link it below if you can see.
    2:22:41 I don’t know.
    2:22:44 But I want to thank you for what you do.
    2:22:54 You’re going to realize one day, as I realize, that you’re helping to change lives even though that wasn’t your intention.
    2:22:56 Your intention was probably to educate.
    2:23:15 10 years on, 20 years on, or as I recently found from 40 years on, somebody will write to you and said, something you said or your example affected me and it changed my life.
    2:23:19 And you’ll go, wow, I never thought about that.
    2:23:21 And that’s what you’ve done.
    2:23:24 And you’ll realize it one day.
    2:23:26 Thank you.
    2:23:28 I mean, it’s what you’re doing too.
    2:23:29 Joe, thank you for being so generous with your time.
    2:23:30 I really, really appreciate it.
    2:23:32 It’s been an honor to meet you.
    2:23:36 And I’m excited to finish the rest of your books and to explore more on your YouTube channel, which I’ll link below.
    2:23:37 You also do lots of speaking.
    2:23:40 You work a lot with companies and organizations.
    2:23:44 And if people want to reach you, they should go to your website and send you an email there.
    2:23:45 Absolutely.
    2:23:49 Just through the website and we’ll attend to it.
    2:23:53 And I’m happy to share that knowledge journey with whoever’s interested.
    2:23:57 I’m going to let you into a little bit of a secret.
    2:23:59 You’re probably going to think me and my team are a little bit weird.
    2:24:05 But I can still remember to this day when Jemima from my team posted on Slack that she changed the scent in this studio.
    2:24:09 And right after she posted it, the entire office clapped in our Slack channel.
    2:24:14 And this might sound crazy, but at the Diary of a CEO, this is the type of 1% improvement we make on our show.
    2:24:16 And that is why the show is the way it is.
    2:24:23 By understanding the power of compounding 1%, you can absolutely change your outcomes in your life.
    2:24:26 It isn’t about drastic transformations or quick wins.
    2:24:31 It’s about the small, consistent actions that have a lasting change in your outcomes.
    2:24:35 So two years ago, we started the process of creating this beautiful diary.
    2:24:36 And it’s truly beautiful.
    2:24:40 Inside, there’s lots of pictures, lots of inspiration and motivation as well.
    2:24:42 Some interactive elements.
    2:24:51 And the purpose of this diary is to help you identify, stay focused on, develop consistency with the 1% that will ultimately change your life.
    2:24:57 So if you want one for yourself or for a friend or for a colleague or for your team, then head to thediary.com right now.
    2:24:58 I’ll link it below.
    2:25:22 See you next time.
    Tôi đã làm việc trong FBI suốt 25 năm.
    Tôi đã ngồi cùng với các gián điệp và kẻ thù của đất nước này,
    và tôi đã học được rất nhiều về hành vi con người.
    Hãy tưởng tượng bạn có thể đọc người khác và hoàn cảnh nhanh hơn.
    Điều đó mang lại cho bạn một lợi thế to lớn trong cuộc sống.
    Tôi muốn nghe mọi thứ.
    Vì vậy, một trong những điều đầu tiên tôi dạy là…
    Joe Navarro là một cựu đặc vụ FBI
    trở thành chuyên gia về ngôn ngữ cơ thể nổi tiếng thế giới.
    Ông giúp mọi người giải mã ngôn ngữ cơ thể
    để cải thiện giao tiếp, sự tin tưởng và ảnh hưởng.
    Một điều mà tôi đã nhận thấy trong các cuộc đàm phán
    là chúng ta, với tư cách là con người, giao tiếp rất nhiều bằng khuôn mặt.
    Ví dụ, chúng ta thường nhíu mày lại
    khi không hiểu điều gì đó.
    Và ngay khi chúng ta nghe thấy điều gì đó mà mình không thích,
    màu sắc thực sự bắt đầu rời khỏi môi,
    và sau đó chúng ta bắt đầu xiết chặt chúng lại.
    Một hành vi khác là khi thiếu tự tin,
    những lo lắng khiến mọi người ngay lập tức…
    Vì vậy, một khi chúng ta hiểu những hành vi này,
    bạn có thể kiểm soát bất kỳ tình huống nào.
    Tự tin. Đây có phải là điều mà bạn được sinh ra với không?
    Hay bạn nghĩ rằng tự tin có thể được rèn luyện?
    Điều này hoàn toàn có thể được rèn luyện.
    Vì vậy, FBI thực sự dạy về sự tự tin.
    Và có rất nhiều chiến lược.
    Một trong số đó là cử chỉ mạnh mẽ nhất mà chúng ta có thể sử dụng.
    Và bạn thấy Musk thường làm điều này.
    Nhưng những gì tôi nói với mọi người là
    cách dễ nhất để học sự tự tin là…
    Joe, chúng tôi thực sự đã quay video tương tác của tôi với bạn khi tôi gặp bạn.
    Và tôi có video ở đây.
    Vì vậy, một trong những điều bạn ngay lập tức làm là…
    Đừng làm thế.
    Đó là điều không nên.
    Một điều nhanh chóng trước khi chúng ta trở lại tập này.
    Chỉ cần cho tôi 30 giây thời gian của bạn.
    Hai điều tôi muốn nói.
    Điều đầu tiên là cảm ơn chân thành bạn đã lắng nghe và theo dõi chương trình tuần này qua tuần khác.
    Điều đó có ý nghĩa rất lớn với tất cả chúng tôi.
    Và đây thực sự là một giấc mơ mà chúng tôi hoàn toàn không bao giờ có
    và không thể tưởng tượng được mình đến được nơi này.
    Nhưng thứ hai, đó là một giấc mơ mà chúng tôi cảm thấy như chỉ mới bắt đầu.
    Và nếu bạn thích những gì chúng tôi làm ở đây,
    xin hãy tham gia cùng 24% người nghe podcast này thường xuyên
    và theo dõi chúng tôi trên ứng dụng này.
    Đây là một lời hứa tôi sẽ dành cho bạn.
    Tôi sẽ làm mọi thứ trong khả năng của mình để làm cho chương trình này tốt nhất có thể
    bây giờ và trong tương lai.
    Chúng tôi sẽ mang đến những vị khách mà bạn muốn tôi nói chuyện.
    Và chúng tôi sẽ tiếp tục làm tất cả những điều mà bạn yêu thích về chương trình này.
    Cảm ơn bạn.
    Cảm ơn bạn rất nhiều.
    Trở lại tập phim.
    Joe, nhìn ra xa, nếu ai đó hỏi bạn trên đường phố
    và họ muốn một câu trả lời chỉ trong hai câu,
    bạn là ai và bạn đã dành cuộc đời mình để làm gì?
    Bạn sẽ trả lời câu hỏi đó như thế nào?
    Chỉ với một từ, dạy học.
    Tôi nghĩ tôi đã dành cả đời mình để dạy học.
    Ngay cả khi tôi ở trong FBI, bắt đầu từ năm 1984,
    nhiều công việc của tôi rõ ràng là làm một đặc vụ FBI,
    điều tra tội phạm, đuổi theo gián điệp và các thứ khác.
    Nhưng, bạn biết đấy, tôi đã gia nhập vào năm 1978.
    Nhưng ngay từ năm 84, tôi đã bắt đầu dạy học.
    Và tôi thích khi mọi người hiểu điều đó và họ nhìn thấy hành vi.
    Họ hiểu được những điều cơ bản, nền tảng của việc tại sao chúng ta làm những điều nhất định.
    Tôi sẽ cho bạn một ví dụ.
    Đôi khi bạn sẽ đến một cảnh tượng khủng khiếp và mọi người ngay lập tức thở hổn hển.
    Họ hít thở một hơi và sau đó che miệng lại.
    Hoặc có một sự chênh lệch điểm số một điểm và mọi người như thế này và họ không hiểu.
    Đó là khi chúng ta bị bao quanh bởi sư tử và hổ và chúng ta học cách che miệng
    để không phát tán hơi thở của mình để chúng không thể nhìn thấy chỗ đứng của chúng ta hoặc tìm thấy chúng ta.
    Và vì vậy cơ thể con người có vài lối tắt.
    Tôi nên nói là bộ não con người.
    Chúng được gọi là nguyên lý ước lượng.
    Và vì vậy một trong số đó là đông cứng lại.
    Vì vậy khi chúng ta nghe một âm thanh lớn hoặc nhìn thấy một kẻ săn mồi hay một con chó, chúng ta đông cứng lại.
    Rõ ràng, bất kỳ ai chạy cách đây 300.000 năm đều bị cắn.
    Và vì thế chúng ta có những lối tắt này.
    Và thật thú vị đối với tôi khi chia sẻ lý do tại sao chúng ta có những hành vi này và tại sao chúng ta…
    Và bạn nhận ra rằng bạn vừa hít thở để có thể nhịn thở.
    Và sau đó chúng ta che hơi thở của mình để không phát tán ra cho các kẻ săn mồi ngửi thấy chúng ta.
    Bạn dành thời gian để viết sách.
    Bạn dành thời gian dạy học trong nhiều bối cảnh khác nhau ngày nay, bất kể là trên sân khấu hay trong các môi trường khác trên Internet.
    Điều gì là điều mà bạn đang mang đến cho mọi người?
    Đó là một câu hỏi sâu sắc mà tôi không nghĩ mình đã từng được hỏi.
    Tôi nghĩ câu trả lời đơn giản nhất là kiến thức, kiến thức mà có lẽ họ không có thời gian để tiếp nhận.
    Tôi lớn lên trong một hoàn cảnh rất nghèo.
    Tôi là một người tị nạn từ Cuba.
    Và tôi sống trong một khu vực ở Miami, chủ yếu là người già.
    Vì vậy, tôi thường ở một mình.
    Tôi đã đi qua các thùng rác để thu thập những thứ để đọc.
    Đó là kiến thức mà tôi may mắn có được, tình yêu đọc sách.
    Và tôi gặp rất nhiều người không có được lợi ích đó.
    Có thể họ không có tình yêu đọc sách và học hỏi.
    Tôi thấy mình như, ôi, tôi có kiến thức này.
    Tôi đã ngồi cùng với các kẻ khủng bố, gián điệp, kẻ thù mang súng bazooka của nước này.
    Và những người khác không bao giờ có cơ hội đó.
    Và tôi học được rất nhiều từ điều đó và từ việc đọc sách của mình.
    Vậy tại sao không chia sẻ?
    Để làm cho cuộc sống của họ trở nên dễ dàng hơn một chút.
    Khi bạn nói làm cho cuộc sống của họ dễ dàng hơn một chút, nếu tôi nhận được kiến thức của bạn, cuộc sống của tôi sẽ tốt hơn như thế nào?
    Tôi sẽ trở nên hiệu quả hơn ra sao?
    Đó là một câu hỏi tuyệt vời.
    Tưởng tượng bạn có thể nhận thức được mọi thứ sớm hơn rất nhiều
    bởi vì bạn có thể đọc người khác và tình huống nhanh hơn.
    Hầu hết mọi người thấy một hành vi và phải ngồi đó tự hỏi,
    họ có đang khó chịu với tôi không?
    Họ đang, như người Anh thường nói, vợ tôi là người Anh,
    họ đang chế nhạo hay điều gì đó không?
    Chỉ bất kỳ số thứ gì.
    Nhưng hãy tưởng tượng khả năng nhìn vào một điều gì đó
    và giải mã nó nhanh chóng hơn bao giờ hết để bạn có thể tận tâm với những điều khác.
    Nơi mà hầu hết chúng ta phân tích khuôn mặt thành trán, mắt, tai, và những thứ khác.
    Nhưng hãy tưởng tượng bạn có thể đánh giá toàn bộ khuôn mặt, vai, tay, mọi thứ cùng một lúc.
    Và rút ra những suy luận từ thông tin đó.
    Điều đó mang lại cho bạn một lợi thế to lớn.
    Và cũng vậy, trong các cuộc đàm phán, khả năng đọc người khác.
    Và đồng thời, chúng ta quên rằng người khác cũng đang đọc chúng ta.
    Và cảm nhận mà chúng ta muốn truyền tải là gì?
    Và nếu tôi đạt được tất cả kiến thức mà bạn có để cung cấp, và tôi áp dụng nó,
    Các lĩnh vực nào trong cuộc sống của tôi bạn tin là sẽ cải thiện?
    Đầu tiên, ngay trong chính bạn, ví dụ, có khả năng đánh giá bản thân.
    Vì vậy, nếu, giả sử, bạn có vấn đề với cơn giận và v.v., hoặc bạn dễ bị kích thích, vậy thì tôi sẽ đối phó với điều đó như thế nào?
    Trước tiên, bạn đánh giá, bạn biết điều gì đang diễn ra?
    Dạ dày của bạn bị khó chịu.
    Ngực thít lại.
    Cảm xúc của bạn dâng lên.
    Vậy tôi sẽ làm gì tiếp theo?
    Hầu hết mọi người không được dạy điều đó.
    Vì vậy, có một phần như vậy.
    Có cách giao tiếp, ví dụ, hiệu quả hơn với trẻ em của bạn.
    Một điều đơn giản mà, ví dụ, và không ai dạy điều này, mà tôi dạy, đó là, bạn biết đấy, nếu bạn đứng trước con của bạn như một sĩ quan huấn luyện với cái cổ cứng,
    bạn sẽ nhận được một phản ứng rất khác so với việc bạn đứng ở góc xa hơn một chút so với đứa trẻ và nghiêng đầu.
    Giao tiếp bạn sẽ trải nghiệm với đứa trẻ đó khác biệt rất nhiều chỉ bằng cách nghiêng đầu so với việc bạn đứng trực tiếp trước mặt chúng, bạn có thể nâng cao giao tiếp.
    Và sau đó bạn nói, vậy, ứng dụng đó trong cuộc sống thực là gì?
    À, bạn thực sự có thể thay đổi thời gian mà bạn nhận được từ một người khác.
    Giả sử bạn chỉ có hai phút và bạn muốn kéo dài thời gian đó chỉ bằng cách nghiêng đầu.
    Chúng tôi đã chứng minh rằng bạn có thể thay đổi số lượng thời gian giao tiếp mà ai đó sẵn sàng dành cho bạn chỉ vì chúng tôi cho thấy rằng chúng tôi đang thư giãn
    và rằng chúng tôi không tiếp cận bạn với một chương trình mà chúng tôi sẵn sàng lắng nghe.
    Nó có thể biến đổi nếu bạn áp dụng kiến thức đó.
    Bây giờ, một số người nhìn vào kiến thức và họ không làm nhiều với nó, nhưng bạn có thể sử dụng nó ở nhà, bạn có thể sử dụng nó tại nơi làm việc, bạn có thể sử dụng nó trong các cuộc đàm phán.
    Ví dụ, một trong những điều tôi dạy là giá trị của thời gian, và thời gian thực sự có thể được sử dụng như một phi ngôn ngữ.
    Vì vậy, khi tôi nói về phi ngôn ngữ, tôi đang thực sự nói về bất cứ điều gì giao tiếp nhưng không phải là một từ.
    Chà, bạn có thể sử dụng thời gian như một phi ngôn ngữ để nói rằng tôi đang kiểm soát.
    Bất kỳ ai chi phối và kiểm soát thời gian thì chi phối.
    Và vì vậy, ngay cả khi tôi thay đổi cách truyền đạt thông điệp của mình để làm chậm mọi thứ lại, bạn đã bắt đầu kiểm soát trong cuộc đàm phán đó.
    Đó là một điều tuyệt vời để chứng kiến khi bạn thực hiện nó đúng cách.
    Vì vậy, có rất nhiều ứng dụng.
    Và, bạn biết đấy, rõ ràng, như bạn, bạn về cơ bản nghiên cứu hành vi con người.
    Bạn là một doanh nhân, nhưng thực ra bạn thực sự đang trong ngành kinh doanh con người.
    Và khi chúng ta hiểu được nhu cầu, và một số thì mang tính sinh học, những mong muốn, những khao khát, sở thích, sở thích của người khác,
    họ thích thông tin được truyền tải như thế nào?
    Họ thích cà phê của họ như thế nào?
    Tất cả những điều đó.
    Nhưng sau đó họ sợ điều gì?
    Hầu hết mọi người không nói với bạn rằng họ có những nỗi sợ hãi.
    Họ nói, ồ, bạn biết đấy, tôi lo lắng về điều này hoặc điều kia.
    Tôi không biết đó có phải là một khoản đầu tư tốt hay không hoặc chúng ta sẽ phải thực hiện một số thẩm định.
    Nhưng não bộ chỉ nhận ra nỗi sợ.
    Vì vậy, một khi bạn hiểu điều đó, nó cho bạn một độ lớn để theo đuổi bất cứ điều gì bạn quan tâm làm hiệu quả hơn.
    Và sự nghiệp của bạn.
    Vâng.
    Vậy bạn đã là một đặc vụ FBI hơn 30 năm?
    Chà, tôi đã làm việc trong lĩnh vực pháp luật 30 năm.
    Tôi đã ở trong FBI 25 năm, chủ yếu làm việc trong lĩnh vực phản gián.
    Nhưng, bạn biết đấy, trong FBI, bạn không bao giờ chỉ đeo một chiếc mũ.
    Tôi cũng là một phi công.
    Vì vậy, tôi đã bay giám sát.
    Tôi là chỉ huy đội SWAT.
    Vì vậy, tôi đã thực hiện các công việc SWAT và thực sự đã làm việc với SAS từ London.
    Và sau đó tôi tham gia vào chương trình phân tích hành vi.
    Vì vậy, chúng tôi đã sử dụng kỹ năng đó để làm việc bắt giữ các gián điệp.
    Chương trình phân tích hành vi là gì?
    Vào năm 1989-1990, FBI đã phát triển một chương trình rất bí mật để phân tích không phải những người đã chết, mà thực sự, làm thế nào chúng ta sử dụng hành vi con người để bắt gián điệp, bắt khủng bố?
    Và sau đó, một khi chúng ta bắt được họ, làm thế nào chúng ta vào được tâm trí của họ?
    Làm thế nào để chúng ta khiến họ nói với chúng ta những gì họ đang làm, mục đích của họ là gì, và v.v.?
    Vì vậy, chúng tôi đã tạo ra chương trình này.
    Tôi, cùng với năm đặc vụ khác trong tổng số 12.000, đã được chọn từ FBI để trở thành một phần của chương trình phân tích hành vi mới này, cái mà lẽ ra phải được phân loại, nhưng nó đã bị rò rỉ một cách tình cờ.
    Và công việc của chúng tôi là xem xét các mối đe dọa, mối đe dọa an ninh quốc gia, và sau đó xem chúng tôi có thể sử dụng kiến thức về hành vi con người như thế nào để tấn công điều đó.
    Vì vậy, khi bạn nói rằng phần lớn công việc của bạn là bắt gián điệp, hầu hết chúng ta chỉ nghe về gián điệp từ việc xem James Bond và những điều tương tự như vậy.
    Vì vậy, chúng tôi không thực sự hiểu được thực tế về gián điệp.
    Vì vậy, nếu tôi giả vờ hoàn toàn ngốc nghếch trong một giây, các quốc gia khác gửi người vào các quốc gia khác, như Hoa Kỳ hay Vương quốc Anh hay Úc, Canada, để làm gì?
    Vì vậy, mỗi quốc gia đều có lợi ích.
    Nhiều trong số đó được đạt được thông qua ngoại giao.
    Nhiều trong số đó hiện nay được đạt được thông qua cái mà chúng tôi gọi là gián điệp.
    Vì vậy, nó không giống như trên truyền hình và trong các bộ phim.
    Một số quốc gia, đặc biệt là các quốc gia thù địch, gửi cái mà chúng tôi gọi là sĩ quan tình báo thù địch, thường giả danh là một nhà ngoại giao, nhưng thường giả dạng thành sinh viên hoặc nhà khoa học hoặc doanh nhân.
    Và công việc của họ là thu thập kiến thức trong các lĩnh vực cụ thể, kiến thức quân sự, khoa học và nghiên cứu, ý định và kế hoạch, ý định và kế hoạch quân sự.
    Hoặc họ có thể quan tâm đến, ví dụ, sản lượng lúa mì ở Argentina trong năm nay, vì điều đó có thể ảnh hưởng đến giá ngũ cốc trên toàn thế giới.
    Vì vậy, có gián điệp thương mại diễn ra.
    Và vì vậy, mỗi quốc gia tự bảo vệ mình bằng cách cố gắng xác định, ồ, ai đang ở đây cố gắng gián điệp?
    Vì vậy, đó là những gì chúng tôi làm.
    Đó là phản gián.
    Đó là gián điệp.
    Và nó không giống như trong phim.
    Chúng tôi không nhảy từ những tòa nhà.
    Dù đôi khi chúng tôi cũng làm vậy, nhưng không hấp dẫn như những điều liên quan đến James Bond. Vậy bạn đã bắt giữ gián điệp bao giờ chưa? Tôi đã. Tôi đã bắt giữ nhiều gián điệp. Hãy cho tôi biết ví dụ thú vị nhất về một gián điệp mà bạn đã xác định trong phiên tòa. Họ đến đây để làm gì? Họ đến từ quốc gia nào? Thật ra, đó là một người Mỹ, bởi vì chúng tôi cũng có những người mà chúng tôi gọi là kẻ phản bội. Trong trường hợp của Roderick James Ramsey, ông là một cá nhân mà vào năm 1989, tôi được yêu cầu phỏng vấn vì chúng tôi nghĩ ông là một nhân chứng cho cái gì đó đã xảy ra ở Đức. Ông đã từng là một hạ sĩ quân đội, đã bị đuổi khỏi quân đội. Quân đội muốn tìm hiểu xem ông biết gì về một số tài liệu bị mất hay có thấy gì không. Trong buổi phỏng vấn, trong khi tôi nghĩ ông là nhân chứng, ông đang hút thuốc lá ở nhà. Tôi đã nhắc đến tên một cá nhân đã có mặt tại căn cứ đó, nhưng đã bị các cơ quan Đức điều tra. Thực tế, là bởi Bundeskriminalamt, cơ quan tương đương với FBI. Không có lý do gì để ông phải phản ứng với điều đó. Đó chỉ là một cái tên. Nhưng khi tôi nhắc đến tên, điếu thuốc của ông đã rung lên. Và tôi biết đủ về hành vi con người để nhận ra rằng thay đổi sinh lý đó phải do một điều gì đó quan trọng. Tại sao một cái tên lại ảnh hưởng đến ông? Vì vậy, theo phương pháp khoa học, tôi đã nói chuyện với ông thêm 20 phút về một vấn đề khác. Và rồi tôi lại nhắc lại cái tên đó. Và thật đúng, điếu thuốc của ông lại rung lên. Và vào thời điểm đó, tôi đã chắc chắn rằng có điều gì đó xấu xa ở đó. Hóa ra, người Đức đã bắt giữ Conrad. Conrad đã ở đó. Clyde Conrad. Đó là tên của người đã bị nghi ngờ. Người mà tôi đang phỏng vấn, Rod Ramsey, thì không. Vì vậy, tôi rời khỏi buổi phỏng vấn đó, và tôi đã thuyết phục các cấp trên tiếp tục nói chuyện với Rod Ramsey. Và điều đó dẫn đến một cuộc điều tra kéo dài 10 năm và bắt giữ thêm ba, bốn, năm, sáu, bảy cá nhân khác. Vậy là chàng trai Rod, Roderick Ramsey với điếu thuốc rung rung là, ông ấy đang do thám Mỹ? Điều ông đang làm, và đó là một câu hỏi hay, và xin lỗi tôi vì không giải thích. Khi ông còn trong quân đội, ông và Clyde Lee Conrad đã đánh cắp bí mật quân sự. Từ đâu? Từ Quân đội Mỹ. Họ đã lấy bí mật của Quân đội Mỹ và sau đó bán cho Liên Xô thông qua Cơ quan tình báo Hungary. Vì vậy, ông là kẻ phản bội của Hoa Kỳ. Vậy là ông là kẻ phản bội. Và đó thường là vấn đề lớn nhất đối với bất kỳ quốc gia nào, đó là những kẻ phản bội từ bên trong. Họ đã nâng cao hoạt động gián điệp lên mức độ công nghiệp. Ý tôi là, đến mức họ thậm chí không còn sử dụng máy ảnh 35mm để chụp những tài liệu nữa. Họ thực sự đã quay video những tài liệu đó để có thể nhanh chóng xử lý hàng ngàn trang. Đây là vụ gián điệp tổn hại nhất trong lịch sử Hoa Kỳ vì họ đã làm lộ các mã số khởi động hạt nhân của Hoa Kỳ tại Đức. Và điều đó đã để lại cho toàn bộ Tây Âu bị lộ. Mã khởi động hạt nhân? Vâng. Đó là gì? Tất cả các tài sản hạt nhân của chúng ta trên toàn thế giới đều được kiểm soát bởi hai điều. Có cái được gọi là “liên kết hành động cho phép”, giống như một khoá an toàn vào phút chót trên từng thiết bị. Và sau đó có mã khởi động cho biết có quyền lực để sử dụng vũ khí này. Vậy nên Ramsey đã có thể đánh cắp chính mã khởi động hạt nhân. Nó là một thẻ. Nó được làm từ một chất liệu đặc biệt mà tôi không thể mô tả. Nó được làm từ kim loại và nhựa đặc biệt cùng các vật liệu khác. Và mối nguy hiểm tiềm ẩn trong những gì họ đã làm không phải là họ có thể khởi động một vụ phóng. Điều đó chỉ có thể được khởi động ở cấp độ quyền lực chỉ huy quốc gia. Nhưng nếu điều này bị xâm phạm và giao cho, giả sử, người Nga vào thời điểm đó, Liên Xô, trước năm 1989, thì một dịch vụ tình báo nước ngoài thù địch có thể lấy điều đó và sao chép nó, nhưng đặt vào đó những con số sai. Và bằng cách đưa những con số sai vào đó, nếu nó ở trong một cấu trúc kim tự tháp và được đặt cao đủ, phải không? Giả sử bạn kiểm soát toàn bộ bờ Đông. Có thể bạn không muốn do thám cho Nga, nhưng với 100,000 đô la, giả sử bạn sẵn sàng đưa điều này vào đó và lấy cái đã có trong đó ra. Được rồi, vì vậy có thể điều đó giúp bạn bớt cắn rứt lương tâm bằng cách nào đó. Sau đó, bạn về cơ bản, nếu đó là một loại sơ đồ kim tự tháp, bạn có thể làm tê liệt mọi thứ bên dưới nó. Được rồi, vì vậy ai đó có thể đã thay đổi mã, đưa một cái giả vào, có nghĩa là nó sẽ không còn hoạt động nữa. Ở cấp độ cao nhất, thì sẽ không có gì hoạt động nếu bạn có quyền truy cập ở cấp độ cao nhất. Họ có bị vào tù không? Oh, có. Có. Người có điếu thuốc rung rung đã vào tù. 33 năm. Để tôi kết thúc bằng cách nói điều này. Vụ án này đã đặt một quả bóng cho Tây Âu vào tình thế nguy hiểm, cũng như Hoa Kỳ. Người tướng đã làm chứng trong vụ án này nói rằng nếu xảy ra xung đột, việc thất bại của phương Tây sẽ được đảm bảo trong vòng ba ngày. Đó là mức độ tàn khốc của nó. Vâng, hãy để điều đó ngấm vào. Đó là lời của ông ấy. Việc thất bại của phương Tây sẽ được đảm bảo vì những tổn hại mà những cá nhân này đã gây ra. Không phải tất cả các vụ án đều quan trọng như vậy trong việc bắt giữ gián điệp. Vì vậy, tôi đã đọc về một vụ khác mà bạn đã bắt giữ một người đàn ông vì cách anh ta cầm một số bông hoa. Vâng. Bạn biết đấy, nhiều khi thông tin chỉ dựa trên hành vi. Bạn biết đấy, bạn thấy xem có bao nhiêu lần ai đó nhìn vào đồng hồ của họ. Đúng thế. Nhưng có thể khi họ tham gia hoạt động, họ nhìn vào đồng hồ thường xuyên hơn. Và họ đã quay phim người đàn ông này mà chúng tôi nghĩ là người mà chúng tôi gọi là “bất hợp pháp.” Trong ngôn ngữ của hoạt động gián điệp, một người bất hợp pháp là người mà tự dưng xuất hiện ở Hoa Kỳ và giả vờ là một người Mỹ, đã luôn là người Mỹ, giống như trong loạt phim “The Americans.” Nhưng chúng tôi đã có một số manh mối từ một trong những dịch vụ chị em của chúng tôi từ một quốc gia khác và nói, chúng tôi nghĩ cá nhân này có thể là người mà các bạn cần xem xét đang giả vờ là một người Mỹ.
    Chúng tôi đang xem xét, chúng tôi tập hợp toàn bộ đội ngũ lại, tất cả sáu người chúng tôi. Và chúng tôi đang xem bộ phim và, bạn biết đấy, nó được quay một cách tình cờ vào Ngày Valentine. Vì vậy, chúng tôi thấy anh ấy bước vào một cửa hàng hoa và rời khỏi cửa hàng hoa. Khi anh ấy ra ngoài, tôi đã nói, chắc chắn anh ấy không phải là người Mỹ. Bạn biết đấy, tất cả mọi người nhìn tôi như kiểu, xin lỗi. Và tôi nói, anh ấy không đến từ đây. Anh ấy nói, làm sao? Và anh ấy nói, nhìn cách anh ấy mang bó hoa. Người Mỹ thường cầm bó hoa ngược lên. Còn người Đông Âu thì cầm xuống. Và, và tiếp tục mang nó theo cách đó. Vì vậy, tôi đã làm điều gọi là giả định. Chúng tôi dừng anh ấy lại một ngày và, và tôi nói, bạn biết đấy, tôi là người của FBI và, và tôi nói, bạn có muốn biết chúng tôi biết như thế nào không? Và đó là, đó là tín hiệu đầu tiên mà tôi đang tìm kiếm để xem anh ấy phản ứng thế nào. Và anh ấy đã bị lừa. Anh ấy nói, tiếp tục đi. Hầu hết mọi người sẽ nói, biến đi, đi chỗ khác. Và, và tôi nói, đó là cách bạn cầm hoa. Cằm của anh ấy hạ xuống, mí mắt anh ấy trở nên nặng trĩu. Khi anh ấy đang đánh giá mọi thứ mà anh ấy đã làm, bạn biết đấy, anh ấy đã thực hành mọi thứ. Tiếng Anh của anh ấy rất hoàn hảo. Bạn biết đấy, anh ấy nghe giống như một người Midwesterner và tất cả những thứ đó. Sau vài giờ trò chuyện thật thú vị, anh ấy đồng ý hợp tác với chúng tôi và thừa nhận mọi thứ. Anh ấy đã thừa nhận điều gì? Rằng anh ấy đã được gửi đến đây bởi một chính phủ nước ngoài. Rằng công việc của anh ấy như một người nhập cư bất hợp pháp là ở lại Hoa Kỳ, hành động như một người Mỹ. Và hầu hết mọi người không hiểu, tại sao một quốc gia lại tiêu tốn nhiều tiền để đào tạo những người này giống như một người Mỹ? Và điều họ không hiểu là mục đích của họ ở đây là để khi có xung đột xảy ra. Họ có thể báo cáo về, ví dụ, giao thông tàu hỏa, những tàu nào chở vũ khí, những sân bay nào đang được sử dụng cho mục đích gì. Nhiều lần, như anh ấy đã nói với chúng tôi sau đó, họ được cung cấp những kho vũ khí để có thể phá hủy những thứ mà không tên lửa nào có thể làm được. Vì vậy, đó là vai trò của họ trong việc ẩn mình ở Mỹ. Không phải để thực hiện gián điệp. Mà là để ở đây trong trường hợp có xung đột xảy ra. Vậy bạn đã lật ngược anh ấy để làm việc với FBI? Đúng vậy. Và điều đó có nghĩa là anh ấy không bị trừng phạt? Chà, anh ấy không bị trừng phạt vì anh ấy không phạm tội nào khác ngoài vi phạm nhập cư. Nhưng những gì anh ấy có thể tiết lộ cho chúng tôi thì không kém phần gây sửng sốt. Quốc gia nào đây? Tôi không thể nói. Nhưng rõ ràng, họ phải có đủ tiền và đủ mối quan tâm để thực hiện một hoạt động như thế này. Nếu bạn phải đoán xem có bao nhiêu người sống trong chúng ta đã được gửi từ một quốc gia nước ngoài và là gián điệp, bạn nghĩ là bao nhiêu người? Chà, hãy định nghĩa điều đó. Bạn biết đấy, nếu họ là sĩ quan tình báo thù địch, nó có thể từ 3% nhân viên ngoại giao đến nhiều nhất, vào một thời điểm nào đó, Liên Xô, 85% nhân viên của họ đã thực hiện các hoạt động gián điệp. Tôi nghĩ con số đó, vậy bạn có những điều đó. Bây giờ, nếu bạn đang đề cập đến, như, có bao nhiêu người bất hợp pháp, tôi sẽ nói ít nhất bạn sẽ có ít nhất hai tá ở Vương quốc Anh, có thể một tá ở Pháp. Và, bạn biết đấy, bạn sẽ có một loạt, một chòm sao trong số họ ở Hoa Kỳ, chỉ đơn giản vì chúng tôi trải dài qua năm múi giờ. Tôi tin rằng Vương quốc Anh chỉ trải dài một múi giờ. Tôi nghĩ tôi đã hỏi điều này một phần vì tôi đang đọc một cái gì đó nói rằng nhiều người nhập cư bất hợp pháp đã vượt biên qua biên giới phía nam của Hoa Kỳ, nhiều người trong số họ là người Trung Quốc. Và đã có một bài báo về việc đặt câu hỏi liệu đó có thể là một hành động có chủ ý để đưa người Trung Quốc bất hợp pháp vào Hoa Kỳ cho một mục đích trong tương lai nào đó. Bạn biết đấy, những tuyên bố lớn cần bằng chứng lớn, và tôi chưa thấy điều đó. Trong kinh nghiệm của tôi, dịch vụ tình báo Trung Quốc thích sử dụng sinh viên và các nhà khoa học. Chúng tôi có khoảng 80.000 sinh viên Trung Quốc ở đây vào bất kỳ thời điểm nào. Tôi biết rằng, ví dụ, vào cuối những năm 80 và đầu những năm 90, họ sẽ được cấp tiền trợ cấp. Luôn làm tôi ấn tượng rằng họ được cấp tiền trợ cấp nhỏ cho bữa ăn, nhưng tiền trợ cấp lớn để sao chép ở thư viện. Chúng tôi gọi đó là một manh mối trong FBI. Vậy nên họ sẽ được cấp 150 đô la để ăn, nhưng họ sẽ được cấp hàng nghìn đô la để có thể sao chép càng nhiều càng tốt từ các thư viện. Thật dễ dàng hơn cho họ, cho bất kỳ quốc gia nào, để gửi người đến đây, sinh viên, và ví dụ, vào ngành kỹ thuật hoặc bất kỳ lĩnh vực nào đó. Về chủ đề ngôn ngữ cơ thể, điều này gây tranh cãi cao vì một số người nói rằng ngôn ngữ cơ thể thực sự cung cấp cho chúng ta những manh mối. Một số người thì nói rằng nó không cung cấp manh mối vì có sự khác biệt văn hóa. Ngôn ngữ cơ thể có quan trọng không? Chà, hãy để tôi giải quyết những gì bạn vừa hỏi. Đầu tiên, ngôn ngữ cơ thể là cực kỳ quan trọng vì chúng ta sinh ra mà không có khả năng nói. Vì vậy, chúng ta phải đọc đứa trẻ trước mặt chúng ta. Để lập luận rằng ngôn ngữ cơ thể, A, không quan trọng hoặc nó phụ thuộc vào sự diễn giải, tôi sẽ lập luận rằng đó sẽ là một cảm xúc rất nhỏ trên toàn thế giới giữa những người thực sự đã nghiên cứu điều này. Và tôi sẽ nói tại sao. Một em bé sinh ra mà không có khả năng nói, nhưng người mẹ nhanh chóng học được thông qua ngôn ngữ phi ngữ nghĩa liệu rằng đứa trẻ đó có bị đau bụng hay không, liệu rằng đứa trẻ đó có cần được trấn an hay không, liệu chúng có lạnh hay nóng và vân vân. Có rất nhiều thứ linh tinh ở ngoài kia, và đây có lẽ là từ sạch nhất mà tôi có thể sử dụng về ngôn ngữ cơ thể, rằng điều này có nghĩa là gì đó hay bất kỳ điều gì đó tương tự. Nhưng chúng ta được chuẩn bị tuyệt vời để giao tiếp bất cứ lúc nào, dù cho chúng ta có thoải mái hay không thoải mái, dù chúng ta có tự tin hay không hiểu. Chúng ta đã phải phát triển khả năng đó chính xác vì chúng ta luôn bị bao quanh bởi những kẻ săn mồi. Ví dụ, Stephen, khi bạn có những nghi ngờ hoặc bạn muốn theo dõi các câu hỏi mà tôi hỏi, bạn sử dụng đôi mắt của bạn một cách tinh tế. Bạn nhíu mày. Một bên mắt nhấc lên, bên mắt kia hạ xuống. Bạn rất dễ dàng để đọc. Vì vậy, tôi tiếp tục cung cấp thông tin. Bạn không cần phải dạy tôi điều đó.
    Bây giờ, điều tôi muốn tranh luận là, có phải tôi đang thấy sự hạn chế không?
    Có phải tôi đang thấy sự khinh miệt hoặc coi thường không?
    À, đó là một lập luận ngu ngốc.
    Chúng ta không tiến hóa để có những câu trả lời hoàn hảo.
    Tiến hóa là về sự xấp xỉ để thành công.
    Nói cách khác, nếu tôi có thể chính xác 75% đến 80% thời gian, thì đó thực sự là đủ tốt.
    Đó là đủ tốt.
    Và vì vậy, điều tôi dạy là, bạn có thấy sự thoải mái hay không thoải mái, tâm lý, thể chất, và những thứ tương tự?
    Tôi có thấy, như trong tâm lý học, chúng ta nói, đó có phải là tích cực hay tiêu cực không?
    Cân bằng, bạn thấy không?
    Bạn đang nhăn mày lại.
    Cái “valenced” có nghĩa là gì?
    Valence thực sự có nghĩa là nó cân bằng hoặc có bao nhiêu năng lượng đi theo hướng này hoặc hướng kia.
    Valence của nó là gì?
    Nếu một cái gì đó có valence tích cực, điều đó có nghĩa là gì?
    Valence tích cực, bạn sẽ thấy những hành vi phi trọng lực.
    Bạn sẽ thấy sự nhấn mạnh.
    Bạn sẽ thấy rất nhiều sự hài hước và hoạt bát và những cử chỉ rộng lớn và những thứ tương tự.
    Nếu nó có valence tiêu cực, thì, bạn biết đấy, là sự kiềm chế.
    Bạn sẽ thấy sự nhăn mày lại.
    Bạn sẽ thấy sự thắt chặt, sự thu hẹp của đôi môi.
    Bạn sẽ thấy rất nhiều sự chạm vào khuôn mặt.
    Tôi không biết, đúng không?
    Tất cả những cái pacifier này.
    Và vì vậy, tôi muốn tranh luận rằng hãy ngừng tìm kiếm sự hoàn hảo.
    Thực tế, Tiến sĩ Ambadi tại Harvard, thật không may cô ấy đã qua đời, đã phát hiện ra rằng chúng ta, như những con người, sẽ chính xác 75% thời gian trong việc đánh giá lẫn nhau.
    Đó là một con số đáng kinh ngạc.
    Nghiên cứu của cô ấy rất phong phú.
    Bạn có thể tìm nghiên cứu của cô ấy.
    Tất cả đều được thực hiện trên cơ sở tìm kiếm những gì cô ấy gọi là đánh giá lát mỏng.
    Đánh giá lát mỏng, tất cả những người xem của bạn nên biết.
    Bởi vì nó cho thấy rằng chỉ từ ba phần nghìn giây, chúng ta thực sự có được một đánh giá khá tốt về nhau.
    Và chúng ta viết chính xác 75% thời gian với ba phần nghìn giây.
    Vâng.
    Vì vậy, họ đã thực hiện một số thí nghiệm.
    Họ đã để người ta vào và quan sát một giáo viên, chẳng hạn, chỉ bằng cách mở cửa lớp học, quan sát cô ấy trong vài giây và đóng cửa.
    Họ đã đánh giá giáo viên đó giống như những người đã ngồi trong lớp học suốt cả kỳ học.
    Về…
    Họ có phải là giáo viên tốt không?
    Họ có phải là giáo viên ấm áp không?
    Họ có phải là giáo viên đồng cảm không?
    Họ có phải là giáo viên có năng lực không?
    Và những thứ tương tự.
    Khi bạn xoa mặt, bởi vì có rất nhiều sự hoài nghi ở đó.
    Bạn phải đánh giá rằng thí nghiệm này được thực hiện đi thực hiện lại nhiều lần trong nhiều lĩnh vực.
    Tôi đang nghĩ, khi bạn nói điều đó, tôi đang nghĩ, trời ơi.
    Tôi đang nghĩ rằng nếu ai đó đọc bạn nhanh như vậy, tôi đang nghĩ về việc dễ dàng để lại ấn tượng xấu ban đầu.
    Chà, bạn biết đấy, khi tôi bắt đầu học ngôn ngữ cơ thể, chính thức vào năm 1971, tôi không hề đánh giá cao việc học ở trường.
    Vì vậy, tôi đã tạo ra chương trình học riêng của mình.
    Khi tôi bắt đầu xem xét ngôn ngữ cơ thể vào năm 1971, tôi nhớ mọi người đã nói, bạn biết đấy, 20 phút đầu tiên là quan trọng nhất để tạo ấn tượng.
    Sau đó, nhiều năm sau, nó giảm xuống còn 15 phút.
    Đến những năm 1980, có người đã nói, chà, đó là 4 phút đầu tiên.
    Chà, dừng lại.
    Đó là thông tin cổ xưa.
    Chúng ta bây giờ biết rằng đánh giá đó được thực hiện trong ba phần nghìn giây đầu tiên.
    Nó nhanh hơn tốc độ nháy mắt của bạn.
    Và bạn có thể bắt đầu làm mọi thứ tồi tệ và xấu và bắt đầu ảnh hưởng tiêu cực đến người khác trong khoảng thời gian đó vì tiềm thức đang đánh giá người khác nhanh hơn.
    Và tiện thể, tôi chưa đề cập đến điều này.
    Ngay cả trước khi chúng ta được sinh ra, chúng ta đang đánh giá thế giới xung quanh đến mức vì lý do sống sót, một đứa trẻ trong bụng mẹ bắt đầu đánh giá thế giới xung quanh thông qua lượng âm thanh và cách phát âm và giọng nói của mẹ, để khi đứa trẻ đó được sinh ra, và bạn có thể tìm nghiên cứu, đứa trẻ sẽ được sinh ra với cách khóc phù hợp với ngôn ngữ mẹ đẻ, để mà, như các nhà nghiên cứu đã phát hiện, một đứa trẻ có mẹ người Đức sẽ khóc khác đi, sẽ khóc khác đi, âm điệu, L-I-L-T, âm điệu của đứa trẻ đó sẽ khác so với một đứa trẻ Pháp.
    Điều đó chiếm ưu thế để chúng ta có thể hòa hợp tốt hơn.
    Và điều này thẳng thắn đến kinh doanh vì đồng bộ là sự hòa hợp.
    Càng nhanh chóng chúng ta có thể đồng bộ, càng nhanh chóng chúng ta có thể hòa hợp.
    Và vì vậy, chúng ta đã được lập trình sẵn.
    Nếu những người xem của bạn quan tâm đến điều đó, họ có thể xem nghiên cứu đã được thực hiện về âm điệu khóc của trẻ sơ sinh.
    Làm thế nào để một người đồng bộ hóa?
    Vì vậy, nếu đồng bộ bằng sự hòa hợp, tức là, nếu chúng ta đồng bộ với nhau, thì chúng ta sẽ hòa hợp trong kinh doanh hoặc trong cuộc sống hoặc bất cứ điều gì.
    Đúng.
    Tôi làm thế nào để đồng bộ với ai đó khi tôi gặp họ?
    Điều đầu tiên là, từ một khoảng cách, nếu tôi thấy bạn đi bộ xuống hành lang và bạn nói, chào Joe, bạn biết đấy, và tôi nói, Steve, bạn khỏe không?
    Đúng không?
    Tôi đang phản chiếu bạn.
    Bạn biết đấy, điều này quay về công việc của Carl Rogers vào những năm 1960.
    Và ông đã tìm ra rằng đồng bộ khiến chúng ta bị khóa chặt vào sự ràng buộc tâm lý này, nơi bạn chào bằng tay và nhướn lông mày, chào, điều đó gửi đi những thông điệp mạnh mẽ.
    Vì vậy, nếu tôi làm như vậy, bạn có thể tưởng tượng nếu bạn chào tôi như thế này và tôi đã nói, ừ, bạn khỏe không?
    Ừ.
    Giống như, chúng ta hoàn toàn không hòa hợp.
    Chúng ta hoàn toàn không đồng bộ.
    Vì vậy, chúng ta bắt đầu bằng những điều không lời.
    Chúng ta bắt đầu, ví dụ, với cách ăn mặc.
    Bạn biết đấy, nếu bạn tham gia một cuộc họp, bạn biết đấy, chúng tôi có thể sẽ ăn mặc giống nhau hoặc gần giống nhau.
    Chúng tôi có thể sẽ có, nhìn chúng tôi ngay bây giờ với những cử chỉ tay.
    Chúng tôi đang thực sự phản chiếu các cử chỉ tay của nhau đến mức mà các ngón tay cái của chúng tôi hoàn toàn giống nhau.
    Tại sao?
    Bởi vì chúng tôi cảm thấy thoải mái với nhau.
    Chúng tôi sẽ nghiêng người về phía nhau nếu chúng tôi hòa hợp tốt.
    Và đến mức bạn thực sự có thể làm việc với các cá nhân để làm dịu họ hoặc thấy mọi thứ theo cách của bạn hoặc để trân trọng, giả sử, trong các cuộc đàm phán, để bắt đầu tiếp nhận hơn.
    Mọi người sẽ tiếp nhận hơn nếu họ có thể phản chiếu hành vi của bạn.
    Vì vậy, mọi người sẽ tiếp nhận hơn nếu họ có thể phản chiếu hành vi của bạn.
    Nếu tôi để bạn phản chiếu hành vi của tôi, thì bạn sẽ dễ tiếp thu hơn những gì tôi nói. Có phải đó là điều bạn đang nói không? Nói chung, chúng ta không thể bắt chước lẫn nhau như thể đó là một trò chơi. Vâng, vâng, vâng. Nó sẽ trở nên vô lý. Nhưng không có cách nào chúng ta có thể đàm phán nếu bạn đang la hét và tôi thì điềm tĩnh. Đúng. Nó đơn giản là không xảy ra. Chẳng hạn, bạn và tôi có thể đang làm khá tốt việc phản chiếu lẫn nhau trong cuộc trò chuyện. Chúng ta có khả năng thành công hơn, có thêm thời gian giao tiếp và đạt được nhiều hơn nếu chúng ta có thể nói chuyện với nhau theo cách này hơn là nếu đột nhiên tôi quyết định ngồi nghiêng, gác chân lên và tựa khuỷu tay. Cử chỉ đó một mình, mặc dù nó thể hiện sự thoải mái, nhưng không đưa chúng ta vào sự đồng bộ. Và mọi thứ mà tôi từng tìm hiểu, ngay cả khi tôi nói chuyện với những kẻ khủng bố, ngay cả khi nói chuyện với những kẻ khủng bố hoàn toàn ghét tôi, ghét nhiều thứ khác, nếu tôi có thể chỉ khiến họ quay lại đến mức chúng tôi nói chuyện với nhau theo cách cơ bản giống nhau và sử dụng những từ giống nhau, nếu họ nói, gia đình tôi, đừng nói vợ và con cái. Hãy dùng từ gia đình. Đừng sử dụng những thuật ngữ chuyên môn. Bạn biết đấy, nếu họ nói, vậy giá cả là gì? Đừng quay lại và nói, ồ, đây là điểm trên điều này. Đó không phải là điều họ đã hỏi. Đó là một cách tuyệt vời để chứng minh rằng bạn không đang lắng nghe. Và điều khác mà tôi luôn nhấn mạnh là trong nhiều năm, mọi người đã nói, hãy cố gắng giảm bớt mọi thứ mang tính cảm xúc để nó không gây cản trở. Đó không phải là cách mà chúng ta tiến hóa. Đó hoàn toàn không phải là cách mà chúng ta tiến hóa. Chúng ta đã tiến hóa để đối phó với cảm xúc vì cảm xúc giữ cho chúng ta sống sót. Khi amygdala của chúng ta cảm nhận một mối đe dọa, nó ở đó để đối phó với điều đó. Và bất cứ điều gì tiêu cực đều nổi lên nổi bật. Đó là một trong những điều đầu tiên tôi dạy. Nếu điều gì đó thực sự tiêu cực, nó sẽ nổi lên nổi bật. Chúng ta đánh giá về nó trước. Chúng ta xử lý điều đó trước. Và thường thì trong kinh doanh, điều chúng ta thấy là, bạn biết đấy, ai đó đã gặp khó khăn trong việc tìm địa điểm của bạn. Họ đã gặp khó khăn trong việc đỗ xe. Sau đó, họ phải gặp lễ tân của bạn, người đang nói chuyện điện thoại và mất khoảng bảy phút để thậm chí nói chào buổi sáng. Và khi họ làm điều đó, họ không có chút hăng hái nào. Sau đó, họ phải qua bảo vệ. Rồi họ phải đi lên thang máy chen chúc và cuối cùng mới tới văn phòng của bạn. Và bạn mong họ nhảy ngay vào cuộc họp mà không có tất cả những tiêu cực đã được tích lũy. Đó không phải là cách mà con người tiến hóa. Đó hoàn toàn không phải là cách mà loài người của chúng ta tiến hóa. Loài của chúng ta đã tiến hóa để giảm thiểu điều đó, để giảm thiểu điều đó bằng cách trước tiên xử lý nó. Đó là từ đâu mà nghệ thuật kể chuyện một phần đã ra đời, nơi chúng ta đến và nói, bạn biết đấy, tôi đã đuổi theo nó. Tôi đã bị tấn công, sau đó tôi đã phản công, bạn biết đấy. Và sau đó chúng ta đi qua toàn bộ câu chuyện, điều này có tầm huyền thoại và các khía cạnh huyền thoại như những nguyên mẫu. Và nếu bạn theo trường phái tâm lý Jung, một trong những lập luận mà tôi luôn sử dụng là điều này. Bao nhiêu bạn đã từng tham gia một cuộc tranh cãi và sau đó 30 phút sau, bạn nhớ tất cả những câu nói thông minh mà bạn nên nói? Tất cả chúng ta đều đã trải qua điều đó. Và đó là bởi vì não cảm xúc đánh cắp hoạt động thần kinh. Nếu bạn muốn điều tốt nhất từ mọi người, nếu bạn muốn điều tốt nhất từ một mối quan hệ, hãy giải tỏa điều đó. Hãy làm cho nó ra. Cho nó thời gian. Được rồi. Và vâng, bạn sẽ phải đầu tư thời gian đó và sau đó tiến về phía trước để bạn có thể xử lý các giao dịch, công việc kinh doanh và những thứ khác. Bạn đã tham chiếu một vài lần về các loại ngôn ngữ cơ thể khác nhau mà tôi đã thể hiện giúp bạn hiểu những gì tôi đang nghĩ và trải qua. Vâng. Tôi nghĩ hồi nãy, bạn đã đề cập đến glabella. Và điều này đưa tôi đến một điều tôi đã đọc trong công việc của bạn về việc nhăn mày. Vâng. Nhăn mày là gì? Khu vực nhỏ này giữa hai mắt của bạn được gọi là glabella. Và glabella rất tuyệt vì khoảng, ôi, tôi đã thấy ở trẻ sơ sinh từ khi mới ra đời khoảng ba hoặc bốn ngày. Nhưng rất sớm, chúng ta bắt đầu nhăn lại. Nói cách khác, chúng ta siết chặt lại khi có nghi ngờ hoặc khi không thích một điều gì đó hoặc không hiểu điều gì đó. Vì vậy, chúng ta nhăn glabella. Một số người gọi đó là nhăn mày vì chúng ta có lông mày đẹp hơn ngày nay, không rậm rạp như thời xưa. Chúng không chạm vào nhau như trước đây. Vì vậy, nhiều biểu hiện của việc, tôi không hiểu, chúng ta sử dụng với đôi mắt híp lại, glabella nhăn lại. Bạn biết đấy, đôi khi chúng ta sẽ chạm vào mặt hoặc gãi mặt của mình. Trẻ sơ sinh ở 47 giây, điều này tôi đã quan sát trực tiếp. Nếu bạn chiếu ánh sáng vào một em bé sơ sinh, nó sẽ nhăn cằm vì nó không thích điều đó. Và trong các bài thuyết trình của tôi, tôi có một hình ảnh tương ứng giữa một người đàn ông 47 tuổi và một em bé 47 giây tuổi, cả hai đều làm điều tương tự khi họ nghe những điều mà họ không thích. Vì vậy, chúng ta bắt đầu giao tiếp khá nhiều, thực sự, bằng khuôn mặt của mình. Còn việc chạm vào mí mắt thì sao? Vâng. Vì vậy, trong một thời gian dài, bao gồm cả trong một số bài viết của tôi, lý thuyết là nhiều người che mắt, chạm vào mắt khi họ nghe tin xấu. Bạn đã nói, ơi Joe, bạn có thể giúp tôi chuyển nhà cuối tuần này không? Oh, trời ơi, Steve. Đúng không? Bạn thấy nhiều điều đó. Và tôi đã bắt đầu nghĩ về điều đó khoảng năm hay sáu năm trước. Và vì vậy, tôi đã tham gia một số lớp học về giải phẫu, giải phẫu con người. Và bây giờ tôi khá chắc chắn rằng nhiều hành động chạm vào mặt, bao gồm cả việc chạm vào mắt và những thứ khác, liên quan đến sự chi phối của dây thần kinh sọ số năm và dây thần kinh sọ số bảy. Bây giờ, một số người xem của bạn có thể cảm thấy điều này thú vị, rằng dây thần kinh đó, nó đi đến trán của chúng ta và thực sự đi vào mí mắt của chúng ta và những thứ khác, và dây thần kinh số bảy, là dây thần kinh mặt, rất gần với não phần đó nơi nó được nhận. Vì vậy, tôi nghĩ, bạn biết đấy, tôi đã giả định, tôi đã viết cho Psychology Today, rằng nhiều lý do tại sao chúng ta chạm vào mặt của mình và tại sao chúng ta chạm vào mắt của mình, ôi không, là vì áp lực đó ngay lập tức đi đến não và giúp giảm căng thẳng. Và vì dây thần kinh rất ngắn, đúng không? Chúng ta có thể mát xa chân của mình và đạt được điều tương tự, nhưng nó thì xa xôi hơn.
    Tôi nghĩ rằng việc chạm vào mặt, bao gồm cả việc chạm vào mắt, là một hành động mà chúng ta thường làm để tự xoa dịu khi cảm thấy căng thẳng. Thú vị là, vào năm 1974, khi tôi còn là sinh viên đại học, tôi cảm thấy nhàm chán. Có một phòng thí nghiệm nơi bạn có thể quan sát trẻ em và nghiên cứu chúng khi đang chơi. Họ có một số trẻ em sinh ra đã mù, vì thế chúng chưa bao giờ nhìn thấy. Tôi thực sự ấn tượng. Lần đầu tiên tôi thấy một đứa trẻ mù chưa bao giờ nhìn thấy, khi nghe tin tức không tốt, nó lập tức che mắt lại, mặc dù chưa bao giờ thấy. Đó là lúc tôi nhận ra rằng, chúng ta có 2,4 triệu năm lịch sử. Điều này đã được lập trình sẵn trong DNA của chúng ta. Đây là một phần trong các mạch cổ xưa của chúng ta, như Dr. David Gibbons đã dạy tôi sau này. Nó liên quan đến cảm giác mà chúng ta có. Đó là lý do tại sao chúng ta chạm vào mặt nhiều như vậy. Thông thường, đó là một cảm xúc tiêu cực và là hình thức tự xoa dịu cho cảm xúc tiêu cực đó. Tôi nghĩ đó là một tóm tắt tốt.
    Nhưng cũng cần nhớ rằng chúng ta cũng chạm vào mặt khi đang thưởng thức một khoảnh khắc vui vẻ. Ví dụ như khi tôi đọc sách, tôi thấy mình lật trang rất nhanh. Tôi lật trang bằng tay trái, nhưng tôi tự xoa dịu mình bằng cách chạm vào mặt, kiểu như một tư thế suy tư. Phụ nữ thường chơi với tóc của mình. Suốt cả ngày, não của chúng ta yêu cầu chúng ta làm những điều để góp phần vào điều đó. Nhưng khi có điều gì căng thẳng xảy ra, chẳng hạn như trong các cuộc đàm phán, khi ai đó đưa ra một con số mà chúng ta không thích, chúng ta sẽ chuyển từ việc chạm vào mặt sang gãi mặt, vì não đang nói, “Này, hãy làm điều gì đó mạnh mẽ hơn để giữ tôi trong trạng thái cân bằng mà chúng ta gọi là homeostasis.”
    Vì vậy, để trả lời câu hỏi của bạn, đúng, nhưng điều đó cũng áp dụng khi chúng ta thực sự tận hưởng một khoảnh khắc. Còn về môi thì sao? Bạn đã nói một chút về việc môi bị bĩu và những thứ khác. Môi cung cấp những manh mối gì? Đối với tôi, môi giống như một seismograph. Môi là seismograph cảm xúc của cơ thể. Khi chúng ta thoải mái và tự tin, môi của chúng ta căng đầy máu, màu sắc thay đổi. Ngay khi nghe điều gì đó không thích, máu bắt đầu rời khỏi môi và chúng trở nên hẹp hơn, sau đó chúng ta bắt đầu siết chặt chúng lại. Bạn biết đấy, nếu ai đó nói điều gì đó tôi không thích, tôi có thể thì thầm, “Hừm,” phải không? Hoặc chúng ta bắt đầu cắn môi vì căng thẳng hoặc kéo nó, làm đủ loại thứ để tự xoa dịu. Nhưng môi thể hiện nhiều cảm xúc lo âu khi chúng ta bị căng thẳng. Chúng rất nhạy cảm, như cả hàm dưới. Chẳng hạn, nếu bạn nói điều gì đó mà tôi không đồng ý, tôi có thể chuyển hàm dưới của mình vì khi bạn chuyển hàm thì tạo áp lực lên khớp hàm (TMJ). Chỉ riêng việc đó đã nói với não rằng hãy chuyển sự chú ý đi nơi khác, đừng, đừng chiến đấu quá nhiều với điều đó. Vì vậy, chúng ta luôn làm điều gì đó về mặt thể chất để chống lại bất cứ điều gì mà não có thể đang trải qua.
    Nói cho tôi biết về chỗ lõm dưới xương ức. Chỗ lõm dưới xương ức có những tên gọi khác. Bạn có thể gọi nó là chỗ lõm nhỏ ở cổ, vùng nhỏ ngay dưới cổ họng của bạn. Đây là phần dễ bị tổn thương nhất trong cơ thể con người. Tất cả không khí, thức ăn, chất dinh dưỡng, máu, điện, oxy, mọi thứ đều đi qua đó. Một điều tôi nhận thấy là vào năm 1975 và 1976, khi tôi tìm kiếm tài liệu thì không có gì mô tả hiện tượng này, tôi nhận thấy rằng khi mọi người lo lắng, họ lập tức che cổ, chạm vào cổ. Trong tài liệu, bạn sẽ nghe thấy, “Ôi, cô ấy đã nắm chặt chuỗi ngọc trai,” đúng không? Việc xoa bóp đó có xu hướng được nam giới thực hiện mạnh mẽ hơn do testosterone. Phụ nữ có xu hướng chạm trực tiếp hơn vào chỗ lõm dưới xương ức. Và điều tôi phát hiện là, khi không có sự tự tin, khi có cảm giác bất an, sợ hãi, lo âu, hoặc những mối quan tâm, mọi người thường nói, “Ôi trời, bạn có thấy điều đó không?” và sau đó cảm thấy nó đã biến mất. Đó là một điều tệ. Tại sao lại chỉ tập trung vào vùng nhỏ này của cổ? Tại sao nam giới lại nắm cổ và xoa bóp cổ khi căng thẳng? Đó là điều tồi tệ nhất bạn có thể làm trong các cuộc đàm phán, dấu hiệu rõ ràng là bạn đang thể hiện sự yếu đuối. Ai đó tự tin thì không bao giờ chạm vào cổ. Bạn thậm chí không đến gần cổ. Bạn không thông gió, bởi vì bạn đang nói rằng điều đó đang tác động đến bạn, hành vi thông gió. Đợi đã, khi bạn nói thông gió, bạn đang nói về việc cung cấp không khí cho mình?
    Đúng vậy, nó có thể là- Hành vi thông gió là hành vi của sự yếu đuối, vì nhiệt độ cơ thể của bạn đã thay đổi trong một phần rất nhỏ của giây. Và điều bạn đang tiết lộ là một điều tiêu cực đang tác động đến bạn. Vì vậy, bạn không làm điều đó. Nhưng đây là hành vi, việc chạm vào cổ, che cổ, che chỗ lõm dưới xương ức. Còn có một hành vi khác. Bạn biết đấy, lúc trước chúng ta đã nói về việc chúng ta bị bao vây bởi những kẻ săn mồi. Một trong những hành vi mà chúng ta thực hiện đó là che miệng hoặc đứng yên khi nghe thấy tiếng ồn. Hành vi thứ ba là che cổ. Che cổ, bởi vì những loài mèo lớn luôn nhắm vào cổ. Và bộ não không có một tủ đầy cà vạt. Nó chỉ có khoảng bốn sự lựa chọn. Và bốn hành vi đó rất tinh vi. Đã được chứng minh qua thời gian rằng nếu chúng ta che miệng, che cổ, không di chuyển, chúng khá hiệu quả. Vì vậy chúng ta không cần phải chọn nhiều màu sắc.
    Và một điều khác mà thỉnh thoảng bạn sẽ thấy mọi người làm là ở Florida, qua thời gian, và chúng tôi thực sự đã thấy điều này vào tháng 11 sau cơn bão, mọi người đến xem nhà của họ và che đầu, hai tay ở trên đây. Ôi trời ơi. Tại sao chúng ta lại làm điều đó? Một lần nữa, là do những loài mèo lớn. Đây là những hành vi phản ứng nhanh. Đây là những phương pháp mà đã tồn tại và nói rằng, “Ô không,” đúng không? Bạn có thể nói, “Ờ, chúng ta không còn bị bao vây bởi chúng nữa.” Vâng, hãy đến Ấn Độ. Năm ngoái có 238 vụ tấn công. Nó đang ở trong DNA của chúng ta. Nó được thực hiện vì nhu cầu để giữ cho chúng ta sống sót. Vì vậy, chúng ta có những phản ứng như vậy.
    Dịch đoạn văn sau sang tiếng Việt:
    Nhưng tôi nhìn vào, chắc chắn là tôi nhìn vào môi và cổ như những nơi tốt để thu thập thông tin.
    Tôi vừa nghĩ về lý do tại sao, vâng, bạn giữ đầu của bạn.
    Nhưng bạn cũng giữ đầu của mình khi bạn thấy một cái gì đó bị đổ.
    Vì vậy, nếu bạn thấy một tòa nhà bị đổ trong một trận động đất, bạn ngay lập tức.
    Hôm nọ, có một chiếc xe cũ và nó đậu trên một con đường nghiêng và họ quên dựng phanh.
    Và tôi đang xem nó từ từ trượt.
    Và tôi nhận thấy bản thân mình, tôi dạy những thứ này với hai tay ở đây.
    Và không may, nó ở bên kia đường và tôi không thể đến đó nhanh đủ.
    Và nó không gây ra bất kỳ thiệt hại nào.
    Nhưng bạn nhận ra rằng những lối tắt này có mặt vì một lý do.
    Phần lớn công việc bạn thực hiện với tư cách là một đặc vụ FBI là một hình thức đàm phán.
    Và bạn dành rất nhiều thời gian dạy mọi người cách trở thành những người đàm phán giỏi.
    Bạn đã nhắc đến đàm phán một chút trước đó.
    Tôi là một người kinh doanh.
    Tôi thực hiện rất nhiều đàm phán, dù là với khách hàng, nhà cung cấp hay phỏng vấn.
    Bạn biết đấy, tôi đang phỏng vấn mọi người thường xuyên, điều mà tôi coi là một sự đàm phán.
    Làm thế nào tôi có thể cải thiện kỹ năng đàm phán của mình?
    Có những điều gì tôi nên suy nghĩ khi tôi bước vào cuộc đàm phán?
    Vâng, bạn biết đấy, họ đã cảnh báo tôi.
    Bạn hỏi những câu hỏi sâu sắc.
    Và bạn nói đúng.
    Trong FBI, ý tôi là, khi bạn cố gắng thuyết phục ai đó hãy nói cho chúng tôi sự thật và đặt mình vào tình huống nguy hiểm, đó chẳng khác gì một cuộc đàm phán.
    Bạn có thể nhìn nhận nó như một cuộc phỏng vấn.
    Nhưng như bạn đã nói, ngay cả một cuộc trò chuyện, bạn biết đấy, tôi nhìn nhận đàm phán theo cùng cách mà tôi nhìn nhận phỏng vấn, ở dạng đơn giản nhất, đó là giao tiếp hiệu quả với một mục đích.
    Vì vậy, bạn nói, vâng, điều đó rất đơn giản.
    Tôi chưa bao giờ nghe điều đó.
    Vâng, hãy nghĩ về nó.
    Vậy mục đích là gì?
    Được rồi, chúng ta sẽ đến đó trong một phút.
    Hoặc bạn có điều gì đó tôi cần hoặc muốn hoặc điều đó.
    Nhưng phải có giao tiếp và phải có sự hiểu biết về những gì tôi có nghĩa và những gì tôi dự định…và vân vân.
    Vì vậy, đối với tôi, đó là một lời nhắc nhở.
    Khi tôi mới vào FBI, một người già đã nói với tôi rằng, phỏng vấn không phải là về lời thú nhận.
    Và tôi nhìn ông ấy như, cái gì?
    Xin lỗi?
    Ý ông là không phải về lời thú nhận sao?
    Ông ấy nói, bạn sẽ có lời thú nhận.
    Phỏng vấn là về thời gian mặt đối mặt.
    Nếu bạn có thể khiến mọi người nói chuyện với bạn trong hai giờ, ba giờ, bốn giờ.
    Trong một trường hợp, tôi đã phỏng vấn một cá nhân trong 12 giờ.
    Họ sẽ nói với bạn mọi thứ bạn cần biết, nhưng bạn phải giữ họ ở lại trong phòng.
    Vì vậy, tôi luôn coi đàm phán đầu tiên là làm thế nào tôi giao tiếp với bạn theo cách mà bạn sẽ muốn nói chuyện với tôi?
    Bạn sẽ muốn nói chuyện với tôi trong bất kỳ khoảng thời gian nào cần thiết để đến mục đích đó, đó là giao dịch.
    Bây giờ, nếu tôi đang đánh giá bạn vì dịch vụ của bạn hoặc nếu tôi đang đàm phán về giá cả, tôi muốn nghe những gì bạn phải nói và tôi muốn nói và tôi muốn trình bày những gì tôi quan tâm đạt được và sau đó hòa giải hoặc làm việc xung quanh bất kỳ sự khác biệt hoặc vấn đề nào có thể xảy ra.
    Tôi nghĩ khi chúng ta nhìn nhận các cuộc đàm phán theo cách đó, chúng ta có thể nói, vâng, điều đó có nghĩa là tôi phải làm rất nhiều việc trước đó, đó là tôi đang giao tiếp với ai?
    Ai là người tôi sẽ đàm phán?
    Phong cách đàm phán là gì?
    Họ có điềm tĩnh không?
    Họ đến và ném đồ xuống?
    Ý tôi là, tôi đã tham gia vào những cuộc đàm phán mà bên đối tác vào và thực sự bước vào phòng, không nói một lời chào buổi sáng, chỉ ném đồ xuống và nói, tôi muốn nghe những con số.
    Được rồi, vậy thì làm thế nào chúng ta bắt đầu xử lý điều đó?
    Bởi vì một người vào và tỏ ra hung hăng và vân vân, bạn phải đối phó với.
    Bạn sẽ làm gì?
    Bạn có nổi lên sự hung hăng của họ không hay bạn cố gắng kéo họ xuống đến vị trí của bạn?
    Câu hỏi tuyệt vời.
    Điều tồi tệ nhất bạn có thể làm là nổi lên điều đó.
    Bạn bắt đầu thống trị họ bằng cách kiểm soát thời gian.
    Bất kỳ ai kiểm soát thời gian đều kiểm soát.
    Vì vậy, họ vào, họ ném đồ xuống.
    Vì vậy, thường thì, bạn biết đấy, chúng tôi sẽ bắt đầu bằng cách, vâng, chào buổi sáng bạn cũng vậy.
    Vâng, vâng, hãy đi thẳng vào vấn đề.
    Và sau đó cả đội mà tôi đang làm việc đều biết rằng chúng tôi sẽ làm chậm mọi thứ lại.
    Chúng tôi sẽ không làm việc ở tốc độ đó vì nếu bạn làm việc ở tốc độ đó, họ đang kiểm soát.
    Vì vậy, chúng tôi làm chậm mọi thứ lại.
    Và có một số chiến lược.
    Bạn có thể trở nên, đột nhiên, bạn có thể trở nên rất trực quan và nói, được rồi, chúng ta sẽ, bạn biết đấy, viết điều này xuống và chúng ta sẽ đặt nó ở đây.
    Chúng ta sẽ đặt, bạn biết đấy, và sau đó đây là sự khác biệt, bạn biết đấy, có rất nhiều chiến lược.
    Nhưng điều đầu tiên là chúng tôi phải khiến người đó hiểu rằng chúng tôi đàm phán, hy vọng, với tư cách bình đẳng.
    Nhưng nếu cái nhìn nhận luôn là người đó đang đàm phán như một kẻ bắt nạt hoặc luôn nắm quyền, bạn sẽ không bao giờ có sự công bằng.
    Bây giờ, tôi đã có rất nhiều khách hàng đã nói, êm, bạn biết đấy, tôi đã thử tất cả các chiến lược của bạn và, bạn biết đấy, người mà tôi đang giao dịch chỉ là, anh ta thô lỗ.
    Anh ta chỉ là một kẻ bắt nạt.
    Anh ta vào và hành động như, và vì vậy một trong những câu hỏi mà tôi luôn hỏi là, anh ta có phải là nguồn duy nhất không?
    Có phải anh ta hoặc cô ta là nguồn duy nhất, số một?
    Và số hai là bạn sẵn lòng chịu đựng người này bao lâu?
    Bởi vì chúng ta không chú ý đến điều đó.
    Anh ta gây ra cho bạn những cơn đau đầu.
    Bạn không ngủ ngon mỗi khi bạn đến đây.
    Tôi đang nghĩ đến một khách hàng cụ thể.
    Bạn trở về với một cái bụng lo lắng và, bạn biết đấy, bạn sẵn lòng chịu đựng điều đó bao lâu?
    Nếu bạn sẵn lòng chịu đựng điều đó, thì, bạn biết đấy, anh ta sẽ không thay đổi phong cách của mình.
    Vì vậy, bạn vào và chúng tôi thay đổi cách tiếp xúc của chúng tôi.
    Vì vậy, chúng tôi sẽ không để tất cả nhân viên của mình tham gia vào những loại tiêu cực đó.
    Chúng tôi gửi vào người đầu tiên và nói, nhìn, đây là những con số và chúng tôi làm việc với điều đó.
    Nhưng có những cách để xử lý những điều rất độc hại.
    Nhưng chúng tôi không cho phép họ thoát khỏi mọi thứ cũng như không nghĩ rằng họ đang nắm quyền.
    Và chúng tôi làm điều đó theo những cách tinh tế.
    Và chúng tôi có phần làm chệch hướng chương trình nghị sự của họ.
    Có thể là chương trình nghị sự của họ, dựa trên các cuộc họp trước đó, là vào và chỉ ném những thứ này vào chúng tôi một cách rất nhanh chóng. Sau đó, chúng tôi phải điều chỉnh theo điều đó. Vì vậy, cần phải có những chiến lược đã được chuẩn bị để đối phó với điều đó. Một trong những điều công việc của bạn khiến tôi suy nghĩ là tầm quan trọng của việc thực sự, như là, ghi lại mục tiêu của cuộc đàm phán của tôi trước khi tôi bước vào cuộc đàm phán. Nếu không, bạn có thể bị cuốn vào cảm xúc của nó và cảm giác khẩn trương trong khoảnh khắc. Vâng, bạn sẽ không phải là người đầu tiên tìm thấy mình trong một cuộc họp đàm phán. Và đột nhiên, bạn biết đấy, cảm giác như là, thực sự chúng tôi đang đàm phán về điều gì? Và đó là lý do tại sao tôi thích sự đơn giản của việc giao tiếp hiệu quả với một mục đích như một hình thức đàm phán. Bởi vì nhiều lần chúng tôi bước vào các cuộc đàm phán và giám đốc tài chính đang ở đó. Thỉnh thoảng chúng ta vào đó và, bạn biết đấy, trợ lý đầu tiên của bạn cũng luôn có mặt. Nhưng bạn cũng có luật sư trong văn phòng tham dự. Vai trò của họ là gì? Và vai trò của tôi là gì? Bạn biết đấy, điều đơn giản như, bạn sẽ làm gì? Nhìn thẳng về phía trước suốt thời gian luật sư của bạn nói? Hay bạn sẽ nhìn vào anh ấy? Chúng ta biết từ nghiên cứu rằng bằng cách nhìn vào người đang nói ở phía bạn, bạn thực sự làm tăng trọng lượng của những gì anh ấy đang nói. Ở những điểm nhấn mạnh nhất mà khi luật sư đó đưa ra, và bạn đã làm điều này trước đó, bạn muốn tạo dáng chóp tay vì chóp tay là cử chỉ mạnh mẽ nhất mà chúng ta có để truyền đạt sự tự tin. Tạo dáng chóp tay là một cử chỉ nhỏ. Angela Merkel, cựu thủ tướng Đức, đã làm điều này rất nhiều. Bạn thấy Musk cũng làm điều này rất nhiều. Bạn thấy Steve Jobs đã từng làm như vậy, có rất nhiều hình ảnh về Steve Jobs thực hiện điều đó. Nhưng, bạn biết đấy, bạn phải giữ điều đó cho thời điểm khi bạn muốn nhấn mạnh. Và điều tồi tệ nhất bạn có thể làm là chỉ ngồi đó yên lặng. Trên thực tế, chúng tôi có nghiên cứu và nó được gọi là thí nghiệm khuôn mặt bất động. Và điều tồi tệ nhất mà bạn có thể làm là ngồi trong một cuộc họp và giữ khuôn mặt bất động. Bạn bị coi là một mối đe dọa. Bạn bị coi là kém đáng tin cậy. Bạn bị coi là không quan trọng. Góc miệng của bạn uốn xuống. Tôi lăn mắt sang bên phải, Stephen. Đó là cách bạn bị cảm nhận. Và đó là điều đã xảy ra. Các thí nghiệm, được thực hiện đầu tiên trên trẻ em, phát hiện rằng nếu bạn lấy một đứa trẻ và thực hiện thí nghiệm đó, nếu bạn nhìn đi rồi nhìn lại và mỉm cười, đứa trẻ sẽ vui vẻ. Bạn có thể làm điều đó vài lần. Nhưng trong lần cuối cùng, bạn quay đi và giữ mặt rất yên. Các em bé trở nên không thể kiểm soát. Chúng có những cơn phát điên. Chúng thực sự gặp rắc rối vì điều đó. Vì vậy, người thực hiện thí nghiệm đã nói, vâng, nhưng độ tuổi nào cho chúng tôi? Họ quyết định thực hiện thí nghiệm với người lớn. Người lớn cũng làm điều tương tự. Nếu bạn và tôi đang nói chuyện và chúng ta trao đổi ánh mắt, điều tồi tệ nhất tôi có thể làm là ngồi yên. Bạn thấy, bạn cảm thấy khó chịu. Vâng. Và những gì bộ não cảm nhận là một mối đe dọa. Và bạn mất đi sự đáng tin cậy. Bởi vì bạn không thể đọc được suy nghĩ của người này theo cả hai cách. Tôi thà bạn không hài lòng còn hơn ít nhất tôi có thể gói gọn điều đó trong một chiếc hộp. Vâng, đó là một cách để nhìn nhận nó. Tôi không chắc rằng ai đó biết lý do chính xác cho điều đó. Nhưng những gì chúng ta hiểu là khuôn mặt bất động, mà nếu bạn tham gia một cuộc gọi ảo, bạn muốn gật đầu, bạn muốn nghiêng đầu, bạn muốn thực hiện những cử chỉ khác nhau. Nhưng điều tồi tệ nhất bạn có thể làm là giữ yên. Và sau đó trong các cuộc đàm phán, khi bạn đang nói với đội ngũ và nói rằng, hãy nhìn, khi chúng ta vào đó, bạn biết đấy, tôi không muốn ai chỉ ngồi đó. Tôi muốn có biểu cảm, và khi ai đó đang nói, bạn biết đấy, bạn đang nhìn họ theo cùng một cách mà phía bên kia sẽ làm. Nhưng bạn phải lên kế hoạch. Bây giờ, điều khác mà tôi thấy ở những người đàm phán, một điều mà tôi đã làm trong FBI là tôi luôn lên kế hoạch cho các cuộc phỏng vấn của mình một cách tỉ mỉ. Ai sẽ vào phòng trước? Ai sẽ nói gì? Tôi sẽ ngồi đâu? Ai được mời nước và khi nào? Bởi vì tôi cần kiểm soát. Ai sẽ nói gì? Đây là những điều mà mọi người không nghĩ đến. Nhưng ở mức độ với những người mà tôi giao tiếp, bạn phải có một lượng lợi thế nhất định. Bạn phải có một mức độ đòn bẩy tâm lý nhất định để nói, hãy nhìn, bạn có thể là nhà sản xuất lớn nhất thế giới của cái này, và tôi chỉ mới bắt đầu. Nhưng tôi không ở dưới đây. Vì vậy, tôi sẽ rất trân trọng nếu bạn bắt đầu đánh giá tôi, và tôi làm điều đó bằng cách thực hiện một số điều theo cách mà tôi bước vào. Bạn nắm quyền kiểm soát tình huống, và nó trông rất đẹp mắt, ô, thật đẹp phải không? Anh ấy đang mời tôi một thứ gì đó để uống. Hoặc trợ lý hoặc ai đó nói, bạn có muốn uống trà không? Bạn muốn nó như thế nào? Và các thứ khác. Và những gì chúng ta thực sự chứng kiến là sự chuyển hóa của việc bạn giờ đã trở thành người thống trị bằng cách trở thành hình mẫu điển hình, hình ảnh của người cha hoặc người mẹ. Bởi vì bạn đang đề nghị một cái gì đó. Bởi vì bạn đang đề nghị nó. Và bạn đang kiểm soát thức ăn và tâm trí. Bạn biết đấy, mọi người thường tự hỏi, vậy sao lại ở Stockholm, Thụy Điển vào những năm 70 mà hội chứng Stockholm lại phát triển nhanh chóng như vậy với những kẻ cướp ngân hàng, nơi họ có ảnh hưởng rất lớn đến các nạn nhân của họ đến mức trong vòng vài giờ, các nạn nhân đã đứng ra bảo vệ những kẻ cướp ngân hàng. Điều đó rất đơn giản. Họ đã trở thành hình mẫu người cha, và những con tin đã trở thành những đứa trẻ. Vì vậy, tôi thực sự không biết câu chuyện đó. Điều xảy ra là có một vụ cướp ngân hàng ở Stockholm, và những kẻ cướp ngân hàng đã vào, giữ những nạn nhân làm con tin. Cuối cùng, họ đã được giải cứu. Nhưng những gì họ phát hiện là trong vòng vài giờ, các nạn nhân đã đứng lên bảo vệ các tội phạm. Và nó đã được gọi là hội chứng Stockholm. Và điều mà nó cho chúng ta thấy là những kẻ cướp đã trở thành hình mẫu của bậc cha mẹ, và những con tin đã trở thành những đứa trẻ. Và trong một khoảnh khắc, họ đã trở nên phục tùng. Có phải điều đó cũng xảy ra trong các vụ bạo hành gia đình không? Vâng. Bạn đã nói đúng.
    Bạn đã làm rất tốt.
    Bạn là người đầu tiên nhận ra điều đó ngay lập tức.
    Và đó là lý do tại sao bạn thường thấy điều này trong các vụ lạm dụng gia đình.
    Và bạn nói, làm thế nào cô ấy có thể bị đánh đập như vậy?
    Cô ấy có thể bênh vực anh ta như thế nào, thường là trường hợp?
    Và bạn nhận ra, ôi trời ơi, chúng ta có như một hội chứng Stockholm, nơi mà anh ta là người chu cấp.
    Anh ta là người duy nhất làm việc hoặc cái này hoặc cái kia.
    Nhưng, bạn biết đấy, quay lại vấn đề thương thuyết, tôi nghĩ đây là một trong những điều mà tôi luôn nhấn mạnh rằng nếu bạn tham gia vào các cuộc thương thuyết, thì bạn phải được đối xử ít nhất như một người bình đẳng.
    Và ngay khi mọi người bắt đầu nhìn bạn với ánh mắt khinh thường, điều đó sẽ tạo ra một cuộc trò chuyện rất khó khăn.
    Vì vậy, khi bạn suy nghĩ về việc bước vào phòng và tất cả những người đang ngồi ở đó, nếu bạn bước vào phòng để phỏng vấn một kẻ khủng bố, bạn có cố gắng bước vào phòng trước tiên hay bạn cố gắng bước vào phòng sau cùng?
    Bạn có gửi đội của bạn vào trước không, sau đó bạn mới xuất hiện sau?
    Và bạn đang nghĩ gì về vị trí ngồi?
    Đúng. Vậy một trong những điều mà tôi luôn nhấn mạnh là tôi sẽ bước vào phòng trước.
    Vậy họ sẽ đã ở trong đó rồi?
    Không, không, không. Chúng tôi sẽ bước vào phòng.
    Ôi, với họ.
    Với họ.
    Sau đó, tôi sẽ chỉ bảo họ chờ một chút ở đó.
    Tôi sẽ mở cửa. Tôi sẽ nhìn vào và nói, ôi, chỉ muốn chắc chắn rằng phòng này an toàn và không có ai ở đây.
    Bạn biết đấy, tôi đã từng bước vào phòng khi có người bên trong.
    Điều đó bắt đầu thiết lập sức mạnh của tôi.
    Và sau đó tôi sẽ nói, tại sao bạn không ngồi ở đó?
    Bạn biết đấy, mọi người hỏi tôi, tại sao, bạn biết đấy, tại sao bạn lại tốt với những tên tội phạm này?
    Đầu tiên, tôi quay lại điều mà một người đã nói.
    Tôi muốn có thời gian gặp mặt trực tiếp.
    Tôi không quan tâm đến những gì cần làm để có được thời gian gặp mặt trực tiếp.
    Nhưng tôi cũng muốn nắm quyền.
    Và nếu việc tốt với anh ta và chỉ vào chiếc ghế nice đó đạt được điều đó, thì quá tốt cho tôi.
    Và sau đó tôi luôn cố gắng ngồi theo cách mà tôi ngồi cao hơn.
    Giờ, trong trường hợp của Ramsey, chúng tôi đã thực sự có phòng trước và chúng tôi thay đổi nội thất sao cho tôi luôn ngồi cao hơn khoảng một inch hoặc hai inch so với anh ta.
    Anh ta không bao giờ nhận ra.
    Ramsey là người có điếu thuốc lá run rẩy.
    Run rẩy.
    Cuối cùng, chúng tôi đã thực hiện 37 cuộc phỏng vấn.
    Và tất cả đều diễn ra trong các phòng khách sạn, chủ yếu ở khu vực Orlando.
    Chúng tôi đã vào trước và sắp xếp nội thất hoặc đưa nội thất vào.
    Nhưng tôi luôn ngồi cao hơn anh ta.
    Anh ta không bao giờ hiểu điều đó.
    Anh ta luôn ngồi trên ghế sofa, mà bằng cách nào đó đã bị cắt bớt một chút nên lúc nào cũng thấp hơn một chút.
    Và vì vậy anh ta luôn phải nhìn lên chúng tôi một cách nhẹ nhàng.
    Và sau đó chúng tôi kiểm soát thời gian khi nào chúng tôi sẽ nghỉ ngơi.
    Và tôi, bạn biết đấy, tôi luôn chú ý và tôi sẽ nói, bạn có muốn uống gì không?
    Tôi nói, ôi, chủ đề này thật tuyệt.
    Tại sao không nghỉ ngơi ngay bây giờ và bạn có thể uống gì đó, và sau đó chúng ta có thể tiếp tục.
    Điều mà anh ta không nhận ra là tôi đang thiết lập quyền kiểm soát đối với anh ta bằng cách định đoạt.
    Sẽ là không, bạn biết đấy, chắc chắn rằng thính giả của bạn có thể nói, ôi, điều đó thì mang tính thao túng.
    Vâng, nhưng trong giai đoạn giao dịch, không khác gì bạn nói với đội của mình, tôi cần nghỉ ngơi ngay bây giờ và đi đến phòng vệ sinh.
    Được thôi, nghỉ một lát.
    Tôi không nghĩ nhiều về điều đó.
    Nhưng theo thời gian, điều gì sẽ xảy ra là anh ta bắt đầu nhường lại nhiều sự mạnh mẽ mà anh ta muốn thể hiện.
    Anh ta sẽ rất muốn nắm quyền, nhưng tôi không cho phép điều đó.
    Và đôi khi anh ta sẽ nói, tôi có thể cần nghỉ để hút thuốc ngay bây giờ.
    Và tôi sẽ nói, đợi một chút, bởi vì điều bạn vừa nói thật sự thú vị.
    Và người bạn đồng hành của tôi, bà Terry Moody, tôi rất yêu mến bà.
    Bà là một đối tác tuyệt vời.
    Bà nhìn tôi như thể, thật à, bạn sẽ đẩy nó xa hơn 1 chút nữa?
    Nhưng điều đó đã hoạt động đến mức, nghĩa là đây là một gã có số điện thoại của luật sư bên mình mọi lúc, và anh ta không bao giờ dùng nó.
    Bạn đã đề cập đến độ cao của những chiếc ghế.
    Độ cao có ý nghĩa gì trong ngữ cảnh này?
    Bởi vì tôi cũng đang nghĩ về Zoom, và điều thú vị về Zoom bây giờ, chúng ta đã nói về điều này trước khi bắt đầu ghi âm, và thực tế là hầu hết các cuộc trò chuyện của chúng ta bây giờ diễn ra trên mạng, là chúng ta thường không nghĩ nhiều về độ cao.
    Và đôi khi tôi có cuộc gọi với một trong những đồng nghiệp hoặc đối tác của mình, và tôi thường hỏi họ trước khi khách hàng hoặc bất kỳ ai mà chúng tôi đang giao dịch tham gia cuộc gọi để điều chỉnh độ cao, bởi vì họ đang nhìn xuống ống kính, hoặc mắt họ đang nhìn lên ống kính, mà tôi nghĩ cũng là không tối ưu.
    Một điều tốt, có một thuật ngữ tốt, có nhiều điều để nói về độ cao, cũng như có một lợi ích về sắc đẹp, đúng không?
    Vì vậy, lợi ích về sắc đẹp, và bạn có thể tìm kiếm điều này, lợi ích về sắc đẹp, được nghiên cứu rất kỹ, về cơ bản nói rằng bạn sẽ kiếm được 8% mỗi năm trong phần còn lại của cuộc đời, chỉ cần bạn đẹp trai.
    Đó là lợi ích về sắc đẹp, bạn có thể lên mạng và xem tất cả các nghiên cứu và thống kê đi kèm với nó.
    Nhưng cũng có một lợi ích về chiều cao, và điều này là phổ quát.
    Nếu bạn nhìn vào người Mỹ cao 6 feet 2 inches, tức là cao hơn một chút so với tôi, chiếm khoảng 3% dân số, trừ khi bạn đến các công ty Fortune 500, và sau đó họ chiếm 39% tất cả các CEO cao 6’2″.
    Ôi, điều đó, bạn tôi, là một sự gia tăng đáng kể.
    Và bạn nói, những người cao hơn có thông minh hơn không?
    Không, không, điều đó liên quan đến lợi ích của việc cao.
    Có một lợi tức, vì vậy chúng ta thường thấy điều đó trên toàn thế giới.
    Từ “lợi tức,” đối với bất kỳ ai không biết, về cơ bản có nghĩa là một lợi ích hoặc một phần thưởng, có thể nghĩ đến như thế.
    Một lợi thế.
    Bạn có một lợi thế.
    Vì vậy, với Ramsey, lợi ích của việc bạn làm cho anh ta cao hơn một chút là gì?
    Bạn đang làm gì vậy, Tim?
    Bạn đang lấy đi sức mạnh của anh ta một chút, làm cho bạn trở nên mạnh mẽ hơn?
    Tôi phải làm như vậy bởi vì anh ta có tất cả quyền lực.
    Anh ta là người gián điệp.
    Anh ta có tất cả chứng cứ trong đầu hoặc trong tay mình, hoặc người Nga có nó.
    Người Nga sẽ không đưa nó cho chúng tôi.
    Họ là kẻ thù.
    Họ đã nói, thật không may, các bạn ạ, nhưng chúng tôi đã có tất cả bí mật của các bạn.
    Họ có quá nhiều bí mật đến nỗi họ đo lường bằng trọng lượng, không chỉ bằng số trang.
    Vấn đề khác mà tôi đang gặp phải là chỉ số IQ của anh ấy.
    Anh ấy có chỉ số IQ cao thứ hai mà quân đội từng ghi nhận kể từ Thế chiến II.
    Anh ấy có thể nói về bất kỳ chủ đề nào, từ vật lý lượng tử cho đến bất cứ điều gì khác.
    Khi bạn có trí thông minh vượt trội, trong trường hợp của anh ấy, điều đó là đúng, hoặc bạn đang đối phó với ai đó,
    hãy nói, là một bệnh nhân narcissist ác tính.
    Họ chiếm khoảng 2% dân số, nhưng khoảng 20% giám đốc điều hành.
    Vì vậy, bệnh nhân narcissist ác tính của bạn là người đánh giá quá cao bản thân và có xu hướng đánh giá thấp người khác,
    và trong trường hợp của tôi với anh ấy, anh ấy có những đặc điểm narcissist, mà tôi có thể đối phó,
    nhưng trí thông minh vượt trội của anh ấy thì khiến tôi sững sờ, và anh ấy có khả năng nhớ hoàn hảo.
    Vì vậy, theo một cách nào đó, điều đó thật đáng sợ, vì tất cả những gì anh ấy phải làm là tự vận chuyển đến một quốc gia khác,
    và anh ấy có thể bán tất cả những bí mật mà anh ấy đã ghi nhớ.
    Vì vậy, tôi phải đóng một vai trò nhất định, nhưng tôi cũng không thể để anh ấy nắm quyền điều tra,
    và không phải là điều mà đã đặt Anh, Đức, tất cả các nước Tây Âu vào nguy hiểm,
    cũng như Canada và Hoa Kỳ.
    Tôi không thể chịu nổi, chính phủ Hoa Kỳ không thể cho phép anh ấy tỏ ra hời hợt với những kiến thức mà anh ấy biết,
    đặc biệt là khi chúng tôi biết rằng anh ấy đã xâm phạm các mã lệnh hạt nhân.
    Bạn có phiền nếu tôi tạm ngưng cuộc trò chuyện này một chút không?
    Tôi muốn nói về nhà tài trợ của chương trình hôm nay, đó là Shopify.
    Tôi luôn tin rằng chi phí lớn nhất trong kinh doanh không phải là thất bại,
    mà là thời gian bạn lãng phí khi cố gắng đưa ra quyết định.
    Thời gian dành cho việc do dự, suy nghĩ quá nhiều, hoặc chờ đợi thời điểm đúng.
    Khi tôi bắt đầu công ty đầu tiên của mình ở tuổi 20, tôi không có kinh nghiệm và không có tiền.
    Điều tôi có là một ý tưởng và sẵn sàng hành động nhanh, và điều đó đã tạo ra sự khác biệt.
    Nếu bạn đang nghĩ đến việc bắt đầu kinh doanh riêng của mình,
    Shopify làm cho toàn bộ quy trình này dễ dàng hơn rất nhiều.
    Với hàng nghìn mẫu tùy chỉnh, bạn không cần kỹ năng lập trình hay thiết kế,
    bạn chỉ cần sẵn sàng bắt đầu.
    Shopify kết nối tất cả các kênh bán hàng của bạn từ trang web đến mạng xã hội,
    và nó cũng xử lý thanh toán, vận chuyển và thuế,
    để bạn có thể tập trung vào việc tiến về phía trước và phát triển doanh nghiệp của mình.
    Nếu bạn đã sẵn sàng bắt đầu, hãy truy cập shopify.com slash Bartlett,
    và đăng ký giai đoạn thử nghiệm 1 bảng Anh mỗi tháng.
    Đó là shopify.com slash Bartlett.
    Còn về tư thế thì sao?
    Bởi vì đó là một cách để làm cho bản thân cao hơn.
    Vâng.
    Có bất kỳ dấu hiệu nào trong tư thế của ai đó không,
    và tư thế của chúng ta có quan trọng đến mức nào trong việc tạo ra ấn tượng khác biệt?
    Vâng, chắc chắn rồi.
    Không chỉ là tư thế, mà còn là lãnh thổ.
    Vì vậy, tôi nhìn vào tư thế như, bạn biết không, khi chúng ta trông tự tin, vai thả lỏng, nhịp thở của chúng ta.
    Đối với tôi, tư thế bắt đầu từ bộ não, cách chúng ta bình tĩnh trong nhịp thở.
    Tôi lại ở Valencia tại sự kiện này, và một phụ nữ đến và nói với tôi,
    bạn sắp ra sân khấu, làm sao bạn không thấy lo lắng?
    Và tôi đã nói, thực ra, tôi đang lo lắng.
    Tôi chỉ đang giấu nó đi.
    Tôi hành động như thể tôi đang kiểm soát, nhưng tôi đã học cách làm điều đó,
    bởi vì bạn không muốn trông giống như một đặc vụ FBI lo lắng.
    Tin tôi đi.
    Bạn muốn trông mát mẻ, bình tĩnh và tự tin.
    Trong các cuộc đàm phán, bạn không muốn trông cần thiết.
    Bạn không muốn trông tuyệt vọng.
    Và cùng một lúc, bạn không muốn xuất hiện như bạn là người thờ ơ.
    Và đôi khi thái độ, tư thế, những cử chỉ, tổng thể của nó có rất nhiều ý nghĩa.
    Bây giờ, bạn phải nhớ rằng, nhiều nhà kinh doanh thành công mà tôi gặp đều thực sự thuộc quang phổ, phải không?
    Vì vậy, quang phổ tự kỷ.
    Và họ không tạo nhiều liên hệ mắt.
    Họ có thể có những hành vi không đều.
    Tôi có một người mà tôi làm việc cùng có hội chứng Asperger, và đôi khi anh ấy có những cử động đột ngột.
    Vì vậy, có rất nhiều sự khó chịu mà tôi thấy từ người khác trong việc đọc anh ấy.
    Tôi không có vấn đề gì.
    Tôi chỉ thấy rằng, được rồi, đây là những hành vi bình thường của anh ấy, và chúng tôi thích nghi.
    Nhưng bạn có thể tìm ra rất nhiều điều về một người.
    Và khi bạn đã đầu tư vào những điều, bạn đang thực hiện sự thận trọng của mình, và bạn đang nói chuyện với mọi người.
    Vâng, bạn có thể nhìn vào con số cả ngày.
    Nhưng bạn cũng đang nhìn vào ngôn ngữ cơ thể và nói, bạn biết không, họ có đang truyền đạt sự tự tin hay không, hoặc họ đang truyền đạt nhu cầu, mong mỏi, hoặc bất kỳ sự yếu đuối nào?
    Tôi vừa đang suy ngẫm về một vài cuộc phỏng vấn mà tôi đã tham gia gần đây.
    Chúng tôi đã phỏng vấn cho một vai trò rất, rất cao cấp.
    Và có hai ứng viên ở giai đoạn cuối.
    Và tôi chỉ đang suy ngẫm, như bạn đã nói, một trong những ứng viên ở giai đoạn cuối lại rất bình tĩnh và ngồi lùi lại trong ghế của họ.
    Còn ứng viên kia thì lại rất ngả về phía trước.
    Và khi suy ngẫm lại, ứng viên thứ hai có lẽ đã khao khát công việc này nhiều hơn.
    Nhưng ứng viên đầu tiên thì có lẽ có kinh nghiệm hơn, tự tin hơn, và có giá trị bản thân cao hơn.
    Và khả năng của họ để rất thoải mái trong môi trường đó, và gần như chiếm giữ ghế trong phòng hội đồng của tôi, thực sự cho tôi cảm giác muốn họ hơn.
    Bởi vì họ đang ra tín hiệu cho tôi rằng họ có nhiều lựa chọn.
    Họ không bị đe dọa.
    Họ không sợ hãi.
    Họ không lo lắng về cơ hội này.
    Bạn biết đấy, đó là một quan sát thú vị, Stephen.
    Và thật tốt khi bạn nhận thấy sự khác biệt đó.
    Một trong những điều mà tôi tìm kiếm là, vai trò của họ sẽ là gì?
    Tôi không quan tâm rằng ai đó cảm thấy lo lắng.
    Chính bản thân tôi, ngay từ đầu, xuất thân từ một gia đình khiêm tốn, cũng thường cảm thấy lo lắng.
    Tôi có xu hướng tập trung vào những điều mà phần lớn tổ chức không đưa vào kế hoạch để tìm kiếm.
    Một trong số đó là giải quyết vấn đề.
    Hãy cho tôi một danh sách về những vấn đề mà bạn đã giải quyết.
    Hầu hết mọi người, khi thuê, đều không bao giờ hỏi câu hỏi đó.
    Họ nói, bạn biết đấy, tôi có thể sử dụng Excel.
    Tôi biết Microsoft.
    Thật tuyệt.
    Xin hãy nói cho tôi biết những vấn đề bạn đã giải quyết ở công việc trước của mình.
    Và, bạn biết đấy, bạn đã làm điều đó hiệu quả như thế nào? Làm thế nào bạn biết họ đã giải quyết được vấn đề hay họ thuộc về một nhóm mà người khác đã giải quyết vấn đề đó? Bởi vì một trong những điều mà tôi đã nói, bạn biết đấy, hãy tìm kiếm, đó là số lượng trường hợp mà họ kể và cách mà họ mô tả nó. Bởi vì điều thú vị là, người giải quyết vấn đề đi vào chi tiết và cảm thấy cảm xúc của người đang kể câu chuyện. Họ chỉ chuyển tải nó, chỉ chuyển tải nó, nhưng không biết cảm xúc đi kèm với việc giải quyết nó.
    Vậy nên khi bạn, khi đứa trẻ nhỏ đó cuối cùng tìm ra cách, bạn biết đấy, bạn đưa cho chúng một cái khóa khó, mà phải để mọi thứ đi theo cách này hay cách kia và sau đó cái khóa nhỏ đó mở ra. Khi chúng quay lại và nói với bạn điều đó, bạn thấy hành vi không bị trọng lực cản trở, sự nâng cao của lông mày, ánh mắt sáng và nói, “Tôi đã giải quyết được.” “Tôi đã giải quyết được.” “Tôi đã vào trong đó.” Vâng. Vấn đề, người chỉ đang kể cho bạn câu chuyện này thì không biết cảm xúc đi kèm với nó.
    Một điều nữa mà bạn biết đấy, mà tôi tìm kiếm, và có thể họ sẽ lo lắng hoặc gì đó, đó là, họ quan sát tốt đến mức nào? Đây là câu hỏi duy nhất đã cứu sống rất nhiều công ty. Khi tôi nói, hãy chắc chắn rằng từ bây giờ bạn hỏi, “Bạn quan sát tốt đến mức nào?” Họ sẽ nói, “À, quan sát cái gì?” “Mọi thứ quan trọng.” “Con người, sự kiện, cơ hội.” Đúng. Nếu bạn đến với tôi và nói, “À, tôi có thể lập trình cái này.” Được rồi. Thật tuyệt. Nhưng trong vị trí mà bạn sẽ ở, bạn sẽ quản lý con người. Bạn quan sát con người tốt đến mức nào? Điều tuyệt vời về những công ty tìm kiếm điều này là, được rồi. Khi bạn đi và bạn xem công ty con của bạn. Bạn đang tìm kiếm cái gì? Bạn đang quan sát cái gì? Vâng, khi tôi nhìn vào sổ sách, còn thái độ của mọi người thì sao? Mọi người có hài lòng không? Họ có hạnh phúc không? Hay họ đều trông như thể bị táo bón? Ý tôi là, tôi đã vào những công ty mà ngay lúc tôi bước vào, tôi đã nói, “Ôi, trời, bạn có vấn đề quản lý ở đây.” Và gã đó hỏi, “Ai đã nói với bạn?” Tôi nói, “À, bạn biết đấy, tôi sẽ phải ngu ngốc lắm mới không nhận ra rằng tất cả những người này đang đi qua với cái đầu cúi thấp, không ai giao tiếp bằng mắt. Không ai, họ đi qua nhau trong tàu điện ngầm mà không nói chuyện với nhau. Bạn có vấn đề quản lý ở đây.” Và, bạn biết đấy, như thể họ đã tuyển dụng cho kỹ năng này. Nhưng liệu đó có thật sự là những gì bạn cần khi bạn thực sự cần một người quan sát tuyệt vời?
    Còn sự tự tin thì sao? Đây có phải là thứ mà bạn sinh ra đã có? Hay bạn nghĩ rằng sự tự tin có thể được rèn luyện vào một người nào đó không? Tôi nghĩ sự tự tin hoàn toàn có thể được rèn luyện. Xuất phát từ Cuba, nơi mà chúng tôi đã mất mọi thứ, đến đây với tư cách là một người tị nạn, không có gì cả. Và rồi đột nhiên, FBI đã yêu cầu tôi trở thành, ý tôi là, tôi không nộp đơn xin FBI. FBI thực sự đã đến và yêu cầu tôi nộp đơn. Và rồi đột nhiên tôi nói, “Các bạn có nghiêm túc không? Hệt như, bạn biết đấy, tôi 23 tuổi. Bạn biết đấy, tôi vừa mới học cạo râu và không có chút tự tin nào.” Và họ dạy bạn cách tự tin. Bạn có thể dạy sự tự tin. Và điều tôi nói với mọi người là cách dễ nhất để học sự tự tin là hãy tự tin về một điều gì đó. Tôi không quan tâm nếu bạn xếp giấy tốt hơn bất kỳ ai khác. Tôi không quan tâm nếu đó là cách bạn dọn giường, bất kỳ điều nhỏ nhặt nào. Hãy cho tôi thấy rằng bạn tự tin. Hãy cho tôi thấy rằng điều đó tốt hơn bất kỳ ai khác. Và ngay khi bạn có thể tự tin về một điều gì đó, bây giờ bạn có thể tự tin về hai điều. Sau đó bạn có thể tự tin về ba điều. Những điều vô lý mà tôi thường thấy mọi người nói, “Chà, chỉ cần vào đây và hãy tự tin.” Tôi nghĩ điều đó thật vô lý. Tôi nghĩ bạn phải học và cơ thể bạn phải học cách tự tin về một điều gì đó. Bạn biết đấy, với tôi, tôi tự tin khi chơi bóng đá, được không? Tôi nhanh nhẹn. Tôi có thể làm một số điều nhất định. Tôi tự tin về điều đó. Tôi biết rằng trong bóng rổ, tôi có thể ném một quả ba điểm, được không? Tự tin về điều đó, nhưng không tự tin về nhiều điều khác. Để ở trong một phòng đầy các giám đốc điều hành, tôi nhớ khi tôi không có tự tin. Vậy làm cách nào để tôi làm việc về điều đó? Bạn không thể, trừ khi bạn là một diễn viên hàng đầu thế giới, bạn không thể bước vào một nơi và đột nhiên giả bộ tự tin. Tôi nói với mọi người, hãy học cách tự tin về một điều. Và đôi khi nó là kiến thức. Tôi luôn, không có cuộc họp nào mà tôi không tìm hiểu kỹ về chủ đề đó. Nếu bạn muốn đạt được sự tự tin, hãy biết tất cả những gì bạn có thể về một chủ đề cụ thể. Và điều đó mang lại cho bạn rất nhiều sự tự tin vĩ đại. Và tôi đã thấy những người trẻ mới ra trường ngồi ở đó, bạn biết đấy, khuỷu tay họ khép lại, họ trông gần như nhút nhát, họ lo lắng, họ nhìn xung quanh liên tục, họ không biết nhìn đâu. Và, bạn biết đấy, và tôi, và tôi nói với họ, hãy biết chủ đề của bạn, hãy biết chủ đề của bạn. Bởi vì ngay khi họ bắt đầu nói về điều đó, họ bắt đầu nở rộ và, và, và thay đổi.
    Vì vậy, năng lực trong một lĩnh vực hoặc vertical cụ thể tạo ra sự tự tin, mà sau đó lan tỏa. Đúng. Và, và đó là điều quân đội, trong, bạn biết đấy, quân đội, giống như quân đội Anh, đó là điều mà họ, họ đưa những người trẻ, 17, 18, 19 tuổi. Và họ nói, “Bạn biết đấy, chúng tôi sẽ biến bạn thành một chiến binh.” Ừ, làm thế nào? Bằng cách chạy, bằng cách khiến bạn trèo lên sợi dây đó, bằng cách làm bất kỳ điều gì mà bạn có thể ra ngoài và cảm thấy tự tin. Bạn đã nói trong một video mà tôi đã xem trên Wired về nhiều cách khác nhau mà chúng ta có thể thể hiện và trở nên tự tin hơn và thể hiện sự tự tin. Một trong số đó thực sự là nhìn vào những người lãnh đạo trong cuộc sống của bạn, những người có sự tự tin và cố gắng sao chép một số hành vi tự tin đó. Đúng. Cái khác là về giọng nói của bạn. Sử dụng giọng nói sâu hơn và đừng lên cao ở cuối câu như thể đó là một câu hỏi. Đúng.
    Xin hãy để tôi nói về những điều đó.
    Đừng cố gắng tái tạo những gì đã thành công.
    Một người tự tin không cần phải nói nhanh và cũng không nói lớn.
    Đúng vậy.
    Tôi còn nhớ lần bắt giữ đầu tiên mà tôi thực hiện và tôi đã nói, dừng lại, đây là FBI.
    Giọng của tôi lúc đó, không ai chịu dừng lại.
    Không ai, không ai cả.
    Và những người đi cùng tôi nói, Joe, bạn cần phải làm việc với giọng nói của mình.
    Bạn cần có một giọng nói lệnh.
    À, giọng lệnh thì phải đi xuống.
    Như thế nào?
    Như, dừng lại ngay đó.
    Tôi sẽ cho bạn một ví dụ.
    Bạn nói với hầu hết các giám đốc điều hành và bạn nói, không, điều đó không thể chấp nhận được.
    Nó quá cao.
    “Không” luôn được nói xuống.
    Không.
    Chúng ta sẽ… không.
    Nghe như một câu hoàn chỉnh.
    Bạn có cho họ thực hành nói “không” không?
    Tất nhiên rồi.
    Tôi đã làm điều đó trong suốt 10 năm.
    Hàng năm vào tháng 2, người mà Brian Hall, người đã khuyến khích tôi viết một trong những cuốn sách của mình mang tên “Louder Than Words”, đã mời tôi đến Harvard.
    Và tôi sẽ không bao giờ quên, tôi có một lớp học hoàn chỉnh tại Harvard.
    Tôi nghĩ có 76 sinh viên.
    Và tôi đã cho tất cả họ nói từ “không, không, không”
    Giọng nói hạ thấp xuống và thấp hơn.
    Anh ấy đã bước ra ngoài để nhận cuộc gọi.
    Khi anh ấy quay lại, anh ấy nghĩ tôi đang có một giáo phái nào đó.
    Tôi nói, không, Brian.
    Tôi chỉ đang dạy họ cách nói đúng, vì đây sẽ là những giám đốc điều hành trong tương lai
    chứ không phải là nói “không, không, không, không, không”.
    Bây giờ, điều đó nghe như một câu hoàn chỉnh.
    Không.
    Không.
    Điều đó không phải cách mà nó sẽ vận hành.
    Và luôn luôn phải hạ xuống.
    Vì vậy, chúng tôi làm việc với các từ.
    Quan trọng hơn, chúng tôi làm việc với các cử chỉ, bạn chiếm bao nhiêu không gian, vì không gian mà bạn chiếm, nếu bạn ở đây.
    Giống như một thứ gì đó bị co lại và chặt chẽ.
    Bạn bị co lại.
    Bạn muốn, bạn không muốn quá mức.
    Bạn không muốn trông như một anh hề, nhưng bạn, bạn, bạn muốn có không gian mà bạn
    được quyền sở hữu.
    Và sau đó tôi nghĩ rất quan trọng để học cách nói theo nhịp điệu.
    Khi bạn nói có nhịp điệu, và tôi làm điều đó, mọi người sẽ lắng nghe.
    Họ có thời gian để xử lý những gì bạn đang nói, nhưng họ cũng có thể gắn kết cảm xúc đi kèm với nó.
    Ai đã nói theo nhịp điệu?
    Churchill.
    Martin Luther King.
    Tôi có một giấc mơ rằng một ngày nào đó quốc gia này sẽ trỗi dậy và sống đúng với ý nghĩa thực sự của tín điều của nó.
    Chúng ta cho những sự thật này là hiển nhiên rằng tất cả mọi người được sinh ra bình đẳng.
    Mạnh mẽ.
    Bạn có thể tưởng tượng nếu ông ấy đứng ở đó và nói, tôi có một giấc mơ mà một ngày nào đó, nó giống như
    ai sẽ lắng nghe điều đó?
    Nhưng ông ấy là một người thuyết giáo, và ông ấy biết cách điều khiển một khán giả.
    Và khi Churchill nói, chúng ta sẽ chiến đấu với chúng trên không, chúng ta sẽ chiến đấu với chúng trên bãi biển,
    chúng ta sẽ chiến đấu trên các sân hạ cánh, chúng ta sẽ chiến đấu ở các cánh đồng và trên các con phố, chúng ta sẽ
    chiến đấu trên các ngọn đồi, chúng ta sẽ không bao giờ đầu hàng.
    Nhịp điệu không chỉ quyến rũ, mà còn mạnh mẽ.
    Và rất nhiều giám đốc điều hành không biết cách sử dụng điều đó.
    Họ chỉ, tôi đã đến các bài thuyết trình nơi mọi người chỉ buông lỏng.
    Họ thậm chí không nghe những gì đang được nói.
    Và rồi ai đó bắt đầu nói với họ bằng nhịp điệu và nói, đây là đề nghị của chúng tôi.
    Nó không phải là cuối cùng.
    Nhưng trong thời điểm này, nó là đề nghị tốt nhất của chúng tôi.
    Bây giờ, bạn đang chú ý.
    Bạn đang chú ý, không chỉ đến những gì tôi đã nói, mà còn là cảm xúc đứng sau nó.
    Thật tốt hơn nhiều để nói, ồ, đây không phải là đề nghị cuối cùng của chúng tôi, nhưng, bạn biết đấy.
    Có một quyền lực thực sự khi bạn làm mọi việc chậm lại một chút và tạo ra những khoảng trống.
    Điều này quay trở lại những gì tôi đã nói, ai kiểm soát thời gian, kiểm soát.
    Bạn đang thiết lập quyền kiểm soát trong sân khấu của các cuộc đàm phán.
    Họ không dạy điều đó.
    Cử chỉ tay của bạn cũng vậy.
    Bạn có những cử chỉ tay rất phù hợp với những gì bạn đang nói.
    Ngay cả khi bạn đang nói chuyện với tôi, bạn vừa hỏi, ai điều khiển thời gian?
    Kiểm soát.
    Và vì vậy tôi tự hỏi làm thế nào để cử chỉ tay của chúng ta.
    Và các ngón tay của tôi đang dạng ra, thiết lập mức độ chúng tôi quan tâm đến điều gì đó.
    Khi chúng tôi lo lắng, các ngón tay của chúng tôi lại gần nhau.
    Và khi chúng tôi lo sợ nhiều, các ngón tay cái lại bị gập vào.
    Tôi đã thấy người ở vị thế thương lượng tiết lộ rất nhiều thông tin bởi vì đột nhiên họ lại
    gập ngón tay cái lại.
    Tôi nói, được rồi, họ đang sợ.
    Bởi vì chó gập tai xuống.
    Con người gập tay xuống, bất kể bạn có tối màu đến đâu, lòng bàn tay
    rất dễ thấy.
    Điều đó tiến hóa cùng chúng ta vì chúng rất biểu cảm.
    Vì vậy ngay cả trong ánh sáng yếu, chúng ta có thể sử dụng tay để giao tiếp.
    Càng tự tin, các ngón tay của chúng ta càng xa nhau.
    Tôi quan tâm.
    Hãy tưởng tượng nếu tôi nói, tôi quan tâm đến bạn so với tôi quan tâm đến bạn.
    Đó là một sự khác biệt lớn.
    Vì vậy trong ví dụ đầu tiên, bạn như kiểu có các ngón tay gần nhau.
    Trong ví dụ thứ hai, bạn đã dạng chúng ra.
    Điều này, tôi quan tâm đến điều này.
    Vì vậy, chúng gia tăng thông điệp.
    Và bộ não con người cũng đã tiến hóa để tìm kiếm bàn tay.
    Bởi vì tay, số một, có thể được sử dụng như một vũ khí.
    Nhưng số hai, chúng cũng tượng trưng cho những cảm xúc mà chúng ta cảm nhận.
    Và giao tiếp bằng mắt.
    Có,
    Rất nhiều điều đã được nói về giao tiếp bằng mắt và tầm quan trọng của nó.
    Tôi nên hiểu gì về sự tự tin trong giao tiếp bằng mắt?
    Giao tiếp bằng mắt theo một cách nào đó là, tôi có thể nói rằng chúng ta có thể dành khoảng 40 phút cho nó vì, và như một giáo viên, tôi có thể nói với bạn vì bạn muốn có giao tiếp bằng mắt tốt.
    Chẳng hạn, nếu bạn đang đối diện với một người phụ nữ, bạn không muốn nó đi, bạn biết đấy, giao tiếp bằng mắt bình thường là ở đây.
    Bạn không muốn nó đi xuống đây, đến ngực.
    Được chứ.
    Vì vậy bạn muốn giữ nó ở trên khuôn mặt, đúng không?
    Vì vậy bạn muốn giữ nó trên khuôn mặt, nhưng bạn cũng không muốn gây áp lực trừ khi bạn muốn gây áp lực.
    Vì vậy bạn phải áp dụng các điều như hành vi nhìn.
    Bạn phải áp dụng các điều như nhìn đi chỗ khác.
    Bây giờ, cả bạn và tôi đều nhìn đi chỗ khác khi đang suy nghĩ về các ví dụ và những điều khác nhau.
    Bạn có thể sử dụng giao tiếp bằng mắt để nhấn mạnh.
    Xem xem chúng ta đã sử dụng giao tiếp bằng mắt hoặc đôi mắt bao nhiêu lần để truyền đạt ý kiến.
    Có thể với người phối ngẫu của bạn, bạn đã nói, bạn nghĩ gì?
    Và ngay lập tức họ sẽ nhìn, anh ấy hoặc cô ấy có thể nhìn vào bạn đời của bạn, không phải cụ thể của bạn, mà là một người mà bạn sống cùng, và họ nói, không.
    Vì vậy, bằng đôi mắt của chúng ta, chúng ta thường đưa ra ý kiến của mình.
    Vì vậy trong các cuộc đàm phán, đó là một lĩnh vực quan trọng.
    Một trong những điều tôi thường suy nghĩ rất nhiều là việc xây dựng mối quan hệ một cách nhanh chóng. Bạn biết đấy, tôi là người thực hiện podcast này khá thường xuyên, đôi khi tôi nghĩ quá nhiều, đặc biệt là khi gặp những người như bạn, vì tôi nghĩ, ôi Chúa ơi, người này sẽ đọc mọi thứ về tôi và da-da-da-da-da-da. Vâng. Thỉnh thoảng tôi cảm thấy mình suy nghĩ quá nhiều khi gặp ai đó như bạn, một chuyên gia về ngôn ngữ cơ thể, người giỏi về khoa học hành vi. Và tôi muốn nói về việc xây dựng mối quan hệ. Chúng tôi thực sự đã quay video cuộc tương tác của chúng tôi ngày hôm nay. Khi tôi bước vào và tôi có video ở đây, hãy để tôi xem điều này, xem nếu có gì, chúng tôi sẽ đưa nó lên màn hình cho bất kỳ ai đang xem, nhưng tôi chỉ muốn bạn phân tích cuộc tương tác của tôi với bạn khi tôi gặp bạn và cho tôi biết nó có thể tốt hơn như thế nào. Được rồi. Xin chào, Joe. Rất vui được gặp bạn. Vậy trước tiên, bạn đã chờ tôi với tay chống hông, điều đó có nghĩa là tôi đang nắm quyền. Tôi là người lớn. Và tay của bạn đang ở đây. Vâng, tôi hiểu. Được rồi. Nhưng, bạn biết đấy. Tôi thực sự nhớ điều đó. Tôi nhớ đã nghĩ, hãy để tay khỏi hông của bạn. Không, không, không. Nhưng, nhưng, nhưng không sao cả. Đây là lĩnh vực của bạn. Tôi kỳ vọng điều này từ bạn trong lĩnh vực của bạn. Nhưng một trong những điều bạn đã làm ngay lập tức là bạn đã đi vòng quanh bàn và tiến lên bắt tay tôi. Đúng không? Vậy một trong những điều tôi nói là mức độ quan trọng của con người đối với chúng ta được xác định bởi tốc độ chúng ta hành động. Được rồi. Vậy việc bạn thực sự đã đi từ đó tới đây và bạn làm ngay lập tức, cho thấy rằng bạn quan tâm. Ngay cả khi mới 11 tháng, một em bé sẽ nhận ra cá nhân hoặc thậm chí là các vật vô tri vô giác mà quan tâm chỉ dựa trên cách nhanh chóng mà họ di chuyển. Hướng về họ? Hướng về họ. Được rồi. Để làm điều gì đó cho họ. Được rồi. Đó được gọi là hành động pro-social. Và trẻ em chỉ mới 11 tháng đã nhận ra điều đó. Vì vậy, đây là một điều mà tôi không ngạc nhiên bởi vì bạn đã thành công. Bạn biết đấy, thành công, đối với tôi, được đo bằng mức độ mà mọi người hòa hợp với nhau. Cảm ơn bạn vì công việc. Tôi trân trọng bạn. Cảm ơn. Không có vấn đề gì. Bạn rất rất thông minh. Bạn trông như một người, ừ, đã làm việc trong FBI. Tôi, ừ, đó là đồng phục FBI. Đây là… À, tôi sẽ có mic không hay chỉ cái này? Chỉ cái đó thôi. Chỉ cái đó thôi. Tuyệt vời. Được rồi. Bạn đã nói điều gì đó đáng yêu về cách tôi ăn mặc, mà tôi, ừ, rất cảm kích. Đây luôn là một lời nhắc nhở tốt cho tôi về việc tôi trông già hơn bây giờ. Và, và, ghi chú duy nhất mà tôi muốn thêm là tôi sẽ đứng lâu một chút và sau đó đảm bảo rằng, bạn biết đấy, khi tôi ngồi, thì bạn ngồi cùng lúc. Được rồi. Vì vậy, mời bạn ngồi và ngồi cùng bạn. Cùng một lúc, hơn là để tôi ngồi trước, nếu bạn có thể thấy trong trường hợp đó, tôi thực sự vẫn đang đứng trên bạn trong khi bạn đã ngồi. Điều đó trong đàm phán sẽ là, như chúng tôi nói, không được phép. Điều đó có nghĩa là gì? Nó là. Đó là một điều cấm kỵ. Đó là một từ lớn. Đó là một từ lớn đối với Steve. Đừng làm như vậy. Thế còn việc ghi chú thì sao? Đây là điều mà tôi đã bắt đầu làm trong sáu tháng qua khi tôi có mặt trong các cuộc họp tại các công ty của tôi ở Anh, ừm, là tôi có một chiếc iPad bây giờ. Và khi ai đó đang nói, điều đó thực sự giúp tôi vì cách mà tôi suy nghĩ, xử lý và học hỏi. Và nó cũng giúp tôi không bị lắng nghe để nói. Nếu họ nói điều gì đó và tôi ngay lập tức có một ý tưởng mà tôi lo lắng sẽ bị mất, thay vì, bạn biết đấy, hành vi kiểu đó, tôi có thể viết xuống điều mà tôi sắp nói. Và điều đó cho tôi thêm thời gian để lắng nghe. Nhưng một trong những điều tôi nhận thấy trong công việc của bạn là bạn nói rằng trong việc thể hiện rằng bạn quan tâm, việc ghi chú là một cách cực kỳ hiệu quả để làm điều đó. Vậy, điều tôi muốn nói với bạn là điều tôi sẽ nói với nhà trị liệu. Một trong những sai lầm lớn nhất mà các nhà trị liệu bắt đầu mắc phải là họ ngồi đó và bởi vì nhiều người trong số họ kiếm được ít tiền hơn và họ không có đội ngũ thư ký như trước đây, họ bây giờ gõ các quan sát của họ trong khi đang nói chuyện với khách hàng của họ. Tôi nghĩ đó là một sai lầm lớn. Và từ những nghiên cứu mà công ty tôi đã thực hiện khảo sát, không phải nhà trị liệu, mà là khách hàng của họ, những người sẵn sàng nói chuyện, thì điều đó thật tệ. Điều tôi cố gắng nhấn mạnh là hãy có tài liệu trước mặt bạn. Và nếu có một ghi chú đặc biệt, hãy viết một chút gì đó, hoặc nếu bạn có ai đó kèm theo bạn sẽ là người ghi chú, tôi không muốn bỏ lỡ bất cứ điều gì. Nếu bạn đang viết, bạn không quan sát. Và quan sát thực sự quan trọng hơn việc viết. Bây giờ, nếu bạn bắt đầu nói và đề cập, nếu bạn đã đề cập đến điểm khuyết cố, tôi có thể nghĩ, được rồi, đó là điểm khuyết cố hay siêu điểm khuyết vô? Được rồi, đó là một ghi chú đáng giá. Và sau đó tôi quay lại và xem xét. Nhưng nếu tôi luôn viết, tôi, bạn biết đấy, tôi có những người trẻ nói với tôi, ừ, bạn chỉ là một người cổ hủ. Đây là cách chúng tôi đã lớn lên. Tôi có thể nói với bạn rằng từ quan điểm tiến hóa, chúng ta không thể vượt qua DNA của mình. Chúng ta thật sự không thể, ví dụ như, nhà trường đến và nói, bạn biết đấy, bạn không thể ôm học sinh nữa. Được rồi. Đừng kỳ vọng, bạn biết đấy, tại sao chúng ta có những học sinh trầm cảm? Tại sao có bất kỳ số lượng điều gì đó, nhưng tôi có thể nói với bạn điều này. Chúng ta tiến hóa để ôm, để chạm, để chào hỏi nhau, bạn biết đấy, người bạn thân nhất của bạn, tất cả những thứ đó. Khi chúng ta từng tranh đấu với những người bạn của mình, đúng không, điều đó, điều đó chơi đùa, tất cả những điều đó đều là chạm kín đáo. Đó là vì loài của chúng ta cần điều đó. Con người cần chạm. Có những điều mà con người cần. Và một trong số đó là tương tác qua khuôn mặt. Khi bạn tập trung vào việc viết, bạn thực sự đang lấy đi điều đó. Vậy bạn nghĩ gì về việc bắt tay? Bởi vì việc bắt tay là cách chúng ta chạm vào những người lạ theo cách xã hội chấp nhận. Có cách bắt tay nào tốt không? Có. Và có những cách tồi.
    Tôi luôn nói rằng khi bắt tay, ngón tay phải hướng xuống, đúng không?
    Rất nhiều người lại giơ ngón tay lên.
    Và khi họ bắt tay, hãy xem liệu chúng ta có thể với tới nhau không.
    Và khi họ làm như vậy, giờ đây bạn có ngón tay của người đàn ông đó ở khu vực nhạy cảm.
    Đây là một khu vực nhạy cảm trên cơ thể bạn.
    Đây là nơi bạn hôn.
    Các mạch máu.
    Đúng vậy.
    Vâng, bên trong cổ tay là một khu vực nhạy cảm.
    Và bây giờ bạn có ngón tay của người đàn ông này ở đây và thật kỳ quặc.
    Vì vậy ngón tay phải thấp và áp lực được truyền đều.
    Vậy nên bạn không nên cố gắng.
    Donald Trump thì làm quá.
    Đúng vậy.
    Đừng, đừng, đừng làm cái bắt tay như của Donald Trump hay đừng có kéo tay quá mạnh.
    Đừng bóp quá chặt.
    Đừng chơi jujitsu.
    Người cùng tuổi tôi có thể bị viêm khớp.
    Tôi không bao giờ bị ấn tượng.
    Tôi đã từng có những người đàn ông một bước vào và họ to lớn lực lưỡng và bóp tay tôi và tôi nghĩ, bạn có nghiêm túc không?
    Còn về việc ôm tay thì sao, đúng không?
    Vì vậy, ôm tay là được với những người thực sự, bạn biết đấy, nhưng hầu hết mọi người không thích bị ôm tay quá chặt.
    Nếu bạn muốn chạm vào tay của người khác.
    Vậy thì bạn bắt tay và sau đó chạm vào cánh tay trên và tất cả những gì đó.
    Đối với bất kỳ ai thích matcha, đối với bất kỳ ai thích latte, một trong những công ty của tôi vừa mới ra mắt sản phẩm matcha latte đóng hộp.
    Và tôi đã trò chuyện với người sáng lập, Marissa, và cô ấy nói rằng việc tạo ra sản phẩm này không hề dễ dàng.
    Họ đã cố gắng ra mắt vào năm 2021, nhưng như thường lệ trong kinh doanh, quy trình phát triển trở nên vô cùng phức tạp.
    Vì vậy, họ đã dành bốn năm qua để kiểm tra và hoàn thiện từng chi tiết để tạo ra sản phẩm tuyệt vời này – một latte matcha vani hoàn hảo và một latte matcha dâu hoàn hảo.
    Vậy những gì chúng ta có trong những lon này là matcha chất lượng barista trực tiếp từ lon.
    Và nó có vị giống như vừa được làm từ quán cà phê yêu thích của bạn, ngọt tự nhiên và kem tự nhiên trong một lon.
    Và lý do mà tôi đầu tư vào công ty này và tôi uống matcha là vì matcha như một nguồn năng lượng giúp tôi có năng lượng bền vững mà không bị sụt giảm mạnh như những sản phẩm khác.
    Bạn có thể tìm mua matcha latte đóng hộp sẵn tại Waitrose, Tesco, Holland và Barrett.
    Và đây là một chút khuyến khích dành cho bạn.
    Nếu bạn truy cập perfectted.com và sử dụng mã diary40, bạn sẽ nhận được 40% giảm giá cho đơn hàng đầu tiên của mình.
    Xin đừng nói với ai.
    Hãy giữ điều đó cho riêng bạn.
    Đó là mã diary40.
    Bạn sẽ nhận được 40% giảm giá tại perfectted.com.
    Vậy hãy sử dụng điều đó trước khi họ thay đổi nhé.
    Tôi có một video khác dành cho bạn ở đây.
    Vậy anh ấy bắt đầu với cánh tay xuống, nhưng anh ấy đang chạm vào cổ của mình, che kín cổ.
    Anh ấy đang tạo hình bên trái khuôn mặt và đang mát xa trán và cổ.
    Vì vậy, tôi có ý nói rằng những điều này biểu thị sự khó chịu tâm lý.
    Giờ, tại sao lại như vậy, chúng ta thấy anh ấy nháy mắt hoặc mí mắt chớp.
    Anh ấy đang chạm vào mặt.
    Vì sao vậy?
    Tôi không biết.
    Bây giờ có một hơi thở giải phóng.
    Trông như anh ấy đang đọc một trong những cuốn sách của tôi.
    Những gì tôi muốn nói với bạn là, đây đều là những hành vi mà bạn không muốn từ một nhà lãnh đạo.
    Chắc chắn, bạn thấy điều đó từ một người theo sau, nhưng không phải từ một nhà lãnh đạo.
    Bạn sẽ không bao giờ thấy một vị tướng làm bất kỳ điều gì như vậy.
    Chắc chắn không trong quân đội Mỹ hay quân đội Anh.
    Tất cả những hành vi mà anh ấy đang thực hiện, những điều làm dịu hoặc biểu thị sự khó chịu tâm lý nào đó cũng là tất cả những hành vi mà chúng ta đồng nhất với sự thiếu tự tin.
    Những nhà lãnh đạo thường là những cá nhân xuất sắc.
    Và bạn nói rằng những cá nhân xuất sắc được tạo nên, không phải sinh ra.
    Và đó là một điều tốt vì nó đưa mức độ xuất sắc này trong tầm tay của bạn và tôi.
    Và bạn đã xác định nhiều đặc điểm làm cho ai đó trở thành một người xuất sắc.
    Đúng vậy.
    Một trong số đó là tự làm chủ.
    Tự làm chủ, bất kể đó có phải là Alexander Đại đế người đã theo đuổi những bài học từ, hãy xem nào, Socrates dạy Plato, Plato dạy Aristotle, và Aristotle dạy Alexander.
    Vì vậy, Aristotle đã dạy Alexander Đại đế, và ông ấy theo đuổi tri thức.
    Thomas Edison, một trong những nhà phát minh vĩ đại nhất ở Mỹ, 1.300 bằng sáng chế,
    rời trường khi mới sáu tuổi, theo đuổi tri thức.
    Tôi có thể xuất thân từ nhà nghèo, nhưng chúng tôi rất nghèo, tôi đã phải đi đến thùng rác để
    cướp sách và tạp chí để học.
    Bạn có thể tạo ra chương trình học việc cho riêng mình, và bạn có thể học cách làm chủ một kỹ năng hoặc một kiến thức hoặc một động tác thể thao, bất cứ điều gì.
    Ai đó có được sự tự làm chủ, họ đã đạt được điều gì đó mà không ai có thể lấy đi từ họ.
    Không ai có thể lấy điều đó từ tôi.
    Điều gì vậy?
    Tất cả kiến thức đó, tất cả kỹ năng đó, tất cả kinh nghiệm đó, không ai có thể lấy đi từ tôi.
    Tại sao từ “tự” lại có trong đó?
    Tự làm chủ.
    Bởi vì rất nhiều điều đó, không ai, bạn biết đấy, chúng ta đã nói chuyện trước đó, và tôi đã nói, tôi cố gắng
    đọc hai cuốn sách mỗi tuần, để tôi có thể đọc khoảng 1.000 cuốn sách trong mỗi thập kỷ.
    Không ai bảo tôi làm điều đó.
    Vì vậy, nó là tự.
    Tại sao?
    Bởi vì tôi muốn biết.
    Bởi vì, bạn biết đấy, tại sao Leonardo da Vinci lại muốn biết về những xoáy nước, hay chiều dài của lưỡi của con chim gõ kiến?
    Ai quan tâm?
    Điều đó không quan trọng.
    Đó là tự nguyện.
    Và chúng ta, trong thế giới này, là những người thừa kế lợi ích từ sự quan tâm của Leonardo da Vinci đến những xoáy nước,
    điều đó đã giúp ông ấy vẽ tóc của nàng Mona Lisa, và chúng ta là những người thừa kế điều đó.
    Tôi nghĩ rằng tự làm chủ quan trọng hơn, tôi nghĩ, những gì mà một trường đại học có thể dạy bạn.
    Một trường đại học có thể dạy bạn cách suy nghĩ, nhưng nó không dạy bạn cách làm chủ.
    Vì vậy có phải điều này là, vì tôi nghe thấy, như, rõ ràng là việc học hỏi và theo đuổi tri thức, và sau đó có một phần khác của tự làm chủ, cảm giác như là sự tự ý thức, nhận thức về bản thân.
    Vâng, tôi nghĩ bạn là một ví dụ của tự làm chủ.
    Đó là từ duy nhất trong vũ trụ ngôn ngữ bao quát được khả năng lấy những gì có sẵn và biến nó thành một phần của cuộc sống bạn.
    Và vì vậy, dù đó là bà tôi dạy tôi cách nói chuyện với mọi người, hay mẹ tôi, hoặc cha tôi, mẹ tôi chỉ cho tôi cách bắt tay thực sự, chị gái tôi chỉ cho tôi cách khiêu vũ. Tất cả những điều này đều là một phần của việc tự làm chủ bản thân.
    Giờ đây, tôi có thể đã từ chối tất cả những điều đó. Và rất nhiều người đã làm như vậy. Nhiều người từ chối khoa học hoặc từ chối, ôi, tôi không muốn học cách khiêu vũ. Tôi không muốn học cách đó. Được rồi. Đó là lựa chọn của bạn. Nhưng có một sự duyên dáng tuyệt vời trong việc có thể nhìn vào thế giới xung quanh bạn và học hỏi từ nó, điều mà bạn đã làm, và nói rằng, tôi sẽ áp dụng điều đó vào thực tiễn. Tại sao tôi phải phát minh lại những gì mà người khác đã trải nghiệm? Tôi sẽ chấp nhận những điều tôi thích và ưa chuộng, và sau đó tôi sẽ sử dụng nó một cách hiệu quả.
    Điều thứ hai là quan sát, điều mà tôi nghĩ rằng chúng ta đã nói đến. Quan sát. Bạn biết không, ví dụ điển hình là một bậc phụ huynh có thể quan sát nhu cầu ngay lập tức của trẻ em và các thứ tương tự. Và tôi thấy mọi người bây giờ thật, tôi đã ở sân bay ngày hôm qua khi đến đây, và có một gia đình mà suốt thời gian họ chờ đợi, không một lần nào nói chuyện với nhau, cũng không tỉnh táo nhận ra những gì người khác đang làm. Tôi cảm thấy điều đó thật khó khăn bởi vì khi con gái tôi lớn lên, tôi chưa bao giờ rời mắt khỏi cô ấy. Tôi thấy mọi người trên thiết bị của họ, như cả gia đình này, và họ đang bỏ lỡ rất nhiều điều, rất nhiều thông tin. Những phát minh vĩ đại được tạo ra thông qua sự quan sát. Velcro. Bạn có biết câu chuyện về Velcro không? Giữa Thế chiến II, một người Thụy Sĩ lên núi và trở về sau khi đi bộ đường dài, đúng không? Và anh nhìn vào đôi tất của mình và nói, con chấy này, những cái nhỏ nhỏ… Có phải đó là một loại cây? Ừ, đó chỉ là những hạt giống nhỏ mà chúng tạo ra dính vào mọi thứ. Ở Mỹ, chúng tôi gọi chúng là sticker. Có nhiều tên gọi khác nhau. Và anh nhìn chúng dưới kính hiển vi và nhận ra rằng chúng không chỉ dính ra ngoài, mà thực sự là cong lại. Và khi cong lại, chúng dính vào mọi thứ. Vì vậy, anh nói, tôi sẽ phát minh cái này. Giờ đây, điều thú vị, chúng ta nói về quan sát, là anh đã thấy điều này một lần. Có bao nhiêu triệu người đã thấy nó? Nhưng chính người quan sát có thể tận dụng điều đó. Và đó là lý do tôi nói với các giám đốc, khi bạn thuê, hãy thuê những người quan sát tốt, vì họ sẽ cứu bạn. Họ là những người sẽ nói, ê, tôi thấy một số xu hướng ở đây không tốt. Vì vậy, quan sát là rất quan trọng.
    Và sau đó chúng ta chuyển sang điều tiếp theo là, hầu hết mọi người nghĩ rằng giao tiếp chỉ là về từ ngữ, và giao tiếp chủ yếu, hiệu quả nhất, và có ảnh hưởng nhất, là phi ngôn ngữ, trải qua mọi nền văn hóa. Và quan niệm sai lầm rằng từ ngữ vượt trội hơn phi ngôn ngữ, hãy đến một đám tang. Hãy đến một đám tang và xem từ ngữ hoạt động tốt như thế nào so với việc đặt tay quanh ai đó và để họ khóc trên vai bạn. Đó là cách chính mà chúng ta giao tiếp. Đó là cách chính mà chúng ta thể hiện sự quan tâm. Và đó là cách chính mà chúng ta thể hiện sự đồng cảm.
    Điều thứ tư là hành động. Và với tôi, nó thực sự liên kết với cả điểm thứ hai, đó là quan sát, nhưng cũng liên quan đến câu chuyện của bạn về Velcro, vì chắc chắn có nhiều người đã nghĩ, ôi Chúa ơi, cái đó dính vào tôi. Và họ không làm gì cả. Có thể ngay cả những người nghĩ, ôi, điều đó có thể hữu ích. Nhưng phần khó thường là làm gì đó với nó. Đó là hành động. Làm điều gì đó, như tôi đã nói trong cuốn sách, hãy trở nên xuất sắc. Hãy làm điều gì đó vì xã hội hoặc có lợi, nhưng đừng chậm trễ, đúng không? Điều tồi tệ nhất mà chúng ta có thể làm, nếu bạn muốn cho mọi người biết rằng bạn không quan tâm, thì hãy từ từ. Và điều này xảy ra mọi lúc. Bạn đến một quầy, bạn đi đến một quầy và nói, ê, bạn biết đấy, tôi muốn được giúp đỡ với điều này, bạn biết đó, và sau đó họ chỉ, ôi, tôi không biết. Để tôi kiểm tra ở phía sau. Và họ mất thời gian để đi đến phía sau. Và sau đó họ mất thời gian để đi trở lại. Bạn có thể cho rằng bạn đang hét lên, tôi không quan tâm. Những gì tôi nói với các quản lý là, đó là trách nhiệm của bạn. Tại sao bạn lại thuê một người không thể di chuyển với tốc độ ánh sáng? Bởi vì chuyển động được đồng nhất với sự quan tâm. Vậy nếu đó là thái độ của họ, bạn cũng có thể treo một tấm biển ghi “tôi không quan tâm”. Giờ đây, bạn có thể nói, ồ, bạn biết đấy, có thể họ có vấn đề về di chuyển. Được rồi, tự nguyện. Tôi sẽ nói, bạn biết không? Tôi sẽ mất một chút thời gian vì tôi vừa mới thay khớp háng, nhưng tôi sẽ giải quyết điều đó ngay bây giờ. Chúng ta có thể tha thứ. Nhưng khi chúng ta không cho thấy rằng chúng ta quan tâm thông qua hành động, điều đó thật ngay lập tức.
    Và điều thứ năm là sự thoải mái tâm lý. Và bạn viết trong cuốn sách rằng đây là sức mạnh mạnh mẽ nhất mà con người sở hữu. Hoàn toàn đồng ý. Điều thú vị về con người trong những năm tôi đã nghiên cứu họ là con người không tìm kiếm sự hoàn hảo. Đứa trẻ không quan tâm nếu nó đang mút ngón tay mình hay ngón tay của em gái. Chúng có thể thay thế cho nhau. Con người không tìm kiếm sự hoàn hảo. Điều chúng ta tìm kiếm là sự thoải mái tâm lý. Và bất cứ ai mang lại điều đó là người chiến thắng nhanh nhất. Đơn giản như vậy. Nếu bạn có thể, bạn còn quá trẻ. Nhưng tôi nhớ khi máy tính mới ra đời và chúng nằm trong những chiếc hộp xấu xí và trong những cửa hàng xấu xí và chúng nằm sau quầy và chúng rất xấu xí. Steve Jobs đến và nói, không, chúng ta sẽ đặt chúng trên những cái bàn thí nghiệm như chúng ta có và chúng ta sẽ làm cho chúng dễ tiếp cận. Vì vậy, thiết bị bí ẩn này là một từ rất xấu mà bạn quên rằng mọi người đã ghét máy tính nhiều đến mức nào. Họ từng đến vào ban đêm và cắt dây. Đó là mức độ sợ hãi của mọi người đối với máy tính. Và ông ấy đã từ 4% thị phần máy tính lên đến 67% hoặc con số nào đó bây giờ. Tại sao? Sự thoải mái tâm lý. Và tôi nói điều này với các doanh nhân. Khi bạn đang đàm phán, điều bạn đang đàm phán là liệu bạn có thể tạo ra đủ sự thoải mái tâm lý để người khác có thể sống với điều đó không, để tôi có thể cảm thấy, được rồi, có thể tôi không có tất cả những gì tôi muốn, nhưng trong khoảng thời gian này, tôi có thể sống với sự thoải mái tâm lý đó.
    Tôi có thể quay lại ban giám đốc và báo cáo rằng đây là những gì tốt nhất tôi có thể làm và như vậy.
    Hướng đến sự thoải mái tâm lý.
    Và làm thế nào để tạo ra sự thoải mái tâm lý trong bất kỳ ngữ cảnh nào?
    Bạn đã bắt đầu điều đó hôm nay.
    Bạn đã chào đón tôi vào và rồi bạn hỏi, bạn muốn uống gì?
    Bạn có muốn uống nước không?
    Bạn có muốn uống trà không?
    Bạn có muốn uống cà phê không?
    Đó là khởi đầu của quá trình tạo ra sự thoải mái tâm lý.
    Chúng ta đang ở trong một môi trường yên tĩnh.
    Ít tiếng ồn, nhiều sự thoải mái tâm lý hơn.
    Ít ánh sáng.
    Điều đó không gây khó chịu cho mắt.
    Bất kỳ điều gì bắt đầu từ cấp độ sinh học, vật lý, sinh lý, và sau đó là nhận thức.
    Vì vậy, sự thoải mái tâm lý.
    Chúng ta đang đàm phán.
    Vậy bạn muốn đề nghị 3.000 đô la.
    Tôi nghĩ tôi đáng giá 6.000 đô la.
    Vậy làm thế nào để chúng ta đạt được điều đó?
    À, tôi sẽ để bạn nói lý do tại sao bạn chỉ có thể cung cấp 3.000 đô la.
    Và tôi sẽ cung cấp lý do của tôi.
    Được rồi.
    Thực tế là chúng ta thực sự có thể kể câu chuyện của mình bắt đầu quá trình thoải mái tâm lý.
    Bây giờ, cuối cùng, tôi có thể phải tuân theo điều đó vì chỉ có b ст tiền.
    Và nếu nó không nằm trong ngân sách, thì nó không có trong ngân sách.
    Nhưng có thể có một số điều mà bạn có thể thêm vào để nói, hãy nhìn, đây là tất cả những gì chúng tôi có vào lúc này.
    Nhưng chúng tôi sẽ đánh giá lại điều này trong ba tháng.
    Và nếu chúng tôi có thể thì, tùy thuộc vào thu nhập, chúng tôi sẽ cố gắng để cung cấp cho bạn thêm 500 đô la mỗi tháng, chúng tôi sẽ làm điều đó sau.
    Chúng tôi thực hiện từng bước một, nhưng luôn suy nghĩ về điều gì mang lại sự thoải mái tâm lý.
    Việc hành động khắc nghiệt, tỏ ra phẫn nộ, không chú ý đến nhu cầu, mong muốn, những ước muốn và thậm chí sở thích tạo ra sự khó chịu về tâm lý.
    Năm 2009, bạn đã viết một cuốn sách có tên là “Những người có tính tự phụ giữa chúng ta”.
    Vâng.
    Và trước đó, bạn đã nói rằng khoảng 2% người là tự phụ, nhưng sau đó là 25% CEO?
    22%.
    Lên đến 22% CEO có những đặc điểm tự phụ, vâng.
    Được rồi.
    Và nếu ai đó phải đối mặt với một người tự phụ, họ nên làm gì để quản lý tình huống đó?
    Bởi vì theo những con số đó, khoảng 98% người không phải là người tự phụ, nhưng có lẽ sẽ phải đối mặt với họ trong đời.
    Và rồi, bạn biết đấy, một số người đáng kể làm việc với họ.
    Dù họ chiếm 2% dân số, chúng ta vẫn sẽ làm việc với hoặc cho ai đó như vậy.
    Vì vậy, điều chúng ta phải nhớ, vâng, người tự phụ có ý nghĩa gì?
    Chúng ta không nói về một người nhìn vào gương và thích xịt nước hoa và chải tóc.
    Đây là một người quá đánh giá bản thân, nhưng phải hạ thấp người khác.
    Đây là người chỉ nghĩ về bản thân mình và không quan tâm đến những đau khổ hay những gì đang diễn ra trong cuộc đời bạn, muốn bạn trung thành, nhưng không trung thành với bạn, không quan tâm đến công việc cá nhân của bạn, nhưng muốn bạn quan tâm đến của họ.
    Đó là người tự phụ ác tính của bạn.
    Ồ, và nhân tiện, họ vốn dĩ nói dối, nhưng lại mong bạn nói sự thật với họ.
    Bây giờ, tác động là, vâng, nếu họ chỉ chiếm 2% dân số, nhưng chúng ta thấy họ trong nhiều công ty, chúng ta sẽ làm việc cho họ, thì, bạn biết đấy, làm thế nào chúng ta có thể hòa hợp?
    Đầu tiên là nhận ra rằng họ sẽ hạ thấp giá trị của chúng ta.
    Bây giờ, đôi khi họ hạ thấp bạn bằng cách không mời bạn tham gia các cuộc họp hoặc chia sẻ thông tin, nhưng nhiều lần thông qua cách họ đối xử với bạn, la mắng bạn, hoặc khinh thường bạn.
    Ý tôi là, tôi có một số điều thật khủng khiếp.
    Vậy chúng ta sẽ làm gì khi có những người như vậy?
    Số một là nhận dạng những gì bạn đang đối phó.
    Và đó là lý do tại sao tôi đã viết “Những nhân cách nguy hiểm”, vì tôi có những danh sách kiểm tra mạnh mẽ trong đó, đã được thử nghiệm nhiều lần.
    Vì vậy, bạn có thể thấy, ôi, thật tuyệt, trong số 125 điều, người này có 75 tính cách này.
    Bạn có một vấn đề.
    Nhưng bây giờ, đây là vấn đề.
    Khi chúng ta sống với một người như thế này, hãy giả sử bạn, bạn biết đấy, họ có thể rất quyến rũ, nhưng sau đó họ quay lại với bạn và trở thành con người thật của họ.
    Vậy làm thế nào để bạn đối phó với điều đó?
    Những gì tôi có thể nói với bạn là quỹ đạo không ủng hộ bạn, rằng những cá nhân này rất khắc nghiệt, họ rất độc hại, đến mức cuối cùng họ sẽ nạn nhân hóa bạn về mặt thể chất, tâm lý, cảm xúc, sinh lý, hoặc tài chính.
    Bạn sẽ trở thành nạn nhân.
    Câu hỏi là, và tôi nói với nhiều giám đốc điều hành làm việc cho những cá nhân như vậy, nơi mà họ bị bắt nạt, và điều này là, bạn sẵn sàng chịu đựng trong bao lâu?
    Nếu bạn có thể đặt ra một con số và nói sáu tháng hoặc một năm, được rồi, nhưng sau đó làm điều gì đó, vì bạn sẽ phải trả giá.
    Bạn biết đấy, có một cuốn sách tuyệt vời có tên là “Cơ thể giữ lại điểm số”.
    Cơ thể chắc chắn sẽ giữ lại điểm số.
    Bạn sẽ phải trả giá cho việc ở gần một cá nhân độc hại.
    Và nếu bạn trở thành món đồ chơi của người đó, bạn sẽ phải chịu đựng rất nhiều.
    Và vì vậy tôi nói, bạn biết đấy, không có viên thuốc nào có thể chữa trị cho họ.
    Không có gì bạn có thể làm để khiến họ thích bạn.
    Đừng mong đợi sự trung thành.
    Cố gắng ra ngoài càng sớm càng tốt.
    Và đó là lời khuyên duy nhất mà, bạn biết đấy, tôi chắc chắn không phải là một nhà lâm sàng.
    Nhưng tôi nghĩ hầu hết các chuyên gia lâm sàng, nếu họ thành thật, sẽ nói, bạn phải ra khỏi đó.
    Điều này là không thể chịu đựng được.
    Đừng cố gắng thắng trong bất kỳ khía cạnh nào.
    Đừng cố gắng và…
    Tôi không nghĩ bạn có thể thắng.
    Trước tiên, những cá nhân này có tính cách rất nghiêm trọng.
    Họ không có sự tự xem xét.
    Họ nhìn nhận mình là hoàn hảo.
    Họ không thấy bất kỳ khía cạnh thiếu sót nào trong chính họ.
    Và vì vậy, vì họ có tính cách khuyết điểm, bạn không thể mong đợi những hành vi bình thường từ họ.
    Và nên tại sao lại phải phơi bày bản thân với họ?
    Họ sẽ như vậy suốt đời.
    Có một chương đặc biệt mà bạn nói, một người thì tệ, hai người thì khủng khiếp, ba người thì chết người.
    Ôi, bạn biết đấy, mọi người, tôi thường nhận được câu hỏi này.
    Vậy, liệu có thể có nhiều đặc điểm không?
    Có.
    Bạn có thể có thể tự phụ bệnh lý.
    Vì vậy bạn đánh giá quá cao bản thân.
    Và bạn cũng có thể có đặc điểm của người có tính cách nghi ngờ khi mà bạn rất cứng nhắc trong suy nghĩ của mình và luôn nghi ngờ mọi ý định của mọi người.
    Trong lịch sử, bạn nhìn vào Hitler.
    Hitler đã tự phụ bệnh lý; ông là một người tự phụ ác tính.
    Ông ta bị hoang tưởng một cách lâm sàng.
    Ông ta sợ ai?
    Các nhóm thiểu số, người Romani, lúc đó được gọi là người gypsy, và tất nhiên là người Do Thái.
    Đó chính là hoang tưởng lâm sàng.
    Và ông ta là một kẻ tâm thần.
    Được rồi, hãy để điều đó được nói rõ.
    Tâm thần học là gì?
    Tâm thần học là khi bạn không có sự ân hận, không có lòng đồng cảm, không có lương tâm.
    Bạn có thể làm bất cứ điều gì bạn muốn và bạn vẫn ngủ ngon vào ban đêm.
    Đó là Robert Hare, nhà nghiên cứu, người đã định nghĩa rõ nhất về tâm thần học.
    Hitler có tất cả.
    Có lẽ có một ranh giới mong manh giữa chủ nghĩa tự mãn và sự tự tin.
    Bởi vì khi bạn nói về chủ nghĩa tự mãn, bạn đang nói về sự quan trọng thái quá, như thật sự tin rằng bản thân mình quan trọng.
    Và nghe có vẻ giống như một người tin tưởng một cách cực kỳ vào bản thân.
    Nhân tiện, chủ nghĩa tự mãn, đã được nghiên cứu từ những năm 1950, chúng ta bây giờ có một xã hội tự mãn như chưa từng có trước đây.
    Chúng ta thấy điều đó trong cách chúng ta nói về bản thân nhiều hơn bất kỳ điều gì khác.
    Chúng ta vào TikTok và các diễn đàn khác và chúng ta tuyên bố mọi thứ.
    Và vì vậy, chúng ta tự mãn hơn nhiều bây giờ so với những năm 1950.
    Họ ngay cả nhìn vào những từ mà chúng ta sử dụng.
    Bây giờ chúng ta sử dụng từ “tôi” và “mình” nhiều hơn so với những năm 1950.
    Chúng ta đã từng nói “chúng ta” và “của chúng ta”.
    Bây giờ chúng ta nói “tôi” và “mình”.
    Và một người tự mãn thật sự có một hệ thống niềm tin rất tham nhũng, họ thật sự bị khuyết điểm về nhân cách.
    Và họ không chỉ có các đặc điểm của chủ nghĩa tự mãn, mà họ thật sự tin vào cách họ nhìn nhận bản thân là không thể sai, rằng chỉ có họ mới có câu trả lời.
    Họ là người có thể làm cho chúng ta vĩ đại trở lại.
    Và tôi biết bạn sẽ hỏi tôi điều gì tiếp theo.
    Không, tôi sẽ không hỏi bạn điều đó.
    Cảm ơn bạn.
    Cảm ơn bạn.
    Nhưng nếu các đặc điểm đó phù hợp, thì điều tôi nói với mọi người là, cho dù bạn đang gia nhập một tổ chức hay đang nhìn vào ai đang lãnh đạo đất nước của bạn, hãy tự hỏi mình, họ có những đặc điểm này không?
    Và nếu họ có những đặc điểm đó, thì không phải là một phép toán khó.
    Tâm lý học, đặc biệt khi nói đến những người có khuyết điểm về nhân cách, không quá khó, là: tôi có muốn làm việc cho một người đánh giá cao tôi không?
    Hay một người coi thường người khác?
    Hay một người coi thường người khác?
    Và bạn bắt đầu từ đó.
    Trong hàng thập kỷ qua, khi bạn đã thực hiện tất cả những điều tuyệt vời này, săn lùng khủng bố, gián điệp, giám sát trên không, làm việc cùng với SAS, phỏng vấn mọi người, đuổi theo khủng bố.
    Nó đã thay đổi bạn như thế nào là một con người?
    Nó đã thay đổi cách bạn nhìn nhận hành vi con người và điều gì là con người, ý nghĩa và tất cả những câu hỏi lớn hơn của cuộc sống như thế nào?
    Tôi chưa bao giờ được hỏi câu hỏi đó.
    Vì vậy, cảm ơn bạn đã hỏi một câu hỏi sâu sắc.
    Tôi đoán câu trả lời tốt nhất là tôi đã học một cách từng bước, và tôi vui vì tôi đã học từng bước.
    Và điều đó, tôi có nghĩa là lần giết người đầu tiên của tôi chỉ là một vụ giết người thông thường mà tôi đã phản ứng.
    Vụ tự tử đầu tiên của tôi, là một cảnh sát, đã diễn ra theo từng giai đoạn.
    Tôi nghĩ nếu tôi bị đột ngột gặp phải mọi thứ mà tôi đã trình bày một lúc, tôi nghĩ tôi sẽ bị sụp đổ tinh thần.
    Tôi vui vì nó diễn ra theo từng tập, tôi đã có thể học hỏi từ mỗi lần.
    Và điều tôi đã học là, thứ nhất, ai là hầu hết những người mà tôi nói chuyện?
    Phần lớn là nhân chứng hoặc nạn nhân.
    Và những người này đều là những người tốt.
    Họ là những người tốt.
    Một trong những người tốt nhất là những người nông dân nghèo ở Arizona.
    Họ trồng bông.
    Họ không kiếm được nhiều.
    Họ là những người tốt.
    Bạn nhận ra rằng mọi điều bạn đang làm trong lực lượng thực thi pháp luật thực sự là vì họ.
    Bạn biết đấy, sau này khi tôi tham gia vào công tác phản gián, và giờ bạn đang xử lý các quốc gia và vốn của các quốc gia khác nhau.
    Và, vâng, mỗi quốc gia có những ưu tiên riêng của họ.
    Nhưng bạn nhận ra rằng khi bạn đang xử lý với những kẻ cực đoan, và họ có hệ thống niềm tin của riêng họ.
    Và không có gì thực sự bạn có thể làm để thay đổi họ.
    Nhưng chúng ta cũng có hệ thống niềm tin của mình.
    Và bạn phải nhận ra, được rồi, tôi không thể giải quyết tất cả các vấn đề.
    Là một nhân viên thực thi pháp luật, tôi chỉ có thể chú ý đến những gì tôi có thể giúp hoặc giải quyết hoặc đại loại là như vậy.
    Tôi không thể tìm ra tất cả các nghi phạm đã hoặc hiếp dâm hoặc giết người hoặc làm nổ.
    Và tôi đã ở Đại học Brigham Young khi cô gái bị bắt cóc bởi một kẻ giết người hàng loạt.
    Và đến bây giờ, tôi vẫn cảm thấy đau đớn rằng tôi đã có mặt khi vụ bắt cóc xảy ra đêm đó.
    Tôi vẫn cảm thấy nó.
    Và những điều này, chúng nặng nề lên bạn.
    Nhưng tôi cũng rất, bạn biết đó, khi tôi làm việc với sinh viên, tôi hướng dẫn mọi người.
    Tôi hướng dẫn rất nhiều giám đốc điều hành.
    Nhưng tôi cũng hướng dẫn những người trẻ tuổi tò mò.
    Và tôi thấy sự háo hức mà họ theo đuổi cuộc sống và kiến thức.
    Và điều đó cho tôi hy vọng lớn.
    Tại sao bạn vẫn còn đau đớn về việc mình đã làm nhiệm vụ đêm đó?
    Bởi vì bạn không thể gạt nó ra khỏi đầu.
    Tôi không thể gạt mùi của…
    Đôi khi bạn đến một hiện trường vụ án và mùi thật tồi tệ đến nỗi bạn không thể rửa sạch nó.
    Bạn phải đốt quần áo của mình.
    Các nhà điều tra pháp y biết điều này.
    Có một số điều mà bạn biết, người đầu tiên tôi thấy bị giết ở Cuba.
    Và bạn không thể, bạn biết đấy, về mặt sinh học, bạn có hai hippocampi.
    Và nó lưu giữ mọi điều tiêu cực bạn đã trải qua.
    Đó là lý do tại sao bạn không thể uống thuốc để điều trị căng thẳng sau chấn thương.
    Bởi vì hippocampi đảm bảo rằng lần đầu tiên bạn bị thương khi chạm vào bếp ga sẽ không xảy ra lần nữa.
    Vì vậy, tất cả những điều tiêu cực được giữ lại, đôi khi mãi mãi, nhưng thường là khoảng một thập kỷ.
    Nhưng tôi cũng thấy sáng suốt từ việc mọi người vẫn theo đuổi những điều tốt đẹp.
    Bạn biết đấy, tôi nghe từ những người làm việc với chó hoặc làm việc với những người khuyết tật mà không kỳ vọng bất kỳ phần thưởng nào.
    Và tôi nghĩ rằng hầu hết mọi người có một trái tim tốt, một trái tim nhân ái.
    Và vì vậy tôi cố gắng tập trung vào những người mà tôi đã gặp, những người đã cho tôi những ví dụ cho “Hãy Nổi Bật”.
    Người phụ nữ ở Brazil, khi mới vô sáu tuổi, đã bị mù.
    Cô tiếp tục sinh ra 12 đứa con.
    Cô đã có nhiều hơn, nhưng chỉ 12 đứa sống sót.
    Và ai đó vẫn có thể làm công việc thêu khi mờ mắt bằng cảm giác.
    Tôi sẽ không bao giờ quên trải nghiệm đó.
    Ngồi trong sự hiện diện của cô ấy là một niềm vui được ban tặng cho tôi. Hiểu một người phụ nữ có khả năng cảm nhận những người xung quanh chỉ thông qua cách mà những sợi lông trên tay cô ấy chuyển động khi họ tương tác với không gian xung quanh. Đó là một trải nghiệm tuyệt vời. Ngày nào trong sự nghiệp của bạn mà bạn tự hào nhất hoặc hạnh phúc nhất? Ôi, wow. Chà, tôi sẽ nói với bạn rằng tôi thực sự rất hạnh phúc khi tôi tốt nghiệp từ Học viện FBI. Hãy tưởng tượng, một lúc nào đó, có 27,000 ứng viên cho FBI và họ chỉ nhận khoảng 220 người mỗi năm. Vì vậy, tôi rất vui mừng. Tôi cũng rất hạnh phúc vào ngày tôi rời FBI vì vào lúc đó tôi đã hoàn thành mọi thứ và tôi muốn làm những điều khác. Tôi muốn viết, điều này rất khó khăn khi bạn đang ở trong Cục. Và tôi muốn tiếp tục giảng dạy. Đúng vậy. Vì vậy, tôi nghĩ rằng hai sự kiện đó là những khoảng thời gian tốt trong cuộc đời của tôi khi nói đến sự nghiệp. Joe, khán giả của tôi chủ yếu là những người muốn học hỏi, yêu thích những câu chuyện, muốn thay đổi cuộc sống của họ, cải thiện cuộc sống để đạt được những mục tiêu mà họ đã đặt ra. Vì vậy, bạn đã viết rất nhiều cuốn sách. Tôi nghĩ là tổng cộng 15 cuốn. Chà, 14 cuốn đã xuất bản, cuốn thứ 15 sẽ ra mắt vào năm tới. Vậy câu hỏi cuối cùng của tôi là, trong tất cả 14 cuốn sách, sắp tới là 15 cuốn mà bạn đã viết và mọi điều bạn đã học, điều gì là quan trọng nhất mà tôi đã không hỏi bạn, điều sẽ hữu ích cho ai đó đang tìm cách cải thiện cuộc sống của họ, kỹ năng giao tiếp, ngôn ngữ cơ thể của họ, để hiệu quả hơn trong việc theo đuổi mục tiêu của họ? Điều mà tôi nên đã hỏi bạn. Chà, tôi không muốn làm bạn thất vọng, nhưng tôi nghĩ bạn đã đặt ra rất nhiều câu hỏi tuyệt vời trong bất kỳ số phút hoặc giờ nào chúng ta đã làm điều này. Và tôi nghĩ rằng trong các câu hỏi của bạn, bản chất là, tầm quan trọng của việc kết nối là gì? Bạn biết đấy, khán giả của bạn đều đang ở trong lĩnh vực con người. Ý tôi là, trừ khi họ làm việc như một lập trình viên, nhưng ngay cả như vậy, chúng ta đều ở trong lĩnh vực con người. Và những câu hỏi của bạn thực sự xoay quanh việc, tầm quan trọng của việc kết nối là gì? Tầm quan trọng của việc kết nối một cách đúng đắn? Và sau đó, làm thế nào chúng ta duy trì những kết nối đó? Và chúng ta đã nói về điều này, tầm quan trọng của ngôn ngữ không lời để giao tiếp, tôi tin tưởng bạn, tôi coi trọng bạn, tôi quan tâm đến bạn và tất cả những điều đó. Nhưng sau đó tạo ra sự thoải mái tâm lý cho phép chúng ta có thời gian dài bên nhau, rằng các mối quan hệ là vô giá. Tôi nghĩ rằng đó là bài học lớn nhất. Mỗi khi tôi đi đâu, tôi đều nói, chúng ta đang ở trong lĩnh vực con người. Và tôi nghĩ bạn là một hình mẫu trong việc thể hiện những gì bạn có thể đạt được, chỉ cần bạn có điều đó. Đó là một lời khen tuyệt vời. Cảm ơn bạn rất nhiều. Chúng tôi có một truyền thống kết thúc nơi khách mời cuối cùng để lại một câu hỏi cho khách mời tiếp theo, mà không biết họ sẽ để lại cho ai. Và câu hỏi mà đã để lại cho bạn là… Hmm, thú vị. Mọi người nói gì về điều họ thích ở bạn? Tôi nghĩ điều đó thật dễ dàng. Và nó dễ dàng vì tôi nghe thấy điều đó rất thường xuyên, và họ nói, bạn thật gần gũi. Tôi nghĩ họ thấy hình ảnh của tôi, bạn biết đấy, nơi tôi trông có vẻ nghiêm khắc, hoặc họ nghĩ về một đặc vụ FBI. Và mọi nơi tôi đến trên thế giới, họ nói, bạn trông thật bình thường, bạn trông gần gũi. Và tôi luôn cố gắng làm cho bản thân mình trở nên gần gũi. Dù bạn là một sinh viên, một bảo vệ an ninh, hay bất cứ ai khác, tôi luôn sẵn sàng tiếp cận. Tôi luôn gần gũi. Và tôi đối xử với mọi người như nhau. Joe, cảm ơn bạn. Đây là một thời gian thật sự thú vị mà chúng ta đang sống. Chúng ta đã nói về điều đó một chút trước khi bắt đầu. Chúng ta số hóa hơn bao giờ hết. Chúng ta sống sau những màn hình. Và kết nối giờ đây có phần như một nghệ thuật đã mất. Và đó là lý do tại sao mọi người hiện nay, tôi nghĩ, một phần, rất háo hức học hỏi cách kết nối tốt hơn, làm thế nào để không bị hiểu nhầm, và làm thế nào để giao tiếp những gì họ thực sự cảm thấy. Bởi vì điều đó không phải là thứ mà giờ đây đến một cách tự nhiên đối với thế hệ bị số hóa từ khi sinh ra. Và đó là điều mà tôi nghĩ công việc của bạn thực hiện rất sâu sắc. Nó giống như đưa chúng ta trở lại điều gì đó về con người, dòng chảy mà thông qua nhân loại học và sự hiểu biết về quá trình tiến hóa của chúng ta và nơi mọi thứ bắt nguồn cũng là một yếu tố củng cố cho mọi thứ bạn nói. Và điều đó vô cùng quan trọng. Và nó rất mạnh mẽ. Tôi đã thấy điều đó qua các video mà bạn đã tham gia và các cuộc phỏng vấn mà bạn đã thực hiện. Chúng thực sự rất mạnh mẽ. Và đó là bởi vì mọi người rất khát khao thông tin này. Và nhiều vấn đề mà chúng ta thường gặp trong cuộc sống xuất phát từ việc thiếu hiệu quả trong việc giao tiếp với người khác những gì chúng ta cảm thấy và những gì chúng ta thực sự nghĩ. Có thể vì chúng ta chưa học, nhưng cũng có thể vì chúng ta đang học một hành vi khác. Và có thể chúng ta đang trở nên cá nhân hơn và rút lui hơn và bị mắc kẹt sau những màn hình. Vì vậy, tôi thực sự khen ngợi bạn vì công việc mà bạn đang thực hiện. Và tôi rất khuyến khích mọi người đi đọc những cuốn sách này. Có rất nhiều cuốn. Nhưng tôi sẽ liên kết tất cả chúng dưới đây và với một chút tóm tắt để bạn có thể quyết định cuốn nào phù hợp nhất với bạn. Tôi đã đọc một vài cuốn. Một trong những cuốn tôi yêu thích là cuốn xuất sắc. Nó rất dễ tiếp cận. Nhưng tất cả chúng đều rất tốt ở các khía cạnh khác nhau tùy thuộc vào điều bạn đang tìm kiếm trong cuộc sống của mình. Cho dù đó là ngôn ngữ cơ thể, cho dù bạn chỉ là một người muốn nghe thêm về việc săn lùng khủng bố hay hiểu tâm lý học tội phạm hay muốn biết nhiều hơn về FBI và cuộc sống mà bạn đã sống. Vì vậy, tôi sẽ liên kết tất cả chúng bên dưới. Có điều gì mà chúng ta đã bỏ lỡ không? Chà, vợ tôi sẽ nói với tôi, xin hãy lịch sự và nói rằng nếu họ có thể đề cập đến việc tôi có một kênh YouTube để nói về nhiều điều này. Chỉ cần truy cập joenavarro.net và có một liên kết đến kênh YouTube của tôi, mà bạn sẽ nghĩ rằng tôi lẽ ra sẽ biết. Chúng tôi sẽ liên kết nó bên dưới nếu bạn có thể thấy. Tôi không biết. Nhưng tôi muốn cảm ơn bạn vì những gì bạn đã làm.
    Bạn sẽ nhận ra một ngày nào đó, như tôi đã nhận ra, rằng bạn đang giúp thay đổi cuộc sống mặc dù điều đó không phải là ý định của bạn. Ý định của bạn có lẽ là để giáo dục. 10 năm sau, 20 năm sau, hoặc như tôi mới thấy từ 40 năm sau, sẽ có ai đó viết cho bạn và nói rằng điều gì đó bạn đã nói hoặc tấm gương của bạn đã ảnh hưởng đến họ và đã thay đổi cuộc sống của họ. Và bạn sẽ nói, wow, tôi chưa từng nghĩ về điều đó. Và đó chính là điều bạn đã làm. Và bạn sẽ nhận ra điều đó một ngày nào đó. Cảm ơn bạn. Ý tôi là, đây cũng là điều bạn đang làm. Joe, cảm ơn bạn đã rộng lượng với thời gian của mình. Tôi thực sự rất trân trọng điều đó. Thật là vinh dự khi gặp bạn. Và tôi rất háo hức để hoàn thành phần còn lại của những cuốn sách của bạn và khám phá thêm trên kênh YouTube của bạn, mà tôi sẽ liên kết bên dưới. Bạn cũng nói rất nhiều. Bạn làm việc nhiều với các công ty và tổ chức. Và nếu mọi người muốn liên lạc với bạn, họ nên vào trang web của bạn và gửi email cho bạn ở đó. Chắc chắn rồi. Chỉ cần thông qua trang web và chúng tôi sẽ xử lý. Và tôi rất vui được chia sẻ hành trình kiến thức đó với bất cứ ai quan tâm. Tôi sẽ để bạn biết một chút bí mật. Bạn có thể sẽ nghĩ tôi và nhóm của tôi hơi kỳ quặc. Nhưng tôi vẫn nhớ đến ngày hôm nay khi Jemima từ nhóm của tôi đăng trên Slack rằng cô ấy đã thay đổi mùi hương trong studio này. Ngay sau khi cô ấy đăng, toàn bộ văn phòng đã vỗ tay trong kênh Slack của chúng tôi. Và điều này có thể nghe có vẻ điên rồ, nhưng tại Diary of a CEO, đây là loại cải tiến 1% mà chúng tôi thực hiện trong chương trình của mình. Và đó là lý do chương trình lại như vậy. Bằng cách hiểu sức mạnh của việc tích lũy 1%, bạn thực sự có thể thay đổi kết quả trong cuộc sống của mình. Nó không phải là về những biến đổi mạnh mẽ hay chiến thắng nhanh chóng. Mà là về những hành động nhỏ, nhất quán mang lại thay đổi lâu dài trong kết quả của bạn. Vậy là hai năm trước, chúng tôi đã bắt đầu quá trình tạo ra cuốn nhật ký xinh đẹp này. Và nó thực sự rất đẹp. Bên trong có nhiều hình ảnh, nhiều nguồn cảm hứng và động lực nữa. Một số yếu tố tương tác. Và mục đích của cuốn nhật ký này là giúp bạn xác định, duy trì tập trung vào, phát triển sự nhất quán với 1% cuối cùng sẽ thay đổi cuộc sống của bạn. Vì vậy, nếu bạn muốn một cuốn cho bản thân hoặc cho một người bạn hoặc cho một đồng nghiệp hoặc cho đội của bạn, hãy đến với thediary.com ngay bây giờ. Tôi sẽ liên kết nó bên dưới. Hẹn gặp lại bạn lần sau.
    我在FBI工作了25年。我曾與間諜和這個國家的敵人面對面,學到了很多關於人類行為的知識。想象一下,能夠更快地讀懂其他人和情況。這在你的生活中會給你帶來巨大的優勢。我想聽到所有的事情。因此,我所教授的第一件事之一是……喬·納瓦羅是前FBI特工,現在是一位享譽全球的身體語言專家。他幫助人們解碼身體語言,以改善溝通、信任和影響力。我在談判中發現的一件事情是,我們作為人類,用臉部的表情進行大量的交流。例如,當我們不理解某件事情時,我們會把眉頭緊皺在一起。而當我們聽到一些我們不喜歡的事情時,嘴唇的血液實際上會開始流失,然後我們會開始緊閉嘴唇。另一種行為是當缺乏信心和不安全感時,人們會馬上……所以一旦我們理解這些行為,你就能掌控任何情況。信心。這是與生俱來的嗎?還是你認為信心可以被訓練?絕對可以被訓練。所以FBI實際上教信心。有很多策略。其中一種是我們可以使用的最強大的手勢。你會發現馬斯克經常這樣做。但我告訴人們,學習信心的最簡單方法是……喬,我們實際上錄了我和你見面時的互動。我這裡有那段視頻。所以你立刻做的一件事是……不要這樣做。這可不行。在我們回到這集之前,先來個快速的插曲。請給我30秒的時間。我想說兩件事。第一件是非常感謝你們一週又一週收聽和關注這個節目。對我們所有人來說,這意義重大。這真的是一個我們從未想過的夢想,也無法想象會達到這個地步。但第二件事是,這是一個讓我們覺得才剛剛起步的夢想。如果你喜歡我們在這裡的所作所為,請加入那24%定期收聽這個播客的人,並在這個應用上關注我們。我會給你們一個承諾。我會盡我所能,讓這個節目變得盡善盡美,現在和未來。我們將會邀請你們想要我去訪談的嘉賓。我們會繼續保持所有你們喜愛的這個節目的內容。謝謝。非常感謝。回到節目中。喬,如果有人在街上問你,並希望得到兩句話的回答,你是誰,你花了一生在做什麼?你會如何回答這個問題?用一句話來說,就是教學。我認為我一生都在教學。即使在1984年我進入FBI的時候,我的工作大部分都是作為FBI特工,調查犯罪,追捕間諜等等。但你知道,我在1978年便入職了。但早在84年,我就已經開始教學。我喜歡當人們明白並看到某種行為時。他們理解我們為什麼做某些事情的基礎。我舉個例子。有時候你會來到一個可怕的現場,人們立刻會驚叫。他們吸一口氣,然後捂住嘴巴。或者在得分板上只有一點差距,人們就是這樣,卻不懂情況的真相。這就像我們曾經被獅子和老虎包圍,我們學會捂住嘴巴,以免我們的呼吸暴露,以便它們無法找到我們。因此,人類的身體有一些捷徑。我應該說是人類的大腦。它們被稱為啟發式思維。所以其中一種就是停滯不前。所以當我們聽到大聲聲音或看到掠食者或狗時,我們會僵住。顯然,三十萬年前奔跑的誰都受到了傷害。因此,我們擁有這些捷徑。分享為什麼我們有這些行為總是讓我感到著迷。你會意識到你剛吸了一口氣,因此你可以屏住呼吸。然後我們捂住呼吸,以免被掠食者嗅到。我花時間寫書。我花時間在各種不同的環境中教學,無論是在舞台上還是在網路上的其他環境。你給人們的是什麼?這是一個深刻的問題,我想我沒有被問過。我認為最簡單的答案是知識,是他們可能沒有時間獲得的知識。我在非常貧困的環境中長大。我是一名來自古巴的難民,我生活在邁阿密的一個主要是老年人的地區。因此我經常獨處。我會翻垃圾箱收集可閱讀的東西。正是這些知識讓我有幸獲得了閱讀的熱情。我遇到很多人,尚未享受到這種福利。也許他們對閱讀和學習沒有熱愛。我自認為,我擁有這些知識。我曾經和恐怖分子、間諜、持有火箭筒的這個國家的敵人坐在一起。而其他人從未有過這樣的機會。我從中學到了很多,還有來自我的閱讀。所以為什麼不分享呢?讓他們的生活稍微輕鬆一些。當你說讓他們的生活稍微輕鬆一些時,如果我能接受你的知識,我的生活會如何變得更好?我會如何變得更有生產力?這是一個很好的問題。想象一下,能夠提前感知事物,因為你能更快地讀懂其他人和情況。大多數人看到一種行為,會坐在那裡思考:他們對我不滿嗎?他們在開我玩笑嗎?或者其他任何事。然而想象一下能夠用更快的速度看待某事並解析它,讓你能將注意力轉向其他事情。我們大多數人將面部解構為額頭、眼睛、耳朵等等。但想象一下能夠一次性評估整個臉、肩膀、手,所有一切,並從這些信息中推斷。這會給你帶來巨大的優勢。
    在談判中,還需要能夠讀懂他人。同時,我們卻忘了別人也在讀我們。我們希望傳達什麼樣的印象?如果我能獲得你所提供的所有知識,並將其實施,那麼你認為我生活中的哪些領域會改善?首先,是在你自己內心,例如,能夠自我評估。如果假設你有憤怒問題,或者你容易觸發情緒,那麼,我該如何應對呢?首先,你要評估一下,發生了什麼事?你的胃不舒服,胸部緊繃,情緒開始波動。那麼我該怎麼做呢?大多數人並沒有接受過這方面的教育。這只是其中一部分。例如,如何與你的孩子更有效地溝通。舉個簡單的例子,雖然沒有人教過這一點,但我可以告訴你,如果你像一位訓練指導員一樣站在孩子面前,脖子僵硬,你會得到非常不同的反應。如果你稍微站遠一點,並傾斜你的頭,那麼你與孩子之間的溝通會截然不同。單單傾斜頭部就能增強溝通效果,與你直接站在他們面前的情況大相徑庭。那麼,這對現實生活有什麼應用呢?實際上,你可以改變別人願意給你的面對面時間。假設你只有兩分鐘的時間,你想通過傾斜頭部來延長這段時間。我們已經證明,只要我們表現得放鬆,沒有 agenda,願意傾聽,就能改變別人願意花多少時間與你面對面。這樣的應用可以變得具有變革性。如果你應用這些知識,某些人可能會看重知識卻不去實踐,但你可以在家中、工作中或談判中使用它。例如,我所教授的一個方面是時間的價值,時間實際上可以作為一種非語言溝通。當我談論非語言時,我所指的是任何傳達信息但不使用詞語的方式。那麼,你可以利用時間作為非語言來表達”我在掌控”。無論是誰主導和控制時間,誰就掌控全局。因此,即使我改變信息的傳遞方式,減慢節奏,你在談判中也已經開始掌控了。當你正確執行這一點時,這是一件很美妙的事情。因此有許多應用。顯然,像你一樣,你基本上是在研究人類行為。你是一個商業人士,但你其實真正從事的是與人相關的工作。當我們了解需求時,有些是生物上的,有些是需求、渴望、偏好,還有別人的偏好,他們喜歡如何接收這些信息?他們喜歡喝什麼樣的咖啡?所有這些都很重要。但他們又恐懼什麼呢?大多數人不會告訴你他們有恐懼。他們會說,哦,我對那件事有點擔心,或者我不確定這是否是一項好的投資,或者我們需要做一些盡職調查。但大腦只認識恐懼。一旦你理解這一點,這會給你帶來更大的空間,以更有效地追求你有興趣做的事情,以及你的職業生涯。沒錯。你在FBI工作超過30年,是嗎?我在執法機構工作了30年,其中在FBI工作了25年,主要專注於反諜報領域。但在FBI,你的角色不止一個。我也是一名飛行員,因此我負責監控飛行。我還是一支SWAT隊的指揮官。所以我進行SWAT的工作,並實際與來自倫敦的SAS合作。然後我還參加了行為分析計劃。 我們利用這一技能來抓捕間諜。什麼是行為分析計劃?在1989年和1990年,FBI開發了一個非常秘密的程序,分析的不是死人,而是我們如何利用人類行為來抓捕間諜、捕捉恐怖分子。我們一旦抓住他們,就要如何進入他們的心靈。要如何讓他們告訴我們他們的計劃與目的等等。因此,我們創建了這個計劃。我和另外五名特工從12000名FBI特工中被選中,成為這個新行為分析程序的一部分,本來應該是保密的,但意外地泄露了。我們的工作是評估國家安全威脅,然後看看如何利用我們對人類行為的知識來對抗這些威脅。所以當你說你的許多工作是抓捕間諜時,我們大多數人只從《詹姆斯·龐德》及其他類似的媒體上聽說過間諜。因此我們其實並不了解間諜的現實。假設我完全裝傻一會兒,其他國家派人進入其他國家,比如美國、英國、澳大利亞、加拿大,這是為了做什麼呢?每個國家都有其利益。有很多是通過外交獲得的,而很多則是通過我們所稱的間諜行為獲得的。因此,這與電視和電影裡的情節完全不同。一些國家,特別是敵對國家,派遣我們所稱的敵對情報官員,通常假裝成外交官,但經常假裝成學生、科學家或商人。他們的工作是獲取特定領域的知識,包括軍事知識、科學與研究、意圖和計劃,軍事意圖和計劃。或者他們可能對例如阿根廷今年的小麥生產量感興趣,因為這可能影響全球穀物的價格。因此,商業間諜行為也是如此。因此,每個國家都在努力防範,以便確定,誰在這裡試圖進行間諜活動。所以這就是我們所做的。這是反諜報工作。這是間諜行為。這和電影裡的情節完全不同。我們不會從建築物上跳下來。
    雖然我們有時會這樣做,但這並沒有詹姆斯·邦德那樣光鮮亮麗。
    那你以前曾經抓過間諜嗎?
    我抓過。
    我逮捕過間諜,多位間諜。
    給我一個在法庭上你識別的最有趣的間諜例子。
    他們來這裡做什麼?
    他們從哪個國家來的?
    結果發現,這是一個美國人,因為我們也有所謂的變節者。
    以羅德里克·詹姆斯·拉姆齊為例,他在1989年,我被要求去面談,因為我們認為他是德國發生某件事情的證人。
    他是一名前陸軍軍士,被軍方開除。
    軍方想查明他是否知道一些失踪文件的事情,是否見過什麼。
    在我對他的面談中,我再重申一次,我認為他是證人,他在家裡抽著香煙。
    我提到過一個曾在那個基地的人名,但該人正受到德國當局的調查。
    事實上,是由聯邦刑事警察局調查,這相當於美國的FBI。
    他沒有理由對此有反應。
    這只是個名字。
    但當我提到這個名字時,他的香煙抖了一下。
    我對人類行為有一定了解,知道這種生理變化肯定是由某些重要的事情引起的。
    為什麼一個名字會影響他?
    於是我以科學方法詢問他另外20分鐘的其他事情。
    然後我再次提到了那個名字。
    果然,他的香煙又抖了一下。
    到那時,我已經確信有某種陰險的情況。
    結果德國人逮捕了康拉德。
    康拉德就在那裡。
    克萊德·康拉德。
    那就是受到懷疑的那個人。
    而我當時正在面談的羅德·拉姆齊並不是。
    於是我結束了那次面談,說服我的上司繼續與羅德·拉姆齊交談。
    這導致了一項長達十年的調查,以及逮捕了三、四、五、六、七名其他個體。
    所以那個香煙抖動的羅德·拉姆齊是,他在間諜活動中針對美國嗎?
    他在做的事情,這是一個好問題,請原諒我沒有解釋。
    當他在軍隊服役時,他和克萊德·李·康拉德正在竊取軍事機密。
    從哪裡?
    從美國陸軍。
    他們正在竊取美國陸軍的機密,然後通過匈牙利情報局將其出售給蘇聯。
    所以他是美國的背叛者。
    所以他是個叛徒。
    這往往是任何國家的最大問題,就是內部的叛徒。
    他們將間諜活動提升到了工業化的程度。
    我指的是他們實際上不再使用35毫米相機來拍攝文件。
    他們實際上在拍攝視頻,以便加速處理數千頁的內容。
    這是美國歷史上最具破壞性的間諜案件,因為他們已經洩漏了美國的核發射密碼,這在德國進行。
    這使得整個西歐都暴露於風險之中。
    核發射密碼是什麼?
    是的。
    那是什麼?
    我們世界各地的核資產由兩個部分控制。
    有一個叫做許可行動鏈的東西,這就像每個裝置上的最後安全鎖。
    然後是發射碼,它表示有權限使用這種武器。
    所以拉姆齊能夠竊取實際的核發射密碼。
    這是一張卡。
    它由一種我無法描述的特殊材料製成。
    它由特殊金屬和塑料以及其他材料製成。
    他們所做的事情的固有危險在於,他們並不能啟動發射。
    這只能在國家指揮當局層面啟動。
    但如果這個發射碼被洩漏並交給當時的蘇聯,這是在1989年之前,那麼外國敵對情報機構就可以拿到它並進行複製,但在裡面放錯號碼。
    通過放錯號碼,如果它在一個金字塔結構中,並且放置得足夠高,對吧?
    假設你控制著整個東海岸。
    也許你不想為俄羅斯間諜活動,但以10萬美元的報酬,假設你願意把這個放進去,並把那裡的取出。
    好吧,所以也許這在某種程度上讓你良心不安減輕了一些。
    這樣你基本上,如果是金字塔結構的話,你可以癱瘓其下的一切。
    好吧,所以某人可能已經更改了密碼,放了假的進去,這意味著這將不再起作用。
    在最高層級下,然後什麼都無法運行,如果你在最高層級進行訪問。
    他們入獄了嗎?
    哦,是的。
    是的。
    那位香煙抖動的家進監獄了。
    33年。
    讓我最後這樣說。
    這起案件使西歐及美國的安全受到了威脅。
    在這起案件中作證的將軍說,若真的爆發敵對行動,西方的失敗在三天內是板上釘釘的。
    這是如此具毀滅性的事件。
    是的,讓這件事情沉澱一下。
    那是他的話。
    因為這些人所造成的損害,西方的失敗將是無可避免的。
    並非所有案件在逮捕間諜方面都如此顯著。
    所以我在讀另一個案例時,發現你因為一個男人握花的方式而抓住了他。
    是的。
    你知道,很多時候這完全依賴於行為。
    你知道,擔心某人看手錶的頻率。
    但也許當他們執行任務的時候,他們看手錶的頻率更高。
    我們拍攝了這個人,他被我們稱為“非法”間諜。
    在間諜術語中,“非法”是指某人神奇地出現在美國,假裝自己是一個美國人,一直都是美國人,就像電視劇《美國人》一樣。
    但我們有來自我們某個姊妹機構的線索,來自另一個國家,說我們認為這個人可能是某個假裝成美國人的人,你需要關注一下。
    我們正在進行,一起把整個團隊聚集在一起,我們六個人。
    我們在看這部電影,你知道,它的拍攝是偶然的,正好是在情人節拍攝的。
    於是我們看到他走進一間花店,又從花店走出來。
    當他走出來時,我就說,他絕對不是美國人。
    你知道,大家都看著我,像是在說, excuse me。
    我說,他不是這裡的人。
    然後他問,怎麼會?
    我說,看看他提著花束的方式。
    美國人提著花束是花束朝上的。
    東歐人則是花束朝下提著。
    而且,他繼續這樣提著。
    所以,我做了一個叫做假設的行為。
    有一天我們攔住了他,我告訴他,你知道,我是FBI的,我問他,想知道我們是怎麼知道的嗎?
    這就是我想要的第一個觸發點,看看他的反應。
    他上當了,並且說,繼續。
    大多數人會說,滾開,走開。
    我說,這就是你提花的方式。
    他的下巴垂了下來,眼皮變得沉重。
    當他在評估他所做的一切時,你知道,他已經練習了所有的東西。
    他的英語非常流利。
    你知道,他聽起來像個中西部人。
    在經過幾個小時的愉快聊天後,他同意跟我們合作並承認了一切。
    他承認了什麼?
    他承認是被一個外國政府派到這裡的。
    他的工作作為一名非法移民是要在美國,扮演美國人。
    大多數人不理解,為什麼一個國家會花那麼多錢來訓練這些人好像是美國人?
    他們不明白的,是他們在這裡的目的是為了當敵對行動爆發時。
    他們可以報告,例如火車運輸,什麼火車在運送武器,哪些機場被用來做什麼用途。
    他後來告訴我們,他們經常會獲得一些爆炸物的藏匿物,這樣他們就能夠摧毀某些任何導彈無法做到的東西。
    所以這就是他們在美國藏匿的角色。
    這不是為了從事間諜活動。
    而是在敵對行動爆發時能夠隨時在這裡。
    所以你讓他轉而和FBI合作?
    正確。
    那這意味著他不會受到懲罰?
    嗯,他不會受到懲罰,因為他除了移民違規外並沒有犯下任何罪行。
    但他能夠向我們透露的內容,簡直令人震驚。
    是哪個國家?
    我不能說。
    但顯然,他們必須有足夠的資金和足夠的興趣來執行這樣的行動。
    如果你必須猜測,住在我們中間有多少人是被外國派來的間諜,你認為會有多少?
    好吧,讓我們先定義一下。
    你知道,如果他們是敵對情報人員,那麼從外交人員中最少可以有3%的比例,最多曾經是蘇聯,其85%的外交人員都在進行間諜活動。
    我想,這是數字,所以你有這些。
    那麼,如果你是指有多少非法移民,我會說至少在英國有至少兩打,在法國可能有一打。
    而且,你知道,鑒於我們跨越五個時區,在美國會有一整批、成群的他們。
    我相信英國只有跨越一個。
    我想這部分是因為我在閱讀一些資料的時候,看到許多非法移民穿越美國南部邊境,其中許多人是中國人。
    還有一篇文章在質疑這是否可能是一個故意的行為,就是為了將非法中國人帶入美國以便於未來的某種目的。
    你知道,大的主張需要大的證據,但我還沒有看到這樣的證據。
    根據我的經驗,中國的情報機構更傾向於使用學生和科學家。
    我們在這裡大約有80,000名中國學生。
    我知道,例如在80年代初和90年代初,他們會獲得津貼。
    我一直印象深刻的是,他們會給予餐飲津貼,但圖書館複印的津貼卻非常大。
    我們在FBI稱之為線索。
    所以他們會獲得150美元作為飲食津貼,但會獲得數千美元用于能夠從圖書館抄寫更多的東西。
    對於他們來說,對於任何國家,派遣學生來這裡,並在工程學或其他相關領域就讀,這是更容易的。
    在這個肢體語言的主題上,存在著激烈的爭論,因為有些人說肢體語言確實給我們提供了線索。
    有些人則說沒有提供線索,因為存在文化差異。
    肢體語言重要嗎?
    好吧,讓我回答你剛才問的問題。
    首先,肢體語言是極其重要的,因為我們出生時沒有講話的能力。
    所以我們必須去理解面前的嬰兒。
    如果說肢體語言A,不重要或是主觀解釋,我會說這在世界各地的精通此道的人中是微不足道的情緒。
    我會說明為什麼。
    一個嬰兒出生時沒有講話的能力,但母親很快就會通過非語言的方式了解到這個孩子是否肚子痛,是否需要只是得到安慰,是否感到冷或熱等等。
    這裡有很多垃圾,那可能是我能用來形容肢體語言中更乾淨的字眼,這意味著那個或其他。
    但我們隨時都極其準備去溝通,無論我們是否感到舒適,是否自信或對問題的理解。
    我們之所以必須進化出這樣的能力,恰恰是因為我們總是被捕食者包圍。
    例如,史蒂芬,當你有疑問或希望跟進我問的問題時,你會非常巧妙地使用眼睛。
    你皺起了眉頭。
    一隻眼睛升起,另一隻則下降。
    你是個容易讀懂的人。
    所以我會隨之提供更多信息。
    你不需要教我這個。
    現在,我想爭辯的是,我是否看到了限制?
    我是否看到了輕視或鄙視?
    嗯,這是個愚蠢的論點。
    我們並不是進化出來以獲得完美的答案。
    進化是關於成功的近似。
    換句話說,如果我能在75%到80%的時間內準確,這實際上已經足夠好了。
    已經足夠好了。
    所以我教的是,你看到的是舒適還是不適,心理上、身體上等等?
    在心理學中,我是否看到的是正向價值還是負向價值?
    平衡,你明白嗎?
    你在皺眉頭。
    價值的意思是什麼?
    價值實際上是指是否平衡,或是有多少電流朝這個方向或那個方向流動。
    那麼它的價值是什麼呢?
    如果某件事是正向價值的,那意味著什麼?
    正向價值的話,你會看到違反重力的行為。
    你會看到強調。
    你會看到很多幽默、敏捷和廣泛的手勢等等。
    如果是負向價值的,則會是約束。
    你會看到皺眉頭。
    你會看到嘴唇收緊、變小。
    你會看到很多面部觸碰。
    我不知道,對吧?
    所有這些安撫者。
    所以我認為不要再尋求完美了。
    事實上,哈佛的安巴迪博士,不幸的是她已經去世,她發現我們人類在彼此評估中會在75%的時間內準確。
    這是一個非凡的數字。
    她的研究非常廣泛。
    你可以查找她的研究。
    這一切都是在尋找她所稱的薄切評估的指導下進行的。
    薄切評估,你們所有的觀眾都應該知道。
    因為它告訴我們,僅僅三毫秒,我們實際上就能對彼此做出相當不錯的評估。
    而在三毫秒內,我們的準確度達到75%。
    是的。
    所以他們做了幾項實驗。
    他們讓人們進去,如同通過打開教室的門來觀看一位老師,觀看她幾秒鐘後再關上門。
    他們評價那位老師的評分與那些整個學期坐在教室裡的人相同。
    在…
    她是一位好老師嗎?
    她是一位溫暖的老師嗎?
    她是一位有同理心的老師嗎?
    她是一位勝任的老師嗎?
    等等。
    你摸著你的臉,因為裡面有許多不可置信的成分。
    你必須知道,這項實驗在很多領域中反覆進行。
    當你說出這句話時,我在想,真是封殺。
    像,我在想,如果有人這麼快地讀懂你,我在想留下不好的第一印象是多麼容易。
    好吧,你知道,當我開始研究肢體語言的時候,正式是在1971年,對學校的學業毫無興趣。
    所以我創建了自己的學習計劃。
    所以當我在1971年開始研究肢體語言時,我記得人們說,最初的20分鐘是給人留下印象最重要的時刻。
    然後幾年後變成了15分鐘。
    到了1980年代,有人說,哦,最初的四分鐘。
    等等,等一下。
    那是古老的信息。
    我們現在知道,這一評估在最初的三毫秒內已經完成。
    這比你的眨眼速度還快。
    而且你可以開始做一些事情做得不好,開始在那段時間內對他人產生負面影響,因為潛意識評估他人的速度要快得多。
    順便說一下,我沒有提到這點。
    甚至在我們出生之前,我們就在評估周圍的世界,根據周圍的噪音、母親的語音節奏進行評估,這是為了生存的目的,因此在子宮中的嬰兒開始評估周圍的世界,以至於當那位嬰兒出生時,你可以查看研究,嬰兒會以母語作為模仿,從而,研究人員發現,德國母親的嬰兒與法國嬰兒的哭聲是不同的,會有不同的音律。
    這是主導的,以便我們能更好地適應。
    而這與商業直接相關,因為同步即是和諧。
    我們同步的越快,我們就能越快地達到和諧。
    所以我們是預先編程好的。
    如果你的觀眾對此感興趣,他們可以查找有關嬰兒哭聲的音律的研究。
    那麼,如何實現同步呢?
    所以如果同步等於和諧,即如果我們彼此同步,那麼在商業或生活等方面,我們就會和諧一致。
    對。
    那麼,當我遇到某人時,我該如何與他同步呢?
    首先,在遠處,如果我看到你在走廊上走過來,然後你說,
    嘿,喬,你知道的,我說,史蒂夫,你好嗎?
    對吧?
    我在和你鏡像。
    你知道的,這與1960年代初卡爾·羅傑斯的工作有關。
    他發現同步會讓我們進入一種綁定的心理狀態,你看看你用手打招呼並揚起你的眉毛,嘿,那就發出強烈的訊息。
    所以如果我這樣做,你可以想像如果你這樣跟我打招呼,而我卻說,嗯,你好嗎?
    是的。
    這就像,我們完全不和諧。
    我們完全不同步。
    所以我們從非語言開始。
    例如,從服裝開始。
    你知道,如果你去一個會議,我們可能會穿得一樣,或者彼此接近。
    我們現在看看我們的手勢。
    我們實際上在鏡像彼此的手勢,甚至連我們的拇指都是完全一樣的方向。
    為什麼?
    因為我們對彼此感到舒適。
    如果我們很好的同步,我們會向前傾斜。
    到你甚至可以與個體合作,使他們冷靜下來,或讓他們開始欣賞,讓我們說,在談判中,更加開放心態。
    如果人們能夠鏡像你的行為,他們會變得更加接受。
    所以,如果人們能夠鏡像你的行為,他們會變得更加接受。
    如果我讓你模仿我的行為,那麼你會更能接受我所說的話。
    這是你的意思嗎?
    一般來說,我們不能像在玩遊戲一樣彼此模仿。
    對,對,對。
    這變得荒謬。
    但如果你在尖叫而我保持冷靜,那我們就無法進行談判。
    是的。
    這根本不會發生。
    舉例來說,你我在談話中可能做得相當好,互相模仿。
    如果我們能這樣交談,成功的可能性、面對面的時間以及達成更多目標的機會會更高,而不是突然之間我決定側坐、翹起腳來並靠在手肘上。
    單靠這個手勢,儘管它是種舒適的表現,但並沒有使我們達到同步。
    我所發現的一切是,即使在我與恐怖分子交談時,即使是那些非常痛恨我的恐怖分子,只要我能讓他們回歸到基本上用相同的方式和詞彙交流的程度,如果他們說「我的家庭」,就不要說「妻子和孩子」。要用「家庭」。
    不要使用專業術語。
    你知道的,如果他們說,「那個價格是多少?」不要回來說,「這的點數是多少?」這不是他們所問的。這是一個很好的方式來證明你沒有在聽。
    我總是強調的另一件事是,很多年來人們說,試著減少所有情感,以免干擾。
    這不是我們進化的方式。這絕對不是我們進化的方式。
    我們進化是為了處理情感,因為情感讓我們活下來。
    當我們的杏仁核感受到威脅時,它就是為了應對這一點。而任何負面情緒都會突出表現。
    這是我教授的第一件事。如果它真的是負面的,它會突出。我們優先評估這些。我們首先處理這個。
    而在商業中,我們經常看到的情況是,你知道,有些人很難找到你的地點。他們很難停車。然後他們不得不去找你的接待員,而接待員正在打電話,花了大約七分鐘才說「早安」。
    而當他們說的時候,卻沒有任何熱情。然後他們還得通過安檢,然後乘坐擁擠的電梯,然後最終到達你的辦公室。
    而你想讓他們毫不費力地直接進入會議,而不帶著那所有積累的負面情緒。這不是人類進化的方式。這絕對不是我們這個物種進化的方式。
    我們的物種進化是為了避免衝突,通過首先處理這一點來減少這些情緒。這就是講故事的部分起源,我們來到這裡說,「你知道,我追逐它。我能攻擊自己,然後我反擊,你知道的。」
    然後我們經過整個故事講述,這具有神話般的比例和神話般的特徵,作為原型。如果你 subscribe 佛洛伊德心理學,我經常使用的論點是這個。
    有多少人在爭論中,30分鐘後,你記住了所有你應該說的聰明話?
    我們都有。因為情感大腦劫持了神經活動。
    如果你想讓人們發揮最佳狀態,如果你想讓關係達到最佳狀態,就要宣洩這些情感。把它表達出來。給它時間。
    好吧。而且是的,你必須投入這些時間,然後再向前進,以便處理交易、業務等等。
    你幾次提到我所展現的不同類型的肢體語言,幫助你理解我的想法和感受。
    是的。
    我想剛才你提到的 glabula。這讓我想到了我在你的作品中讀到的有關眉頭緊皺的內容。
    對。
    什麼是眉頭緊皺?
    你眼睛之間這小區域叫做 glabella。
    glabella 很棒,因為大約在,我見過寶寶的時候有三、四天大。但很早我們就開始皺眉頭。
    換句話說,當我們有疑慮、不喜歡某個東西或不理解某個東西時,我們就會將這個部位緊皺在一起。因此我們皺了 glabella。有些人稱其為眉頭緊皺,因為我們今天有更好看的眉毛,而不像以前那樣毛躁的眉毛了。它們不會像以前那樣合在一起。
    所以很多表達出「我不理解」的表情,我們會使用微皺的眼睛和皺眉的 glabella。你知道,我們有時會觸碰臉部或抓癢自己的臉。
    我曾觀察到的47秒大的嬰兒。如果你在新生嬰兒面前照射光線,他會皺起下巴,因為他不喜歡這樣。在我的報告中,我有一個47歲的男人和一個47秒大的嬰兒,相同的時候發生相同的反應,當他們聽到不喜歡的東西。
    所以,在事實上,我們開始用臉部溝通得相當多。
    那麼眼瞼觸碰呢?
    對。
    所以很長一段時間,包括在我的一些寫作中,理論是很多人聽到壞消息時會掩住自己的眼睛或觸碰自己的眼睛。
    你說:「嘿,喬,你能幫我這個週末搬家嗎?」 哦,天啊,史蒂夫。對吧?
    你會看到很多這種情況。
    我大約五、六年前開始思考這個問題。於是我參加了一些人體解剖的課程。
    現在我幾乎相信,很多面部觸碰的行為,包括對眼睛的觸碰等等,都是跟第五腦神經和第七腦神經的神經支配有關。
    現在,你的觀眾中有些人可能會覺得這很有趣,那條神經是通往我們的額頭,實際上進入我們的眼瞼等等,而第七條是面部神經,距離到接收的那部分大腦的距離非常短。
    所以我想,你知道,我曾經假設過,我為《心理學今天》寫過文章,很多我們觸碰自己面部和眼睛的原因,哦,不,是因為那個壓力立刻傳到大腦並幫助減輕壓力。
    而且因為神經距離很短,對吧?我們可以按摩我們的腳來達到同樣的效果,但那距離就很遠。
    所以我認為很多臉部接觸,包括觸碰眼睛,都是因為它有能力在壓力來臨時安撫我們自己。順便說一句,這很有趣。1974年,我在大學時感到無聊。當時有一個實驗室,你可以觀察孩子們,並研究他們的遊戲。他們那裡有一些天生失明的孩子,從來沒有看過東西。我第一次看到一個從未見過光明的盲孩,當他們聽到一些不好的消息時,立刻用手遮住眼睛,這讓我感到震驚。這時我意識到,好吧,我們的歷史有240萬年。這是我們基因中硬接線的部分。這是我們舊神經迴路的一部分,正如大衛·吉本斯博士後來教我的那樣。這與感覺有關。因此,我們會如此頻繁地觸碰自己的臉。這通常是負面情緒和自我安撫的一種表現。我認為這是一個不錯的總結。但也要記住,我們在享受美好時光時有多頻繁地觸碰自己的臉。例如,當我在閱讀時,發現自己因為讀得非常快而翻頁。我用左手翻頁,但我會透過觸碰自己的臉來安撫自己,這是一種沉思的姿勢。女性則會玩弄自己的頭髮。整天,我們的大腦都在要求我們做一些事情來促進這種行為。但是當我們遇到壓力時,例如在談判中,當有人提出我們不喜歡的數字時,我們會從觸碰臉部轉變為抓癢臉部,因為大腦在告訴我們,嘿,做一些更強有力的事情,讓我保持在所謂的內穩態。因此,為了回答你的問題,是的,但它也適用於我們真的享受某一時刻的時候。
    至於我們的嘴唇?你剛才談到緊閉的嘴唇等。嘴唇透露了哪些線索?對我來說,嘴唇就像是身體的地震儀。當我們感到舒適和自信時,我們的嘴唇充滿血液,顏色會改變。當我們聽到一些不喜歡的事情時,血液會開始流出嘴唇,它們變得更狹窄,然後我們開始緊閉嘴唇。你知道,如果有人說了我不喜歡的話,我可能會嗯哼一下,對吧?或者我們開始咬嘴唇,因為感到壓力,或者拔嘴唇、拉扯它,做各種事情來安慰它。但是在我們壓力下,嘴唇會表現出很多緊張情緒。因此,這一點也適用於下巴。例如,如果你說了一些我可能不同意的話,我可能會轉動我的下巴,因為當你轉動下巴時,會對顳顎關節施加壓力。這本身就告訴大腦去別的地方,不要對這件事過於掙扎。所以我們總是在做一些身體的事情來對抗大腦可能正在經歷的任何事情。
    告訴我有關超鎖骨凹陷的事情。超鎖骨凹陷,它有其他的名稱。你可以稱之為小脖子凹陷,即在喉嚨底部的這個小區域。這是一個深凹的地方。這是人體中最脆弱的部分。所有空氣、食物、營養、血液、電、氧氣,所有東西都經過這裡。發生的事情是,我在1975年、76年時發現文獻中沒有提到,當人們緊張時,他們會立即遮住脖子,觸碰脖子。你知道,在文獻中,會提到「哦,她緊握珍珠」,對吧?有些男性往往會更強烈地這樣做,因為男性激素的影響。女性則更直接地觸碰超鎖骨凹陷。我發現,當缺乏自信、不安全感、恐懼、焦慮或擔憂時,人們會驚呼,「哦,我的天啊,你看到那個了嗎?」對吧?哦,壞掉了。大家的注意力都集中在脖子的這個小區域。為什麼男性會在緊張時抓住脖子或按摩脖子?順便說一句,在談判中,觸碰脖子是最糟糕的事情,因為你傳遞出的是弱點!任何有自信的人都不會觸碰脖子,你根本不會。你不會靠近脖子。你不會通風流通,因為你在表達的是,你受到了影響,這種通風行為。
    等一下,抱歉,當你說通風,你是指讓自己通風嗎?對。所以這可能是……通風行為是弱點的行為,因為你的體溫在一秒的五十分之一的時間裡改變,而你所透露的是有些消極的東西正在影響你。因此你不這麼做。但這裡有一種行為,觸摸脖子、遮蓋脖子、遮蓋超鎖骨凹陷。還有另一種行為。你知道,之前我們提到過我們被掠食者圍繞。我们其中一種行為就是在聽到噪音時遮住嘴巴或靜止不動。第三種行為是遮蓋脖子。遮蓋脖子,因為大型貓科動物總是會瞄準脖子。因此,大腦沒有一個滿是領帶的衣櫃。它大約只有四種選擇,而這四種行為是精緻的。經過時間的考驗,如果我們遮住嘴巴、遮蓋脖子、不移動,這些行為相當有效。因此,我們不必選擇很多顏色。而且有時你會看到一些人這樣做。在佛羅里達你會看到這種情況,當然我們在颶風過後的十一月也看到過,人們來查看他們的房子,卻用手遮住頭,手舉在這裡。哦,我的天啊。你知道,我們為什麼要這樣做呢?同樣是因為大型貓科動物。這些都是捷徑。這是持久的啟發,告訴我們「哦,不」,對吧?你會說,我們不再被它們所包圍了。好吧,去印度吧。去年有238起攻擊事件。這存在於我們的DNA中。這是為了生存而產生的反應。因此,我們有這些反應。
    但我確實會關注嘴唇和脖子,這些都是獲取信息的好地方。
    我剛剛在想,為什麼你會抱著頭。
    但當你看到某個東西倒下時,你也會抱著頭。
    所以如果你看到一棟樓在地震中倒塌,你會立刻。
    前幾天,有一輛舊車停在一條斜坡上,他們忘了拉手剎,
    我看著它慢慢滑下來。
    我發現自己在教這些東西的時候手一直在這裡舉著。
    不幸的是,車子是在馬路對面,我無法快點過去。
    它沒有造成任何損壞。
    但你會意識到,這些捷徑的存在是有其目的的。
    作為FBI探員,你所做的大部分工作都是某種形式的談判。
    你花了很多時間教導人們如何成為優秀的談判者。
    你剛才提到的談判,我是一個商業人士。
    我經常進行談判,無論是與客戶還是供應商,或進行面試。
    你知道,我不斷地在面試人,這我認為也是一種談判。
    我該如何提高我的談判技巧?
    在進入談判時,我應該考慮哪些事情?
    嗯,你知道,他們警告過我。
    你提出了深奧的問題。
    沒錯,在FBI中,當你試圖說服某人告訴我們真相,並使他們置於危險之中,這僅僅是談判。
    你可能會把它視為面試。
    但正如你所說,即使是一段對話,我也是如此看待談判的,從最簡單的層面來看,就是有目的的有效溝通。
    所以你會說,這樣說太過簡化了。
    我從來沒有聽過這樣的說法。
    那麼,想想看,目的究竟是什麼?
    好吧,我們一會兒會談到這個。
    要麼你有我需要或想要的東西,或者是其他的。
    但一定要有溝通,並且你必須理解我的意思和我的意圖等等。
    所以對我來說,這是一個提醒。
    我剛進入FBI時,一位前輩告訴我,面試並不是為了獲得供詞。
    我瞪大了眼睛看著他,什麼?
    不好意思,你的意思是說不是為了獲得供詞嗎?
    他說,你會得到供詞。
    面試是關於面對面的交流。
    如果你能讓人與你交談兩個小時、三個小時或四個小時。
    在某個案例中,我面試了一個人達12個小時。
    他們會告訴你所有你需要知道的事情,但你必須讓他們留在房間裡。
    所以我總是把談判看作第一步是如何以一種你願意與我交談的方式與你溝通?
    你會想和我談多久以達到那個目的,即交易。
    現在,如果我在評估你的服務,或者在談價格的話,我希望聽聽你要說的,
    我想說出我感興趣的目標,然後調和或處理任何可能存在的差異或問題。
    我認為當我們這樣看待談判時,我們可以說,這意味著我需要提前做很多準備,
    要了解我在和誰溝通?
    我將與誰進行談判?
    談判風格是什麼?
    他們是冷靜的嗎?
    他們會進來嗎?
    他們會把東西丟下嗎?
    我見過那些來自對方的律師進來,根本不打招呼,只是把東西丟下,說,
    我想聽聽數字。
    好吧,那麼我們該如何開始處理這個問題?
    因為來的人如果很具攻擊性,必須處理。
    你該怎麼做?
    你是該迎合他們的攻擊性,還是試著把他們帶回到你的立場?
    好問題。
    最糟糕的事情就是迎合他們。
    你通過掌控時間來主導他們。
    誰掌控時間,誰就掌控一切。
    所以他們進來,把東西丟下。
    所以通常來說,我們會先說,
    哦,你好啊。
    是呀,是呀,讓我們直入主題。
    然後我整個工作團隊知道,我們要讓事情慢下來。
    我們不會以這樣的速度工作,因為如果你以這樣的速度工作,他們就掌控了。
    所以我們慢下來。
    有幾個策略。
    你可以突然變得非常有視覺化,說,好吧,我們要把這些寫下來,
    然後把這些放在這裡。
    我們要放置,然後這是區別,
    有很多策略。但第一件事情是我們必須讓那個人明白,我們希望公平地進行談判。
    但如果認知上總是那個人作為欺凌者或總是掌控一切,你就永遠不會有平等。
    我有很多客戶說,嘿,你知道,我試過了你的所有策略,
    你知道,我面對的這個人就是,他太粗魯了。
    他只是個欺凌者。
    他進來的時候是那樣的,所以我總是問的一個問題是,他是唯一的來源嗎?
    他或她是唯一的來源嗎,第一點?
    第二,您願意容忍這個人多久?
    因為我們忽視了這一點。
    他讓你頭痛。
    每次去見他時你都睡不好。我想到一位客戶。
    每次約他都是緊張的波動,
    那麼你願意容忍這種情況多久?
    如果你願意忍受,那麼,你知道,他不會改變他的風格。
    然後我們進場,改變我們的曝光。
    所以我們不會讓我們所有的員工都面對那種消極情緒。
    我們派出我們的第一個人,說,
    看,這些是數字,我們在這裡合作。
    但有辦法去處理非常有毒的情況。
    但我們不會讓他們隨意而行,或者以為他們是主導者。
    我們以微妙的方式做到這一點。
    我們會稍微擾亂他們的議程。
    或許根據過去的會議,他們的議程是迅速向我們拋出這些問題。然後我們便必須適應這一點。因此,我們必須有經過排練的策略來應對這種情況。你的工作讓我想到的一件事是,在進入談判之前,實際上寫下我的談判目標是多麼重要。否則,你可能會被情感和當下的熱度所沖昏頭腦。是的,你並不是第一個在會議中進行談判卻突然發現自己在做什麼的人。所以,我喜歡以目的明確的有效溝通來進行談判的簡單性。因為很多時候我們參加談判時,首席財務官會在場。有時候,你的首席助理也會在那裡。但你還會有辦公室的法律顧問參加。他們的角色是什麼?而我的角色又是什麼?你知道,一些如此簡單的事情,比如,你要怎麼做?整個時間都盯著你的律師不放嗎?還是你要看著他?我們從研究中知道,當你看著和你同一方講話的人時,會有助於強化他所說的內容。在那位律師表達的最強烈的時刻,比如你之前所做的那樣,你會想要雙手交疊,因為這是我們表達自信的最有力的姿勢。交疊手指就是這樣一個小手勢。交疊手指是前德國總理安格拉·默克爾經常這樣做的。你會看到馬斯克也經常這樣做,史蒂夫·喬布斯的很多照片中也能看到他這樣做。但,你知道,你要為強調的那個時刻保留這個姿勢。因此,你能做的最糟糕的事情就是坐那裡一動不動。事實上,我們有研究,稱為靜臉實驗。最糟糕的事情就是在會議中保持靜止的面孔。你會被視為威脅,會被視為不太可信,會被認為不重要。嘴角下垂,眼睛朝右滾,這就是你的感知。這就是事情的發展。這些實驗首先在嬰兒身上進行發現,如果你拿起一個嬰兒,然後背過身去再回頭並微笑,嬰兒會感到滿足。你可以這樣做好幾次。但在最後一次時,你轉過身來並保持靜止。嬰兒會變得無法控制。他們會發作,對此感到很困擾。所以實驗者就說,嗯,那麼,這對我們的年齡段有什麼影響?所以他們決定用成年人來進行實驗。成年人也會做同樣的事情。如果你和我在交談,面部表情交換,最糟糕的情況就是我坐在那裡。你會覺得這讓人非常不安。是的,大腦感知到了這是一種威脅,你失去了可信度,因為你無法讀懂這個人究竟在想什麼。與其這樣,我寧可你不高興,這樣我至少可以把這放到一個盒子裡。這是一種看待它的方法。我不確定是否有人知道具體的原因。但我們所理解的是,靜臉,如果你在虛擬通話中,想要點頭,想要傾斜你的頭,想要做不同的手勢。但你能做的最糟糕的事情就是保持靜止。然後在談判中,當你和團隊交談時,說,聽着,當我們進去的時候,我不希望任何人只是坐在那裡。我希望有表情,當有人講話時,你要像對方一樣看著他們。但你必須計劃。接下來,我還發現談判者的另一件事,我在FBI做的一件事就是,我總是精心計劃我的面談。誰會第一個進入房間?誰會說什麼?我會坐在哪裡?誰會在什麼時候提供水?因為我需要掌控局面。誰會說什麼?這些都是人們不會考慮到的事情。但在我所接觸的人群中,你必須有一定的優勢。你必須擁有一定的心理槓桿,才能說,聽着,你可能是這個行業最大的製造商,而我只是剛起步。但我並不在這個低位。因此,我會感謝你開始重視我,而我會通過以某種方式進入來做到這一點。你要掌控局面,而且看起來美觀,哦,這很好嗎?他在邀請我喝東西。或者助理或其他人說,你想要一些茶嗎?你想要怎麼喝?等等。我們實際上見證的是,你已經成為了主導者,通過成為典型的父母形象。因為你在提供東西。因為你在提供。而且你掌握著控制權和食物。你知道,人們經常想,嗯,為什麼在上世紀七十年代的瑞典斯德哥爾摩,斯德哥爾摩綜合症如此迅速地在那些銀行搶匪身上發生,他們對受害者產生了如此大的影響,以至於在幾個小時內,受害者便開始為銀行搶匪辯護。這很簡單。他們成為了父母形象,而人質則成為了孩子。因此,我實際上不知道那個故事。發生的事情是,在斯德哥爾摩發生了一起銀行搶劫,搶匪進入並挾持了受害者。最終,他們被解救了。但他們發現,在短短幾個小時內,受害者開始為罪犯辯護。這被稱為斯德哥爾摩綜合症。它向我們展示了搶匪成為了父母的典型形象,而人質則成為了孩子。他們瞬間變得任你擺布。這在家庭暴力案件中是否也會發生?是的,你說對了。
    你表現得非常出色。
    你是第一個立刻就能明白的人。
    這就是為什麼你經常在家庭暴力案件中看到這種情況。
    你可能會想,怎麼會她被打了?
    她怎麼能為他辯護,通常都是這樣的情況?
    你會意識到,哦,我的天,我們好像有一種斯德哥爾摩綜合症,他是供養者。
    他是唯一的工作者或其他等等。
    但,回到談判的話題上,我認為這是我堅持的一件事,那就是如果你進入談判,你至少應該被視為平等的。
    一旦人們開始看不起你,就會讓談話變得非常困難。
    當你考慮進入房間,想想你坐的位置時,如果你走進房間去面談一個恐怖分子,你是想先進去還是想最後進去?
    你是否讓你的團隊先進去,然後你最後再出現?
    你對座位位置有什麼考量?
    對吧?
    因此,我一直堅持的一件事是我要先進入房間。
    所以他們已經在那裡了?
    不,不,不。我們會和他們一起走進房間。
    然後我會讓他們等一會兒。
    我會打開門,看看,然後說,哦,只是想確認這個房間是安全的,裡面沒有人。
    你知道,我之前也曾走進過一些人裡面。
    這開始建立了我的主導地位。
    然後我會說,嗯,為什麼你不坐在那裡呢?
    你知道,人們問我,為什麼你對這些罪犯這麼好?
    首先,我會回到那位老前輩的話,我想要面對面的接觸。
    我不在乎付出什麼來獲得面對面的接觸。
    但我也希望掌控局面。
    如果通過對他好並指向那把舒適的椅子能達到這個目的,那我就這樣做。
    然後我總是嘗試坐得更高一點。
    在蘭姆齊的情況下,我們會提前進入房間,然後調整家具,使我總是坐得比他高一到兩英寸。
    他從來沒有注意到這一點。
    蘭姆齊那個人抽煙時手會抖。
    會抖。
    最後我們一共進行了37次訪談。
    這些訪談都是在酒店房間進行的,主要是在奧蘭多地區。
    我們會提前進去,重新排列家具或搬進家具。
    但我總是坐得比他高。
    他從來不知道這一點。
    他總是坐在沙發上,沙發的高度被削減了,所以他總是坐得稍微低一些。
    因此他始終是稍微抬頭看我們,而我們控制著休息的時機。
    我,嗯,我總是保持注意,然後說,你知道,你現在想喝點什麼嗎?
    我說,嗯,這是一個好話題,我們為什麼現在不休息一下,喝個飲料,然後我們再繼續呢?
    他沒意識到的是,我是在以某種方式通過支配談話來建立對他的控制。
    肯定你們的聽眾會說,哦,這樣很操控。
    是的,但在交易階段,這和你告訴你的團隊,我需要現在休息一下,去洗手間,沒什麼不同。
    好的,休息一下。
    我並不覺得這有什麼問題。
    但隨著時間的推移,發生的事情是,他開始放棄許多他想要展示的強勢。
    他希望掌控局面,但我並不允許。
    有時,他會說,嗯,我現在可以抽根煙。
    我會說,等一下,因為你剛才說的真有趣。
    而我的夥伴,特莉·穆迪女士,我非常喜歡她。
    她是個很棒的夥伴。
    她看著我,像是說,真的,你要再逼他一下嗎?
    但這樣做奏效了,以至於我意思是,這是一個總是隨身攜帶律師電話號碼的人,卻從來沒有使用過。
    你提到椅子的高度。
    在這個背景下,身高有什麼重要性?
    因為我也在想Zoom,而現在有趣的是,關於Zoom的事情,我們在開始錄製之前也談到了,事實上我們的大多數對話現在都是以數字形式進行的,因此我們常常不會考慮身高。
    有時我與我的同事或夥伴通話時,我會在客戶或我們的商業夥伴加入通話之前經常請他們調整身高,因為他們要麼在鏡頭下方看,要麼在鏡頭上方看,我認為這也是不理想的。
    一個很好的術語,有很多可以說的關於身高,正如有美貌紅利一樣。
    對吧?
    那麼,美貌紅利,你可以查到,經過充分研究的美貌紅利基本上說的是,如果你長得好看,你將在未來的每一年賺取8%的收入。
    這就是美貌紅利,你可以在線查詢所有相關的研究和統計。
    但也有身高紅利,這是普遍存在的。
    如果你看看美國身高6英尺2英寸的人,他們占總人口的約3%,但在財富500強公司中,他們卻占了39%的首席執行官,身高6英尺2英寸。
    哇,那,我的朋友,那是大幅增加。
    你在想,高個子的人更聰明嗎?
    不,不,這和高大的好處有關。
    有紅利,因此我們傾向於在全世界看到這一點。
    對於任何不懂“紅利”這個單詞的人,它基本上意味著一種好處或獎勵,你可以把它看作是一種優勢。
    你有優勢。
    那麼,對於蘭姆齊,讓你的身高高出一英寸的紅利是什麼?
    你在做什麼,蒂姆?
    你是在稍微削弱他的權力,讓自己更強大嗎?
    我必須這麼做,因為他掌控了一切。
    他是間諜。
    他手中或腦中擁有所有證據,或是俄羅斯人擁有。
    俄羅斯人不會把它交給我們。
    他們是敵人。
    他們說,太糟糕了,夥伴們,但我們掌握了你們所有的秘密。
    他們的秘密之多,以至於以重量來計算,而非僅僅是頁數。
    我還面臨的另一個問題是他的智商。
    他的智商是自第二次世界大戰以來軍方記錄的第二高。
    他可以談論任何主題,從量子物理到任何事情。
    當你擁有優越的智力,對於他來說,這是真的,或是你正在與某人打交道,
    假設他是一個病態自戀者。
    病態自戀者約占人口的2%,但在CEO中卻佔了約20%。
    所以,你的病態自戀者會過高評價自己並傾向貶低他人,
    在我與他的情況中,他有自戀特質,我能應對,但他的超凡智力令人震驚,且他擁有完美的回憶。
    因此,從某種角度看,這很可怕,因為他所要做的就是瞬間傳送到另一個國家,
    然後他可以販賣所有他所記住的秘密。
    所以我必須扮演某種角色,但我也不能讓他主導調查,
    更何況這是一個使英國、德國及整個西歐以及加拿大和美國都處於危險之中的調查。
    我無法承擔,美國政府無法承擔讓他對他所掌握的知識掉以輕心,
    尤其是在我們知道他已經妥協了核反應堅持代碼之後。
    你介意我暫停這個對話一會兒嗎?
    我想談談今天的節目贊助商,Shopify。
    我一直認為,商業中最大的成本不是失敗,而是你浪費在做決策上的時間。
    花時間猶豫、過度思考或等待最佳時機。
    當我20歲時開始我的第一家公司時,我沒有經驗,也沒有錢。
    我擁有的是一個想法和迅速行動的意願,這使一切都變得不同。
    如果你一直在考慮創業,
    Shopify讓這整個過程變得容易得多。
    擁有成千上萬的可自定義模板,你不需要編程或設計技能,
    你只需要一個開始的意願。
    Shopify連接了從你網站到社交媒體的所有銷售渠道,
    並且它也處理後端的支付、運輸和稅收,
    讓你可以專注於前進和拓展你的業務。
    如果你準備好開始,請訪問shopify.com / Bartlett,
    並註冊每月1英鎊的試用期。
    那就是shopify.com / Bartlett。
    姿勢怎麼樣?
    因為那是一種讓自己看起來更高的方法。
    是的。
    一個人的姿勢中有任何線索嗎?
    玩弄姿勢以創造不同的印象有多重要?
    是的,絕對重要。
    不僅僅是姿勢,還有地盤。
    所以我把姿勢看作是,當我們看起來自信時,肩膀向後,我們的呼吸。
    對我來說,姿勢始於大腦,我們在呼吸中有多冷靜。
    我再次回到瓦倫西亞參加這個活動時,一位女士走到我面前,她說,
    你要上台了,怎麼可能不緊張?
    我回答說,我是緊張的。
    我只是在掩蓋它。
    我在表現得好像我控制著一切,但我學會了這樣做,
    因為你不想看起來像一個緊張的FBI特工。
    相信我。
    你想看起來冷靜、鎮定且沉著。
    在談判中,你不想看起來需要,或是顯得絕望。
    同時,你也不想給人一種冷漠的感覺。
    有時,那種舉止、姿勢和手勢的總和有著重要的意義。
    現在,你必須記住,我遇到的許多成功商人實際上是處於自閉症譜系上,是吧?
    所以,這些人不太會進行眼神接觸。
    他們可能有一些不規則的行為。
    我有一個要處理的朋友,他有亞斯伯格症,所以他有時會抽搐。
    因此,我發現其他人在理解他的時候感到很不舒服。
    我沒有任何問題。
    我只是看著,好的,這是他的正常行為,我們會一起相處。
    但你可以從一個人身上看出很多東西。
    當你在某些事情上投資時,你進行了盡職調查,並與人交談。
    是的,你可以全天看數字。
    但你同樣也在注意非語言溝通,並在想,他們是在傳達自信,還是在傳達渴望、需要或任何脆弱感?
    我剛在反思最近的一些面試。
    我們一直在面試一個特別高級的職位。
    有兩位最終候選人。
    我在思考你說的,如何其中一位最終階段的候選人極其冷靜,坐在椅子裡。
    而另一个候选人則非常向前傾。
    反思之後,第二位候選人顯然更渴望得到這份工作。
    但第一位候選人可能更有經驗,更自信,且自我價值感更高。
    他們能在那種環境中如此輕鬆,並在我的董事會上擁有那張椅子,這實際上讓我更加想要他們。
    因為他們告訴我,他們有很多選擇。
    他們不感到害怕。
    他們不害怕這個機會。
    你知道,這是個有趣的觀察,Stephen。
    而且你觀察到這種差異非常好。
    我尋找的其中一個要素是,他們的角色會是什麼?
    我不介意某人在緊張。
    我自己早期來自平凡背景時也常常感到緊張。
    我往往關注許多組織在計劃中不會尋求的事情。
    其中之一是解決問題。
    告訴我你解決過的問題列表。
    大多數人在招聘時從不問這個問題。
    他們會說,你知道,我會使用Excel。
    我會使用Microsoft。
    太好了。
    請告訴我你在上份工作中解決了哪些問題。
    而且,你知道,你是多麼有效率地做到這一點的呢?
    你怎麼知道他們是否解決了問題,還是他們在一個團隊中而是別人解決了問題?
    因為我所說的一件事,就是要注意他們告訴你多少個實例,還有他們是如何描述這些的。
    因為這裡有一件有趣的事情。
    解決問題的人會進入細節並感受到講述故事者的情感。
    他們只是傳達,僅僅傳達,但不知道解決問題所附帶的情感。
    所以當那個小孩終於弄清楚了如何去做,比如你給他們一個需要這樣或那樣的方式才能打開的密碼鎖,然後那個小東西打開了。
    當他們回來告訴你時,你可以看到他們的行為如同無重力般輕盈,眉毛揚起,眼睛閃亮地說:「我解決了問題。我解決了。我進來了。」
    是的。
    那位只是告訴你這個故事的人並不知道與之相關的情感。
    我還關注的另一件事是,他們可能緊張或其他原因,他們的觀察能力有多好?
    這是一個實際上拯救了許多公司的問題。
    當我說,從現在開始你要問他們觀察能力有多好時,他們會問,觀察什麼?
    一切重要的事情。
    人、事件、機會。
    對吧。
    如果你來找我說,「好吧,我可以編碼這個。」好的,這很好。
    但是在你將要處於的職位上,你將要管理人員。
    你對觀察人員的能力有多好?
    尋求這種能力的公司的好處是,當你去業務部門,去看自己的子公司時,你在尋找什麼?
    你在觀察什麼?
    哦,當我查看帳本時,員工們的態度怎麼樣?
    人們滿意嗎?
    他們快樂嗎?
    還是都看起來像是便秘一樣?
    我是說,我曾經進入一些公司,當我一進去,我就會想到,「哦,天啊,你們這裡有管理問題。」
    然後那個人說,「誰?有人告訴你了嗎?」
    我說,「嗯,你知道,如果我不識別出所有這些人都低著頭、沒有眼神接觸,我就得是臨床上愚蠢了。他們在地鐵上擦肩而過卻互不交流。你們這裡有管理問題。」
    而且,你知道,他們似乎是為了這種技能而僱用。
    但是當你實際上需要的是一個出色的觀察者時,這真的合適嗎?
    那麼自信呢?
    這是天生的還是你認為自信可以培養?
    我認為自信絕對可以培養。
    我來自古巴,失去了一切,以難民身份抵達,身無分文。
    然後突然之間,FBI請我成為,我的意思是,我並沒有申請FBI。
    FBI實際上主動找我,請我申請。
    然後突然我說,你們認真的嗎?
    就像,你知道,我23歲。
    你知道,我才剛開始學習如何刮鬍子,根本沒有自信。
    然後他們教你如何變得自信。
    你可以教導自信。
    我告訴人們,學習自信最簡單的方法就是對一件事保持自信。
    我不在乎那是否是你堆紙的能力比別人更好。
    我不在乎那是不是你整理床鋪的方式,任何小事。
    讓我看到你自信的樣子。
    讓我看到那比其他人都好。
    當你能對一件事感到自信時,那麼你現在可以對兩件事感到自信。
    然後你可以對三件事感到自信。
    這種我經常看到的人說「好,進來就自信吧」的胡說八道,我認為真是無稽之談。
    我認為你必須學習,而你的生理也必須學習對一件事保持自信。
    對我來說,我在踢足球時很自信,好嗎?
    我很快。
    我能做某些事情。
    我對此保持自信。
    我知道在籃球中,我能投三分球,好嗎?
    對此感到自信,但對許多其他事情並不自信。
    我曾經在一群高管面前的房間裡,我記得我沒有自信。
    那我該如何改進這一點?
    除非你是世界級的演員,否則你不能走進一個地方,突然假裝你很自信。
    我告訴人們,學會對一件事自信。
    有時這是知識。
    我在每一個會議上都不會進去而對那個主題了解不深。
    如果你想獲得自信,了解你能夠掌握的某個特定主題的一切。
    而這會給你帶來巨大的自信。
    我見過年輕人剛從大學畢業,坐在那裡,你知道,他們的肘部靠在身體上,看起來有些害羞,緊張地四下張望,不知道該往哪裡看。
    然後,我告訴他們,了解你的主題,了解你的主題。
    因為當他們開始談論這個時,他們會開始綻放並改變。
    所以在特定領域或行業中的能力會創造自信,然後逐漸滲透。
    是的。
    這就是軍隊的做法,例如英國軍隊,他們會把17、18、19歲的年輕人帶來。
    他們會說,你知道,我們將把你變成戰士。
    好吧,怎麼做到的?
    通過跑步、讓你爬繩索,做任何數量的事情,你可以做到並感受到那份自信。
    你在我看過的Wired的視頻中談到,我們可以用多種不同的方式來展現和增強自信。
    其中一個是實際上觀察你生活中那些自信的領導者,並試著複製一些這些自信的行為。
    對吧。
    另一個是關於你的聲音。
    使用較深的聲音,並在句子的結尾不要上揚就像在問問題一樣。
    對。
    讓我談談這些。
    不要嘗試重新發明那些成功的東西。
    一個自信的人不必講得很快,也不會提高聲音。
    對。
    我記得我第一次逮捕的時候,我說,停下來,這是FBI。
    我的聲音是,沒有人會停下來。
    沒有人,沒有人。
    和我一起的那些人說,喬,你得改善你的聲音。
    你必須要有指揮的聲音。
    好吧,指揮的聲音是低沉的。
    怎麼樣?
    比如,停在那裡。
    我給你一個例子。
    你跟大多數高管說,不,這是不可接受的。
    聲音太高了。
    “No”永遠是用低沉的聲音說的。
    不。
    我們會嗎?
    不。
    這聽起來像一個完整的句子。
    你讓他們練習說”No”嗎?
    絕對是的。
    我做了,知道嗎,持續了十年。
    每年二月份,鼓勵我寫書的布萊恩·霍爾邀請我去哈佛。
    我永遠不會忘記,我有一整個哈佛班級。
    我記得有76名學生。
    我讓他們都說“No,No,No”。
    越說越低。
    他出去接電話的時候,他回來時以為我在搞邪教。
    我說,不,布萊恩。
    我只是教他們正確的方式,因為這些將成為未來的高管。
    你不應該說,不,沒有,沒有,沒有,沒有。
    現在,這聽起來像一個完整的句子。
    不。
    不。
    這不是運作的方式。
    而且聲音總是要低。
    所以我們著重於單詞。
    更重要的是,我們在於手勢,佔據多少空間,因為你所佔據的空間,如果你在這裡。
    就像是萎縮和緊繃。
    你萎縮了。
    你不想過度。
    你不想看起來像小丑,但你想要擁有你應得的空間。
    然後,我認為學會有節奏地說話是非常重要的。
    當你有節奏地說話時,我也是這樣,大家會聆聽。
    他們有時間處理你所說的內容,同時也能附加上與之相隨的情感。
    誰以節奏說話?
    丘吉爾。
    馬丁·路德·金。
    我有一個夢想,有一天這個國家將崛起並活出其信條的真正意義。
    我們認為這些真理是不言自明的,所有人都是平等的。
    強大。
    你能想象如果他站出來說,我有一個夢想,有一天可能,聽到的人會是誰?
    但他是一位傳教士,他知道如何指揮觀眾。
    當丘吉爾說,我們將在空中與他們作戰,我們將在海灘上與他們作戰,我們將在登陸地點作戰,我們將在田野和街道上作戰,我們將在山丘上作戰,我們永遠不會投降。
    那個節奏不僅吸引人,而且非常有力。
    而許多高管不知道如何使用它。
    我曾經參加過一些演示會,那些人只是放鬆。
    他們甚至不聽所說的內容。
    然而,有人開始以節奏跟他們說,這是我們的報價。
    這不是最終的報價。
    但目前來說,這是我們最好的報價。
    現在,你開始注意。
    你不僅關注我的話,還關注其中的情感。
    這樣的說法要好得多,說,這不是我們的最後報價,但,你知道。
    當你稍微放慢速度並提供空隙時,會有一種真正的權威。
    這回到我說的,誰控制時間,誰就控制。
    你正在建立對談判舞台的控制。
    他們不教這些。
    你的手勢也是如此。
    你的手勢非常補充你所說的內容。
    即使在和我交流時,你剛剛說,誰控制時間?
    控制。
    所以我在想我們的手勢。
    我的手指張開,代表我們對某事的重要程度。
    當我們感到恐懼時,我們的手指合攏。
    當我們恐懼得很多時,我們的拇指會縮進。
    我在談判中見過人們因為突然將拇指縮進而放棄了很多信息。
    我說,好吧,他們害怕。
    因為狗會縮起耳朵。
    人類則會縮起手,無論你多黑暗,你的手,手掌都是非常明顯的。
    這是隨著我們的進化而來的,因為它們富有表現力。
    所以即使在光線較暗的地方,我們也可以用手來溝通。
    我們越自信,我們的手指就會越分開。
    我在乎。
    想象一下,我說,我在乎你,與我說,我在乎你。
    這是很大的區別。
    所以在第一個例子中,你的手指有點在一起。
    在第二個例子中,你把它們張開。
    這,我在乎這個。
    所以它們強化了這個訊息。
    而人類大腦也進化成尋找雙手。
    因為手,第一,可以用作武器。
    但第二,它們也象徵著我們的情感。
    和眼神接觸。
    是的。
    關於眼神接觸及其重要性已經說了很多。
    我應該了解眼神接觸和自信之間的什麼?
    在某些方面,眼神接觸是,我們可以花大約40分鐘來討論它,因為,作為一名教師,我可以告訴你,因為你想要有良好的眼神接觸。
    例如,當你與一位女性交談時,你不想讓眼神接觸從這裡下降到胸部。
    好的。
    所以你希望保持在臉部,對吧?
    所以你想保持在臉部,但你也不希望造成恐懼,除非你想要恐懼。
    所以你必須運用眼神行為。
    你必須運用像是移開目光的方式。
    現在,我們兩個在思考範例和其他事情的時候都會移開目光。
    你可以用眼神接觸來強調。
    看看我們多麼經常使用眼神接觸或眼睛來表達意見。
    也許跟你的伴侶說,你覺得怎麼樣?
    他或她可能會立即看向你的伴侶,而不是專門指向你的某人,他們會說,不。
    所以通過我們的眼睛,我們經常表達我們的意見。
    因此,在談判中,這是一個重要的領域。
    我經常思考的一件事就是如何快速建立融洽關係。你知道,我經常主持這個播客,有時我會想得太多,尤其是在遇到像你這樣的人時,因為我心想,哦,天啊,這個家伙會看我所有的資料等等。是的。所以每當我見到你這樣的肢體語言專家,也就是善於行為科學的人時,我有時會想得太多。我想和你談談如何建立融洽的關係。我們今天其實錄下了我們的互動。所以,當我走進來時,我這裡有視頻,讓我看看這個,看看是否有什麼。對於觀看的每一個人,我們會將其放在螢幕上,但我只是希望你能分析我和你見面時的互動,告訴我如何可以做得更好。好的。你好,喬。很高興見到你。所以首先,你在我來之前雙手插腰等我,這是一種表達自己在主導地位的方式。你就這樣站著。是的,我明白了。好吧,但你知道,我其實是記得這一點的。我記得我在想,把你的手從你的腰上拿開。不是,不是這樣。但是這是你的領域,我期待你在你自己的領域這樣做。但你立刻做的一件事是你繞過桌子,向我伸出手來握手,對吧?所以我常常說,對我們來說,人有多重要取決於我們行動的速度。好吧。所以你從那裡走到這裡,並且你馬上這麼做,展示出你真的在乎。有研究顯示,甚至11個月大的嬰兒會根據他們的移動速度來識別個體或甚至無生命的物體,以此判斷他們是否關心他們。朝向他們?是的,朝向他們。好吧。為他們做一些事情。好吧,這叫做親社會行為。甚至11個月大的嬰兒也能認識到這一點。所以這一點對我來說並不奇怪,因為你取得了成功。對我而言,成功是衡量人們與他人相處得怎麼樣。謝謝你的工作,感謝你。謝謝。沒問題。你非常非常聰明。你看起來像個在FBI工作的人。我,這是FBI的制服。這是……那我會被麥克風錄音,還是就這個?就那一個。剛剛好。好的。你對我的穿著有些有趣的評價,我很感激。這總是提醒我我現在看起來有多老。唯一我想補充的建議是我應該再站久一點,然後確保你坐下的同時,我也坐下。好吧。我想邀請你坐下,然後和你一起坐下。這樣的時間點比讓我獨自坐下要好。如果你能注意到在那個時候,我實際上仍高於你,而你已經坐下了。在談判中,我們會說這是不利的。那是什麼意思?這是一個不可以的事情。這對史蒂夫來說是一個大詞。不要這樣做。那記筆記呢?這是我在過去六個月中開始做的事情,在我在英國的公司開會時。我現在有個iPad,當有人發言時,這實際上幫助我,因為我的思維、處理和學習方式。這幫助我避免聽著聽著就想要發言。如果他們說了某些我擔心會忘記的事情,我可以馬上記下我想要說的,這樣我就有更多的時間來傾聽。但我注意到你在工作中提到,對於表現出你在乎他人而言,記筆記是一種非常有效的方式。好吧,我想對你說的是我對治療師所說的。治療師們犯的最大錯誤之一就是他們坐在那裡,因為他們中的許多人賺得少,不再有像以前那樣的秘書,所以他們在和客戶交談的同時打字記下觀察。我認為這是個大錯誤。而根據我公司所做的調查,並不是針對治療師的,而是針對他們的客戶,那些願意交談的客戶,結果是很糟糕的。我試圖強調的是在你面前有材料。如果有什麼特別的筆記,略作記錄,或者如果你有一位要做筆記的人,我不想錯過任何事情。如果你在寫作,你就無法進行觀察。而觀察實際上比寫作要重要。如果你開始講話,提到什麼超胸鎖突,它是超還是上胸鎖突?這是一個值得記下的筆記。然後我再回來回顧。但如果我一直在寫,我,你知道,我有年輕人告訴我,不過你只是個老古董。這就是我們長大的方式。我可以告訴你,從進化的角度而言,我們無法超越我們的DNA。我們只是不能,例如,學校進來說,你知道,你不能再擁抱學生了。好吧。別指望,為什麼,我們為什麼會有抑鬱的學生?為什麼會有,任何數量的事情,但我可以告訴你。我們進化出來就是為了擁抱,觸碰,互相問候,你知道,和你最好的朋友那些東西。當我們和朋友摔跤的時候,那場遊戲,那場摔跤,所有的那些都是隱性接觸。因為我們物種需要這樣。人類需要觸碰。有些事情是人類需要的。其中之一就是這種面部互動。當你專注於寫作時,實際上是在削弱這種互動。你怎麼看握手呢?因為握手就是我們以社會可接受的方式觸碰陌生人的方式。有沒有好的握手方式?有的,還有壞的握手方式。
    所以我總是說當你握手的時候,手指應該向下,對吧?很多人則會把手指翹起來。所以當他們握手時,讓我們看看是否能夠握到彼此的手。當他們這樣做時,你的手中就有了他們的手指在這個敏感區域。這是你親吻的地方。靜脈。對。嗯,手腕的內側也是一個敏感區域。所以現在你有這個男人的手指在這裡,這真的很奇怪。所以手指應該低,壓力應該均勻施加。你不要試著去做。唐納德·特朗普式的握手。對。不要,別做唐納德·特朗普的握手,或者別猛拉手。不用太緊地握住。不要玩柔術。像我這個年紀的人都有關節炎。我從不被這種情況打動。我曾經遇到過一些身材魁梧的男人,他們握緊我的手,然後我就想,你是認真的嗎?那關於掌握的方式呢?所以手掌的包圍對於真正的朋友來說是可以的,但大多數人不喜歡被手握住。如果你想觸摸別人的手。那麼你握手,然後觸碰上臂等等。對於任何喜歡抹茶的人來說,對於任何喜歡拿鐵的人來說,我的一家公司剛剛推出了罐裝抹茶拿鐵。我和創始人瑪麗莎交談,她說創造這個產品並不是一件容易的事。他們在2021年嘗試過推出,但商業上常常是這樣,開發過程變得極其複雜。因此,他們花了四年的時間來測試和完善每一個細節,創造出完美的 Ted 抹茶香草拿鐵和完美的 Ted 抹茶草莓拿鐵。所以我們在這些罐中擁有的就是來自罐子的咖啡師品質的抹茶。它的味道就像剛剛從你最喜愛的咖啡館製作出來的,自然甜美,自然醇厚,裝在罐中。我之所以投資這家公司並喝抹茶是因為抹茶作為能量源給我持久的精力,沒有我從其他產品中得到的那種大起大落。你可以在 Waitrose、Tesco 和 Holland and Barrett 購買他們的即飲罐裝抹茶拿鐵。這裡有個小優惠給你。如果你去 perfectted.com 並使用代碼 diary40,你將獲得首訂 40% 的折扣。請不要告訴任何人。保密好這個。代碼是 diary40。你在 perfectted.com 上可以享受 40% 的優惠。先去使用它,在他們改變之前。我這裡還有另一個視頻給你。所以他開始時手臂放下,但他在觸摸自己的脖子,捂住他的脖子。他在撫摸自己臉的左側,還有按摩自己的前額和脖子。這就是說,我們看了之後認為,這些都是心理不適的標誌。現在,為什麼會這樣呢,我們看到他的眨眼或眼瞼顫動。他在觸摸自己的臉。這是為什麼?我不知道。現在有一個宣泄的呼氣。看起來他在閱讀我的一本書。我想告訴你的是,這些都是你不希望一位領導者表現出來的行為。你肯定會在追隨者那裡看到這些,但不是在領導者那裡。你永遠不會看到將軍這樣做。當然不會在美國陸軍或英國陸軍中。他所做的所有行為,無論是安撫還是某種心理不適的指標,都是我們所認為的缺乏自信的行為。領導者通常是卓越的。你會說這些卓越的個體是造就的,而不是天生的。這是件好事,因為這讓你我都能接近這種卓越的水平。你已經確定了幾個使人卓越的特質。嗯,其中之一就是自我掌握。自我掌握,不論是亞歷山大大帝尋求蘇格拉底的學習,蘇格拉底教了柏拉圖,柏拉圖教了亞里士多德,然後亞里士多德教了亞歷山大大帝。所以亞里士多德教了亞歷山大,而他追求知識。托馬斯·愛迪生,美國最偉大的發明家之一,擁有1300項專利,6歲時退學,追求知識。我的出身雖然很卑微,我們非常窮,我真的不得不去垃圾堆裡偷書和雜誌來學習。你可以創建你自己的學徒計劃,學會掌握某個技能或知識,或體育動作等等。什麼是自我掌握的人,他們已經達成了什麼?他們已經完成了沒有人可以奪走的事情。沒有人能奪走這個東西。我擁有的所有知識、所有技能、所有經驗,沒有人能奪走。我為何要使用「自我」這個字?自我掌握。因為很大一部分,沒有誰,對吧?我們之前在談論,我說,我努力每週讀兩本書,這樣我就能每十年讀大約一千本書。沒有人告訴我這樣做。所以是自我。為什麼?因為我想知道。因為,為什麼達·芬奇要知道水中的漩渦,或啄木鳥的舌頭長度?誰在乎?這無關緊要。這是自我強加的。我們在這個世界上是達·芬奇對水漩渦興趣的受益者,這幫助他畫出《蒙娜麗莎》的秀髮,我們都是受益者。我認為自我掌握比大學能教的更重要。大學可以教你如何思考,但卻不能教你掌握。所以這是因為我聽到,顯然是學習和追求知識,然後還有自我掌握這一部分,感覺像是自我意識,意識到自己。嗯,我認為你是一個自我掌握的例子。這是宇宙中唯一能夠將可用的東西變成你生活一部分的語言。
    因此,無論是我的祖母教我如何與人交談,還是我的母親或父親,母親教我如何握手,姐姐教我跳舞,這些都是自我掌握的一部分。
    現在,我本可以拒絕這一切。 而很多人確實這樣做。 很多人拒絕科學,或拒絕哦,我不想學習跳舞,我不想學習這個。 好的,這是你的選擇。 但能夠觀察周圍的世界並從中學習,有著非凡的優雅,而你已經這樣做了,並說,我要把這些運用起來。 我為什麼要重新發明別人已經經歷過的東西? 我要採納我喜歡和偏好的東西,然後將其好好利用。
    第二個是觀察,我想我們已經談過這個。 觀察。 你知道,偉大的例子是一位父母能夠觀察到孩子們的即時需求等。我昨天在機場的時候看到有一個家庭,他們在等候的整個時間裡,彼此都沒有交談,甚至不關心彼此在做什麼。 我覺得這很困難,因為當我的女兒成長的時候,我從來沒有將目光從她身上移開。 我看到人們在使用自己的設備,就像這整個家庭一樣,他們錯過了很多事情,很多信息。
    偉大的發明都是通過觀察而來的。 魔術貼。 你知道魔術貼的故事嗎? 在第二次世界大戰的中間,一位瑞士人士走上山,回來時提醒自己,對吧?他看了他的襪子,說,天啊,這些小蟲,這些小…… 是植物嗎? 是啊,就是那些排出的小芽,會粘附在物體上。 在美國,我們稱它們為黏貼物。 有各種名稱。 他在顯微鏡下看,注意到它們不只是突出,而是實際上是彎曲的。 在彎曲的情況下,它們會黏附在一切上。所以他說,我就發明這個。 現有趣的是,我們談論觀察時,他只見過這一次。 有多少百萬人也見過它? 但只有觀察者能夠利用這一點。 這就是為什麼我告訴執行者,當你招募時,雇用好的觀察者,因為他們會拯救你。 他們會說,嘿,我看到這裡有一些壞的趨勢。
    所以,觀察是關鍵。 然後我們直接過渡到下一點,大多數人認為溝通僅僅是關於詞語,而實際上,溝通在每個文化中,主要、最有效和最具影響力的是非語言的。 而關於詞語勝過非語言的誤解,可以去參加一場葬禮。 去參加一場葬禮,看看話語效果如何,與其把手放在某人的肩膀上讓他哭泣。 這是我們溝通的最主要方式。 這是我們表達關心的最主要方式。 這是我們表達同理心的最主要方式。
    第四點是行動。 對我來說,這實際上與第二點,即觀察,密切相關,也與你的魔術貼故事相關,因為一定有很多人想,哦,我的天,那個東西黏在我身上。 他們卻什麼都不做。 也許甚至有人覺得,哦,那可能有用。 但然後最難的部分往往是採取行動。 這就是行動。 做一些事情,正如我在書中所說,要卓越。 去做一些有益於社會的事情,但不要拖延,對吧? 如果你想讓別人知道你不在乎,最糟糕的事情就是拖延。 這種情況一直在發生。 你走到櫃台,走過去說,嗨,你知道,我希望能幫助這件事,然後他們就,哦,我不知道。 讓我去後面看看。 他們走到後面花了時間,然後又花時間回來。 你不如大喊,我不在乎。 我告訴經理的就是,這是你的責任。 你為什麼要雇用一個無法以光速移動的人? 因為移動就等於關心。 所以如果他們的態度是這樣的,你不如掛個牌告訴別人,我不在乎。
    你可以說,好吧,也許他們有行動不便的問題。 好吧,前提是這樣。 我會說,你知道嗎?我需要一分鐘,因為我剛做過髖關節置換,但我會立即處理這個問題。 我們可以理解。 但是當我們不通過行動來表達我們的關心時,這是如此直接。而第五點是心理舒適。 你在書中寫到,這是人類擁有的最強大的力量。 確實如此。 有趣的是,在我研究人類的這些年裡,人類並不尋求完美。 嬰兒並不在乎是吸自己的拇指還是雙胞胎妹妹的拇指。 它們是可以互換的。 人類並不尋求完美。 我們尋求的是心理上的舒適。 提供這一點的人最快會成為贏家。 就這麼簡單。
    如果你能的話,你太年輕了。 但我記得電腦剛出來的時候,它們放在醜陋的盒子裡,放在醜陋的商店,並且藏在櫃檯後面,它們很醜。 史蒂夫·喬布斯出現,說,不,我們要把它們放在像我們有的那樣的實驗桌上,讓它們變得易於接近。 所以這個神秘的設備是一個如此醜陋的詞,你會忘記人們曾經是多麼厭惡電腦。 他們曾經會在晚上進來,剪斷電源線。 這就是人們對電腦的恐懼。而他從4%的市場份額增加到現在的67%,或者其他數字。 為什麼? 心理舒適。 我告訴商人,當你在談判時,你所談判的是能否創造足夠的心理舒適,使對方能夠接受,讓我覺得,好吧,也許我沒有得到我想要的一切,但在這段時間內,我可以忍受這種心理舒適。
    我可以回到董事會,報告這是我所能做的最好。追求心理上的舒適感。那么,在任何上下文中,如何創造心理舒適感呢?你今天開始了這個過程。你歡迎我進來,然後你問我:你想喝點什麼?你想要水嗎?你想要茶嗎?你想要咖啡嗎?這些開始了心理舒適感的過程。我們身處一個安靜的環境中。噪音少,心理舒適感更多。燈光少,不傷眼。這一切從生物、物理、生理層面開始,然後到認知層面。因此,心理舒適感。我們在談判。因此,你想提供三千美元。我認為我的價值是六千美元。我們如何達成呢?好吧,我會讓你告訴我你只能提供三千美元的理由,而我會告訴你我的理由。好吧。事實上,我們能夠講述自己的故事,開始了心理舒適感的過程。現在,最終,我可能不得不遵循那個,因為只有這麼多錢。如果不在預算之內,就不在預算之內。但你可以加入一些說法,例如,這是我們目前所能提供的所有。但我們會在三個月後重新評估這個問題。如果那時根據收益能再給你每月五百美元的話,我們會這樣做。我們會逐步進行,始終考慮什麼能提供心理舒適感。苛刻、憤怒、不關注需求、想要、欲望甚至偏好,都會造成心理不適。在2009年,你寫了一本書叫做《我們身邊的自戀者》。是的。你之前說過大約2%的人是自戀者,但25%的首席執行官呢?22%。高達22%的首席執行官具有自戀特徵,是的。那麼,當有人與自戀者打交道時,他們需要怎麼做才能管理該情況?因為根據這些數字,大約有98%的人不是自戀者,但可能在一生中會遇到他們。而且,你知道,有相當多的人與他們共事。即使他們只占人口的2%,我們也會和這樣的人共事或為他們工作。所以我們需要記住,嗯,我們所說的自戀者意味著什麼?我們不是在談一個對著鏡子看自己、喜歡噴香水和梳頭髮的人。這是一個過度評價自己,但需要貶低他人的人。這是一個只考慮自己,不在乎你生活中所經歷的痛苦或所發生的事情,希望你忠誠,但對你不忠,對你的私事不感興趣,但希望你對他們的事感興趣。這就是你的惡性自戀者。哦,順便提一下,他們本質上會說謊,但期望你對他們說真話。那麼,效果是,如果他們只是人口的2%,但我們在許多公司中看到他們,並且我們要為他們工作,那麼,我們該如何相處呢?首先要認識到他們將貶低我們。現在,有時他們會通過不邀請你參加會議或不分享信息來貶低你,但很多時候是通過他們對待你的方式,比如對你大吼,貶低你。我是說,我有一些可怕的經歷。那么,當我們遇到這樣的人時該怎麼辦呢?第一步是認識到你面對的是什麼。這就是我寫《危險的人格》的原因,因為裡面有這些健全的清單,這些清單已經多次被驗證。所以你可以看到,哦,哇,從125個特徵中,這個人擁有75個特徵。你有問題。但現在重點是,當我們和這樣的人一起生活時,假設你知道,他們可能非常有魅力,但然後他們會轉而對你,展現他們真正的自我。那麼,你該如何處理呢?我可以告訴你的是,這段軌跡的趨勢不利於你,這些人是如此具有腐蝕性,如此有毒,最終他們將在身體、心理、情感、生理或經濟上使你受害。你會成為受害者。問題是,我告訴很多為這些人工作的高管,他們被欺凌,這些事情就是,你願意忍受多久?如果你能設定一個數字,比如六個月或一年,好吧,但然後要採取行動,因為你會付出代價。你知道有一本很棒的書叫《身體記住一切》。身體肯定會記住一切。你會因為接近有毒個體而付出代價。如果你成為那個人的咀嚼玩具,你將遭受極大的痛苦。因此我說,你知道,沒有藥物可以治療他們。你無法做任何事情讓他們喜歡你。不要期待任何忠誠。儘快脫身。那就是我唯一的建議,顯然我不是臨床醫生。但我相信大多數臨床醫生,如果他們誠實,會說,你必須脫身。這種情況是不能容忍的。不要試著在任何方面贏得勝利。不要試著去…我認為你無法贏。首先,這些個體的性格有嚴重缺陷。他們沒有內省。他們認為自己是完美的。他們看不到自己有任何缺陷。因此,由於他們的人格缺陷,你無法期望他們有正常的行為。因此,為什麼要將自己暴露於他們之下?他們會這樣一輩子。你在某個特定章節中提到,數量達到一個是不好的,兩個是可怕的,三個則是致命的。哦,你知道,我經常被問這個問題。那麼,一個人可以有多種特徵嗎?是的。你可以是病態性的自戀者。也就是說你過高評價自己。你還可以具有偏執型人格的特徵,這意味著你在思考上非常僵化,並且總是懷疑每個人的意圖。在歷史上,你看看希特勒。希特勒是病理性的,他是個惡性自戀者。
    他臨床上有偏執症。
    他害怕誰?
    少數族裔,羅姆人,當時被稱為吉普賽人,還有猶太人。
    這就是臨床偏執症。
    而且他是一名精神病患者。
    好吧,我們就這麼說吧。
    什麼是精神病?
    精神病是指你沒有悔恨,沒有同情心,沒有良心。
    你可以隨心所欲地做任何事情,而你晚上可以安然入睡。
    這就是你的羅伯特·哈雷,這位研究者是對精神病定義得最好的。
    希特勒擁有一切。
    在自戀和自信之間可能有一條微妙的界限。
    因為當你描述自戀時,你是在講過度重要感,真心相信自己很重要。
    這聽起來有點像一個極度自信的人。
    順便說一句,自戀自1950年代以來一直受到研究,我們現在擁有的自戀社會前所未有。
    我們在談論自己的方式中表現出來的比什麼都重要。
    我們在TikTok和其他論壇上表達各種想法。
    所以我們現在的自戀程度比1950年代高得多。
    他們甚至會研究我們使用的詞語。
    現在我們使用「我」這個詞比1950年代頻繁得多。
    我們過去常說「我們」和「我們的」。
    現在我們說「我」。
    而真正的自戀者有一套腐敗的信仰體系,他們的品格真是有缺陷。
    他們不僅擁有自戀的特徵,而且他們確實相信自己是無謬的,只有他們才有答案。
    我是能讓我們重新偉大的那個人。
    我知道你接下來要問我什麼。
    不,我不會問你那個。
    謝謝你。
    但是如果這些特徵適合,那麼你知道,我告訴人們的是,無論你是進入一個組織還是看誰在領導你的國家,問問自己,他們是否擁有這些特徵?
    如果他們擁有這些特徵,那麼這不是一個困難的方程式。
    心理學,尤其是在涉及品格有缺陷的人時,並不是那麼困難,問題是我是否想為一個重視我的人工作?
    還是為一個貶低他人的人工作?
    還是為一個貶低他人的人工作?
    然後你就從這裡開始。
    這幾十年來你做了這麼多不可思議的事情,追捕恐怖分子、間諜、空中監視、與特種空勤團合作、採訪人員、追捕恐怖分子。
    這對你作為一個人有什麼改變?
    這如何改變了你對人類行為的看法,還有作為一個人是什麼,意義以及生活中所有這些更大問題?
    我從來沒被問過這個問題。
    所以謝謝你提出這個最深刻的問題。
    我想最好的回答是,我是逐漸學習的,並且我很高興我這樣學習。
    我的第一次謀殺案只是一起普通的謀殺案,我去處理了。
    我的第一次自殺事件,是一位警察,這是漸進的。
    我想如果我當時一次性面對所有我所面臨的事情,我想我會精神崩潰。
    我很高興它是分批的,我能夠從中學習。
    我學到的,第一是,我所交談的大多數人是誰?
    大多數是證人或受害者。
    這些人都很好。
    他們是善良的人。
    一些最善良的人是這些在亞利桑那州的可憐農民。
    他們種棉花。
    他們收入不高。
    但他們是好人。
    你會發現,法律執法中你所做的一切實際上都是為了他們。
    你知道,當我後來進入反間諜活動時,現在你面對的是國家和不同國家的利益。
    是的,每個國家都有自己的優先考慮事項。
    但你意識到,當你處理極端主義者時,他們有自己的信仰體系。
    而且你真的無法改變他們。
    但我們也有自己的信仰體系。
    你必須意識到,好吧,我無法解決所有問題。
    作為一名執法官員,我只能關注我能幫助或解決的事情。
    我無法找到所有強暴、謀殺或炸彈攻擊的嫌疑犯。
    我在布里igham Young大學時,當一名女孩被連環殺手綁架時我正值值班。
    直到今天,當晚我值班時她被綁架,我仍然感到痛苦。
    我仍然感受到。
    這些事情會壓在你心頭。
    但我同時也非常……你知道,當我與學生在一起時,我指導人們。
    我指導很多高管。
    但我也指導那些好奇的年輕人。
    我看到他們追求生活和知識的渴望。
    這讓我充滿希望。
    你為什麼對那晚值班感到痛苦?
    因為你無法將其從心中抹去。
    我無法擺脫那種氣味……有時你去犯罪現場,氣味非常難聞,以至於你無法洗去那種氣味。
    你必須燒掉你的衣服。
    法醫檢察官知道這一點。
    有些事情是你無法……你知道,我第一次看到有人被殺是在古巴。
    你不能……生物學上,你有海馬體。
    你有兩個。
    它會保留你經歷過的所有負面事件。
    這就是為什麼你不能用藥物治療創傷後壓力症的原因。
    因為海馬體會確保你第一次燙傷自己、碰到爐子不會再發生。
    所以所有負面情緒都會保留下來,有時會持續一輩子,但通常大約十年。
    但我也被告知,事實上人們仍然追求好的事物。
    你知道,我聽說有些人跟狗一起工作,或者與殘疾人一起工作,沒有期待任何報酬。
    我認為大多數人都有一顆善良的心、一顆良善的心。
    所以我試著關注那些我遇到的人,這些人為我提供了「卓越」的範例。
    那位在巴西的女性,在六歲時失明。
    她生了12個孩子。
    她有更多孩子,但只有12個存活下來。
    而且她能在失明的情況下,通過觸感進行針線活。
    我也永遠不會忘記那段經歷。
    坐在她的面前,是我所獲得的珍貴享受。
    了解一位能夠僅透過手上的毛發隨著與周圍空間互動而感知他人移動的女性,真是一種美妙的體驗。
    在你的職業生涯中,有哪一天是你最引以為傲或最開心的呢?
    哦,哇。
    好吧,我告訴你,我畢業於FBI學院的那一天,我是非常開心的。
    想像一下,任何時候,FBI都有27,000名申請者,而他們每年只會接受約220人。
    所以我感到非常興奮。
    當我離開FBI的那一天,我也非常高興,因為那時我已經完成了所有我想做的事情,我想要做其他的事情。
    我想寫作,而當你在FBI工作時,這是非常困難的。
    我還想繼續教學。
    所以我認為這兩個事件,對於我的職業來說,是我人生中美好的時刻。
    喬,我的觀眾大多是想要學習、喜愛故事、希望改變自己的生活、改善生活以實現他們目標的人。
    所以你寫了很多書,我想總共是15本。
    好吧,已經出版了14本,第15本明年會出版。
    那麼我的最後一個問題是,在你所寫的14本書中(還有待出版的第15本)和你所學到的一切中,
    有什麼是我沒有問的,但對於那些希望改善自己生活、溝通技巧和身體語言,以便在追求目標上更有效的人會有幫助的?
    我應該問你的。
    嗯,我不想破壞這一點,但我覺得在我們進行的這些分鐘或小時內,你已經問了很多很棒的問題。
    我認為你的問題的本質是,建立聯繫的重要性是什麼?
    你的觀眾都是從事人際工作的。
    除非他們是寫代碼的,但即使如此,我們都是在與人交往。
    你問題真正圍繞的是,建立聯繫的重要性是什麼?
    正確建立聯繫的重要性又是什麼?
    然後我們怎麼保持這些聯繫?
    我們談到了非語言交流的重要性來傳達我信任你、我重視你、我關心你等等。
    但然後創造出心理上的舒適感,讓我們能夠長時間在一起,因為人際關係是無價的。
    我認為這是最大的教訓。
    每當我去到任何地方,我都會說,我們從事的是人際工作。
    而我認為你在展示如果你有這種能力能取得的成就方面是典範。
    這是個很大的讚美。
    非常感謝你。
    我們有一個結尾的傳統,上一位嘉賓會為下一位嘉賓留下一個問題,而不知道他們是為誰留下的。
    留給你的問題是…
    嗯,有趣。
    人們說他們喜歡你什麼?
    我認為這個問題很簡單。
    因為我經常聽到,他們會說,你真親切。
    我想他們看我嚴肅的照片,或是認為FBI特工應該是什麼樣子。
    而我到世界各地時,他們會說,你看起來很普通,容易接近。
    我一直努力讓自己變得容易接觸。
    無論你是學生、保安還是其他什麼,我總是可以被接觸到。
    我總是親切對待每一個人。
    喬,謝謝你。
    我們現在生活的時代真有趣。
    我們在開始錄製之前談到過。
    我們比以往任何時候都更數位化。
    我們生活在螢幕後面。
    而聯繫在某種程度上是一種失傳的藝術。
    這也是為什麼人們如此渴望學習如何更好地建立聯繫,如何不被誤解,以及如何真正地表達自己的感受。
    因為對於這一代生來數位化的人來說,這並不是一種自然的能力。
    而我認為你的工作在這方面做得非常深刻。
    它讓我們重新回到人類的本質,透過人類學和理解我們的演變,以及這一切從何而來的脈絡,是強化你所說的一切。
    這是非常重要的。
    而且是如此共鳴。
    我已經在你參與過的視頻和訪談中看到過。
    它們都令人難以置信地有共鳴。
    因為人們如此渴望這些資訊。
    而我認為我們生活中面對的許多問題都源於無法有效地向他人表達我們的感受和真實想法。
    也許是因為我們還沒有學會,也許是因為我們正在學習另一種行為。
    也許我們變得更加個人主義,變得更加內向,被困在螢幕後面。
    所以我非常讚賞你所做的工作。
    我強烈建議大家去閱讀這些書籍。
    它們有很多本。
    但我會在下面提供所有書籍的鏈接和簡介,讓你可以決定哪一本最適合你。
    我讀過幾本,其中一個我最喜歡的就是《非凡》。
    它非常易讀。
    但它們在根據你生活中尋求的東西不同而各具特點。
    無論是身體語言,還是你只是想聽更多有關獵捕恐怖分子或理解精神病患者的故事,或是一般了解FBI及你所生活的生活。
    所以我會把它們都鏈接在下面。
    有什麼我們遺漏的嗎?
    嗯,我的妻子會告訴我,請好心告訴大家,如果他們能提到我現在有一個YouTube頻道,可以解決很多這些問題。
    只需訪問joenavarro.net,裡面有連結到我的YouTube頻道,你會認為我會知道。
    如果你能看到,我會把它鏈接在下面。
    我不知道。
    但我想感謝你所做的事情。
    你總有一天會明白,就像我一樣,雖然這不是你的初衷,但你正在幫助改變生命。你的初衷可能是教育。十年後、二十年後,或者就如我最近發現的,四十年後,會有人寫信給你,說你曾經說的某些話或你的榜樣影響了我,改變了我的生命。你會感到驚訝,哇,我從來沒想過這一點。這就是你所做的事情。你有一天會意識到這一點。謝謝你。我是說,這也是你所做的事情。喬,謝謝你如此慷慨地分享你的時間。我真的非常感激。能夠見到你真是一種榮幸。我很期待完成你剩下的書籍,並更多地探索你的 YouTube 渠道,我會在下面連結。你還有很多演講機會,你與很多公司和組織合作。如果人們想聯繫你,應該到你的網站上給你發郵件。當然可以。只需通過網站發送郵件,我們會處理的。我也很高興能與任何有興趣的人分享這段知識的旅程。我將告訴你一個小秘密。你可能會認為我和我的團隊有點奇怪。但直到今天我仍然記得,我的團隊成員 Jemima 在 Slack 上發佈她改變了這個工作室的氣味。當她發佈後,整個辦公室在我們的 Slack 渠道裡鼓掌。這聽起來可能有點瘋狂,但在 CEO 日記中,這就是我們在節目中所做的 1% 改進。而這就是為什麼這個節目會是現在這個樣子的。通過理解 1% 增長的力量,你絕對可以改變你生活的結果。這並不是關於劇變或快速獲勝,而是關乎那些小而持續的行動,它們對你的結果產生持久的變化。因此,兩年前,我們開始創建這本美麗的日記。它真的很美。在裡面,有很多圖片、靈感和動力,還有一些互動元素。這本日記的目的是幫助你識別、專注於並與 1% 一起發展一致性,最終改變你的生活。所以如果你想為自己、朋友、同事或團隊要一本,現在就去 thediary.com吧。我會把鏈接放在下面。下次見!

    Joe Navarro spent decades catching liars for the FBI, now he reveals the subconscious habits that are sabotaging your success

    Joe Navarro is a former FBI agent and internationally recognised expert in the interpretation and application of nonverbal behaviour. He is also the author of over 15 books such as, ‘Be Exceptional: Master the Five Traits That Set Extraordinary People Apart’.

    In this conversation, Joe and Steven discuss topics such as, the quiet trick that gives you instant control, how to read any room like a book, the negotiation trick the FBI use, and the one gesture that reveals you’re not confidence. 

    00:00 Intro

    02:25 Who Are You and What Have You Spent Your Life Working On?

    04:30 What Is It You’re Giving People?

    07:16 How Would My Life Change If I Applied Your Knowledge?

    11:13 Your Career

    12:01 Behavioral Program at the FBI

    15:01 Have You Caught Spies?

    22:08 Story of Catching a Spy Using Flowers

    26:42 How Many People Could Be Spies Walking Among Us?

    29:16 Is Body Language Important?

    34:43 First Impressions

    37:33 How Do We Synchronize With Someone?

    44:15 Eyebrow Knitting

    46:08 Eyelid Touching

    49:45 What Do Our Lips Give Away?

    51:14 The Supersternal Notch

    55:54 How Do We Negotiate?

    1:02:49 Writing Down the Goal of Your Negotiation

    1:06:51 Taking Control of a Situation

    1:11:07 When Should We Walk Into Rooms?

    1:15:09 Why Does Height Matter When Speaking to Someone?

    1:20:25 What Clues in Someone’s Posture Should We Look For?

    1:26:00 The Importance of Observing

    1:27:42 Can You Train Confidence?

    1:31:59 Don’t Rise at the End of a Sentence

    1:34:20 Speaking in Cadence

    1:36:31 Hand Gestures

    1:38:12 Eye Contact

    1:39:40 What to Do When Greeting People

    1:42:59 Should We Be Taking Notes?

    1:46:07 Handshakes

    1:48:42 Behaviors You Wouldn’t Want From a Leader

    1:49:34 Self-Mastery

    1:51:52 The Importance of Taking Action

    1:53:22 Observation

    1:53:42 Psychological Comfort

    1:57:59 How to Spot a Narcissist

    2:04:07 Narcissism and Self-Belief

    2:06:02 How Has Seeing All of This Changed You as a Human?

    2:11:22 Is There a Proudest Day in Your Career?

    2:13:10 The Importance of Connecting

    2:14:53 What Do People Say They Like About You?

    Follow Joe:

    Instagram – https://g2ul0.app.link/mEIBxWMqESb 

    Twitter – https://g2ul0.app.link/2r4SCkOqESb 

    Body Language Academy – https://g2ul0.app.link/xDCgWDRqESb 

    You can purchase Joe Navarro’s book ‘Be Exceptional: Master the Five Traits That Set Extraordinary People Apart’, here: https://g2ul0.app.link/gbRf5uWqESb 

    Watch the episodes on Youtube – https://g2ul0.app.link/DOACEpisodes 

    The 1% Diary is back – and it won’t be around for long, so act fast! https://bit.ly/1-Diary-Megaphone-ad-reads

    You can purchase the The Diary Of A CEO Conversation Cards: Second Edition, here: https://g2ul0.app.link/f31dsUttKKb 

    Sign up to receive email updates about Diary Of A CEO here: https://bit.ly/diary-of-a-ceo-yt 

    Ready to think like a CEO? Gain access to the 100 CEOs newsletter here: https://bit.ly/100-ceos-newsletter 

    Follow me:

    https://g2ul0.app.link/gnGqL4IsKKb 

    Sponsors:

    Shopify – https://shopify.com/bartlett

    Perfect Ted – https://www.perfectted.com with code DIARY40 for 40% off

    Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices

  • No Mercy / No Malice: United States of Debt

    AI transcript
    0:00:06 Hey, this is Peter Kafka. I’m the host of Channels, a show about media and tech and lots of other stuff.
    0:00:13 And this week I learned about how to make money in media and specifically how to do that in Washington, D.C. in 2025.
    0:00:18 My guest, Jake Sherman, the co-founder of Punchbowl News.
    0:00:24 That’s the fast-growing, super inside the Beltway pub that covers Congress and Congress and nothing else.
    0:00:28 And it’s working. That’s on Channels, wherever you hear your favorite pods.
    0:00:37 Soon enough, high schoolers will be donning those caps and gowns.
    0:00:41 But what comes next is less of a sure thing than it was a decade ago.
    0:00:48 Students are genuinely questioning if college is worth it and if college is really the right thing for them, knowing what they know about themselves.
    0:00:57 This week on Explain It To Me, a look at the new range of alternatives to college and how some high schools are setting up their graduates for success.
    0:01:01 New episodes on Sunday mornings, wherever you get your podcasts.
    0:01:07 Are tariffs a turning point for U.S. economic and foreign policy?
    0:01:18 We have Trump who is completely unconstrained and is completely convinced, confident that everything he’s doing is utterly right, doesn’t need to take advice from those around him.
    0:01:29 I’m Preet Bharara, and this week, political scientist Ian Bremmer joins me on my podcast, Stay Tuned With Preet, to discuss economic and political turmoil and how they impact America and the world.
    0:01:35 The episode is out now. Search and follow Stay Tuned With Preet wherever you get your podcasts.
    0:01:41 I’m Scott Galloway, and this is No Mercy, No Malice.
    0:01:47 Last week, we saw the tariff war jump the lab and become a capital war.
    0:01:51 United States of Debt, as read by George Hahn.
    0:02:08 Quote, I would like to come back as the bond market.
    0:02:11 You can intimidate everybody.
    0:02:12 Unquote.
    0:02:14 James Carville.
    0:02:18 America is blinking.
    0:02:26 The day after April Fool’s Day, President Trump liberated the United States from an eight-decade run as the world’s economic superpower,
    0:02:32 raising the cost of capital for the federal government, American companies, and consumers.
    0:02:40 If this sounds like stupidity, i.e. hurting others while also hurting yourself, trust your instincts.
    0:02:44 But don’t trust America.
    0:02:48 A blackout drunk is behind the wheel of the U.S. economy.
    0:02:56 All around us, horns, bear markets, consumer confidence plummeting to historic lows, are blaring.
    0:03:06 In the back seat is a cultist, the GOP, who thinks the red lights Trump has blown through and the accidents in his wake are baller moves.
    0:03:16 Also in the back seat, a sulking teen, the Democrats, who’s visibly upset but can’t articulate what they want or suggest a better route.
    0:03:22 Riding shotgun, though, is an adult the driver can’t ignore.
    0:03:24 The bond market.
    0:03:32 First-year economics students are taught that money evolved to make early barter systems practical.
    0:03:45 In his book, debt, the first 5,000 years, anthropologist David Graeber argues that the barter story was likely a fiction created by Adam Smith.
    0:03:51 Graeber believes the earliest coins were actually tokens used to keep track of debt.
    0:04:16 Debt is both a financial instrument and a social construct that binds people, firms, and nations to one another and links together the past, present, and future.
    0:04:28 As many anthropologists have pointed out, debt has moral implications around fairness, responsibility, and obligation, as it’s a tool through which we impose order.
    0:04:42 Historically, Judaism, Christianity, and Islam outlawed interest under most circumstances, counseled their followers against taking on debt, and advised debtors to repay loans promptly.
    0:04:49 When someone saves another person’s life, the person they rescued is said to be in their debt.
    0:04:56 When a criminal has served their sentence, they’re said to have repaid their debt to society.
    0:05:06 In a debt crisis, the real risk is not default, but a breakdown of the economic, social, and political orders.
    0:05:09 How bad is this debt crisis?
    0:05:11 It’s too early to tell.
    0:05:16 But as former Treasury Secretary Lawrence Summers explained,
    0:05:22 what has people most scared is the real-time erosion of the American-led economic order.
    0:05:34 Our reputation as a bastion of strength and stability, with our dollar and treasuries representing safety, is in jeopardy.
    0:05:46 Increasingly, we resemble an emerging economy, where a crisis in confidence sends stocks, bonds, and currencies down and spikes interest rates.
    0:05:48 Quote,
    0:05:58 If the United States isn’t credible, that makes the whole financial system less stable, Summers said, adding,
    0:06:03 We are more vulnerable to bad surprises from here than to good surprises.
    0:06:04 Unquote.
    0:06:23 This week, Fed Chair Jerome Powell warned that Trump’s trade policy and the resulting uncertainty may put us in
    0:06:46 Since World War II, the U.S. dollar and U.S. treasuries have been the backbone of the global economy.
    0:07:00 Charles de Gaulle called this exorbitant privilege, as it creates an asymmetrical financial system where foreign governments effectively subsidize American living standards and firms.
    0:07:04 Just how exorbitant is difficult to quantify.
    0:07:14 But as economist Barry Eichengreen argued, the privilege isn’t what it was in the 1960s when de Gaulle complained that America was far too powerful.
    0:07:29 Still, our exorbitant privilege is a benefit, not a liability, as reliance on U.S. currency and debt lowers our cost of capital and increases the punching power of our economic sanctions.
    0:07:42 But in the wake of Liberation Day, analysts at Societe Generale, Deutsche Bank, and Goldman Sachs expressed concern that America’s privilege is eroding.
    0:07:51 A financial adage, frequently attributed to John Maynard Keynes, John Paul Getty, and others.
    0:07:51 Quote,
    0:07:56 If you owe the bank $100, that’s your problem.
    0:08:01 If you owe the bank $100 million, that’s the bank’s problem.
    0:08:02 Unquote.
    0:08:05 This is the paradox of debt.
    0:08:28 Trump, who bragged that he was the king of debt during his 2016 campaign, has leveraged this paradox his entire career, filing for bankruptcy six times.
    0:08:32 But compared to the federal government, Trump is a lightweight.
    0:08:43 Despite decades of warnings from economists and business leaders, increasing the debt is one of the longest-running bipartisan traditions in Congress.
    0:08:53 Conservatives, teetotalers, campaign as deficit hawks, then vote to increase the debt for unfunded tax cuts.
    0:09:05 Liberals, social drinkers, deprioritize debt by pairing big spending initiatives with modest proposals to increase revenue, i.e. taxes.
    0:09:23 And progressives, full-blown alcoholics, champion modern monetary theory, which holds that governments, with control over their own currency, can finance spending without worrying about deficits or debt, as long as they manage inflation.
    0:09:25 How’s that working out?
    0:09:29 America is drunk on debt.
    0:09:33 We continue to drink at the bar long after last call.
    0:09:38 Spiking bond yields and the declining dollar are interventions.
    0:09:41 It’s not too late to get sober, however.
    0:09:47 I believe we should do it for our kids, as debt is a tax on future generations.
    0:09:54 But as I argued in my TED Talk, despite saying we love our children, we’re waging war on them.
    0:09:57 There’s another reason to sober up.
    0:09:59 Self-preservation.
    0:10:11 Sovereign debt crises have been the green mile of empires, from ancient Rome to the French monarchy to the Ottoman and British empires to the Soviet Union.
    0:10:17 America is exceptional in many ways, but we’re not exempt from history.
    0:10:21 Countries typically are not conquered, but go broke.
    0:10:29 In budgetary terms, some people call the U.S. an insurance company with an army.
    0:10:40 This is correct insofar as our largest deliverables are the greatest military in history and a social safety net that lags behind those of other industrialized nations.
    0:11:08 If current laws remain the same, net interest payments will total $13.8 trillion over the next decade, rising from an annual cost of $1.0 trillion in 2026 to $1.8 trillion in 2035,
    0:11:22 According to CBO projections, rising interest rates increase the VIG, crowding out mandatory and discretionary spending as well as our capacity to respond to future crises.
    0:11:32 General Omar Bradley once said, amateurs talk strategy, professionals talk logistics.
    0:11:43 His point was that war plans, even when the defense secretary doesn’t drunkenly share them with the Atlantic’s editor-in-chief on Signal, don’t count for much.
    0:11:51 It’s the unsexy stuff, supply lines, resources, and infrastructure, that wins wars.
    0:11:56 The world’s least sexy financial instruments are U.S. treasuries.
    0:12:17 U.S. debt is both a shield that protects us from higher borrowing costs and a sword that, when used in conjunction with the dollar as the global reserve currency, guarantees American economic hegemony.
    0:12:25 But as with any weapon, if we lose control of it, our debt can be used against us.
    0:12:30 The U.S. debt is roughly $36 trillion.
    0:12:40 Nearly three-quarters of that debt is held by U.S. investors, the Fed, and various federal agencies, including the Social Security Administration.
    0:12:43 The rest is held by foreign investors.
    0:12:49 China is currently the second largest foreign holder of treasuries, behind Japan.
    0:12:59 After last week’s shitshow, some analysts asked, without hard evidence, whether China was to blame for bond market volatility.
    0:13:02 That question misses the point.
    0:13:12 It’s not what China did or didn’t do, but rather what it’s capable of doing, now that the blinker-in-chief has put a spotlight on our Achilles’ heel.
    0:13:22 Dumping treasuries raises U.S. borrowing costs and, more important, undermines global trust in American leadership.
    0:13:31 It also hurts China, as a fire sale means they’ll take losses, too, and a possible recession hurts everyone.
    0:13:38 Beijing’s fear of that economic pain has been a strong deterrent, until now.
    0:13:49 A trade war makes the pain real, meaning China has a lot less to lose, and potentially something to gain, by using our debt against us.
    0:13:53 And China has a pain multiplier here.
    0:14:05 An increase of 50 basis points on a $36 trillion debt adds about $180 billion per year in additional interest.
    0:14:16 An equivalent of 13 aircraft carriers, we currently have 11, or $30 billion more than Doge claims it’ll save taxpayers this year.
    0:14:21 Our debt isn’t our only vulnerability.
    0:14:29 China holds $3.2 trillion U.S. dollars, more than any other foreign nation.
    0:14:38 Devaluing the U.S. dollar in the face of rising inflation would hurt Americans, as they’d pay even more for less.
    0:14:50 China’s mortgage-backed securities position is less clear, but as one of the top three foreign MBS holders, it has the power to spook an already troubled housing market.
    0:15:00 China’s leading export partners are ASEAN, a 10-nation trading bloc in Southeast Asia, and the EU, followed by the U.S.
    0:15:09 Decoupling hurts both countries, but it hurts us more, as our exposure is greater and our pain tolerance lower.
    0:15:16 Remember, Americans freaked out about toilet paper and masks during COVID.
    0:15:19 China did actual lockdowns.
    0:15:23 We lost 36,000 service members fighting in Korea.
    0:15:28 Before tapping out, China suffered 10 times the casualties.
    0:15:35 We don’t have the tolerance for pain to exchange fire in an economic war with China.
    0:15:41 Ask Bo and Yang who’s more willing to endure hardship for the glory of their nation.
    0:15:51 In the same week that U.S. Treasuries surged 50 basis points, yields on German buns were largely unchanged.
    0:15:56 According to Bloomberg, that’s the biggest underperformance since 1989.
    0:16:05 In non-financial terms, as investors lost trust in the U.S., they found safety in Germany.
    0:16:11 One fixed income portfolio manager put it this way, quote,
    0:16:20 Buns have been one of the only rate markets that has acted as a risk-off asset during recent volatility, unquote.
    0:16:23 Are Buns the new T-bill?
    0:16:25 Too soon to tell.
    0:16:30 But if last week kicked off a debt crisis that unravels the world order,
    0:16:35 Germany, even allowing for a recent increase in defense spending,
    0:16:41 looks like a paragon of fiscal responsibility compared to other industrialized nations.
    0:16:51 Ostensibly, HBO’s Game of Thrones was a show about knights, dragons, Arctic zombies, and hot people.
    0:17:00 But underneath the veneer of sex and violence, the show was an epic story about the relationship between debt and power.
    0:17:06 As three economists who analyzed the political economy of Westeros wrote, quote,
    0:17:12 Those who control the purse strings of the realm thereby acquire political power.
    0:17:20 And although it is a foreign institution, the Iron Bank becomes a key political player in Westeros, unquote.
    0:17:27 Full faith and credit is American for a Lannister always pays his debts.
    0:17:37 Instead of a mad king sitting on the Iron Throne, we have a very unstable genius, minus the genius, sitting behind the resolute desk.
    0:17:44 His small council of sycophants know better, but drunk on a cocktail of fear and greed,
    0:17:48 they cheer him on, claiming he’s playing 4D chess.
    0:17:55 This is the bullshit we hear from the Sparrows, who can’t offer a counter-argument to what is depressingly clear.
    0:18:00 The president’s actions are nuclear-grade stupidity.
    0:18:02 Chess?
    0:18:06 At this point, the Western world is expecting him to eat the pieces.
    0:18:14 Trump’s game isn’t chess or checkers, but Russian roulette with bullets in five of the six chambers.
    0:18:23 The interpretive dancing and intellectual pretzeling of the remaining cultists doesn’t fool the Iron Bank,
    0:18:25 a.k.a. America’s creditors.
    0:18:34 In season one of True Detective, hashtag awesome, Matthew McConaughey needs something from his former partner, Woody Harrelson.
    0:18:37 McConaughey convinces him with a simple statement.
    0:18:45 you have a debt, calling on his sense of equity and a bond they share to reciprocate.
    0:18:55 Europe, China, the Middle East, and America all, at one time, imprisoned people who couldn’t pay their debts.
    0:19:02 With 4% of the world’s population and 25% of global GDP,
    0:19:05 we have a debt to our allies,
    0:19:13 who’ve engaged in relationships that provide roughly 6x the prosperity relative to the rest of the world.
    0:19:20 However, that hasn’t been enough, and we’ve accrued unsustainable debt.
    0:19:26 From George Washington through George W. Bush, we borrowed $10 trillion.
    0:19:32 During the first Trump administration, we borrowed $8 trillion.
    0:19:35 Biden was $4 trillion.
    0:19:41 We find ourselves ignorant of our debts and in a prison of our own making,
    0:19:46 a giant with feet of clay, ignorant to our vulnerabilities.
    0:19:52 In sum, we, America, are acting like assholes.
    0:19:57 Life is so rich.

    As read by George Hahn.

    United States of Debt

    Learn more about your ad choices. Visit podcastchoices.com/adchoices

  • How much for that egg

    Recently, one of our NPR colleagues wrote a message to all of NPR saying he had extra eggs to sell for cheap, but needed a fair way to distribute them during a shortage. What is Planet Money here for if not to get OVERLY involved in this kind of situation?

    Our colleague didn’t want to charge more than $5, so we couldn’t just auction the eggs off. A lottery? Too boring, he said.

    Okay! A very Planet Money puzzle to solve.

    Today on the show, we go in search of novel systems to help our colleague decide who gets his scarce resource: cheap, farm-fresh eggs. We steal from the world of new product development to try and secretly test for egg love, and we discover a pricing method used in development economics that may be America’s next great gameshow.

    This episode of Planet Money was produced by Emma Peaslee and it was edited by Marianne McCune. It was fact checked by Sierra Juarez and engineered by Jimmy Keeley. Alex Goldmark is our executive producer.

    Find more Planet Money: Facebook / Instagram / TikTok / Our weekly Newsletter.

    Listen free at these links: Apple Podcasts, Spotify, the NPR app or anywhere you get podcasts.

    Help support Planet Money and hear our bonus episodes by subscribing to Planet Money+ in Apple Podcasts or at plus.npr.org/planetmoney.

    Music: NPR Source Audio – “Punchy Punchline,” “Game Face,” “Feeling the Funk,” and “The Host Most Wanted”

    Learn more about sponsor message choices: podcastchoices.com/adchoices

    NPR Privacy Policy