Hormozi Says Business Success Demands Elimination of Alternatives

The Diary Of A CEO

Acquisition.com founder Alex Hormozi argues that scaling a company requires relentless focus, accepting public failure, and prioritizing continuous skill acquisition over passive seeking of happiness or quick tactical hacks.

AI-assisted summary of The Man That Makes Millionaires: Turn $0 to $10k With This Step By Step Formula! Alex Hormozi — original source. Check the original for full context.

Source published: 2025-02-13

Detailed notes

## Background This episode of The Diary Of A CEO, hosted by Steven Bartlett and published on YouTube on February 13, 2025, features Iran-American entrepreneur, investor, and Acquisition.com founder Alex Hormozi. According to the page description, the interview focuses on Hormozi's actionable frameworks for building and scaling businesses, moving from zero to $10k and beyond, alongside insights from his bestselling business books.

## TL;DR Alex Hormozi breaks down the mental barriers, operational strategies, and talent frameworks required to build high-growth businesses. He addresses the psychological shift needed to overcome the fear of failure, outlining actionable blueprints for quitting corporate jobs, hiring elite 'A-players', and maintaining long-term focus amid distraction. Across the conversation, Hormozi advocates for radical self-responsibility, high experimentation rates, and viewing hard work itself—rather than an elusive concept of happiness—as the ultimate destination.

## Atmosphere & style The conversation feels intensely candid, pragmatic, and intellectually rigorous, combining Steven Bartlett's reflective probing with Hormozi's rapid-fire, no-nonsense delivery. It balances raw vulnerability about personal struggles and career leaps with highly analytical, first-principles logic. Watching it feels like a masterclass in unvarnished self-awareness, shifting from high-energy business tactical insights to deeply grounded, almost stoic philosophical reflections on life and purpose.

## Key takeaways - [03:23](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Kl-I7sUcAOY&t=203s) The fundamental barrier holding most entrepreneurs back is not a lack of tactical hacks, but the fear of failure, public shame, and the unwillingness to make difficult choices. - [15:40](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Kl-I7sUcAOY&t=940s) Fear thrives in ambiguity; breaking vague fears down into concrete worst-case scenarios logically disengages the amygdala and enables rational decision-making. - [12:09](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Kl-I7sUcAOY&t=729s) The mathematical framework for quitting a job requires saving 3–6 months of expenses, building a digital side hustle to match corporate income, and sustaining that income for 3–6 months before transitioning. - [23:41](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Kl-I7sUcAOY&t=1421s) Transitioning out of a day job can be guided by the 3 P's: Pain (solving a personal problem), Past Profession (monetizing an employer-proven corporate skill), or Passion (monetizing a hobby done for free). - [27:35](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Kl-I7sUcAOY&t=1655s) Missionary founders driven by personal pain build deeper trust, possess a clear narrative, and possess an relentless drive that mercenary founders lack. - [35:53](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Kl-I7sUcAOY&t=2153s) Building a lasting brand requires the courage to remain undiluted and authentic, accepting that being disliked by a portion of the audience is a fixed cost of reaching true superfans. - [49:13](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Kl-I7sUcAOY&t=2953s) An organization's capacity and ceiling are strictly capped by the aggregate intellectual horsepower of its team, making high-leverage recruitment essential for scaling. - [01:09:36](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Kl-I7sUcAOY&t=4176s) Effective leadership requires being 'kind' rather than 'nice,' prioritizing an employee's long-term growth and objective performance standard over conflict-averse politeness. - [01:33:15](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Kl-I7sUcAOY&t=5595s) Focus is defined by the quality and quantity of opportunities turned down, while commitment requires eliminating alternative choices to avoid splitting focus across multiple ventures. - [02:02:54](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Kl-I7sUcAOY&t=7374s) In the $1M to $3M revenue stage ('the swamp'), scaling requires sacrificing short-term personal profits to hire scale-ready executives or personally working extra hours to cover operational gaps. - [02:10:52](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Kl-I7sUcAOY&t=7852s) Instead of hunting for an impossible 'unicorn' hire to replace a founder's diverse skill set, companies should hire specialized individuals to handle distinct operational functions. - [02:07:16](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Kl-I7sUcAOY&t=7636s) Mastery and skill acquisition are accelerated through rapid iteration and high-volume feedback loops that isolate success factors and standardize proven processes. - [02:23:07](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Kl-I7sUcAOY&t=8587s) Business strategy is fundamentally the discipline of prioritization and the intentional allocation of scarce resources among endless choices. - [02:29:10](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Kl-I7sUcAOY&t=8950s) Formal individual mentors are optional if entrepreneurs systematically study, deconstruct, and replicate the decision-making frameworks and behavioral models of successful leaders. - [04:50:40](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Kl-I7sUcAOY&t=17440s) Reframing hard work as the ultimate destination rather than merely a means to an end creates lasting fulfillment and removes arbitrary expectations around happiness.

## Detailed walkthrough ### [00:00](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Kl-I7sUcAOY&t=0s) The Entrepreneur Life Cycle & Introduction

Alex Hormozi breaks down the entrepreneur life cycle into six distinct stages, noting that the vast majority of entrepreneurs get stuck on stage three. Making mistakes at this critical junction can leave a person living the exact same six months for twenty consecutive years, trapped in continuous struggle until they learn how to break free. Reflecting on his own journey, Hormozi highlights the hard truth behind building success: business owners must be willing to make impossible choices, have the courage to be wrong, and face the shame of failing in front of people whose opinions matter to them.

Host Steven Bartlett frames the conversation around the core tension of entrepreneurship—how the fear of failure keeps people stuck in jobs and lives they despise. Hormozi shares how he once lived a seemingly perfect white-collar life with a condo overlooking the city, yet felt so consumed by fear that he dreaded waking up. Crossing that barrier unleashed a realm of new possibilities, opening the door to mastering the real game of business: understanding the key pillars of business ideas, driving customer success, and mastering high-level strategy.

- **The Core Problem:** Most entrepreneurs stall out at Stage 3 of the 6-stage lifecycle, repeating the same six-month cycle for decades. - **The Emotional Hurdle:** Overcoming the fear of public failure and judgment is the prerequisite to scaling a business.

---

[02:19](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Kl-I7sUcAOY&t=139s) What Would You Say to the Millions of Entrepreneurs That Follow You?

Hormozi explains the overarching mission of Acquisition.com, where his team focuses on scaling businesses at every tier of growth. Their strategies cater to entrepreneurs going from zero to one (getting off the ground), scaling from $1 million to $10 million, and expanding from $10 million to $100 million or executing an exit. He notes that core strategic frameworks apply across all these revenue stages to help business owners maximize the return on their time.

Applying just one of these high-level frameworks can collapse time for a founder, effectively pulling five years of career progress forward. Hormozi emphasizes that the goal of sharing this operational knowledge is to give entrepreneurs immediate leverage regardless of where they currently sit on the revenue spectrum.

---

[03:23](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Kl-I7sUcAOY&t=203s) What Entrepreneurs Really Need: Breaking Free from the "Mental Prison"

When people ask for advice on going from zero to one, Hormozi observes a sharp divide between what they *think* they want and what they *actually* need. Beginners usually ask for a magic tactical hack to start a business immediately. In reality, what they desperately need is "the courage to be willing to be wrong and to be willing to have shame by failing at things in front of people whose opinions they care about." He notes that the harder it is for someone to break free from their own self-imposed "mental prison," the more compelling and resonant their eventual breakthrough story becomes.

Hormozi refutes the popular narrative of the natural-born entrepreneur who sold lemonade at age thirteen. He excelled at traditional academics, graduated from Vanderbilt University in three years, scored above Harvard's median GMAT score, and possessed a clear, prestigious career trajectory lined up through management consulting, top-tier business schools, investment banking, and private equity. Yet, looking at the people twenty years ahead of him on that path, he realized he didn't want their life.

The decision to break away came down to an intense personal crisis involving his relationship with his father, who was immensely proud of his conventional success. Hormozi realized that pursuing his father's dream required killing his own: "his dream must die in order for mine to live." To escape the immense pressure and fear of judgment, Hormozi packed up, drove halfway across the country, and only then called his father to announce he had quit his career to take a minimum-wage job cleaning floors at a gym to learn the fitness business from the ground up. Their relationship fractured for years as a result.

> "His dream must die in order for mine to live."

> "Fear is a mile wide and an inch deep. You look at it, it looks like this ocean, and then you take the first step and you realize you don't drown because there's ground underneath."

- **The Conventional Path:** Hormozi had a straight shot to elite business schools (Harvard/Stanford) and private equity, but realized the end goal was unfulfilling. - **The Execution Strategy:** He physically left the state before calling his father to prevent himself from being persuaded to stay. - **The Definition of Cowardice:** Allowing fear to alter your behavior in an aversive direction, moving you away from what you actually want.

---

[12:09](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Kl-I7sUcAOY&t=729s) Is There a Framework for Knowing When to Quit?

Hormozi outlines both the mathematical approach and the emotional reality of quitting a job to go full-time into business. Mathematically, the decision is straightforward: save 3 to 6 months of personal expenses, start a side business using digital leverage, match your full-time job's income in your spare time, and sustain that income level for 3 to 6 months. However, Hormozi emphasizes that logic and math are almost never the actual reasons people hesitate to make the leap.

``` +-----------------------------------------------------------------------+ | THE MATHEMATICAL QUIT FRAMEWORK | +-----------------------------------------------------------------------+ | 1. Personal Runway: Save 3 to 6 months of living expenses. | | 2. Side Business: Build a side hustle matching job income. | | 3. Consistency: Prove side income stability for 3 to 6 months. | +-----------------------------------------------------------------------+ ```

Steven Bartlett draws a parallel to his own journey, noting how he also faced family disownership when abandoning a traditional academic trajectory for business. The primary driver wasn't that the risk felt small, but rather a realization of the alternative outcome: staying on the current path was a "guaranteed bad outcome delayed over time," whereas taking the risk offered a genuine chance at a good life.

Hormozi adds that fear thrives on ambiguity and vagueness. When founders concretely outline the worst-case scenario, the fear vanishes. Failing at a startup simply becomes a compelling narrative for business school or a resume booster that leads to a higher-paying corporate role.

> "Fear exists in the vague, not in the specific."

- **Guaranteed Bad vs. Chance at Good:** Staying in an unfulfilling career guarantees a poor outcome long-term; taking an entrepreneurial risk introduces a probability of success. - **De-risking Failure:** A failed business attempt builds real-world skill sets that can be leveraged for better corporate positions if necessary.

[15:40](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Kl-I7sUcAOY&t=940s) Fear vs. Logic: How to Think Rationally

When facing major career or business decisions, people often let fear dictate their choices because the mind defaults to vague, catastrophic outcomes. Alex Hormozi illustrates this contrast by examining the two ways people process risk:

* **The Amygdala's Narrative:** A fear-based response that paints a doom-and-gloom scenario—*"I'll fail, everyone will hate me, and I'll die."* * **The Prefrontal Cortex's Narrative:** A logic-based evaluation that breaks down the actual worst-case scenario—sleeping on a friend's couch or in a garage, dealing with self-inflicted shame, and eventually having a great story to tell.

By moving from vague fears to specific realities, you disengage the amygdala because it cannot reason through a logical chain of cause and effect. Breaking down the steps reveals that a worst-case scenario usually just means temporary discomfort or a minor career detour. In hindsight, these tough times often turn into the "good old days" or funny anecdotes. If a painful or embarrassing moment is bound to be funny in five years, you might as well bring that timeline forward and laugh at it now.

This rational approach applies to everyday fears beyond launching a business, such as having a difficult conversation:

> "Let me play it out. I say something... what's going to happen? I'll say these words, and then they'll flip the table, give me the finger, or maybe cry or shout. Okay, if they shout at me, what do I do?"

Playing out the scenario step-by-step demystifies the anxiety and leaves you prepared for the actual outcomes.

---

[18:34](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Kl-I7sUcAOY&t=1114s) Overcoming Delay Discounting and Misery

When remaining in a current position guarantees misery, taking a risk is logically the better path. However, people often stay stuck due to **delay discounting**—a psychological bias where future outcomes are heavily discounted compared to immediate ones.

* **Setting a 5:00 AM alarm:** Easy to do at night because the pain of waking up is delayed. * **Quitting a bad job:** Constantly postponed because the discomfort of quitting is immediate, even if it leads to a lifetime of passive misery.

People discount a full lifetime of unhappiness just to avoid a moment of immediate friction, staying trapped in situations they know won't make them happy.

---

[19:13](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Kl-I7sUcAOY&t=1153s) Your Decisions Are Driven by Self-Awareness

Transitioning from quitting a job to starting a business requires grounded self-awareness rather than blindly copying successful founders. Referring to a tweet by Andrew Wilkinson, Alex notes that every entrepreneur points to their success and says, *"Here's the winning number for my lottery ticket,"* forgetting that that specific drawing has already happened. You cannot simply replicate Steve Jobs or Elon Musk and expect the same outcome.

Instead, entrepreneurs need to understand **first principles**—the foundational, unchanging truths of business applied to current environmental conditions. At its core, an economic business goal boils down to trading **time** (the ultimate currency) for the highest possible return.

Every business relies on three core operational pillars: 1. **Attracting attention** (Marketing/Advertising) 2. **Converting attention** (Sales) 3. **Delivering value** (Product/Service)

Maximizing output requires applying **leverage** across all three pillars. Alex's firm, Acquisition.com, uses a logo representing these core principles: a triangle acting as a **fulcrum for leverage**, containing the balancing forces of **supply and demand**.

``` / \ / \ <- Fulcrum for Leverage / S D \ <- Supply & Demand ----------- ```

For someone starting with zero assets, their primary resources are time, hands, and brainpower, making **skill acquisition** through informal, hyper-tactical learning the highest-return investment. Over time, businesses scale by shifting from low-leverage mechanisms to high-leverage ones:

* **Delivery:** Moving from high-touch services to scalable products like software or media ("code once, sell a thousand times"). * **Sales:** Shifting from manual 1-on-1 sales calls to automated checkout pages or Video Sales Letters (VSLs). * **Advertising:** Moving from individual outbound outreach to media content viewed by millions simultaneously.

---

[23:41](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Kl-I7sUcAOY&t=1421s) What to Do When You Quit Your Job: The 3 P's

When deciding what business to build after leaving a job, founders should look to the **3 P's**:

* **Pain:** Solving a problem you have personally experienced and deeply understand. * **Past Profession:** Monetizing a skill acquired in the corporate workforce, which is already economically proven because employers paid for it. * **Passion:** Building around an interest you would naturally spend time on for free.

Every business consists of modular jobs—sales, marketing, customer support, product design, and web development. Mastering just one of these functional skills allows a soloist or freelancer to trade service for revenue immediately.

---

[24:47](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Kl-I7sUcAOY&t=1487s) Pain as a Driver & Deep Prospect Knowledge

Building a business out of personal pain creates a distinct advantage: **deep, visceral knowledge of the prospect**. Rather than spending months doing formal market research, an entrepreneur who has lived the problem inherently understands the nuance of existing product failures.

Alex shares his personal experience with chronic breathing issues since the 8th grade:

> "I learned how to fall asleep with my hand on my face like this, so that it keeps my nostril open and I can fall asleep without it moving... I've tried every product on the market for 20+ years."

This deep, long-term exposure allows a founder to formulate a far superior hypothesis for a solution. For investors, a founder driven by a clear personal narrative is infinitely more compelling than one relying purely on abstract market logic.

* **Example:** An investor in Regal Cinemas backed a founder with a single theater because the founder knew every micro-detail of the operations—down to the exact cost of a single kernel of popcorn. That level of category mastery signaled an operation that couldn't fail.

---

[27:35](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Kl-I7sUcAOY&t=1655s) Mercenaries vs. Missionaries in Business

The contrast between product specs and a authentic origin story highlights Jeff Bezos's framework of **Mercenaries vs. Missionaries**:

* **Mercenaries:** Driven purely by market trends, surveys, and financial analysis. They attempt to logic their way into a category to capture market share. * **Missionaries:** Driven by a personal experience with a problem. They build solutions because they viscerally hate the pain point and want to spare others from experiencing it.

While mercenaries can build viable companies, missionaries often achieve massive success because their genuine obsession builds trust and fuels powerful, long-term marketing stories. On platforms like Instagram, TikTok, or pitches on shows like *Dragon's Den*, a founder saying, *"I had this exact problem, tried everything, and solved it for myself"* is a narrative that investors and customers instinctively trust.

[29:53](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Kl-I7sUcAOY&t=1793s) The Power of Obsession and the Lack of an "Off Button"

Alex Hormozi describes his relentless approach to product testing, stating that if every product currently on the market were placed in front of him, he could identify its flaws. His obsession is global; he has tested options from the US, Europe, and various foreign countries, and continues to test new products sent to him by followers. This deep commitment serves as a meta-concept for business communication. Hormozi highlights that a live demonstration or a personal model is always more compelling to an audience or an investor than a abstract concept. Presenting a narrative that explains exactly why a founder cares deeply about a problem can win over investors who might not otherwise care about the specific product category.

``` [ Pain ] ───> [ Obsession ] ───> [ Unique Narrative ] ───> [ Compelling Pitch ] ```

The discussion shifts to how high level obsession is perceived, with Hormozi noting that in certain regions, such as the UK, being entirely consumed by a goal is sometimes chastised. However, he maintains that obsessed individuals are the ones who change the world. He shares an anecdote from a close friend who managed nutrition and supplementation for overseas Olympic teams. When asked what sets champions apart from everyone else, the friend flipped the standard assumption:

> "Everyone always looks at them and says, 'What do champions have that I don't have?' And he said, 'It's they have it backwards... It's what do champions *not* have that I have.' It's what do they lack? And it's an off button. They just don't stop."

Steven Bartlett connects this back to human psychology and brain function, noting that the most effective pitches target the amygdala—the emotional center of the brain. Hearing Hormozi recount the childhood pain of sleeping with his hand stretched across his face to keep his nasal passages open builds instant empathy and authority. Bartlett reveals that his own girlfriend is currently facing her third nasal surgery, meaning they have personally bought and tested countless nose strips and products to find relief.

[33:36](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Kl-I7sUcAOY&t=2016s) The Triad of Success: Pain, Profession, and Passion

Hormozi introduces a framework for entrepreneurial alignment consisting of three elements: **Pain**, **Profession**, and **Passion**. While having all three makes failure almost impossible, an entrepreneur only needs to lean into one to build a viable business. For instance, an individual who is simply passionate about model cars could manufacture them, provide speed-tuning services, flip collectible cars, or build a media company around the hobby.

* **The Scope of Business Scale:** The size of an entrepreneur's financial goal directly dictates how narrow their strategic path must be. * **\$10 Million to \$100 Million:** Achievable in almost any industry given a long enough time horizon. * **Trillion or Deca-Trillion Dollars:** Requires an incredibly narrow scope, almost certainly involving advanced technology or Artificial Intelligence (AI). * **The Consumption Cap:** Hormozi points out that after reaching roughly \$20 million to \$25 million, an individual's personal consumption peaks, as they can already afford the most expensive restaurants, hotels, and vehicles. Higher financial goals often stem from a lack of rigorous thinking about lifestyle limits.

To ground this, Hormozi references an upcoming episode of his show *Mozi Tank*, featuring an IT professional who loves *Dungeons & Dragons*. The founder's pure and clear objective is simply to generate enough revenue from his passion to leave his IT job. While the business may never turn him into a billionaire, clarity on that outcome allows for a highly tailored and satisfying strategy.

---

[35:53](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Kl-I7sUcAOY&t=2153s) Standing Out in 2025: The Courage to Remain Undiluted

Bartlett presents a hypothetical scenario to explore the modern attention economy: how should a standard personal trainer stand out in the saturated landscape of 2025? Hormozi advises against trying to "out-science" established PhD content creators who are already heavily built and highly knowledgeable. Instead, the ultimate alpha lies in leaning directly into one's unique personal fingerprint and life experience.

Because the vast majority of products and services are heavily commoditized, consumers rarely buy because a provider is drastically superior; they buy because of brand affinity. Hormozi points to the beverage company *Prime* as a prime example—consumers choose it over comparable options because they want to support the specific creator behind it. In the short term, a personal trainer in 2025 should focus on direct outreach and compelling offers, while playing a long-term game of building uncopyable personal media.

Bartlett notes that iconic creators share the "courage to be themselves." He recalls his own early, cringeworthy content filled with generic clichés like "everything happens for a reason," acknowledging it took years to relax into his true identity online. Being truly unique carries unknown risks and rewards because there is no pre-existing blueprint, which naturally terrifies humans who crave certainty.

Hormozi underscores this by sharing a private conversation he had with his wife, Leila, after facing intense criticism online regarding a series of posts on X (formerly Twitter). When he questioned whether he should soften his messaging, Leila gave him definitive advice:

> "Never dilute yourself... There are so many more people who need that message than people who are hating that message... If you're actually going to make a difference in a lot of people's lives, there's going to be an equal and opposing force of people who want to reject that."

[42:34](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Kl-I7sUcAOY&t=2554s) Navigating the Gray of Contradictory Ideals

True brand value depends entirely on consistency, allowing an audience to firmly establish a creator's core values. Hormozi breaks down the underlying difficulty of content creation: navigating the gray areas where two positive, universally accepted human ideals clash.

> "You've got mercy and you've got justice. They are somehow opposed, and they are both ideals. So how can we believe in justice and also believe in mercy at the same time?"

He offers the example of a single mother pulled over for speeding. A pure stance on **Justice** demands she receive a ticket because accountability applies to everyone, whereas a stance on **Mercy** suggests letting her off due to her difficult life circumstances. Both perspectives represent good human values, yet choosing one side will inevitably draw criticism from proponents of the other. Political and social discourse is built entirely on these structural tensions—such as balancing consistency with innovation, or respecting tradition with promoting change. A creator's unique identity is defined by how their audience expects them to navigate these distinct tradeoffs.

[44:42](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Kl-I7sUcAOY&t=2682s) The Mosaic of Personal Branding and Changing Your Mind

Alex Hormozi describes personal branding as a mosaic made of colored tiles. Individual short clips, like a single post by Steven Bartlett, are just isolated tiles of color—red, yellow, or green. In isolation, a viewer cannot see the full image, but when they zoom out across a thousand pieces of content over time, the overall proportion of those colors defines the brand. Many people try to artificially balance their brand by formulaically scheduling one post about family, one about finance, and one about lifestyle. Hormozi rejects this approach, arguing that creators should simply express who they naturally are, allowing the proportions to shake out organically over time.

Because people naturally evolve, brands must evolve alongside them. Hormozi addresses the discomfort of looking back at past statements, sharing that his first podcast launched in July 2017—just 90 days after he lost everything. His eighth episode was titled "Stop Branding," an stance he has completely reversed over time. He emphasizes that documenting his journey from zero to a billion-dollar portfolio means his changing perspectives on business are publicly recorded. Changing one's mind upon acquiring new information is a sign of growth, not hypocrisy, drawing a parallel to how politicians are often unfairly criticized for changing their positions.

- Steven Bartlett’s podcast journey started in July 2017, with Episode 8 titled "Stop Branding." - The "Hormozi Journey" was publicly documented starting just 90 days after losing everything. - Brand evolution should happen gradually as a natural byproduct of personal growth.

---

[46:44](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Kl-I7sUcAOY&t=2804s) The 20-60-20 Rule and Unapologetic Authenticity

Addressing the anxiety of dealing with critics, Steven Bartlett shares an insight from a therapist who appeared on his podcast. Audience dynamics generally split into a 20-60-20 distribution: 20% are super-fans who love everything, 60% are reasonable, quiet followers who consume content without commenting, and 20% will hate everything regardless of what is done. Bartlett admits to falling into the trap of over-focusing on the vocal 20% of haters rather than serving the quiet majority.

Hormozi adds that being disliked is a fixed cost of existing in the public eye because no one is universally liked. Therefore, it is far better to be disliked for who you truly are than to be loved for an inauthentic persona. Quoting Jane Wurwand, the founder of Dermalogica, Bartlett notes that in marketing, "to get to your 20%, you have to be willing to piss off the 80%." Standing for a clear stance naturally draws a line in the sand, offending those on the other side. They highlight Nike's "Winning Isn't for Everyone" campaign narrated by Willem Dafoe—with lines like *"What's yours is mine and what's mine is mine"*—as a prime example of a brand embracing its core identity (victory requires someone to lose) despite alienating critics.

> "Being disliked is a fixed cost... it is far better to be disliked for being who you are than loved for someone you're not."

- **The Audience Split**: 20% super-fans, 60% silent reasonable followers, 20% perpetual critics. - **Jane Wurwand's Rule**: Reaching your core 20% of passionate fans requires a willingness to alienate the remaining 80%. - **Nike Campaign**: The Willem Dafoe-narrated ad split reactions (roughly 80% neutral/offended, 20% deeply resonated), restoring positive brand affinity among performance-driven athletes.

---

[49:13](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Kl-I7sUcAOY&t=2953s) Intellectual Horsepower and the Capacity of an Organization

When Bartlett asks about the true importance of people in building a company, Hormozi framing it as the foundational element of enterprise value. He recalls a conversation with a mentor who explained how his focus shifted over the decades: in his 20s, it was about the *destination*; in his 30s, the *journey*; and in his 40s, the *company* he kept along the way. Hormozi states that an organization's ultimate growth ceiling is directly dictated by the aggregate intellectual horsepower of its team.

If a founder is the smartest person in their company, the business is strictly capped by that single individual's life experience and bandwidth. No matter how intelligent someone is, they cannot live a thousand lifetimes of experience on their own. Pointing to the world's most successful tech leaders, Hormozi notes that almost none of them maintain 100% ownership of their companies at scale—Jensen Huang owns roughly 4% of NVIDIA, Jeff Bezos owns 7%–9% of Amazon, and Elon Musk owns around 20% of Tesla. Scaling a monumental business requires sharing ownership to bring in elite talent.

- **Mentor's Perspective Shift**: 20s = Destination, 30s = Journey, 40s = Company (the people). - **Ownership Scale**: Top tech founders hold minority stakes (Jensen Huang ~4%, Jeff Bezos ~7-9%, Elon Musk ~20%) to aggregate massive human talent.

---

[51:59](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Kl-I7sUcAOY&t=3119s) Barrels vs. Ammunition and Boss Battles in Hiring

To illustrate operational throughput, Hormozi references Keith Rabois's (PayPal Mafia) "Barrels and Ammunition" metaphor. When a startup hits product-market fit, founders often hire aggressively, expecting output to scale linearly (e.g., hiring 50 people to 5x a 10-person team's output). However, output fails to scale because most employees are "ammunition" (cannonballs), while throughput is limited by the number of "barrels" (engineers or leaders who can drive projects independently). Expanding total capacity requires finding more barrels. Hormozi also references Price's Law, noting that the square root of the number of people in an organization generates 50% of the value (e.g., 10 people in a 100-person company).

``` [ Ammunition ] ---> ( Single Barrel) ---> Limited Output [ Ammunition ] ---> ( Barrel 1) ( Barrel 2) ---> Multiplied Throughput ```

Hormozi compares developing organizational leadership to beating bosses in a video game. When starting out, a founder spends months learning how to hire and manage a basic role like a frontline salesperson. When starting a second company, they blitz through those early levels because they recognize the exact archetype needed. However, they soon hit new "boss battles"—such as hiring a Sales Manager or a VP of Marketing—where missing pattern recognition causes long delays. Finding, hiring, onboarding, and ultimately firing an underperforming manager can burn 6 to 18 months of company momentum before the founder learns what true excellence looks like at that specific scale.

- **Keith Rabois's Metaphor**: Most hires are ammunition; true capacity increases only when you hire "barrels." - **Price's Law**: $\sqrt{N}$ people in a company produce 50% of the total results (10 out of 100 employees). - **Leveling Up**: Executive archetypes change at distinct revenue milestones ($1M–$10M vs. $10M–$100M).

---

[56:52](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Kl-I7sUcAOY&t=3412s) The First-Time Founder's Dilemma and the 3D Framework

Bartlett reflects on his own early founder mistakes, admitting he hired a high school friend who worked at Prada to manage accounts and a 30-year-old professional gamer met at a rap battle as his marketing director. It was only three or four years in that he accidentally hired an exceptional "A-player," which completely transformed his understanding of talent density. Because first-time founders operate with "unknown unknowns," they frequently make these mistakes until forced to go through the pain themselves.

To bridge this gap without relying purely on luck, Hormozi lays out the **3D Framework** for training and onboarding talent when a founder doesn't yet know how to hire for a role:

1. **Document**: The founder does the job themselves and writes out a granular, step-by-step checklist of everything required to achieve success. 2. **Demonstrate**: The founder executes the checklist live in front of the new hire, adjusting the steps if they realize they skipped details in practice. 3. **Duplicate**: The new hire executes the checklist in front of the founder to demonstrate mastery.

- Bootstrapped founders often gain broader operational knowledge early on because they are forced to do every job before delegating it. - Accidentally hiring an A-player is often the pivotal realization point for first-time founders.

[59:20](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Kl-I7sUcAOY&t=3560s) The Executive Hiring Risk and the "Shots at the Bar" Analogy

When hiring at higher levels within an organization, the stakes scale exponentially. Alex Hormozi contrasts two leaders: Cacey Leison, who brought on ten people—nine of whom became top performers in the company—and another C-player executive who hired ten people that all turned out to be complete failures. When a leader lacks cultural or skill fit, the entire division underneath them decays. Hormozi compares it to a tree with a completely rotten branch where you end up having to scoop out three-quarters of the team underneath them because they were either ineffective or working against the company's actual mission.

To help his team digest the painful necessity of cutting out "deadwood," Hormozi uses two vivid analogies:

* **The Bar Tab Analogy:** Imagine being out at a club where someone keeps recklessly ordering rounds of expensive shots for everyone and then suddenly dips out before paying. Everyone left behind has to foot the bill. When a manager fires bad fits or scoops out organizational rot, the immediate pain felt is not because cleaning house is wrong—it is simply paying the unavoidable bill left behind by bad hiring choices. * **The Infidelity Analogy:** If a partner admits to an affair, the moment of honesty causes immense pain. However, telling the truth isn't the mistake—the act of cheating was the mistake. Admitting it is the beginning of making things right. Likewise, the pain of having hard firing conversations feels wrong in the moment, but it is actually the necessary process of correcting a past error. Businesses stay stuck for years simply because they refuse to have that hard conversation.

[01:01:46](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Kl-I7sUcAOY&t=3706s) Culture Operationalized and the Virus of Quiet Dissatisfaction

Steven Bartlett notes that the defining mark of elite founders is their ability to have difficult conversations much sooner. He shares an example of first-time founders in his portfolio complaining month after month about a failing e-commerce director, yet letting him linger in the role for over a year without even telling the manager they were unhappy with his performance. This "quiet dissatisfaction" acts as a virus across the company. Everyone else on the team knows the manager is performing poorly, and when leadership does nothing, that sub-par performance becomes the accepted baseline standard for excellence.

Hormozi defines culture operationalized as "the rules that govern reinforcement within an organization—what we reward and what we punish." While values act as bundled decision-making filters for gray areas (such as balancing speed versus quality, like Rolls-Royce prioritizing quality over speed), culture ultimately boils down to spoken and unspoken rules.

- If ten people attend a marketing meeting and someone shows up three minutes late without being called out, leadership has passively reinforced an unspoken rule that tardiness is acceptable. - If an employee is late due to closing a high-priority sales call or helping a client, leadership should explicitly acknowledge and validate that reason to publicly reinforce that revenue generation and customer success take precedence. - Citing Peter Drucker's famous principle, Hormozi asserts that culture eats strategy for breakfast every day of the week, because execution—not strategic complexity—is what limits almost every business.

[01:05:46](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Kl-I7sUcAOY&t=3946s) Feedback Loops, Dog Training, and Skill-Based Hiring

Training effectiveness relies heavily on the speed of the feedback loop. Drawing on behavioral psychology studies on dog training, Hormozi explains that giving a reward immediately after a dog sits teaches the behavior rapidly. Waiting ten seconds triples the required repetitions, and delaying past a minute destroys the learning curve entirely because the reward inadvertently reinforces whatever random action occurred immediately prior. High-performing organizations operate as rapid-feedback training environments.

When onboarding sales reps on a new script, standard organizations let them read through an entire draft and offer feedback at the very end—a method that rarely yields results. Hormozi sets explicit expectations upfront: *"We are going to go through this script, and in the first 30 minutes, I am probably going to stop you 30 times. If that happens, it means we're doing it right."* By stopping them after the very first sentence to correct tone and cadence, praising them on a good repetition, and building sentence by sentence, reps rapidly master the material through high-volume feedback loops.

- **The Training Alpha:** Up-skilling a employee from B-level capability to A+ performance allows an organization to capture the net profit profit delta between the talent's hiring cost and their output value. - **The Selection Trap:** Relying solely on market-rate hiring forces companies to pay top-dollar salaries for pre-existing talent, directly eating into gross profit margins. - **Smallest Skill Deficiency Framework:** When hiring for low-skilled positions (e.g., a cupcake shop cashier), hire for attitude over aptitude, as register training takes 30 minutes, whereas foundational traits take longer to build. For high-skilled roles (e.g., an M&A CFO with ten years of experience), hire for the core technical expertise first, as teaching soft skills like situational politeness is vastly faster than teaching a decade of corporate finance.

[01:09:36](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Kl-I7sUcAOY&t=4176s) "Be Kind, Not Nice" and the Stop-Start-Keep Framework

Managers frequently avoid delivering petty feedback out of fear of offending employees or coming across as autocratic dictators. Hormozi counters this by distinguishing between being "nice" (conflict-averse politeness) and being "kind" (doing what maximizes the employee's chance of long-term success). People rarely get fired for one massive error; they fail due to a hundred unaddressed micro-mistakes. Immediate, granular corrections protect their career trajectory.

To deliver effective feedback, leaders must separate objective criticism from emotional insults:

* **Criticisms vs. Insults:** Criticism is the objective measurement of a discrepancy between desired performance and actual behavior (e.g., "You were late twice this week when the standard is punctuality"). An insult adds a judgmental label to that discrepancy (e.g., "You are lazy"). * **Behavioral Guidance:** Removing personal insults and substituting clear, actionable directives helps people adjust instantly. * **The "Stop, Start, Keep" Action Plan:** Hormozi illustrates this with a high-performing director who was widely disliked by the executive team. Rather than telling him "stop being a dick"—which provides zero actionable guidance—Hormozi broke it down into concrete behavior loops: when interrupting others, *stop* talking, *start* waiting until they finish, and *keep* verifying if they are done before speaking.

- "Kind, not nice" serves as an internal operational mantra to ensure managers give real-time feedback without sugarcoating truths. - Criticism must always address the gap between actual output and expected results, followed by explicit instructions on what specific behavior to start, stop, or retain.

[01:13:29](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Kl-I7sUcAOY&t=4409s) Teaching through Specific Behaviors and Conditions

Managers frequently struggle with corrective feedback because they rely on emotional insults and vague demands instead of actionable guidance. When dealing with an employee who seems underperforming or unprofessional—such as "Sandy," who takes hours to respond on Slack, submits half-baked work, and shows up on Zoom looking disheveled—the knee-jerk reaction is to react from the amygdala. Shouting, insulting someone, or telling them they need to "level up" yields zero useful action. Instead, a leader must access the prefrontal cortex to translate subjective frustration into concrete data points and specific behavioral conditions.

Effective coaching requires setting clear rules tied to specific triggers. Instead of berating an employee or threatening a formal Performance Improvement Plan (PIP), a manager can implement corrective steps directly. For instance, instruct the team member to switch their Zoom background to the company standard, wear a collared shirt, turn on Slack notifications, and respond within 10 minutes during work hours. Setting explicit behavioral conditions empowers the employee to fix their performance and ultimately stops others from labeling them negatively.

* Effective feedback transitions from emotional insults to granular, observable data points. * Performance Improvement Plans can be applied practically by changing specific daily behaviors without using demoralizing jargon. * Setting clear conditional triggers—stating what action to take when a specific situation occurs—is what drives real behavioral change.

[01:16:10](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Kl-I7sUcAOY&t=4570s) Hiring Top Talent Through Referral Loops and Rapid Learning

When early-stage entrepreneurs approach hiring, starting with the assumption that you are bad at hiring helps remove personal bias. To avoid making costly mistakes, founders should decentralize the decision-making process by involving trusted external experts. For instance, when recruiting a top salesperson, a founder might assemble an interview panel consisting of the sharpest sales professionals they have ever encountered.

``` [Identify Initial Experts] │ ▼ [Ask: "Who is the best at X?"] │ ▼ [Interview Top Candidates / Experts] │ ▼ [Ask: "Who is the absolute best THEY know?"] │ ▼ [Target "God-Tier" Talent] ```

This approach mirrors how high-level consultants rapidly master unfamiliar industries. When an analyst needs to understand complex domains quickly, they interview top specialists, map the information ecosystem, and continuously ask each expert to point to the best mind in their field. By running this referral chain multiple times, founders can trace the talent tree directly to "god-tier" candidates.

* Sam Ovens, the founder of Skool, interviewed roughly 600 developers before landing Daniel, who ultimately became the company's CTO. * Skool (skool.com) serves as a platform bringing online communities together with in-person experiences. * Consulting techniques for rapid learning involve gathering expert insights, reorganizing raw notes by category, and distilling core truths to generate action plans.

[01:20:10](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Kl-I7sUcAOY&t=4810s) Evaluating Candidate Expertise Through Nuance and Metrics

The interview process serves a dual purpose for founders: it acts as a venue to select candidates and a source of free high-level consulting. By presenting real, unsolved company problems to applicants, a founder can assess how deeply a candidate thinks about execution. Experts stand out from beginners through the sheer quality and quantity of the metrics they monitor, as well as their ability to map concrete actions directly to financial outcomes.

While beginners fall into binary thinking—assuming a strategy simply "worked" or "didn't work"—seasoned experts break down entire processes into sub-metrics. When asked how they will solve a problem like low click-through rates or underperforming sales, true experts outline specific, repeatable daily behaviors rather than vague promises like "coaching the team."

* Beginners evaluate efforts binary-style, whereas experts analyze performance across multi-step conversion funnels. * High-performing employees can clearly articulate how their specific job function—even in entry-level roles like customer support—drives retention, referrals, and overall company revenue. * The Feynman technique applies directly to interviews: candidates who resort to overly complex jargon often lack genuine mastery or are deliberately obscuring their ability.

[01:24:49](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Kl-I7sUcAOY&t=5089s) Securing High-Level Talent and Structuring Equity

Recruiting top-tier talent away from high-paying, secure corporate roles when you are running a early startup requires leveraging both hard and soft incentive levers. Cash compensation is often limited, so founders must understand the core components of enterprise ownership to offer attractive upside structures:

When cash is scarce, founders can structure contractual profit-sharing or future sales upside without surrendering operational control or transferring financial risk. The single most effective question a founder can ask a high-caliber prospective hire is simply, "What would it take?" Framing the conversation this way subtly assumes an eventual deal and prompts the candidate to reveal their exact decision criteria.

* "What would it take?" acts as a powerful framing question that bypasses guesswork and shifts negotiations directly to candidate requirements. * Non-software businesses can use creative contractual structures around profit distributions and sales participation instead of traditional stock grants. * Early-stage founders can overcome compensation deficits by isolating what a high-value candidate values most—whether that is long-term equity, profit share, or mission-driven upside.

[01:26:52](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Kl-I7sUcAOY&t=5212s) Pitching Talent and the Barbell Hiring Strategy

Persuading an exceptional leader or potential co-founder to join a startup requires the exact same psychological framing as pitching an investor. The only difference is that instead of allocating financial capital, high-caliber hires are investing their time, life, and expertise into your vision. Steven Bartlett recalls Steve Jobs’ legendary pitch to Pepsi executive John Sculley—asking whether he wanted to sell sugar water for the rest of his life or come change the world—to highlight the power of an emotional, mission-driven narrative. Alex Hormozi connects this back to the "amygdala story" mentioned earlier, emphasizing that a leader’s pitch must speak directly to core drives and conviction.

When asked whether founders should hire naive, scrappy youth or experienced, expensive industry veterans, Hormozi advocates for a strict **barbell strategy**. On one side, you recruit young, hungry individuals who crave fast growth, lack preconceptions, and are willing to put in relentless hours. On the other side, you hire late-career executives who are secure in their finances and status, completely disinterested in corporate ladder-climbing or title games, but genuinely love doing the work and bring massive strategic leverage. The "middle" tier—those who act like title-obsessed careerists constantly bargaining over what they get versus what they give—tends to cause the most friction in an organization.

* **Barbell Strategy Breakdown:** * **Growth-Focused (Youth/Naivety):** High energy, open mind, high rep count, no preconceived ideas of "how things are supposed to be done." * **Mastery-Focused (Late Career):** Deep experience, zero title anxiety, brings operational leverage and battle-tested strategy. * **The Problematic Middle:** Careerists seeking tit-for-tat trade-offs, often creating corporate drag without either pure drive or deep wisdom. * "Persuading someone exceptional to come and join your mission... fundamentally, you're asking for investment—except instead of investing capital, they're investing time, their life, and their expertise."

---

[01:29:46](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Kl-I7sUcAOY&t=5386s) First Principles and the 4 R's of Customer Success

Naivety serves as a powerful engine for industry disruption because newcomers are forced to build solutions from first principles rather than blindly copying established norms. When you strip a business down to its core truths—such as the simple fact that satisfied customers are far more likely to recommend a product than unhappy ones—you can re-derive working models with true conviction. Rather than overcomplicating customer success, every action should focus on optimizing the key moments where customer satisfaction translates directly into measurable business growth.

To systematically capture this growth, Hormozi relies on a simple framework called the **4 R's**:

* **Retain:** Deliver immediate value to keep the customer engaged right from the start. * **Review:** Prompt the customer to give positive public feedback at high-delight touchpoints. * **Refer:** Lower the friction and add incentives for customers to share the product with friends or colleagues. * **Resell:** Offer logical next-step products or service upgrades to maximize lifetime value.

---

[01:33:15](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Kl-I7sUcAOY&t=5595s) The Entrepreneurial Life Cycle and the "Woman in the Red Dress"

Every entrepreneur undergoes a predictable psychological emotional roller coaster. Without awareness of this cycle, founders often mistakenly assume something is fundamentally wrong with them or their business model, prompting them to abandon ship prematurely. Hormozi breaks down the six distinct stages of the entrepreneurial life cycle:

1. **Uninformed Optimism:** The excitement of seeing an opportunity without understanding its underlying difficulty. 2. **Informed Pessimism:** Entering the business and realizing it is vastly more complex and demanding than expected. 3. **Valley of Despair (Crisis of Meaning):** Working endlessly with minimal initial results. This is the critical juncture where paths split. 4. **The Doom Loop (The Wrong Path):** Bailing on the hard work to chase a new shiny idea, hopping right back into Uninformed Optimism, and repeating the same 6-month cycle for 20 years. 5. **Informed Optimism (The Right Path):** Pushing through the pain, learning how to navigate the downsides, and maximizing the upsides. 6. **Achievement:** Reaching long-term success through sustained execution.

Hormozi compares the temptation of new shiny business opportunities to the famous "Woman in the Red Dress" scene from *The Matrix*. While Neo is distracted by a captivating woman walking down the street, Morpheus warns him, and when Neo looks back, she has transformed into an Agent holding a gun to his head. In business, a brand-new idea looks pristine and effortless from a distance, but the moment you abandon your current business to pursue it, you inherit a whole new set of unforeseen problems.

Recalling a pivotal lesson from his former CFO at Gym Launch—a veteran who had scaled four companies from zero to $100M and led over 40 M&A transactions—Hormozi shares her raw wisdom on distractive opportunities: *"The grass is always greener on the other side, you just don't know that it's fertilized with shit."* Every business has its own hidden problems; the key is sticking with the set of problems you already understand rather than trading them for unknown ones.

* **Defining Focus and Commitment:** * **Focus** is measured by the quantity and quality of opportunities you say "no" to. * **Commitment** is defined as the total elimination of alternative options—much like marriage eliminates alternatives to forge deep devotion. * "The grass is always greener on the other side, you just don't know that it's fertilized with shit." * "I measure focus by the quantity and quality of things that you say no to, and I define commitment as the elimination of alternatives."

Here is the detailed walkthrough covering this segment of the interview.

[01:40:30](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Kl-I7sUcAOY&t=6030s) "Niche Slapping" and the Arrogance of Divided Attention

Steven Bartlett reflects on how entrepreneurs frequently handle a crisis of meaning: rather than truly focusing on or abandoning their main venture, they simply stack new side projects on top of it. He sees this constantly when founders approach him in the gym, listing three completely un-related ventures—a crypto project, an e-commerce hair business, and another side hustle—operating under the false assumption that doing more things increases their odds of success. Steven recounts how his own mother started 20 to 30 businesses throughout his childhood, hopping from a hairdressing salon to an estate agency to a furniture store every six months without ever reaching the escape velocity that sustained focus brings.

Alex Hormozi responds that entrepreneurship is far more a "war of the heart than it is a war of the mind," noting that people generally know what they *should* do but fail to follow their own advice. He calls the act of juggling multiple ventures "niche slapping"—jokingly threatening to slap founders into picking just one path. Alex argues that splitting one's focus across multiple companies is an exercise in arrogance and ego: a founder who gives 30% of their time to a project will inevitably get crushed by a competitor devoting 100% of their energy to that single business. Alex speaks from personal experience, recalling a phase when he simultaneously ran his gym launch company, six physical gym locations, a chiropractic agency, and a dental agency—a distraction that eventually slowed down his revenue growth.

* The illusion of portfolio building often stems from confusing being a passive business owner with being an active CEO. * Alex admits his biggest career mistakes came from introducing an e-commerce line to his licensing business out of a fear of "leaving money on the table." * Leaving small amounts of money on the table is a necessary trade-off to capture the much larger payoff on your main table. * Alex quotes Shane Parrish: "Success is doing the obvious thing for an extraordinary period of time without believing that you're smarter than you are."

---

[01:47:01](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Kl-I7sUcAOY&t=6421s) Confronting the "Level Three Boss" and the 10-Year Horizon

Alex uses a video game analogy to illustrate why entrepreneurs constantly jump to new projects. When a founder learns how to beat levels one through three of a business, they hit a wall at level four. Instead of pushing through the pain and uncertainty of learning how to beat that difficult boss, they restart the entire game from level one in a brand-new endeavor where they already know the early steps. Overcoming this cycle requires leaning into the repetitions and realizing that extended timelines turn seemingly crazy goals into sane outcomes. Almost any business—whether cutting hair or running a local dry cleaner—can be scaled to $100 million if expanded over a 10- to 20-year horizon through licensing, franchising, or national expansion.

Building a business that creates real generational wealth typically takes a 10-year period: about five years to figure out "which way is North" and another five years to build a enterprise that scales. Alex shares the hard truth for those leaving jobs: when you quit your job to work less and make more, you end up working much harder for far less money for an extended period. The initial rush of making your first dollar outside a day job is addictive, but it can accidentally reinforce the dangerous habit of quitting and restarting whenever things get tough.

* Most multi-billion dollar companies reach massive numbers between years 6 and 10 of focused effort. * Founders often say they are 5 years into entrepreneurship, but they are only 6 months into their current project because they keep resetting the clock. * "You quit your job because you don't want to work as hard... As soon as you quit, you will realize that you are now going to work way harder than you were and you're going to make less money for an extended period of time."

---

[01:51:07](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Kl-I7sUcAOY&t=6667s) Binary Thinking vs. Nuanced Iteration

Steven points out that first-time founders often treat an initial wrong hypothesis as a sign to abandon the entire business, whereas experienced entrepreneurs know their starting premise is almost certainly wrong and view the journey as a process of refining that hypothesis. Alex illustrates this dynamic with a viral tweet contrasting first-time founders with third-time founders:

> "First-time founder: 'Hey, I need you to sign an NDA before I tell you my business idea.' > Third-time founder: 'Here's everything I have... it's probably all wrong and this probably won't work, but I have a couple smart people and I think we'll be able to figure it out. It'll cost more and take longer than we think, but we think it's worth a shot.'"

The fundamental difference between beginners and experts is that beginners rely on binary thinking—believing something either completely worked or completely failed. Masters use nuanced thinking to break a problem into its component parts. When an ad campaign fails, an expert doesn't claim "advertising doesn't work"; they analyze whether the issue is the ad hook, landing page offer clarity, or product positioning. Alex references Mark Zuckerberg and early Facebook as an example: when faced with poor user retention, Zuckerberg didn't conclude that social networks were a failed concept. Instead, he identified a single, highly specific metric to fix the issue—getting a user connected to 10 friends within 14 days.

* Beginners discard entire business models when a single variable fails, missing the root cause hidden in the details. * Facebook solved its early retention crisis by rallying around the single focus of establishing 10 friends in 14 days for every new user.

[01:54:47](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Kl-I7sUcAOY&t=6887s) Identifying Constraints and Ego Shift in Leadership

Alex Hormozi explains that foundational business models—whether cutting hair or mowing lawns—work because they solve a real problem for a profitable price. When growth stalls, it is rarely a problem with the core business concept itself; rather, it indicates a specific bottleneck holding things back. Zooming into that constraint usually reveals twenty underlying factors contributing to the issue, not just one. Developing the expertise to diagnose these issues requires trying, failing, and maintaining an exceptionally high tolerance for failure without internalizing it or feeling like a personal failure.

``` ┌─────────────────────────────────────────┐ │ Foundational Business Problem │ │ (Service/Product matches Market Need) │ └────────────────────┬────────────────────┘ │ ▼ ┌─────────────────────────────────────────┐ │ Identify Key Constraint │ │ (Analyze underlying factors) │ └────────────────────┬────────────────────┘ │ ┌─────────────┴─────────────┐ ▼ ▼ ┌──────────────────────────┐┌──────────────────────────┐ │ Game of Being "Right" ││ Game of Being "Successful"│ │ - Ego-driven CEO role ││ - Ego is secondary │ │ - Forcing hypothesis ││ - Hiring true experts │ │ - Ignoring feedback ││ - Stepping into best role│ └──────────────────────────┘└──────────────────────────┘ ```

Steven Bartlett draws on his early career starting WallPark, reflecting on how he initially thought entrepreneurship was about "being right"—forcing the original pitch deck hypothesis even when customers said otherwise. Over time, he learned that winning is about being *successful*, which requires putting ego aside. Bartlett cites major UK successes like Represent (valued at £100M), Gymshark (£1.5B), and Huel (£1B+), noting a common thread: early on, their founders realized they were not necessarily the best CEOs and stepped into roles like Chief Brand Officer or Head of Product to let the business thrive.

- **Foundational business test:** If a real problem exists and customers pay more than it costs to deliver, the underlying model is sound. - **Root-cause analysis:** Performance bottlenecks are almost never caused by a single variable; usually ~20 micro-factors contribute to the outcome. - **Ego vs. Outcome:** Wanting to be "right" keeps founders trapped in roles they aren't suited for, whereas wanting to be successful forces them to step into the role where they create maximum value.

---

[01:56:37](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Kl-I7sUcAOY&t=6997s) The "Who" and the Power of Recruiting Top Talent

Building a truly massive company requires far more lifetimes of expertise than any single founder possesses. As a company scales, entrepreneurship rapidly transforms into a recruiting game. Hormozi points out that legendary founders like Mark Zuckerberg, Elon Musk, and Steve Jobs spent extraordinary amounts of time recruiting. Jobs famously dedicated 12 to 18 months to bring a single key individual into Apple, systematically staying on their radar until they finally agreed to join.

``` ┌─────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────┐ │ Steve Jobs' Recruitment Flywheel │ └──────────────────────────────┬──────────────────────────────┘ │ ▼ ┌───────────────────────────────────┐ │ Identify & Pursue "A-Players" │ │ (Patience over 12-18 months) │ └──────────────────┬────────────────┘ │ ▼ ┌───────────────────────────────────┐ │ Assemble Core Group of Top Talent│ │ (A-Players love top peers) │ └──────────────────┬────────────────┘ │ ▼ ┌───────────────────────────────────┐ │ Self-Policing Culture Forms │ │ (Rejection of B & C Players) │ └───────────────────────────────────┘ ```

Bartlett references one of his favorite videos of Steve Jobs discussing how Apple's success was not just his own doing, but the result of doing the painful work of finding and hiring exceptional talent. Jobs highlighted a natural dynamic: when you get a core group of top performers ("A-players") working together, they love it because they rarely get that opportunity. That environment becomes self-policing; A-players refuse to work with "B and C players" and insist on hiring only other A-players, creating a culture of excellence that propagates across the entire organization.

> "I've built a lot of my success off finding these truly gifted people and not settling for B and C players, but really going for the A-players." — Steve Jobs

- **Recruiting timeline:** Top-tier talent acquisition is a long game that can take up to 18 months per critical hire. - **Leverage:** Outside of groundbreaking technological breakthroughs, elite human capital represents the highest-leverage asset a company can acquire. - **Self-policing standard:** High performers naturally push out mediocrity because they refuse to tolerate B and C-player standards.

---

[01:59:01](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Kl-I7sUcAOY&t=7141s) Re-Defining A-Players and High-Leverage Priorities

Hormozi highlights a common blind spot for founders: your definition of an "A-player" today will be vastly different from what you consider an A-player five years from now. To scale rapidly, founders must project themselves into the future size of the company, ask who an A-player would be at that scale, and figure out how to recruit those people today. Replacing a team of mixed capabilities with five true scale-ready A-players does not just double revenue—it can 10x or 50x the business, dramatically speed up execution, and increase the company's valuation multiple by reducing dependency on the founder.

To illustrate immediate, high-leverage business shifts, Hormozi shares an operational example outside of hiring: lead response times. Research consistently shows that calling inbound leads within 60 seconds increases conversion rates by 4x to 5x. He shares a story about a home restoration entrepreneur converting 55% of all inbound leads by paying his aunt $60,000 a year to do literally nothing else except immediately call incoming leads the second they arrive—generating millions in revenue.

> "The moment a lead comes in, you stop having sex with your husband, you stop cooking, you stop loving your child—and you immediately call the lead." — Alex Hormozi

- **Future projection exercise:** Identify what an A-player looks like at 10x your current revenue, and make hiring them your top priority today. - **Speed to lead ROI:** Calling leads within 60 seconds yields a 4x–5x conversion lift compared to standard response times. - **Funding high-payoff roles:** High-value hires should not be paid out of current profits, but out of the undiscovered revenue their immediate execution unlocks.

---

[02:02:54](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Kl-I7sUcAOY&t=7374s) Navigating "The Swamp" and the Reality of Hard Choices

At Acquisition.com, Hormozi calls the $1M to $3M revenue stage "the swamp." It is one of the most painful phases for entrepreneurs because of the financial squeeze. In a $1M business with 20% margins ($200,000 profit), hiring a single scale-ready executive can cost 100% of the owner's net income. The founder is left with an agonizing choice: sacrifice all short-term personal profits to hire help, or work an extra six hours a day to do the job themselves. Both options carry risk—overworking leads to burnout, while a bad hire burns precious capital.

``` ┌──────────────────────────────┐ │ The $1M - $3M "Swamp" │ │ ($200k Profit / 20% Margin)│ └──────────────┬───────────────┘ │ ┌──────────────────┴──────────────────┐ ▼ ▼ ┌─────────────────────────┐ ┌─────────────────────────┐ │ Option A: Do the Work │ │ Option B: Reinvest Profit│ │ - Work +6 hours/day │ │ - Spend $100k-$200k on │ │ - Risk: Burnout/Stagnation │ an A-Player │ │ - Reward: Keep cash flow│ │ - Risk: Bad hire │ └─────────────────────────┘ │ - Reward: Unlock 10x │ └─────────────────────────┘ ```

This dynamic explains why business owners get outsized returns: they take on outsized risk and make decisions where every path feels painful. Hormozi invokes Elon Musk's quote that running a business is "like staring into the abyss and chewing glass." The "abyss" represents constant existential risk, while "chewing glass" means that as a CEO, only the worst, most intractable problems flow up to your desk. Real hardship isn't just working long hours; it's being willing to pay in new currencies of discomfort—facing lawsuits, making risky bets, and having tough, unpleasant conversations.

> "Running a business is like staring out into the abyss and chewing glass." — Elon Musk

- **The $1M–$3M "Swamp":** The growth phase where hiring key talent directly competes with owner compensation. - **The CEO filter:** Solvable, easy problems are handled by the team; only complex, high-stakes, or painful decisions reach the founder. - **How businesses die:** Most entrepreneurs don't quit in a dramatic moment; they "fizzle" by settling for their current level, losing their desire to chew new forms of glass.

---

[02:07:24](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Kl-I7sUcAOY&t=7644s) Rapid Skill Acquisition through High Volume and Iteration

When entering a new domain or marketing channel, failure is almost guaranteed at first because general knowledge must be adapted to a new set of rules. Hormozi contrasts entrepreneurs who get stuck in old paradigms—like a multi-hundred-million-dollar company founder who crushed infomercials but delayed adapting to YouTube for a decade—with those who rapidly adapt to new media landscapes like TikTok.

``` ┌─────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────┐ │ High-Volume Feedback Loop Engine │ └──────────────────────────────┬──────────────────────────────┘ │ ▼ ┌───────────────────────────────────┐ │ Execute High Volume (100 Reps) │ │ (Calls, Outreach, Videos) │ └──────────────────┬────────────────┘ │ ▼ ┌───────────────────────────────────┐ │ Isolate Top 10% Performers │ │ (Identify common variables) │ └──────────────────┬────────────────┘ │ ▼ ┌───────────────────────────────────┐ │ Standardize onto Next 100 Reps │ │ (Build repeatable checklists) │ └───────────────────────────────────┘ ```

To master any new skill or channel at speed without buying courses, Hormozi relies on an iterative, high-volume feedback engine:

1. **Execute high initial volume:** Perform 100 iterations of an activity (e.g., 100 sales calls, 100 outreach messages, or 100 videos). 2. **Isolate top performers:** Analyze the top 10% of results and identify what variables made them different from the remaining 90%. 3. **Standardize and repeat:** Incorporate those successful variables into the next batch of 100 reps. 4. **Refine continuous checklists:** Repeat the process to spot new variables, converting insights into systematic execution checklists.

- **Adaptation trap:** Legacy success in old channels (e.g., TV infomercials or blogs) can create blind spots that delay adapting to new platforms. - **Volume over theory:** Skill acquisition speeds up drastically when forced through high-rep iterations rather than passive study. - **Systematizing quality:** Comparing top-performing reps against the rest creates a clear, empirical checklist for high-performing content or sales processes.

[02:09:16](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Kl-I7sUcAOY&t=7756s) The Iterative Process of Skill Acquisition

Alex Hormozi recounts a story shared by David Perell about Chris Rock’s creative process. When audiences see Chris Rock command a room at Madison Square Garden with 60 minutes of non-stop, razor-sharp comedy, they assume it is pure natural talent. What they do not see are the months spent performing at small, local comedy clubs. During his first hour-long set at a small club, Rock might only get three big laughs and have about five minutes of solid material, while the remaining 55 minutes completely flop.

Instead of getting discouraged, Rock takes those five winning minutes, places them at the beginning of his next set, and spends the remaining 55 minutes trying entirely new material. He repeats this iterative loop over and over—extracting the winning minutes, placing them at the front, and experimenting with the rest—until he eventually builds 60 uninterrupted minutes of tier-one material. Hormozi emphasizes that this exact framework applies to writing, business, and skill acquisition as a whole: success rarely comes from a single breakthrough, but rather from compounding many small, refined iterations that generate outsized returns.

[02:10:52](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Kl-I7sUcAOY&t=7852s) Emotional Regulation and Escaping the Founder's Trap

Steven Bartlett brings up the emotional toll on founders who fail to build executive teams to handle operational strain. He shares an example of a founder visiting his office who was on track to build a $30M–$50M business, yet was posting tearful messages on social media about wanting to quit. When Steven asked her about her executive leadership team, she rolled her eyes and admitted she didn't have one. Steven notes that early-stage founders often believe the intense operational chaos and interpersonal drama of the $1M–$30M phase will last forever, causing severe nervous system burnout.

To solve this operational bottleneck, Hormozi outlines a concrete time-tracking audit he uses with portfolio founders:

* **15-Minute Audit Sheet:** Create a Google Sheet listing every 15-minute time block from 5:00 a.m. to midnight. * **Kitchen Timer Method:** Set a physical timer to go off every 15 minutes. Every time it dings, write down a one- or two-word summary of what was just done. * **Time Reallocation:** At the end of the week, review the audit. If 40% of the founder's time is spent on a repetitive operational task, they can immediately calculate the cost of hiring a role to own that 40%, freeing themselves up to double the business.

Hormozi reframes the entrepreneur as a multi-headed fractional worker who continually absorbs tasks onto their plate until there is enough volume to offload them into a full-time role. Addresses the common pushback—*"No one can do what I do"*—Hormozi uses the **Unicorn Analogy**:

> "You probably won't find a unicorn... but you can find a white horse, and you can find a rhinoceros to get the horn, and you can find some fireflies to give you the twinkles."

Instead of hunting for a single mythical hire who possesses every single one of your unique skills, you break the role into pieces and hire two or three specialized individuals who can execute those specific tasks far better than you ever could.

[02:16:47](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Kl-I7sUcAOY&t=8207s) The Innovator's Dilemma, Scale, and Resource Allocation

The conversation shifts to how past success can trap companies into irrelevance when channels evolve. Hormozi refers to Google's famous **70-20-10 resource allocation framework** created by Sergey Brin to continuously innovate without starving the core business:

* **70% of Resources:** Dedicated to the core business (doing more of what currently generates revenue). * **20% of Resources:** Dedicated to adjacent opportunities (high-probability expansions one step removed from the core). * **10% of Resources:** Dedicated to moonshots (high-risk, 100x potential payoff plays).

Hormozi ties this framework directly to the concept of **"More, Better, New"** from his book *$100M Leads*. He explains that most small businesses severely underestimate the sheer volume of output required to scale, often confusing low marketing volume with volatility.

To illustrate this gap in volume, Hormozi shares a personal story from his early gym-owner days:

* **The 300 vs. 150,000 Flyer Lesson:** After launching his first gym, Hormozi placed 300 flyers on car windshields. When it yielded no noticeable results, he called his mentor (who owned 20 gym locations) to complain that flyers didn't work. His mentor revealed that his base *test size* was 5,000 flyers, and once a winning offer was identified, his team distributed 5,000 flyers every single day—totaling 150,000 flyers a month. His mentor was operating at 500 times the volume. * **Content Output Scale:** When people ask Hormozi how to build a personal brand and mention posting 1 to 2 videos a week, he points out that his team publishes **450 pieces of content per week**. Outsized results come from outsized leverage and raw volume.

Hormozi outlines the **Three Strategic Buckets** every business must fund when reinvesting profits:

1. **Get More Customers:** Scale existing acquisition channels to drive core top-line growth. 2. **Increase Lifetime Gross Profit:** Maximize customer lifetime value so each acquisition is worth significantly more. 3. **Decrease Risk (Future Insurance):** Reinvest capital into new channels and models so the business survives shift changes.

Crucially, Hormozi warns CEOs never to pull top performers away from the primary cash-cow driver to build experimental new divisions. The core business must remain fully staffed by its proven stars while separate teams are hired to test and build the "New." As CEO, your role is to act as a "flex player" who parachutes into complex problems with the unique leverage of immediate decision-making power and capital deployment.

[02:23:07](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Kl-I7sUcAOY&t=8587s) What Strategy Actually Means (and Sponsor Breaks)

Alex Hormozi strips the corporate mystique away from the word "strategy." In his view, strategy isn't a complex concept that requires approval from a committee or running an idea up a flagpole. It simply comes down to prioritization. When you run a business, you have an unlimited number of opportunities you could pursue, but you are always constrained by limited resources. Strategy is fundamentally the act of deciding how to allocate those scarce resources against endless options.

Following this discussion, host Steven Bartlett introduces a sponsor break for Zoe, a company specializing in microbiome data and personalized nutrition plans. Steven displays the Zoe testing kit, detailing the at-home gut health process which includes a blood sugar arm sensor, a blood fat sample, a stool sample to analyze the microbiome, and the famous blue "Zoe cookies" to test metabolic responses. Steven shares that he invested in the company because of these advanced diagnostic tools and offers listeners a 10% discount using the code STEVEN10.

Steven then pivots to another podcast sponsor, Shopify. He mentions using the platform for his own business ventures at Flight Studio—a division of Flight Group—including the successful launch of his "Diary Of A CEO Conversation Cards." He praises Shopify for removing the logistical friction points of e-commerce, making it exceptionally easy to set up an online storefront capable of scaling globally regardless of the company's size. He extends a promotional trial offer to the audience allowing listeners to get started for just $1 a month.

[02:25:33](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Kl-I7sUcAOY&t=8733s) The Rate of Experimentation Over Creative Guesswork

Returning to the conversation, Steven recalls a scenario within his investment portfolio involving a major national supermarket chain. The business was granted a physical display slot across 400 supermarket locations and presented Steven with two competing design mockups, asking his advice on which one to choose. Steven's response was direct: "I don't know, and you don't know." Instead of guessing or relying on subjective creative instincts, he advised them to create 100 different display variations and test them rapidly as digital ads on Facebook to let real data dictate the winner. Steven emphasizes that true competitive advantage doesn't come from trying to be a "creative genius"—it comes from out-experimenting the competition. He notes that traditional university training often paralyzes copywriters and creators because it conditions them to want to be right rather than successful.

Alex completely agrees, stating there are two types of questions business owners should never ask outside opinions for: questions that can be solved with a spreadsheet, and questions that can be solved with testing.

* **Spreadsheet Problems:** Roughly 30% of the questions Alex receives are people asking which product they should sell. Alex points out that this is pure mathematics. By calculating the Lifetime Value (LTV) and the Customer Acquisition Cost (CAC) for each option, the math clearly reveals which product possesses the superior LTV-to-CAC ratio. * **Testing Problems:** For everything else, you test. Alex reveals that when he wrote his book *$100M Leads*, he had no idea what to name it. Because the book is technically about advertising, he spent two weeks running simple story tests on social media to pit different concepts against each other. * **The Book Title Matrix:** He first tested "$100 Million Promotions" against "$100 Million Advertising"; advertising won. He then tested "$100 Million Advertising" against "$100 Million Marketing"; advertising won again. Finally, he tested "$100 Million Advertising" against "$100 Million Leads". Leads won by a landslide and kept winning against all subsequent challengers. Alex highlights the consumer psychology behind this: the book is structurally about the drill (advertising), but the customer only cares about buying the hole in the wall (leads). He followed this exact same systematic testing process for the book's sub-headline and cover design.

Alex also drops a highly practical "cheat code" for brick-and-mortar or location-based businesses looking to expand into new geographic territories:

* **The Expansion Hack:** If you are choosing between five new potential markets, do not spend $250,000 on market research studies and lease builds out of the gate. Instead, take $1,000 per market ($5,000 to $10,000 total) and run your absolute best-performing digital promotion across all five target areas simultaneously. Compare the incoming data to see which city generates the lowest cost per lead. Whichever market wins the cost-per-lead test is the location you open. This tiny upfront "risk bucket" expenditure ensures that consumer demand actually exists before committing major capital.

[02:29:10](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Kl-I7sUcAOY&t=8950s) Models Over Mentors

When Steven raises the common question from young entrepreneurs asking, "Will you be my mentor?" Alex provides an unconventional perspective. He asks a foundational question: Is a mentor strictly required to win in business? His answer is no. While a mentor isn't mandatory, achieving success requires executing specific actions and behaviors at a high velocity. Human progress is built entirely on "standing on our forefathers' shoulders." Alex admits he has absolutely no idea how the mechanical architecture of the internet works, but he leverages it daily because prior generations figured it out and passed the baton forward.

Instead of searching for a single mythical mentor figure, Alex advises entrepreneurs to think in terms of "models, not mentors." The goal should be identifying highly successful individuals and deeply analyzing their behavioral patterns to replicate the specific actions that drive speed and efficiency. Alex asserts that absolutely everything in business scales up or down to human behavior.

This hyper-rational stance makes Alex deeply skeptical of surface-level fluff often discussed in modern entrepreneurial circles:

> "I'm always afraid to go on podcasts where somebody is like really heavy in like manifestation and like energy and frequencies and like whatever the hell. And they'll say things like, 'I manifested this meeting,' and I'll be like, 'You didn't. You have content that did well because you produce content on a regular basis, and then your EA reached out to my EA... Now some people might say yeah, it was also the vibes, but I would bet that if they made the content and did the reach out, I would still do it... If we just did the manifestation and didn't make the content and the reach out, I would not be here.'"

Alex explains that he intentionally studies high-performing leaders like Elon Musk, Jeff Bezos, and Mark Zuckerberg by consuming every piece of interview footage or written material available. He isn't looking for a personal relationship with them; he is attempting to reverse-engineer their core decision-making frameworks so he can apply those exact behavioral models to his own operational context.

[02:32:36](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Kl-I7sUcAOY&t=9156s) Paying for Knowledge in Time or Money

While anyone can technically figure out business through individual trial and error, Alex emphasizes that the ultimate variable is the value you place on your own time. A strategic entrepreneur should always be willing to trade capital or effort to instantly leapfrog five years of costly mistakes. To illustrate this, Alex shares a foundational story from the start of his entrepreneurial journey when he was just 22 years old. After quitting his corporate job, he packed all his belongings into his car and drove completely across the country unannounced to the location of a gym consultant he had found via Google who went by the internet moniker "Seven Figure Sam."

When Alex showed up at the facility out of nowhere demanding to be mentored, the owner was understandably baffled and busy. However, seeing that Alex had no place to sleep and was living out of his packed vehicle, the owner generously invited him to stay at his house. A few weeks later, the consultant hosted a paid mastermind meetup for independent gym owners utilizing his training system. Alex paid to get into the room.

During the round-table session, the veteran gym owners ruthlessly picked apart Alex's naive business plan for his first facility:

* They told him his planned equipment vendor was charging full retail prices, pointing him instead to a secondhand supplier where he acquired the exact same gear for a tenth of the price. * They warned him against buying flashy, fragile fitness equipment that clients routinely injured themselves on, advising him to buy incredibly cheap, highly durable sandbags instead. * They looked at his real estate plans and told him he could safely cut his square footage projection exactly in half. * They gave him hard guardrails on commercial rent, instructing him to never pay more than $1.50 per square foot when he had been completely willing to hand over $2.00 per square foot.

By paying to sit in that room for a single day, Alex absorbed the collective painful mistakes of dozens of operators. He built his first gym directly on the back of their hard-earned data, saving himself years of failure. While that type of specialized information is widely available for free today on platforms like YouTube or Instagram, it was completely inaccessible online when Alex started.

Alex concludes by sharing a powerful visual analogy he once saw a salesman present at a conference. The speaker wrote $1,000,000 on a whiteboard, called up an audience member making $50,000 a year, and subtracted the two numbers to leave $950,000. The speaker told the attendee: "It costs you $950,000 every single year you don't know how to make a million dollars a year." Alex notes that internet trolls often mock this perspective by asking if it applies to billions, but he stands by it completely. The massive financial delta between where you currently stand and where you want to be is the literal economic value of the missing skills. If people appraised that delta as a hidden, ongoing tax on their ignorance rather than focusing purely on the cash currently sitting inside their wallets, they would be far more willing to aggressively sacrifice whatever time or money is required to buy the knowledge they lack.

[02:36:54](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Kl-I7sUcAOY&t=9414s) Parrots vs. Practitioners: The Best Way to Learn

Steven Bartlett introduces the distinction between "parrots" and "practitioners." A parrot is someone who simply repeats words they heard from someone else without deep experience, while a practitioner—like Alex Hormozi—has personally gone through the struggles, synthesized the hard-won lessons, and distilled them down to their core essence, much like the physicist Richard Feynman.

Hormozi expands on this concept by linking it to established educational science, differentiating between **declarative knowledge** (knowing *about* something conceptually) and **procedural knowledge** (knowing *how* to actually execute it). To truly learn rapidly, an entrepreneur must collect real repetitions. Reading 100 books on sales will never teach as much as making 100 actual sales calls. The key to mastery is going through 100 repetitions as fast as possible, failing repeatedly, identifying the few instances that sucked the least, and iteratively improving until proficiency is achieved.

- **Declarative Knowledge:** Understanding a concept theoretically (e.g., explaining how private equity uses debt and multiples for arbitrage without ever closing a deal). - **Procedural Knowledge:** Understanding how to execute through hands-on experience. - **The Repetition Framework:** Rapidly executing high volume to fail fast, analyzing feedback loops, and systematically improving over time.

---

[02:38:46](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Kl-I7sUcAOY&t=9526s) Content Creation: Entertainers vs. Educators and Buying Time

Hormozi divides content creators into two fundamental categories: **Entertainers** and **Educators**. The sole objective of an entertainer is to capture and hold audience attention. In contrast, the true objective of an educator is to change human behavior.

In the education space, content is fundamentally a transaction of time. An educator spends years of trial, error, and pain to distill lessons into a concise format, allowing the consumer to "time warp" into the future without paying the same tax in their own life. Hormozi points out that people always pay using the currency they value least: wealthy individuals value time over money, so they gladly spend money to buy back time, whereas poorer individuals often trade massive amounts of time to save small amounts of money.

> "Education is... if said differently, what you do is you buy time... it's the only way to actually buy time today."

- **Entertainer Goal:** Maintain audience attention. - **Educator Goal:** Drive actionable behavioral change. - **Time/Money Exchange:** Rich individuals spend money to save time; poor individuals spend time to save money. - **Building Unreasonable Confidence:** Executing such a high volume of activity (whether 10, 100, or 1,000 public speeches) that it becomes statistically unreasonable to still be bad at it.

---

[02:41:09](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Kl-I7sUcAOY&t=9669s) First-Principles Thinking and "Founder Mode"

To possess true confidence and authority in any skill, one must derive the solution from first principles rather than echoing someone else's conclusions. Hormozi explains that if you cannot explain *why* you believe what you believe, it is not your belief—it is simply a parroted statement.

This connects directly to the concept of **"Founder Mode"** (popularized by Brian Chesky and Silicon Valley circles). Founders hold a unique advantage within their companies because they personally derived the original rules from the ground up during the early days of building. Because they understand the context and variables that created those rules, they possess the unique authority and understanding required to bend or break them when conditions change.

- **Parroting vs. Deriving:** Repeating aphorisms leaves you helpless when edge cases or unexpected problems arise. - **Founder Mode Dynamics:** Founders retain deep authority because they personally derived the operational playbook through early repetitions.

---

[02:42:40](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Kl-I7sUcAOY&t=9760s) Framework Iteration: The "5 P's" of YouTube Intros

Illustrating how a practitioner continuously refines their craft, Hormozi breaks down how his team iterated their strategy for video introductions on YouTube by carefully analyzing high-performing outlier videos:

``` Proof ➔ Promise ➔ Plan ➔ Picture ➔ Pain ```

1. **Proof:** Demonstrating credibility right at the start. 2. **Promise:** Stating clearly what the viewer will gain. 3. **Plan:** Outlining the structure of the video. 4. **Picture:** Providing a visual layout or representation of the plan. 5. **Pain:** Highlighting the specific problem or frustration being solved.

Hormozi emphasizes that mastery involves checking off multiple elements simultaneously in a single concise opening line. A beginner blames the entire medium when a video flops, whereas an expert diagnoses the granular failure (e.g., "This video underperformed because we only hit 3 out of the 5 criteria").

---

[02:44:29](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Kl-I7sUcAOY&t=9869s) Book Summaries vs. First-Principles Understanding

Steven Bartlett shares an anecdote from the previous day. His girlfriend showed him a book-summarizing app (like Headway or Blinkist) that had condensed Law 2 of his book *The 33 Laws of Business & Life*—which covers the Feynman Technique—down to a single line: "Writing is the best way to learn."

Bartlett explained to her that reading a one-line summary or punchline completely strips away the narrative, the foundational reasoning, and the agreeable steps required to truly understand the nature of a problem. Without the underlying story and context, a reader cannot translate the principle to new settings. Hormozi agrees, noting that while distillation is helpful for communication down an organization, knowledge transfer is not bidirectional—a novice reading a summary cannot re-derive the deep insights of a master.

> "There's no point knowing the conclusion, the aphorism... like the punchline, when you don't know the story."

- **The Feynman Technique Loop:** Learn a concept, simplify it so a 10-year-old can understand it, teach it, identify gaps in comprehension, and return to the original source material to fill those gaps. - **Limits of Summaries:** Knowing the final aphorism without the foundational context prevents you from applying the lesson dynamically when new problems arise.

---

[02:46:32](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Kl-I7sUcAOY&t=9992s) Why Founders Shouldn't Fear Competitors Copying Them

Addressing founders who get anxious or upset when competitors copy their product designs, content, thumbnails, or marketing strategies, Bartlett and Hormozi offer a comforting perspective rooted in the parrot vs. practitioner dynamic.

If a competitor merely copies step 5 of your staircase, they lack the foundational understanding of steps 1 through 4 that enabled you to create it. Consequently, they will never be able to predict or execute step 6. Bartlett refers to this as the "Iceberg Principle"—99% of what makes a successful company or podcast work (the culture, team dynamics, production rigor) remains completely invisible under the surface.

- **Requisite of Success:** If you are doing anything meaningful, being copied is an inevitable byproduct; the only alternative is obscurity. - **Copycats Are Inherently Second:** The moment someone copies you, they admit defeat and concede leadership in the market. - **The Iceberg Metaphor:** Outer artifacts (thumbnails, headlines, product wrappers) are only 1% of the equation; 99% is the unseen execution behind the scenes.

---

[02:48:57](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Kl-I7sUcAOY&t=10137s) Work-Life Balance and the Misery of Inactivity

Steven Bartlett transitions into a broader discussion on work-life balance, hard work, love, and happiness, pointing out Hormozi’s well-known obsession with his work and his alignment with his wife, Leila Hormozi.

Hormozi responds by recounting the period when they were selling their company, Gym Launch. Having already taken around $40 million in personal distributions over the preceding years, they entered the sales process. During a company sale, a founder is trapped in a harrowing middle ground: they cannot alter current operations, nor can they start a new venture in case the deal falls through. This forced inactivity made it one of the most miserable years of his life, solidifying his core thesis on the necessity of active, meaningful work.

- **Gym Launch Distributions:** Approximately $40,000,000 in distributions taken prior to and during the business sale process. - **The Founder’s Dilemma During M&A:** Forced operational stillness creates immense psychological friction for growth-driven entrepreneurs.

[02:50:40](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Kl-I7sUcAOY&t=10240s) Hard Work as the Ultimate Goal and Unifying Life, Love, and Work

Alex Hormozi reflects on his life to identify the days he enjoyed most, realizing that his happiest moments were always the ones where he worked out, produced something meaningful, and spent long hours working alongside people he liked. This insight led him to reject the idea of working hard as merely a means to an end—a mindset that keeps a person stuck in a destination-driven loop. Instead, he formulated a new core philosophy: "Hard work is the goal." His objective is simply to work hard on things worth doing until he dies, treating the effort itself as the ultimate prize rather than chasing a future payoff. While this perspective often draws criticism from people who find it unrelatable or intense, Hormozi emphasizes that his life is "a documentary, not a sermon." He isn't prescribing his lifestyle to anyone else, but for those who feel dissatisfied with standard advice, he encourages them to pursue what works for them.

For Hormozi, the process of writing his books represents this principle in action. While writing isn't pleasurable in the exact moment due to the grueling mental effort—like sitting with his forehead in his hands trying to solve complex frameworks so that even a kid in a remote location won't get stuck—the challenge matches his skill level, and the moment a framework clicks brings immense satisfaction. He explains that while many people separate their love lives, happiness, and careers into distinct silos, his own life has unified all three into a single stream. He admires figures like Warren Buffett and Charlie Munger, the latter of whom worked until the day he died. Hormozi operates without a traditional seven-day calendar, working continuously until fatigue slows his output, taking a full day off only when his energy is completely depleted, regardless of what day of the week it happens to be.

* **The Zero Concept:** Hormozi references a story from Jesse Itzler showing his child ending a race holding up a zero, signifying leaving absolutely nothing in the tank and giving everything to the effort. * **The Spartan Ethos:** He invokes the famous phrase from the movie *300*—"Come back with your shield or on it"—as a metaphor for how he views his commitment to his life's work. * **The Primary Quote:** "Hard work is the goal. It's just to work hard, that is my goal, and then die on things worth doing."

---

[02:54:40](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Kl-I7sUcAOY&t=10480s) Radical Responsibility, the "Fuck Happiness" Mantra, and Eliminating "Shoulds"

Addressing the backlash he frequently receives for loving his work, Hormozi expresses frustration that others get upset by how he chooses to live. He views absolute personal responsibility as his core tenet, explaining that wherever a person places blame, power flows to that same entity. Blaming parents or a boss cedes control over one's life to them, whereas taking full responsibility preserves self-efficacy. Hormozi acknowledges that his approach is not normal, but accepting his own differences has unlocked immense freedom. He recalls struggling deeply with depression and searching for meaning through religion and self-help in his early twenties. To operationalize happiness—which felt like an ephemeral carrot permanently out of reach—he adopted the counterintuitive mantra: "Fuck happiness." By letting go of the desperate pursuit of happiness and simply focusing on doing what he wanted to do, he looked up years later and realized he actually enjoyed his life.

Hormozi argues that the primary source of human suffering is the expectation that life should be different than it currently is, identifying the word "should" as the root of all psychological pain. Unconditional "shoulds"—such as believing someone should get married at a certain age, have children, or work less—are arbitrary expectations imposed without basis. Applying this philosophy to his personal life, Hormozi was upfront with his wife, Leila, when they began dating, telling her that his relationship with his work was the most satisfying connection in his life and non-negotiable. Rather than forcing a separation between work and romance, he invited Leila into his world; on their second date, she sat alongside him working on her own projects, eventually transitioning to building Acquisition.com together. Hormozi notes that while this unified lifestyle doesn't work for most people, it works for him because he doesn't believe in inherent meaning—only the meaning one consciously chooses to create.

> "Where we place the finger of blame is also where power flows. If you blame your parents for your life, your parents have power over your life... If you blame you for your bad life, at least you can change you."

---

[03:02:35](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Kl-I7sUcAOY&t=10955s) The Courage to Be Happy and Questioning Unspoken Beliefs

Steven Bartlett reflects on Hormozi's journey, making a connection between content creation and personal fulfillment. Just as being a great content creator stems from having the courage to be oneself, genuine happiness requires the courage to resist public pressure, societal expectations, and parental "shoulds." Because every individual's background—such as Hormozi's upbringing, his relationship with his father, and his early business ventures—is unique, the specific formula that generates happiness for one person will inevitably look completely different from everyone else's. Standing by one's personal definition of fulfillment in the face of judgment requires deep self-conviction.

Expanding on this idea, Hormozi shares a pivotal conversation he had years ago with a friend who had built and sold a company for hundreds of millions of dollars. When Hormozi asked him how he derived meaning from his life, the friend replied with a question that shattered Hormozi's worldview: *"Why do you think that life needs to be meaningful?"* This response exposed an unspoken, deeply ingrained demand Hormozi had been placing on the universe—that life was required to be meaningful and happy. Pointing to his favorite quote by Orson Scott Card, Hormozi emphasizes that the beliefs holding people back the most are not the ones they actively debate, but the fundamental assumptions they never even think to question.

* **Key Insight on Meaning:** The assumption that life *must* have an intrinsic meaning or that happiness *must* be achieved is itself an arbitrary "should" that creates unnecessary suffering. * **Historical Perspective:** On a long enough timeline, history sweeps almost everyone into obscurity within a hundred years, making grand demands for universal significance largely irrelevant compared to personal choice. * **Favorite Quote:** *"We question all of our beliefs except for those that we truly believe, and those we never think to question."* (Orson Scott Card)

Here is the detailed walkthrough covering the final portion of the transcript.

[03:05:32](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Kl-I7sUcAOY&t=11132s) How to Drive Meaning from Your Life

Alex Hormozi reflects on the sheer scale of time, noting that in a thousand years, nearly everyone alive today will be forgotten, and looking 10,000 or 100,000 years into the future, virtually no one will be remembered. Accepting this reality eliminates the perceived obligation to leave a permanent mark. Instead of demanding that the universe grant him meaning or happiness, Alex frames his pursuit around focus on degrees of freedom and responsibility—identifying what he can actually control and doing his best to improve his own life and the lives of others without projecting demands onto existence.

He explains that demanding to be happy or searching for meaning externally creates an inherent, unbridgeable gap. It was only when he relinquished the demand for happiness that he was actually able to experience it. Operating from a behaviorist lens, Alex notes that everything boils down to human actions and feedback: he continues engaging in specific behaviors simply because he enjoyed the results when he did them in the past. He advises others to stick to what brings them positive results without assuming everyone else needs to follow the exact same path.

- In a thousand to 100,000 years, virtually no human memory of current individuals will persist. - Demanding external meaning creates an unbridgeable emotional gap; letting go of the demand allows one to actually experience happiness. - Alex views the world through a behaviorist lens: people repeat actions that yielded positive rewards in the past.

[03:07:48](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Kl-I7sUcAOY&t=11268s) The Courage to Be Different

Steven Bartlett shares a personal reaction to Alex’s candid nature, particularly regarding topics like not enjoying traditional holidays or viewing marriage through an unconventional lens. Steven reflects that even when he doesn't agree with 100% of Alex's perspective—usually landing around 95%—hearing Alex comfortably speak about being different gives him permission to accept his own variance. Steven admits he used to experience a deep sense of guilt for working constantly on something he loved rather than taking standard vacations, simply because of societal "shoulds."

Steven encourages Alex to maintain the courage to speak openly, emphasizing that it makes a whole "group of weirdos" who feel like they don't fit into the standard societal playbook feel seen, understood, and validated. Alex warmly acknowledges this sentiment, confirming that he creates his content specifically for that exact audience.

- Steven expresses that Alex’s honesty validates anyone who feels like they are not playing by conventional societal rules. - Guilt often stems from internalizing other people's expectations ("shoulds") rather than following one's own fulfillment. - Alex confirms that his messaging is intentionally made for people who embrace their variance.

[03:09:24](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Kl-I7sUcAOY&t=11364s) What Is the Meaning of Life?

Following the podcast's tradition, Steven opens the Diary of a CEO guest book to read the question left by the previous guest: "What is the meaning of life?" Laughing at the grand irony of receiving such a massive philosophical question at the very end of the interview, Alex jokes that "the short answer is obviously 42" before offering a grounded, practical definition: learning. He defines learning as being exposed to new conditions that ultimately alter your behavior over time.

Alex draws an analogy to business, explaining that the meaning or purpose of a business is simply its output—such as Elon Musk's mission where the intended output of SpaceX is getting people to Mars. Applying this to human existence, Alex asserts that the output of experience is learning, which happens automatically whether a person wants it to or not. Therefore, the true question in life isn't whether you will learn, but whether you are learning the things you actually want to learn.

- "The short answer is obviously 42," referencing *The Hitchhiker's Guide to the Galaxy*. - Definition of learning: exposure to new conditions over time that changes behavior. - Purpose/meaning of a business: defined strictly by its output. - The fundamental output of human experience is learning, making it the practical meaning of life.

[03:11:14](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Kl-I7sUcAOY&t=11474s) Final Plugs and Closing Remarks

Steven highly recommends that viewers check out Alex’s content and tools, spotlighting his YouTube series where Alex builds a $1,000,000 business for a stranger in 56 minutes. Steven describes it as a practical, highly actionable evolution of the *Shark Tank* concept that required immense effort to refine. He also praises Alex’s best-selling books (*$100M Offers* and *$100M Leads*), calling them essential prerequisites for any entrepreneur's toolkit, while teasing the upcoming release of Volume 3 later in the year.

Steven directs entrepreneurs interested in scaling or partnering to Acquisition.com as the go-to resource. He thanks Alex for his generosity and for having the courage to be unapologetically himself. The episode concludes with Steven introducing Version 2 of the *Diary Of A CEO Conversation Cards*, a physical card game featuring questions asked by past podcast guests paired with QR codes linking directly to the video responses.

- Alex's YouTube format: *Building a $1,000,000 business for a stranger in 56 minutes*. - Upcoming book: Volume 3 of Alex's series set to release later in the year. - Core resource for scaling businesses: Acquisition.com. - Promotional note: *Diary Of A CEO Conversation Cards (Version 2)* available at theconversationcards.com.

## Notable quotes > [03:23](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Kl-I7sUcAOY&t=203s) his dream must die in order for mine to live. — Alex Hormozi

> [03:23](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Kl-I7sUcAOY&t=203s) Fear is a mile wide and an inch deep. You look at it, it looks like this ocean, and then you take the first step and you realize you don't drown because there's ground underneath. — Alex Hormozi

> [12:09](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Kl-I7sUcAOY&t=729s) Fear exists in the vague, not in the specific. — Alex Hormozi

> [29:53](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Kl-I7sUcAOY&t=1793s) Everyone always looks at them and says, 'What do champions have that I don't have?' And he said, 'It's they have it backwards... It's what do champions *not* have that I have.' It's what do they lack? And it's an off button. They just don't stop. — Alex Hormozi

> [35:53](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Kl-I7sUcAOY&t=2153s) Never dilute yourself... There are so many more people who need that message than people who are hating that message... If you're actually going to make a difference in a lot of people's lives, there's going to be an equal and opposing force of people who want to reject that. — Leila Hormozi

> [46:44](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Kl-I7sUcAOY&t=2804s) Being disliked is a fixed cost... it is far better to be disliked for being who you are than loved for someone you're not. — Alex Hormozi

> [01:33:15](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Kl-I7sUcAOY&t=5595s) The grass is always greener on the other side, you just don't know that it's fertilized with shit. — Alex Hormozi

> [01:33:15](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Kl-I7sUcAOY&t=5595s) I measure focus by the quantity and quality of things that you say no to, and I define commitment as the elimination of alternatives. — Alex Hormozi

> [01:40:30](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Kl-I7sUcAOY&t=6030s) Success is doing the obvious thing for an extraordinary period of time without believing that you're smarter than you are. — Shane Parrish

> [01:56:37](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Kl-I7sUcAOY&t=6997s) I've built a lot of my success off finding these truly gifted people and not settling for B and C players, but really going for the A-players. — Steve Jobs

> [01:53:49](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Kl-I7sUcAOY&t=6829s) The moment a lead comes in, you stop having sex with your husband, you stop cooking, you stop loving your child—and you immediately call the lead. — Alex Hormozi

> [02:02:54](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Kl-I7sUcAOY&t=7374s) Running a business is like staring out into the abyss and chewing glass. — Elon Musk

> [02:38:46](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Kl-I7sUcAOY&t=9526s) Education is... if said differently, what you do is you buy time... it's the only way to actually buy time today. — Alex Hormozi

> [02:50:40](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Kl-I7sUcAOY&t=10240s) Hard work is the goal. It's just to work hard, that is my goal, and then die on things worth doing. — Alex Hormozi

> [02:54:40](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Kl-I7sUcAOY&t=10480s) Where we place the finger of blame is also where power flows. If you blame your parents for your life, your parents have power over your life... If you blame you for your bad life, at least you can change you. — Alex Hormozi

## Mentioned Alex Hormozi, Steven Bartlett, Leila Hormozi, Acquisition.com, The Diary Of A CEO, Vanderbilt University, Harvard University, Stanford University, Andrew Wilkinson, Gym Launch, Prime, Mozi Tank, Dragon's Den, Dermalogica, Jane Wurwand, Nike, Willem Dafoe, Jensen Huang, NVIDIA, Jeff Bezos, Amazon, Elon Musk, Tesla, Keith Rabois, PayPal Mafia, Price's Law, Prada, Cacey Leison, Peter Drucker, Sam Ovens, Skool, Steve Jobs, John Sculley, Pepsi, Rolls-Royce, Shane Parrish, WallPark, Represent, Gymshark, Huel, Mark Zuckerberg, Facebook, Apple, David Perell, Chris Rock, Madison Square Garden, Google, Sergey Brin, Zoe, Shopify, Flight Studio, Flight Group, Seven Figure Sam, Richard Feynman, Brian Chesky, YouTube, TikTok, Headway, Blinkist, $100M Leads, The 33 Laws of Business & Life, Warren Buffett, Charlie Munger, Jesse Itzler, Orson Scott Card, SpaceX, $100M Offers, Shark Tank, The Hitchhiker's Guide to the Galaxy, Diary Of A CEO Conversation Cards

[Source](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Kl-I7sUcAOY)

中文简报

霍尔莫齐称商业成功需要排除其他选项 Acquisition.com 创始人 Alex Hormozi 认为，扩大公司规模需要坚持不懈的专注、接纳公开的失败，并优先考虑持续习得技能，而非被动追求幸福或依赖速成的战术技巧。 Alex Hormozi 剖析了打造高增长企业所需的心理障碍突破、运营策略和人才架构。他探讨了克服失败恐惧所需的心理转变，概述了辞去全职工作、招聘顶尖“A类人才”（A-players）以及在纷扰中保持长期专注的切实可行的行动蓝图。在整场对话中，Hormozi 主张极致的自我责任感、提高实验试错频率，并将努力工作本身——而非难以捉摸的幸福概念——视为终极目标。阻碍大多数创业者的根本障碍并非缺乏战术捷径，而是对失败和当众受辱的恐惧，以及不愿做出艰难抉择的心理。 (3:23) 恐惧滋生于模糊之中；将模糊的恐惧拆解为具体的最坏情况，在逻辑上能平复杏仁核的应激反应，从而实现理性决策。 (15:40) 离职创业的量化框架要求：储备 3–6 个月的生活支出，打造一份收入能匹敌全职工作的数字化副业，并在正式转型前将该收入维持 3–6 个月。 (12:09) 告别全职工作可遵循“3P”原则：痛苦（Pain，解决切身问题）、过往职业（Past Profession，将雇主验证过的职场技能变现）或热情（Passion，将此前免费投入的爱好变现）。 (23:41) 受切身痛苦驱动的“传教士型”创始人能够建立更深层的信任，拥有清晰的叙事，并具备“雇佣军型”创始人所缺乏的不懈动力。 (27:35)

Reading summary

Entrepreneur and investor Alex Hormozi argues that building scalable enterprises relies on systematic execution, rapid feedback loops, and volume-based experimentation rather than creative intuition or premature diversification. Across every stage of growth, he asserts that long-term success requires viewing talent density and hard work as operational imperatives rather than transactional steps toward an exit. De-Risking the Leap Through Calculated Execution (12:09) Hormozi rejects the premise that launching an enterprise requires uncalculated risk, presenting a mathematical threshold for leaving employment: save three to six months of living expenses, establish a side business, and match one's full-time salary for three to six consecutive months before resigning. He notes that hesitation is typically driven by emotional narratives of catastrophic failure. Applying rational scrutiny disarms these fears by revealing that worst-case scenarios generally amount to temporary discomfort. Steven Bartlett reinforces this view, noting that remaining in an unfulfilling career is a guaranteed negative outcome delayed over time. When selecting a business model, Hormozi advocates focusing on the '3 P's'—addressing a personal Pain, commercializing a Past Profession with proven economic demand, or monetizing a Passion. Instead of attempting to replicate individual successful founders whose circumstances cannot be repeated, entrepreneurs must ground their efforts in first principles across three operational pillars: attracting attention, converting attention into sales, and delivering value. Scaling Through Talent Density and Rapid Feedback (49:13) An organization's growth ceiling is governed directly by the aggregate intellectual horsepower of its workforce. Hormozi observes that prominent technology founders willingly dilute their ownership to aggregate elite talent, citing Jensen Huang's roughly 4% stake in NVIDIA, Jeff Bezos's 7% to 9% in Amazon, and Elon Musk's approximately 20% in Tesla. To onboard employees effectively without relying on luck, Hormozi uses the '3D Framework': Document the process into a granular checklist, Demonstrate the execution live, and have the hire Duplicate the task under supervision. Accelerating operational proficiency requires rapid, tight feedback loops. Drawing on behavioral psychology, Hormozi emphasizes that immediate, real-time corrections—such as stopping a sales trainee thirty times in thirty minutes—drastically compress the learning curve compared to delayed evaluations. When recruiting, he recommends a 'barbell strategy': pairing hungry, unconditioned junior personnel willing to handle high volume with late-career executives who possess deep operational leverage and have outgrown corporate politics, deliberately bypassing title-focused middle management. Overcoming Growth Bottlenecks Through Volume (122:54) Between $1 million and $3 million in revenue—a stage Hormozi labels 'the swamp'—businesses face severe capital and labor constraints. In a $1 million enterprise generating a 20% margin ($200,000 profit), hiring a single senior operator can consume 100% of the owner's net income, leaving founders torn between sacrificing short-term earnings or absorbing excessive hours themselves. To diagnose bottlenecks, Hormozi implements a week-long audit using a 15-minute timer, tracking tasks to calculate the precise financial return of delegating repetitive operational duties. Both Bartlett and Hormozi caution against 'niche slapping,' where founders split attention across unrelated side projects instead of pushing through the plateau of their primary business. Hormozi argues that underperformance rarely stems from an unviable core idea, but rather from severely underestimating required volume. Citing Google's 70-20-10 resource framework (core, adjacent, moonshots) and his early gym experience—where 300 flyers failed, while a competitor's system deployed 150,000 per month—he emphasizes that empirical testing and raw repetition must replace creative guesswork. Brand Differentiation and Work as the Objective (170:40) Because products and services are widely commoditized, Hormozi contends that brand differentiation depends on an undiluted personal identity and distinct values. Taking firm stances inevitably alienates detractors; Bartlett references the 20-60-20 rule, noting that 20% of an audience will reliably oppose a creator regardless of conduct, making authentic positioning far more durable than trying to please everyone. Hormozi separates content creators into entertainers seeking attention and educators driving measurable behavioral change, framing educational content as an exchange that allows consumers to buy back time. Challenging the conventional idea that intense labor is merely a temporary sacrifice to fund leisure, Hormozi recalls experiencing profound dissatisfaction during the sale of Gym Launch—a period of forced operational inactivity despite taking approximately $40 million in distributions. He posits that hard work on worthwhile problems is the objective itself, not the toll paid to escape it. Operating from a behaviorist perspective, he defines the fundamental meaning and output of human life as learning: continuous exposure to new conditions that permanently refines behavior. Hormozi's model outlines a hyper-rational, volume-dependent path to enterprise growth rooted in behavioral mechanics, iterative testing, and aggressive talent acquisition. While these tactical frameworks offer clear operating rules for scaling businesses, Hormozi explicitly frames his high-intensity dedication to continuous work as an individual choice rather than a prescriptive sermon, leaving open how founders with differing life priorities might adapt these methods without adopting his all-consuming schedule.

精炼阅读摘要

Alex Hormozi 与 Steven Bartlett 在对话中指出，创业成功并非源于避免失败或盲目模仿，而是建立在理性风险计算、组织杠杆、高频迭代及绝对专注之上；商业与个人的真正壁垒，在于将高强度的专注工作本身视作终极追求，并通过持续的行为迭代突破增长瓶颈。克服恐惧与第一性原理冷启动 (12:09) Hormozi 提出了离职创业的量化路径：储备 3 至 6 个月生活开销，利用业余时间开展数字化副业，并在副业收入连续 3 至 6 个月持平全职薪资后全职投入。但他强调，阻碍行动的往往并非数学逻辑，而是杏仁核主导的灾难化想象。若运用前额叶皮层进行理性推演，会发现最坏情况通常只是寄宿朋友沙发或承受短期尴尬等暂时挫折，未来反而会变成励志谈资。在业务起点上，创始人切忌盲目复刻科技巨头的成功个案，而应回归第一性原理，聚焦“3P法则”（痛点 Pain、过往专业技能 Past Profession、热情 Passion）。商业的核心支柱在于获取注意力、转化销售与交付价值。比起单纯追逐市场趋势的“雇佣兵”，亲自遭遇过痛点并试图根除它的“传教士”型创业者，更能凭借真实叙事建立持久信任。组织天花板与杠铃式人才策略 (49:13) 企业的增长上限直接由团队的综合智力水平决定。Hormozi 指出，创始人若一直是公司最聪明的人，业务必然受制于个人带宽；即便如 Jensen Huang（英伟达约 4%）、Jeff Bezos（亚马逊 7%–9%）和 Elon Musk（特斯拉约 20%），也是通过让渡股权以聚合顶级人才。针对早期培训困难，他提出“3D框架”：由创始人撰写执行清单（Document）、实操演示（Demonstrate），再交由新人复刻（Duplicate）。在招聘与管理上，Hormozi 建议采用“杠铃式策略”：一端招募饥渴、无思维定式且拼劲十足的年轻新人；另一端招募财富稳固、远离职场内耗的高阶资深专家，避开热衷争夺头衔的中层官僚。同时，管理应建立极短的即时反馈闭环（效仿训犬心理学），坚持“严厉方是真正的善意”（Be kind, not nice），利用“停止、开始、保持”（Stop, Start, Keep）提供具体行为指令而非人身标签。突破沼泽期与抵制精力分散 (100:30) 多数创业者在遭遇瓶颈时容易陷入“利基拍打”（Niche Slapping），即同时开设多个不相关的新项目以逃避难题，导致精力被分散，最终输给全力投入的对手。Hormozi 将其比作在游戏第四关遇挫后不断重启第一关；他指出，打造具代际财富的企业通常需要 10 年周期（5 年明确方向，5 年规模扩张）。在年营收 100 万至 300 万美元的“沼泽期”，企业利润常受到严重挤压：例如在 20% 净利率（20 万美元利润）下，聘请一名核心高管就可能耗尽全部个人所得。创始人必须在牺牲短期利润招募顶尖人才与自行承担工作导致倦怠之间做出决断。Hormozi 建议通过 15 分钟计时器进行时间审计以剥离重复工作，并借鉴谷歌 70-20-10 模型分配资源，认清规模扩张所需的大规模执行体量（如每月分发 15 万份传单而非仅发数百份）。高频迭代与数据驱动的行动模型 (127:24) 学习包含理论性的“陈述性知识”与实操性的“程序性知识”。Steven 与 Hormozi 认为，只会复述理论的“鹦鹉”无法成事，只有高频试错的“践行者”能建立优势。掌握新技能或新渠道需依赖高频迭代引擎：以 100 次执行（如 100 通电话或 100 条视频）为基数，提炼排名前 10% 的共性要素，建立标准化清单后再应用于后续循环。商业决断应摒弃主观创意猜测，转向两类工具：用电子表格测算客户生命周期价值（LTV）与获客成本（CAC），或通过数字化广告大批量测试真实转化。在用户运营上，Hormozi 主张落实客户成功的“4R框架”——留存（Retain）、评价（Review）、推荐（Refer）与复购（Resell），通过快速交付即时价值与降低推荐阻力，将客户满意度转化为可量化的业务增长飞轮。努力即终点与作为输出的学习 (170:40) 在出售 Gym Launch 并套现约 4000 万美元期间，交易流程引发的停滞令 Hormozi 经历了心理极度痛苦的一年。这促使他摒弃了“工作仅是通往享受之手段”的传统假设，确立了“艰苦工作本身即是目标”的核心信念——在有价值的事物上倾注心力直至生命终结，专注的过程本身就是终极奖赏。对于人生的终极意义，Hormozi 认为从千年或万年的时间尺度来看，人类个体的记忆终将湮灭，因此苛求外界赋予意义容易导致失落。从行为主义角度而言，企业的使命由其商业产出定义，而人类生命体验的核心产出则是“学习”——即在全新环境中随时间演进并改变自身行为。人生的关键并非被动接受经验，而在于主动选择自己真正渴望学习与精进的方向。 Hormozi 的核心论述将商业实践与个人成长锚定在严谨的行为主义与高频实验闭环中，颠覆了将功成名就视作劳作终点的叙事。然而，这种将高负荷甚至痛苦的工作过程直接等同于幸福源泉的哲学，对个人的心理承载力和抗压耐受度提出了极高要求；对于资源有限或追求工作生活平衡的普通创业者而言，这种近乎苦行僧式的全情投入模式在普适性与可持续性上仍面临显著考验。

Detailed notes — zh

## Background 该视频由商业访谈频道《The Diary Of A CEO》（主持人 Steven Bartlett）于 2025 年 2 月 13 日发布在 YouTube 平台。页面简介介绍，本期对话嘉宾为知名企业家、投资人、《1亿美元报价》与《1亿美元线索》作者兼 Acquisition.com 创始人 Alex Hormozi，内容重点探讨从 0 到 1 万美元乃至跨越亿美元规模的分步商业逻辑与创业心法。 ## TL;DR Alex Hormozi 在长达三小时的对谈中，系统拆解了从个体起步到操盘上亿美元企业的全周期底层认知。他分享了脱离稳定职场时的心理破局（用前额叶具象拆解恐惧、“杀死父亲的梦想”）、初创落地的 3P 痛点法则与 4R 客户价值体系，并深入阐述了卓越团队招聘的杠铃策略、炮管与弹药理论及“Kind, Not Nice”的管理硬度。最后，他彻底打破外界关于“工作生活平衡”与虚无追逐幸福的规训，坦诚主张将热爱的事业作为生命终点，并将人生的终极意义归结为持续改变行为模式的“学习”。 ## Atmosphere & style 整场对话洋溢着高密度的硬核逻辑、冷峻的认知拆解与不加粉饰的真诚，毫无任何空洞的商业套话与廉价鸡汤。Alex Hormozi 语速沉稳、目光如炬，以近乎机械般精准的第一性原理将复杂的商业与人性痛苦剖析得透彻入骨，而 Steven Bartlett 敏锐温和的引导则频频触及对方内心最幽微的顿悟时刻。观看体验既像是一场步步见血的高维战略推演，又是一次直击灵魂的精神松绑，为那些在孤独深渊中死磕目标的创业者带来了极具压迫感却又无比踏实的解药与共鸣。 ## Bulletin - [12:09](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Kl-I7sUcAOY&t=729s) 全职离职创业存在明确的数学门槛：个人需预留 3 至 6 个月应急储蓄，且副业收入连续 3 至 6 个月持平或超越全职薪资方可离职。 - [01:33:07](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Kl-I7sUcAOY&t=5587s) 创业情绪经历从“无知的乐观”到“绝望之谷”的周期，绝大多数人因在谷底轻易转赛道而陷入用 20 年重复度过同一个 6 个月的死循环。 - [49:13](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Kl-I7sUcAOY&t=2953s) 团队扩张受制于领军核心的吞吐量，且普莱斯定律显示百人组织中 50% 的核心产出通常仅由约 10 名核心顶尖人才创造。 - [02:00:22](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Kl-I7sUcAOY&t=7222s) 潜客提交表单后在 60 秒内迅速回电，转化率能直接飙升 4 到 5 倍，商业逻辑应用关键动作带来的增量现金流为扩张买单。 - [03:08:28](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Kl-I7sUcAOY&t=11308s) 人生的终极产出即为学习，其本质是在新环境中随时间推移主动重塑自身的行为模式。 ## Key takeaways - [03:23](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Kl-I7sUcAOY&t=203s) 创业者若想走出心理牢笼必须敢于承受失败与羞耻感，前额叶具象拆解能将模糊的灾难化恐惧转化为理性应对推演。 - [12:09](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Kl-I7sUcAOY&t=729s) 全职投入创业须遵循严苛的数学标准，唯有连续数月副业收入与全职薪资打平且备足备用金时才是理性转型的时机。 - [20:17](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Kl-I7sUcAOY&t=1217s) 商业的底层原始货币是时间，最高杠杆来自用既定时间投入创造可无限次复用的产品或内容分发体系。 - [23:41](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Kl-I7sUcAOY&t=1421s) 亲历痛点（Pain）是创业最深护城河，相比投机的雇佣兵，身负切肤之痛的传教士型创业者具备坚不可摧的长期韧性。 - [44:40](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Kl-I7sUcAOY&t=2680s) 被讨厌是打造个人影响力的固定成本，受众天然呈 20/60/20 分布，赢得核心铁粉必须做好惹恼批评者的准备。 - [01:01:46](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Kl-I7sUcAOY&t=3706s) 顶尖创始人与平庸者的分水岭在于能否更早开启艰难对话，通过‘停止-开始-保持’框架提供即时客观反馈。 - [01:24:30](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Kl-I7sUcAOY&t=5070s) 撬动顶尖大牛本质是向人才兜售愿景以融资，其交付不可再生的时间资产，可用控制权与分红等股权要素灵活重组。 - [01:38:44](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Kl-I7sUcAOY&t=5924s) 创业初期应抵制频繁更换赛道的诱惑，跨越绝望之谷必须对备选项做彻底根除，享受长期复利带来的非线性加速度。 - [01:51:49](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Kl-I7sUcAOY&t=6709s) 新手容易陷于非黑即白的二元定论，成熟连续创业者则擅长将挫折微观拆解为抓手、文案或指标等单一变量持续试错。 - [02:02:52](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Kl-I7sUcAOY&t=7372s) 年入 100 万至 300 万美元的沼泽期充满断链与过载抉择，创业不会变容易，只是支付艰难的硬度货币形式在不断升级。 - [02:11:07](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Kl-I7sUcAOY&t=7867s) 通过 15 分钟时间审计剥离占用 40% 精力的日常杂务，雇佣多名单点专家组合拼装成能够替代创始人的团队体系。 - [02:16:47](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Kl-I7sUcAOY&t=8207s) 获客必须严格遵循‘更多、更好、更新’的执行次序，初学者常将自身极低的行动量误判为市场的剧烈波动。 - [02:29:10](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Kl-I7sUcAOY&t=8950s) 学习的底层在于提炼并吸收顶尖实践者的行为模型而非盲目搞个人崇拜，以最快速度完成 100 次实操提纯技能。 - [02:46:32](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Kl-I7sUcAOY&t=9992s) 抄袭者由于缺失水面下 99% 的试错根基与文化壁垒注定落后，掉头去模仿竞争对手等同于主动放弃行业领先地位。 - [02:48:57](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Kl-I7sUcAOY&t=10137s) 打破努力工作仅为换取退休享受的功利思维，确立努力工作本身即为终点与心流来源，全然接纳做值得之事的状态。 - [02:56:35](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Kl-I7sUcAOY&t=10595s) 人类绝大多数痛苦源于执念于现实‘应该’如何，剔除所有非限定性的应该并全然接纳当下，才能摆脱虚妄的意义焦虑。 ## Detailed walkthrough ### [00:00](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Kl-I7sUcAOY&t=0s) 创业者的六个生命周期阶段与开场前瞻访谈伊始便切入创业的核心痛点：创业者往往迫切想知道赚更多钱的“秘诀”，但在此之前，必须先看清所谓的“创业生命周期”（Entrepreneur Life Cycle）。这个周期被划分为六个阶段，而绝大多数创业者都会卡在第三阶段。霍尔莫齐（Alex Hormozi）直言，自己早年最大的职业失误全部发生在这一阶段——若无法突破，创业者便会陷入长达二十年日复一日痛苦循环的怪圈。 ```mermaid flowchart LR accTitle: 创业者生命周期的困境 accDescr: 创业者生命周期包含六个阶段，其中绝大多数人卡在第三阶段无法突破。 S1["阶段一：起步探索"] --> S2["阶段二：初步验证"] S2 --> S3["阶段三：瓶颈卡点 （绝大多数人被困20年）"] S3 -. "突破瓶颈".-> S4["阶段四：规模化扩张"] S4 --> S5["阶段五：成熟裂变"] S5 --> S6["阶段六：资本退出 / 传承"] ``` 主持人史蒂芬·巴特利特（Steven Bartlett）介绍道，霍尔莫齐是擅长将企业推上数千万甚至上亿美元规模的商业战略导师。然而，无论是从零起步还是从百万迈向千万美元，最残酷的真相在于：创业者必须有勇气面对错误，承受在至亲或尊重的人面前失败的奇耻大辱。正是这种恐惧，将无数人困在毫无成就感的白领工作中。在本场对话中，他们将围绕从破除恐惧、业务灵感的“3P原则”、客户成功的“4R模型”、快速掌握新技能，直至2025年的制胜战略展开全盘剖析。在进入正题前，主持人巴特利特穿插了一个团队内部的赌局：节目即将迎来 YouTube 1000 万订阅里程碑，团队提出在未来 30 天内，每增加一个新订阅者，主持人就要向团队幕后庆祝基金注入 1 美元。他打趣道这是自己第一次“奉劝大家别订阅”，免得自己钱包大出血。 --- ### [02:19](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Kl-I7sUcAOY&t=139s) 谁应该听这场对话：从 0 到 100M 的通用战略框架当被问及为什么百万计的创业者应当花上几个小时留下来聆听这场长对话时，霍尔莫齐从他的投资管理公司 Acquisition.com 的定位切入做出了解答。他的公司核心业务就是帮助企业实现规模化增长，而他所输出的内容与构建的认知框架，能够横跨三个截然不同的商业周期： - **从 0 到 1 的初创阶段**：帮助刚离开职场、两手空空的创始人起步落地并站稳脚跟。 - **从 100 万到 1000 万美元的成长阶段**：帮助企业搭建系统，突破作坊式瓶颈，实现规模扩张。 - **从 1000 万到 1 亿美元的成熟阶段**：帮助企业家突破天花板，完成战略重构或高价值并购退出。霍尔莫齐强调，真正高阶的商业框架既具备深度又具备广度。如果一个处在瓶颈期的创业者能够从中找到一条切中自身业务的底层逻辑，往往能直接将整个职业生涯提速整整五年，这在时间回报率（Return on Time）上是无与伦比的投资。 --- ### [03:23](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Kl-I7sUcAOY&t=203s) 创业起步真正的障碍：恐惧、耻辱感与“杀死父亲的梦想” 针对处于“从 0 到 1”起步阶段的人群，巴特利特追问：这些人来向霍尔莫齐求助时，他们真正想要的究竟是什么？霍尔莫齐指出，“创业者自以为想要的”和“他们真正需要的”往往是两码事。新手总是在寻找某种能立竿见影起盘的战术妙招或秘籍，但他们真正缺失的，是**敢于犯错的勇气**，以及**在自己在乎的人面前遭遇失败并承受羞耻感的承受力**。回看自己的过去，霍尔莫齐谈到打破心智牢笼的艰难过程。他并非那种 13 岁就在路边摆柠檬水摊的天生商业神童，恰恰相反，他在传统升学体系中表现极其优异： - 仅用三年时间便从范德堡大学（Vanderbilt University）提前毕业； - 考取了高于哈佛商学院中位录取分数的 GMAT 成绩； - 毕业后直接进入顶级管理咨询公司，拿着优厚薪水，22 岁便买下了俯瞰城市景观的高层公寓； - 眼前铺陈着无比清晰且受社会极高赞誉的晋升阶梯：顶级商学院进修（哈佛或斯坦福） $\rightarrow$ 投资银行 / 高级咨询 $\rightarrow$ 私募股权基金（PE），坐享社会地位与财富。然而，当他观察比自己年长二十岁的行业前辈时，内心却充满了抗拒与恐慌——他根本不想过那种生活。在那段看似人生赢家的日子里，他每晚入睡前都在祈祷自己第二天不要醒来。极度讽刺的是，那个阶段恰好是他父亲最为他自豪的时刻。霍尔莫齐痛苦地意识到，他在为实现父亲的梦想而活，而这个梦想的极致代价却是自己精神上的死亡。“他的梦想必须死，我的梦想才能活”（"His dream must die in order for mine to live"）成为了他当时不断重复的精神咒语。为了逃离这份窒息的期待，他甚至怯懦到先辞职收拾行李、一路开车跨越大半个美国之后，才敢在半路打电话给父亲摊牌。当父亲在电话里依然以为一切尚可挽回，提出“回家吃个午饭聊聊”时，霍尔莫齐只得坦白：“我已经离开州界了。”电话那头父亲的语气瞬间冰冷，父子关系由此陷入长达数年的冰点与决裂。霍尔莫齐借此打破了许多成功学叙事中“家庭无条件支持”的温情神话：很多人并不能在领奖台上感谢父母的理解，而他的创业起步，正是从一名受过精英教育的天之骄子，沦落为在健身房拿着最低时薪的私人教练开始的。 ### [09:15](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Kl-I7sUcAOY&t=555s) 挣脱心理枷锁与“一英里宽、一英寸深”的假想深渊谈及当年下定决心离开管理咨询行业、跑去健身房从扫地擦地板做起以摸清门路的经历，Alex Hormozi 回忆那不仅是地理上的出走，更是一场彻底的精神决裂。在做出改变的前夕，他必须逼迫自己坦然接受一个残酷的可能性：在某种现实走向中，严厉的父亲可能这辈子都再也不会同他讲一句话。他强调，很多处于“从 0 到 1”起步阶段的创业者，四处搜罗并吞咽海量的商业书籍，但往往连一页策略都无法付诸实践，根本原因不在于缺乏战术知识，而是被巨大的内心恐惧完全冻结。在事后回望时，人们总会惊叹于假想中的“心魔”是如何被无端放大的。Alex 引用了妻子 Leila Hormozi 经常分享的一句话：“恐惧就像是一片一英里宽、一英寸深的水洼。”当你站在岸上远眺时，它波涛翻涌如同一望无际的深渊大海；可一旦硬着头皮迈出第一步，脚掌踩下的瞬间才会发现水深不过没过脚踝，脚下是有坚实地面的。跳出舒适圈后，失去旧圈子的同时也会结识真正同行的新朋友。Alex 感慨道，在所有人生分支路线中，打破这份恐惧是他创办商业帝国路上做过的最艰难决定；如果存在多元宇宙，在 90% 的宇宙分支里，那个叫做 Alex Hormozi 的人大概率一辈子都只是个循规蹈矩的咨询顾问。因此，他向所有因犹豫而痛苦的人喊话：“跳出去你不会死；相反，你可能会真正活过来。” ```mermaid flowchart TD accTitle: 恐惧感知与具体推演对比 accDescr: 展示从模糊恐惧（杏仁核驱动）到具体推演（前额叶皮层驱动）的心理转变路径 subgraph Vague["模糊想象：杏仁核主导"] A["辞职 / 创业失败"] --> B["身败名裂、流落街头"] B --> C["所有人嘲笑我，人生彻底完蛋"] end subgraph Specific["具体拆解：前额叶皮层主导"] D["辞职尝试业务"] --> E["项目未达预期但积累实战经验"] E --> F["将经历化为商学院申请文书或跳槽资本"] F --> G["借住朋友沙发 / 最坏情况短暂回父母家"] G --> H["实质损失有限，日后回望成为谈资"] end ``` ### [10:47](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Kl-I7sUcAOY&t=647s) 懦夫与确定的痛苦：宁做失败者，不做逃兵 Steven Bartlett 对此深表赞同，并指出绝大多数被问及“为何迟迟不迈出第一步”的人，表面上总会拿“缺乏资金”、“时机未到”等客观理由作掩护，但潜意识的核心完全是情绪机制——人类本能地极度排斥不确定性，甚至宁愿选择“确定的痛苦”（留在令自己窒息的现状中），也不愿拥抱未知的可能性。 Alex 坦言自己之所以在讨论中刻意选用“懦夫”（coward）这样刺耳而不讨喜的字眼，是因为没有人愿意承认自己是懦夫。然而，“害怕”本身是人类正常的生理防御机制，唯有当你允许恐惧扭转了你的行为方向、迫使你背离内心真正追求的目标时，才构成了真正的懦弱。正所谓勇气不是毫无恐惧，而是带着恐惧依然前行；如果任由恐惧牵着鼻子走，就坐实了懦夫的标签。Alex 直言，他这辈子最不能容忍的就是别人或自己扣上“懦夫”的帽子，相比于在尝试中遭遇惨烈惨败，他宁可被称作“失败者”，也绝不能成为临阵退缩的逃兵。 ### [12:09](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Kl-I7sUcAOY&t=729s) 离职退场的数学公式与真正借口关于创业者何时应当辞职全职投入，Alex 拆解了理性维度的“数学法则”。这个标准在逻辑上其实极为清晰且门槛明确： - **流动储蓄储备**：个人账户中必须预留出可覆盖 3 到 6 个月基础开销的应急储蓄。 - **副业验证与收入置换**：利用下班后的业余时间启动轻量化业务，当这笔副业收入能够完全覆盖甚至超过全职工作的薪资，并且这一现金流能够在 3 到 6 个月内持续得到验证。但 Alex 与 Steven 随即达成共识：缺乏这套“数学证明”几乎从来不是人们不敢辞职的真正原因。很多时候，一个人即便存够了应急资金、副业收益也已追平工资，只要全职投入大概率能赚得更多，他们依然会选择按兵不动。Steven 补充道，放弃事物通常只有两种缘由：一种是因为过程艰难，这绝不是放弃的理由，就像为了热爱的慈善事业跑马拉松，再筋疲力尽也会跑完全程；另一种则是该行为已经无法通向任何具有实质意义的目标，就像没有任何观众、没有慈善目的、也无益于健康的无意义奔跑，此时停下才是理智的。 ### [14:05](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Kl-I7sUcAOY&t=845s) 恐惧消散于具体细节：从杏仁核向理性大脑的思维推演 Alex 提出了一套极其关键的决策框架——“注定的糟糕结果 vs. 胜算尚存的希望”（guaranteed bad vs. chance at good）。如果留在现有的工作轨道上，其终局是可以百分之百预见的平庸与懊悔，这种痛苦只是被推迟发生而已；而跳出去哪怕九死一生，也保留了通往理想人生的机会。不仅如此，Alex 强调了破除恐惧的核心秘密：“恐惧只存在于模糊之中，消散于具体的细节里。”（Fear exists in the vague, not in the specific.） - **模糊思维（由杏仁核掌管）**：“要是我辞职创业失败了，我就完了，一切都毁了，所有人都会唾弃我，我会死。”这种原始的灾难化想象会引发剧烈的恐惧。 - **具象思维（由前额叶皮层掌管）**：“辞职后如果创业失败，我拥有了这段独特的商业试错经历，完全可以写进申请顶尖商学院的申请信里展示企业家精神；同时结合过往咨询经验，重新找一份薪资持平甚至更高的工作并非难事；财产损失充其量只是花光了原有的部分积蓄，对于漫长的赚钱生涯而言无足轻重；极端情况下就算交不起房租，我也有关系足够铁的朋友能借我一张沙发甚至车库睡觉。最坏的结果无非是承受一点自我施加的尴尬羞耻感，日后简历多拐了一个弯而已。” Steven 指出，一旦将路径具象化为清晰的因果链条，缺乏长逻辑推理能力的杏仁核就会熄火，理性前额叶皮层接管大脑。Alex 幽默地反问：“一件丢脸的事情发生之后，要过多久你才会觉得它其实很好笑？”答案通常是几年甚至几个月。既然未来在饭桌上笑谈当年睡沙发追梦的窘迫会是一段美好的“激情岁月”，那不如现在就把它当成笑谈，将心理时间线提前。这套将最坏情境推演到极致的具体化工具，不仅适用于离职创业，也同样适用于职场与生活中的各种艰难沟通（例如主动摊牌坏消息：对方顶多掀桌子、痛哭或大吼，逐项准备应对预案即可破除内耗）。 ### [18:30](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Kl-I7sUcAOY&t=1110s) 延迟折扣与自我认知：我们为何忍受确定的痛苦对话由一个发人深省的前提展开：面对“必然的痛苦”，任何其他选择理应都更好，毕竟人生只有一次，可为什么人们往往宁愿留在确定的痛苦中也不愿做出改变？ Alex 指出，这背后的罪魁祸首是心理学上的“延迟折扣”（Delay Discounting），而且这种机制是双向起作用的。一个典型的例子是晚上定闹钟：晚上定早上 5:00 的闹钟时，每个人都信心满满地觉得自己做得到，因为早起痛苦的那一刻被推迟到了未来；然而当清晨闹钟真正响起时，痛苦变成了即时的，人们便立刻选择退缩。辞职也是同样的道理——许多人连续二十年每天都念叨着“我明天就辞职”，就是因为他们将“忍受一辈子的痛苦”极大地折现，反而觉得当下的忍耐微不足道，而把改变所带来的即刻痛苦无限放大。随后，Steven Bartlett 提出了核心问题：如果一个人已经下定决心辞去工作，在决定接下来该追求什么方向时，这个决定在多大程度上取决于“自我认知”？许多创业者看到 Alex Hormozi 做了 Acquisition.com 就想复制一个，看到 Steve Jobs 做了苹果电脑就想做硬件，看到 Elon Musk 发射火箭就想做太空探索。那么，创业者到底需要对自己有多深的了解？ Alex 引用了 Tiny 创始人 Andrew Wilkinson 的一条经典推文来作答：“每个创业者的发言，都像是在说：‘看，这就是我那张彩票的中奖号码！’”Alex 解释道，盲目模仿成功者的致命缺陷在于——那场彩票抽奖早就已经结束了，你拿着上一轮的中奖号码根本无法兑现。 ```mermaid flowchart TD accTitle: 商业底层第一性原理与杠杆模型 accDescr: 展示时间作为核心输入，通过供需关系和杠杆产生商业产出的逻辑 subgraph Inputs["核心输入"] Time["时间投入 (Time)"] Skills["技能与认知 (Skills)"] end subgraph Engine["商业基本盘 (Acquisition.com 支柱)"] SD["供需关系 (Supply & Demand)"] Leverage["支点杠杆 (Leverage Fulcrum)"] end subgraph Funnel["商业转化全流程"] Attract["吸引注意力 (Attract)"] Convert["转化注意力 (Convert)"] Deliver["交付价值/产品 (Deliver)"] end Inputs --> Engine Engine --> Funnel Funnel --> Output["高杠杆产出 / 商业回报"] ``` --- ### [20:17](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Kl-I7sUcAOY&t=1217s) 商业的第一性原理：用时间换取最高杠杆产出很多人张口闭口就是“第一性原理”（First Principles），但 Alex 认为真正理解其含义的人少之又少。商业的第一性原理是那些永恒不变的底层真理，外部环境和时代条件会变迁，而创业者要做的，是将不变的底层逻辑应用到当下的特定情境中。从最宏观的视角来看，如果创业的目标纯粹是经济回报，那么每个人唯一拥有的原始货币就是“时间”。Alex 直言他非常反感市面上鼓吹的“千万不要用时间换金钱”的说辞，因为在物理现实中，没有任何人能逃脱用时间换金钱的定律，区别只在于有些人换取的效率极高，有些人效率极低。即使是不按工时计费的商业交易，也是在时间的维度上发生的。因此，真正的核心诉求是在既定的时间投入下获得最高的回报率。 Alex 提到，Acquisition.com 的 Logo（一个类似三角形/支点的图案，常被调侃为共济会符号）代表着支撑生意的两大核心支柱： 1. **杠杆的支点（Leverage Fulcrum）**：用尽可能少的时间换取尽可能庞大的产出。 2. **供需关系（Supply and Demand）**：任何商业赖以存在的底层事实。在商业运转中，必然经历三个阶段：**吸引注意力（Attract）**、**转化注意力（Convert）** 与 **交付产品/服务（Deliver）**。在每一个环节中，创业者都必须追求从“低杠杆”向“高杠杆”进化： - **交付杠杆**：软件或数字媒体具备极高杠杆，因为它们“制作一次，可以销售一千次甚至无数次”；相比之下，定制化、纯人力服务的交付杠杆则较低。 - **转化杠杆**：自动化的结账页面或视频销售信（VSL）具备自动转化能力，客户不需要销售人员沟通即可直接下单；引入电话销售团队虽然有效，但杠杆率相对较低。 - **获客杠杆**：一对一私聊拓展属于低杠杆，而制作一条能被一百万人观看的内容则是超高杠杆。 Alex 强调，所谓“我该做什么”，本质上就是问：“在当前拥有的技能、资源和资产框架内，我该如何投入自己的双手、大脑和时间，来换取最大的杠杆与回报？” --- ### [23:41](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Kl-I7sUcAOY&t=1421s) 辞职后选择方向的“3P 框架”与痛苦的巨大优势面对“刚辞职该做什么业务”的普遍迷茫，Alex 提出了寻找商业构想的 **“3P 框架”**： | 维度 (3P) | 核心定义与商业逻辑 | 现实优势与应用场景 | |:--- |:--- |:--- | | **Pain（痛苦）** | 自身正在亲身经历且未被解决的痛点 | 对潜在客户具备刻骨铭心的深刻理解，能做出极其精准的产品假设。 | | **Past Profession（过去的职业）** | 刚刚辞掉或过去长期从事的工作领域 | **最稳妥的赚钱方式**。市场已经证明了人们愿意为此付费，可将其技能拆解为外包/单飞业务。 | | **Passion（激情/热爱）** | 即使不给钱也愿意花全部业余时间投入的领域 | 投入了大量自由支配时间，自然掌握了行业细微的隐性知识（Nuance）。 | Alex 深入剖析了 **Past Profession（过去的职业）**：在当今的零工经济（Gig Economy）和一人企业（Solopreneur）时代，任何复杂的企业都可以被拆解为具体的工作流程。销售、营销、客户成功（Customer Success）、客户支持、产品设计、网页搭建等环节都可以被“碎片化/零工化”。只要从过去的职业中提炼出一项硬技能并向市场出售，就能立刻开始赚钱，且无需受制于老板。而在所有驱动力中，**Pain（痛苦）** 往往具备最强烈的杀伤力与杠杆优势。Alex 举了一个生动的例子：如果你有某种特殊的食物过敏，市场上根本买不到既符合你的禁忌又好吃的松饼，而你判断世界上必然有大量面临同样窘境的松饼爱好者，那么针对这个过敏痛点研发出一款美味的松饼，一门极具威力的生意就此诞生。为什么“痛苦”能带来未来五年的巨大竞争优势？Alex 指出，打造非凡产品最关键的核心就是**对目标客群拥有极深度的理解**。要达到这种深度，要么花费极其庞大的时间做海量市场调研，要么你自己就是那个饱受折磨的受众。Alex 分享了他自己的切身体会：因为呼吸问题，他从初二（8年级）开始尝试市面上所有的鼻腔通气产品，至今已有二三十年之久。他不是浅尝辄止，而是每种产品都连续试用一个月。因此，他对市面上任何一款竞品的优缺点了如指掌，正是这种在问题中浸泡的漫长时间，让他能精准洞察现有解决方案的弊病，提出远超常人的产品假设；而这种基于亲身体验构建的故事向投资人提案时，其说服力远比苍白的逻辑推导强大得多。最后，Alex 讲述了他结识的一位早期投资了全美最大连锁影院之一 **Regal Cinemas** 的投资人案例：在投资当时，影院行业正处于低谷期，许多人认为看电影的时代过去了。而该投资人毅然决定下注的原因非常纯粹——那位创业者对影院业务细节的了解到了近乎变态的程度，甚至清楚算得出“一粒爆米花玉米粒的成本到底是多少”。投资人当时心想：“这个人太懂这门生意了，他把这行摸得像手背一样透彻，他根本不可能失败。”这个案例再次印证：无论是源自过去的职业、全身心投入的 Passion，还是自身刻骨铭心的 Pain，创业的真正护城河最终都源自于对问题和受众那份无可替代的深度理解。 ### [27:05](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Kl-I7sUcAOY&t=1625s) 职业与个人痛点：传教士与雇佣兵的商业哲学在探讨创业起点的选择时，Alex Hormozi 指出，从本职专业（Profession）切入往往是一条“捷径”。如果你因为讨厌当前的工作而辞职，决定出来单干，这种方式在商业逻辑上具有天然的确定性——你已经证明了这项技能可以变现，其商业可行性已被市场验证。相比之下，从纯粹的个人痛点（Pain）或热情（Passion）出发，虽然变现的确定性稍低，但潜在的上升空间（upside）却可能巨大得多。 Steven Bartlett 对此深有感触，并以 Hormozi 先前提到的鼻塞呼吸困扰为例：如果 Hormozi 仅仅坐下来推销说“我做了一款鼻贴，耐用度提升了 20%，能让鼻孔开合度增加 20%”，这种理性的产品卖点陈述毫无感染力；然而，当他讲述自己从小受呼吸障碍折磨、为了自救而尝试一切手段的真实故事时，说服力呈指数级放大。这种发自内心的叙事，本身就是未来五年在 TikTok 和 Instagram 上的最佳营销素材。Steven 提到，在《龙穴》（Dragon's Den）节目中也经常看到类似场景：听了一整天枯燥的商业宣讲后，突然有创业者走上来说“我有 ADHD，市面上所有的能量补充剂都让我精神崩溃，所以我亲自研发了这款产品自救”，评委们立刻精神一振，因为面对这种真实的切肤之痛，你根本无法反驳。 ```mermaid flowchart LR accTitle: 商业动机分类：雇佣兵与传教士 accDescr: 对比雇佣兵基于数据与利己目标的商业逻辑与传教士基于真实痛点驱动的商业模型。 subgraph Mercenary["雇佣兵模式 (Mercenaries)"] M1["分析市场趋势与调研问卷"] --> M2["寻找增长赛道与卡位红利"] M2 --> M3["逻辑推导但缺乏深层共鸣"] end subgraph Missionary["传教士模式 (Missionaries)"] P1["亲身体验痛点 (Visceral Pain)"] --> P2["执念自救与阻止他人受苦"] P2 --> P3["极强叙事感染力与长期商业成功"] end ``` 这种现象印证了 Jeff Bezos 提出的“传教士与雇佣兵”（Missionaries and Mercenaries）框架： - **雇佣兵（Mercenaries）**：依赖市场趋势分析、问卷调查和增长红利，靠逻辑算计去抢占风口；虽然部分人也能成功，但往往缺乏韧性。 - **传教士（Missionaries）**：尽管同样需要底层的商业引擎来支撑运转，但他们之所以全力以赴，是因为切身体验过某种切肤之痛，绝不想让别人再经历同样的痛苦。正如 Alex 所言，这类传教士型创业者往往能赚到最多的钱，因为他们的动机坚不可摧。 --- ### [29:10](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Kl-I7sUcAOY&t=1750s) 偏执的痴迷：冠军与常人的真正差异为了说明切身体验带来的狂热，Hormozi 详细讲述了自己从八年级起对抗鼻塞的经历。当年他每晚无法呼吸，甚至摸索出一种独特的入睡姿势：必须用手掌托住侧脸，顺势拉开一侧鼻孔，保持这种姿势在沙发上睡着，因为入睡后肌肉放松，只有这样卡住手部才能维持气道畅通。多年来他试遍了市面上所有的鼻贴和呼吸辅助工具，不仅包括 Amazon 上的常规商品，还涵盖全欧洲及海外各国的各种设计。哪怕到现在，只要有粉丝或创业公司寄来新型鼻腔产品，他都会亲自测试，但至今仍未发现一款能真正彻底解决问题的产品。这种偏执的个人经历揭示了一个核心商业逻辑：**展示（Demonstration）与原型永远比纯粹的说辞更具说服力**。当你能讲清楚自己为何在乎这个痛点时，不仅能打动用户，更能打动投资者。哪怕投资人本身对厨具毫无兴趣，但只要看到一个对厨具陷入狂热痴迷的女性创始人，就会愿意下注，因为大家都在寻找那种“痴迷”（Obsession）。 Alex 进一步分享了他一位负责某国奥运代表团营养与补剂好友的洞察： - 普通人观察顶尖冠军时总会问：“冠军到底拥有什么我没有的东西？” - 这位专家的回答却颠覆了常理：“恰恰相反，**你要看冠军身上缺少了什么——他们缺少的是‘关机键’（Off Button）**。” - 真正的金牌得主根本停不下来，他们的人生全天候围绕单一目标运转。商业世界亦然，那种对产品和细节近乎病态的痴迷，正是拉开平庸与卓越差距的核心动力。 --- ### [32:36](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Kl-I7sUcAOY&t=1956s) 驱动力的三要素与目标规模的法则 Steven Bartlett 指出，这种叙事之所以极具杀伤力，是因为它直接越过了理性思维，重击了大脑的“杏仁核”（Amygdala）。人们在做出辞职等重大人生决策时受杏仁核主导，而在面对商业宣传时，最有效的触达路径同样是激发情感共鸣。看到 Alex 用手撑脸艰难入睡的画面，听众会立刻产生同理心，并本能地坚信“如果说全天下有谁能把鼻腔呼吸产品做成功，那绝对就是这个饱受折磨的疯子”。 Alex 总结了构建成功事业的三大驱动要素：**痛点（Pain）、专业（Profession）、热情（Passion）**： - **三者兼备**：如果由痛点催生出痴迷，恰好与你的专业经验重合，再加上深厚的热情，那么创业失败的概率几乎为零。 - **只需其一**：实际上，普通人只需占有其中一项就足以立足。即使仅仅拥有小众热情（比如对微缩模型车情有独钟），也可以围绕它展开极其丰富的商业模式：制造模型、性能改装调校（供模型车竞速赛）、收藏与倒买倒卖、乃至围绕制作教学打造垂直内容媒体矩阵。 Alex 在他即将推出的创投节目《Mozi Tank》中就遇到一位从事 IT 工作的参赛者，唯一的狂热爱好是《龙与地下城》（Dungeons & Dragons），他的诉求非常纯粹：只想让这个爱好赚够生活费，从而摆脱枯燥的 IT 岗位。Alex 强调，**认清自己的真实目标至关重要**： - **不同量级的目标决定了不同的赛道宽窄**： - 如果目标是赚 **1,000 万美元**，在几乎任何行业（只要深耕模式）都可以实现； - 如果目标是赚 **1 亿美元**，拉长到足够的时间周期，在大多数传统或垂直领域依然大有可为； - 但如果目标是成为**世界首富**（面对万亿甚至十万亿美元量级的估值机遇），可选的路径就会被极度收窄——它必然属于前沿科技、AI 等具备无限规模效应的极少数领域。目标越大，通往目标的路径范围就越狭窄。 ### [35:33](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Kl-I7sUcAOY&t=2133s) 财富上限与 2025 年注意力游戏的“作弊码” Alex Hormozi 从物质财富的边际效应切入，指出许多人扬言“想成为世界首富”，本质上是因为他们从未真正想清楚其中的逻辑。实际上，资产超过 1 亿美元之后，除了能购买更多体积庞大的资产外，个人实际消费层面已经没有什么是买不到的；甚至只要达到 2,000 万到 2,500 万美元，你就已经能出入最昂贵的餐厅、入住顶级的奢华酒店、驾驶最好的超级跑车。随后，Steven Bartlett 抛出了一个核心议题：在 2025 年这个 AI 盛行、新兴平台与媒体形态层出不穷的时代，想要在“争夺注意力”的游戏中获胜，究竟有没有一套新的“作弊码”？Steven 以“开一家私人健身教练业务”作为典型假设——这是一个门槛极低、所有人都能做且高度同质化饱和的行业，身处 2025 年的私教该如何思考并获取注意力？ Alex Hormozi 直截了当地指出，他首先“绝不会做的事”就是去跟那些科研派硬碰硬： - 试图在科学理论上压倒学术派是徒劳的：网络上早就存在拥有运动科学博士学位（PhD）、同时练得无比壮硕的博主，对方既比你懂得多又比你身材好，在这条维度上你毫无胜算。 - 在注意力竞争中，真正的胜负手在于寻找自身的独特性（Uniqueness）——当所有人都在声嘶力竭地大声叫嚷时，唯有不同才能脱颖而出。 ```mermaid flowchart TD accTitle: 注意力竞争策略对比 accDescr: 对比错误策略与基于独特性建立品牌溢价的正确策略 subgraph WrongWay["错误策略：在同质化维度硬拼"] W1["试图比学术派更懂科学"] --> W2["遇到既有 PhD 又练得极好的博主"] W2 --> W3["毫无胜算，沦为平庸"] end subgraph RightWay["2025 作弊码：靠个人独特性破局"] R1["整合独特的个人经历与兴趣成分"] --> R2["真实展现自我，不做稀释"] R2 --> R3["建立受众忠诚度与品牌偏好"] R3 --> R4["商品化服务获得品牌溢价"] end ``` --- ### [36:44](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Kl-I7sUcAOY&t=2204s) 你的生活指纹：将大宗商品化的服务打上“品牌溢价” Alex Hormozi 解释说，虽然听起来老生常谈，但每个人的指纹在生物学上都是独一无二的，个人的生活轨迹和过往经历亦是如此。将精力倾注在“成为真实的自己”上，能带来远超常规努力的超额回报（Alpha）。试图模仿 Alex Hormozi 做内容注定行不通，因为“你不可能在扮演我这件事上赢过我，但你做自己永远无人能敌”。针对个人品牌的构成，Alex 拆解了自己的内容模块作为范例： - **哲学思考**：虽然商业内容并不强制需要哲学，但这构成了他的个人底色。 - **商业与营销**：他在销售、转化、获客及营销推广上花费了大量时间思考，构成了核心输出。 - **健身元素**：来自创立 Gym Launch 以及此前拥有多家健身房的职业经历，健身是他生活的重要部分，因此在内容中轻度穿插。 - **家庭与妻子**：与妻子 Leila 的互动和共同创业经历自然融入其中。 - **冷幽默与暗黑幽默**：源于他日常海量消费喜剧内容的习惯，不经意间在表达中流露。每个创作者都有这些属于自己的经历“木桶”（Buckets），不仅木桶的种类各不相同，各自所占的比例更是千差万别。绝大多数产品与服务本质上都是大宗商品化（Commoditized）的，作为一名普通私教，你的专业能力大概率不会比同行卓越多少，但你必须与众不同。消费者去买健身服务往往带有一定的偶然性，“买谁的不是买，不如买他的”。Alex 举了知名网红饮料品牌 Prime 的例子：市场上能替代 Prime 满足解渴和电解质需求的产品多如牛毛，但只要产品品质与价格相差无几，消费者会单纯因为对网红创作者的情感认同（Brand Affinity）而用钞票投票。因此，在 2025 年做私教： - **短期策略**：主动触达（Outreach）你认识的人，给出极具诱惑力、让人无法拒绝的 Offer。 - **长期策略**：打造具有鲜明个人特色的内容，将原本可能流向任何人的大宗需求，转化为针对你个人的品牌溢价。 --- ### [39:39](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Kl-I7sUcAOY&t=2379s) 展现真实的勇气：面对批评决不“稀释自我” Steven Bartlett 对此深有共鸣。他指出，所有顶尖成功的创作者身上最核心的共性，就是拥有“做自己的勇气”（Courage to be themselves）。Steven 回顾自己早期做内容时，常发一些诸如“事出必有因”等陈词滥调、令人尴尬的鸡汤；他花了数年时间才真正放松下来，敢于在互联网上展现原汁原味的自己。 Alex Hormozi 坦言，人性的本能往往是在抗拒展现真实自我。他分享了几天前的一个亲身经历：他在社交平台 X 上发布了一些观点后遭到了大量抨击和非议，感到动摇的他跟妻子 Leila 倾诉：“也许我不该谈论这些东西，也许我应该收敛一点。”Leila 直视着他的眼睛严肃地告诫他： > “永远不要稀释你自己（Never dilute yourself）。需要听到这条信息的人，远比那些讨厌这条信息的人多得多。如果你真的想对很多人的生活产生深远影响，就必然会招致同等大小的反对力量来排斥它。这是你想要产生巨大影响力所必须承受的代价。” Alex 笑称，作为丈夫，只要妻子觉得他很酷，他就能坚定地继续走下去。因为一旦为了迎合外界而做出妥协与稀释，原本独一无二的内容就会瞬间退化为千篇一律的平庸之物。 Steven Bartlett 分析指出，人们之所以不敢做自己、倾向于抄袭他人，是因为“独特性”意味着前面没有任何现成的蓝图或前人验证过的路径。展现真正的自我伴随着未知的风险，但也蕴含着未知的收益。人类天生厌恶不确定性，抄袭已有模版显然更让人感到安全。然而，受众之所以追随某个人，正是因为摸清了他的鲜明价值观；一旦创作者开始迎合、摇摆或稀释自己，受众就会觉得他不再真实，其价值也会大打折扣。 --- ### [42:44](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Kl-I7sUcAOY&t=2564s) 在灰色地带穿行：对立理想之间的张力与品牌印记 Alex Hormozi 进一步引申，创作者在表达自我时最艰难的考验，往往不是非黑即白的抉择，而是在“灰色地带”中穿行。人类社会存在着许多看似崇高、却彼此冲突的对立理想： - **仁慈（Mercy）与正义（Justice）**：二者皆是人类追求的美德，但往往难以兼得。 - **多样性（Variety）与一致性（Consistency）**：两者都有其价值，但方向相反。 - **坚守传统价值（Respecting values）与开拓创新（Innovating）**：同样处于永恒的张力之中。 Alex 举例说明这种两难境地：假设你更偏向“正义”，主张每个人都要为自己的行为承担个人责任，因此超速就必须开罚单；但面对一位超速的单亲母亲，另一方主张“仁慈”，认为今天应当放她一马。这两个立场各自代表了一种崇高的理想，99% 的人都承认正义是好的，也承认仁慈是好的。因此，无论你站在哪一边，都会遭到另一方站在道德高地上的猛烈攻击。这种抨击之所以让人极其难受，正是因为“对方说的也是对的”，这构成了政治与社会争论的底层本质。在这些互相对立的美德之间，根本不可能做到毫无冲突，唯一的区别只在于“尺度的拿捏（How much）”。 Alex 总结道，作为一个创作者，你的“核心指纹”正是体现在这种复杂情境的选择中：当面对仁慈与正义的权衡时，你的忠实受众能够准确预测并理解 Alex 会做出怎样的选择——这种高度一致、经得起考验的价值取向与处事尺度，正是塑造真正品牌认同的核心所在。 ### [04:40](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Kl-I7sUcAOY&t=280s) 个人品牌如同马赛克拼贴：拥抱认知迭代的必然性 Alex Hormozi 将个人品牌塑造形象地比作一幅巨大的马赛克镶嵌画：每一条短内容不过是带有单一颜色的一小块瓷砖。如果受众只看过 Steven Bartlett 的一条短视频切片，根本不可能真正了解他是谁；但如果看了一千条，退后一步拉远视角，整幅完整的全景画面便赫然显现。品牌的本质，正是由这些拼贴中各种颜色的配比——红、黄、绿各占多少以及它们各自落在何处——所共同决定的。许多创作者试图将此公式化，刻板地规划“一条发家庭、一条发财务、一条发生活”，但这种刻意设计往往行不通。更自然的路径是做真实的自己，那些内容的比例自然会形成，且随着岁月的推移，个人认知发生蜕变，品牌形象自然也会随之演变。谈及过往言论，Alex 坦言必须学会接纳“自己不再认同过去说过的一些话”。他在 2017 年 7 月开启第一档播客，第 8 期的标题赫然是《停止做品牌》（Stop Branding），而如今他对品牌建设的看法已截然不同。那期节目录制时，距离他经历人生低谷、失去一切仅仅过去了 90 天。可以说，他从身无分文到建立数十亿资产的整个心路历程，完完整整地被数字化记录了下来。面对新信息的输入，如果一个人依旧机械重复旧观点，那才是问题所在。就像在政治领域，政客改变立场常被讥讽为“摇摆不定”，但人若不被允许学习与进化，思想便是一潭死水。只要创作者在任何时候都真诚做自己，这种观点的改变就会如涓涓细流般自然过渡，而非突兀的割裂。 ```mermaid flowchart LR accTitle: 个人品牌的马赛克演变模型 accDescr: 展示碎片化内容如何通过真实表达汇聚成整体品牌，并随着认知迭代自然演化。 subgraph S1["内容创作与拼贴"] A["碎片化真实内容 (单色小瓷砖)"] --> B["海量持续输出 (拉远全貌视角)"] end subgraph S2["品牌沉淀与演进"] B --> C["天然内容比例 (形成真实品牌)"] C --> D["获取新认知 (允许观点自然演化)"] end ``` ### [04:46](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Kl-I7sUcAOY&t=286s) 20/60/20 受众法则与被讨厌的“固定成本” 在面对公众舆论时，人们极易陷入过分关注不理性群体的心理陷阱，而这是一场注定无法取胜的消耗战。Steven Bartlett 分享了一位心理治疗师曾给出的受众分布结构：任何公众人物都会面临“20/60/20”的群体画像——20% 的人是不论你说什么都死心塌地拥护的铁杆粉丝；60% 的人是理性的沉默大多数，他们默默观看，既不随波逐流也不在社交媒体上发帖论战；而剩下的 20% 则是无论你做什么都会挑刺生恨的批评者。将宝贵的生命耗费在去迎合或纠偏这 20% 的反对者身上，是最大的精力黑洞。 Alex Hormozi 从商业思维切入，提出了一个精辟论断：“被讨厌是一笔固定成本”（Being disliked is a fixed cost）。在这个世界上，没有任何一个人能被所有人喜爱，既然无论如何都必定会被一部分人厌恶，那“宁可因为做真实的自己而被讨厌，也绝不要因为伪装成别人而获爱”。Steven 紧接着引用了全球护肤品牌德美乐嘉（Dermalogica）创始人 Jane Wurwand 的商业洞见：“要想赢得属于你的 20%，你就必须做好惹恼那 80% 人的准备。”在品牌塑造中，鲜明的立场必然伴随着分水岭——一旦在沙滩上画下界线，就意味着非此即彼，中庸与平庸往往是同义词。两人还深度探讨了由 Willem Dafoe 配音的耐克争议广告《胜利不属于所有人》（Winning Isn't for Everyone）。这则充斥着“胜者全拿、赢家通吃、渴望击碎对手”冷酷基调的短片，一改耐克近年来追求政治正确的温和路线，回归了品牌名字源自“胜利女神”的骨血基因。这则广告在社交网络上引发了激烈的两极分化，但正是这种敢于激怒部分人群的极致表达，反而让真正的核心受众重新感受到了品牌的灵魂与澎湃的购买欲。 - **受众的三重分布**：20% 铁粉布道者，60% 潜水冷眼的理性大众，20% 永远无法取悦的黑粉。 - **立场的代价**：任何清晰有力的品牌价值主张，本质上都是一种排他性声明；不树敌便无法真正聚拢狂热信徒。 ### [04:49](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Kl-I7sUcAOY&t=289s) 组织天花板：人才是企业乘风破浪的终极底牌当话题转向初创企业最核心的命脉时，Steven 观察到早期创始人普遍存在一个致命盲区：他们似乎永远无法深刻理解招聘与团队搭建的极端重要性，总固执地认为单凭商业模式或产品本身就能成事。Alex Hormozi 讲述了一位导师的人生阶段顿悟：二十几岁时，眼里只有终点（Destination）；三十几岁时，体会到了过程（Journey）的意义；到了四十多岁才幡然醒悟，最关键的原来源自同行的人（Company）。 Alex 指出，一家企业的潜在上限，与其内部所有人员的“综合智力马力”（aggregate intellectual horsepower）直接挂钩。创始人如果自视甚高，成为公司里最聪明、能在所有工种上超越员工的人，那么这家公司的天花板就死死被锁定在创始人的个人寿命与精力上限之内。即便一个人的学习速度再快，也不可能活出一千个人的丰富经验。放眼全球商业版图，顶尖企业的掌门人极少独占 100% 的股份： - 英伟达（NVIDIA）CEO 黄仁勋（Jensen Huang）仅持有约 4% 的股权； - 亚马逊（Amazon）创始人杰夫·贝佐斯（Jeff Bezos）持股约在 7% 至 9%； - 特斯拉（Tesla）CEO 埃隆·马斯克（Elon Musk）持股也仅在 20% 左右。其核心逻辑在于，要把战车推向月球，必须集结整支庞大且顶尖的马群，稀释股权换取智力资本是规模化的必然代价。针对团队扩张的吞吐瓶颈，Alex 引用了前 PayPal 黑帮核心成员、知名投资人 Keith Rabois 提出的“炮管与弹药”理论（Barrels and Ammunition）。初创公司在验证了产品市场契合度（PMF）后往往盲目扩招，以为将团队从 10 人扩至 50 人就能实现产能翻五倍，结果却发现产出几乎停滞。这是因为绝大多数普通员工只是“弹药”（Ammunition），而真正能够独立驱动项目、统领全局的核心人才则是“炮管”（Barrels）。如果组织内部只有一个炮管，塞入再多的弹药也只能单发发射；企业的产能瓶颈永远受限于炮管的吞吐量。这也吻合了经典的普莱斯定律（Price's Law）：一个百人组织中，50% 的核心价值实际上是由根号人数（即 10 个人）创造出来的。创业的成熟过程，正是一个创始人逐步提高识人与用人标准、不断挖掘组织“炮管”的漫长进阶之路。 ### [53:40](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Kl-I7sUcAOY&t=3220s) 创业如打游戏通关：建立人才画像的模式识别亚历克斯·霍尔莫齐（Alex Hormozi）将创办公司的过程比作打电子游戏。在第一家公司时，你花了数月时间才摸索出击败第二关“关底 Boss”的方法；打到第三关，可能又要耗费几个月；而当你通关后换一个新角色重新开局时，你可以毫不费力地一路狂飙冲过前三关，直到踏入此前从未涉足的第四关——面对未知的“处女地”，你才需要再次停下脚步死磕。创办企业也是如此，每一次再创业，企业家都能以快得多的速度达到上一家公司的成就，其核心就在于掌握了组织内部各个职能的“人才画像原型”（Archetype Finding）。 ```mermaid flowchart TD accTitle: 组织人才模式识别进阶图 accDescr: 展示从首次摸索招聘到建立成熟人才模式识别的演进路径 subgraph Phase1["初次摸索阶段（打怪碰壁）"] A["首次招聘某岗位\n（缺乏画像认知）"] --> B["经历反复试错\n与人员流失"] B --> C["幸运遇到核心骨干\n（打透该职能 Boss）"] end subgraph Phase2["模式沉淀阶段（飞速通关）"] C --> D["形成该职能清晰画像原型"] D --> E["新业务中迅速组建团队\n直奔更高层级难题"] end subgraph Phase3["企业规模升级（精细分层）"] E --> F["匹配不同体量的人才\n（如 100万-1000万美元 vs 1000万-1亿美元）"] end ``` 在企业刚起步时，创始人往往根本不知道一个合格的职能人员应该具备什么素质。以销售为例，你起初只是招了一个自称“很会卖东西”的人，结果可能根本不行；在换了三四个人、折腾数番之后，你终于撞见了一个真正的销售悍将，那一瞬间你才会恍然大悟：“原来这就是我想要的人！”随后你便能照着这个标杆去复制和寻找相似的原型。可当你跨过这个门槛，又会发现自己从未招过销售经理，于是不得不重新招人、培训、发现不行、再解雇，耗费 18 个月才啃下这块硬骨头。随着业务从 100 万到 1000 万美元跨越至 1000 万到 1 亿美元，每个阶段对高管的要求又截然不同。经验丰富的成熟企业家不再把创业看作是“从零摸索建设”，而是将其视为“拼装积木”——他们脑中已有清晰的拼图模板，只需将各模块严丝合缝地拼接起来。霍尔莫齐强调，所谓构建企业的长期价值，本质上就是搭建这个由技能与协同机制构成的“集体意识”： > “人们总问人才在企业中有多重要？人才本身就是企业（People are the organization）。懂得如何组建并配置团队，就是创业者的终极职责。” --- ### [56:52](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Kl-I7sUcAOY&t=3412s) 初创期的盲目招聘与“3D”培训法则斯蒂芬·巴特利特（Steven Bartlett）对此深有共鸣。他指出，绝大多数首次创业者之所以必须经历痛苦才能学会这一点，是因为这属于典型的“未知的未知”（Unknown Unknowns）——你甚至根本不知道自己缺失了什么。斯蒂芬坦承自己当年也犯过荒唐的错误：他曾招募在普拉达（Prada）当店员的朋友来当公司会计，还曾在说唱比赛现场随手拉了一个 30 岁整天靠打电子游戏度日的人来担任市场总监。直到公司创立三四年后，他才机缘巧合、毫无预兆地招进了一位真正顶尖的人才，亲眼目睹其带来的天翻地覆的成效，才彻底惊醒。面对“当创始人自己不懂某项业务时，该如何招揽并搭建体系”的提问，霍尔莫齐直言没有捷径：初创期最笨却最有效的方法，往往是创始人不得不硬着头皮自己先去做这项工作。一旦跑通并拆解出路径， Acquisition.com 内部会严格执行一套用于培养和交接的“3D”培训法则： * **文档化（Document）**：将自己成功完成该项工作的所有具体步骤沉淀成一份极其详尽的检查清单（Checklist）。 * **做演示（Demonstrate）**：在候选人或新员工面前，严格对照清单上的每一步逐条进行实操演练。在这个过程中，创始人往往会尴尬地发现自己其实并未完全遵照清单操作，这就倒逼着去持续修正清单，直到形成绝对一致的标准化输出。 * **去复制（Duplicate）**：让新员工在你的现场监督下，一丝不苟地对照清单独立执行。霍尔莫齐解释，这也是为什么靠自力更生（Bootstrap）做起来的创始人往往对公司各模块的底层细节了如指掌——因为他们必须先学会，才能把体系教给别人。 --- ### [59:14](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Kl-I7sUcAOY&t=3554s) 顶尖人才吸引顶尖人才与清理“腐烂枝干”的代价斯蒂芬补充了自己在用人上的另一个顿悟：“顶尖人才会吸引顶尖人才（A-players hire A-players）。”他以团队中一位名叫凯西·莱森（Casey Leaden）的优秀员工为例，她后来招揽进来的 10 个人里有 9 个最终都成了公司的业务中流砥柱；相反，公司里曾有一位表现平庸的“C 级员工”，其招进来的 10 个人全都是不及格的“F 级人员”。霍尔莫齐随即剖析了组织层级向上延伸时随之暴增的用人风险。一旦某个处于管理层级的人选错了——不论是因为价值观不合，还是能力跟不上——其危害就如同一根完全腐烂的树枝，最终你不得不把其下属的四分之三人员全部挖掉，因为整个分支已经被带偏或彻底失效。为了帮助团队消除解雇腐败分支时的心理负罪感，霍尔莫齐分享了两个极具穿透力的类比： * **酒吧账单比喻**：一群人在夜店狂欢，有个人疯狂点昂贵的烈酒请全场畅饮，结果点完后此人直接溜之大吉。当大家不得不留下来凑钱买单时，那一刻所有人心里都极其痛苦。“清理组织中的朽木就像在收拾烂摊子买单，那种痛苦并非因为‘清理朽木’本身是错的，而是因为我们最初把信任错付给了那个点了一桌昂贵账单却拍拍屁股走人的人。” * **伴侣出轨坦白比喻**：当一方出轨后向伴侣坦白真相时，那个当下双方都会经历撕心裂肺的剧痛，以至于让人产生错觉，以为“说出真话”是个错误。“但坦白真相并不是错，错的是出轨本身；说出真话是在匡正错误。在组织中割除毒瘤的痛苦也是同理——你是在拨乱反正，但这正是许多企业长期陷入泥潭的原因，他们不愿承受那场艰难对话的阵痛，宁愿在烂摊子里耗费数年。” --- ### [01:01:46](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Kl-I7sUcAOY&t=3706s) 优秀创始人的核心素质：更早开启艰难对话斯蒂芬极度赞同这一观点，并指出拉开顶尖创始人和普通创始人差距的关键素质，就在于“能否更早地开启艰难对话（The ability to have the hard conversations sooner）”。他提到自己在投资孵化初创企业时最常碰到的场景：许多首次创业者在月度例会上向他大倒苦水，抱怨负责电商业务的主管有多么糟糕，自己不得不每天替他收拾烂摊子并疲惫不堪地请教：“斯蒂芬，我到底该怎么办？”然而两周后再次碰头，那个人依然原封不动地坐在位子上；甚至过了一整年，创始人还在抱怨同一个不称职的员工。正是因为缺乏直面冲突并当机立断的魄力，才导致整个团队持续为平庸和内耗买单。 ### [01:02:16](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Kl-I7sUcAOY&t=3736s) 潜规则与组织文化的本质 Steven Bartlett 与 Alex Hormozi 谈到了企业管理中一种极具破坏力的现象：管理者对某位员工心存不满，但当被问到“对方知道你对他不满吗”时，答案往往是否定的。这种“隐性不满”（quiet dissatisfaction）犹如企业内部的病毒。更糟糕的是，团队中其他人其实全都心知肚明某个员工表现极差，而领导者的放任使得这个低劣水平沦为了全公司“可接受的标准底线”。 ```mermaid flowchart TD accTitle: 组织强化规则与企业文化闭环 accDescr: 解释领导者的默许或干预如何塑造组织的潜规则与企业文化 subgraph Reinforcement ["强化机制：奖惩规则"] A["具体行为发生 (例如：开会迟到3分钟)"] --> B{"领导者反应"} B -->|"沉默放任"| C["潜规则确立：迟到完全被接受"] B -->|"即时干预对齐"| D["潜规则确立：客户优先，常规必须准时"] end subgraph CultureImpact ["文化与执行力"] C --> E["底线拉低：低效成为常态"] D --> F["标准明确：复制决策逻辑"] E --> G["执行力溃败"] F --> H["执行力壁垒：文化胜过策略"] end ``` Alex 指出，如果说“品牌”（Brand）是企业在外部的声誉，那么“文化”（Culture）就是企业在内部的声誉。文化绝非虚无缥缈的口号，从操作层面定义，它就是**“组织内部支配强化的规则”**——即企业究竟奖励什么、惩罚什么。企业价值观的本质，是用来在互相冲突的诉求间做出抉择的过滤器。例如 Rolls-Royce（劳斯莱斯）将“品质高于速度”作为决策准绳，而其他公司可能在正义与仁慈、速度与质量之间有不同的平衡点。借用 Peter Drucker（彼得·德鲁克）的名言，Alex 强调“文化不仅能把战略当早餐吃，简直一周七天、每天都在碾压战略”。绝大多数商业策略并不复杂（比如交付极好的产品引发口碑、保持健康的毛利率），真正拉开差距的从来不是战略，而是执行力，而文化正是执行力最底层的保障。 - **不发声即是默许**：若有人开会迟到 3 分钟而管理者不置一词，管理者就已经用行动确认并强化了一条潜规则——开会迟到 3 分钟是被允许的。 - **正向干预案例**：当员工因敲定销售订单而迟到时，Alex 会让其私下或公开说明原因，并当众宣布：“为了签单客户迟到完全没问题，永远以赚钱为先”，借此把规则精确强化到“以业务成效为先”上。 --- ### [01:05:46](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Kl-I7sUcAOY&t=3946s) 即时反馈循环与企业最强的阿尔法（超额能力） Alex 提出，改变与培养行为的关键在于**“极高频且即时的现场反馈”**。心理学与动物行为学研究表明，训练小狗坐下时，如果在其坐下的瞬间给饼干，它学得极快；如果延迟 10 秒，需要多花三倍的重复次数；如果延迟超过 1 分钟，小狗几乎永远学不会，因为饼干强化的只是吃饼干前那一瞬间的行为。大多数公司在培训时习惯于让员工通读一遍话术，最后才慢条斯理地提几点改进意见，这种反馈周期过长的培训方式 95% 都是无效的。 Alex 展示了他的销售话术实操培训法： 1. **预先建立心智预期**：明确告知对方“前 30 分钟可能只能练完三分之一的内容，且我中途会打断你 30 次，打断得越多说明我们练得越对”。 2. **即时叫停与正向强化**：第一句话一出口，若语调不对立刻叫停重来；说对了便立即夸奖并要求再练一遍，然后第一句、第二句串联，层层递进。 3. **肌肉记忆与本能反应**：通过超高密度的反馈循环，直到员工能像吹口哨、唱歌一样自然无误地脱口而出。在人才获取上，多数企业只会“挑选”（花市场公允高价招募现成高手，或招 10 个人赌谁能活下来），这会极大地侵蚀利润率。而具备真正培训能力的企业，能够用 B 级的成本引入人才并将其培养至 A+ 级，从而稳稳赚取人才成本与超额产出之间的差价利润（Delta）。这就是组织最巨大的超额回报（Alpha）来源。 --- ### [01:08:21](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Kl-I7sUcAOY&t=4101s) 弥合技能短板：态度与能力的本质在招聘策略上，企业应始终坚持**“针对最小的技能差距（Smallest Skill Deficiency）进行招聘”**，即招募那些补齐短板所需时间与成本最低的人。在 Alex 的认知框架中，并不存在“态度”与“能力”的对立划分，因为所谓的态度本就是一系列微小技能的集合体。 | 岗位的技能要求级别 | 招聘侧重与考量 | 训练成本权衡 | |:--- |:--- |:--- | | **低技能岗位**（如纸杯蛋糕店收银员） | **侧重“态度”**（准时、微笑、待人友善） | 收银机操作只需 30 分钟即可学会；而微笑、情绪调节等“态度”实则是多项复杂技能的打包，极难在短时间内速成。 | | **高技能岗位**（如负责并购的 CFO） | **侧重“专业能力”**（拥有 10 年 M&A 财务实操经验） | 无法在几周内教会一个人长达 10 年的并购财务经验；相比之下，教一个高阶专家在特定场景下保持友好，耗时反而要短得多。 | --- ### [01:09:36](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Kl-I7sUcAOY&t=4176s) 做仁慈的管理者，而非表面上的老好人（Kind, Not Nice）很多管理者和创始人之所以抗拒指出员工细枝末节的错误，是因为害怕被视作挑剔苛刻的独裁者，他们将过多精力放在了维系“人好”（Nice）的表面形象上。Alex 和 Steven 指出，这是对管理职责的根本性误解。 - **核心准则：“Kind, Not Nice”（要仁慈，不要当老好人）**：如果一位管理者放任员工犯小错而不予纠正，导致其最终因业绩不达标被解雇，这种“老好人”态度本质上是极端的残忍（Unkind）。 - **真正的仁慈**：在日常细节中不厌其烦地给出纠偏反馈，竭尽全力提升该员工在其岗位上获得成功的概率。正如 Alex 所总结的，员工被解雇从来不是因为管理者提了太多即时反馈，而是因为管理者平时什么都不说，最后直接给了一纸辞退通知。 ### [01:10:31](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Kl-I7sUcAOY&t=4231s) 批评与侮辱的区别：“停止、开始与保持”行为框架在团队管理中，问题的产生往往不是因为单一的重大过失，而是上百个细枝末节的错误累积而成的。大多数员工内心都渴望把工作做好、渴望取得成功并获得晋升。管理者如果能迅速帮他们纠正这些细小偏差，就能将成功的概率最大化。这种文化必须从员工入职第一天就确立下来——例如在过销售话术时哪怕只推进了三分之一、中途打断纠正30次，也是为了树立明确的预期：“在这里，我们发现问题就会改，而且改得极快。” 很多管理者常犯的致命错误是将“侮辱”与“批评”混为一谈。亚历克斯·霍尔莫齐（Alex Hormozi）在团队培训中明确界定了两者的界限： * **批评（Criticism）**：客观指出“实际情况”与“预期目标”之间的差距。例如：“你本该准时到岗，但本周你迟到了两次。”这属于纯粹、客观的事实差距。 * **侮辱（Insult）**：在客观差距之上附加主观价值判断。例如追加一句：“你太懒了。” ```mermaid flowchart TD accTitle: 区分批评与侮辱的管理反馈模型 accDescr: 展示管理者如何将主观情绪判断拆解为客观差距并转化为具体行为指导 subgraph Evaluation["评估阶段"] A["观察到员工偏差"] --> B{"反馈方式选择"} end subgraph WrongWay["错误反馈（情绪化）"] B -->|"附加主观判断"| C["侮辱 (Insult) '你太懒了 / 你情商低'"] C --> D["触发杏仁核防御 员工受挫且不知所措"] end subgraph RightWay["正确反馈（行动导向）"] B -->|"陈述客观差距"| E["批评 (Criticism) 实际表现 vs 预期标准"] E --> F["行为条件设定 (Stop-Start-Keep) '当情境X发生时，执行动作Y'"] F --> G["具体行动与即时改变"] end ``` 管理者若想提升团队表现，必须彻底剔除侮辱性语言，专注于事实差距，并运用“停止（Stop）、开始（Start）、保持（Keep）”的框架，告诉对方下一步究竟该怎么做。 ### [01:11:38](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Kl-I7sUcAOY&t=4298s) 实战案例：如何改造一名被全员孤立的高管霍尔莫齐分享了一起真实案例。公司曾有一位总监级别的核心骨干，业务能力极其过硬，但在人际交往上存在严重缺陷——简而言之，“所有人都觉得他是个混蛋（dick）”。这位总监先后与四位执行层高管谈过话，但言行毫无改观。最终他怀着忐忑的心情走进霍尔莫齐的办公室，甚至担忧地问：“我是不是要被开除了？”霍尔莫齐当场打消了他的顾虑，直言：“如果要开除你，找你谈话的会是 HR，而不是我。” 霍尔莫齐开门见山地为这次谈话设立了共同目标：“我的目标是降低未来别人骂你是混蛋的概率，你认同这个目标吗？”对方立刻表示赞同。随后霍尔莫齐挑明：“我不在乎你骨子里是不是个混蛋，我只在乎别人别再这么认为你，也别再让我卷进这些破事里。” 此前其他管理层给他的反馈全都是抽象的抱怨——“哥们，别再当个混蛋了”，这种反馈除了让对方感到受辱之外毫无建设性。霍尔莫齐则将其彻底拆解为具体的触发情境与对应行为： 1. **打断他人讲话**：“当别人说话时，闭嘴。耐心等对方讲完；如果你不确定对方讲完没有，主动问一句‘你讲完了吗？’” 2. **越界指手画脚**：“当你打算对其他部门的运作指手画脚提出不请自来的建议时，别开口；或者先礼貌询问‘你需要建议吗？’，如果对方说不需要，就一个字都别说。” 在这场针对三到四个具体行为的梳理之后，该总监在短短一周之内判若两人，同事们甚至惊呼他像换了个人。霍尔莫齐强调，这个人本质并不坏，他只是之前根本不知道在特定情境下该如何得体地行动。教学的核心在于建立“特定条件（Condition）与对应行为（Behavior）”的映射规则，而不是靠嗓门斥责对方“提升绩效”或“搞好人际关系”。 ### [01:14:08](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Kl-I7sUcAOY&t=4448s) 将模糊评价转化为可量化的“隐形绩效改善计划” 管理中最困难的一步，其实是管理者自我反思的过程：我为什么会觉得某人“懒惰”或“讨厌”？管理者必须把这种下意识的情绪判断，逆向还原为支持该结论的事实数据。霍尔莫齐以虚拟员工桑迪（Sandy）为例：如果你心里觉得她很懒，需要先搜集事实依据： * **响应时效**：在 Slack 上发消息，她经常延迟 1 到 3 个小时才回复。 * **交付质量**：提交的项目方案不够完整、缺乏深度推敲。 * **专业形象**：每次接入 Zoom 视频会议时，整个人显得邋里邋遢。管理者绝不能直接去质问桑迪：“你看起来太懒了，赶紧给我提高点，否则就得进绩效改善计划（PIP）。”正确的做法是直接推行实际的改善方案，而不必挂上吓人的标签： * **视频参会规范**：将背景统一更换为公司标准虚拟背景（遮挡杂乱的卧室）；腰部以上必须保持职业形象，穿带领子的衬衫并把头发梳理整齐。 * **即时通讯响应**：工作时间（9:00 至 17:00）内必须开启 Slack 通知，且消息响应时间不得超过 10 分钟。通过向对方确认这些清晰的行为标准能否达成，最终的目标依然是“帮助你摆脱‘懒惰’的标签”。斯蒂芬·巴特利特（Steven Bartlett）对此总结道，这种具体化沟通实际上是将大脑的反应机制从负责情绪与防御的“杏仁核”，转移到了负责理性执行的“前额叶皮层”，让员工能够将精力投入到切实有用的行动中。 ### [01:16:03](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Kl-I7sUcAOY&t=4563s) 创始人招聘防坑指南：承认自身局限与去中心化决策针对正准备开启早期招聘的创业者，巴特利特提出了一个核心假说：创业初期避免踩坑的最佳方式，就是“永久假定自己极度不擅长招聘”。因为每个人都带有认知盲区和主观偏见，一旦承认自己在这方面能力有限，创始人就会主动将招聘决策权去中心化。巴特利特建议，在招聘销售人员等关键岗位时，可以组建一个5人面试委员会，创始人自己只占其中一票，其余4人则邀请创始人认知范围内最顶尖的专业人士——甚至包括当初把自己房子卖给你的顶级房产经纪人，借用他们的专业眼光来把关。霍尔莫齐对此高度认同，并补充指出：**背景调查和推荐背书的深度，应该与该岗位的重要性完全成正比**。 ### [01:17:00](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Kl-I7sUcAOY&t=4620s) Skool创始人面试600人的启示与咨询顾问的“快速学习法” 霍尔莫齐以社群平台 Skool（skool.com）为例印证这一观点。Skool 是霍尔莫齐除 Acquisition.com 之外唯一公开参与投资的重要平台，定位于在线教育与媒体深度融合的社群载体。Skool 的创始人萨姆·奥文斯（Sam Ovens）本身是一个完全不懂技术的非技术型创始人，但他深知要打造世界一流的软件，必须拥有世界顶级的技术合伙人。为了找到最终成为联合创始人兼 CTO 的丹尼尔（Daniel），萨姆累计面试了整整 600 名开发者。他的寻找过程采取了一种递推式的人脉搜寻机制： * 询问所有人：“你认识的最牛的程序员是谁？” * 顺着线索找到那批顶尖程序员，再问他们：“在你们眼里，谁才是最厉害的编程大神？” * 如此层层递进、不断溯源，最终所有人的推荐都指向了处于“神级（god tier）”水准的丹尼尔。萨姆想方设法与其取得联系并成功说服对方加入。这种递归式的人才与智慧搜寻，直接引申出了霍尔莫齐早年从事管理咨询时的“极速学习法”。霍尔莫齐回忆，自己 22 岁刚出校门做咨询顾问时，一年前还在大学里通宵畅饮啤酒，转眼却要硬着头皮向拥有 30 年军旅资历的四星上将做汇报，讲解连自己都一无所知的尖端武器系统。在极度缺乏行业经验的情况下迅速掌握一个领域并显得极为内行的咨询秘诀，第一步就是锁定该领域的 5 位资深专家：向业内人士询问“列出你认识的在这一细分领域最厉害的 5 个人”，借由顶级专业圈层的智慧沉淀迅速建立认知体系。 ### [01:18:54](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Kl-I7sUcAOY&t=4734s) 专家网络与“免费咨询式”面试法 Alex Hormozi 讲述了在管理咨询行业中分析师的高效学习框架。这套方法起源于他当年负责的一个航空航天与网络安全（Space and Cyber）咨询项目。在该项目中，分析师团队收集了超过 600 页的专家访谈原始速记。在信息爆炸的时代，缺乏的不是信息（任何人都能用 Google 搜索），而是如何建立高质量的信息过滤器——专家们花费了数年甚至数十年提炼出最具杠杆价值的核心认知。因此，分析师的第一步是将这些原始笔记按类别重新归类，第二步是将分类笔记提纯并整合成对特定武器系统（或业务模块）的核心结论与信念，第三步则是基于这些事实推导出行动指南：正确的状态是什么、痛点在哪里、潜在的解决方案是什么，进而拍板下一步该怎么做。 ```mermaid flowchart TD accTitle: 咨询式信息提纯与面试验证流程 accDescr: 展示从专家访谈到面试评估的递进链条 subgraph Phase1["信息萃取与学习流程"] A["600页专家访谈原始速记"] --> B["按业务类别重新归纳分类"] B --> C["提纯为底层信念与核心认知"] C --> D["推导业务问题与具体落地行动"] end subgraph Phase2["高阶人才面试转化"] D --> E["抛出公司真实业务痛点"] E --> F["让候选人提供推演方案（获取免费咨询）"] F --> G["考察指标维度、落地行为与商业变现链路"] end ``` 这种向专家请教并萃取认知的框架，完全可以移植到高端人才的面试中。对于初创公司创始人而言，越是高级别的管理或技术人才，创始人越应该把面试当成一次“向咨询顾问偷师”的过程。你可以直接把公司当前面临的、该岗位职能管辖范围内的真实业务难题抛给对方，坦诚发问：“如果是你，你会如何解决这个问题？”随后静静观察候选人所考量的考量维度、思维框架以及切入路径。当你连续聊过四五个顶级候选人后，你不仅获得了价值连城的免费业务诊断方案，还能横向对比出不同人的认知水位。 ### [01:20:44](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Kl-I7sUcAOY&t=4844s) 识别行家与“扯淡者”的三层标准如何真正识破一个候选人是在夸夸其谈还是真才实学？Alex 强调，新手与顶尖专家的本质差异在于思考的细腻程度以及对指标的粒度把控： - **初学者的二元对立思维**：新手看待结果往往是黑白二分的，比如遇到营销挫折，他们会得出极其宽泛的结论：“营销根本行不通”或“投广告没有用”。 - **顶尖专家的细分诊断思维**：专家会精准定位到转化漏斗的微观瓶颈，比如指出“这次广告效果不好，是因为点击率（CTR）太低”、“带来的流量质量不够高，在落地页无法有效转化”，或者“用户在四步转化漏斗中，停留在第一步没有推进到第二步”。面对销售或客服类岗位的考核，Alex 会刨根问底：“你平时追踪哪些指标？你会采取哪些具体行为来拉动这些指标？这些行为到底如何帮公司赚钱？”以客服代表为例，如果对方只会说“我的工作就是回答客户问题”，那他充其量只是个普通打工人；如果对方能有条理地回答：“当我妥善解答问题时，我提升了客户转介新客户的概率，降低了流失率并维持了订阅续费；同时，在适当时机我会推荐配套产品并转介给销售同事，从而创造增量收入”，那么这种深刻理解自身岗位与商业利润之间逻辑链路的人，往往具备总监级别的格局与实力。面对候选人抛出的宏观辞藻（例如“我会对销售团队进行辅导激励”），创始人应当像剥洋葱一样步步紧逼：“这意味着什么？你具体如何操作？”优秀的实干家会清晰描述具体动作：“我们每天早上准时集合，对照标准脚本进行半小时的角色扮演与话术实战演练。”正如物理学家理查德·费曼（Richard Feynman）的名言——如果你不能用浅显直白的话向一个小孩子解释清楚，说明你自己还没真正理解它。在面试中用大词把创始人绕晕的候选人，要么是肚子里面没有货，要么是居心叵测在刻意隐瞒。 Alex 总结出的三层面试评估维度： - **追踪指标的广度与质量**：候选人关注的是虚荣指标，还是深度切中业务脉搏的过程指标。 - **改写指标的微观行为动作**：候选人能否详细拆解出他们日常每天具体做什么去干预和改变该指标。 - **自下而上的创收链路理解**：这些微观行为和业务指标，最终究竟如何一步步汇聚转化成公司的净利润与现金流。 ### [01:24:30](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Kl-I7sUcAOY&t=5070s) 囊中羞涩时如何撬动顶级大牛：“这需要什么条件？” Steven Bartlett 提出了早期创业者普遍遭遇的剧痛场景：在车库或卧室创业的阶段，创始人常常盯上某家头部大厂的顶尖技术骨干或核心 CTO，心中默念“如果能把他拉入伙，整个公司的命运将被彻底改写”。然而对方在大厂拿着极高年薪、享受着丰厚福利与极高稳定性，初创团队在资金捉襟见肘的情况下，到底该如何说服他们离开舒适区加盟？ Alex 将引才筹码拆解为软硬两个层面。在硬性条件方面，如果现金吃紧，创始人需要用好权益与期权杠杆。他特别强调，非软件类创业公司往往容易忽视“股权”内部包含的四个独立权利维度： | 权益核心要素 | 核心定义与归属 | 早期引才常见约定 | |:--- |:--- |:--- | | **控制权 (Control)** | 谁在最终决策上说了算，决定战略拍板权 | 创始人通常必须牢牢握在手中，不轻易让渡 | | **法律与债务风险 (Risk)** | 公司出现巨额负债或经营失败时谁来承担连带责任 | 绝大多数高级雇员绝不愿意承担个人连带风险 | | **日常分红 (Profits)** | 业务实际产生的现金流与阶段性利润分配权 | 可通过分红协议灵活设计，作为现金工资的补充 | | **资本增值/出售红利 (Enterprise Value / Sale)** | 未来公司出售、并购或资本化时享受的退出溢价 | 通过期权、增值权合同绑定，分享远期成功成果 | 即使不直接给大额原始股，创始人也可以通过各种灵活的合同条款（如虚拟股权、利润分红池、里程碑清算权益）来对这些要素进行自由重组与切割。而在谈判心法层面，Alex 认为创业者最大的误区是试图预设一整套复杂的说服话术去硬推。他最推崇的一个极具杀伤力的提问是：**“这需要什么条件？”（"What would it take?"）** 创始人往往并不清楚对方内心真正渴望的是什么——可能是厌倦了体制内的官僚内耗、渴望更大的自主权、需要更高的远期资本增值，亦或是需要弹性的远程办公环境。直接坦诚地把皮球踢给对方：“我们要怎样才能让你心动并加入我们？”这种问法在心理上直接默认了“成交是完全有可能的，现在只需商量具体条款与解决障碍”，不仅卸下了防备，更能让对方主动亮出底牌，引导出真正的交易条件。 ### [01:26:46](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Kl-I7sUcAOY&t=5206s) 招聘本质上就是融资：向人才兜售愿景史蒂文·巴特利特（Steven Bartlett）指出，亚历克斯·霍尔莫齐（Alex Hormozi）的很多著作与内容核心都围绕着“销售”展开，而招揽卓越人才加入团队本质上也是一场高难度的心理学销售。巴特利特援引了史蒂夫·乔布斯（Steve Jobs）当年劝说百事可乐高管约翰·斯卡利（John Sculley）加入苹果时的传世名言：“你是想后半辈子继续卖糖水，还是想跟我一起改变世界？”他询问霍尔莫齐，在这种说服顶尖人才的沟通过程中，情感与心理层面的驱动力究竟扮演着怎样的角色。 ```mermaid flowchart LR accTitle: 招聘早期核心成员与向投资人融资的逻辑对比 accDescr: 展示创始人向核心人才推介与向风险投资人推介的本质相同性，区别仅在于投入资产的形式不同。 subgraph PITCH["创始人推介的核心本质"] A["公司愿景与使命"] end subgraph INVESTOR["向投资人募资"] B["投资标的：资金资本"] end subgraph TALENT["向核心人才招募"] C["投资标的：时间、生命与专业技能"] end PITCH --> B PITCH --> C ``` 霍尔莫齐将这一过程串联回之前提及的商业直觉故事。他强调，无论面对潜在的联合创始人还是早期的核心管理层，创始人所做的推介演讲与面对投资人时几乎毫无二致。唯一的区别在于：投资人投入的是资金资本，而顶尖人才投入的是他们不可再生的时间、专业技能乃至整个人生。因此，向顶级人才推销岗位，本质上就是在向他们募集最为昂贵的人力资产。 - **乔布斯名言的本质**：直击人类杏仁核与深层价值追求，将平庸的日常工作与改变世界的宏大叙事形成极致反差。 - **人才招聘的投资属性**：早期员工承受着高风险，创始人必须以对待领投人般的同等尊重和商业逻辑向他们阐明未来的商业回报与使命价值。 --- ### [01:27:45](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Kl-I7sUcAOY&t=5265s) 招聘中的“杠铃策略”：初生牛犊与行业老将关于初创企业应该招聘缺乏经验但充满新思路的“新手”，还是雇佣资深稳妥但昂贵常规的“老兵”，巴特利特认为许多创业公司往往在这两极之间摇摆并走入极端。霍尔莫齐则直言自己在这一点上态度非常鲜明，他近期与 ButcherBox 的首席执行官深入讨论过这一话题，并提出了明确的**“杠铃策略”（Barbell Strategy）**：在人才结构的两端大力布局，尽可能剔除处于夹心层的人才。霍尔莫齐极力推崇两类人：一端是年轻、渴望成长的新人，他们愿意投入超长工时、全情投入并用大量的重复实践弥补经验不足；另一端则是处于职业生涯后半程的资深老手。这批老兵早已实现了财富自由，他们不愁找工作，也绝非霍尔莫齐最讨厌的**“职业官僚”（Careerists）**——他们不执着于虚荣的头衔、升职加薪路线图或办公室政治，他们唯一的加入标准只是一个基础的报酬底线，留下的真实动力纯粹是热爱做这件事本身。他们凭借几十年的经验，用高杠杆的战略为公司规避风险、放大成效。最让企业头痛、流失率也最高的反而是处于中间层的人。这部分人往往斤斤计较于微小的权力、职位和利益互换，陷入一种“我贡献了一点点，你就必须立刻回报我”的狭隘交易关系中。霍尔莫齐特别澄清，这种划分并非取决于生理年龄，而是取决于认知与心态：“你来到这里究竟是为了追求个人爆发式的学习成长，还是为了倾囊相授自己的认知经验？”中间层往往两者皆失，成为组织内最大的阻力来源。 --- ### [01:29:46](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Kl-I7sUcAOY&t=5386s) 第一性原理与客户成功的“4 R”框架当巴特利特问及“无知”（Naivety）在创新中扮演的角色时，霍尔莫齐肯定了初生牛犊不怕虎的颠覆力：“如果你根本不知道一个行业原本规定的‘条条框框’是怎样的，你反而能够颠覆它。”这就是第一性原理的体现——抛弃所有既定行规，仅从几条绝对真理出发去推导路径。即便有时候这种探索只是“重新推导出了早已存在的方案”，创始人也能彻底理解其运作底层逻辑，从而拥有不可动摇的执行底气。霍尔莫齐以一个最朴素的商业真理举例：“如果客户疯狂热爱我的产品，他们向别人推荐的可能性就远高于他们讨厌产品的时候。”基于这一确定性，团队就可以将其拆解为细致入微的运营指标：在什么时间节点触达客户、在何种体验节点消除转介绍摩擦、如何设计奖励机制。为了系统化这一过程，霍尔莫齐总结了一套适用于任何实体、服务或软件业务的客户生命周期里程碑——**“4 R 框架”**： | 阶段 | 核心目标 (4 R) | 业务执行重点 | |:--- |:--- |:--- | | **第一步** | **留存 (Retain)** | 在交易完成后以最快速度提供首发价值，确保客户在初期不流失。 | | **第二步** | **好评 (Review)** | 在客户体验达到愉悦峰值时降低发声阻力，引导其产生正面评价与社媒分享。 | | **第三步** | **推荐 (Refer)** | 消除转介绍朋友时的各类操作摩擦，同时提供匹配的激励手段。 | | **第四步** | **复购 (Resell)** | 对高度满意的客户进行二次销售或增购，挖掘深层长期客户价值（LTV）。 | 霍尔莫齐指出，所谓的“客户成功”不是抽象的高深概念，一切活动都是为了倒推并提升这四个“R”发生的概率。 --- ### [01:33:07](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Kl-I7sUcAOY&t=5587s) 创业者的情绪过山车：六阶段崩溃循环在谈及获客之前，巴特利特展示了一张霍尔莫齐曾绘制的情绪循环图表，指出新晋创业者在面临残酷洗礼前必须具备心理准备，否则陷入低谷时便会怀疑人生。霍尔莫齐将这套创业生命周期模型称为打破死循环前必须经历的成长考验，其中前三个关键阶段几乎所有人都会经历： ```mermaid flowchart TD accTitle: 创业者情绪生命周期前三阶段 accDescr: 展示创业者从盲目乐观跌入绝望之谷的心路历程及分流点。 subgraph CYCLE["情绪过山车演变过程"] S1["第一阶段：无知的乐观 (Uninformed Optimism) 看到表面风光，误以为创业很容易"] S2["第二阶段：知情的悲观 (Informed Pessimism) 亲自下场碰壁，发现难度与复杂性远超预期"] S3["第三阶段：绝望之谷 / 意义危机 (Valley of Despair) 持续努力却持续失败，来到命运分水岭"] end SPLIT{"抉择分流"} CHURN["转向新项目 (盲目开始下一个循环)"] BREAK["穿透谷底实现突破 (极少数人)"] S1 --> S2 S2 --> S3 S3 --> SPLIT SPLIT -->|绝大多数人| CHURN SPLIT -->|坚持复盘突破| BREAK ``` 1. **无知的乐观（Uninformed Optimism）**：创始人看到朋友在某个领域赚了大钱，或者在网上刷到了某种商机（例如烘焙纸杯蛋糕、割草服务或炒币），觉得前景一片光明。这种乐观纯粹来源于无知，因为当事人根本不知道具体落地需要付出怎样的代价。 2. **知情的悲观（Informed Pessimism）**：一旦真正卷起袖子下场，才发现里面涉及的变量和环节繁琐复杂，现实远比预想的残酷得多。 3. **绝望之谷 / 意义危机（Crisis of Meaning / The Valley of Despair）**：创业者拼命干活，但事情依然毫无起色；继续加班加点，结果依然是持续失败。这是所有创业者命运分流的“真理时刻”。绝大多数人在此刻会选择放弃并寻找新的退路，他们会看着远处说：“哎，好像我另一个朋友做的那个东西更有前途，也许我该转行去做那个。”从而重新跌回下一个“无知乐观”的恶性循环之中。 ### [01:35:00](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Kl-I7sUcAOY&t=5700s) 走出绝望之谷：红衣女郎与“另一边的草地” 创业者的情绪循环往往存在两个截然相反的走向：绝大多数人从盲目乐观（uninformed optimism）跌入知情悲观（informed pessimism），滑落至绝望之谷后，选择放弃并换一个新方向，重新陷入另一场盲目乐观，结果就是“用整整20年的人生重复度过同一个6个月”。而另一条突破路径，是在绝望之谷中死磕到底。只有坚持留下来，你才会成为一名知情乐观者（informed optimist）——你不仅深谙业务中所有的暗坑与糟糕之处，更摸清了它的优势所在，学会了如何规避风险并放大收益，最终达成最初设想的目标。 ```mermaid flowchart TD accTitle: 创业情绪周期与红衣女郎陷阱 accDescr: 展示创业者在盲目乐观、知情悲观、绝望之谷以及分流至红衣女郎死循环或知情乐观成功路径的流程图 subgraph Phase1["初期阶段"] A["盲目乐观 (Uninformed Optimism)"] --> B["知情悲观 (Informed Pessimism)"] B --> C["绝望之谷 (Valley of Despair)"] end subgraph Loop["分流一：死循环"] C --> D["诱惑：红衣女郎 (新项目/分心)"] D -->|重启循环| A end subgraph Success["分流二：突围路径"] C -->|坚持深耕| E["知情乐观 (Informed Optimist)"] E --> F["达成目标 (长期复利壁垒)"] end ``` Alex Hormozi 将这种致命的诱惑借喻为电影《黑客帝国》（The Matrix）中的经典桥段——“红衣女郎”（The Woman in the Red Dress）。墨菲斯（Morpheus）带着尼奥（Neo）穿过熙熙攘攘的虚拟街头，当墨菲斯问尼奥是否在听他说话时，尼奥正目不转睛地盯着那位惊艳的红衣女郎；墨菲斯让他再看一眼，红衣女郎已化身为用枪顶着尼奥脑袋的特工史密斯（Agent Smith）。在商业世界中，红衣女郎就是那个看似光鲜、实则摧毁你现有机会的幻象。Alex 用两性关系打比方：当你与自己的业务相处久了，看到它卸了妆、穿着卫裤、睡觉打呼噜且喜怒无常，你开始犹豫要不要跟它“结婚”；此时街角走过一个红衣女郎，你以为找到了真爱而移情别恋，跳过去才发现对方不仅一堆毛病，身后还跟着一个难缠的前男友。 Alex 动情地回忆起 Gym Launch 初期聘请的一位功勋 CFO。这位资深女性高管职业生涯极其辉煌，曾带领4家企业实现从0到1亿美元的跃升，主导过40多起并购交易（最大一笔规模高达50亿美元）。当时 Alex 才26或27岁，妻子 Leila 只有23或24岁，面对这位步入职业生涯尾声的老将，夫妻俩如同小学生般恳求指点。这位操着浓重南方口音的高管留下了一句让 Alex 铭记终生的箴言：“另一边的草地看起来总是更绿，只是因为你不知道它下面是用狗屎施的肥（The grass is always greener on the other side, you just don't know that it's fertilized with sh*t）。”所有商业模式背后都有难以下咽的破事，留在当下的业务里，面对的至少是你已知的问题，而不是未知的深坑。 - 资深 CFO 履历：带领过4家公司跨越 0 至 1 亿美元门槛，操盘超 40 起并购，单笔最高达 50 亿美元。 - 盲目跳槽与转型的本质：用已知的麻烦去置换未知的麻烦。 ### [01:38:44](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Kl-I7sUcAOY&t=5924s) 极致聚焦：承诺就是彻底切断退路 Alex 坦言自己长期受创业多动症（entrepreneurial ADD）和错失恐惧（FOMO, Fear of Missing Out）困扰，早年频繁分散精力做多个项目，犯下了职业生涯中最沉重的错误。直到2024至2025年，他才第一次真正战胜了 FOMO。现在的他如果听到别人在某个新赛道大赚特赚，心境会非常平和：“那对他们来说太棒了，但我相信背后必然存在我不知道的一大堆难题。而我要继续做手上这件我唯一擅长的事情，对那些自以为简单而盲目涌入的对手构筑信息与认知的复利优势。” 对于聚焦与承诺，Alex 给出了颠覆常规的深刻定义： 1. **衡量专注的尺度**：不是你做了多少事，而是你“所拒绝事项的数量与质量”。 2. **承诺的本质**：是对所有备选项的彻底根除（elimination of alternatives）。如同婚姻是通过排除除配偶外的所有人来达成终极承诺一样，优秀的创业者要想把业务规模做大5倍乃至10倍，唯一的做法就是“破釜沉舟（burning the boats）”，彻底斩断所有后路。构筑无法分心的生活结构，在绝望之谷中扼杀所有逃跑的念头，才能冲过分水岭，迎来知情乐观与商业壁垒。 ### [01:40:40](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Kl-I7sUcAOY&t=6040s) 警惕自负陷阱：当头棒喝的“赛道耳光” Steven Bartlett 对此深有共鸣，并补充了创业者在“意义危机（crisis of meaning）”时刻的另一种逃避机制：他们往往不舍得直接关停旧业务，而是热衷于不断堆叠新项目。很多年轻人在健身房遇到 Steven 寻求建议时，会滔滔不绝地罗列三四个并行的摊子——一边和朋友做加密货币，一边在电商平台卖护发产品，手头还在折腾别的项目，仿佛经手的项目越多，成功的概率就越高。Steven 透露自己的母亲也是这种模式的典型受害者：童年时期他眼睁睁看着母亲先后创办了20到30家企业，美发沙龙刚开业，听到隔壁做房产中介赚大钱就转头去搞房产，遇到挫折后又去开家具店，每家店几乎都在6个月左右陷入绝望之谷并关门倒闭，像猴子荡秋千一样不停换枝头，一生都未能积累起实现逃逸速度（escape velocity）的知情乐观。 Alex 指出：“创业在本质上是一场内心的较量，而非大脑的较量（a war of the heart than it is a war of the mind）。”人们完全明白应该做什么，只是在情绪的本能驱使下做不到；每个人给别人提建议时都条理清晰，如果能按自己的建议去执行早就能成功。针对这种贪多嚼不烂的现象，Alex 戏称为需要给创业者狠狠来记“赛道耳光（Niche slap）”，打醒那些妄图脚踩多只船的人。任何一个细分赛道都能跑通，前提是你必须独宠其一。Alex 一针见血地指出，以为自己同时做三件事能击败那些专注做一件事的人，纯粹是一种傲慢（an exercise in arrogance）与自负（ego）。在任何一个领域里，那个最终打败你的竞争对手，必然是押上全部身心只死磕那一件事的人。Alex 承认自己当年也陷入过这种虚荣——在运营 Gym Launch 模式的同时，手里不仅攥着6家健身房，还兼顾着一家脊椎按摩诊所营销机构以及一家牙科诊所营销机构，沉醉在向他人炫耀多重身份的虚妄满足中。 ### [01:43:19](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Kl-I7sUcAOY&t=6199s) 投资组合与执行专注：所有者与 CEO 的认知误区许多创业者在初入商海时，最容易混淆的概念就是“所有者”（Owner）与“首席执行官”（CEO）之间的本质差异。Alex 指出，很多新手看到资深投资人或成功企业家坐拥庞大的企业投资组合（Portfolio），便盲目效仿，以为自己也应该同时开启好几条赛道。这种荒谬的模仿逻辑，无异于“看到别人身材高大去打篮球，就以为自己只要去打篮球也能长高”，或者“以为要想变富就必须先坐私人飞机”。这种因果倒置严重忽视了成功的“时序原则”：获得超额商业回报的前提，是必须先倾尽全力、心无旁骛地攻克一件事。尤其是处于创业初期的阶段，创业者本就对商业运转的各个环节缺乏经验，面对无数盲区。如果在这个时候同时开启三个业务，就相当于强迫自己在同一时间内征服三倍的未知世界。不少人陷入一种自欺欺人的思维陷阱：“我先把这些项目全部试一遍，看看哪个能跑通。”然而真相是，没有任何一个会成功。商业不是碰运气，在遵循基本商业常识的前提下（比如不在做赔本赚吆喝的买卖），几乎任何成熟行业——不论是房地产、美发沙龙还是割草服务——都有人在赚钱。任何一个赛道只要深耕都能做大，但你绝不可能“同时”把所有赛道都做成。Alex 回忆起 Steven 刚进演播室坐下时，谈及自己的业务状态只用了一句“做同样的事，并且做得更好”（More of the same and better）。这种返璞归真的智慧，正是从无数次血泪教训与痛苦中沉淀出来的。 ```mermaid flowchart TD accTitle: 创业时序与专注力陷阱 accDescr: 展示了盲目分散精力与专注深耕在不同时间阶段上的回报差异 subgraph 错误模式["常见认知陷阱：分散精力"] A1["过早建立所谓'投资组合'"] --> B1["同时开辟 3+ 业务赛道"] B1 --> C1["被多重未知与复杂性击垮"] C1 --> D1["所有业务停滞不前"] end subgraph 正确时序["成功路径：时序深耕"] A2["极端专注单一商业模型"] --> B2["经历 0 到 1 的磨砺与复利积累"] B2 --> C2["形成成熟现金流与壁垒"] C2 --> D2["具备所有者视角再做拓展"] end ``` ### [01:44:59](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Kl-I7sUcAOY&t=6299s) 复利的代价：为什么你必须“主动留钱在桌上” Alex 坦白，自己职业生涯中犯过的每一个重大错误，根源全都在于“精力的分散”。当年他在自己的健身房授权许可业务（Licensing company）上，生生强加了一个电商业态。结果非但没有如愿双丰收，主营业务的营收增长反而立刻踩下刹车。之所以会犯这种低级错误，仅仅是因为贪恋眼前的小利，觉得“不想把利润留在桌面上”。对此，Alex 语气极其笃定地强调：在创业中，你“注定”要把钱留在桌上，而这正是保持专注的必然代价。你主动放弃这张桌子上的蝇头小利，是为了守住并追求另一张桌子上规模宏大得多的复利财富。人们往往缺乏对长期复利的正确评估视角。很多创业者在原业务打拼到第三年时，萌生了想要跳槽开辟新赛道的念头。当他们在对比“新赛道第 0 年”与“老业务第 0 年”时，可能会觉得新赛道爆发力更强；但现实生活是线性流动的，真正摆在面前的选择，是“新业务的第 0 年”能否击败“老业务从第 3 年迈向第 4 年”所累积的巨大复利加速度。几乎所有取得极高商业成就的企业家，无一不是在单一业务上咬牙坚持了不可思议的超长时间。正如商业思想家 Shane Parrish 所言：“成功就是在异乎寻常的漫长时间里做显而易见的事情，并且始终不自作聪明（Success is doing the obvious thing for an extraordinary period of time without believing that you're smarter than you are）。”我们本就知道该怎么做，规模化自会带来复杂度，根本不需要在起跑时就亲手把事情搞复杂。 - **注意力分散的代价**：主营业务失去增长动能，团队精力与管理带宽被迅速稀释。 - **复利的线性误区**：不可拿新业务的起步期增速（Year 0）与老业务起步期对比，必须正视它与老业务即将到来的爆发期（Year 3 到 4）之间的巨大机会成本。 - **认知的反向陷阱**：在单一模型跑通前做“加法”，往往不是高瞻远瞩，而是对深水区困难的潜意识逃避。 ### [01:47:01](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Kl-I7sUcAOY&t=6421s) 击败关底 Boss 与十年长跑的真实时间线创业就像一场关卡明确的通关游戏。许多人之所以频繁更换赛道，是因为他们只掌握了击败前三关小 Boss 的技能。每当打到第四关卡关时，他们就骗自己说：“只要换一个新赛道从头开始，这次一定不一样。”但结果他们只是在新的领域里重新爬到第三关，随后再次被同一道坎卡死。破局的唯一方式，是勇敢直面未知，坚信只要进行足够多次的有效尝试，谜题终将被解开。即使是最不起眼的传统行业——哪怕是理发店或干洗店——只要把本职服务做到极致并长期坚持，就能形成可持续的盈利模型，进而通过特许经营、授权、引入外部资本或全国直营扩张到年营收上亿美元。Alex 直言，没有任何一门基础生意是做不到年入一亿美金的，所谓的“疯狂目标”，往往只是因为创始人设定了“疯狂且不切实际的时间线”；只要把时间线拉长到 10 年乃至 20 年，几乎任何商业宏愿都能达成。现实的创业节奏远比大众想象的残酷。大部分百亿美元巨头都是在创办的第 6 到 10 年之间才迎来指数级飞跃。可悲的是，很多自称创业 5 年的人，其实只是在过去 5 年里不断更换项目，当前手头的业务才刚刚做了 6 个月。每一次重启，都把通往 10 年大成的时间钟摆彻底拨回了原点。通常而言，创业者前 5 年往往都在跌跌撞撞地摸索“究竟哪边才是正北方向”，后 5 年才是真正将成熟模式放大、沉淀下世代财富（Generational wealth）的攻坚期。 - **通关 Boss 困境**：换赛道无法掩盖能力短板，避开第四关的深水区挑战只会导致人生陷入前三关的低水平循环。 - **百亿生意的规律**：真正的质变与爆发往往孕育在第 6 至第 10 年的耐力积累期。 - **重启的时钟惩罚**：随意转换方向，本质上是在用虚假的新鲜感消耗最宝贵的复合增长时间。 ### [01:49:28](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Kl-I7sUcAOY&t=6568s) 辞职初期的错觉与未经验证的商业假设很多人辞掉工作全职创业的初衷，是为了摆脱沉重的工作压力并赚更多的钱。但冷酷的真相是：一旦你递交辞呈，在接下来的近五年时间里，你大概率会比上一份工作更加疲于奔命，而挣到的钱却远远少于打工时期。唯一的精神慰藉在于，你可以全权掌控自己的命运，并理直气壮地为每一分收益与每一滴汗水负责，哪怕自嘲“我的老板是个蠢货，而那个蠢货正是我自己”。这种“盲目乐观的无知”（Optimistic ignorance）恰恰是推动创业者迈出第一步的救赎特质。然而，创业路上最凶险的心智陷阱随之而来。当你第一次辞职单干并赚到新公司的第一笔钱时，那种精神上的狂喜与自由感是无与伦比的。但这笔钱会形成极其强烈的心智奖励，不经意间在你的脑海中强化了一个极其危险的习惯：它奖励了你“果断停下正在做的事情，转头去开辟全新事物”的行为。许多人从此沉迷于这种“弃船开新局”的短期多巴胺刺激，而这恰恰是迈向伟大企业前必须立刻忘掉的致命错觉。对此，Steven 补充道，许多新手创业者最大的短板在于缺乏对“假设必定有误”的敬畏心。他们在第一年或第七个月意识到最初的设想跑不通时，往往误以为这意味着全盘皆输，只能弃船逃跑；而成熟的二次创业者深知，最初的商业假设在第一天起几乎注定是错的，创业的整个旅程本就是一个持续纠偏、不断逼近有效假设的修正过程。就如同 Mark Zuckerberg 最初在哈佛宿舍里不过是做了一个给同学颜值打分的“Facemash”，最终却蜕变为了涵盖虚拟现实与 AI 的庞大科技帝国 Meta。创业从不是一次性的押注，而是以假设为起点的漫长演进。 ### [01:51:49](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Kl-I7sUcAOY&t=6709s) 初创者与连续创业者的思维反差：二元论对比微观拆解 Alex Hormozi 提到了一条自己曾发过的爆款推文，生动地对比了新手与老手的典型心理： - **初创者（First-time founder）**：“嘿，在我告诉你我的商业点子之前，必须先签一份保密协议（NDA）。” - **第三次创业者（Third-time founder）**：“这是我目前所有的一切，文档、财务预测全都在这儿。不过它们大概率全都是错的，这事大概率也行不通。但我找来了几个聪明人，觉得我们能摸索出办法。过程肯定会比预期的花销更大、耗时更长，但我们觉得值得一试。” 这种对比在创业者和投资人之间引发了强烈的共鸣。无论是创办过企业的人，还是经常要跟各类创业者打交道的投资人，都会会心一笑。Alex 借此指出，初学者与专家的本质差异在于思考方式：初学者往往陷入“二元思维”（Binary thinking），一旦某件事没奏效，就会得出“这个点子彻底不行了，我得换个全新项目”的极端结论；而大师或专家则具备细致入微的拆解思维（Nuance thinking），他们会层层剖析组成部分，定位具体是哪一颗螺丝松了。例如投放广告效果不好，并不是 Meta 广告失效或广告本身没用，而是文案的抓手（Hook）不够吸睛、落地页承接不够清晰连贯，抑或是产品的核心价值主张没有击中用户的根本痛点。解决问题的关键往往藏在这些微小细节的筛选与打磨之中。 ```mermaid flowchart TD accTitle: 初学者与专家的商业问题诊断差异 accDescr: 对比初学者的二元放弃思维与专家的细粒度归因流程 subgraph Beginner["初学者思维 (二元论)"] B1["推出想法 / 实验"] --> B2{"未达预期?"} B2 -- 是 --> B3["结论: '这个业务行不通'"] B3 --> B4["彻底放弃，寻找全新点子"] end subgraph Expert["大师 / 专家思维 (微观拆解)"] E1["推出想法 / 实验"] --> E2{"未达预期?"} E2 -- 是 --> E3["拆解各个组件与约束点"] E3 --> E4["排查细节: 广告Hook / 落地页 / 定价 / 核心痛点"] E4 --> E5["找到微观杠杆，微调迭代"] end ``` ### [01:53:44](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Kl-I7sUcAOY&t=6824s) Facebook 的“14天加10个好友”与容错心态为了进一步阐明细节调整如何撬动庞大增长，Alex 举了 Facebook 早期的经典案例。当时 Facebook 面临严重的留存难题，用户虽然注册但很快流失，团队被关在会议室里苦思冥想数天。在缺乏绝对数据证明的情况下，马克·扎克伯格（Mark Zuckerberg）提出了一个假设：用户如果在平台上拥有更多好友，留存与活跃度必然会更高。于是他定下了一个极其具体的目标——“14天内添加10位好友”（10 friends in 14 days）。产品团队全力围绕这一指标重塑引导体验，结果让 Facebook 的增长曲线彻底爆发。扎克伯格当时并没有得出“社交网络没前途”的结论，而是把焦点放在极微观的关键指标上。 Alex 指出，商业的本质常常像理发、除草一样朴素：只要真实需求存在，能够收费并产生利润，业务本身就没有根本问题，关键在于找出限制增长的瓶颈（Constraint）。瓶颈往往由几十个微小变量共同决定，而这种精细的洞察力只能通过反复尝试和失败来沉淀。创业者必须具备极高的“失败容忍度”，最核心的是不能将外部尝试的失败内化（Internalize）为自我认同，误以为自己是个“失败者”。 ### [01:55:22](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Kl-I7sUcAOY&t=6922s) 创业的目标是“把事情做成”，而非“证明自己是对的” Steven Bartlett 深有感触地回顾了自己在18岁创立第一家公司 Wallpark 的经历。他坦言年轻时总觉得创业的目的是“证明自己是对的”——执着于当 CEO，执着于首版商业计划书里的假设全部成真，甚至当客户明确表示不买账时，还在拼命强推自己的想法。后来经历了几家公司后，他才深刻领悟到：创业的终极目标是“赢得胜利、把事情做成”（To be successful），而不是“证明自己正确”（To be right）。当创始人的目标转变为“让企业成功”时，心态会发生巨变，放低个人虚荣心（Ego）： - 很多创始人会主动承认：“虽然是我创立的这家公司，但我可能并不是当 CEO 的最佳人选。” - 创始人主动退居幕后或转任更擅长、更契合的岗位，比如首席品牌官（Chief Brand Officer）、产品负责人或市场负责人。 - Steven 举了英国顶尖品牌的例子：估值1亿英镑的 Represent、Ben 创立的估值达15亿英镑的 Gymshark，以及 Julian 估值约10亿英镑的企业，其创始人都在早期阶段把个人虚荣心置于企业利益之后，引入更专业的高管掌舵。 ### [01:56:40](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Kl-I7sUcAOY&t=7000s) 商业最终是招聘竞赛：史蒂夫·乔布斯与 A 级人才法则 Alex 顺势指出，要打造一家极其庞大成功的企业，所需要的专业经验远超一个人单打独斗多辈子所能积累的极限。因此，企业做大后迅速演变成为一场纯粹的“招聘游戏”。无论听扎克伯格、埃隆·马斯克还是史蒂夫·乔布斯的分享，都会发现他们对人才极其执着。乔布斯甚至会花上12到18个月去死磕挖角一位顶尖人才，即便期间面过很多合格人选，他依然会说“他们不是 John”，坚持不懈直到打动对方加入。除了突破性的顶尖科技之外，人是商业世界中杠杆率最高的要素。 Steven 接着分享了乔布斯一段震撼人心的经典采访片段。乔布斯在视频中表示，很多人把苹果的成功归功于他个人的天赋和才能，但实际上他的职业生涯建立在“寻找真正天赋异禀的顶尖人才，绝不向 B 级、C 级平庸之辈妥协，全力招募 A 级选手（A-players）”之上。乔布斯发现了一个规律： - 当你克服极大困难找到5位真正的 A 级人才并把他们聚在一起时，他们会极其热爱彼此共事，因为他们此前往往没有这样的机会。 - A 级人才极度抗拒与 B/C 级人才合作，整个团队会形成一种“自我净化”（Self-policing）机制。 - 团队会自发坚持只招募更优秀的 A 级人才，形成良性循环并向外扩散。 ### [01:58:58](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Kl-I7sUcAOY&t=7138s) 5倍与10倍的思考框架：定义未来的顶级人才 Alex 进一步补充，认识到“人才重要”就像懂得“金钱买不来快乐”一样，是每位创始人必须亲身踩坑才能大彻大悟的道理。更关键的是认知会随时间迭代：你今天眼里认为的“A 级人才”，五年后再回头看可能根本不够格。创始人需要建立一种跨越时间的心理推演机制： 1. **未来视角的映射**：将自己投射到未来想要达到的企业规模和层级，思考在那种体量下，真正的 A 级人才应该具备什么样的能力与格局； 2. **逆向推导回当下**：再回到现实，思考“我现在怎样才能吸引他们今天就来为我工作？”； 3. **5倍化心智实验**：对于已经拥有员工的创业者，审视自己当前团队中最拔尖的那位 A 级员工；接着闭上眼睛设想，如果团队里拥有5个这种水平的人，业务会发生什么变化？ - 营收是否会翻倍、5倍，甚至直接实现 10倍（10x）或 50倍增长？ - 一旦公司涌现出5个核心支柱，企业的营收不仅能直接飙升十倍，企业的整体估值更会远超10倍倍增，因为企业不再极端依赖创始人个人，而是建立在强大、自主运转的团队基石之上。 ### [02:00:22](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Kl-I7sUcAOY&t=7222s) 机会成本试金石与60秒响应法则：6万美元换数百万营收的故事 Alex Hormozi 深入探讨了企业动作的优先级评估。如果企业能够让多个引擎同时运转，业务就能以更快的速度被推向前进。面对琳琅满目的任务，创始人必须从机会成本的角度严厉质问自己：眼下是否还有任何其他活动，既能让公司实现10倍速增长、加快前进步伐，又能显著提升企业的估值倍数（Enterprise Value multiple）？如果找不到更具杠杆效应的事，却依然把时间耗在琐事上，那就证明你抓错了重点。这是一个极佳的“试金石”。为了说明这一点，Hormozi 抛开复杂的人才管理，举了一个极度纯粹的杠杆动作——在60秒内给潜客（Leads）回电。海量行业数据与研究表明，如果在客户提交表单的60秒内迅速致电，转化率能直接飙升4到5倍。创始人总在制定跨部门的各种宏伟计划，但有哪一项能在成本极低的前提下，立即带来4至5倍的营收提升？若答案是否定的，那为什么不立刻去抓首分钟电话响应？面对“我们人手不够，顾不过来在60秒内打电话”的借口，Hormozi 算了一笔账：4倍营收对你意味着什么？而雇一个专职打电话的人又需要多少成本？他分享了一个极其生动的真实例子：他最近结识了一位经营房屋暴风雨水灾修复（Water damage restoration）的老板。这名老板的线索转化率高达惊人的55%——这里指的甚至不是实际接通电话的转化率，而是所有原始线索的绝对转化率。Hormozi 追问他是怎么做到的、一天能接多少线索，对方回答每天只有两到三条。至于执行流程更是简单直接：“我雇了自己的阿姨，一年开给她6万美元薪水。她在公司没有别的任何职责，唯一的任务就是：一旦系统进了一条线索，哪怕你正跟丈夫温存也得停下，正在做饭也得关火，就算正在照顾孩子也得先放下，必须在几秒钟内立刻拨通那个客户的电话。”阿姨每天的工作就是打这三通电话，年薪6万美元，却为公司换回了数百万美元的业务。许多创始人总是纠结“我现在账上没有这笔钱”，但商业的逻辑从来不是用现有的钱去支付，而是用这项行动即刻撬动的增量收入去买单。 --- ### [02:02:52](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Kl-I7sUcAOY&t=7372s) 穿越100万到300万的“沼泽期”：利润全交还是每天多干6小时？话题重新回到团队搭建与人才扩张。Alex Hormozi 指出，在 Acquisition.com 的内部术语中，年营收100万到300万美元的阶段被称为“沼泽期”（The Swamp）。这是所有创业者历程中最痛苦、折损率极高的一道坎，其根本原因在于极度残酷的财务数学逻辑。 ```mermaid flowchart TD accTitle: 沼泽期的两难抉择 accDescr: 百万级营收企业在招聘顶尖人才与自行死扛之间的残酷权衡 subgraph SWAMP["年营收100万美元（净利润20万美元）"] DIR["面对核心业务瓶颈"] end subgraph PATH_A["路径 A：耗尽利润招募顶级人才"] A1["年薪20万美元聘用 A级人才"] A2["当期利润归零 / 现金流紧绷"] A3{"选对人了吗？"} A4["业务破局突破300万-400万"] A5["选错人面临资金链断裂风险"] end subgraph PATH_B["路径 B：创始人肉身硬扛"] B1["创始人每天多干6个小时"] B2["保住20万美元现金流生活"] B3["身心濒临崩溃极限 / 业务缺乏杠杆"] end DIR --> PATH_A DIR --> PATH_B A1 --> A2 --> A3 A3 -- 是 --> A4 A3 -- 否 --> A5 B1 --> B2 --> B3 ``` 假设一家年营收100万美元的公司，净利润率维持在健康的20%，意味着创始人一年能拿到20万美元的纯利润。在这一阶段，如果想从外部引进一名独当一面的A级人才（A-Player），其市场薪资往往刚好就是20万美元——等于要吞噬掉公司整整100%的利润。摆在眼前的几乎是一道“不可能的抉择”： - 究竟是牺牲自己一整年辛辛苦苦换来的全部利润，把赌注压在一个人身上？ - 还是选择每天再咬牙多干6个小时，用肉身硬扛下原本该由这个人承担的繁重业务？两条路都能走通，但也同样充满剧痛。如果选择多干6小时死扛，只要熬过那个坎，把营收推到300万或400万美元，20%的利润率就能带来60万至80万美元的利润，此时花20万雇人就游刃有余；但其代价是创始人可能在半途被活活耗尽。而如果选择雇人，最大的致命风险在于：万一招错人了怎么办？全盘利润付诸东流，公司现金流瞬间命悬一线。Hormozi 强调，这也正是企业家能够获得超额回报（Outsized returns）的原因所在——因为承担了常人难以想象的超额风险（Outsized risk）。企业家的本质工作，就是在两个同样糟糕的选项之间做出决断。那些轻松、显而易见的决定（比如响应线索快一点、跟进勤快一点）根本算不上真正的选择。 --- ### [02:04:39](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Kl-I7sUcAOY&t=7479s) 凝视深渊与嚼玻璃碎渣：企业家的“硬度货币”在不断升级 Alex Hormozi 引用了埃隆·马斯克（Elon Musk）那句著名的比喻：“经营一家企业就像凝视深渊，同时咀嚼碎玻璃。”（Running a business is like staring into the abyss and chewing glass.） - **凝视深渊**：代表着这家公司可能随时倒闭、随时可能彻底失效的宿命，企业每天都必须直面生死攸关的系统性生存风险。 - **咀嚼碎玻璃**：源于角色的必然性。公司里所有最棘手、别人搞不定、或者根本没人愿意碰的脏活烂活，最终都会像漏斗一样汇集到创始人的桌面上。正因如此，创业的日常才会感觉像是无休止的“每天都在救火”。面对两杯毒药，唯独创始人必须硬着头皮喝下一杯。很多人总会痛苦地问：“为什么创业总是这么难？”Hormozi 指出，残酷的真相是：**它永远不会变容易，只是你支付“艰难”的货币形式改变了**。大部分人对创业艰辛的想象，往往停留在类似《洛奇》（Rocky）电影蒙太奇里的热血苦练：只要每天拼命工作、加班熬夜就能熬出头。但现实绝非如此。无数人日夜操劳却丝毫无法把公司做大，因为他们拒绝支付另一种形态的“硬度货币”——比如进行一场让人极其不舒服的严厉对话、承担一次可能倾家荡产的商业豪赌、面对突如其来的法律官司、或是处理被心腹员工起诉等糟心变故。随着公司层级的提升，你所解锁的不是轻松，而是不同型号、更加扎嘴的“新玻璃渣”。 --- ### [02:06:27](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Kl-I7sUcAOY&t=7587s) 大多数人不是放弃而是“逐渐熄火”：通过海量迭代征服新技能正是由于新层级的挑战不断变换形态，Alex Hormozi 观察到，绝大多数创业者并不是以轰轰烈烈的姿态宣布“破产放弃”，而是在无声无息中“逐渐熄火”（Fizzle）。他们不再主动向外探索，要么在某个收入阶段感到知足安逸，觉得更高的阶层不值得自己付出相应的代价——Hormozi 表示如果年入百万就满足并选择享受生活，这完全称得上是人生的赢家；要么就是丧失了心气，在原地得过且过，最终被时代的变化慢慢磨灭。无论是媒体、网红生态还是商业全流程，都在经历一轮又一轮的残酷周期。十年前在某些渠道如日中天的玩家，随着生态变迁，如果拒绝吞下“学习新事物”这块新玻璃渣（例如从写长博客转战研究短视频 TikTok），就会迅速边缘化。Hormozi 举例说，他曾遇到一位年销售额数亿美元的巨头老板，对方早年凭借电视直销广告（Infomercials）赚得盆满钵满，却在2024年对他说：“我们真的得花精力把 YouTube 这块骨头啃下来了。”Hormozi 听后深感震撼：明明在十年前就该转型的战场，哪怕坐拥数亿美元的资金与资源，却因为对未知的恐惧和对初期必然遭遇失败的抗拒，硬生生拖延了十年。进入一个新领域的真正难点在于：你大概率在第一击就会面临彻底的失败。当需要在没有现成捷径或外部课程的情况下快速掌握一项新技能（无论是做销售回访、做冷启动触达、创作内容还是客户交付），Hormozi 坚持践行一套极其高效的“海量迭代法”： - **堆叠海量动作**：首先以最快速度完成100次高密度重复（例如打100通销售电话、发100条外联私信）。 - **提炼头部10%**：从中挑出效果最好的前10%样本，仔细比对它们与其余90%之间到底存在什么决定性差异。 - **锁定变量并复现**：提炼出排头兵身上具备的2到3个核心变量，并把这几项特征强制固化在接下来的下一轮100次测试中。 - **连续进化**：在新的百次实验中，由于客观环境的变化，又会产生全新的变量特征，再从中提取新的顶尖样本进行迭代。通过持续在海量实战中闭环反馈，便能以最快速度在未知领域建立起自己的认知壁垒。 ### [02:09:08](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Kl-I7sUcAOY&t=7748s) 技能习得的复利：克里斯·洛克式的内容迭代 Alex Hormozi 深入剖析了如何提炼顶尖技能——无论是打造爆款视频，还是成为顶尖演讲者。他引用了作家 David Perell 剖析喜剧大师 Chris Rock（克里斯·洛克）创作过程的著名例子：大众在麦迪逊广场花园看到 Chris Rock 呈现整整 60 分钟毫无尿点、笑料不断的炸裂演出，总会惊叹他天赋异禀。但人们往往忽视了背后的残酷真相——在此之前，Chris Rock 会在许多小喜剧俱乐部里反复打磨。第一次演满一小时，全场可能只有三处引人发笑，仅有 5 分钟是真正优秀的，剩下 55 分钟都烂透了。下一次去俱乐部时，Chris Rock 会将那验证有效的 5 分钟放在最开头，接下来的 55 分钟全部尝试全新段子；如果又挖掘出新的 5 分钟优质素材，便继续把它并入开场。通过数百次在小舞台上的试错、修剪与叠加，最终才打磨出长达 60 分钟、能够跨越年龄与文化鸿沟、让所有人哄堂大笑的传世专场。Alex 强调，不管是写作、做短视频还是创业，所有顶尖能力的习得都是如此：不断对照数据，剔除平庸的 90%，提炼并固化那 10% 顶尖有效的要素，然后反复组合迭代。 - **技能获取的核心逻辑**：卓越往往不是单一顿悟，而是由无数个“微小优势”在聚合（aggregate）后产生的巨大超额回报（outsized returns）。 - **建立爆款清单**：分析历史最佳产出中特有的几个共性动作，将其制度化为创作或业务的标准清单（checklist）。 ```mermaid flowchart TD accTitle: Chris Rock 循环迭代法 accDescr: 展示从初步测试、提取亮点到迭代积累最终形成顶尖产出的循环过程 subgraph Phase1["初次测试与筛选"] A["60分钟新素材测试"] --> B["55分钟平庸/失败"] A --> C["5分钟有效笑点"] end subgraph Phase2["叠加与复用"] C --> D["将5分钟保留于开头"] D --> E["后55分钟继续测试新段子"] end subgraph Phase3["复利积累"] E --> F{"是否凑足60分钟优质内容？"} F -- "否" --> D F -- "是" --> G["麦迪逊广场花园炸裂演出"] end ``` ### [02:10:52](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Kl-I7sUcAOY&t=7852s) 创业者的情绪崩溃与“应许之地”的幻觉 Steven Bartlett 顺着话题指出，很多创业者在业务高速增长时往往陷入严重的精神耗竭。他分享了上周来到自己办公室的一位女性创业者案例：她的公司今年营收预计达到 3000 万到 5000 万美元，势头极其迅猛，但她却在社交媒体上哭诉自己快要放弃了。Steven 询问她管理层团队搭建得如何，她却无奈翻白眼说自己根本没有高管团队。几乎公司里的每件大小琐事——哪怕是办公室员工之间周末醉酒后的人际摩擦——都直接落到她头上，导致其神经系统长期承受极限负荷。很多创始人在 100 万到 300 万美元阶段遭遇这种非人的折磨，便悲观地认为“创业注定永远都是这么痛苦”。Steven 坦言自己前两三年也经历过这种绝望，直到意外招进了一位极其优秀的得力高管，替他扛下了所有的琐碎烂摊子，他才重新获得了思考战略的脑力空间。很多人之所以无法抵达那片业务能够顺畅运转的“应许之地（Promised Land）”，是因为他们未能在创始人与底层业务之间及时搭建起关键的管理缓冲层。 ### [02:12:34](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Kl-I7sUcAOY&t=7954s) 夺回时间的 15 分钟审计法则与“拼装独角兽” 针对被琐事淹没的创始人，Alex Hormozi 给出了极具实操性的时间解耦流程。创始人必须认清一个本质：创业的整个底层逻辑，就是不断拿自己的时间去“以小博大”，逐步将时间置换到更高价值的维度。如果一直被困在杂务中，业务的价值天花板就锁死在创始人个人的精力上限上。 1. **15 分钟时间戳审计（Time Audit）**： - 准备一张简单的 Google 电子表格，按 15 分钟为一个时间槽（从早上 5:00 到午夜）。 - 准备一个厨房定时器，每 15 分钟响一次铃，立即用一两个词快速记录刚才做的事。 - 坚持记录整整一周。虽然执行初期会觉得繁琐，但这将成为创始人一生中最具生产力的一周，能彻底揭示时间的真实黑洞。 2. **业务分拆与雇佣杠杆**： - 审视周报表，如果发现某类事务占据了 40% 的时间，就测算雇佣专人接管这部分事务的成本。用拿回的 40% 精力去拓展核心业务，其带来的增量价值往往数倍于那名员工的薪水。 - 对于占据 15% 左右的小块时间，尝试沉淀 SOP（标准作业程序）或暂时吸收，直到累积成一个全职岗位的量再派发出去。创始人本质上就是业务内部的“多面手零工”，不断揽入杂务，积累足够体量后再剥离给全职人员。 3. **破解“无人可替代我”的独角兽悖论**： - 很多创始人拒绝放权，借口是“没人能做到我这种程度”。Alex 承认创始人或许确实是独一无二的“独角兽”（拥有白马身躯、犀牛尖角和发光荧光翅膀的集合体）。 - 但在招聘市场上，你完全不需要寻找一只真正的神话独角兽。你可以直接雇一匹纯正的白马、找一只带有尖角的犀牛、再抓几只萤火虫来发光——雇佣三名各有所长的人，由于他们能将 100% 的时间专注在单一细分领域，最终执行效果往往比身兼数职、精力分散的创始人做得更加出色。 ### [02:16:47](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Kl-I7sUcAOY&t=8207s) 创新的窘境：如何打破成功带来的增长陷阱对话随后转向了商业进化的残酷法则。Steven 提到，许多企业和创作者之所以落伍，恰恰是因为过去的成功困住了他们——正如经典的“创新者的窘境（The Innovator's Dilemma）”。很多依赖博客起家的先行者之所以错失了 YouTube 的庞大红利，是因为他们不愿将已经盈利、支撑账单的核心业务人力抽调出来，投向充满未知的新赛道。如今的当红创作者如果不主动适应时代，转眼也会沦为下一代人眼中的过气“恐龙”。 Alex Hormozi 认同这一观点，指出任何现行的成功路径都有其生命周期，唯一的解法就是制度化地分配资源去试错。他提到 Google 著名的资源配置模型（由联合创始人 Sergey Brin 等人从数学角度探索确立）： - **70% 资源**：坚决分配给核心主营业务（Core Business），在当前经过验证的赚钱路径上持续放大规模。 - **20% 资源**：投向与核心业务邻近、具有明确延展机会的衍生方向。 - **10% 资源**：完全用于前沿、高风险、可能带来颠覆性破局的创新实验。唯有通过这种刚性配比，企业才能在榨取现有成果的同时，为下一次迭代建立生存护城河。 ### [02:17:27](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Kl-I7sUcAOY&t=8247s) “更多、更好、更新”法则与 70/20/10 资源分配在商业战略的资源配置中，合理的分配比例至关重要：70% 的精力与资源倾注于现有核心业务；20% 投入到与核心紧密相邻、成功概率极高的延展业务；剩下的 10% 则留给完全跳出常规路线、可能博取百倍回报却也大概率失败的“登月计划”（Moonshots）。Alex Hormozi 指出，这在数学上完全站得住脚，并在其著作《$100M Leads》中凝练为了“更多、更好、更新”（More, Better, New）的执行框架。 ```mermaid flowchart TD accTitle: 核心四大获客方式与更多更好更新的迭代演进 accDescr: 展示四种基础获客动作如何通过更多、更好、更新三个阶段进行杠杆放大与战略升级 subgraph CoreFour["获客核心四动作 (Core Four)"] C1["发布内容 (Post Content)"] C2["投放广告 (Run Ads)"] C3["陌生拓客 (Cold Outreach)"] C4["熟人触达 (Warm Outreach)"] end subgraph ExecutionPath["执行演进路径"] M["1. 更多 (More) 将测试量与投放规模拉升数百倍"] B["2. 更好 (Better) 优化传单文案、调整 Offer、提高转化"] N["3. 更新 (New - 10% 试错) 开辟全新渠道 (如从传单拓展至线上广告)"] end CoreFour --> M M --> B B --> N ``` 任何企业在广告获客上都离不开四大基础动作（Core Four）：发布内容、投放广告、触达陌生人、触达熟人。然而绝大多数初创企业与小商家面临的最大认知盲区，就是“做得极少，却自以为已经拼尽全力”。 - **核心四大获客路径（Core Four）**：公开发布内容（Content）、付费投放广告（Ads）、陌生人外联（Cold Outreach）、熟人关系激活（Warm Outreach）。 - **执行次序原则**：在尝试任何花哨新花样之前，第一步必须是无条件地把基础动作做到极致的“更多”（More）。 --- ### [02:18:13](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Kl-I7sUcAOY&t=8293s) 传单测试与认知鸿沟：别把“极低业务量”误当成“市场波动” Alex Hormozi 分享了自己早年开第一家健身房时的亲身经历。当时他向一位拥有 20 家门店的前辈请教获客渠道，对方告知依靠发汽车挡风玻璃传单。Alex 随即印发了 300 张传单，结果毫无起色，他气急败坏地打电话质问前辈为何没用。前辈淡定地问他的“测试样本量”（Test Size）是多少，Alex 愣住了，表示 300 张就是全部。前辈解释道，他们的常规起步测试规模是 5,000 张，一旦跑出有效模板，后续便是每家店每天发 5,000 张。这意味着在 30 天周期内，前辈的门店累计铺设了 150,000 张传单，而 Alex 仅发了可怜的 300 张——整整相差了 500 倍的体量。小企业主最致命的错觉，就是将“极低的行动量”（Low Volume）误以为是“业绩波动大”（Volatility）。如果一个月只做一两单生意，看起来极度不稳定，但那是因为全月付出的营销努力，头部竞争对手仅一天之内就全部完成了。 Alex 同样以做个人 IP 为例：当有人咨询如何打造个人品牌，并自豪地表示自己一周能发一两篇内容时，Alex 会坦言告诉对方，自己的团队每周产出的内容高达 450 条。普通人往往无法想象别人比自己多付出 2 倍、10 倍甚至 1,000 倍的产出，而这正是结果产生天壤之别的残酷现实。 - **健身房传单实战数据对比**： - Alex 的单次测试量：300 张传单（30 天累计 300 张）。 - 成熟连锁店的基准量：5,000 张做首轮测试；确认胜出模板后，每天投放 5,000 张，30 天累计 150,000 张（500 倍于初学者的体量）。 - **内容产出密度对比**： - 普通创作者：每周 1 至 2 篇内容。 - Hormozi 团队：每周发布 450 篇内容。 --- ### [02:20:35](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Kl-I7sUcAOY&t=8435s) 杠杆演进、三大战略漏斗与 CEO 的“空降兵”本质从基础工作走向企业扩张，本质上是运用杠杆（Leverage）的过程： 1. **初期亲力亲为**：创始人自己去街头插传单； 2. **购买时间与劳动力**：利用发传单赚取的收益雇佣两人专职负责，不仅每天换回创始人 8 小时的高价值时间，还将产出提升一倍； 3. **“更好”与“更新”的选择**：是雇更多的人发传单（更多），还是修改传单上的 Offer 与排版（更好），抑或是把 10% 的收益投入 Facebook 广告测试（更新）。当公司实现稳定盈利后，资源分配必须严格对齐三大战略漏斗： 1. **获取更多客户**（拉新获客，带动规模扩张）； 2. **提升单客生命周期毛利**（LTV 提升，即使客户总数不变也能增加利润）； 3. **降低经营风险**（确保前两项业务飞轮永不失速的“未来保险”）。 ```mermaid flowchart TD accTitle: 盈利企业的资源配置三大战略漏斗 accDescr: 展示企业盈利再投资的三大方向及其与70/20/10框架的映射对应关系 subgraph StrategicBuckets["企业资源三大战略漏斗"] B1["漏斗 1：获取更多客户 (Get More Customers)"] B2["漏斗 2：提升单客生命周期毛利 (Increase Lifetime Gross Profit)"] B3["漏斗 3：降低系统性断裂风险 (Decrease Risk / Future Insurance)"] end subgraph Allocation["70 / 20 / 10 映射逻辑"] CoreWork["70% 核心 + 20% 邻近业务 主攻客户规模与单客价值提升"] NewWork["10% 探索性全新举措 构筑防范未来技术/渠道迭代的护城河"] end B1 --> CoreWork B2 --> CoreWork B3 --> NewWork ``` Alex 特别警告创业者在应对未来风险时常犯的致命错误：**切忌抽调主营业务中的顶尖骨干去开拓全新的探索业务**。如果原有核心团队被分散，新技术又尚未探索出闭环，公司往往会面临主业崩盘、新线颗粒无收的双重绝境。正是在这一阶段，CEO 应该转变为“自由人/空降兵”（Flex Player）：哪里出现棘手瓶颈就空降到哪个部门。CEO 最大的超能力在于无需请示汇报、能当场开支票下达决断。Alex 强调：“所谓战略（Strategy），不过是人们用来包装‘设定优先级’（Prioritization）的高级词汇罢了。”企业的机会无限，而资源永远有限，如何在无限的机会与有限的资源之间权衡取舍、明确排序，就是商业战略的全部真相。 --- ### [02:23:38](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Kl-I7sUcAOY&t=8618s) 节目赞助插播：ZOE 肠道健康检测与 Shopify 电商基建在探讨深入话题的间隙，主持人 Steven Bartlett 插入了两则品牌赞助分享： - **ZOE 肠道健康检测**： Steven Bartlett 介绍了自己投资的肠道微生态健康品牌 ZOE。人体肠道与整体健康紧密相连，ZOE 拥有全球领先的微生物数据库与家庭检测体系。其全套检测包括贴在手臂上的实时血糖传感器（用于评估食物对血糖的即时反应）、采集血液样本检测血脂代谢、著名的蓝色特制饼干测试身体代谢速率，以及深度分析肠道菌群多样性的粪便样本检测。用户寄回样本后，ZOE 应用程序会量身定制专属的个性化饮食营养方案。听众可使用专属折扣码 `STEVEN10` 在其官网享受会员 9 折优惠。 - **Shopify 一站式电商建站平台**： Steven Bartlett 分享了自己旗下的媒体制作机构 Flight Studio（隶属于 Flight Group）在拓展业务时的工具选择。无论此前发售“深度对话卡牌”（Conversation Cards），还是即将上线的新产品，均高度依赖 Shopify。该平台彻底消除了在线开店和全球交付的技术壁垒与痛点。节目向所有听众提供每月仅需 1 美元的试用福利（访问入口：`shopify.com/bartlett`）。广告结束后，对话重新切回关于汽车传单案例的深度探讨。 ### [02:25:38](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Kl-I7sUcAOY&t=8738s) 提高实验频率：不要靠直觉押注，让测试与数学做决定史蒂文·巴特利特（Steven Bartlett）分享了一个来自其投资组合的真实案例：一家全国性大型连锁超市为他们旗下的一家品牌在全英 400 家门店提供了陈列展位，团队拿着两套设计方案纠结地跑来问史蒂文到底该选哪一个。史蒂文坦白地告诉他们：“我不知道，你们也不知道；但我们可以建立一个系统去找到答案——制作 100 套陈列方案，直接放在 Facebook 上做广告投放测试。”史蒂文强调，许多人在大学接受了正规的文案或设计培训后，往往深陷于“证明自己是对的”，而非“把事情做成功”的心魔。优秀的创作者和创业者应该大方承认自己的无知，把精力和胜算押注在高于竞争对手数倍的“实验频率”（rate of experimentation）上，通过高频试错撞上正确答案。亚历克斯·霍尔莫齐（Alex Hormozi）对此深表认同，并总结出两种绝不需要向外界征求主观建议的问题：能用电子表格算清的问题，以及能通过测试得出结论的问题。许多创业者常问该卖产品 A 还是产品 B，亚历克斯便会让他们测算两者的终身价值（LTV）与获客成本（CAC），只要 LTV:CAC 的比例一出来，资源该投向哪里一目了然，这纯粹是小学数学。而在测试层面，亚历克斯撰写畅销书《100M Leads》（亿万线索）时，也是完全靠数据测试敲定的书名与封面。他在社交平台上连续一两周发起投票与投放，在《100M Promotions》、《100M Advertising》、《100M Marketing》与《100M Leads》等选项中层层角逐，最终“Leads”（潜在销售线索）压倒性胜出。亚历克斯直言，书的内核虽然是广告与营销，但消费者并不关心手段，他们只想要结果——“就像人们并不想要买电钻，他们只是想要墙上有个孔”，书籍只是获取线索的工具。针对实体店（Brick-and-Mortar）的选址扩张，亚历克斯还给出了一个极度实用的低成本破局策略：与其先耗费 25 万美元做详尽的市场调研、签租约、大兴土木建店，最后才发现当地获客成本奇高无比，不如预先拿出 5,000 到 10,000 美元作为风险对冲。在计划拓展的五个候选城市中，每个市场投入 1,000 美元广告费，跑一套在现有大本营经过验证的最佳促销活动，直接比对五个市场的获客成本（Lead Cost），哪里的获客成本最低就去哪里开店，从而用极小代价彻底锁定胜率。 ```mermaid flowchart TD accTitle: 决策漏斗系统 accDescr: 展现了问题归类及低成本测试驱动决策的完整执行闭环 subgraph ProblemType["问题类型分类"] A["创业决策难题"] --> B{"属于哪类问题？"} B -->|"可用数据量化"| C["电子表格与数学题"] B -->|"无法事前预知"| D["市场偏好与创意测试"] end subgraph SolutionPath["解决方案"] C --> E["测算 LTV:CAC 比例 按投资回报分配资源"] D --> F["高频小规模 A/B 测试 广告文案 / 标题 / 选址测试"] end subgraph Outcome["最终结果"] E --> G["以确定性数据取代直觉盲猜"] F --> G end ``` - **书名 A/B 轮次测试**：亚历克斯在 Instagram Story 等渠道将 Promotions、Advertising、Marketing 与 Leads 互相捉对测试，封面配色与副标题同样经过多轮筛选。 - **电钻与孔洞理论**：广告（Advertising）是打孔的电钻，潜在客户（Leads）是墙上的孔洞；用户购买的是最终成果，而非达成成果的工具本身。 - **实体扩张测算公式**：5 个候选区域 × 1,000 美元广告测试预算，直接根据线索获取单价决定 25 万美元重资产门店的落地选址。 --- ### [02:29:10](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Kl-I7sUcAOY&t=8950s) 导师真的重要吗？寻找“行为模型”而非崇拜导师许多年轻人常热衷于四处寻找导师，甚至追着提问：“你能做我的导师吗？”史蒂文抛出疑问：在创业路上，导师到底重不重要？亚历克斯的回答十分客观：赢得商业成功并不“必须”拥有导师，但这并不意味着你可以闭门造车。人类文明之所以进步，是因为一代代人站在前人的肩膀上拾级而上——我们不需要重新发明电灯泡，也不必从零理解互联网的底层代码，只需要接过前人交出的接力棒。亚历克斯提出了一个关键认知转变：“我思考的是模型，而非导师（I think in models, not mentors）。”与其寻找一个高高在上的导师神像，不如观察优秀先行者的行为模式，探究他们在特定情境下是如何思考和做决定的，然后将这些行为模式移植到自己的行动中，以提高获胜几率和迭代速度。亚历克斯坦言，自己的一切思考与方法论最终都会回归到最底层、最客观的“行为改变”（Behavior Change）：无论是员工培训还是广告营销，其本质都是尽可能提高一个陌生人采取目标行动的概率。谈到这里，亚历克斯犀利且幽默地抨击了市面上泛滥的“显化法则”（Manifestation）与“宇宙能量玄学”。他直言自己很怕上那些满口“我通过向宇宙显化召来了这次会面”的播客访谈，亚历克斯会毫不留情地当面戳破：“你根本不是显化出来的；你是因为持续高质量地产出内容，然后你的执行助理联系了我的执行助理，这通具体的联络行为才促成了这次录制。”如果抽离掉持续的内容产出与实际的邮件联络，单纯靠所谓意念发功，任何会面都不会发生。正因如此，亚历克斯将目光聚焦在现实世界的顶尖实践者身上，他海量阅读并拆解埃隆·马斯克（Elon Musk）、杰夫·贝佐斯（Jeff Bezos）和马克·扎克伯格（Mark Zuckerberg）的公开访谈与决策机制，从中提取行为决策的底层逻辑。 - **显化的本质**：亚历克斯强调因果关系中的必要条件；即使有人坚信频率共振，但真正产生效果、可复现的永远是具体的行为操作。 - **商业巨头的输入**：把注意力放在顶级商业操盘手的决策框架上，借用他们耗费数十亿美元试错得出的经验来指导自身。 --- ### [02:32:27](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Kl-I7sUcAOY&t=9147s) 跨越全美的拜访：22岁找“七位数山姆”取经的故事任何人当然都可以单靠自己的反复试错最终摸索出门道，但其中唯一的不可逆成本就是时间。亚历克斯发问：“你愿意付出多少金钱或时间，去直接跨过未来 5 年的试错弯路？”为了说明先行者的经验有多宝贵，他讲述了自己 22 岁初次踏入健身房行业时的荒唐与决绝。当年他毅然辞去了管理咨询的高薪工作，没有先去租场地开健身房，而是在谷歌上搜寻懂行的人，搜到了一个绰号叫“七位数山姆”（Seven Figure Sam，即 Sam Bakhtiar）的健身房导师。亚历克斯直接开着塞满全部家当的破车跨越全美，未经任何预约便唐突地出现在了山姆的健身房门口，对正在忙碌的山姆喊道：“我来了，我是来向你拜师学习的！”山姆当时一头雾水：“我还在工作呢，我根本不认识你，明后天再说吧。”当山姆询问亚历克斯今晚住哪家酒店时，亚历克斯坦诚地指了指外面的车子：“我不知道，我就开着车过来了，家当全在后座，我打算到了再想办法。”被亚历克斯这种孤注一掷的生猛与推销劲头所触动，慷慨的山姆当晚收留了他住在自己家中。几周后，山姆为旗下采用其私教与体能训练营模式的健身房老板们举办了一场闭门交流会。22 岁的亚历克斯付费获得了入场资格，置身于一群身经百战的成熟健身房经营者之中。参会的店主们依次复盘各自业务的得失与痛点；当轮到这个还没开张的毛头小子发言时，亚历克斯站起来拿出自己精心构思的商业模式与开店规划，直接向这些行业老手请教并接受全方位审视。正是这种不惜一切代价浸润在真实行业认知中的行为，让他在起点便省去了数年的盲目摸索。 - **破釜沉舟的行动力**：亚历克斯在毫无退路、没有任何熟人引荐的情况下，驱车数千英里跨越美国，以近乎鲁莽的热忱叩开行业前辈的大门。 - **同行交流圈的价值**：通过付费进入成熟从业者的圈子，直接获取一线正在生效或失败的操作经验，用资本和主动性买断未来多年的弯路。 ### [02:34:03](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Kl-I7sUcAOY&t=9243s) 向先行者学习：一天省下数年弯路与“技能差距”的真正代价 Alex 回忆起自己筹备第一家健身房时向行业老手请教的经历。当时他满脑子都是不切实际的设想：定价策略完全离谱，老手们直接拍砖指出行不通；他原打算去昂贵的零售店采购器械，对方立即喝止并推荐了二手渠道，价格仅为零售价的十分之一；他想买某种花哨的器械，老手警告说曾有两个女生在那玩意上摔得鼻青脸肿，根本用不上，不如买极其便宜又耐操的沙袋，不仅能做几百种训练，坏了随时换也不心疼；Alex 甚至打算租超大面积的场地并愿意支付每平方英尺 2 美元的租金，老手们斩钉截铁地告诉他面积砍半足够，而且租金绝对不能超过 1.5 美元。仅仅花了一天时间，Alex 就把这些老手多年踩坑换来的经验全盘吸收，站在他们的肩膀上成功开出了第一家健身房。他感叹道：“这对我而言值多少钱？值整整几年的时间！”因此他向来愿意用任何必要的方式（无论是金钱还是时间）去换取自己尚未掌握的知识。 Alex 还分享了一个令他记忆犹新的销售大会场景：一位销售员在白板上写下 100 万美元，随后邀请台下一位年收入 5 万美元的女士上台。销售员在 100 万下方写上 5 万并做减法，得出差额 95 万美元。销售员指着这个数字说：“因为你不知道如何年入百万，这个认知盲区每年都在让你损失 95 万美元。”Alex 强调，这项技能的真正价值正是那 95 万美元的差距（Delta）。尽管后来网络上有杠精讽刺说“那要是跟年入一亿或十亿美元相比呢”，Alex 直言逻辑完全成立——如果你拥有年入十亿的能力，那 5 万与 10 亿之间的差额就是那套复合技能的真实价值。人们如果不再用钱包里现有的余额去衡量学习成本，而是用“未来能赚到多少或能省下多少时间”来评估，就会更愿意为学习投资。 - **老手建议带来的避坑清单**： - 二手器材成本仅为零售价的十分之一（1/10）。 - 弃用危险且低利用率的花哨器械，改用超廉价且适配数百种动作的沙袋。 - 场地面积直接砍半，租金从预算的每平方英尺 $2 压到严格不得超过 $1.5。 - **技能估值逻辑**：目标成果与当前成果之间的差额（Delta），就是你尚未掌握该能力所承担的隐形亏损。 --- ### [02:37:06](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Kl-I7sUcAOY&t=9426s) 鹦鹉与实践者：陈述性知识 vs. 程序性知识 Steven Bartlett 提出了“鹦鹉与实践者”（Parrots vs. Practitioners）的对比。所谓“鹦鹉”，是指那些听了别人的观点就到处复述、整天读书发帖却从不下场冒险的人；而“实践者”则是像理查德·费曼（Richard Feynman）那样，在泥潭中摔打摸爬过、真正把经验提炼出精髓的人。 Alex 从教育学理论切入，将知识分为两类： 1. **陈述性知识（Declarative Knowledge）**：了解某件事的概念（Knowing about something）。比如懂得私募股权（PE）的运作架构、杠杆债务、估值倍数与套利机制，能够讲得头头是道，但从未真正实操过哪怕一笔交易。 2. **程序性知识（Procedural Knowledge）**：懂得如何去动手执行（Knowing how to do something）。就像读完 100 本销售书籍，其收获也远比不上真正打通前 100 通销售电话。 Alex 提出，想要实现极速成长，秘诀就是以最快的速度完成前 100 次重复训练（Repetitions），甚至允许自己连续搞砸 100 次，从中挑出 10 次“砸得最轻”的表现，分析并思考如何在接下来的 100 次中减少失误，循环往复直至真正掌握技能。 ```mermaid flowchart TD accTitle: Learning Feedback Loop accDescr: High volume iterations lead to procedural mastery through targeted feedback. subgraph Phase1["第一阶段：快速堆积体量"] A["设定超高迭代目标 （如 100 次拨打 / 演讲）"] --> B["快速暴露问题 （即使连续犯错）"] end subgraph Phase2["第二阶段：复盘与筛选"] B --> C["从 100 次中挑选 表现最好的 10-20%"] C --> D["复盘成功要素： 哪些环节做对了？"] end subgraph Phase3["第三阶段：优化迭代"] D --> E["将经验应用至下一组 100 次"] E --> A end ``` --- ### [02:38:46](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Kl-I7sUcAOY&t=9526s) 购买时间、压倒性做工量与“创始人模式” 谈到内容创作者与教育的本质，Alex 区分了娱乐者（Entertainers）与教育者（Educators）：娱乐者的目的是抓住并留住观众的注意力；而教育者的核心目的则是改变他人的行为。在教育领域，本质上是在“售卖时间”——导师花数年踩坑摸索出的四条核心经验交付给学生，学生便不必亲自耗费这些岁月。 Alex 敏锐地指出，人们花钱购买教育，其实是在“穿越时空”购买别人的人生经验： - **富人的金钱观**：时间价值高于金钱，因此极度乐意用金钱换取时间。 - **穷人的金钱观**：更在乎金钱，甚至愿意开车转悠 10 家加油站只为省 10 美分油钱，或者跑遍 10 家超市使用优惠券，用极其廉价的方式变卖时间。在树立真正的信心方面，Alex 提出了“压倒性做工量”法则：做工量必须庞大到“自己还做不好简直不合常理”的程度。无论是公开演讲还是客户拜访，直接写下一个让你坚信“练完这么多绝不可能不行”的数字（例如 1000 场），然后砍掉一切替代选项全力以赴。但关键在于必须配合反馈闭环：每做 10 到 20 次，就复盘其中最顶尖的 10% 到 20%，找出有效策略并加倍投入。最后，Alex 强调了从底层逻辑推导（Derive from the ground up）的重要性。如果你无法解释自己为什么坚信某种做法，那这根本不是你的信念，你只是一只学舌的鹦鹉。这也是为什么近期硅谷与 Y Combinator 热议由布莱恩·切斯基（Brian Chesky，Airbnb 创始人）引发的“创始人模式”（Founder Mode）——因为创始人亲自从零把业务一步步摸索构建出来，具备无可替代的直觉与洞察力。 ### [02:42:17](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Kl-I7sUcAOY&t=9737s) 实践者与鹦鹉学舌者：从重复试炼中提炼规则 Alex Hormozi 深入剖析了“实践者”（Practitioner）与“鹦鹉学舌者”（Parrot）的本质区别。后入局者往往只会亦步亦趋地模仿前人的做法，背诵现成的规条；但真正的实践者深知当初是在何种边界条件与约束下设立了这些规则，因此他们不仅知道规则的存在，更清楚何时可以打破它、何时可以融会贯通。唯有经历过成千上万次实操重复的人，才能提炼出少数颠扑不破的真理，并透彻理解其背后的机理。 Alex 举了一个自己在 YouTube 内容运营上的真实迭代过程： 1. **第一阶段（3P 原则）**：团队复盘爆款视频后发现，表现最好的内容前 30 秒都包含了三个要素：证明（Proof）、承诺（Promise）和行动计划（Plan）。于是团队规定所有视频开头必须执行这一框架。 2. **第二阶段（引入画面 Picture）**：在继续追踪异常高播放的视频时，他们发现如果能在开篇为这个计划提供具象的“视觉画面”（Picture），数据会更上一层楼，框架演变为“Proof, Promise, Plan, Picture”。 3. **第三阶段（融入痛点 Pain）**：经过更多轮的数据测试，他们发现加入要解决的“痛点或问题”（Pain/Problem）能进一步拉升留存，公式随之扩充为 5P。面对不断叠加的要素，初学者常犯的错误是把开篇越拉越长，而高手展现的则是创作的优雅度（Elegance of creation）——“如何用一句话同时勾选并满足其中的三个条件？”Alex 指出，1 万播放量与 100 万播放量的视频差距就在于对全流程细节维度的深刻洞察。新手遇到视频扑街只会怨天尤人：“做视频根本没用”或“做内容赚不到钱”；而真正的实践者能精准诊断：“这个视频失败了，因为我们五个维度里只做到了三个。” ```mermaid flowchart TD accTitle: 内容框架的演进路径 accDescr: 展示从简单规则到高阶融合创作的迭代流程 subgraph Phase1["基础验证"] A["3P 阶段 Proof + Promise + Plan"] end subgraph Phase2["细节迭代"] B["4P 阶段 + 视觉呈现 (Picture)"] C["5P 阶段 + 痛点直击 (Pain)"] end subgraph Mastery["大师级提炼"] D["创作的优雅度 一句话兼顾多个维度"] end A --> B B --> C C --> D ``` 只有通过“不合常理的超量工作”（Unreasonable amount of work），你才能真正摸清细节里的魔鬼，心态才能从早期的“无知之乐观”或迷茫，蜕变为建立在稳固框架之上的“知情之乐观”（Informed optimism）。 --- ### [02:44:29](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Kl-I7sUcAOY&t=9869s) 费曼技巧与知识单向性：为何摘要成就不了认知？ Steven Bartlett 顺着这个话题分享了前一天的亲身经历：他的女友来到录音室的休息室，兴奋地向他推荐一款书籍提炼摘要 App。Steven 让她搜索自己的新书《商业与生活的 33 条法则》（The 33 Laws Of Business & Life）。书中第二法则深入探讨了理查德·费曼学习法（Richard Feynman Technique）——将复杂知识精简为其本质并讲给 10 岁孩子听，若对方听懂了就继续，若卡住就倒退回去重新深入理解。然而那款 App 却将这一法则粗暴地浓缩为一句格言：“写作是最好的学习方式。”Steven 告诉女友，如果一个人只看到金字塔尖的结论摘要，缺乏完整的叙事故事和底层推导基石，是绝不可能真正理解问题本质并在不同场景下灵活运用的。听完之后，他的女友当场删除了该 App。没有来龙去脉的故事与论证，知道一句警句或包袱（Punchline）毫无价值。 Alex Hormozi 从知识论角度补充道： - **知识的提炼是不可逆的（非双向的）**：费曼可以将高深的物理概念简化给小孩子听，但小孩子绝不可能凭这一句大白话反向推导出费曼的整套物理大厦。 - **摘要仅用于便捷沟通**：结论与格言适合组织内的新人培训，提供方向指引，但无法赋予人创新与推演的能力。 - **创始人模式（Founder Mode）的底层逻辑**：创始人必须是推导出一级原理的人。当新危机来临，唯有从底层逻辑推导过系统的人，才能重新推导（Rederive）出全新解法，而不是生搬硬套过时的金句。 --- ### [02:46:32](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Kl-I7sUcAOY&t=9992s) 抄袭者注定落后：创始人如何应对模仿这一逻辑直接解答了许多创始人遭遇抄袭时的焦虑。Steven 指出，如果成功需要走完 1、2、3、4、5 步阶梯才能预判出第 6 步，那么当抄袭者直接复制第 5 步时，原创者应该感到彻底的释怀。因为抄袭者缺乏走到第 5 步背后的试错根基与文化支撑。播客行业充斥着对封面图、标题和剪辑风格的抄袭，但如果一个节目的核心竞争力仅仅依赖封面或预告片，那这档节目本身早就完蛋了。真正的核心壁垒是水面下 99% 的冰山——组织文化、深层工作机制与严苛标准。 Alex 分享了他摆脱“被抄袭焦虑”的两大核心心法： 1. **反向思考其对立面**：如果市场上没人抄袭你，说明你做的事情根本微不足道、无人问津。被抄袭是成功的必然副产物，是商业运转的一部分。 2. **抄袭从定义上就决定了其第二名的属性**：只要对方在模仿你，对方就默认了自己是追随者。真正的领跑者目光永远不会停留在竞对身上，而是基于自己的推导去创造未知的“第 6 步”。一旦你转头去抄袭别人，你就等同于缴械投降，把冠军的接力棒交给了对方。而在注意力经济这种“赢家通吃”（Winner-take-all）的世界里，所有的果实只属于第一名。 --- ### [02:48:57](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Kl-I7sUcAOY&t=10137s) 苦干、热爱与幸福：在公司出售期的煎熬反思 Steven 将话题引入最后一个核心维度：勤勉苦干（Hard work）、热爱（Love）与幸福（Happiness）之间的交织，也就是大众常说的“工作与生活的平衡”（Work-life balance）。Alex Hormozi 以极度沉迷工作著称，而他的妻子兼商业合伙人 Leila 也同样极其拼命。 Alex 回顾了自己“人生论文”（Life thesis）的形成契机： - 在经营 Gym Launch 期间，他们夫妇个人累计获得了约 4000 万美元的分红。 - 在决定出售公司的推进年份里，他经历了创业生涯中最折磨人的一段真空期。根据并购交易惯例，出售期间创始人不能大刀阔斧地对现有业务做调整，必须维持公司业务稳定运转以完成尽职调查。 - 创始人天性渴望创新与突破，但在那段时期： - **既不能改动现有业务**（防止业绩产生剧烈波动导致交易告吹）； - **也不能开启新项目**（避免违反专注原则，分心于“红衣女郎”式的诱惑，一旦出售失败就会陷入同时顾两家公司的被动局面）。 - 作为习惯了高速运转的创始人，被迫无所事事地干坐着等待交易落地，那种无力感反而逼迫他退后一步，对工作、生活平衡与人生价值的本质展开了最深刻的推演。 ### [02:50:28](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Kl-I7sUcAOY&t=10228s) 努力工作本身就是终点，而非达成目的的手段在 Alex Hormozi 曾经放手让业务自行运转的一年里，他经历了人生中最痛苦的一段时光，因为无事可做让他感到极度空虚。当他回顾自己生命中最享受的那些日子时，他发现那些日子都有几个共同特征：高强度的健身训练、创造出某些实质性的成果、与志同道合且彼此喜欢的人共事，并且几乎每一天都连续工作了极长的时间。正是这一领悟打破了他过去“努力工作是为了换取某种结果”的传统思维模式——只要在努力工作后面加上“以便于……”（so that...），工作就依然沦为了被终点绑架的工具。于是他提出了自己的核心信念：“努力工作本身就是目标，做值得做的事直到生命终结。” 这种近乎狂热的职业观为 Alex 带来了大量外界的质疑与攻击，但他对此非常坦然：“我的生活不是布道，而是一部纪录片。”他并不强求别人认同或效仿自己的生活方式，每个人尽可以选择适合自己的道路。对于 Alex 来说，写作是最纯粹的幸福时刻。这种幸福并非当下生理上的轻松，而是一种挑战与技能高度匹配的“心流”与煎熬：他会苦恼地揉着额头，反复推敲、推倒两三个不同的商业模型框架，不断反问自己“如果这个步骤讲不通，远在阿富汗的某个年轻人照着做就会卡住，我必须找到能在任何环境下通用的解法”。直到灵感突现、框架彻底成立的那一刻，他才会如释重负地拍案叫绝：“就是它了，不服来辩！” 对 Alex 而言，爱、幸福与工作从来不是相互割裂的板块，而是融为一体的生活本身。他的偶像 Warren Buffett 和 Charlie Munger 都是终生工作的典范，Charlie Munger 更是笔耕不辍、工作直至生命的最后一天。Alex 在工作节奏上并不遵循固定的七天制日历或朝九晚五的打卡制度，他的机制非常简单：只要精力允许就全力输出，直到疲劳导致产出效率断崖式下跌便去睡觉；当连续高强度工作了 9 天、20 天甚至 30 天，感觉油箱彻底空了的时候，不论当天是周二、周六还是周日，他都会彻底休息整整一天来充电。 ```mermaid flowchart TD accTitle: 传统工作观与 Alex Hormozi 目标导向模型对比 accDescr: 对比以结果为导向的传统工作逻辑与以努力工作本身为目标的心流逻辑 subgraph DestinationDriven["传统目标导向模型"] A["高强度工作"] --> B["换取终点 / 休息 / 财富"] B --> C["抵达后产生虚无与空虚感"] end subgraph ProcessDriven["Alex Hormozi 的生活哲学"] D["挑战性任务与能力匹配"] --> E["全神贯注地创造与解决问题"] E --> F["努力工作本身即是幸福与终点"] F --> G["力竭时无周期性彻底休息"] G --> D end ``` ### [02:53:55](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Kl-I7sUcAOY&t=10435s) 彻底的自由与绝对的责任：油箱见底与斯巴达盾牌对 Alex 来说，奋斗从来不是为了赶往某个会不断后退的终点线。他借用了 Jesse Itzler 分享过的一个画面：Jesse 的孩子在越野赛冲过终点线时打出了一个“0”的手势，代表他在赛场上毫无保留地耗尽了最后一滴能量，油箱彻底见底。这也让 Alex 联想到电影《斯巴达300勇士》（*300*）中，王后在国王出征前叮嘱的那句经典名言：“带着你的盾牌凯旋，或者躺在上面被抬回来。”在自己深爱的事业中燃尽生命，是他能想象到的最崇高的谢幕方式。令他略感困扰的是，许多人仅仅因为他人热爱与众不同的事物就心生敌意。这种人生态度的底色是“彻底的自由”与“绝对的责任”。Alex 指出，责任与权力的流动是严格绑定的：你把指责的手指指向哪里，你的力量就流向哪里。如果你将人生困境归咎于父母，父母就控制了你的生活；如果你归咎于老板，老板就拥有了主宰你幸福的权力；而当你将责任全部揽在自己身上时，你才拥有了改变现状的力量。 - **责权一体的归因原则**：指责父母 = 赋予父母掌控权；指责雇主 = 赋予雇主掌控权；承担全责 = 拿回重塑自我的绝对力量。 - **成功的个性化定义**：若有人认为人生的极致就是少工作、多陪伴家人，Alex 会真诚地送上祝贺并认为对方“彻底赢了”；但他坚决反对将任何单一维度的成功强加于他人。 - **接纳自己的“不正常”**：Alex 承认自己的生活方式在常人眼中“不正常”，但这只是独特而非错误。意识到这一点，能彻底解锁追求所爱的广阔可能性。 ### [02:56:35](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Kl-I7sUcAOY&t=10595s) 摆脱“应该”的束缚与“去他的幸福” 在 18 至 22 岁之间，Alex 曾深陷抑郁，苦苦在哲学和宗教中探寻人生的答案。为了将虚无缥缈的幸福感“量化操作”，他曾试图从做过的上百件事中筛选出前 10% 带来快乐的事物，但最终发现，越是刻意追逐幸福，幸福就越像一根悬在眼前的胡萝卜，始终可望而不可即。绝望之中，他顿悟出了自己的解脱咒语：“去他的幸福（Fuck happiness）。”当他彻底放弃对幸福的执念，不再将其作为衡量指标，而是埋头去做自己真正想做、该做的工作时，几年后抬头再看，他惊喜地发现自己竟然发自内心地喜欢当下的生活。 Alex 认为，人类绝大多数痛苦的根源都在于预期现实“应该”（should）与现状有所不同。无处不在的“应该”是痛苦的核心度量衡——认为某人“应该结婚生子”、“应该更早或更晚成家”、“应该多给家里打电话”、“应该按某种标准生活”。他努力从生命中剔除所有非限定性的“应该”，全然拥抱“本来的样子”（is）。只要不存在具体的因果前提（如“如果你想赚更多钱，你应该考虑这样做”），所有的道德说教和泛化期望都毫无意义。这种纯粹的价值观也深刻影响了他的亲密关系。由于工作在他生命中占据着无可替代的满足感，在刚刚开始与妻子 Leila 约会时，Alex 便开诚布公地划清了底线：“我不打算改变我的工作方式。你必须能够接受我这样拼命工作，否则我们不可能走下去，因为我与工作的关系是我拥有的最令人满意的关系。”即便旁人会嘲讽他“不懂什么是真爱”，Alex 也完全不在意。在他看来，与目标的关系本质上是他与自己之间最神圣的契约，绝不容许他人以“你工作太拼了”为由轻易践踏。 ### [02:59:53](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Kl-I7sUcAOY&t=10793s) 与妻子莱拉的相处之道：共同创造的伙伴关系 Alex Hormozi 坦言，外界总喜欢对人贴标签，但他始终清楚自己真正想过的是怎样的生活，并在寻找伴侣时希望对方能够融入这种生活方式。他回忆起与妻子莱拉（Leila Hormozi）相识的趣事：两人的第一次约会足足聊了四个小时的商业话题；而到了第二次约会，Alex 更是直接坦白：“我今天一整天都要工作，如果你能陪我一起工作就太棒了。”于是莱拉就坐在他身旁做她自己的事情。这种默默陪伴的默契让 Alex 感到非常舒适。随着时间推移，Alex 邀请莱拉：“要不你干脆和我一起来做我的事业吧？”莱拉欣然答应。从此，两人日常探讨的核心就变成了他们共同创造的事业。 Alex 承认，这种夫妻共同高强度创业的模式未必适合所有人，甚至可能不适合绝大多数人，但它非常适合自己。他深知自己的行为模式本就与众不同，因此用来汲取人生意义或快乐的方程式也自然异于常人。他认为世界上不存在什么与生俱来的“固有意义”，所有意义都是人类主观赋予的，因此必须由他自己在所做的工作中去构建意义。 ```mermaid flowchart TD accTitle: 寻找生活幸福的循环 accDescr: 展示Alex Hormozi从寻找好日子到通过工作创造自我意义的思维闭环。 subgraph Mindset["核心认知"] A["世界没有固有意义 意义由自己赋予"] --> B["幸福可操作化定义： 连续过上满意的一天"] end subgraph Practice["日常实践"] B --> C["专注热爱的工作与共创"] C --> D["不强求迎合主流度假文化"] end D --> A ``` --- ### [03:01:12](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Kl-I7sUcAOY&t=10872s) 幸福的可操作定义与不爱休假的真相在公司被收购前，Alex 和莱拉已经套现了 4000 万美元，随后又完成了整个公司的出售交割。Alex 曾经历过整整一年无事可做的休整期。在那个完全不需要为了生计而工作的阶段，他反复问自己：下半生到底想做什么？最终他的答案依然是——他喜欢工作。他对生活方式的顿悟源于多年前一位前主管的无心之言。当时 Alex 度过了一个愉快的周末，周一精神饱满地去上班。那位领导随口说道：“你周末一定过得很棒吧。我敢肯定，幸福的秘诀就是尽可能把这样美好的日子一天接着一天连轴过下去。”这句话彻底击中了 Alex，因为它提供了一个极其具体且“极具可操作性（operational）”的人生准则：找出什么是属于自己的好日子，然后尽可能多地让每一天都变成那样。这种追求也导致 Alex 在公众层面上常遭抨击——因为他公开承认自己根本不喜欢去度假。度假只会让他迫不及待地想回到手头的工作中。Alex 举例说，今年圣诞节期间他和莱拉去了墨西哥度假一周。之所以选在圣诞周，是因为整个商业世界都停摆了，即使 Acquisition.com 内部疯狂的团队愿意加班，外部供应商和合作伙伴也不工作。可即便在墨西哥，Alex 心中浮现的唯一念头只有：“这种休闲度假是给别人准备的，不适合我——但承认这一点也没关系。” --- ### [03:02:35](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Kl-I7sUcAOY&t=10955s) 做自己的勇气与幸福的勇气主持人 Steven Bartlett 对此深有感触，并敏锐地串联起两人早先关于内容创作的讨论。Steven 指出： - 成为顶尖内容创作者的核心，在于拥有“做自己的勇气”； - 同样地，要想获得真正的幸福，也需要“做自己的勇气”，甚至是一种**“敢于幸福的勇气（the courage of being happy）”**。 Steven 强调，Alex 从早年与父亲的冲突、在管理咨询公司的挣扎，再到健身房创业一路走来的独特经历，从第一性原理来看，注定了能让 Alex 感到幸福的事情必然和普通大众完全不同。要拥有幸福的勇气，就必须经受住外部舆论的绑架，抵御父母、社交媒体灌输的各种“理应如此（shoulds）”，敢于倾听自己每一天内心的真实感受。 --- ### [03:03:50](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Kl-I7sUcAOY&t=11030s) 破除“人生理应有意义”的潜意识枷锁 Alex 随后分享了一个彻底颠覆其认知的故事。在他感到迷茫的那段时间，他四处向高人请教，其中联系到了一位以数亿美元卖掉公司的极聪明的前辈。Alex 问对方：“你到底是如何从人生中汲取意义的？”对方反问了一句极其震撼的话： > “你为什么会觉得人生需要有意义？” 这句话直接撼动了 Alex 的整个世界观。他意识到，自己潜意识中竟然对宇宙做出了一个蛮横的预设——“人生理应是有意义的，我理应感到快乐”。Alex 援引了科幻作家奥森·斯科特·卡德（Orson Scott Card）的一句名言（也是他未来可能刻在墓碑上的警句）：**“我们会去质疑自己所有的信念，除了那些我们真正坚信不疑的信念——而那些信念，我们甚至从未想过去质疑。”** Alex 深刻剖析了这种荒谬感： 1. **时间维度的虚无**：把时间尺度拉长到 100 年，绝大多数普通人都会被历史抹平；拉长到 1000 年，几乎所有人都荡然无存；再到 10 万年后，连人类整体的痕迹都未必被记住。所谓“必须被铭记”、“必须有意义”的执念，本质上根本经不起追问。 2. **消解预设需求**：当一个人不断向宇宙索求“我必须快乐”、“人生必须有意义”时，反而把快乐与意义当成了外在于自己的客体，人为拉开了一道永远无法弥合的鸿沟。唯有彻底放下“宇宙理应如何”的傲慢需求，才能真正沉浸在当下，体会到切实的幸福。 3. **行为主义视角**：Alex 强调自己是一个坚定的行为主义者。他之所以持续做手头的事，不是为了形而上的宏大目标，仅仅是因为以往做这些行为时得到了积极正向的反馈。他呼吁每个人去重复那些能给自己带来良好反馈的事情，但绝不要将自身经验强加在他人身上，误以为别人照做也能得到相同的结果。 Steven 动情地总结道，听到 Alex 坦诚分享自己不爱度假、与妻子的工作狂相处模式，即便自己未必百分之百完全照搬，但这种“展示与众不同”的坦荡，让所有与主流标准不同的人找到了被接纳的释怀感。 ### [03:08:28](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Kl-I7sUcAOY&t=11308s) 做个“异类”的勇气：摆脱他人规训与休假内疚史蒂文·巴特利特（Steven Bartlett）分享了他与亚历克斯·霍尔莫齐（Alex Hormozi）之间深刻的心灵共鸣。史蒂文坦言，自己一直觉得自己与“正常人”截然不同，即便他与亚历克斯的特质并不完全相同，但他们都有一种骨子里的感觉——他们没有按社会常理出牌，甚至因此常常陷入自我怀疑，觉得自己在某种程度上“把生活过错了”，因为公众话语体系总是定义了一套人人都“应该”如何生活的标准叙事。史蒂文特别回忆起亚历克斯曾经发布的一段视频。在那期视频中，亚历克斯坦承自己根本不喜欢去度假，而是对工作有着近乎痴迷的狂热。史蒂文看到那段话时内心大呼解脱，因为在内心深处，他也曾为自己沉迷工作而产生内疚感。他反思道：“我明明每天都在做自己深爱的事情，这种负罪感究竟从何而来？其实完全来自于别人所设立的‘应该’。”史蒂文恳请亚历克斯无视外界的一切批评与质疑，继续保持做自己的勇气，因为这种真实无意中拯救了一大群觉得自己格格不入的“异类”（weirdos），让他们感受到被理解与被看见。对此，亚历克斯温和地回应：“这正是我的初衷，我制作内容就是为了他们。” ### [03:09:26](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Kl-I7sUcAOY&t=11366s) 终极追问：人生的意义在于学习随后节目进入经典闭幕环节。前一位嘉宾在《CEO日记》（The Diary Of A CEO）的专属笔记本上留下了一个神秘问题，而他并不知道这个问题会由谁来解答。看到问题后，史蒂文忍不住失笑，直呼太有宿命般的讽刺意味——问题赫然写着：“人生的意义是什么？”（What is the meaning of life?）亚历克斯先是开玩笑抛出了《银河系漫游指南》里的经典梗：“简短的答案显然是 42。”随后，他给出了自己极其严肃深邃的解答：人生的意义就是“学习”（Learning）。亚历克斯从本质出发剖析学习的定义：人暴露在全新的环境与条件下，随着时间推移改变了自己的行为模式。今天的你之所以不同于十年前的你，正是因为你学到了更多的东西。他将这个哲学命题与商业世界自然融合： ```mermaid flowchart LR accTitle: 人生与商业的意义模型 accDescr: 对比商业输出与人生经验输出的对应关系，阐明人生的意义即为学习 subgraph Business["商业逻辑"] B1["商业定位与使命\n(例: SpaceX 去火星)"] --> B2["业务实际产出 (Output)\n(目标达成与交付)"] B2 --> B3["商业的核心意义"] end subgraph Life["生命逻辑"] L1["个体经历与探索\n(全新环境与挑战)"] --> L2["行为改变与认知进化"] L2 --> L3["产出：持续学习与成长"] end Business -.->|"本质对应"| Life ``` - **输出决定意义**：一个企业的意义与使命，本质上就是这个企业最终交付的产出（Output）。例如埃隆·马斯克（Elon Musk）创立 SpaceX 的使命是让人类登陆火星，那么该企业的意义就在于让人类抵达火星这个最终产出。 - **经验的产出即为学习**：对于整个人类而言，所有人生经历（experience）的必然产出就是学习。无论你是否愿意、喜欢与否，生活都会逼着你学习，行为改变必然发生。 - **核心追问**：既然学习无论如何都会发生，人生最关键的命题就不再是“人生的意义是什么”，而是“你是否正在学习那些你真正渴望掌握的东西？” ### [03:11:14](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Kl-I7sUcAOY&t=11474s) 商业赋能与终章致谢在节目尾声，史蒂文极力向观众推荐亚历克斯在 YouTube 上推出的颠覆性视频栏目——《56分钟内为陌生人打造百万美元企业》（Building a $1 Million Business for a Stranger in 56 Minutes）。史蒂文评价这就像是新一代更具实操性、更接地气的《创智赢家》（Shark Tank），凝聚了亚历克斯团队数不清的心血打磨，提供了极高密度的实用商业策略。史蒂文同时盛赞了亚历克斯的两本畅销著作《1亿美元报价》（$100M Offers）与《1亿美元线索》（$100M Leads），称其几乎是每一位创业者起步、寻求规模化增长、获客及销售的必备工具书。史蒂文还剧透亚历克斯正在闭关创作该系列的第三卷，预计将在年内重磅发布。最后，他呼吁寻找商业合作与咨询的创业者访问 Acquisition.com，并真诚地感谢亚历克斯的无私分享：“感谢你的慷慨，感谢你始终敢于与众不同，敢于做自己。这个世界不需要更多千篇一律的人，我们需要的是有勇气活出自我、有勇气获得幸福的人。” ### [03:12:38](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Kl-I7sUcAOY&t=11558s) 幕后延伸：《CEO日记》对话卡牌对谈结束后，史蒂文展示了节目衍生的官方互动卡牌——《CEO日记》对话卡牌第2版（The Diary Of A CEO Conversation Cards V2）。该项目将历期所有神秘嘉宾亲笔写下的深度追问集结成实体卡片，卡牌背面印有二维码，扫码即可直接观看当年写下该问题的神秘人揭晓以及下一位嘉宾的作答现场。史蒂文提醒观众，这套限量卡牌在此前已经经历过两次瞬时售罄，呼吁感兴趣的观众尽早入手。 ## Notable quotes > [03:23](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Kl-I7sUcAOY&t=203s) His dream must die in order for mine to live — Alex Hormozi > [09:15](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Kl-I7sUcAOY&t=555s) 恐惧就像是一片一英里宽、一英寸深的水洼。 — Leila Hormozi > [14:05](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Kl-I7sUcAOY&t=845s) Fear exists in the vague, not in the specific. — Alex Hormozi > [18:30](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Kl-I7sUcAOY&t=1110s) 每个创业者的发言，都像是在说：‘看，这就是我那张彩票的中奖号码！’ — Andrew Wilkinson > [29:10](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Kl-I7sUcAOY&t=1750s) 你要看冠军身上缺少了什么——他们缺少的是‘关机键’（Off Button）。 — Alex Hormozi > [39:39](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Kl-I7sUcAOY&t=2379s) 永远不要稀释你自己（Never dilute yourself）。需要听到这条信息的人，远比那些讨厌这条信息的人多得多。如果你真的想对很多人的生活产生深远影响，就必然会招致同等大小的反对力量来排斥它。这是你想要产生巨大影响力所必须承受的代价。 — Leila Hormozi > [44:40](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Kl-I7sUcAOY&t=2680s) 要想赢得属于你的 20%，你就必须做好惹恼那 80% 人的准备。 — Jane Wurwand > [01:01:46](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Kl-I7sUcAOY&t=3706s) The ability to have the hard conversations sooner — Steven Bartlett > [01:26:46](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Kl-I7sUcAOY&t=5206s) 你是想后半辈子继续卖糖水，还是想跟我一起改变世界？ — Steve Jobs > [01:35:00](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Kl-I7sUcAOY&t=5700s) The grass is always greener on the other side, you just don't know that it's fertilized with sh*t — Gym Launch 资深 CFO > [01:44:59](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Kl-I7sUcAOY&t=6299s) Success is doing the obvious thing for an extraordinary period of time without believing that you're smarter than you are — Shane Parrish > [02:02:52](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Kl-I7sUcAOY&t=7372s) Running a business is like staring into the abyss and chewing glass. — Elon Musk > [02:50:28](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Kl-I7sUcAOY&t=10228s) 努力工作本身就是目标，做值得做的事直到生命终结。 — Alex Hormozi > [03:03:50](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Kl-I7sUcAOY&t=11030s) 我们会去质疑自己所有的信念，除了那些我们真正坚信不疑的信念——而那些信念，我们甚至从未想过去质疑。 — Orson Scott Card ## Mentioned Alex Hormozi, Steven Bartlett, Leila Hormozi, Acquisition.com, Andrew Wilkinson, Tiny, Jeff Bezos, Amazon, Regal Cinemas, Prime, Jane Wurwand, Dermalogica, Willem Dafoe, Nike, Jensen Huang, NVIDIA, Elon Musk, Tesla, Keith Rabois, Casey Leaden, Peter Drucker, Rolls-Royce, Skool, Sam Ovens, Richard Feynman, Steve Jobs, John Sculley, Apple, PepsiCo, ButcherBox, Gym Launch, Shane Parrish, Mark Zuckerberg, Meta, Represent, Gymshark, David Perell, Chris Rock, Sergey Brin, Google, ZOE, Shopify, Flight Studio, Sam Bakhtiar, Brian Chesky, Y Combinator, Warren Buffett, Charlie Munger, Jesse Itzler, Orson Scott Card, SpaceX, The Hitchhiker's Guide to the Galaxy, Shark Tank, $100M Offers, $100M Leads, The Diary Of A CEO, The Diary Of A CEO Conversation Cards V2 ## Video description Alex Hormozi is an Iranian-American entrepreneur, investor, philanthropist and founder of Acquisition.com. He is the author of books such as ‘$100M Leads: How to Get Strangers To Want To Buy Your Stuff’ and $100M Offers: How To Make Offers So Good People Feel Stupid Saying No’. 00:00 Intro 02:19 What Would You Say to the Millions of Entrepreneurs That Follow You? 03:23 What Entrepreneurs Really Need 12:09 Is There a Framework for Knowing When to Quit? 16:10 Fear vs. Logic: How to Think Rationally 19:13 Your Decisions Are Driven by Self-Awareness 23:41 What to Do When You Quit Your Job: The 4 P's 24:47 Pain as a Driver 27:35 Mercenaries and Missionaries in Business 32:36 Just One P Will Make You Succeed! 35:53 What's the Cheat Code to Win at the Game of Attention? 39:39 The Winning Strategy for 2025 49:13 How Important Are People in the Business Journey? 56:52 First-Time Founders Need to Know This About Recruiting 59:14 A-Players Hire A-Players 01:01:46 The Ability to Have Hard Conversations Sooner 01:09:36 Be Kind, Not Nice, as a Manager 01:15:47 How to Not F*ck Up in the Hiring Process 01:23:46 How Do You Know They're Not BSing You in the Interview? 01:24:49 How to Hire Great People If You Don't Have the Money 01:28:03 The Pros and Cons of Experienced vs. Less Experienced Employees 01:30:05 The 4 R's 01:32:24 Ads 01:33:15 How to Be Prepared for the Rollercoaster of Building a Business 01:55:42 What Successful Companies Do 01:58:05 How to Double Your Business Growth 02:10:52 How to Help a Founder Who's About to Quit—They Can't Take It Anymore 02:16:47 The Old Innovators' Dilemma and How to Adapt 02:23:55 Ads 02:25:53 Your Rate of Experimentation Has to Be Higher Than Your Competitors! 02:29:10 Do Mentors Matter in Our Journey? 02:37:25 Parrots vs. Practitioners: The Best Way to Learn 02:42:23 The Founder Mode 02:46:51 Founders and the Competitors Around Them 02:49:14 Work-Life Balance 02:56:35 The Mantra That Helped Me 03:03:43 How to Drive Meaning from Your Life 03:09:51 What Is the Meaning of Life? Follow Alex: Instagram - https://g2ul0.app.link/EBxnhGYpNQb Twitter - https://g2ul0.app.link/wucQ8x0pNQb You can purchase Alex’s book, ‘$100M Leads: How to Get Strangers To Want To Buy Your Stuff’, here: https://amzn.to/413cH2K My new book! 'The 33 Laws Of Business & Life' is out now - https://g2ul0.app.link/DOACBook Get your hands on the Diary Of A CEO Conversation Cards here: https://appurl.io/iUUJeYn25v Get access to exclusive Diary of a CEO content: https://www.youtube.com/channel/UCGq-a57w-aPwyi3pW7XLiHw/join Sponsors: Adobe - https://www.adobe.com/uk/express/spotlight/stevenbartlett?sdid=5NHJ82ZD&mv=social ZOE - http://joinzoe.com with code STEVEN10 for 10% off Shopify - https://shopify.com/bartlett [Source](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Kl-I7sUcAOY)

Source quotes

[3:23] Alex Hormozi: His dream must die in order for mine to live [9:15] Leila Hormozi: 恐惧就像是一片一英里宽、一英寸深的水洼。 [14:05] Alex Hormozi: Fear exists in the vague, not in the specific. [18:30] Andrew Wilkinson: 每个创业者的发言，都像是在说：‘看，这就是我那张彩票的中奖号码！’ [29:10] Alex Hormozi: 你要看冠军身上缺少了什么——他们缺少的是‘关机键’（Off Button）。 [39:39] Leila Hormozi: 永远不要稀释你自己（Never dilute yourself）。需要听到这条信息的人，远比那些讨厌这条信息的人多得多。如果你真的想对很多人的生活产生深远影响，就必然会招致同等大小的反对力量来排斥它。这是你想要产生巨大影响力所必须承受的代价。 [44:40] Jane Wurwand: 要想赢得属于你的 20%，你就必须做好惹恼那 80% 人的准备。 [61:46] Steven Bartlett: The ability to have the hard conversations sooner [86:46] Steve Jobs: 你是想后半辈子继续卖糖水，还是想跟我一起改变世界？ [95:00] Gym Launch 资深 CFO: The grass is always greener on the other side, you just don't know that it's fertilized with sh*t [104:59] Shane Parrish: Success is doing the obvious thing for an extraordinary period of time without believing that you're smarter than you are [122:52] Elon Musk: Running a business is like staring into the abyss and chewing glass. [170:28] Alex Hormozi: 努力工作本身就是目标，做值得做的事直到生命终结。 [183:50] Orson Scott Card: 我们会去质疑自己所有的信念，除了那些我们真正坚信不疑的信念——而那些信念，我们甚至从未想过去质疑。

Source quotes

[3:23] Alex Hormozi: his dream must die in order for mine to live. [3:23] Alex Hormozi: Fear is a mile wide and an inch deep. You look at it, it looks like this ocean, and then you take the first step and you realize you don't drown because there's ground underneath. [12:09] Alex Hormozi: Fear exists in the vague, not in the specific. [29:53] Alex Hormozi: Everyone always looks at them and says, 'What do champions have that I don't have?' And he said, 'It's they have it backwards... It's what do champions *not* have that I have.' It's what do they lack? And it's an off button. They just don't stop. [35:53] Leila Hormozi: Never dilute yourself... There are so many more people who need that message than people who are hating that message... If you're actually going to make a difference in a lot of people's lives, there's going to be an equal and opposing force of people who want to reject that. [46:44] Alex Hormozi: Being disliked is a fixed cost... it is far better to be disliked for being who you are than loved for someone you're not. [93:15] Alex Hormozi: The grass is always greener on the other side, you just don't know that it's fertilized with shit. [93:15] Alex Hormozi: I measure focus by the quantity and quality of things that you say no to, and I define commitment as the elimination of alternatives. [100:30] Shane Parrish: Success is doing the obvious thing for an extraordinary period of time without believing that you're smarter than you are. [116:37] Steve Jobs: I've built a lot of my success off finding these truly gifted people and not settling for B and C players, but really going for the A-players. [113:49] Alex Hormozi: The moment a lead comes in, you stop having sex with your husband, you stop cooking, you stop loving your child—and you immediately call the lead. [122:54] Elon Musk: Running a business is like staring out into the abyss and chewing glass. [158:46] Alex Hormozi: Education is... if said differently, what you do is you buy time... it's the only way to actually buy time today. [170:40] Alex Hormozi: Hard work is the goal. It's just to work hard, that is my goal, and then die on things worth doing. [174:40] Alex Hormozi: Where we place the finger of blame is also where power flows. If you blame your parents for your life, your parents have power over your life... If you blame you for your bad life, at least you can change you.

Original transcript

[0:00] if you want to make more money you might [0:02] want to consider doing this so number [0:03] one is hold that thought for just a [0:05] second because the thing that comes [0:07] before that is this grow of yours oh God [0:10] this is the entrepreneur life cycle and [0:12] there are six stages now the vast [0:13] majority of people get stuck on stage [0:15] three and I've made some of the biggest [0:16] career mistakes at this point and you [0:18] end up living the same 6 months for 20 [0:19] straight years suffering until you learn [0:22] how to break free from it I want to go [0:23] through the whole thing this is going to [0:25] be awesome Alex horos is the master of [0:28] business strategy an autist in tring [0:30] companies into the millions and a [0:31] leading voice in how to craft your way [0:33] to success he's an entrepreneurial [0:35] Powerhouse whether you're starting out [0:36] or want to go from 1 million to 10 [0:38] million there are certain behaviors and [0:39] actions that will increase the [0:40] likelihood of success that we're going [0:41] to go through but here's the really hard [0:43] truth that a lot of people don't like [0:44] talking about entrepreneurs must be [0:46] willing to make impossible choices have [0:48] the courage to be willing to be wrong [0:49] have Shame by failing at things in front [0:51] of people whose opinions they care about [0:53] and that fear keeps people stuck in a [0:55] job and a life they don't want for years [0:57] and that was my path I had a white [0:58] collar job condo overlooking the city [1:00] everything's according to plan and I [1:02] remember thinking like I didn't want to [1:04] be alive cuz I was so afraid but once [1:07] you get over the fear it unleashes this [1:09] whole new realm of possibility of being [1:11] able to do what you want and that is [1:13] when you can learn the real game of [1:14] Entrepreneurship such as knowing that [1:16] business ideas typically come from one [1:17] of three piece and you only need one of [1:19] those three and then there's the four RS [1:20] for customer success how to learn new [1:22] skills quickly how to stand out in a [1:24] competitive market the winning strategy [1:25] for 2025 and so much more so where [1:28] should I start [1:31] I have been forced into a bet with my [1:34] team we're about to hit 10 million [1:35] subscribers on YouTube which is our [1:37] biggest Milestone ever thanks to all of [1:38] you and we want to have a massive party [1:40] for the people that have worked on this [1:42] show for years behind the scenes so they [1:44] said to me Steve for every new [1:46] subscriber we get in the next 30 days [1:47] can $1 be given to our celebration fund [1:52] for the entire team and I've agreed to [1:54] the bet so if you want to say thank you [1:55] to the team behind the scenes at D of [1:57] here all you've got to do is hit the [1:58] Subscribe button actually this is the [2:00] first time I'm going to tell you not to [2:02] subscribe because it might end up [2:04] costing me an [2:07] [Applause] [2:12] [Music] [2:18] awful Alex if someone's just clicked on [2:21] this conversation and they're [2:22] considering listening for the next [2:24] couple of hours based on everything that [2:26] you do for the millions of entrepreneurs [2:28] that follow you that read your books can [2:31] you tell me exactly why you believe they [2:33] should stay and listen and who should [2:35] stay and listen at [2:37] acquisition. we scale [2:40] businesses the content that I generate [2:42] that we put out conversations like this [2:45] helps people who are going from Z to one [2:47] just getting off the ground to helping [2:49] people go from 1 million to 10 million [2:51] um to helping the entrepreneurs going [2:53] from 10 to 100 either get there or exit [2:56] along the way and there are Frameworks [2:59] that cross all three of those that I [3:02] consider both deep and wide um that help [3:05] any business navigate whatever strategic [3:07] decision is in front of them to get The [3:09] Highest Potential return for their time [3:11] and so if you're listening or watching [3:14] then if one of those Frameworks applies [3:17] immediately to your business and allows [3:18] you to pull five years forward in your [3:20] career I would say that's a pretty good [3:22] return on time for the people that are [3:24] at zero yeah what is it that they're [3:26] typically coming to you to help them [3:29] with so if you were one of them yeah [3:31] what is it that they want from Alex hzi [3:34] I think it's um there's what they think [3:37] they want and what they actually need um [3:39] which are two different things and so I [3:42] think what they think they want is uh [3:45] some tactic that's going to immediately [3:47] help them start a business um what they [3:51] typically actually need is um the [3:55] courage to be willing to be wrong and to [3:59] be willing to have Shame by failing at [4:03] things in front of people whose opinions [4:06] they care about and I think that's like [4:08] if I re rewind the clock for me it was [4:11] probably one of the hardest things that [4:12] I had to get over and so I think that's [4:14] why maybe my message resonates with a [4:15] lot of people is because it was so hard [4:17] for me um to get over and what's [4:19] interesting is basically anybody who's [4:21] listening the harder it is for you to [4:23] break free of whatever kind of mental [4:25] prison you've made for yourself whether [4:27] that's real or just in in your head [4:30] the more compelling your story will be [4:32] when you break through it um because it [4:34] will resonate with even more people uh [4:37] for the people that it was easy that [4:39] their story doesn't have doesn't have a [4:40] lot like I was immediately an [4:42] entrepreneur like I wasn't like that I [4:43] had a job when I was in high school I [4:45] had a job immediately out of college [4:46] some people were like I was selling [4:48] lemonade out of the back of my you know [4:49] thing when I was 13 I didn't do any of [4:51] that like I School failed me I actually [4:53] was pretty good at school uh I didn't [4:55] have any of those issues you know what I [4:56] mean and so I had a pretty clear career [4:58] path and so I had many would consider [5:00] like I had a real opportunity cost so I [5:03] had a white collar job and I had uh a [5:05] GMAT score above Harvard's mid score and [5:08] so I had a a really clear path of what [5:10] my life would could look like in the [5:12] next 20 30 years and it was fairly well [5:14] defined like I'll go to Harvard or [5:16] Stanford or one of the top Business [5:18] Schools and then I will either go back [5:19] into management consulting or I'll go [5:20] into Investment Banking and then [5:21] eventually end up in private Equity um [5:23] and that would be the path right and [5:25] then all the flowers would be set at my [5:27] feet and you know everyone would say we [5:29] approve of you you're an excellent [5:31] person but when I saw the people who [5:32] were 20 years ahead of me I really [5:35] didn't want their life and then it [5:36] started making me look at my life and I [5:38] was like I don't even know if I really [5:38] want my life um and so the the big [5:42] decisions that I've made in my life [5:44] unfortunately um have almost always come [5:46] at the at the the doorstep of a parent [5:50] death um and I think maybe in some ways [5:52] that makes me a coward uh for having [5:55] needed death to make decisions and so [5:59] operational realizing that has been [6:01] something that has helped me move faster [6:03] to make decisions that I know I need to [6:05] make but don't and so like the first big [6:08] kind of like what felt like a death [6:10] decision was um I was a consultant 22 is [6:14] years old I had a paid for you know [6:16] condo that I bought uh overlooking the [6:18] city and I remember thinking like I [6:21] really hope I don't wake up tomorrow and [6:24] that and I don't mean that to be [6:26] melodramatic it just I just for a period [6:28] of time I just always just like hooped [6:30] every night I was like I just really up [6:31] I don't wake up tomorrow like I just [6:32] don't want to do this and what was [6:35] difficult about that was that at that [6:36] time was when my father was most proud [6:38] of me uh because I was doing everything [6:41] that was according to plan you know he [6:43] could talk like his son who graduated in [6:45] three years from Vanderbilt had the had [6:47] the good job like everything was we're [6:48] following the plan um and it was upon [6:54] realizing that my ultimate expression of [6:57] living out his dream was me feeling like [7:00] I didn't want to be alive and so in and [7:03] it took me time to get to that point to [7:06] even articulate that because obviously [7:07] you never want to kind of like admit [7:08] failure of like I have really messed [7:11] something up here um but I was living my [7:14] life to win someone else's game and when [7:17] I realized that I realized that one of [7:20] our dreams had to die either his or mine [7:23] and when I realized that his dream must [7:27] die in order for mine to live was a a [7:30] statement that I kind of crystallized [7:32] when I was at that point in my life like [7:34] I had to keep repeating that like his [7:35] dream has to die in order for mine to [7:36] live and so to put this in perspective [7:39] of like how afraid of my father's [7:41] judgment I was I left the state and [7:44] drove across the country halfway through [7:45] before calling him to tell him that I [7:46] was gone and so I I bring this up [7:49] because I don't try I'm not trying to be [7:50] dramatic here but I'm saying that if you [7:52] feel a lot of pressure I get it like I [7:54] tried to leave the job that I was at to [7:56] pursue just literally anything that [7:58] wasn't that just I wanted to start a [8:00] business at some point I didn't know how [8:02] I was going to do it I just knew that [8:03] what I was doing was not the path I [8:04] wanted to be on and everybody around me [8:07] wanted me to be on that path and so I [8:09] went to go be like hey I'm thinking [8:11] about doing something else and you know [8:12] it would always be that ah you know [8:14] don't later later like everything's good [8:16] later you know and um I remember when I [8:18] called my dad and I told him that he [8:21] said understand why don't you come like [8:23] come home well uh well I didn't tell him [8:25] that I was I was gone yet like I said [8:27] hey I want you know I want to go pursue [8:28] this Fitness thing [8:30] um he said cool come over for lunch [8:31] we'll talk about it you know and and he [8:33] and I was like I'm I'm already gone and [8:36] then obviously his tone changed a lot um [8:39] and um and you know our relationship [8:40] struggled for you know years after that [8:42] and I I also bring that up because [8:45] sometimes there's this illusion that [8:47] like you know you get on the on the [8:49] Oscar stage or whatever it is and you're [8:50] like hey I just want to think you know [8:51] my mom my dad my friends for always [8:53] supporting me and um I can't say that [8:57] and I wish I could and you might not not [8:59] be able to say that either and I also [9:01] don't think that's a reason not to do it [9:04] and so um we did struggle for years [9:06] after that to kind of like because I was [9:08] basically living as what was once his [9:10] prodical son uh goes and takes a minimum [9:13] wage job as a personal trainer at a gym [9:15] uh like you know cleaning floors and [9:17] stuff to learn just to learn the gym [9:19] business um but that was ultimately like [9:21] how I broke free literally you know [9:23] physically uh leaving the area and you [9:26] know mentally but I think that I had to [9:28] accept that [9:30] there was a there was a timeline where [9:31] my father would never talk to me again [9:33] and I had to be okay with that um to [9:35] pursue what I wanted and I think that [9:37] when you ask the original question what [9:38] are the people from 0 to one really [9:39] looking for I read tons of business [9:42] books at that time but I couldn't use [9:44] any of them because I was so afraid and [9:47] what's crazy is that like I think about [9:48] it now in retrospect and it's like it's [9:51] crazy how large the perceived monsters [9:54] can appear and Leila has this quote that [9:57] I love but it's um is a mile wide an [10:00] inch deep and so you look at it it looks [10:03] like this ocean and then you take the [10:04] first step and you realize you don't [10:05] drown because it's like oh there's [10:06] ground underneath of this right there's [10:08] other people who are more on my path and [10:11] the friends you lose you gain new [10:12] friends right and so um that [10:16] fear was the hardest decision that I've [10:19] had to overcome in my entrepreneural [10:20] career and I think of all the of all the [10:22] the split paths in my life that was the [10:25] one that if I had many timelines or many [10:27] universes that existed that was is [10:29] probably the one that is the most likely [10:30] that I would not have parted from so I [10:33] think in like 90% of universes that Alex [10:35] rosi exists I'm just a consultant [10:37] somewhere and so um I would encourage [10:40] you if you do feel that you're not going [10:42] to die like you won't die and you might [10:46] just [10:47] live it's so interesting because I think [10:50] everything you've said is just [10:51] absolutely spot on but you're right in [10:53] way you say that if you'd asked an [10:55] audience member listening now why they [10:57] haven't started yet they would say fear [11:00] they would say I haven't got the X I [11:02] haven't got the Y but actually it is [11:03] such an emotional thing and we don't [11:05] talk about that enough because [11:06] uncertainty is humans seem to be [11:08] allergic to uncertainty and they'd [11:10] rather the certain misery of their [11:11] current situation typically than [11:14] uncertainty and I think um and I and I [11:17] used what I consider a very non-p [11:19] palatable word of coward purposefully [11:22] because no one wants to say they're [11:24] afraid because if you say you're afraid [11:26] then it means you're a coward and I [11:28] think that it only means coward if you [11:30] don't if you allow that fear to change [11:34] your behavior in an aversive way as in [11:37] it not towards what you want and so you [11:41] know the inverse of that many people [11:42] have heard it Courage is not acting um [11:44] without fear but despite fear um and I [11:46] think that um when you [11:49] act when you allow fear to change your [11:53] behavior the wrong way that is when you [11:55] can give yourself that title of coward [11:57] and I think that that is a title that I [11:59] feared my whole life and that label is [12:02] almost I'm more afraid of that label [12:04] than the label of failure I'd rather be [12:07] a failure than a [12:08] coward is there a framework for knowing [12:10] when to [12:12] quit so I think there's the there's like [12:15] the math behind it and the math I think [12:16] is pretty straightforward so like when [12:18] do you quit your business I like you've [12:21] saved up three to six months of personal [12:23] savings number one number two is that [12:25] you have started something because [12:27] nowadays in the digital age you can [12:28] begin a business on the side that can [12:30] generate income and that income um in [12:34] the small amount of time that you're not [12:35] working uh replaces or at least matches [12:38] the existing income you have from your [12:40] your current job and you've been able to [12:41] do that or demonstrate that income for [12:44] like 3 to six months if you do that [12:46] that's a very like math way of [12:47] approaching it that also is basically [12:49] never the reason that people aren't [12:51] quitting their job right like that's a [12:53] really s like I have I have I have [12:54] backlog I've matched my current income [12:57] with my part-time work and if I just put [12:59] my full-time work I would probably make [13:00] more very reasonable but never actually [13:03] the reason that people don't do it I was [13:05] I was thinking about the two sort of [13:07] reasons why someone might quit something [13:09] or feel like they want to quit and one [13:10] of them is clearly because it's hard and [13:12] that's obviously not reason enough to [13:13] quit and then there's another one which [13:14] you are speaking to there which is it's [13:16] not moving me towards a meaningful goal [13:19] irrespective of how hard it is like a [13:20] marathon you're raising money for a [13:22] charity you care about it's hard but you [13:24] don't quit yeah and then there's maybe [13:26] if you're running a marathon for no [13:27] apparent reason you know there was no [13:29] charity there was no one watching there [13:31] was no like Fitness benefit then that's [13:33] a good I guess moment to consider [13:35] quitting um my story mimics yours in a [13:38] way that I didn't realize I didn't [13:40] realize you went through a similar thing [13:41] in terms of call the parents [13:43] disownership yeah um no real great [13:46] option to to flee to but feeling like [13:49] the current path that would have led me [13:51] to be I don't know business management [13:52] student was significantly worse on [13:55] balance than taking the risk but I think [13:59] maybe a point of Distinction is it [14:00] didn't I was so naive that it didn't [14:01] feel like a risk yeah so what's really [14:05] interesting about that is um the [14:07] guarantee and so a lot of times we don't [14:10] we don't look at what I call the don't [14:11] which is like the the alternate path and [14:14] so if I had played out my existing path [14:17] I had a guarantee of outcome I didn't [14:19] want it was just out a [14:21] delay whereas here there's a chance that [14:25] I can make it and so one of the final [14:28] kind of framework for making the [14:29] decision was guaranteed bad chance at [14:33] good and I was like well I might as well [14:36] take a chance and I I strongly um [14:41] encourage thinking about uh playing it [14:44] out and so what I mean by that is like I [14:46] think [14:47] fear exists in the vague not in the [14:51] specific and so when you say I'm GNA [14:54] quit my job and then what if this [14:56] doesn't work I'm GNA failure tons of [14:58] fear [14:59] if I say I'm going to quit my job and [15:02] then I'm going to try and start a [15:04] business and if the business doesn't [15:06] work I'll probably have a compelling [15:08] story that I could tell for business [15:10] school if I wanted to to show that I had [15:12] some entrepreneurial slant in the [15:14] meantime I could use that experience [15:15] plus my job experience to probably get [15:17] another or maybe even better job in the [15:19] meantime and match or or supersede my [15:22] existing income and the actual loss [15:24] would be maybe the savings that I had [15:26] saved up but if I'm younger or I haven't [15:28] made as much money as I want then that's [15:30] never been the amount of money that [15:31] would be material anyways on the grand [15:33] scheme of what I would like to make um [15:35] and in terms of living situation I will [15:37] worst case go back to my parents house [15:40] with my tail between my legs or sleep at [15:43] a friend's couch because I have enough [15:45] people that would be willing to put me [15:46] up in a garage if I had to and so it's [15:48] like okay so my actual worst case [15:50] scenario is just like I have a cool [15:52] story and maybe some shame that I is [15:55] self-inflicted cuz it's not like no one [15:57] else cares really but it's [15:58] self-inflicted shame [15:59] and maybe a detour or a different story [16:01] that I have to tell later on in my [16:04] career not as much fear there right but [16:07] like the first one like I'll fail [16:08] everyone will hate me and I'll die the [16:11] first one sounded like it was written by [16:13] your like amigdala like the Fierce and [16:15] the second one was pure like prefrontal [16:16] cortex it was all logic yeah and I'm [16:18] wondering you know as you're going into [16:19] that decision obviously fear is going to [16:21] lead it so of course you're going to go [16:22] for option one where you just think [16:23] about the downside maybe there's a [16:25] practice that allows you to get into [16:27] your prefrontal cortex into logic and I [16:29] think that's I actually so I think you [16:30] nailed it and said it way better than I [16:33] did but I think that's I think going [16:34] from vague to specific basically [16:37] disengages your mdala because it's it [16:40] can't reason the logic chain of [16:42] causation and causality of what's going [16:43] to happen next in a chain of events and [16:46] so when you get into the specific of it [16:48] all of a sudden you're like okay I'm not [16:51] going to be homeless and then shamed and [16:53] die um I might live in inferior living [16:57] conditions for a short period which by [16:59] the way when you're later on in your [17:00] life you'll look back and think of as [17:02] the good old days cuz I can't believe I [17:03] was couch surfing I was pursuing my [17:05] dreams right it's it's only like in the [17:07] moment that it feels bad when you look [17:09] back like even I I find this hilarious [17:11] like like how long after you do [17:13] something embarrassing is it [17:14] funny right like at at some point for [17:17] almost all of us with enough time the [17:19] shameful experience becomes funny and so [17:22] if it is going to become funny [17:23] eventually it might as well become funny [17:25] now yeah and so it's just like pulling [17:26] the time Horizon up but all of that [17:28] prefrontal cortex decision making and so [17:31] um no but I think that's exact like I [17:33] think that that nailed it because when I [17:34] thought about this this decision [17:36] obviously I had my very you know [17:37] emotional statement around like his [17:39] dream has to die for mine to live yes [17:41] also logic downside risk here I'll have [17:44] a story and I can always get my job [17:47] back okay and if I can't get that job [17:49] back I'll will have other ones that will [17:51] be available fine and if I have a [17:53] downgrading and some people think that [17:54] I'm not as successful as then okay I'll [17:57] not stop though and so I think that that [17:59] that demystifies a lot of the fears I [18:01] think that applies not just for [18:02] entrepreneurial fears I think applies [18:03] for any fear like I'm going to talk like [18:05] I can't tell this person this bad news [18:06] all right let's play it out I say [18:08] something and then they're going to kill [18:09] me probably not so what's going to [18:11] happen I'll say these words and then [18:14] there they they they'll flip the table [18:16] they'll they'll flick me off they'll [18:18] maybe just feel hurt and maybe they'll [18:20] cry maybe they'll shout okay okay if [18:23] they shouted at me what do I do like and [18:24] you just kind of play it out and you're [18:25] like okay I think I have like most of [18:26] these conditions prepared for and then [18:30] all of a sudden you can like have those [18:31] things what you also said is that in the [18:34] face of guaranteed misery any option is [18:36] better yeah like it's real you get to [18:39] live once yeah so like why would [18:41] guaranteed misery be better than any [18:43] available option it's delay discounting [18:46] that's what's crazy is delay discounting [18:47] happens both ways like um so like you [18:50] set your alarm for 5:00 a.m. at night [18:52] and you're like I'm going to wake up at [18:54] 5: but that's because you're delaying [18:56] the pain of waking up and when it's [18:58] immediate when I have to quit the job [19:00] like I'll quit my job tomorrow for 20 [19:02] years and so it's just like we always we [19:04] we we delay the fact that we're going to [19:06] be miserable into the present uh to like [19:09] a like we we massively discount what a [19:11] whole lifetime of misery would be amen [19:14] when you're thinking about what to [19:16] pursue so say you've left the job you've [19:18] quit the thing when you're thinking [19:19] about what to [19:20] pursue how much of that is a [19:24] decision derived from self-awareness [19:27] because you know they'll someone will [19:28] look at you now and be like Oh No Alex [19:30] did this so I'm going to start a [19:32] acquisition. comom you know or they'll [19:34] say um I want to I saw Steve Jobs did [19:37] that thing with the computers I'm going [19:38] to start Apple yeah right or Elon I'm [19:40] going to do the spaceships how much do [19:42] you have to know thyself to know what to [19:44] pursue man this is a really good [19:46] question so um there's a tweet that I [19:48] love by Andrew Wilkinson which is um [19:51] every entrepreneur ever colon here's the [19:54] winning number for my lottery ticket and [19:56] so it's like every entrepreneur will say [19:59] here's the winning lottery ticket but [20:01] it's like that game already that drawing [20:04] already happened ah okay yeah right and [20:06] so like you can't cash that ticket in [20:07] it's already done and so people say the [20:10] word first principles no one really [20:11] knows what it means uh I mean some [20:13] people do but the I think far more [20:15] people say it than know what it means [20:17] and so basically there are foundational [20:19] truths of business that that exist and [20:23] the conditions of the environment will [20:24] change and so you have to apply those [20:27] truths to whatever the current condition [20:29] is and so that's what I try and tease [20:30] out with the books and the stuff that I [20:32] that I put out in content but at the end [20:34] of the day you have an input of time [20:36] like zooming all the way out if the goal [20:38] assuming that your goal is to make money [20:40] okay like and this is just a purely [20:42] economic business goal then you have [20:45] time which is the primary currency that [20:47] you trade it and you make dollars over a [20:48] period of time and so I tend to reject [20:51] the idea of like never you know never [20:52] trade time for dollars or anything like [20:54] that because everyone trades time for [20:56] dollars it's just some of us are more [20:57] efficient at it than others but even [21:00] exchanges that occur that just are not [21:01] denominated in time still occur over [21:03] time and so uh you have this [21:07] foundational unit of time which you're [21:08] going to give in what we're seeking is [21:11] the highest return on that time and so [21:14] there you know within a business context [21:16] there's kind of three levels of uh [21:18] things that have to occur in business [21:19] you have to you know attract attention [21:21] you have to convert attention then you [21:22] have to deliver something uh for that [21:23] attention and in each of those things [21:25] you want as much leverage as possible so [21:27] you want as little time as possible [21:29] required to get the most output and so I [21:32] have built acquisition. comom on [21:33] basically two primary thesis uh which [21:35] are in the logo which is this is a full [21:39] Crum for leverage for people that can't [21:40] see it's like a triangle yeah so it's [21:42] like a triangle or the Illuminati [21:44] because that always gets brought up um [21:46] right so we've got the full Crum for [21:48] leverage and then inside of it you have [21:50] supply and demand and I see those as the [21:52] two foundational principles of business [21:54] and so which is you need supply and [21:56] demand to have a business and then [21:58] leverage to get as much out of it as you [22:00] possibly can and so um when you're [22:03] looking at the assets that you have [22:05] assets can also be skills resources what [22:07] you have available to you now if you [22:08] have nothing then all you have is your [22:10] brain your hands and the time that you [22:12] have that you can put towards learning [22:13] something which is why I'm a big fan of [22:15] skill acquisition as one of the the [22:17] primary things that you can do is [22:18] educating yourself and not formally [22:20] educating but informally or [22:22] alternatively educating yourself on [22:24] super tactical things uh once you get [22:26] over the fear then you start asking okay [22:28] okay how do I let people know about my [22:29] stuff and what do I let them know right [22:32] and so you have to have something to [22:34] sell which is the offer and ideally you [22:36] want the offer to have as much leverage [22:37] as possible like so if you sold software [22:39] or you sold media those are things that [22:40] you can U cut once sell sell a thousand [22:44] times um if you have a conversion [22:47] mechanism it's like you can have it be [22:48] automated like a check out page or some [22:50] sort of video sales letter or something [22:52] like that where people just buy without [22:54] a phone salesperson if you add a phone [22:55] salesp person there's less leverage not [22:56] to say this wrong but you you want to [22:59] have the highest leverage opportunity [23:00] and then from a um from the [23:02] deliverability expect uh perspective um [23:06] I kind of talked about deliverability [23:07] first but uh from the advertising [23:09] perspective uh if you reach out to [23:11] people one-onone that's lower leverage [23:13] than being able to make one piece of [23:14] content that a million people see right [23:16] and so over time you go from low [23:17] leverage to high leverage uh where you [23:19] have the same inputs but you just get [23:21] significantly more for your output and [23:23] that fundamentally is like if we're [23:24] reasoning up from first principles how [23:26] do I get the said differently the [23:28] question someone I think is really [23:29] asking is how do I get the most for what [23:31] I put in and you have to reason within [23:34] your current context of your skills and [23:36] your resources and your assets in order [23:38] to derive that solution for you so if [23:41] someone walks up to you in the street [23:42] and they say Alex what idea should I [23:43] pursue I've just quit my job yeah right [23:46] so I would say um business idea is [23:49] typically come from one of three PS so [23:50] it comes from a pain that you're [23:52] currently experiencing a past profession [23:54] so the thing that you just quit or some [23:56] of the jobs that you just quit or a [23:57] passion MH so it's something that you're [23:59] inherently interested in that you would [24:00] spend your time doing [24:02] anyways uh some skill that you learned [24:04] while you were in the workforce which by [24:05] the way is one of the most proven ways [24:07] of making money because the economy has [24:09] already showed you that people are [24:10] willing to exchange money for that for [24:12] that specific job and so uh in the world [24:15] of gig economies and solar preneurs [24:17] every business can be dismantled into [24:18] just jobs being done and all of those [24:21] jobs can be fractionalized so anybody [24:23] like we look at any business you've got [24:25] sales you've got you've got marketing [24:27] you've got customer uccess you've got [24:29] you've got customer support if you want [24:30] to differentiate that you've got product [24:31] you've got design you've got web pages [24:33] there's you know there's so many [24:34] different components to a business you [24:36] just need to learn one of them and then [24:37] it's like boom you have a skill that you [24:39] can trade for money that you don't have [24:40] anybody else to report to um and then [24:43] pain is usually I think um in some ways [24:47] um sometimes one of the biggest drivers [24:49] it's like you had an eating allergy and [24:52] you couldn't find pancakes that dealt [24:57] with your specific eating all and you [24:59] bet that there's a decent amount of [25:00] other people with that allergy that also [25:01] like pancakes and so then you make [25:03] pancakes that that are delicious and [25:05] amazing that also cater to people with [25:07] that food allergy and then all of a [25:08] sudden like you have a business based on [25:09] pain and why why does that matter what [25:12] the Pain part um I what leverage and [25:14] Advantage does it give you for the next [25:16] five years I think that deep knowledge [25:19] of the prospect is Paramount or very [25:22] important for creating exceptional [25:24] products and you can either do that by [25:26] doing a ton and ton of research or by [25:29] being the Prospect and there's a certain [25:31] amount of like visceral feel that you'll [25:35] know like if someone wants to make a [25:36] nose product for breathing I have tried [25:39] every product since I was in eth grade [25:40] so it's been 20 plus years 30 whatever a [25:43] lot of years um that since then and I've [25:45] tried everything and so I know the pros [25:47] and cons of every product that exists on [25:49] the market and I can tell because and [25:51] I've done it's not like oh I tried it [25:52] for a day it's like I'll try things for [25:54] a month at a time and so I have so much [25:56] time exposure to this problem that I [25:58] have a lot of nuance in my opinion on [26:00] what's wrong with the solutions so I can [26:02] formulate a way better hypothesis on how [26:04] to fix it and that hypothesis would will [26:06] be for an investor so much more [26:08] compelling because you lead with a story [26:10] as opposed to logic I met the guy who uh [26:13] invested in Regal Cinemas which is the [26:15] probably the biggest chain in the US um [26:18] and it was when it was there was guy had [26:20] just one theater and it became now [26:21] obviously Co has disrupted that business [26:23] but you know for 20 you know years [26:24] whatever they they crushed and he said [26:27] it was so weird to say that oh Cinemas [26:29] are going to make a comeback because [26:30] they'd kind of been on a downturn or [26:31] something like that during the time that [26:33] he was making the investment and he said [26:35] the reason I decided to invest in it was [26:36] because this guy knew everything about [26:38] the business down to how much the cost [26:39] of Colonel of popcorn was and he just [26:42] knew it so like the back of his hand [26:44] that he was like this guy can't fail [26:45] like he just knows too much about this [26:47] business to not have it work and so he [26:49] investing in you know making gazillion [26:50] dollars and so but I think that that [26:53] deep understanding and if you look at [26:55] all of these the passion things you'll [26:57] have deep understanding because you're [26:58] spending spending all of your [26:58] discretionary time pursuing this passion [27:01] the pain you have a deep understanding [27:03] of the of the problem and the prospects [27:05] going through it because you've [27:06] experienced it probably for years now [27:08] the professional one I would say is a [27:10] bit of a shortcut um because if you're [27:12] quitting the job because you don't like [27:15] it and then you say I'm now going to do [27:16] this for myself well you're [27:21] okay um I mean well the the the one the [27:24] one proven point about that is that that [27:26] one is proven to work from an economic [27:27] perspective [27:28] you will be able to make money doing [27:29] that because you already have made money [27:31] doing it these other two are less proven [27:33] but sometimes have a significantly more [27:34] upside when you were talking about the [27:36] breathing example with your nose it's [27:38] funny because if you had sat down and [27:39] said to me Steve I've made these like [27:40] breathing nose strips um they are better [27:42] they're 20% more durable they expand [27:44] your nostrils by 20% it is multiples [27:48] less compelling than you telling me that [27:50] story you just said about being a kid [27:52] having breathing problems trying to [27:53] solve this problem for yourself and it's [27:55] funny cuz that that story you told [27:57] versus the sort of rational logical [27:59] approach or the benefits approach is [28:01] your marketing campaign for the next [28:04] five years on Tik Tok and Instagram it's [28:06] I had a problem I solved it I tried [28:08] everything and solved it for myself [28:09] there's almost like nothing more [28:10] compelling and believable no we see that [28:12] in Dragon's Den it we'll be sat there [28:14] listening to these pictures all day then [28:15] someone will come in and say I had ADHD [28:18] I tried Energy Products they all made me [28:20] crash so I went out and solved this [28:22] problem for myself and we're on edge cuz [28:24] we almost can't argue with it yeah at [28:26] that point you know yeah so basic has [28:28] this great framework where he talks [28:29] about missionaries and mercenaries and [28:31] so it's kind of like you have the guy [28:33] who says okay I looked at market trends [28:35] and this is a growing category and you [28:37] know I surveyed people and this was the [28:40] you know the result that came back and [28:42] so I believe that if we time this [28:43] product right uh at this point in the [28:45] market we'll achieve huge you know a [28:47] mass adoption blah blah blah blah and [28:50] it's like loging your way through and to [28:52] be fair some people do you know do make [28:54] it work but the missionaries are the [28:56] ones that end up making the most money [28:57] because is like they do it sure for the [29:01] money cuz the business has to have some [29:02] economic engine behind it but really [29:04] because they viscerally experienced this [29:06] problem and don't want anyone else to [29:07] solve to deal with that problem either [29:08] and so like if I were to tell that story [29:10] like you were saying like when I was in [29:12] eth grade it was the first year that I I [29:14] started really noticing I couldn't [29:15] breathe at night and so I learned how to [29:17] fall asleep with my hand on my face like [29:18] this so that my nostril would so I could [29:21] fall asleep in my hand with because you [29:22] there's no actually other because you [29:23] can't hold your because you fall asleep [29:25] right and so if I fall asleep with my [29:27] hand like this right like like I'm on [29:29] the couch and I fall asleep like that it [29:31] keeps my nostril open and I can fall [29:33] asleep and it doesn't move and so that's [29:35] how I learned how to sleep for years uh [29:38] before founding like just like simple [29:40] nasal strips and things like that but [29:41] there's tons of problems with with those [29:43] solutions that exist right now that I [29:44] won't get into but um maybe someday I'll [29:47] make a nasal product I think I mean [29:49] literally just [29:51] delivered [ __ ] I can tell you if you [29:53] put if you put every product in front of [29:55] me that exists right now I can tell you [29:56] what's wrong with it cuz I've tried I've [29:57] tried literally all of them not like I'm [29:59] pretty obsessive and so like I've tried [30:01] all of them missing opportunity here [30:03] I've tried I've tried the ones from [30:04] Europe I've tried the like not just us [30:06] like I've tried I've tried every product [30:07] that exists on Amazon I've tried all the [30:10] ones from foreign countries every every [30:11] fan or follower who sends me a product [30:13] that is a nasal company that's new um I [30:16] will try the product I still do um and [30:19] there has yet there's there's yet to be [30:21] one that has truly solved it I mean you [30:23] should I [30:25] mean but I I think in some ways uh so [30:28] this is actually a really good meta uh [30:29] concept here which is that um if you [30:32] want to be compelling a demonstration or [30:35] a model is always more compelling than [30:37] anything else and [30:39] so me even going through that entire [30:41] narrative right is taking everyone else [30:45] who's been listening to this on some [30:46] Journey it's like if you want to make a [30:47] compelling pitch for a business it's [30:50] like we pretty much just kind of went [30:51] through one um and so that's that's [30:55] really what it comes down to you're like [30:56] well what do I do with my business it's [30:57] like [30:58] create your Narrative of why you're even [31:00] doing this and if you can explain to [31:03] somebody why why they should care about [31:04] this problem or more specifically why [31:06] you care about this [31:08] problem I'll tell you this more [31:10] investors will like I might be like I [31:11] don't care about kitchen utensils but [31:13] this girl certainly does and I'm sure [31:15] there's other women who do too and what [31:17] everyone wants to see is Obsession and [31:19] unfortunately in like some of the world [31:22] I know more in the UK than the US now [31:24] like that kind of perspective of like [31:27] just being all in obsessed with stuff [31:28] has almost been like um bastard or like [31:31] you know been um [31:32] chastised and I but the people who are [31:35] obsessed with the ones who changed the [31:36] world at least changed their world and [31:40] um and I think that so a very close [31:42] friend of mine um did all the uh Olympic [31:45] teams um nutrition and supplementation [31:48] stuff for uh a country overseas and he [31:51] said you know the difference between [31:52] Champions and everyone else and I was [31:53] like what he said everyone always looks [31:55] at them and says what do champions have [31:58] that I don't have and he said it's they [32:01] have it backwards he said it's what do [32:04] Champions not have that I have it's what [32:07] do they lack and it's an off button they [32:10] just don't stop and so in dealing with [32:13] the gold medals he's like they just [32:14] never stop they just can't stop [32:16] everything in their life is geared [32:17] towards one goal and so finding that [32:21] thing and they approach everything in [32:23] their life that way and I think that [32:26] that level of obsession of around like [32:29] everything that you touch on a daily [32:30] basis is required for really getting to [32:33] where you want to [32:35] go so interesting because as we spoke [32:37] there about the reason why the story was [32:41] so much more compelling it was back to [32:43] the amigdala it was back to emotion [32:46] right and it's funny because we we said [32:47] a second ago that when someone's [32:48] thinking about quitting a job they're [32:49] like SE in their amigdala humans run [32:51] mostly on their amydala so when we think [32:53] about pitching we should really be [32:55] aiming at the same part of the brain [32:57] which is what you did when you showed me [32:58] that you were sleeping as a kid with [32:59] your hand stretching across your face I [33:01] immediately felt sorry for you felt [33:03] sympathy and I immediately believed that [33:04] if anyone's going to solve this problem [33:06] it is this [ __ ] guy who's been [33:07] through that pain I've had two surgeries [33:09] both of them didn't really work like I [33:11] mean like i' I've got the story my [33:12] girlfriend's the same what really two [33:14] surgeries but she's coming up to her [33:16] third one now we've tried all the nose [33:17] drips I saw you wearing one I bought [33:19] that one for her yeah um and so there's [33:22] a lot of people watching right now and [33:23] there's something going on with these [33:24] bloody [ __ ] like noses yeah people [33:26] shouldn't like yeah we're doing [33:28] something I I feel like I may it popular [33:29] some of the N Stuff yeah but D making it [33:33] cool pain profession passion yeah [33:36] ideally you have all three if you have [33:38] all three then you're I mean my God [33:40] you're set like if you if basically pain [33:42] created an obsession and for some reason [33:44] you also were doing something like that [33:45] in your work like I feel like the [33:46] likelihood that you don't succeed is [33:48] almost nothing you only need one of [33:50] those three you just pick one like if [33:51] you just had one pain that you had that [33:53] you wanted to overcome or one passion [33:55] that you were just inherently interested [33:57] cuz sometimes passion has nothing to [33:58] like you might just be really into model [33:59] cars it's okay well there's a lot of [34:01] businesses that you can build around [34:02] model cars it's like you can you can [34:04] manufacture model cars uh you can have [34:06] services around model cars making them [34:07] faster because some people race model [34:08] cars you can uh be a collector and start [34:10] flipping model cars like you can just [34:12] make media around how to build them and [34:14] then have a media company around like [34:16] there's so many different components of [34:17] any Obsession or interest that you can [34:19] make I I was talking to um on one of the [34:21] future episodes of uh mosy tank uh [34:24] that's coming out we have a guy who's um [34:26] he loves Dungeons and Dragons so he's an [34:27] it he's an IT guy and just loves [34:31] Dungeons and Dragons and he was like I [34:33] just want this to make enough money that [34:35] I don't have to do ID [34:37] anymore and but it was so pure you know [34:39] what I mean and so I was like we're [34:40] going to help you do this and so we kind [34:42] of walk through the business plan for it [34:43] but like is he going to be a billionaire [34:45] no but I also don't think that's his [34:47] goal and so I think being really clear [34:49] on what you want um is important so if [34:51] you're like I want to be the richest [34:53] person in the world I think it's a [34:54] terrible goal but if you want that great [34:56] well you have to have a multi-trillion [34:58] dollar idea because now because by the [35:01] time that occurs there's already multi- [35:03] trillion dollar companies now so you got [35:05] to be looking at like Deca trillion [35:06] dollar opportunity and so believe it or [35:09] not basically the bigger the goal the [35:10] narrow the scope of the path to get [35:12] there if you're like I want to make $10 [35:14] million like you can literally do that [35:16] in almost any business you want to make [35:18] $100 million probably still almost any [35:20] business you can do it on a long enough [35:22] time rise and you can do it a trillion [35:23] or decad trillion it's going to be some [35:25] sort of tech it's probably going to have [35:27] some sort of AI [35:28] like and so you get basically the bigger [35:30] the goal is the narrower the scope of of [35:32] how to get there but the vast majority [35:33] of people were like I want to be the [35:34] richest man in the world it's just [35:35] because they don't know how to like [35:36] really think through it and be like all [35:38] right well after like a hundred there's [35:39] really nothing you can't do except buy [35:42] more big things but like in terms of [35:44] your actual consumption maybe even 20 is [35:46] like you can only eat at restaurants [35:47] that go so expensive you can only stay [35:49] at the best hotels you can only drive [35:50] the nicest cars you can do that with [35:51] about 25 [35:52] million what do you think the cheat code [35:54] is then so I've got my idea what do you [35:55] think the cheat code is in 2025 [35:58] to win at the game of attention like [36:02] there's got to be some new rules here [36:03] because we've got AI we've got new [36:04] platforms we've got New [36:06] Media you know I'm give you a [36:09] hypothetical business idea I'm going to [36:11] be a personal trainer okay and I pick [36:13] that because everyone can do it and it's [36:14] it's a saturated industry if I'm if I'm [36:16] a personal trainer in the [36:18] 2025 how should I be thinking about [36:21] building attention mhm so I'll tell you [36:24] what I wouldn't do first which is I [36:26] don't think I try and out science the [36:28] science people uh because like unless [36:30] you have some PhD there is a PhD guy [36:32] who's already jacked who's making [36:34] content and so he's more knowledgeable [36:36] and more Jack than you so you're not [36:38] going to win there and so I think in the [36:40] game of attention it's trying to find [36:42] what is unique right and so how do you [36:44] how do you quote stand out when [36:46] everyone's loud and this is going to [36:48] sound trite but your fingerprint is [36:52] unique literally from a biological [36:54] perspective but so is your life and your [36:56] experiences and so there's there's real [36:59] Alpha or or benefit to be had above [37:02] normal level of effort by leaning into [37:05] you and so what makes every person [37:08] unique is what makes their content [37:10] unique and so trying to be like oh I [37:12] want to make content like Alex is [37:14] probably not the best way to do it [37:15] because you're not going to beat me at [37:16] being me but you'll beat me at being you [37:19] and so it's basically your flavor of [37:21] media so like for me it's like you know [37:23] what is you know my brand to to to to [37:25] model this it's like well I have [37:26] elements of flly philosophy that are in [37:28] my brand well do I need that no but [37:30] that's like kind of me um I obviously [37:32] talk a ton about business marketing and [37:33] sales promotion conversion those are all [37:35] things that I spend a lot of time [37:36] thinking about and so a lot of my [37:38] content about that um Fitness is a [37:40] component of my life and so there's [37:41] light sprinkling of Fitness uh in my [37:43] content also I come from a background of [37:45] Fitness um with the the with gym launch [37:47] and and the companies that I owned [37:48] before that and so that would make sense [37:51] that and I've my wife Lea and so that [37:53] sprinkled in and so like those are [37:54] basically the components of My Life um [37:56] and so that's what kind of shines [37:57] through in my content I consume a ton of [37:59] comedy and so sometimes you'll see some [38:00] dry humor and dark humor that that [38:01] shines through um but that's me now you [38:04] have all of those little buckets of you [38:07] and not only are those buckets unique [38:09] but also the proportions of those [38:11] buckets will be different and so maybe [38:12] your philosophy is way bigger or maybe [38:14] Fitness part is way bigger but I think [38:16] what makes the truly unique personal [38:17] trainer or Fitness brand is leaning [38:20] into people being interested in you for [38:23] being you and then being like by the way [38:27] I have Fitness stuff if you want to buy [38:29] it from me and I think the key part is [38:33] the vast majority of products and [38:34] services are commone tized there you're [38:36] not you're probably not going to be [38:37] significantly better than other trainers [38:40] just being real you probably aren't but [38:43] you will be different than them and we [38:46] want to lean on I I want to buy Fitness [38:49] from somebody and so I might as well buy [38:51] from her or I might as well buy it from [38:52] him so you're taking basically this [38:54] audience that would buy from anyone but [38:57] your brand premium gets them to want to [38:59] buy it from you we think about Prime for [39:01] example with the drink the drink company [39:03] like it's a it's a drink that there's [39:06] other products that already exist in the [39:07] marketplace that satisfy the same thing [39:09] as Prime but if you are agnostic to that [39:12] brand and you have brand Affinity with [39:13] that that Creator then you're like well [39:16] then if I have two things that are [39:18] basically equal and I just like this guy [39:19] better I'm just going to as long as the [39:21] prices are comparable I'll just vote [39:23] with my dollars here and so I think that [39:25] if you're a personal trainer in 2025 [39:28] um it's going to be longterm it's going [39:31] to be building the content short term [39:33] it's going to be Outreach to people that [39:35] you know and making a compelling offer [39:37] to get people to try to work with you [39:39] this overarching point you said there [39:40] about being yourself as I was thinking [39:42] about it I was thinking gosh do you know [39:44] what the thing that all of my favorite [39:46] creators and the Really successful [39:47] creators have in common is they all have [39:50] and I use these words intentionally the [39:52] courage to be themselves yeah because I [39:56] tell you what when I was starting out as [39:57] a content creator and I looked back I [39:58] was showing one of my team members the [39:59] other day the things I used to post it [40:01] was like everything happens for a reason [40:03] it was cringe cliche fluff and it took [40:06] me several years to almost relax into [40:09] just realizing that the game here was to [40:11] get to the point where I could be myself [40:12] on the internet and actually that was [40:14] the most high value because of you know [40:16] of what you said it's the uniquest part [40:17] of me but the courage to be yourself and [40:21] it's it's it is the winning strategy for [40:24] 2025 and it's I think um it's leaning [40:27] into it and the thing is is that [40:29] everything in you wants to not do that [40:30] I'm not really sure why um but I was [40:33] having a conversation with Ila I want to [40:34] say two nights ago or three nights ago [40:37] um I got a bunch of flack for uh some X [40:40] poost that I made and she just looked at [40:42] me and she was like never dilute [40:46] yourself because I was like maybe I was [40:48] like maybe I shouldn't talk about this [40:49] stuff like maybe I should just like you [40:51] know I'll just lean off and she was like [40:53] never dilute yourself like there are so [40:56] many more people people who need that [40:59] message than people who are hating that [41:02] message and she was like and if you're [41:03] actually going to make a difference in a [41:06] lot of people's lives there's going to [41:07] be an equal and opposing force of people [41:09] who want to reject that and she's like [41:12] this just comes with the territory of [41:14] like how big of an impact you want to [41:15] have and it was just such a great you [41:17] know wife talking to husband you know [41:19] conversation um that I guess for me at [41:21] the end of the day I'm like as long as [41:22] she thinks I'm cool like you know I I'll [41:25] keep doing it but um but yeah it's just [41:28] uh because the diluted down version all [41:31] all of a sudden becomes everyone else's [41:33] stuff well you said a second ago you're [41:35] not sure why that is but by very [41:39] definition of it being unique that that [41:41] means that there is no blueprint yeah [41:43] there is no person that's come before [41:45] you and proven that it works so the [41:48] courage of being yourself there's only [41:49] one Steven Bartlett so if I'm truly [41:51] myself it's never been done before that [41:53] means that the risks are unknown the [41:54] upside is also unknown yeah but so again [41:56] going back to to our our hate of [41:58] uncertainty it makes much more sense for [42:00] me to try and copy you because I can see [42:03] a blueprint there than to run the risk [42:05] of being yourself and you are someone [42:07] have to say who is running the risk of [42:09] being yourself and actually as someone [42:11] who's observing you now I know who you [42:13] are and I now know who you're not and [42:16] it's important for me as someone that [42:17] follows your work yeah that actually I [42:20] see consistency because I've established [42:22] Alex os's values yeah and anything that [42:24] diverts from that is actually less [42:26] valuable because you say it's more like [42:28] everyone else and the things I've had [42:29] before but it's also it wouldn't feel [42:30] true anymore yeah and um and this is [42:34] something that even as a Creator myself [42:36] I I have to fall back on is my audience [42:38] know who I am now For Better or For [42:40] Worse yeah they're not going to learn [42:42] anything new yeah you know what's really [42:44] interesting is navigating the gray and [42:46] so there are contradictory ideals and [42:51] this is what I kind of come back to when [42:52] I'm when I'm like worried about these [42:53] types of things which is like you've got [42:55] mercy and you've got [42:58] Justice they are somehow opposed and [43:01] they are both ideals so how can we [43:04] believe in Justice and also believe in [43:05] Mercy at the same time and so and I mean [43:09] there's you can have variety and [43:10] consistency like there there's there [43:12] there's tons of examples of this right [43:15] um and so we have these diametrically [43:17] opposed ideals which means that if you [43:19] ever say by the way I'm a little bit [43:21] more of a Justice guy like I understand [43:24] they had a hard time but at some point [43:26] you got to take your own personal [43:27] accountability so like no you're not [43:28] going to get out of the speeding ticket [43:29] you're going to get like that's what's [43:31] just on the other hand it's like hey [43:33] single mom uh gets pulled over uh for [43:35] driving too fast you know what maybe we [43:38] let her off today both of those stories [43:40] fair but you're going to get attacked by [43:43] the other side that has an ideal that [43:46] all humans try to strive for and it will [43:48] feel terrible because they are right and [43:51] so what and so I think that like [43:54] understanding that that conflict will [43:56] always exist between two apparent ideals [43:58] that and this is fun this is [44:00] foundationally what politics is right is [44:03] that there are two apparent ideals that [44:04] bet all of us I would say 99% of people [44:07] would say justice is good Mercy is good [44:09] variety is good consistency is good [44:11] right respecting values is good so is [44:14] innovating and doing new things how can [44:16] we have both of these contradictory [44:18] ideas and at the same time like navigate [44:19] that without conflict you can't because [44:22] how much becomes the question and so I [44:24] think that your thumbprint as a Creator [44:26] is that when someone presents a [44:29] scenario and says does Alex choose Mercy [44:32] or Justice in the scenario that your [44:34] audience says gets it right and so I [44:37] think about um branding in general as [44:40] basically a mosaic that you get to [44:42] create and so like each piece of content [44:43] is a little tile that has a single color [44:45] on it and if you just see one piece of [44:47] short content of of Steven Bartlett you [44:50] you don't really have an idea who Steven [44:51] Marlett is but if you see a thousand of [44:53] them all of a sudden you zoom out and [44:54] you get to see the whole picture and I [44:56] think that that the the colors that are [44:58] in those mosaics and the and the [44:59] proportion of how many yellows how many [45:02] Reds how many greens and where are they [45:04] is what ultimately creates the brand and [45:06] so um because people want to try and [45:08] turn this into okay so I make one post [45:10] about family I make one post about [45:12] finances I make one post about whatever [45:14] right it's like I don't think that's how [45:16] it works I think you just be you and [45:19] then those proportions will naturally [45:21] shake out and also over time you will [45:24] change and so it also makes sense that [45:26] your brand will change and was I had to [45:29] recile which likeit I don't know if I [45:31] agree as with some of the things that I [45:32] said years ago the thing is in the [45:34] digital world like my first podcast was [45:36] 2017 July of 2017 [45:39] wow episode 8 is called stop [45:44] branding I have changed my views on [45:47] branding to be clear yeah but that first [45:50] podcast is 90 days from when I lost [45:52] everything MH and so the entire the [45:55] entire like horm Journey if you want to [45:57] call that from zero to billion is [46:00] actually documented 90 days from zero [46:03] it's all there and so you can see how my [46:05] my my views on business have changed and [46:07] like what I was thinking about at every [46:09] kind of portion of my life and so I had [46:11] to just be okay with the idea that like [46:14] I will change my mind because I will get [46:17] new information because let's take the [46:18] alternative stance if I get new [46:19] information do I just keep parting what [46:21] you did before this is also an issue [46:22] with politics right is that like he's [46:24] flippy floppy it's like so they're not [46:26] allowed to learn [46:27] yeah you've been in politics like you [46:29] haven't learned anything like no stances [46:32] Chang like I feel like we should be able [46:33] to do that obviously Brands don't work [46:35] that way so it has to be gradual over [46:37] time which I think if you were always [46:39] you at all times it will be gradual over [46:41] time yeah I don't know I think a lot of [46:44] the time we end up over focusing on [46:46] unreasonable people which is a war we [46:48] can never win anyway because you say [46:50] that to me I think so I think it was [46:52] like I had this uh this guy therapist on [46:53] my podcast who I then spoke to after the [46:55] podcast and he basically broke it down [46:57] to me he was like there's 20% of people [46:59] that just absolutely love everything you [47:00] will ever do like you could say anything [47:02] you change they're [ __ ] they're just [47:03] super fans there's 80% of people that [47:05] are actually like he said there 60% of [47:07] people that are really reasonable they [47:09] don't speak yeah they just watch they're [47:11] like reasonable and there's 20% of [47:13] people with no matter what the [ __ ] you [47:14] do they're going to be he is like don't [47:16] spend your life focusing on the the 20% [47:19] the quiet majority the 60% they don't [47:21] tweet they don't they just chill and [47:23] then the 20% you know they your [47:25] evangelists but you know I find myself [47:27] falling into the Trap of the so what's [47:29] interesting about the 20% is that like [47:31] um I was thinking about this today the [47:33] your so no matter who you are you're [47:36] going to be disliked period because no [47:38] one's liked by everyone so we just have [47:40] like let's if we can accept that as a [47:41] premise right no one's going to be like [47:43] for everyone you might as well be [47:44] disliked for being you than being [47:45] somebody else amen am at the most basic [47:48] level you the being disliked is a fixed [47:53] cost and and I think to to to to take [47:56] the opposite pers perspective I think it [47:57] is far better to be disliked for being [47:59] who you are than loved for someone [48:00] you're not yeah and one one of the great [48:04] entrepreneurs I interviewed on the [48:05] podcast said to me when it comes to [48:06] marketing and branding and this sort of [48:07] attention conversation we're having she [48:10] said to me that in order to reach your [48:13] 80% you have to piss off your 20% or at [48:16] least be willing to piss off your 20% it [48:18] was Jane warang who's the founder of [48:19] demica global Beauty um brand with I [48:22] think hundreds of thousands of people [48:24] and she sat and said to get to your 80% [48:26] you have to be willing to piss off no [48:28] actually [ __ ] she said to get to your [48:30] 20% you have to be willing to piss off [48:32] the [48:32] 80% and from a branding perspective it [48:35] makes so much sense because when you [48:37] stand for something clearly which you do [48:40] you inadvertently stand against a you [48:42] have to if you draw a line there's [48:44] there's there's a side on either side [48:46] and you have to say like I'm on this [48:47] side did you see that Nike ad dude I was [48:50] just going to say that I was just going [48:52] to say that yeah the William defo ad [48:54] yeah like what's yours is mine and [48:55] what's mine is mine yeah just like it [48:57] was actually the first time that I'd [48:59] seen something from Nike in a long time [49:00] that I was like this is what built this [49:02] brand and I think they have they had [49:05] lost their way for a while yeah uh with [49:07] like the wokeism and all that stuff and [49:08] I think it's like Nike means Victory [49:11] which means people have to lose yeah and [49:14] they were willing to say that for the [49:15] first time ever right I posted it on my [49:16] LinkedIn and it was 50/50 yeah I'd say [49:19] it was actually more like 80% of people [49:21] were either neutral or pissed off and 20 [49:24] yeah and 20% of people were like that is [49:27] me I am a Nike person and for me when I [49:29] saw that I thought I want to buy some [49:30] Nike shorts yeah it was I mean it was [49:32] the first time I actually felt like I [49:33] had positive brand Affinity towards the [49:34] brand in a long time how important in [49:36] this game of building and starting is [49:39] people [49:41] oh very a hiring question I'll tell you [49:45] why I asked this question because when I [49:46] look at my portfolio early stage first [49:48] Founders never seem to understand the [49:50] importance of hiring in people yeah and [49:53] I bang my head against the wall trying [49:54] to convince them that actually the game [49:56] they're playing is in the company group [49:59] of people yeah so I would I'll start [50:02] with one thing and then I'll answer the [50:03] question so I was talking to um a mentor [50:05] of mine and he said when I was in my 20s [50:07] it was all about the destination he said [50:09] when I got to my 30s I realized it was [50:11] all about the journey he said when I was [50:13] in my 40s I realized it was about the [50:14] company and I was like I can't wait till [50:16] you're in your [50:17] 50s the next one right but I thought [50:19] that was such a great like such a [50:20] profound shift in terms of how he [50:22] thought about his business success cuz [50:23] he was like I don't need to be a you [50:25] know a Deca billionaire he's like I'm [50:27] I'm cool where I'm at um and now I just [50:30] want to do it with people that I like [50:32] and so to the question about um people [50:38] overall I believe that the potential of [50:41] an organization is directly correlated [50:44] with the aggregate intellectual [50:46] horsepower of everyone contained within [50:49] it and so if you are the smartest person [50:53] in the business then and you can do [50:56] every everyone's job better than [50:57] everyone in your company then it means [50:59] that the limit of the business is purely [51:01] based on one person's horsepower and one [51:02] person's life [51:05] experiences and that will be the cap and [51:07] basically it doesn't matter how smart [51:09] you are you can't live a 100 lifetimes [51:12] like you can learn quickly sure there's [51:13] some people who can learn faster than [51:14] others but you're not going to be able [51:15] to live a thousand lifetimes and [51:18] so as a business grows more expertise is [51:22] required and I think the easiest liit [51:24] test for this is if you look at the [51:25] richest people in the World almost none [51:27] of them Own 100% of their business so [51:29] number one most of them don't even own [51:31] 50 like most of them are small [51:33] percentages Jensen WIS at 4% for NVIDIA [51:36] basos is at seven or 9% for for Amazon [51:39] uh I think elon's at 20 for Tesla like [51:41] small percentages and it's because it [51:43] takes a lot of horses to take a chariot [51:46] to the Moon right and so basically as [51:50] you put in more intellectual horsepower [51:53] the potential peak of the business goes [51:56] so much so much higher so much faster [51:59] Keith rabois from um he's one of the [52:01] original PayPal Mafia guys has a really [52:02] good analogy for this and he talks about [52:04] it in terms of barrels and ammunition [52:06] and he says so as soon as you get some [52:09] product Market fit the business starts [52:11] to grow and you say okay we need to [52:12] start shipping things faster and this [52:14] works the same with a Services business [52:15] a physical products business software [52:17] business the concept's the same and said [52:19] so what happens is you then hire a lot [52:20] of people and you assume that your [52:23] throughput is going to increase [52:24] proportionally so we have 10 people we [52:25] hire 50 we should 5xr output and then [52:27] you quickly realize that that is not the [52:29] case and so what happens is uh there are [52:32] people who are rate limiters for or or [52:34] and organization and those are the [52:36] barrels so think about like a civil war [52:37] Barrel you know Old Cannon and you've [52:39] got these cannonballs next to it he said [52:40] most people are ammunition and so you [52:42] bring more ammunition but you're still [52:44] going to be limited by the one barrel [52:46] capacity of how how many shots can get [52:48] taken by the barrel and so you need to [52:50] find more barrels so you have to go from [52:52] one barrel to two barrels two barrels to [52:54] three barrels and that becomes an [52:55] increase in capacity or throughput for [52:57] the organization and there are very few [52:59] of those in a different um I can't [53:02] remember the law but it's some [53:03] organizational uh law but uh the square [53:06] root of the number of people in a [53:07] company generate 50% of the work so you [53:10] have 100 people in an organization 10 [53:11] people are responsible for 50% of the [53:13] value that's created facts right anybody [53:16] who's been in like you're like of like [53:18] preach and so the thing is is I think [53:21] the real game of Entrepreneurship is [53:23] that your standards rise over time and [53:26] it's unfortunate because we we hear [53:29] things that other entrepreneurs tell us [53:30] it's all about the people stupid and [53:31] then you're like sure but look at my and [53:33] it's like no you're not hearing it and I [53:36] don't know there are some I think [53:37] Williamson talks about this how there's [53:38] like some lessons that for some reason [53:40] it's like we have to learn for ourselves [53:43] I still believe that that it's like we [53:44] can operationalize this at a lower level [53:46] so that we don't have to learn it for [53:47] ourselves but like I'm convinced I [53:49] haven't figured it out yet but um so [53:52] every entrepreneur can can can can [53:54] resonate with this which is every [53:56] business that I've started I've gotten [53:58] to the success of the business Prior Way [54:01] faster and I kind of liken it to a video [54:04] game where it's like you beat level one [54:07] and then you know you get to level two [54:09] and it's like you spend months trying to [54:10] beat this boss and you finally figure [54:11] how to beat the boss and it's like great [54:13] and you spend another three months [54:14] getting beating Boss 3 and let's say you [54:16] start the game over with a new character [54:18] it's like you just zoom through level [54:19] one two and three and then you get to [54:20] level four and you're like shoot now I [54:21] got to spend time it's like virgin land [54:23] like I don't know how to beat this yet [54:24] and so I think that that happens for [54:27] archetype finding for skill and talent [54:29] within an organization and so say that [54:32] again so if you have functions across an [54:35] organization there are people who are [54:36] going to drive results within that [54:38] function and the first time you hire a [54:40] salesperson for example you don't know [54:42] what you're looking for and so you just [54:44] hire a human who says they can sell and [54:46] maybe they can maybe they can't and then [54:49] you cycle you try to train them that [54:50] doesn't work does work whatever and then [54:52] finally you let's say you cycle through [54:53] three sales guys and finally you find a [54:54] killer and then you have this [54:56] recognition you're like okay that's what [54:58] I'm looking for and then all of a sudden [54:59] you try and approximate that person or [55:01] that archetype as as much as you can and [55:04] so when you start your second company [55:05] you're like oh I can quickly staff up [55:07] sales because I know what I'm looking [55:08] for but then you're like shoot I've [55:10] never really nailed sales manager yet [55:12] and so then you cycle through you start [55:13] you start whacking away at the boss and [55:15] then you have to end up firing the boss [55:17] at level because you're like oh God this [55:18] didn't work and then six months are gone [55:20] because you had to find them recruit [55:21] them hire them train them and then find [55:22] out they sucked and then start over [55:24] again and maybe it takes 18 months to [55:25] really find the right sales manager and [55:27] then you're like okay I know what that [55:29] looks like but I still don't have a [55:31] director of marketing what does that [55:32] look like and so it's basically [55:34] developing this pattern recognition [55:36] across all functions of the business so [55:38] you that you know what exceptional looks [55:39] like and then over time what happens is [55:42] as a business grows your ability to [55:44] attract Talent increases and so then [55:47] your standards also grow and then you [55:49] find out that there's even more Nuance [55:50] to this which is that there's a director [55:52] of sales at a $1 to10 million level [55:54] which is a different looking person [55:56] from10 to100 million level and it [55:58] continues to go all the way up and so [56:01] it's basically building this repertoire [56:03] of identifying patterns and what if you [56:07] talk to I would say more experienced [56:09] entrepreneurs now they don't talk about [56:10] building businesses it's like assembling [56:12] them you just assemble the pieces and [56:14] you just know that this is how it's all [56:16] going to flow together and that [56:19] fundamentally is basically what I try [56:21] and decode within the content that I [56:22] have so that it's like here's a pattern [56:24] for how you recognize this here's a [56:25] pattern for how you recog ize this so [56:27] that you can just move faster through [56:29] the levels um to get to where you want [56:30] to go and so to loop back to the [56:33] original question which is how important [56:34] are people in an organization people are [56:37] the organization and so if you ever want [56:39] to build Enterprise Value it's building [56:41] the collective consciousness of the [56:43] organization the skills and how they [56:44] collaborate together towards a specific [56:46] outcome and so knowing how to staff that [56:49] up is the [56:51] job I think the reason why first-time [56:53] Founders feel like they have to learn [56:55] this lesson themselves is because [56:57] everything you've just said is an [56:57] unknown unknown like they don't even [56:59] know that they don't know it so they [57:00] stumbl they hire the sales guy because [57:02] they were their friend from high school [57:03] and then [ __ ] and then they go [57:05] through the pain and I say this because [57:07] I'm so unbelievably passionate about it [57:09] I went through the same BS I hired my [57:11] friend who worked at Prada to be art [57:12] account I hired a guy I met at a rap [57:14] battle to be my marketing director who [57:16] who was literally playing video games [57:18] for a living at 30 years old um and I [57:20] went through this whole thing and then [57:22] at maybe three four years into my first [57:24] business I accidentally hired someone [57:27] great like through no intention of [57:29] myself accidentally I saw the net impact [57:31] they had and I thought oh my God over [57:33] the coming years I learned that the game [57:34] the fundamental game here is as you said [57:37] assembling the best group of [57:38] people how if I'm a firsttime Founder [57:42] can I put a system in place to to make [57:47] sure that even though I don't know what [57:48] a good salesperson looks like yeah even [57:50] though I don't know what an ex good [57:52] person looks like I still attract them [57:54] to my company [57:57] the simplest way of doing it so the [57:59] simplest way of attracting somebody to [58:02] your business when you don't know how to [58:04] do the job or know who to look for is to [58:07] unfortunately do the job yourself and [58:10] then once you can break down the job we [58:12] follow 3DS which is um document [58:15] demonstrate duplicate that's how we [58:16] train anybody so first you have to [58:18] document everything that you do to [58:20] successfully do the job and that's [58:22] step-by step into a checklist then you [58:25] demonstrate so you do do this checklist [58:26] in front of the person that you're [58:27] trying to bring on then they duplicate [58:30] they do the checklist in front of you [58:32] what's interesting about that three-step [58:33] process is that you'll often find when [58:36] you try to demonstrate following the [58:37] checklist you don't follow your [58:38] checklist and so then you have to adjust [58:40] the checklist until you actually follow [58:41] the checklist and then when you can [58:43] consistently follow that checklist and [58:44] get the output then you can have them do [58:46] that checklist and so I think this is [58:48] why bootstrap Founders uh I think often [58:51] times will find they they tend to know [58:54] more about more things because they had [58:56] to learn them in order to teach them now [58:59] what's really interesting about what you [59:00] said about accidentally finding that [59:02] that star at 3 or four years in is that [59:04] I think that happens to almost everyone [59:06] well hopefully it the people who end up [59:07] making it it happens to almost everyone [59:09] um because then you realize oh my God [59:11] like if I had four of these people like [59:13] we could change the world right say [59:15] something as well the other Epiphany [59:17] Revelation I had was the star hired [59:20] Stars yeah right and so I think of her [59:23] name's casy leison of the 10 people she [59:25] then hired nine of them became the best [59:26] people in my company and also I'm not [59:28] going to say his name but someone else [59:29] in my business a c player yeah of the 10 [59:33] people he hired yeah he and everyone he [59:35] hired was F so one of the it's so as you [59:39] go up in the organization with hires the [59:41] risk and reward goes up and so that's [59:43] something that a lot of people don't [59:44] like talking about but I will um which [59:47] is if you hire somebody and let's say [59:50] that they're not a cultural fit maybe [59:51] they have the skills uh or they are a [59:53] cultural fit and they don't have the [59:54] skill fit and they're a leader [59:56] what you find often and it sucks is that [59:59] everyone it's almost like it's like a [60:01] tree that has an entirely rotten Branch [60:03] it's like you end up having to scoop out [60:05] three4 of what was underneath because [60:08] you realize that they were ineffective [60:10] or they just were against the actual [60:11] mission of the business and it's it's [60:13] harrowing and it's horrible but I try to [60:17] give this analogy um to my team because [60:19] we've had to do it in every business we [60:21] like it happens it's just part of [60:22] business [60:24] is if somebody goes to the bar and [60:28] you're at the club and somebody racks up [60:31] you know just ordering shots for [60:32] everybody shots shot shot shot shot [60:33] shots and then that guy dips that guy [60:36] leaves we all have to pay the bill in [60:39] the moment when we pay the bill when we [60:41] scoop out the Deadwood when we scoop out [60:43] the rot from the organization it feels [60:46] horrible but that pain isn't because the [60:49] scooping out the rot is bad it's because [60:52] we planted it on bad ground or because [60:54] that guy ordered all these shop but [60:56] couldn't afford it and I have a [60:57] different analogy because I really want [60:58] to drive this home because I think it's [60:59] important is that in the in the [61:01] relationship world if one spouse tells [61:05] the other spouse hey I cheated on you I [61:08] had an affair that moment is incredibly [61:11] painful for both parties and so what it [61:13] makes you think is oh this was wrong to [61:16] tell the truth but it's not wrong to [61:19] tell the truth what's wrong was cheating [61:21] when you tell the truth is when you make [61:23] it right and so the pain that you often [61:25] have to to encounter in organization [61:27] feels wrong but is right because that [61:31] was you're you're writing a wrong and [61:33] that's where the pain occurs and that's [61:35] why so many businesses stay stuck is [61:36] because they have this affair they have [61:39] this person and they're unwilling to [61:40] have that hard conversation or multiple [61:42] in order to make it right and they stay [61:44] stuck for [61:45] years this is [61:47] another quality of really successful [61:49] Founders that I've noticed which is what [61:51] you just said is the ability to have the [61:52] hard conversation sooner and in my first [61:55] um in my Folia where there's firsttime [61:56] Founders they're coming to me and in our [62:00] like uh monthly meeting saying God [62:02] there's this guy who's running the Ecom [62:04] Division and he's so bad and I'm having [62:06] to do the job for him what do I do about [62:07] it Steve what do you [62:10] think but then they come back to me two [62:12] weeks later and they're like he's still [62:13] there yeah right A year later and you're [62:15] like it's still John you know you're [62:16] like what are we talking about here I [62:18] remember asking him when at such meeting [62:20] uh does JN know that you're unhappy with [62:22] him oh yeah [62:23] no so there this quiet dis [62:26] faction which I think is a virus right [62:29] right and what what no one wants to [62:30] discuss is the fact that everyone else [62:32] knows John sucks amen and that that [62:34] becomes the minimum standard for what is [62:36] acceptable for excellence in the [62:38] organization and so I think like so if [62:41] brand is what your reputation is [62:43] externally I think culture is kind of [62:44] what reputation is internally and so I [62:47] Define culture operationalized because I [62:48] think culture is a very fluffy word what [62:50] does that mean right it's the rules that [62:51] govern reinforcement within organization [62:53] what do we reward what do we punish and [62:55] so the thing is is that there's [62:57] realistically there's like people have [62:59] values because they're bundled terms [63:01] that lad up many behaviors if I said [63:05] Rolls-Royce probably would have some [63:07] value that's quality over speed probably [63:09] right and so they would have that but [63:11] somebody would have to say like what [63:12] does that mean right well we hope that [63:15] we use this as a decision-making filter [63:17] for how it affects behaviors on every [63:20] situation so that when you're in the [63:22] should I go fast or should I make it [63:24] right you make it right and there are [63:26] other organizations kind of like the [63:27] speed uh justice and mercy speed and [63:29] quality both of them are important and [63:32] sometimes they sit diametrically opposed [63:34] and so it's like we have to say where do [63:35] we sit in the gray so that we can [63:37] duplicate decision-making across the [63:38] organization so that we can maintain the [63:40] culture and so culture uh you know lless [63:44] this is a lot but culture I think this [63:45] is a drer quote actually U culture [63:47] Trump's strategy like twice week and [63:50] every day on Sunday if you have a [63:51] mediocre strategy but an unbelievable [63:53] culture you will crush somebody who has [63:54] a great strategy and a terrible culture [63:56] because culture Lads up to Performance [63:58] and execution and almost every business [63:59] is limited by execution not strategy [64:01] most business strategies isn't that [64:02] complicated like let's do a really good [64:04] job so good that people tell their [64:05] friends about us and as long as we have [64:07] enough gross margin we'll make money [64:08] it's not that hard right it's just that [64:10] the doing it is the hard part and so so [64:13] when we have these uh they are the [64:15] spoken and unspoken roles mostly [64:17] unspoken if someone shows up 3 minutes [64:19] late to a meeting and there's 10 people [64:20] in the meeting and it's supposed to be a [64:21] marketing meeting and I'm there if I [64:23] don't say anything I have now said we [64:27] have an unspoken rule that if someone [64:28] shows up 3 minutes slate to a meeting [64:29] it's okay I've I've reinforced that rule [64:32] now if I I've reinforce it by not [64:34] punishing the behavior or at least [64:35] calling it out um on the flip side if [64:38] someone comes in and I berate them [64:40] that's also a way of changing Behavior [64:42] maybe not the right way to do it um but [64:45] I could then like what do you do in that [64:47] situation someone shows up 3 minutes [64:48] late um first off you would probably [64:54] sideline with that person be like hey [64:56] I don't know if you realized that you [64:57] were 3 minutes late what happened and [65:00] they're like I was on a client call um [65:02] it went late I'm really sorry or I was [65:05] on a sales call for me in my [65:07] organization clients in sales like will [65:09] take priority so if you have a meeting [65:11] and you're on a sale and you're about to [65:12] close it close the sale right but if you [65:15] were just doing nothing and we have this [65:18] meeting then this is the priority and so [65:20] the next time we hop on I'll be like hey [65:22] guys I just want to address something [65:23] John was late he was late because of [65:25] aale call or when I dm' him right as he [65:28] got on late I would say hey make sure [65:29] you say that and be like hey guys sorry [65:31] I was late I was on a sales call and [65:32] then I would say that's fine you're good [65:35] to go always go make money yeah and then [65:37] I'm reinforcing the right thing yeah [65:39] right and so I think we're very big on [65:41] rapid feedback um in the moment because [65:44] that's how you train Behavior so if you [65:45] look [65:46] at if so there's tons of studies on this [65:48] but basically if you want to train a dog [65:50] right um and you want it to sit if you [65:53] have it sit and then immediately give a [65:55] biscuit it learns really quickly if you [65:58] have it sit and then wait 10 seconds [66:01] before you give a biscuit it takes like [66:02] three times as many repetitions for it [66:04] to learn that the that the sitting gets [66:06] the biscuit if you wait more than a [66:08] minute it never learns really it just [66:10] you can see the learning curve the [66:11] amount of repetitions just skyrockets [66:13] until eventually there is no amount but [66:15] here's where it gets crazy that biscuit [66:17] is still reinforcing something just not [66:19] sitting it's reinforcing the thing that [66:22] just came before it so if we want people [66:24] to do something we have to change in the [66:25] moment and so when we train and I think [66:27] that we're we're a training organization [66:29] we're very good at training whatever [66:31] skills um is engineering ways to give [66:36] many feedback loops in a short period of [66:38] time around uh specific skills so I use [66:41] sales because it's one that everyone [66:42] understands if you're training a script [66:45] with someone at the if you if you let [66:48] someone read through a script and then [66:49] at the end you say Hey you know here [66:51] here's the things you could have done [66:52] better blah this is how 95% of people [66:54] train it's also doesn't work mhm we set [66:57] the premise with you're going to read [66:58] through the script and in the first 30 [67:00] minutes we might get through a third of [67:01] it and I'm going to probably stop you [67:03] like 30 times and if that happens it [67:05] means we're doing it right so we set the [67:06] premise that I'm going to interrupt you [67:07] a bunch of times and as soon as you say [67:09] the first line I'm going be like stop [67:11] say it again say it like this go again [67:14] and then they're like okay and they say [67:15] it and I'm like awesome job do it again [67:17] awesome job do it again so I reinforce [67:20] it as many times I can okay go to the [67:21] second sentence right now do first and [67:23] second right do second and third right [67:24] and you keep working working your way [67:25] through until eventually they just say [67:27] like a whistle they can sing it because [67:28] they've also had so many repetitions and [67:30] so many feedback loops that they're like [67:31] this is what it sounds like when it's [67:33] right and I think that the vast vast [67:35] majority of organizations have no idea [67:37] how to train and their entire training [67:40] their their way of getting Talent is [67:42] just uh let's hire 10 and we'll just see [67:45] who works out rather than being able to [67:46] take someone and level them up and I [67:48] think that the ability to train is one [67:50] of the largest Alphas that exist in [67:52] organizations because if you can buy [67:54] Talent at at B skill and get them to A+ [67:57] then you net the Delta and profit [68:00] between what you had to attract and pay [68:01] the person to come and what they perform [68:03] at if you have to use a picking strategy [68:05] then you have to pay for ex for current [68:07] market rate of the skill and so you [68:09] actually eat into margin because you [68:11] don't know how to train there are [68:13] advantages to speed and sometimes it [68:14] still makes sense to bring in the talent [68:16] because maybe the training requires so [68:18] much time that it's not worth it and so [68:21] from a hiring perspective because I we [68:22] were just talking this is the theme we [68:25] always want to hire for the smallest [68:26] skilled deficiency and so in low skilled [68:29] labor for example if we have a cupcake [68:31] uh Bakery and I need somebody to work [68:33] the counter that is pretty low skilled [68:36] labor and so if there's a number of [68:39] skills that are required being able to [68:40] be on time smile be nice those things [68:43] are bundled terms that have many skills [68:45] underneath of them right whereas [68:48] teaching someone how to use the register [68:49] might take like 30 minutes and so it [68:52] makes sense to hire for attitude and [68:54] then train aptitude when you have low [68:56] skilled [68:57] labor when you have really high skilled [69:00] labor I can't teach someone 10 years of [69:03] being a CFO for m&a just just an extreme [69:06] example right and so in that instance we [69:10] still hire for the smallest skilled [69:11] deficiency but I can probably teach [69:14] someone to be nice under these [69:15] circumstances faster than I can teach [69:18] them to be a CFO if they have everything [69:20] that I want here obviously you would [69:21] want both but the world is imp perfect [69:23] and so we just try to hire for the [69:24] smallest SK Gap and attitude is a series [69:28] of skills and so instead instead of [69:30] thinking of things as an attitude and [69:31] aptitude just think of everything as [69:32] skills and then we hire always for the [69:34] smallest efficiency mhm the thing that's [69:37] easiest to train up yeah okay one of the [69:39] things that's so Central to that is we [69:41] were saying about giving people feedback [69:44] and I wrote down most companies and most [69:46] entrepreneurs and Founders are scared to [69:48] give Petty feedback oh because if like I [69:52] might notice you're making a slight [69:54] error yeah but if feels Petty to point [69:56] that out it feels like I'm some kind of [69:58] rude dictator yeah why is that so [70:02] important and how do you create an [70:03] environment I'm totally good with that [70:05] yeah I a lot of people aren't I I have [70:06] lots of managers on my teams and they [70:08] don't want to offend people their [70:09] Central focus is too much on being nice [70:11] and it's dude kind not nice it's one of [70:14] our one of our one of our cultural you [70:16] know I wouldn't say it's not the one on [70:18] the site but things that are repeated [70:19] internally all the time K not nice is [70:21] one of the big ones which is that you're [70:23] actually being unkind to someone by not [70:26] maximizing the likely that they succeed [70:27] in their [70:28] role and people don't lose jobs because [70:31] typically because of one thing it's [70:32] usually a hundred small things and so if [70:34] we can immediately fix those hundred [70:36] Small Things most people want to do a [70:38] good job and most people want to succeed [70:40] and most people want to move up and we [70:42] can maximize the likelihood that those [70:43] things occur if we help them [70:46] and this is where the culture is there [70:49] if on that first day like I said we say [70:51] we're going to work through the script [70:52] and we're only going to get through a [70:53] third of it I'm going to stop you 30 [70:54] times to correct you we've already kind [70:55] of set the expectations of how things go [70:58] here like we will fix things and we will [71:00] fix them fast and it's understanding the [71:02] difference and I we teach our teams this [71:04] is what is the difference between an [71:05] insult and criticism so criticism is a [71:09] discrepancy between actual and desired [71:11] so you were supposed to be on time and [71:13] this week you were late twice and so [71:15] that is [71:16] discrepancy and you're lazy is the [71:18] insult and so the Judgment that's [71:21] associated with the discrepancy is [71:23] insulting someone pointing out the [71:24] discrepancy is purely criticism and [71:26] that's objective and so if you want to [71:28] improve the team remove insults focus on [71:31] criticism and tell them what to do [71:32] instead and so the easiest way to think [71:34] through this I think is stop start keep [71:38] so I'll tell you a real story so we had [71:41] um we had a we had a a director level so [71:44] a relatively High person um in the [71:46] organization who was having um behavior [71:49] issues uh oh said differently everyone [71:52] thinks you're a [71:53] dick and so so he ended up making his [71:56] rounds of the executive team uh and [71:59] having a sit down with all of them [72:01] because he was really proficient at the [72:02] scale he's high performer like good at [72:03] what he does just no one liked him and [72:05] so um he talks to four different [72:08] Executives and the behavior didn't [72:09] change and so he finally came to to my [72:12] office and he was like a little bit [72:13] worried and he was and he was like am I [72:15] going to get fired and I was like no HR [72:17] will fire you if you're going to get [72:17] fired you're not going to meet with me [72:19] what are we talking about um but when we [72:21] sat down I said Okay I want to be clear [72:25] I want to decrease the likelihood that [72:26] people call you a dick in the future I [72:27] was said does that sound like an [72:29] agreeable goal and he said yeah I don't [72:31] I want that I was like okay good I also [72:33] don't care if you are a dick I just care [72:35] that everyone else thinks you are and so [72:38] I just want to minimize likely that I [72:39] get drawn into this ever again [72:42] so the reasons that they are calling you [72:44] a dick we need to dive into that because [72:46] every other conversation you'd had with [72:48] you know some of the leaders was just [72:49] like hey man stop being a dick and the [72:51] thing is is what do you do with that [72:53] nothing you just get insulted [72:55] and then you have nothing to do and so [72:57] instead it's like okay when you cut [73:00] people off when they [73:02] talk stop start keep doing do this [73:06] instead shut up so when someone else is [73:09] talking wait until they finish and if [73:11] you're not sure ask if they're done it's [73:13] like [73:14] okay when uh you give unsolicited advice [73:19] on how they should run their Department [73:21] don't or ask if they want it if if they [73:25] say no don't say anything and so we [73:28] identified three or four behaviors that [73:29] he was doing and I said just do this [73:32] instead and literally the next week [73:34] people were like what happened to him [73:35] he's like a new man and the thing is is [73:37] that he wasn't a dick he just didn't [73:39] know how to behave and so if you want to [73:42] teach teaching has to come from [73:44] conditions and a behavior and so if [73:46] you're trying to get someone to be [73:48] different you have to give them the [73:49] conditions under which they need to [73:50] change so when someone says this if this [73:52] occurs there's a condition and then this [73:54] is you need to do and so the vast [73:56] majority of training that exists does [73:58] none of that it's just people shouting [74:00] at each other insulting them and saying [74:02] hey you need to level up you need to you [74:04] need to get you know you need to [74:05] increase your performance what does that [74:07] mean and so I think one of the easiest [74:10] ways to identify the actual Behavior [74:12] because that's actually the tough part [74:13] is like why do I think he's a dick why [74:15] do I think she's lazy because I want to [74:18] insult them but that's not so how do I [74:20] help her it's like okay why am I [74:22] describing her this way okay so when I [74:24] slack she she tends to be slow in her [74:26] response so sometimes it takes an hour [74:28] sometimes three hours I'm like okay so [74:29] I'm going to gather that data and be [74:30] like okay so when I talk to her I'm like [74:32] I'm going to have this this branch of [74:33] data the next thing is when I get stuff [74:36] uh you know projects from her they are [74:39] incomplete I feel like they're not all [74:41] the way fleshed out I'm like okay that's [74:43] a second second bucket um the next one [74:45] is that when she shows up on Zoom she [74:48] looks disheveled I'm like okay so now [74:50] when I talk to Sandy I'm not going to [74:53] say hey Sandy you look lazy need you to [74:55] level up a little bit here otherwise [74:57] we're going to have issues and have to [74:58] put you on a pip performance Improvement [74:59] plan right instead of saying that just [75:02] put her on the performance Improvement [75:03] plan without saying it's performance [75:04] Improvement plan and just [75:06] say when you show up on calls change [75:10] your background to like the the standard [75:11] company setting so we don't see your [75:13] bedroom right and and make sure that [75:15] from the waist up you look professional [75:17] and what do why I mean by look [75:19] professional have a collared shirt and [75:21] put your hair back okay now some people [75:23] like how does that work at in woke [75:25] politics no idea deal with it in your [75:26] country but like you should have a [75:28] culture where you can say stuff like [75:29] that the second thing is that right now [75:31] I need you to turn on slack [75:32] notifications and I need you to respond [75:34] within within 10 minutes okay during [75:36] work hours after work hours fine but you [75:39] know 9 to5 you have to respond within 10 [75:41] minutes do you think you can do that yes [75:42] and so the end goal here is like I will [75:44] get everyone to stop calling you [75:46] lazy and this is how we do it it's [75:48] interesting because it goes back to [75:49] something you were saying earlier where [75:50] you were saying specifics versus vague [75:52] yeah prefrontal cortex versus amigdala [75:54] like insult is amigdala totally can't do [75:56] anything with that but if you make it [75:58] specific then action is more likely to [76:01] occur and useful action is more likely [76:03] to occur um on on this point of a person [76:05] who's listening now who's an [76:06] entrepreneur they've got a business yeah [76:08] and they're thinking about making those [76:09] first hires I want you to throw a [76:11] proposition at you to see what you [76:12] thought of this one of the things that I [76:14] think can help you not [ __ ] up in the [76:16] hiring process especially early is if [76:18] you just live it with the permanent [76:20] assumption that you are bad at hiring so [76:22] I live with the permanent assumption [76:24] that I'm bad at hiring because I've got [76:25] biases there's things I don't know about [76:27] certain things Etc and when you start [76:29] with that assumption that you are really [76:31] really bad at hiring you try and [76:33] decentralize the decision- making so one [76:35] thing I say a lot to Startup Founders is [76:38] if you're hiring a salesperson create an [76:40] interview process where there's five [76:41] people and one of them might be you and [76:44] the other four are the best salesp [76:46] people you've ever encountered in your [76:47] life like who sold you your house yeah [76:49] and ask them ask them to be part of the [76:52] interview process how does that sit with [76:54] you I think it sits great and I think [76:56] that the amount of references that you [76:58] go for is proportional to the importance [77:00] of the role okay so say I'm the [77:02] co-founder of school um when he so he [77:04] was a non-technical Founder who school [77:06] what is school sorry oh so school's uh [77:07] school.com is uh a platform for building [77:09] communities right now it's online but we [77:11] have an inperson component so that [77:12] people can meet online then meet in [77:13] person it's awesome and so that's the [77:16] only investment that I've publicly uh [77:19] Associated myself with outside of [77:20] acquisition. comom so it's a very big [77:22] deal it's something I believe in a lot [77:23] because it's education it's where [77:25] education and media meet [77:27] um Sam is the is the is the founder of [77:30] school and he is not Technical and so he [77:34] knew that to build an exceptional [77:35] software product you need worldclass [77:37] talent and so he interviewed 600 [77:42] developers to find Daniel who' become [77:45] the CTO of school and he asked everybody [77:49] to know who the best coders were and [77:51] then he talked to all those people and [77:53] then he asked them who the best coder [77:54] they knew was and he talked to those [77:56] people and then he asked them who they [77:57] thought the best coder they knew was and [78:00] eventually like Daniel's name came up as [78:02] like god tier he's like if you can ever [78:04] get this guy he'd be amazing and so he [78:07] ended up finding a way in to find Daniel [78:10] and then he ended up becoming a [78:12] co-founder of school as well and what's [78:15] interesting about that process is that [78:17] it actually Lads into uh rapid learning [78:22] and so when I was a consultant you I was [78:24] 22 years old [78:25] and I would go and have to give [78:27] presentations to fourstar generals right [78:29] about about weapon systems that I knew [78:31] nothing about cuz I was you know [78:33] chugging beers like 12 months earlier [78:35] right um and so how do you sound [78:37] intelligent in front of somebody who has [78:39] 30 years more experience than you do and [78:43] so this is the Consulting process for [78:44] Rapid [78:45] learning first is you find five experts [78:49] so you ask the one person you're like [78:51] hey tell me the five people you know who [78:53] are the best at this thing and then you [78:54] ask them who are the five people you [78:55] know who are who are who also know a ton [78:58] about this thing and for each of the [78:59] interviews you take all of their their [79:01] information down of like what do you [79:02] think about this what do you think about [79:03] this what do you think this and what [79:04] happens you start mapping kind of like [79:06] the E the information ecosystem and the [79:08] reason you talk to experts first is that [79:09] there's no lack of information like you [79:11] can Google whatever you want the problem [79:12] is there's too much and so the filter [79:14] becomes where the highest point of [79:15] Leverage is and so experts have spent [79:17] years filtering out for what's important [79:19] and so then you basically rapidly [79:21] consume the most filtered information [79:23] and then you reor organize the [79:25] information and so this is what a [79:26] typical analyst will do as a consultant [79:28] is like I would so for the space and [79:29] cyber project that I did I we had 600 [79:32] pages of notes from all the interviews [79:33] that we did first step is you [79:35] recategorize all all the newes by [79:37] category so it goes from raw notes to [79:39] categorized notes then from there you [79:41] distill and consolidate notes into what [79:43] are the what are the TR truths or the [79:47] the most distilled beliefs that we have [79:49] about these particular in this case [79:50] weapon systems but it could be whatever [79:53] and then from there you're able to [79:55] generate your inferences for what the [79:57] what it looks like when it's right what [79:59] the problems are what potential [80:00] Solutions might be and then that's [80:02] fundamentally how you say this is what [80:04] we need to do next that's if you're [80:05] trying to learn something but in talking [80:07] to all those people it actually works [80:09] the same way because the interview [80:10] process the higher up the talent is the [80:13] more I would encourage entrepreneurs to [80:14] use it as a learning process as a [80:16] consultant and so I present somebody who [80:19] wants to come in for this role the [80:20] actual problems of the business for [80:23] which they would have control over and [80:24] say how would you solve these and so [80:26] then they tell me all the things that [80:27] they would be considering and what [80:28] they're thinking about and then I'll ask [80:30] the next guy what he thinks and what he [80:31] thinks and what he thinks or she thinks [80:33] and then all of a sudden one I get free [80:34] consulting which is amazing but secondly [80:36] you can tell by how the quality and [80:39] quantity of metrics that someone tracks [80:42] how good they are at a particular scale [80:44] and so this is fundamentally what [80:45] separates beginners from experts and so [80:48] beginners typically have binary thinking [80:49] in terms of outcomes either it worked or [80:51] it didn't work an expert for example for [80:53] a marketing campaign [80:55] isn't going to say oh marketing doesn't [80:57] work or ads don't work they're going to [80:58] say this particular campaign didn't work [81:01] because our click-through rate was too [81:02] low or because it was sending traffic [81:04] that wasn't qualified and we weren't [81:05] converting enough on the page or we [81:06] didn't have enough people who were [81:08] taking the second step in our four steps [81:10] and like they can break down any part of [81:12] those any part of that Continuum if I'm [81:14] interviewing a salesperson and the [81:16] person says and I say okay how are you [81:19] going to affect these metrics what [81:21] behaviors are are you going to do so to [81:23] the same degree about vague versus [81:24] spefic specific if they give me vague [81:26] things back I'm going to dial in and say [81:27] no what are you going to do that's going [81:29] to change that and by the way this is a [81:31] wonderful way to teach in the [81:32] organization how what they do makes a [81:34] business money and so if you have like a [81:36] customer support rep for example and you [81:38] say Hey how do you make our company [81:41] money if they can't explain it to you [81:43] they probably aren't doing it and it [81:46] sounds as simple as it is but if someone [81:47] says well you know I answer customers [81:50] questions and it's like how does that [81:51] make us money now if they're able to say [81:54] when I answer customers questions I [81:56] increase the likely that they refer [81:58] other customers and I increase the [81:59] likelihood that they stay and continue [82:00] to pay for us so I help us get new [82:02] customers by delivering an amazing [82:04] experience and I get the customers that [82:05] we have to continue to pay us and if it [82:08] makes sense I recommend other products [82:09] and services that we have that I can [82:11] introduce them to sales guys who can [82:12] explain that so we generate even more [82:14] revenue from them I'd be like one if you [82:16] can articulate that you're probably not [82:17] just a front like us you're probably a [82:20] director right and so that level of [82:22] nuance the specificity is what shows [82:25] expertise and so when I look for and I'm [82:28] interviewing uh for candidates I first I [82:31] I want to gather this once information [82:32] as I can I want to drain as much [82:34] knowledge as possible but I'm also [82:36] really looking for the quality and [82:37] quantity of metrics they track and [82:39] behaviors that they do to influence [82:41] those metrics so in the hypothetical [82:44] problem that let's say we're trying to [82:45] solve uh we have low clickthrough rates [82:46] I'd be like okay this is the problem we [82:48] have how would you approach changing it [82:51] right and then that actually gets me to [82:53] understand what they would do in the [82:55] organization because it's very easy to [82:56] say uh you know I'm going to come in and [82:58] let's say a sales director I'm going to [82:59] come in and I'm going to I'm going to [83:00] improve the the sales team I'm like okay [83:02] cool what are you going to do you know [83:03] I'm going to coach the guys up I'm like [83:04] okay what does that mean and so just [83:06] continuing to ask what does that mean [83:08] how do you do that until they're like [83:10] okay well I'm going to meet with the [83:12] guys every single morning and we're [83:13] going to do role play all right how do [83:15] you role playay well we're going to [83:16] start with the script and we're like the [83:18] more detailed they get the more I [83:20] believe they can do it because they've [83:21] actually explained what actions they [83:23] will take if someone can't dial into [83:25] actions then it's very unlikely that [83:27] they're going to take them and so what I [83:29] just outlined is basically Three core [83:31] things so one is the quality and [83:32] quantity of metrics that they track the [83:34] second is the behaviors that they're [83:36] going to do to influence those metrics [83:37] and then lading up to Third how do those [83:40] metrics and these behaviors influence [83:41] the revenue in the business if they can [83:43] explain that clearly you have a [83:45] winner all of that [83:48] is requires them to know if the person's [83:52] not [83:52] bullshitting and also to know like what [83:54] metrics matter right cuz someone could [83:56] sit in an interview if for my firsttime [83:57] founder say a bunch of big complicated [83:59] words it sounds good I hire them and [84:02] that's really what I'm trying to [84:03] mitigate here is how do I not let a [84:04] [ __ ] a pass me so assume I know [84:07] nothing let's start there what do you [84:10] think customer service [84:12] means and [84:14] so if someone really has expertise so [84:17] Richard fan was famous this the [84:18] physicist which is if you can't explain [84:20] it to a child then you don't understand [84:21] it well enough and so if they do confuse [84:24] you it means that they don't understand [84:25] it or they're doing it purposefully [84:27] neither of which are good scenarios you [84:30] said something during during that [84:32] explanation you said you were talking [84:34] about your like your founding partner at [84:36] school and you said that he was pursuing [84:38] a CTO and he said if we can get this guy [84:42] he'd be amazing yeah so many [84:43] entrepreneurs that are starting in [84:45] business have that thought sometimes [84:47] they think if I could just get that guy [84:49] from that amazing company to come join [84:51] our garage where we're building this new [84:53] startup it would change our [84:55] fortunes but how how do I get a truly [84:58] exceptional person who is being paid [85:01] [ __ ] tons of money who has a comfortable [85:03] job who has security to come join me in [85:05] my [85:07] bedroom well I think there's there's the [85:09] soft and the hard side right so the hard [85:11] side is the is compensation maybe you [85:14] don't have as much cash so it's like [85:15] you're going to have you know a few [85:17] levers at your disposal so you have what [85:19] do you pay them in cash what's their [85:21] upside if there's Equity or shares that [85:22] you're going to give them this is [85:23] obviously if it's soft software business [85:24] you can and I'm you know it's probably [85:26] worth segmenting this so if you're not [85:28] in a software company which is probably [85:29] the vast majority of people listening to [85:31] this there are four elements within [85:34] Equity that that that exist you have [85:37] control so who gets to call the shots [85:39] you have risk what happens if everything [85:41] goes wrong who's liable you have profits [85:45] which is the cash flow of the business [85:46] who gets distributions and then [85:48] basically sale or Enterprise Value when [85:51] we sell or if we sell who gets to [85:53] participate in that upside those are [85:54] kind of the four elements of equity now [85:56] the thing is is that you can obviously [85:58] Grant shares or you can give stock in a [86:01] company that's one way of doing it but [86:03] you can also basically contract around [86:05] any of these things now most of the [86:07] times they don't want the risk and they [86:09] probably won't get the control uh if [86:11] it's your company so you really just [86:12] have profit and you have uh and you have [86:14] upside in terms of uh a sale and so you [86:18] can contract these things and there's [86:20] lots of structur so I'm not going to get [86:21] into legal around this um but asking [86:23] somebody what do want sometimes it's [86:25] just a very powerful way of beginning [86:27] this and my favorite question for these [86:28] types of scenarios is asking what would [86:31] it [86:32] take so when you have this guy it's like [86:34] man it would be amazing like how do I [86:35] sell this guy I just ask him what would [86:37] sell you so I say what would it take [86:40] because I don't know he'll tell me and I [86:43] love that frame because it assumes [86:46] yes it assumes you're going to come so [86:48] what would it take how so many of the [86:52] books that you you write and so much of [86:54] the content you make centers on this [86:55] idea of sales yeah and it is a sale [86:58] isn't it totally and I I always think [87:00] about the Steve Jobs quote where he met [87:02] with was it John Scully who was working [87:04] at like Pepsi and he said do you want to [87:05] consider continue selling sugar water [87:07] for the rest of your life who you want [87:08] to come change the world yeah um how [87:10] does that sort of emotional [87:12] psychological element of this self [87:13] factor into it persuading someone [87:15] exceptional to come and join your [87:16] mission I think it's the amigdala story [87:18] that we started with the nasal strip [87:20] thing which now has actually reared its [87:21] nose multiple times poked its nose in a [87:23] few times here but I think that pitch [87:25] that you're giving to a potential [87:27] co-founder or potential early hire who's [87:29] going to be a leader is the same more or [87:31] less that you'd give to an investor it's [87:33] almost the same pitch except instead of [87:35] investing Capital they're investing time [87:36] they're investing their life they're [87:37] investing their expertise but [87:39] fundamentally you're asking for [87:40] investment I'm just asking [87:42] you there's also this weird question [87:45] which I've I've actually never asked [87:46] anybody but Founders often struggle with [87:50] do I hire naivity because that's going [87:53] to probably create new solutions to Old [87:55] problems like the young Scrappy kid that [87:57] gets Tik Tok or do I hire experience [88:01] which is going to be more expensive more [88:02] conventional and safe and I see some [88:04] companies lean too far either way [88:07] yeah I have actually fairly strong [88:10] opinions on this oh great so I actually [88:12] think it's um and I was talking to the [88:14] CEO of butcher boox about this [88:15] particular thing um last [88:17] week I think it's a barbell strategy [88:20] where you have people on either ends and [88:22] very little in the middle interesting so [88:25] I love lots of young hungry people who [88:28] are here for growth and want to learn [88:30] and are ready to work long hours and [88:32] just go all [88:34] in and the people at the call it the L [88:37] the back half of their career that are [88:40] here that they they've made enough money [88:42] they know they can get a job wherever [88:43] they feel like it you're not doing them [88:46] a favor by giving them a job and they're [88:48] not what I a term I hate which is [88:50] careerists they're not obsessed with [88:52] their title they're not obsessed [88:54] obsessed with their career path what [88:55] their promotion plan is going to be they [88:57] basically have a litmus test which is [88:59] like I have to have make about this to [89:00] get to come in and do this with you but [89:02] they actually just really love the work [89:05] and so these people are learning so the [89:07] young people are learning and and [89:09] overcompensating with tons of hours and [89:11] Reps and these people are bringing their [89:13] experience to the game and creating [89:15] significantly more leverage with [89:16] strategy the people in the middle are [89:18] the ones that tend to be the pain in the [89:20] ass for everybody and I don't think and [89:22] be clear here I don't think this is [89:23] actually an age thing I think it's a [89:25] perspective thing so it's just are you [89:28] here for growth or are you here to share [89:31] what you know and I think that it's the [89:34] people in the middle that are like well [89:36] I'm bringing something but I need some [89:37] it's like this kind of tit fortat [89:39] relationship that um I would say the [89:42] vast majority of people that don't work [89:43] out are in that bucket and what role [89:46] does naivity play in Innovation here [89:49] because the kids that don't know the [89:50] rules yeah are more likely to stumble [89:52] across nuances right I think yes [89:56] uh you can fundamentally you can disrupt [89:59] any industry if you don't know how it's [90:00] supposed to go and so but that's I think [90:04] that really teases out something we said [90:06] at the very beginning which is um [90:08] starting from first principles which is [90:10] what are the few things I know to be [90:11] true and then basically forgetting [90:13] everything else and when you build from [90:16] those assumptions up you end up building [90:17] a lots of different paths up the [90:19] mountain that may or may not have been [90:20] Trot in before I think one of the one of [90:22] the one of the most um ating things that [90:24] can happen sometimes is that like you [90:25] rederive a solution that already works [90:28] and you're like okay well now I know why [90:29] this works right and I think but I think [90:31] that's actually then you have more [90:33] confidence in the path and you're like [90:34] okay that's fine but now I know why [90:35] we're doing this not just because other [90:36] people did it but because I understand [90:38] why it works and so I think it just [90:40] comes down to what are the few truths [90:42] that I know to be true and going all in [90:44] on those things like I know that if [90:46] customers love my product they are more [90:49] likely to tell other people about it [90:50] than if they hate it that I feel very [90:51] confident so then we say okay what are [90:53] the things that must occur in order to [90:55] get someone to quote love my product AKA [90:57] increase the likelihood that they tell [90:58] their friends about it or post about us [91:00] and so now there's and you can break [91:02] this and again this is where quality and [91:03] quantity of metrics matter so it's like [91:05] how how much more Nuance can I break and [91:08] break this up into small pieces so it's [91:09] like okay at what time do we deliver [91:11] these messages or around what [91:13] experiences that have high likelihood of [91:15] them posting can we decrease the [91:17] friction around uh them sending friends [91:19] how can we make it both easy and how can [91:20] we incentivize it and so all of these [91:22] components whether it's a service [91:23] business a physical products business a [91:25] software business it still works the [91:26] same way is you know and for each each [91:29] customer for example as we're taking [91:30] someone through this I have four [91:31] Milestones that I look for which are the [91:33] four RS so how do I get them to review [91:36] my product how do I how do I well in [91:39] order it be how do I retain them [91:41] immediately how do I get them to review [91:43] my product how do I get them to refer [91:46] somebody and then how do I resell them [91:49] and so they're basically those for RS is [91:51] what I try and take every customer [91:52] through it's a very simple framework [91:54] right when you think I was like oh man [91:56] customer success what does it mean it's [91:57] just like well these are the four things [91:58] that I want to occur and so all I'm [92:00] trying to do is reverse engineer what [92:02] activities increase the likely that each [92:03] of these four hours [92:05] happen this year 55% of businesses [92:08] globally are utilizing AI in some form [92:10] it's become so integrated across every [92:12] point of my businesses that it's hard to [92:14] remember a time when my team and I [92:16] weren't using it Adobe Express who [92:18] sponsored this podcast is a prime [92:19] example of a tool our team uses day in [92:21] and day out it's generate image tool [92:23] only needs a few words describing what [92:25] you want and using AI it returns many [92:27] images for you to choose from if you're [92:29] watching see how quick and easy it is [92:32] and you can try it yourself for free the [92:34] customizable templates mean you or [92:36] anyone in your team can create something [92:38] that stands out without starting [92:40] entirely from scratch or being a design [92:41] expert it's the type of technology that [92:44] differentiates Adobe Express from being [92:46] just another design tool and makes it [92:48] the quick and easy create anything app [92:51] search Adobe Express will download it [92:53] for free in the the app store right now [92:56] well I want to go through the the four [92:57] RS but I also I think that what comes [92:59] before the 4 RS is knowing how to get [93:01] customers in the first place which is a [93:03] was a tricky one and actually maybe even [93:05] the thing that comes before that is [93:07] being psychologically prepared for [93:10] the the toll and the roller coaster that [93:13] business is I found this um found this [93:16] graph of yours oh God yeah and I think [93:19] for any founder starting a business it's [93:21] important to for them to understand this [93:23] cycle um I think you call it like the [93:25] crash burn cycle or something because if [93:27] you're not aware of the cycle when you [93:29] hit certain parts of it you're probably [93:30] going to think that there's something [93:31] wrong with you yeah and but there's a [93:33] certain inevitability to this crash [93:35] cycle I'll put it on the screen for [93:36] anyone to see yeah this is this is the [93:39] entrepreneur life cycle until you learn [93:41] how to break free from it and so there [93:44] are six [93:45] stages you have stage one which is [93:49] uninformed optimism this is where you [93:52] see your friend or you see something [93:54] online and it looks like they're making [93:55] money or it looks like there's some [93:57] opportunity and you think oh my God that [93:58] sounds amazing and you have optimism [94:01] because it looks great but it's [94:03] uninformed because you have no idea what [94:04] it [94:05] entails so then you dive in and you say [94:07] okay I'm going to pursue this this thing [94:09] whatever is it baking cupcakes or I'm [94:10] going to I'm going to do lawn mowing or [94:11] I'm going to do crypto trading whatever [94:14] second step is you get into it and [94:15] you're like oh my God I don't know [94:17] there's so many things involved in this [94:18] and this is significantly more [94:19] complicated than I I expected so then [94:21] you become an informed pessimist [94:24] you now know uh that it's hard or [94:26] significantly harder than you expected [94:29] the third stage is you have your crisis [94:31] of meaning or the value of Despair so [94:34] you're continuing to do this stuff it's [94:36] continuing to not work and you keep [94:38] working and it keeps not working and so [94:41] this is the step and this is the this is [94:43] the point of Truth and this is the cycle [94:46] where the the paths of the entrepreneurs [94:48] split and the vast majority of people [94:50] take this next step which is they then [94:52] say you know what [94:54] there's that thing over there that my [94:55] other friend's doing maybe I should do [94:57] that instead and so then they hop back [95:00] to uninformed optimism and then they go [95:02] boom to inform pessimism and they just [95:04] go around and around and around and they [95:05] live the same six months uh for 20 [95:08] straight [95:09] years now the other path of from the [95:14] valley of Despair is sticking with it [95:17] and so then you become an informed [95:19] Optimist because now you understand you [95:21] still understood all the bad stuff but [95:23] you also understand the good stuff and [95:24] how to avoid the bad and maximize the [95:27] good and then once you're there you do [95:29] you stick on that path long enough and [95:30] you end up achieving what you originally [95:32] thought was really easy and fast and so [95:35] that cycle this is more or less the um [95:37] the Alex rosi life story which is why I [95:39] can so intimately describe you to the [95:41] steps is that I call that Loop and that [95:45] uh the person on the other side the [95:46] woman in the red dress which is probably [95:49] my favorite part of the Matrix movie [95:52] which is Neo who's the the main [95:53] character uh is in a program to teach [95:55] him one thing and so he's walking uh [95:57] through the crowded streets of what [95:59] looks like a New York City with Morpheus [96:01] leading him and uh he's drawing on about [96:04] something that he's supposed to learn [96:06] and he says Neo were you listening to me [96:08] or were you looking to the woman looking [96:09] at the woman in the red dress and and [96:11] Neo was looking at the woman in the red [96:13] dress as Morpheus is talking and then he [96:15] says look again and he looks back at the [96:18] one the dress and it's agent Smith with [96:19] a gun point at his head and in that [96:22] moment he's like freeze [96:24] and he explains that you're either one [96:28] of us or one of them and they are the [96:31] people who are Sentinels sent to destroy [96:32] us and so what appears to be the woman [96:35] in the red dress is actually a a an [96:38] agent from the system meant to destroy [96:40] the opportunity that you're in right now [96:42] and so I love the woman that red dress [96:44] so much because it's so real because [96:46] you're in this thing you're in this [96:48] relationship with your business and [96:50] you're like you know this girl seems [96:52] great and then you you get to know her [96:54] and you find out she snores when she [96:55] sleeps and all of a sudden it's like you [96:57] know uh you know you see you see the [96:58] sweatpants and no makeup in the morning [97:01] and you realize that sometimes she's [97:02] Moody whatever but you get to you start [97:04] to get to know you're like I don't know [97:05] if we're going to get married like you [97:06] know this is kind of where we're at and [97:08] then you see a woman in the red dress [97:10] and you're like you know what I think [97:12] that's the girl and so you quit this [97:13] relationship with your business and you [97:14] get into that relationship but then you [97:16] realize that that girl has crab she has [97:17] a crazy ex-boyfriend and you're like oh [97:19] my God I didn't want to deal with any of [97:20] this stuff right and so my CF so was one [97:24] of the first people that were like oh my [97:25] God I hired that person it changed [97:26] everything so my CFO in gym launch um [97:28] had taken four companies from 0 to 100 [97:30] million um she had done over 40 m&a [97:33] transactions her largest one was 5 [97:34] billion super experience um she was the [97:37] very end of her career and she was like [97:39] I'll take you guys I'll I'll take this [97:41] one last ride with you guys and so you [97:43] know mind you Leila and I I'm 26 or 27 [97:45] at the time Leela's 23 24 and we're [97:48] sitting across the table from a very [97:49] experienced business person being like [97:51] please help us and so one of the things [97:54] that she taught me that I I'll never [97:56] forget is she [97:59] said the grass is always greener on the [98:01] other side you just don't know that it's [98:04] fertilized with [98:05] [ __ ] and she and she she's Southern so [98:08] she have this deep southern act she's [98:09] like there's always [ __ ] yeah [ __ ] [98:12] everywhere and so she's like I've been [98:13] in enough businesses to know that all [98:15] businesses have [ __ ] and so you just [98:17] have the [ __ ] you don't know about and [98:18] the [ __ ] you do know about and you're in [98:19] this business and so this is the [ __ ] [98:21] you know and that has been so profoundly [98:25] impactful in my life because it was so [98:26] hard for me to break the cycle really [98:28] hard for me um I mean I gave you my my [98:31] life story of the many businesses that [98:32] I've been involved in and so like the [98:33] entrepreneurial add has been so real for [98:35] me and I've made some of the biggest [98:36] career Mistakes by just pursuing and [98:38] splitting my attention between multiple [98:40] Endeavors and I can say truthfully that [98:44] this 2024 was the first year and this is [98:46] now 2025 the first time in my life where [98:48] I haven't experienced fomo so fear of [98:51] missing out and it was one of those [98:53] things things that I just always had I [98:54] would see somebody doing really well [98:55] like oh man I mean I should be getting [98:57] into that like that I shouldn't be doing [98:58] this I should doing that um and it was [99:01] it was one of those things it's kind of [99:02] like being happy where like you don't [99:04] realize you're happy you just look back [99:05] and you're like you know what that was a [99:06] really good year you know like you kind [99:07] of like you kind of see it in retrospect [99:09] what I realized was that now when I hear [99:11] someone say like oh my God I crushed it [99:13] with this thing I think that's amazing [99:16] for them I'm sure there's tons of [99:17] problems that I don't know about and [99:18] that's amazing but I'm going to keep [99:19] doing this thing because this is the [99:20] only thing I know how to do pretty well [99:22] and I'm just going to keep compounding [99:23] my information advantage against [99:24] everybody else who thinks this is easy [99:26] and wants to get into it and so um I [99:29] think that [99:30] that every any any massive company that [99:33] you know of has existed for multiple [99:35] decades and in order for something to [99:37] exist for multiple decades the founder [99:38] has to stay focused on that thing for [99:40] the whole time and I measure focus by [99:42] the quantity and quality of things that [99:44] you say no to and I measure [99:48] commitment or I Define commitment as the [99:50] elimination of Alternatives and so if [99:52] you think of marriage as the commitment [99:54] then it is the ultimate commitment [99:55] because you've limited literally every [99:56] alternative besides this person and so I [99:59] think that many business problems and [100:01] many entrepreneurs would 5x 10x their [100:05] business if they simply gave themselves [100:07] no way [100:08] out this is what I'm doing and I'm I [100:11] mean the term you know burning the boats [100:13] but I'm eliminating all Alternatives and [100:16] structuring my life such that I I make [100:18] it very difficult to pursue the [100:20] Alternatives and I think by doing that [100:22] you can actually conquer this this cycle [100:24] and make it past the split where you go [100:27] uh Crash and Burn and then restart the [100:28] Doom Loop or make it to informed [100:30] optimism and then eventually to the [100:32] achievement that you [100:34] want there's so much there there's so [100:37] much there but it's such an important [100:38] Point [100:40] um so where should I start so at that [100:43] moment here this crisis of meaning [100:46] moment yeah what I see so much of is [100:48] entrepreneurs not necessarily quitting [100:50] the old thing but just taking on [100:51] something else and get entrepreneurs [100:54] will come up to me in the gym and [100:55] they'll say hey Steve um just want to [100:57] let you know what I do and see if you [100:58] can offer me any advice and then they'll [101:00] list three things they'll say I'm [101:02] starting this crypto thing with my [101:03] friend Dave I've got this hair business [101:04] where we're selling on Ecom and I've got [101:06] this other thing and they almost assume [101:08] that the more things they're doing the [101:11] higher the probability that they'll be [101:12] successful in [101:15] something my mom was that my my mom has [101:18] started 30 businesses and I watched for [101:21] my whole childhood how she was start a [101:24] hairdressing salon and then the person [101:26] down the street running an estate agents [101:28] would come in and say we're making loads [101:29] of money as an estate agents she'd start [101:31] that that business would suck she'd hit [101:32] this moment of crisis of meaning she' [101:34] then start a Furniture business and a [101:37] and then she she so she jumped between [101:40] 20 to 30 businesses and it's kind of [101:43] still happening now where they last six [101:45] months they eventually go bust she sort [101:47] of like you know like the monkeys that [101:48] swing to the next brch swings to the [101:50] next thing and there's never been the [101:51] escape Velocity that comes from this [101:53] formed optimism [101:55] part so yeah this it really rang true [101:57] for me in every sense of the word this [101:59] idea of like a focus going against all [102:03] of your instincts and your emotions but [102:05] being pivotal to achievement I think [102:08] entrepreneurship is far more a war of [102:10] the heart than it is a war of the mind [102:13] like we can understand what we should do [102:15] we just don't do it and I think that's [102:17] why um we are so much better at giving [102:20] advice than we are at following it so [102:21] most people if they just followed their [102:22] own advice they'd be [102:24] successful right and so um with this [102:27] kind of valley of Despair I call it um [102:31] Niche slapping it's like don't make me [102:32] nit slap [102:33] you which is like when you have three [102:35] things going on it's like let me like [102:38] slap you into just picking one because [102:40] the thing is is that any of them can [102:42] work but none of them will work unless [102:44] you pick only one because it's actually [102:48] in my [102:49] opinion an exercise and arrogance to [102:52] assume that you doing three things is [102:54] somehow going to beat somebody who's [102:56] doing one and I can promise you the [102:58] competitor who is going to beat you is [102:59] only doing that one thing and you think [103:01] a third of your time is going to be [103:02] there no it's not going to I think it's [103:05] arrogant and so there's actually like an [103:07] under there's like an underpinning of [103:09] egoo underneath of this and I say this [103:10] to somebody who did this so like when I [103:12] had the launch business I also had my [103:14] six gyms I also had a chiropractor [103:16] agency and I also had a dental agency [103:18] and so I would introduce myself I'm like [103:19] oh I own lots of companies but I think [103:22] one of the biggest Mis conceptions when [103:23] you're an entrepreneur is not [103:24] understanding the difference between [103:25] being an owner and being the CEO and so [103:28] they might hear that you have a [103:29] portfolio they might hear that I have a [103:30] portfolio and be like okay well they [103:32] have a portfolio so I must model that [103:33] that guy's tall I should play basketball [103:35] doesn't work that way right I should be [103:37] so if I want to be rich I should fly [103:38] private doesn't work that way right um [103:41] it's conflating order and [103:45] so we must do these things in order uh [103:48] to get the outcome we have to [103:49] concentrate on only one thing in order [103:51] to get the outsized return [103:54] and that spreading of attention [103:57] especially when you're newer in the [103:58] entrepreneurial career it's like you [104:00] already don't know so many things how do [104:02] you now want to have three sets of [104:03] unknowns that you want to try and [104:04] Conquer at the same time and the the [104:07] fallacy of thinking is that I'm going to [104:08] try all of them and see which one [104:11] works but none of them will work because [104:14] you're waiting to see which one will [104:16] work because you can force in my opinion [104:18] you can force one thing to work provided [104:21] like I'm I'm going to just assume BAS [104:23] like you're selling you're not selling [104:24] $5 bills for $4 like like you know the [104:27] normal economics of a business like if [104:29] if if if a real estate business exists [104:31] there are other people are making money [104:32] there are hairon businesses where people [104:33] are making money there are lawnmowing [104:34] business where people are making money [104:36] you can make money in all of them you [104:37] just can't make money in all of [104:39] them at the same and it it's when you [104:41] walked in today and you sat down on the [104:43] chair I said like what's going on with [104:44] you professionally I remember what you [104:45] said you said more of the same and [104:47] better which clearly comes from your [104:49] wisdom my my infinite wisdom right well [104:52] it's just from from from from from [104:54] suffering um the the the wo of this [104:59] like the biggest entrepreneurial [105:02] mistakes I've made in my career have all [105:03] come from splitting my attention every [105:06] one of them like every single one of [105:08] them like I talked about how I had the [105:10] e-commerce business that I bolted on to [105:11] my to my licensing company I should not [105:13] have done that as soon as I did that my [105:15] my Revenue started slowing down and it's [105:17] growth why did you because I was [105:19] add like I just I was like oh my I don't [105:22] want to leave money on the table and I [105:24] want to I want to be so violent about [105:26] this you are always going to leave money [105:28] on the table that is the result of focus [105:32] but you're you're leaving a small amount [105:34] of money on the table to pursue the much [105:36] larger money that's on another table of [105:38] just sticking with the thing that you're [105:39] on right now because compounding if I [105:42] were to show a chart here it's like if [105:44] you're at year three of your thing and [105:47] you want to think about moving to year [105:49] zero of a new thing you have to compare [105:52] maybe year zero of a new thing grows [105:54] faster but it has to grow faster than [105:56] year three to four of the thing that [105:58] you're on right now and I think that's [106:01] that people will compare year zero to [106:02] year zero but not year four to year zero [106:05] and the thing is is you actually we have [106:07] a linear life and so we that is it's an [106:09] unfair but true comparison of the [106:11] opportunity cost and every exceptionally [106:16] um successful entrepreneur that I know [106:17] has just stuck with one thing for such [106:18] an inordinate amount of time and I think [106:20] there's a quote by um I want to say [106:22] Shane per is but he said um success is [106:27] doing the obvious thing for an [106:29] extraordinary period of time without [106:30] believing that you're smarter than you [106:32] are and it's just like you we we know [106:36] what we need to do [106:38] and comp so we don't need to make our [106:41] lives more complex complexity will come [106:43] with scale I promise and so just simply [106:46] trying to do more of what you're already [106:48] doing well is already hard enough don't [106:51] add anything else and so like if you [106:53] need to write some sort of commitment of [106:55] like I'm just going to stick with this [106:57] then do that but [107:01] the what happens is we were talking [107:03] about the levels earlier about like [107:04] beating the bosses so what happens is [107:08] you know how to beat boss one through [107:10] three of of the game and so then you [107:14] just say okay well I'm just going to [107:15] start the game over and beat boss I mean [107:17] this is this time it's going to be [107:18] different but then you just get to level [107:20] three again and then you're stuck again [107:23] and so people just keep getting up to [107:25] level three and new and and and new [107:27] Endeavors over and over again because [107:28] they never learned how to get past that [107:30] boss and so you just have to confront [107:32] the uncertainty of knowing that you [107:34] don't know how to do it but that you [107:36] will figure it out if you keep doing [107:38] enough repetitions and that's where you [107:41] talk to as many people as you can you [107:42] see what they said you consolidate it [107:44] all you say I think this is the highest [107:45] likely path it might not work but I do [107:48] believe fundamentally that if we cut [107:49] people's hair well and we do it for a [107:52] long period of time we will have a [107:53] thriving business and if we have a [107:54] really good model from that thing we [107:56] might be able to open up another [107:57] location and if we keep our costs down [107:59] we might be able to have an actual model [108:00] that we could either invest our own [108:02] capital or bring somebody else and take [108:03] it national like all of these like I [108:06] have yet to find a business that can't [108:08] get to $100 million a year that has a [108:11] permutation of it that exists you're a [108:13] dry cleaner fine well cool we'll build [108:15] the model and either we're going to [108:16] license the model we can franchise the [108:17] model out we can get outside investors [108:18] we can scale it nationally we can do it [108:20] but the crazy goals are only crazy [108:22] because people crazy timelines they're [108:24] actually very seane goals if you extend [108:25] the timeline out if you have a a true 10 [108:28] year goal or true 20- year goal almost [108:29] anything's accomplishable I mean almost [108:32] every multi-billion dollar company is [108:34] about you know they get it's usually [108:36] between like years six and 10 when [108:38] companies get to kind of like those big [108:40] numbers and most people who are [108:41] listening to this are five years into [108:44] entrepreneurship but you're six months [108:46] into the thing that you've been working [108:46] on right now and you keep restarting the [108:49] clock for getting to year 10 every time [108:51] you start over and I think that's the [108:53] part that it took me a very long time to [108:55] figure out and I think it takes a lot of [108:56] entrepreneurs like everyone messes [108:58] around with a lot of stuff in the [108:59] beginning because you just don't know [108:59] what you're doing and so in my [109:02] experience it takes about five years for [109:05] most entrepreneurs that I know to just [109:07] like find something that works like like [109:10] takes about five years to figure out [109:11] which way is North yeah right and then [109:14] it takes like another five years and a [109:16] lot of people that's it like they they [109:17] restart they they they go off Crash and [109:19] Burn um and it takes another 5 years to [109:22] build something that can can create [109:24] generational wealth so it's about a [109:26] 10year slug and here's the really hard [109:28] truth about it if you have a job right [109:31] now for almost all of that five years [109:34] you quit your job because you don't want [109:36] to work as hard as you are and you want [109:38] to make more money and as soon as you [109:40] quit you will realize that you are now [109:42] going to work way harder than you were [109:43] and you're going to make less money for [109:46] an extended period of time the one [109:48] benefit is that you get to claim all [109:49] responsibility for how little you make [109:51] and how much you work [109:53] because you're like my boss is an idiot [109:54] and it's me but it's the truth and I [109:57] think that in some ways having that um [110:02] optimistic ignorance is actually one of [110:04] the really redeeming traits of [110:06] entrepreneurs and one of the really hard [110:09] Parts is that the biggest jump you have [110:11] to make gets so immediately reinforced [110:13] from the freedom you have from being [110:15] able to you know chart your own [110:19] path but [110:23] that big success of quitting one thing [110:25] and starting another you need to [110:27] immediately forget and I think that [110:30] fundamentally that is why so many [110:31] entrepreneurs keep doing it is because [110:33] the first time you do it it's the [110:36] biggest rush ever you quit your job you [110:38] do the business and and you get some [110:40] some first traction and that that first [110:42] dollar that you make when the new [110:43] business is like the best dollar ever [110:45] right but it such a strong reinforcer [110:48] that what does it reinforce it [110:50] reinforces stopping what you're doing [110:52] and St starting something else and so I [110:54] think one of the fundamental errors of [110:56] Entrepreneurship is that sometimes the [110:59] jumping ship to start this thing is the [111:01] lesson that you need to immediately [111:02] unlearn because after that you have to [111:04] just stick with it for a very long [111:06] period of [111:07] time there's also something in that [111:10] entrepreneurs don't go into starting a [111:12] company with the belief that their [111:14] hypothesis is wrong so in year one or [111:17] seven months in when they realized that [111:19] their initial hypothesis was wrong they [111:21] think that means abandoned [ __ ] because [111:23] my hypothesis was wrong whereas [111:25] successful entrepreneurs that I've met [111:26] especially second time Founders realize [111:28] that their hypothesis is almost [111:30] certainly wrong from the jump and that [111:31] the process of starting is to correct [111:33] and to find a new hypothesis I think [111:35] about like Mark Zuckerberg in his room [111:37] with like face swap or whatever it was [111:39] rating people's attractiveness and now [111:41] meta is this like virtual reality AI [111:43] company yeah but understanding that your [111:45] hypothesis is wrong from the jump and [111:48] that you know this is a process of [111:49] finding a new hypothesis I think would [111:51] give you a little bit more p patience as [111:53] well through these cycles of the crisis [111:56] of meaning and so on so two things so [111:58] one is I had this tweet that went like [112:00] super viral but it was like uh [112:02] first-time founder hey I need you to [112:04] sign an NDA before I tell you my [112:06] business idea I know you've gotten I [112:08] know I know you [112:10] have third time [112:13] founder uh here's everything I have [112:15] here's all the documents here's all the [112:17] projections it's probably all wrong and [112:19] this probably won't work um but I have a [112:20] couple smart people and I think we'll be [112:22] able to f figure it out it'll probably [112:23] cost longer and take longer cost more [112:25] and take longer than we think but we [112:26] think it's worth a [112:29] shot and that things because everyone [112:32] who who who's been on both sides of that [112:34] understand like the entrepreneurs got it [112:35] because they're like oh my God I was [112:36] that guy um and all the investors get it [112:38] because they're like oh my God I deal [112:39] with this guy all the time but actually [112:41] what you just said with the many many [112:44] iterations that from your original idea [112:45] until what actually happens is yet again [112:49] one of those um demonstrations of the [112:51] difference between a beginner an expert [112:54] a beginner has binary thinking so they [112:56] think this worked or it didn't work and [112:57] if it didn't work then I need a new idea [113:00] rather than having the Nuance thinking [113:01] of a master or an expert or Advanced [113:03] person who says what about this if I [113:05] click into it I break it into its [113:07] component parts what about this didn't [113:09] work okay it's not that meta ads don't [113:12] work or advertising doesn't work it's [113:13] that we didn't nail the hook in our ad [113:16] or that we didn't make our our offer [113:18] clear enough on the landing page or it [113:21] was not congruent with the advertisement [113:23] or um you know it was the offer itself [113:26] wasn't very compelling or it didn't have [113:27] it didn't like it was just this we [113:29] everyone's coming in and saying yeah [113:30] yeah I kind of want that but this is [113:32] actually my issue we're not solving the [113:33] core problem so it's it's always in the [113:36] in the details it's always in the [113:37] sifting through the many small things [113:40] that you find the kernel that ends up [113:41] fixing uh the business I mean I know [113:44] that uh Facebook was trying to fix their [113:46] virality issue and they were locked in a [113:49] room for days trying to figure out how [113:52] they could get more users to retain on [113:54] the platform right people would sign up [113:55] but then they wouldn't do anything and [113:56] then they they drop out and so finally [113:59] um Zuck just said okay we have some [114:04] belief that if people have more friends [114:07] that they will engage and so they didn't [114:10] and here's the thing like with the [114:11] uncertainty they couldn't prove it he [114:13] just was like I feel like that's better [114:15] than them not having friends and so he [114:18] said all right the new goal is 10 [114:20] friends in 14 days that's the goal so we [114:23] have to create the experience so that we [114:24] can get it to introduce them to 10 [114:26] people or connect them with 10 people [114:28] they already know on the platform within [114:29] 14 days and as soon as that happened [114:32] then obviously Facebook took off or [114:34] continued to grow and so he wasn't like [114:37] oh Facebook doesn't work anymore or [114:38] social networks aren't going to be a [114:40] thing it's it's usually way smaller and [114:43] way the adjustment you need to make is [114:45] much more nuanced than what you [114:47] originally expect if the foundational [114:49] principle of like cutting hair mowing [114:51] lawns whatever it's like this problem [114:53] exists and I can charge a certain amount [114:55] and make a profit on it then there's [114:57] nothing wrong with the business it's [114:59] just what is the constraint that's [115:00] holding us back and then usually zooming [115:02] into the constraint and realizing [115:03] there's 20 things that are contributing [115:05] to the outcome not one and that's where [115:07] expertise and that and you develop that [115:09] expertise by trying and failing yeah and [115:12] that's and that's just the name of the [115:13] game and so I think you have to have an [115:15] incredibly high tolerance for failure [115:17] without internalizing it and feeling [115:19] like you yourself are a failure as a [115:21] result of failure [115:22] well this is it when I started my first [115:24] business at 18 years old called wallpark [115:26] social network whatever um I thought the [115:28] game was to be right yeah I came to [115:31] learn from businesses that came after [115:34] that actually the game of [115:35] Entrepreneurship is to be successful and [115:37] they're two very different things to win [115:40] because when you want to be right you [115:41] not only want to be CEO and you want [115:42] your hypothesis that you put in that [115:44] first um Pitch deck to come true and [115:46] even when customers are telling you that [115:47] you were wrong you try and force the [115:49] [ __ ] [115:50] hyp yeah but when when your game is to [115:53] be successful there's a couple of really [115:55] interesting things that I observe happen [115:56] one of them is you I watch Founders say [115:58] actually maybe I'm not the best person [116:00] to be CEO yeah even though I founded [116:01] this thing maybe I should be Chief brand [116:03] officer when I think about some of the [116:05] top companies in the UK represent just [116:08] valued at 100 million Jim shark Ben's [116:10] business valued at 1.5 billion Julian's [116:12] business probably valued at a billion [116:15] I'm involved in some of these businesses [116:16] in different ways but um the thing they [116:19] all have in common is at some early [116:21] point the founder their ego secondary to [116:23] the success of the business they said [116:25] actually I'm not the best CEO I should [116:26] be head of brand or marketing product or [116:29] product or whatever it is and that's [116:31] that mindset shift from being I need to [116:32] be right and I need to be at the helm of [116:34] being right versus this thing needs to [116:36] be [116:37] successful and this goes back to the [116:40] who which is if you if you at some point [116:44] if you want to have a really [116:45] ridiculously successful company it will [116:47] require more lifetimes of expertise than [116:49] you can live and so then it's it becomes [116:52] a recruiting game like very quickly [116:55] almost all business becomes [116:57] recruiting which is how do I I mean if [116:59] you if you listen to Zuck talk about it [117:01] you look you listen to Elon talk about [117:02] it you listen to to Steve Jobs talk [117:04] about it Steve would talk about how the [117:06] best players that he had in the company [117:07] he would set aside like a year to 18 [117:09] months to bring them in amen and he said [117:13] every time I you know I I I knew who I [117:15] wanted and then I would he's like you [117:18] know I would take some calls with other [117:19] people and I would just be like but [117:21] they're not [117:22] John they're not John and so he would [117:25] just keep working on them and working on [117:27] them and working them and eventually [117:28] they're like you know what fine they [117:31] like give up they're like if this guy's [117:32] this persistent like he probably will be [117:35] successful on but he will take us there [117:37] and I think that like people are the [117:40] highest leverage thing that you that you [117:41] can bring into the company outside of [117:43] you know crazy [117:45] technology I am one of my favorite [117:47] videos of all time is where Steve Jobs [117:48] who you just mentioned talks about [117:51] hiring tril exceptional people and he [117:53] says words to the effect I'll play it on [117:54] screen he says um people think the [117:56] success of Apple is a consequence of me [117:58] and my talent and my skills but what [118:00] I've actually done is I've built my [118:01] career quote on hiring truly exceptional [118:04] people doing the extremely hard work of [118:06] finding them and hiring them and this [118:08] crazy thing happens when you do that is [118:10] it propagates I a players then want to [118:13] work with a players they also hire a [118:15] players and it spreads I think it was [118:17] this [118:18] video I've [118:20] built a lot of my success off finding [118:24] these truly gifted people and not [118:28] settling for B andc players but really [118:30] going for the a players and I found [118:32] something I found that when you get [118:35] enough a players together when you go to [118:37] through the incredible work to find you [118:39] know five of these eight players they [118:42] really like working with each other [118:43] because they they've never had a chance [118:44] to do that before and they don't want to [118:47] work with BNC players and so it becomes [118:50] self-policing and they only one hire [118:52] more a players and so you build up these [118:54] pockets of a players and it [118:58] propagates the thing is is that it's [119:01] just like money won't make you [119:03] happy it's one of those things that like [119:05] every founder like has to figure out for [119:07] themselves but the thing is is and I and [119:10] I've had obviously a bunch of [119:11] conversations around this but [119:13] like what you think is an a player today [119:17] is not what you will think an a player [119:18] is in five years and so I think one of [119:21] the the hardest mental hacks around this [119:23] is trying to project yourself into the [119:25] future into the size business that you [119:27] want to have and say who would be an a [119:29] player at that size and scale and then [119:32] coming back to the present and saying [119:34] how do I get them to work for me today [119:36] amen and it's it's really and so as a [119:39] mental process for anybody who does have [119:41] a business right now and has some [119:42] employees if you like everybody right [119:45] now you probably have some version of [119:47] your a player because every business has [119:48] at least one hopefully right besides you [119:50] um imagine your business had five of [119:53] those people like you picture in your [119:54] head you've got that one person now you [119:56] have five of them how much more would [119:59] you make would you would you double [120:01] would you would you five would you 10x [120:03] would you 50x and sometimes you realize [120:06] you're like no I think I would actually [120:07] 10x and so if that were the case one Not [120:11] only would you 10x the company number [120:13] two the value of the company would more [120:14] than 10x because it would no longer be [120:16] it would be significantly less relied on [120:17] you and it'd be more reliant on the team [120:19] that you've [120:20] built number three if would happen [120:22] faster because you would have more [120:24] barrels that were firing concurrently [120:26] moving things forward and those those [120:31] pieces when put together you have to [120:33] then ask yourself from an opportunity [120:35] cost perspective what other activity [120:38] could I be doing that would have the [120:40] possibility of texing my company doing [120:42] it faster and increasing the Enterprise [120:44] Value [120:45] multiple that's not that and if you [120:48] can't find one then it means you're [120:50] working on the wrong stuff and I think [120:52] that is one of those um great litmus [120:54] tests of like if I can find something [120:56] and I'll give you a really simple one [120:57] that's not not human B the talent based [121:00] here something as simple as calling your [121:02] leads so there's tons of research that [121:05] suggest that you can four 5x your [121:08] conversion of leads by calling them [121:09] within 60 seconds of them opting it for [121:12] any product you [121:14] have if you have all of these priorities [121:16] they have across the [121:18] company does any of them have the high [121:21] likelihood of four or 5x in your [121:23] business [121:25] immediately with very low cost of doing [121:27] so less so than just calling the leads [121:30] within 60 seconds if the answer is no [121:33] Then by God why are you not calling all [121:36] your leads within 60 seconds the fob [121:38] question would would be like well I [121:39] don't have enough people to call our [121:40] leads within 60 seconds so then we'd say [121:43] okay what is 4X the revenue of your [121:45] company worth okay what does it cost to [121:50] hire one person who whose only job is to [121:53] just call the leads now I recently [121:55] talked to a Restoration company so they [121:57] did water damage for homes when they got [121:59] hit by storms and he told me he said he [122:01] was converting 55% of his leads not [122:04] calls leads and I was like how on Earth [122:06] are you doing this and I was like well [122:08] how many leads a day do you get he said [122:09] two or three I was like okay so what's [122:12] the process he's like oh it's really [122:13] simple uh my aunt I pay her $60,000 a [122:17] year and she has only one job she has no [122:19] responsibility in the company besides [122:20] the moment a lead comes in you stop [122:23] having sex with your husband you stop [122:24] you stop you stop cooking you stop [122:26] loving your child and you immediately [122:28] call the lead that's the only [122:29] responsibility she just has to make [122:30] three calls a day at the moment the [122:32] leads come in and he pays her [122:35] $60,000 and that brings in millions of [122:38] dollars of Revenue and So you you're not [122:41] going to pay for it out of the dollars [122:43] you have now you're going to pay for it [122:44] out of the dollars that you're going to [122:45] make that you're not making yet because [122:47] you haven't done it yet and [122:49] so pin in that [122:52] back to the [122:54] people I think the hardest time I we [122:56] call this the swamp at acquisition. [122:58] comom but it's usually between like 1 [122:59] and 3 million is the swamp and I think [123:02] there's a numberous reason for why it's [123:04] such a painful period for [123:07] entrepreneurs let's say 1 million for [123:09] simple math if you have a million-dollar [123:11] business let's say that you have 20% [123:13] margins so that means you're making [123:14] $200,000 a year in profit for you to get [123:17] an a player it's probably going to cost [123:20] you 100% of your profit to get that a [123:22] player and so you'll have what appears [123:25] to be an impossible Choice you'll have [123:28] do I sacrifice basically 100% of my [123:31] profit to bring this person in or do I [123:34] work another six hours a day to to do [123:38] the job that this person is doing both [123:40] paths work both are painful and risky [123:44] because the overworking yourself thing [123:46] you can get yourself through that hump [123:47] and then now you're at maybe 3 or 4 [123:49] million and that 20% is 800 you can you [123:51] can spend 200 you still have cash flow [123:53] you can still live the downside for the [123:56] picking the person path is that what if [123:57] you pick [123:59] wrong and this by the way ladies and [124:01] gentlemen is why entrepreneurs get [124:03] outside returns is because we take on [124:05] outside risk and so this is the this is [124:08] the job is that we have to be willing to [124:10] make impossible choices and the vast [124:13] majority of choices for entrepreneurs in [124:15] the business are impossible choices [124:17] between two relatively bad scenarios [124:20] because the rest of the choices aren't [124:21] don't even feel like choices because [124:23] they're obvious of course we should car [124:25] leads faster of course we should follow [124:27] up more of course we should try and [124:28] onboard faster okay all these things are [124:30] the obvious ones but when you [124:32] have man I'm trying to think of the ones [124:35] I I'm not I'm [124:36] not almost all the decisions that you [124:39] get stuck with and Elon says this really [124:41] beautifully he says [124:43] um running a business is like staring [124:46] out to the abyss and chewing glass so [124:49] because uh the staring out to the abyss [124:51] component of it is just the fact that [124:53] this may never work and you're almost [124:57] facing existential risk at all times to [124:59] the business and the eating glass [125:00] component is that you will by nature of [125:03] your role get funneled the worst [125:06] problems in the business and the [125:07] problems that no one else can solve so [125:08] it's one problems that people can't [125:10] solve two the worst ones or that they [125:13] they don't want to solve and they suck [125:16] and so you basically become a filter for [125:18] the worst things and that's why it feels [125:19] like a fire every single day in the [125:21] business because you're the only one who [125:23] can make the tough call because no one [125:25] else wants to choose between these two [125:26] impossible choices and you're like why [125:28] is it so hard and the thing is is that [125:30] it literally never stops being hard it's [125:32] that the currency that you pay for in [125:34] the hardness changes and so you know a [125:38] lot of people have this envisionment of [125:39] like the rocky cut scene of like it must [125:40] be hard for business but I don't I don't [125:42] think that's where the hardship comes I [125:44] think the hardship is that at every [125:46] level of business there's new sacrifices [125:49] that you didn't know you were going to [125:50] have to make because if it was just oh I [125:52] have to work long hours there's tons of [125:53] people work long hours in their business [125:55] and don't don't grow and it's usually [125:56] because they're unwilling to have a hard [125:58] conversation it's a different currency [126:01] right they have to take on risk it's a [126:03] different currency they have to um they [126:06] have to they have to make some sort of [126:07] BET right that they otherwise wouldn't [126:09] have had to make they have some sort of [126:10] legal issue that they encounter they [126:12] have an employee who tries to sue them [126:14] for some sort of Mal whatever right all [126:17] of a sudden you're like wait all of [126:18] these things are happening and they [126:19] happen on a regular basis and at each [126:21] level you unlock new levels of glass [126:24] that you get to True through and so this [126:27] is why like most entrepreneurs in my [126:29] opinion don't actually quit they fizzle [126:32] so it's not a big bang usually it's they [126:35] just they stop seeking so either they [126:37] get content at the level that they're at [126:39] and they just don't strive for more um [126:41] and sometimes they say it just wasn't [126:43] worth the trade and I respect that if [126:44] you're like you know what I'm at a [126:45] million dollar a year and I don't want [126:46] anymore fine you won congratulations [126:48] like you won at life um but most of the [126:51] time they don't really quit they just [126:53] stop trying and then they just either [126:55] coast and or it just Fizzles into into [126:58] nothingness and that's just my [126:59] experience of having I'm sure you've [127:01] seen this having gone through like [127:02] cycles of entrepreneur it's like Seasons [127:03] it's like oh yeah I came in through even [127:06] like in the media and influencer space [127:07] whatever it's like there's a bunch of [127:09] guys that 10 years ago it's a different [127:11] landscape now than it was 10 years ago [127:12] some people adapted some of them were [127:14] like I don't like the they they just [127:17] they just they weren't willing to chew [127:19] the new glass which is how do I learn [127:20] Tik Tok how do I learn but man blogs [127:22] were so good it's like yeah and they're [127:24] not anymore I talked to an entrepreneur [127:26] really massive many hundreds of millions [127:28] of year in sales and he was like dude we [127:31] were killing it on infomercials so TV [127:34] and he's like we just you know we uh we [127:37] just we really just have to crack [127:38] YouTube and I'm thinking to myself like [127:41] dude it's 2024 like what like you needed [127:45] to crack YouTube 10 years ago and he had [127:47] the resources to do it but it was just a [127:49] different kind of hard and so most of [127:52] the hard is one a level of uncertainty [127:56] that that goes into it and almost [127:58] certain immediate failure because the [128:00] first thing you're going to do will [128:02] probably not work and again it's the [128:04] iterations of when you get into the new [128:06] domain you have to transfer your [128:08] generalized knowledge which is that as [128:10] an entrepreneur I will know that this [128:11] doesn't work probably because I only [128:13] know four things about it and I need to [128:15] know like 400 and so I will get my first [128:18] shot and I need to get directionally [128:20] correct and then just keep doing more of [128:22] that and so I gave the Consulting way of [128:24] learning kind of like a new space but if [128:26] you want to learn a new skill the [128:28] fastest way that I do it that's outside [128:29] of courses or anything is tremendous [128:32] volume of activity so whether that's [128:34] like I want to take a lot of sales calls [128:35] I want to do a lot of Outreach I want to [128:36] make a lot of content I want to do a lot [128:38] of customer success calls whatever it is [128:40] you do a hundred of those and then you [128:41] say what are the top 10% of these okay [128:45] what did these top 10% have different [128:48] than the other 90 and then I say okay [128:50] well these ones had these three things [128:52] that were different let's try and do [128:53] those three things on the next 100 and [128:56] then because of the variety of life [128:57] there's going to be some new variables [128:59] that exist that you look at the top 10% [129:02] of the next 100 and you're like okay we [129:04] did those three but there's also two [129:06] more things that happened in this 10 [129:08] versus the other 90 now let's do all [129:10] five of those things and over time this [129:12] is how you develop a checklist for [129:13] making Banger content and Banger videos [129:16] and I'm sure like there's this clip [129:18] David Perell talks about Chris Rock's [129:20] creative process and he says how is it [129:24] that you see Chris Rock at Madison [129:25] Square Gardens and it's just like 60 [129:28] Minutes of just fire you're like how is [129:30] this guy so funny and it's because what [129:32] you don't see is the many small clubs [129:34] and the first club that he goes to and [129:36] does a whole hourong set and has like [129:39] three moments that people laugh a lot [129:40] about and he's got like five minutes [129:42] that are good and the other 55 minutes [129:45] basically suck and so the next time he [129:47] goes to a club he takes those five [129:48] minutes puts them at the front and then [129:50] he tries all new material for the next [129:52] 55 minutes and he gets another 5 minutes [129:54] and he continues to repeat this process [129:56] and put the new stuff at the front until [129:58] eventually is 60 Minutes of [129:59] uninterrupted laughing and then people [130:01] are like oh my God he's so talented I [130:03] can't believe that he can just stand up [130:04] there and talk into a microphone and [130:06] make everyone laugh cross age boundaries [130:08] cross cultural boundaries um cross you [130:11] know all of the boundaries that you [130:12] might imagine how can he be so funny to [130:14] everyone that's how how can that guy be [130:17] so good at writing well he looked at the [130:18] stuff that he wrote he found the best [130:20] stuff made it into the the few things [130:21] that he always does and then kept [130:23] writing and that fundamentally is the [130:25] process of learning anything and it's [130:26] usually not one thing it's many small [130:28] things that when added together in [130:29] aggregate create the outside returns [130:31] sorry that was a little Pulpit there I [130:34] just get violent about skill acquisition [130:36] like that's what it takes so interesting [130:37] but it's so interesting to see your [130:38] journey through that and how and how you [130:40] you you ended up at skill acquisition [130:42] because I was as you went through there [130:44] was three things that I was thinking [130:45] about and I managed to write them down [130:47] the first at the top of it was you you [130:49] detailed three reasons why hiring the um [130:53] exceptional person when you're faced [130:54] with that Paradox of what do I do with [130:55] my profits Mak so much sense one of the [130:57] big things I hear from Founders that [130:59] they don't appreciate [131:02] is to go for a long period of time you [131:06] have to have some kind of emotional [131:07] regulation and as you were talking about [131:10] the the different levels of business and [131:11] every level you have more problems what [131:13] I often see is a young founder hasn't [131:16] hired those levels in between to deal [131:18] with all those different types of [131:19] problems and they are like burning out [131:22] and thinking of quitting I had someone [131:23] in my office last week and she's on [131:25] route to build about a $50 $50 million [131:27] business this year and the first [131:29] question I said to her was what's your [131:31] executive team and she just like rolls [131:33] her eyes and she's like I don't have an [131:34] executive team she'd done a post on [131:36] social media basically in tear saying [131:38] that she was going to quit she's got a [131:40] 30 to 50 million business it's growing [131:43] like wildfire but she's about to almost [131:45] quit it because she's dealing with every [131:47] single problem and often Founders say to [131:50] me they think because they're [131:52] experiencing so much hardship in that [131:53] like 1 to three million phase that [131:55] forever it's going to be just huge pain [131:58] and I talked to them about this thing I [132:00] called the promised land I love this cuz [132:03] cuz I cuz in the first two three years [132:04] of my business I thought that forever [132:06] I'm going to have to deal with every [132:07] [ __ ] problem Jenny and the offic is [132:08] pissed off at Dave and on Saturday night [132:10] when they were drunk they did something [132:11] which they shouldn't have have and I [132:13] realized the problem was I hadn't solved [132:15] for hiring these levels so everything [132:17] was coming to me and the emotional toll [132:19] and my nervous system of dealing with [132:21] problem was not sustainable and then I [132:23] accidentally hiir someone good yeah who [132:25] I mentioned and from and she dealt sheal [132:28] with all [ __ ] and then I could think [132:30] again as a Founder right so I wanted [132:32] just give a moment to that and your [132:34] thoughts on that I want to do my best [132:37] shot at operationalizing what you just [132:38] said for someone who's [132:40] listening when we have when we encounter [132:43] this issue we have a specific process [132:44] that we go through and so we tell the [132:47] founder I want you to make a Google [132:48] sheet really simple and I want you to [132:50] have the time slots from 5:00 a.m. to [132:52] you know midnight what however long you [132:54] work in 15minute increments and I want [132:57] you to set a timer easy timer kitchen [132:59] timer like for cooking for every 15 [133:01] minutes and every 15 minutes I want you [133:03] to when it dings I want you to write [133:05] down what you did one or two one or two [133:07] words doesn't doesn't doesn't take a lot [133:09] now as soon as I say that people are [133:10] like oh my God I don't have time for [133:11] this I will promise you it will be the [133:13] most productive week of your life [133:15] because you will be aware of how you're [133:16] spending your time every time I do this [133:18] I immediately think I should do this all [133:20] the time and I don't so just do it just [133:22] do it for the one week okay and so what [133:24] happens is you'll do it for a whole week [133:27] and then what the second step of this is [133:29] you'll look at that and you'll say okay [133:31] wow I didn't know that 40% of my time is [133:34] dealing with this thing and I can hire a [133:37] role to handle 40% of my time for this [133:40] amount of money if I had 40% of my time [133:43] back I could double this business and [133:45] that would be worth significantly more [133:47] than what I'd pay this person and then [133:48] you look at the next 13 you know 15% of [133:51] your time and you're like okay is this [133:53] something that I can give to somebody [133:54] else like can I can I push this down can [133:57] I create some process around this that [133:58] can correct it or do I need to keep [134:00] eating it for a little bit until it's [134:01] enough that it's a full-time role and so [134:04] fundamentally I see the entrepreneur as [134:06] the the many hated fractional that you [134:09] continue to pull things under your plate [134:11] until you have enough that you can ship [134:12] it out to somebody else full-time and [134:15] being aware of again the one resources [134:17] we have which is time how we're [134:19] allocating it so we get the highest [134:20] return and so if you look at the stack [134:22] of time as an entrepreneur we are always [134:24] getting paid for our time kind of the [134:26] premise of the the whole the whole talk [134:28] here um is that we trade our time for [134:30] dollars and so we always the whole [134:34] process of Entrepreneurship is [134:35] continuing to trade up what you're [134:37] trading your time for and that's it like [134:40] at the most foundational level that is [134:42] all we're doing and so to take this as a [134:46] hypothetical your business doesn't need [134:49] you right now you spend spend whatever [134:51] hours you do working and you do these [134:53] things imagine a world where you could [134:55] hire somebody who could spend the same [134:56] amount of time doing all that stuff now [134:58] you own the business and whatever you [135:00] have to pay them you take out of the [135:01] profit and everything else is now [135:03] distributions that you own as an [135:05] owner that's it now the entrepreneur [135:09] who's Missi driven then Stacks their [135:11] plate with even more things that they [135:12] need to do and then just continues that [135:14] process over and over again now this is [135:16] the part where the the push back comes [135:19] which is no one can do what I can do and [135:21] I want to say you're right [135:23] and if I wanted to let's say you're a [135:26] unicorn so we can imagine this mythical [135:28] unicorn got this White Horse got the [135:29] horn tail everything and the little [135:32] pixie pixie flies for the magic that's [135:33] around it okay you probably won't find a [135:37] unicorn but you can find a white [135:40] horse and you can find a rhinoceros to [135:43] get the horn and you can find some [135:45] fireflies to give you the twinkles and [135:47] so you may not hire one person who has [135:50] all of these things but you can hire [135:52] three and then those three together can [135:55] potentially do everything that you're [135:56] doing better because it's all they're [135:58] doing with all of their time and [136:01] breaking it up into basically [136:03] understanding that you're not going to [136:04] find that unicorn but you just break it [136:05] into pieces and then you can partition [136:07] it out to people who can just do those [136:08] parts makes it a lot more manageable [136:12] from an emotional level to think like [136:14] I'm never going to find this of course [136:16] you're not and that's okay because we [136:18] can find we can solve for parts of our [136:20] calar calend and fundamentally when you [136:22] buy back the time you can then do what [136:26] you're like basically take the next step [136:27] in the business the other really [136:29] interesting thing as you were talking [136:30] about your friend who was doing blogs [136:31] and missed YouTube was the idea that our [136:34] success trapped the old innovators [136:36] dilemma yeah that success traps Us in [136:39] the past so your friend probably missed [136:41] YouTube because he didn't want to [136:42] reallocate headcount to something that [136:44] was working and paying the bills and [136:46] this I guess ties into your point about [136:48] failure being so unbelievably important [136:49] because what me and you both do right [136:52] now is going to get old yeah like you [136:55] know mean and we probably both watched [136:57] the people that came before us fade into [136:59] irrelevance look at these dinosaurs yeah [137:01] right and we're part of some kind of new [137:03] school of content creation but we're [137:04] going to become part of the old school [137:06] if we don't [137:08] yeah what's what's in that Gap [137:12] adapt and I think that it's a poort so [137:14] you know Google has their their you know [137:16] I think Sergey like solved this [137:18] mathematically but they I think they [137:19] called it 72010 so 70% of resources get [137:23] allocated to the Core Business do more [137:24] of what we're currently doing 20% goes [137:27] to adjacent businesses so things that [137:29] are high likelihood success that are you [137:31] know one-step removed from the existing [137:32] Core Business um and then 10% goes to [137:35] moonshots totally like off the path like [137:38] let's just see maybe we'll get 100 extra [137:40] turn we probably will lose on most of [137:41] these and he proved it with math he's [137:45] smarter than I am um but fundamentally [137:47] that is the concept of more better new [137:49] and so that's one of the chapters in in [137:51] in the leads book which is okay now that [137:53] you have the core four right these are [137:54] the four things that you can do you can [137:55] post content you can run ads you can do [137:56] Outreach to strangers you can do [137:57] Outreach to people you know those are [137:58] the four things any person can do to [138:01] advertise the first thing you do is you [138:03] do more and for most small businesses [138:06] they're they're doing so little and [138:08] think they're doing so much and it's [138:10] it's a huge gap in in understanding and [138:13] so I'll I'll tell this this story that's [138:15] that's probably the easiest way to [138:16] explain it which is when I had my first [138:19] gym I called up a mentor he had 20 [138:22] locations I said how do you advertise he [138:24] said I use flyers I said okay so I put [138:26] 300 Flyers [138:28] out it didn't work I called him back I [138:31] was upset I said WTF he said slow down [138:35] what was your test size and I said what [138:38] do you mean he's like well your test [138:40] size so like I mean 300 wasn't the only [138:43] amount that you put out I was like well [138:46] yeah it's like well our test size is [138:48] 5,000 flyers and then once we have a [138:51] winner then we do 5,000 every day in [138:53] terms of Flyers that they put on cars to [138:54] get people in the get people in and so [138:58] over a 30-day period he would be putting [138:59] out 150,000 flyers and over a 30-day [139:02] period I put out [139:04] 300 and so he was in a very real way [139:06] doing whatever the math is there but [139:08] like 300 times or whatever I don't know [139:10] a lot more 500 times the math sorry 500 [139:13] times the Flyers that I was and of [139:14] course he was getting a better result [139:16] and so one of the fundamental [139:18] misconceptions of small businesses is [139:20] that they mistake V they mistake low [139:23] volume for volatility [139:26] meaning if you if you're not sure where [139:29] your sales come from and you get one [139:30] sale here and then you know two weeks [139:32] later you get another sale and it feels [139:34] sporadic it feels volatile well there is [139:37] a certain amount of advertising activity [139:39] that is occurring over that period of [139:41] time and we know that a month passes and [139:45] you get one to two sales and so the [139:47] companies that are in your space that [139:49] are doing one to sales a day take what [139:52] you're doing in a month and they do that [139:54] every day and I know that you can get [139:56] this and I want to put this in context [139:58] here I hear I would like to build a [140:00] personal brand and I say cool and then I [140:03] ask how much cont are you putting out [140:04] and they say you know I put out you know [140:05] one or two pieces a week and I like [140:07] that's amazing um for context for anyone [140:09] who's listening to this we put out 450 [140:11] pieces a [140:13] week and so the brand that we have is [140:16] way larger because we do so much more [140:19] than you do and [140:21] that's it's people can't fathom the idea [140:24] that someone Works two times five times [140:26] 10 times a thousand times more output [140:29] than they are doing but it is usually [140:31] the reality of why they are getting a [140:33] thousand times more than you're getting [140:35] and fundamentally this is the concept of [140:37] Leverage which is you know the that you [140:38] get more for what you put in in the [140:40] beginning you're the one doing the [140:41] flyers then you get leverage because [140:42] then you make enough from those flyers [140:43] that you can look at your time study and [140:45] be like okay I can pay two guys to do [140:47] these flyers and I can get eight hours [140:49] back that would be amazing but now [140:50] you've got two guys doing Flyers which [140:52] is still double of what you were doing [140:53] now you have double the revenue that's [140:55] coming in like okay should I hire more [140:56] guys that's more or should I do [140:58] something better should I change my [140:59] flyer up should I change the offer on [141:01] the flyer that would be better or should [141:02] I start Facebook ads well the new which [141:06] would be Facebook ads is the 10% thing [141:08] now when you're looking at allocation of [141:10] resources let's say we're now I'm fast [141:12] forwarding a little bit into a company [141:13] that has you know profit that they can [141:15] do stuff with part of the reinvestment [141:17] is insurance for the future and so every [141:20] business has three strategic buckets [141:23] that it has to allocate its resources [141:24] into number one is how do we get more [141:27] customers like if we get more customers [141:29] the company grows period number two how [141:32] do we increase lifetime gross profit per [141:33] customer so if we got the same amount of [141:35] customers but we made all the customers [141:36] worth more we would also grow bucket [141:38] three is how do we decrease risk AKA how [141:41] do we increase the likelihood that the [141:42] first two things don't stop happening [141:44] and so those are the three buckets and [141:45] so when we're when you look at that [141:49] 72010 the for the most part is usually [141:51] going to be directed towards get more [141:53] customers make them worth more and the [141:54] better also Lads up to that the risk [141:57] factor is usually going to be the new [141:59] thing that you're going to do to uh [142:02] ensure your future is going to be there [142:04] by the time you get there and so if you [142:06] Noti if we noticed for example that like [142:08] YouTube becomes like Legacy television [142:10] and you know viewership starts dropping [142:11] and it becomes this new VR whatever [142:13] right at some point we're going to have [142:15] to look and be like we need to take 10% [142:18] 20% of our profit every year and start [142:19] building out this this new team we're [142:21] going to continue to do what we're [142:22] currently doing and here's the mistake [142:24] that you need to avoid don't take the [142:27] stars that are making the one thing work [142:29] and then push them on the other thing [142:30] you have to find the people who can [142:32] build this otherwise you're going to [142:33] sacrifice the core because all of a [142:35] sudden it's like oh god well now we're [142:37] totally screwed because now we're not [142:38] getting customers from our existing [142:39] thing and we haven't figured out the new [142:41] thing yet right and so this is [142:42] fundamentally where I see the CEO role [142:44] is like you want to eventually become [142:46] the flex player which is that you can [142:48] parachute in to a specific division or [142:50] Department that's solving a complex [142:52] issue and then you have the benefit that [142:54] you have a CEO or founder is that you [142:56] have decision- making power and you have [142:58] the ability to allocate resources and [143:00] immediately say yes to things and that's [143:02] why and to be fair it's unfair to your [143:03] team to say why can't why can't they do [143:05] things as fast as me well because you [143:06] can write the checks and because you can [143:07] say yes you don't need to check with the [143:09] committee you don't need to run it up [143:10] the flag pole it's just you saying do [143:12] this do that don't worry about that I'm [143:14] telling you you can stay late for this [143:15] meeting this is more important and so [143:17] strategy is just a fancy word that [143:19] people say when mean prioritization [143:21] that's all it means we have we have [143:23] unlimited opportunities that we can [143:25] allocate things towards but we have [143:26] limited resources and so how do we [143:28] prioritize those unlimited opportunities [143:30] against those limited resources that is [143:32] fundamentally what strategy is and [143:34] that's another way of just saying we [143:35] prioritize yoga and Mya is the home of [143:38] our digestion and it's also a gateway to [143:40] Better Health but it can be hard to know [143:42] what's going on in there Zoe who [143:44] sponsors this podcast has one of the [143:45] largest microbiome databases on the [143:47] planet and one of the world's most [143:49] advanced at home got Health tests their [143:51] blood sugar sensor which I have in this [143:52] box in front of me goes on your arm so [143:54] you can see how different foods impact [143:56] your blood sugar then there's the at [143:58] home blood sample which is really easy [143:59] and analyzes your body's blood fat and [144:02] of course the [144:04] famous blue Zoey cookie which tests your [144:08] metabolism oh and I can't forget there's [144:10] also a poo sample which is a critical [144:12] step in understanding the health of your [144:14] microbiome and you post it all to Zoe [144:16] and you get your results back which will [144:17] help you to understand your body's [144:19] response to different foods using your [144:20] results Zoe's app will also create a [144:22] personalized nutrition plan for you and [144:24] this is exactly why I invested in the [144:26] business so my question to you is how [144:28] healthy is your gut head to zoe.com to [144:30] AUD yourkit and find out and because [144:32] you're one of our listeners use code [144:34] Steven 10 for 10% off your membership [144:37] head to zoe.com [144:39] now at my company flight Studio which is [144:41] part of my bigger company flight group [144:43] we're constantly looking for ways to [144:44] build deeper connections with our [144:46] audiences whether that's a new show a [144:48] product or a project it's I launched the [144:51] conversation cards I've relied on [144:52] Shopify before who's a sponsor of [144:54] today's podcast and I'll be using them [144:56] again for the next big launch which [144:58] we'll hear about soon and I use them [144:59] because of how easy it is to set up an [145:01] online store that reaches all of you no [145:03] matter where you are in the world with [145:05] Shopify the usual pain points of [145:06] launching products online Disappear [145:08] Completely no matter the size of your [145:11] business Shopify has everything you need [145:13] to make your business go to the next [145:15] level and better connect with your [145:16] customers all over the world to say [145:18] thank you to all of you for listening to [145:19] my show we're giving you a trial which [145:22] is just $1 a month you can sign up by [145:25] going to shopify.com [145:27] Bartlet that's shopify.com Bartlet or [145:31] find the link in the description [145:33] below on the on the car example you're [145:35] talking about with the Flyers yeah what [145:37] I was thinking is so many businesses try [145:38] and win on the game of creativity so [145:41] we'll create something more creative and [145:43] appealing as an advert and I see this in [145:45] my portfolio because they'll send me [145:47] something and they'll go Steve one [145:49] particular business thinking about a [145:50] major national supermarket has given us [145:52] a display slot in a in 400 supermarkets [145:56] which display should we use and they'll [145:59] say to me this one or this one right and [146:01] I remember replying to them and saying I [146:03] don't know and you don't know but here's [146:06] a system to find out we're going to [146:07] create a 100 displays and we're going to [146:09] run them as ads on Facebook or we're [146:10] going to create some kind of environment [146:12] where we're not going to try and win on [146:13] being the best creative guesses we're [146:15] going to win on our rate of [146:16] experimentation yeah we're going to [146:18] conduct more experiments yeah and I [146:20] think this is a a real shift in so many [146:22] regards because especially if we've gone [146:24] through University and we've been [146:26] trained as a copywriter we have the old [146:28] problem of wanting to be right not [146:29] successful yeah and and being able to as [146:31] a creative even as a podcast to say I [146:34] don't know what the right answer is but [146:35] I'm I'm going to create a system where [146:36] our rate of experimentation is going to [146:38] be so much higher than our competitors [146:40] that we're going to stumble across the [146:42] right answer more than they do is a [146:44] shift in thinking so there are two types [146:47] of questions that you shouldn't ask [146:49] questions that that can be solved with a [146:51] spreadsheet and questions that can be [146:53] solved with testing and so fundamentally [146:56] the outside advice that you get on [146:57] something that can be solved with math [146:59] just solve with math and I get I would [147:00] say like 30% of the questions that I get [147:02] are like should I should I sell this one [147:04] or this one and I'm like okay well [147:05] what's lifetime value of this product [147:06] and what's lifetime value of that [147:07] product okay what's cost to acquire for [147:09] this customer what's cost to acquire for [147:11] that customer okay this is a math [147:12] problem you have way higher LTV to C [147:14] ratio here allocate resources here but [147:16] that's a math problem anyone can just do [147:18] that math for the testing one I love [147:20] this like the leads book um I didn't [147:23] know what to name it so it's about [147:25] advertising so I ran story tests for [147:28] like a week or two just saying uh $100 [147:31] million promotions $100 million uh [147:34] advertising and then advertising one [147:35] it's like1 million dollar advertising [147:36] $100 million marketing okay then [147:38] advertising wins I'm like okay $100 $100 [147:40] million uh advertising $100 million [147:43] leads leads wins $100 million leads [147:45] versus two other things leads keeps [147:46] winning okay that's the title and then I [147:49] did the same thing for the cover I did [147:50] the same thing for the sub headline and [147:51] so I tested every component of it to get [147:53] the thing that people seem to want which [147:55] is like the book is advertising but [147:57] ironically people want leads so it's [147:59] kind of like uh do I want to have a book [148:00] on drills or do I want to have a book on [148:02] holes right people want the hole in the [148:03] wall not the drill that's just the [148:04] vehicle and so the book is just the [148:05] vehicle to getting leads amen um but uh [148:08] as a quick hack uh for anybody who has a [148:11] a brick-and mortar business this is just [148:13] a just a quick hack for anybody if [148:14] you're like what Market should I expand [148:16] into here's five markets we're looking [148:18] at take $1,000 [148:20] run your best promotion that you win in [148:22] your current market in all five of those [148:24] markets see what your lead cost is in [148:26] all five markets the one that has the [148:28] lowest lead cost then open in that [148:30] market don't spend [148:32] $250,000 you know doing all these [148:34] studies and then and then building out [148:36] this location only to find out that the [148:37] lead cost in that area sucks just test [148:40] it first it's the best $5,000 or $10,000 [148:42] that you're ever going to spend to just [148:45] ensure this is a risk this is a risk [148:47] bucket ensure that when you're there [148:49] it's going to work [148:51] I mean amen it's our whole philosophy so [148:53] it's U it's so wonderful to hear that [148:55] and I didn't realize that you done that [148:57] with the book oh yeah I have it in the [148:58] chapter where I'm like you have to wrap [149:00] everything and and I show all the tests [149:02] that I ran to I'm like you can see all [149:03] the percentages of of people saying this [149:05] is the that's the book title when people [149:07] look at you Alex they you're a guy that [149:08] knows a lot about a lot and one of the [149:11] questions that I often get as well is um [149:13] I need a mentor people kids will come up [149:15] to you and say I'm sure they say it to [149:17] you all the time will you be my mentor [149:19] yeah do mentors [149:22] matter so to I I'll explain what I'm [149:25] thinking through so to answer that [149:26] question I think it asks what is what is [149:29] required to [149:31] win [149:33] and is a mentor required [149:37] no but there [149:40] are certain behaviors and actions that [149:43] will increase the likel of [149:44] success if you can do those [149:47] actions faster then you will have a [149:50] higher likelihood of winning and high [149:51] have a higher likelihood of winning [149:53] faster all of humanity has been built on [149:57] us standing on our forefather's [149:59] shoulders and taking what they learned [150:01] we don't have to figure out how light [150:03] bulbs work I have no idea how the [150:04] internet works but I know that it works [150:06] and there's somebody who can figure it [150:07] out and so we just start where they kind [150:10] of lay off the Baton and then we pick it [150:12] up from there and we and we run the next [150:13] Tower manyu and then we die and we end [150:14] to the next guy [150:16] and I think you don't need mentors but [150:20] you need to learn from people ahead of [150:22] you and so I think in models not mentors [150:26] what can I model about their behavior so [150:29] that it can change my behavior to [150:30] increase the likelihood that I win [150:31] faster and so everything that I do and I [150:34] feel like pretty this a pretty strong [150:36] statement everything that I do Ls up or [150:40] down to behavior and so you'd probably [150:43] notice it when I talk about training and [150:45] employees when I talk about advertising [150:46] I just want to increase the likelihood [150:48] that a stranger takes that Des desired [150:50] action that's all I'm trying to do and [150:51] when we get into Behavior change it [150:54] removes a lot of the surface level fluff [150:58] that I think confuses the vast majority [151:00] of people and so I'm always afraid to go [151:03] on podcasts where somebody is like [151:06] really heavy in like manifestation and [151:08] like energy and frequencies and like [151:11] whatever the [151:12] hell and they'll say things like I [151:15] manifested this meeting and I'll be like [151:17] you didn't you're uh you have content [151:20] that did well because you produce [151:21] content on a regular basis and then your [151:23] EA reached out to my EA that reach out [151:25] is what initiated this not whatever [151:28] Vibes you were setting out into the [151:29] universe now some people might say yeah [151:31] it was also The Vibes but I would bet [151:33] that if they made the content and did [151:35] the reach out I would still do it which [151:36] means that those are the core things [151:38] because if we' removed those if we just [151:40] did the manifestation and didn't make [151:42] the content on the reach out I would not [151:43] be here and so one of these works one of [151:46] these doesn't and so that is what has [151:48] allowed me to try and extract the [151:50] essence from the mentors or Heroes ahead [151:53] of me I I consume a tremendous amount of [151:56] Elon basos Zuck anything that I can find [152:00] uh that they put out or that they're [152:01] interviewed on I try and consume it and [152:03] the whole goal is I want to think about [152:06] their decision-making process as it [152:08] relates to what they did and try and [152:11] apply that to my context um in terms of [152:14] behavior and so that has been just like [152:17] the big the big big big zoom out for do [152:20] I need a mentor no but you need to learn [152:22] stuff and so whatever way is the fastest [152:24] way for you to learn things do that and [152:27] so I'll tell this story because I think [152:28] it's it it like do you need one no no [152:31] one needs one you could you can [152:32] literally just do all of these things [152:33] through trial and err on your own and [152:34] you will figure it out time is obviously [152:37] the one thing that is the the big [152:38] question mark and I think part of it is [152:39] a question of how valuable is your time [152:41] to you not in a micro example but could [152:43] would I pay in time or money to move [152:46] forward five years and not make five [152:47] years of mistakes so when I started my [152:50] first gym I didn't actually start the [152:52] gym because I quit my job and I drove [152:54] across the country and I showed up at a [152:55] guy's house that I Googled on the [152:56] internet who said he was good at running [152:58] gyms his name was seven figure Sam all [153:00] right and so he was a gym Guru and so I [153:03] showed up at his actual gym unannounced [153:05] and I was like hey I'm here to be [153:08] mentored and learn and he was like uh [153:11] I'm working um I really don't know who [153:14] you are and uh like maybe we'll talk [153:17] tomorrow or something and I was like [153:19] okay and he's like where are you staying [153:20] and I said I don't know haven't decided [153:21] yet he's like what do you mean I was [153:24] like that's my car I just drove here and [153:25] all my stuff's in there and he's like [153:27] you have nowh I was like figured I just [153:29] figured out when I got here and so he [153:30] offered me to stay that at his at his [153:32] house that night which was unbelievably [153:33] generous and maybe my salesmanship got [153:34] him you know who knows um but within a [153:38] few weeks he had a Meetup of all the [153:39] gyms that were kind of like following [153:41] his little system for how he ran his [153:43] personal training studio and and boot [153:45] camp and I got to go as a 22-year-old [153:48] and I paid to have access to this [153:50] community of gym owners and they were [153:53] all going around talking about what was [153:55] going good and what was going wrong uh [153:56] in the business and when it got to me I [153:59] was like well okay so I want to open a [154:01] location and this is kind of what I was [154:02] thinking about my model and this is what [154:03] I was thinking about price points and [154:04] they were like wrong wrong here's why [154:06] that's not going to work here's how [154:07] that's not going to work and I was like [154:09] oh uh okay well this is where I was [154:10] going to buy equipment they're like [154:11] don't buy there that's retail you can [154:13] get it from secondhand over here and [154:14] it's literally a tenth of the price and [154:16] I was like oh that's awesome okay great [154:18] I was like well I was thinking about [154:19] getting this this type of thing they're [154:20] like no girls will eat [ __ ] on that and [154:21] they'll fall like I've had two girls do [154:23] it don't worry about it like you're end [154:25] not going to use it but you can get [154:26] sandbags you can use them all the time [154:28] and they're super cheap and if you have [154:29] to replace them you can but you can use [154:30] them for like hundreds of exercises and [154:31] I was like great I'll do that and then I [154:33] was like okay so I was thinking about [154:34] this kind of square footage for my for [154:36] my facility they're like dude you don't [154:37] need all that you can cut that in half [154:39] and I was like okay well cut that in [154:40] half and um I was like I'm willing to [154:42] pay two bucks a foot and they were like [154:44] no never go over 150 and I was like okay [154:46] never go over and so like in a matter of [154:48] a day I got to take like all of the [154:51] knowledge of all of these guys of the [154:53] mistakes that they had all made with [154:54] their gyms and I started my first gym [154:57] just on their [154:58] backs and so how much was that Worth to [155:02] me years and so for me I have always [155:07] been willing to pay in whatever currency [155:10] was required to get knowledge that I [155:12] don't know can you get that now for free [155:15] yes it didn't exist then YouTube wasn't [155:17] even a thing Instagram had just come out [155:18] like for context who listening to this [155:21] um I think about this equation a lot and [155:23] I actually had some video of somebody [155:24] [ __ ] on me for this but I'm going to [155:25] say it anyways because there's the 20% G [155:27] to say that's I'm not going to dilute [155:29] myself so I saw a Salesman say this at a [155:32] at a at a conference and he he wrote a [155:35] million doll on a [155:36] whiteboard and he called up a lady in [155:39] the in the audience and he said how much [155:40] do you make and she said $50,000 a year [155:42] so he wrote $50,000 underneath the [155:44] million and he subtracted it and it said [155:46] $950,000 he said it cost you $950,000 [155:50] every single year you don't know how to [155:51] make a million dollar a year and so the [155:54] question is what is the value of that [155:56] skill and the answer is the [155:59] difference and so the the the troll who [156:03] who who who responded to this originally [156:05] was like well you can keep going what [156:06] about a100 million do a year or a [156:08] billion dollars a year and I was like [156:10] yes yes if you had the skill of making a [156:13] billion dollars a year then the [156:14] difference between 50,000 and a billion [156:16] is the Delta of the value of that skill [156:19] and it's really not one skill it's many [156:21] skills that lad her up to when combined [156:23] together to create that kind of value [156:25] but I remember that being like seared [156:27] into my memory which is like whatever I [156:30] want to have the Delta between where I'm [156:32] at and where that thing is is what [156:34] basically what I've what I'm willing to [156:36] sacrifice in order to learn what I need [156:39] to learn to get there and I think that [156:42] if people appraised that Delta not by [156:45] the money in their wallet or the time [156:47] that they currently have but how much [156:48] they would be making or how much time [156:50] they would have and how much that's [156:52] worth to them then I think far more [156:54] people would be willing to invest in [156:55] their education and it's such a taboo [156:57] word because people hate the word [156:58] education it's like oh it's like work [157:00] but like you want to be an entrepreneur [157:02] like you got to learn you just have [157:04] there's so much stuff to learn Pirates [157:06] versus practitioners this is an idea [157:08] that I've I've thought about a lot over [157:10] the years because I look at someone like [157:11] you and I can tell based on everything [157:13] you say today that you are a [157:16] practitioner um in this analogy what I [157:18] call a parot is is someone who hears [157:20] what Alex said and then starts saying it [157:22] but your lessons and wisdom have come [157:25] from going through that [ __ ] and and [157:28] being able to distill the essence like [157:29] Richard Fryman and then share um there [157:32] is a group of people that just spend [157:33] their whole life reading books yeah [157:35] posting about it Etc they never take the [157:37] jump Pirates versus practitioners is the [157:40] best way to learn being a [157:41] practitioner this is widely known in the [157:43] education space but not as much in the [157:45] the content world but there are two [157:47] types of uh education there is [157:49] procedural and there is declarative so [157:51] declarative knowledge is knowing about [157:52] something procedural knowledge is [157:54] knowing how to do something so a simple [157:56] example would be okay I understand how [157:58] private Equity works right like that you [158:00] can you could talk about it you can [158:02] explain how okay they take some debt and [158:04] then they have this Arbitrage and they [158:05] get this Enterprise Value multiple [158:07] whatever but you've never done a deal [158:10] and until you've done a deal you will [158:11] not have procedur knowledge of knowing [158:12] how to actually do a deal and so you can [158:15] read a hundred books on sales but you [158:17] will learn more about actually selling [158:19] from your first hundred sales calls and [158:21] business is the same yes and so the idea [158:24] in my opinion for most people is that if [158:26] you want to rapidly learn you want to [158:27] rapidly do those 100 repetitions as fast [158:30] as you can so that you can suck a 100 [158:32] times in a row and find the 10 that did [158:34] that sucked the least and then say how [158:36] do I suck least on the next 100 and you [158:38] keep doing that so many times until [158:40] eventually you suck so little that [158:41] you're actually [158:42] good hard work yes and I think you know [158:46] this is actually really interesting [158:47] because it Lads up to because there's [158:48] two types of creators you've you've got [158:49] entertainers and then you have Educators [158:51] at least that's how I separate it the [158:52] point of entertainment is to maintain [158:54] the attention of the audience that is it [158:56] so the point of an Entertainer is to [158:58] literally just keep people watching the [159:00] point of an educator is to change [159:01] someone's behavior and so if you [159:06] uh if you want content to do well in [159:11] either of these buckets fundamentally at [159:13] least in the education space you selling [159:16] time so [159:18] education is [159:20] I spent all this time doing this thing [159:21] to learn these four things that I can [159:23] give to you so that you don't have to [159:25] spend this time learning it and so [159:27] education is actually if said [159:28] differently what you do is you buy time [159:31] so when you buy it's the only thing it's [159:33] the only way to actually buy time today [159:35] so if you want to basically Time Warp [159:38] into your future you have to buy [159:40] education so that you can buy all of the [159:42] life experiences from all these people [159:43] and then not pay for it in your life you [159:45] pay for it with less time by consuming [159:49] what they have or some money or some [159:50] combination of those things and [159:52] fundamentally we usually pay with the [159:53] currency that we value least and so [159:58] interestingly a rich person values their [160:00] time more than their money and so [160:01] they're willing to pay with money to get [160:03] time back a poor person will also pay [160:04] for their time and drive around to 10 [160:06] different gas stations to find the one [160:08] thing that's 10 cents cheaper or drive [160:09] to 10 different grocery stores to to use [160:11] whatever whatever coupons they're [160:12] valuing their time over their money in [160:15] that instance and [160:17] so back to the the [160:20] educator if you want to be certain or [160:22] have confidence in any Endeavor you have [160:25] to do so much volume of activity that it [160:27] would be unreasonable that you would [160:29] suck and if you were to write out the [160:31] equation of like okay how many public [160:34] speeches would I need to give for it to [160:35] be unreasonable that I would suck is it [160:37] 10 is it 100 is it a thousand write the [160:41] number that you're like there's no way [160:42] that I would suck after this many and [160:45] then all of your effort gets really [160:46] narrowed commitment elimination of [160:48] Alternatives focused turn down quality [160:50] and quantity of other things to just [160:51] doing that and then and the key part of [160:54] this is not just to do the Thousand but [160:56] after every 10 or every 20 looking at [160:58] the top 10 or 20% and saying what did I [161:00] do well there and then because you have [161:01] to have the feedback loop otherwise it's [161:03] not just doing 100 reach outs you have [161:04] to do 100 reach outs and then look at [161:05] what worked and then do more of what [161:07] worked and so for the the parent versus [161:10] the uh practitioner uh component of [161:13] this even if you're starting out you can [161:16] have confidence in what you're doing [161:18] because you derived the solution and you [161:21] can actually answer why you do something [161:24] so if you cannot explain why you believe [161:27] what you believe it's not your belief [161:29] it's someone [161:30] else's and so most people I would say [161:34] parot the vast majority of the things [161:35] that they say because and to be fair [161:37] that's how humans learn you're 5 years [161:38] old you say what's that they say Bull [161:40] and you say bull you pared it back and [161:42] there we go right but when it comes to [161:44] uh skills you can describe what other [161:47] people have said before but if something [161:50] goes wrong or what about this condition [161:52] you won't know what to do but if you [161:54] derived it from the ground up and [161:55] there's a there's a great uh portion of [161:57] this in the Y combinator Community that [161:59] you or the Silicon Valley Community that [162:00] you probably heard it maybe like three [162:02] or four months ago it was like founder [162:03] mode did did that get to the UK okay it [162:05] was from um Brian ches I actually [162:06] messaged him about it after oh yeah it [162:08] was like it was it was awesome right and [162:10] so the basically the tenant is that the [162:12] founder always has special powers in the [162:14] company because you know what built it [162:17] and so that is basically at its core the [162:19] practitioner versus parrot the people [162:21] who came later are parting why you do [162:24] what you do but you know what conditions [162:26] you were in when you made this Rule and [162:28] also you know how to break it and when [162:31] to bend those rules and so if you build [162:34] something when you built it from those [162:35] repetitions to to still out the few [162:38] truths that exist you'll know why those [162:40] are the truths like I'll give you a [162:41] really simple example so if we you know [162:43] we've tried to learn YouTube and we've [162:44] gotten better over time um but in the [162:46] beginning I did this massive review and [162:48] I figured out that the the videos that [162:50] we had that had three things at the [162:51] beginning proof promise plan was the [162:54] videos that did the best and so then all [162:55] of a sudden we said okay all videos have [162:57] to have proof promise plan right at the [162:59] beginning the first 30 seconds great so [163:01] we started doing that for a while and [163:02] then we looked at the outliers among [163:04] those and we were like oh well we also [163:06] in some of the ones that did really well [163:07] also had some sort of visual picture of [163:09] of this plan all right so it became [163:11] proof promise plan [163:13] picture then we kept looking and we [163:15] found out over more repetitions that if [163:18] we also include includes some sort of [163:19] pain or problem that's being solved that [163:22] also helps so proof promise plan picture [163:24] pain and so you're like wait if you keep [163:27] adding to this thing it's going to get [163:28] really long no sometimes you can check [163:29] multiple boxes with one thing and this [163:31] becomes the Elegance of creation like [163:33] how can I how can I check off three of [163:34] these boxes with one sentence right and [163:37] so that is by the way for if you're like [163:38] thinking about this you're like do they [163:40] really think about this when they're [163:41] making videos yes and that is the [163:43] difference between a 10,000 view video [163:44] and a million view video and it's it's [163:46] understanding that level of nuance [163:48] across the ENT ire thing that creates [163:50] expertise and also when you're like oh [163:53] this video flopped when you're a [163:54] beginner you're like these videos in [163:55] general don't work or content doesn't [163:56] work rather than saying this video [163:58] didn't work and here's why because we [164:00] did three of the [164:02] five and so it's just like all of the I [164:05] mean the devil is in the details and you [164:06] only you only you meet the Devil Himself [164:09] by doing the unreasonable amount of work [164:11] and then it becomes it goes from [164:13] uninformed uh lack of knowledge to [164:16] informed optimism because first you're [164:18] like I can make videos get rich then you [164:20] realize that it's really hard to make [164:21] videos that people watch and then [164:22] finally you start develop a framework of [164:24] this is how I make videos that people [164:25] watch and when they don't watch it it's [164:27] because I didn't follow it it's so [164:29] timely because it's weaves into [164:31] something you said earlier because my [164:32] girlfriend came to the recording [164:33] yesterday and as I went into the green [164:35] room and I sat down she went babe look I [164:36] found this new app and I said what is it [164:37] she goes it's an app that summarizes [164:40] books yeah and she it's called like head [164:42] something and she showed me it and I go [164:44] look at my book yeah cuz I know the laws [164:46] I know the chapters I know all of the [164:48] principles that lead up to the point so [164:49] show me my book and law two of my book's [164:53] called 33 laws so these 33 laws I got it [164:54] yeah and um law two was about the [164:56] Richard fman technique you talked about [164:58] and I explain why that process of [165:01] learning something simplifying it to its [165:03] Essence for a 10-year-old teaching it to [165:05] someone else if they understand it move [165:07] on if they don't go back to the top and [165:08] learn again and it had summarized l two [165:11] of my book to um like writing is the [165:13] best way to learn yeah and I said babe [165:15] if you I said if you just read that that [165:17] summary the top of the pyramid and you [165:19] don't have the story and all these [165:21] agreeable foundations which I then [165:22] explained to her would you be able to [165:25] then translate that and truly understand [165:26] the nature of the problem so that you [165:28] could apply it to lots of different [165:29] settings and so on and then I told her [165:31] what that that second law in my book [165:32] actually meant and she deleted the app [165:34] yeah because there's no point knowing [165:36] the the conclusion the aphorism yeah [165:38] like like the punchline when you don't [165:40] know the story um and without the story [165:43] you can't I I guess get get to the first [165:45] principles of the thing so this is [165:46] really interesting because um with that [165:49] fan example it it proves that the [165:51] distillation of knowledge is not [165:53] bidirectional so you Richard Fineman can [165:57] break it down to a child but a child [165:58] cannot then rederive what Fineman has [166:00] done interesting yeah and so it's it's [166:03] convenient for the transmission of [166:05] communication and for teaching someone [166:07] who's let's say coming new to an [166:08] organization here's the here are the [166:10] things and these give you the [166:11] decision-making Frameworks around which [166:13] and it can give you directional um uh [166:16] guidance but that is the whole founder [166:18] mode that is basically a different way [166:20] of getting to the founder mode idea that [166:22] person derived this thing yeah and so [166:24] when a problem arises we can rederive [166:27] the next solution rather than trying to [166:30] apply the aphorism to a new setting [166:32] another point for Founders who are [166:34] getting their work copied because this [166:36] everything you've just said actually [166:38] should give a Founder who's having their [166:39] work copied their t-shirt designs their [166:41] content copied huge amount of piece [166:43] because if I need to know steps 1 2 3 4 [166:46] five up the staircase to success to be [166:49] able to predict step six then if [166:52] someone's just copying your step five [166:54] you should be at total piece because [166:55] they don't know yeah the the foundations [166:58] that would lead to the next step and [167:00] that's what we see as podcasts podcast [167:01] is copy you they'll copy your thumbnail [167:02] your title your whatever dude I mean I'm [167:04] sure you you see it everywhere but the [167:06] piece that the piece that I have is [167:08] honestly I say to the team all the time [167:10] if that's the thing that makes us [167:11] special we're [ __ ] anyway yeah like if [167:14] if it's the thumbnail or the this or the [167:15] how we do this if it's the trailer that [167:17] made us special we're [ __ ] any way [167:19] yeah but also there's a set of [167:21] principles we call it the iceberg the [167:23] 99% of what we do you can't see it's the [167:26] it's the culture as you said it's like [167:28] uh so I have so much on this so um one [167:31] is right when I sat down you were [167:32] telling me about uh the episode that we [167:34] we ran that was like akin to a shark [167:36] tank but new version that we had on our [167:37] Channel and as you saw me like kind of [167:40] like grow and be like it was 56 minutes [167:43] on video but it was so much work to [167:45] produce that one thing but no one sees [167:47] all the work behind it that's the 99% % [167:49] so that's thing one the the next thing [167:51] is think about the if you're a Founder [167:53] who's plagued with competition and being [167:55] upset about it I was one too and I want [167:58] to tell you how I got over it so number [168:00] one is think about the alternative which [168:02] is that no one copies you because no one [168:04] cares about what you're doing well then [168:06] it would be a requisite for Success that [168:07] people will copy you so as long as you [168:09] are successful this is just a part of [168:12] business the the second piece is by [168:16] definition if someone copies you they [168:19] are second period and so if you want to [168:22] lead you can't look at anyone else you [168:25] have to consistently be deriving the [168:28] next step the step six that's unseen [168:30] from your first five steps to innovate [168:33] rather than I'm just going to parot the [168:35] next thing and as soon as you find [168:37] yourself copying you have admitted [168:39] defeat you've admitted that you were no [168:40] longer the leader and that you were just [168:42] following in someone else's footsteps [168:43] and you're giving them the Baton and [168:45] saying you be the champion I'm happy [168:46] with second third fifth place and in a [168:49] winner take all world like attention is [168:52] all the fruits go to the first place [168:54] anyways amen amen I have nothing more to [168:57] add that's talk two last the last thing [168:59] I want to talk to you about is it's [169:01] really like a three-part thing it's hard [169:02] work love and happiness okay and I put [169:04] them together intentionally um one could [169:07] say work life balance yeah love [169:09] happiness I think these things are kind [169:10] of fundamentally intertwined but how do [169:12] you think about it you're someone that's [169:13] known as being very obsessive um very [169:17] into your work to say the least um you [169:20] have a wonderful partner who seems to be [169:22] aligned I know oh super okay good she's [169:24] hardcore so let's go through it work [169:26] life balance SL hard work love and [169:29] happiness okay if we start with work [169:31] life [169:32] balance it was that [ __ ] question [169:35] beliefs on it [169:37] yeah so I will answer with how I derived [169:40] my kind of Life thesis which was after [169:44] we uh so when we went to so we had taken [169:46] about $40 million in distributions from [169:48] gym launch um personally throughout the [169:51] you know years that we ran the company [169:53] and then in the year of the sale um for [169:55] those of you've never sold a company [169:56] before you typically don't want to [169:57] change a lot of things you kind of want [169:58] the company to just be like be stable [170:01] keep working everything's fine and so [170:03] one of it's one of the most harrowing [170:05] experiences to go through because you [170:07] can't really change anything and if [170:10] you're the founder you're always trying [170:10] to innovate so you can't do what you're [170:12] normally doing um and you also can't [170:16] start the next so you can't change [170:17] current and you can't start new [170:19] because if the deal doesn't go through [170:20] then you don't want to start two [170:21] businesses remember because we you know [170:22] cardinal rule number one we're not [170:23] chasing chasing wom in the red dress and [170:25] so you basically have to sit idly by and [170:28] just like let things operate and so in [170:30] that year it was one of the most [170:32] miserable years of my life because I [170:33] basically had nothing to do and um when [170:37] I looked back on my life this sounds [170:40] like you know I looked back on my life [170:41] as though it's been so long I looked at [170:43] the days that I enjoyed the most and on [170:47] those days I had worked out and I had [170:51] produced something and I had done both [170:53] of those with people I [170:54] liked [170:57] and almost all of those days I'd worked [171:00] many many [171:01] hours and when I realized that the idea [171:06] of working hard so that I can insert [171:10] blank the so that actually makes it [171:13] still destination [171:16] driven so that was when I DED what I [171:19] called hard work is the goal it's just [171:22] to work hard that is my goal and then [171:25] die MH on things worth [171:28] doing and I those are the days that I [171:33] love and I get a tremendous amount of [171:35] push back for saying this and it bothers [171:38] a lot of people and to them I say live [171:41] your life whatever way you want this is [171:44] again my my life is not a sermon it's a [171:46] documentary this is just how I do it you [171:49] can do whatever you want and for the [171:50] people who are dissatisfied try it and [171:52] if not no worries um I really enjoy [171:56] working like the best days are like when [171:59] I write those books it's the happiest I [172:01] am and it's not happy in the moment [172:03] because it's really hard but the amount [172:06] of challenge is about proportional to my [172:08] level of skill and every book I think is [172:10] better than the last and the third book [172:12] that's coming out is going to be [ __ ] [172:14] awesome I'm very excited about it but [172:17] there's nothing that I enjoy more more [172:18] but in the moment I'm like how do I [172:20] break this down and I'm just rubbing my [172:21] forehead and I'm like and then I and I [172:23] create two three different Frameworks [172:24] I'm like no that's that doesn't work [172:26] here and that doesn't work here which [172:27] means some kid in Afghanistan is going [172:29] to get stuck on this step because it [172:30] doesn't work I have to figure out how to [172:32] get it so that it works everywhere and I [172:34] keep driving into but the moment it's [172:35] like it clicks I'm like that's it fight [172:37] me like that's the [172:39] framework that is what I what I strive [172:41] for and for me the love the happiness [172:45] and work have all because of the nature [172:47] of my life in one now some people have [172:50] lived their lives where their love life [172:52] and their happiness and their work are [172:54] all separate um for me it has just been [172:57] life and I like it that way and for the [173:00] people who are upset by that I'm not [173:02] upset about how you live your life um I [173:05] just choose to live it this way and if [173:06] in the future I change my mind I'll [173:10] change my life if I get to a point where [173:12] I'm like this is no longer a priority [173:14] for me something else is then I will but [173:16] when I look at the centenarians and I [173:18] look at the people who like I look at [173:19] Warren Buffett as somebody and Charlie [173:20] merer as two of my heroes Charlie worked [173:23] until the day he died and to be clear I [173:26] don't work on a 7-Day calendar um I [173:29] don't work a certain hour I work as much [173:32] as I can until I feel like my rate of [173:33] output drops precipitously because of [173:35] fatigue and then I and I sleep and then [173:37] if I feel like on a on a longer time [173:39] Horizon of like I've worked nine days [173:41] I've worked 20 days I've worked 30 days [173:42] in a row and I'm like all right I feel [173:44] like I don't have any gas today then [173:45] I'll take the whole day off and whether [173:47] that's a Tuesday or a Sunday or Saturday [173:48] I take the day off and that just is what [173:50] it is and I've just I have learned to [173:53] work that way and I am okay with it the [173:55] goal clearly for you then is the hard [173:58] work itself and not a certain place [174:00] you're trying to get to necessarily [174:01] because that always moves yeah and so um [174:04] Jesse iler has this and maybe maybe I'll [174:06] I'll be able to steal it from him [174:07] someday um but he told I saw him show a [174:11] picture of his kid finishing a race and [174:13] putting a zero up and what that [174:16] signified was nothing left in the tank [174:18] that he'd spent everything he had on the [174:20] field and I [174:22] would and it's like I have this visual [174:25] of uh the 300 movie where the queen says [174:28] to the king as he goes off the battle [174:29] she says come back with your Shield or [174:31] on it and I kind of see like my work [174:35] that way like I can't imagine a better [174:37] way to go out than like doing the thing [174:39] I love and it bothers a lot of people [174:42] that I love something different than [174:43] they love and it's like it really it [174:45] really Bo and it it bothers me that it [174:47] bothers them to be honest [174:50] um because I I I make no projections [174:54] like do whatever you want and I feel [174:55] like if if I ever had a a like one thing [174:59] that that people took from me it was [175:01] like absolute freedom and because of [175:04] that absolute freedom we are 100% [175:06] responsible for our own lives and so [175:08] where we place the the finger of blame [175:10] is also where power flows so if you [175:12] blame your parents for your life your [175:13] parents have power over your life if you [175:15] blame your boss for your bad life your [175:17] boss has power over your life if if you [175:18] blame you for your bad life at least you [175:19] can change you and you can do something [175:21] about it and so I think absolute [175:23] responsibility has been my my core [175:26] tenant and if you have a life where [175:28] you're like I don't want to care about [175:30] work that much and I just want to spend [175:31] all my time with my family I'm like [175:32] congratulations you [ __ ] won that's [175:35] amazing just don't assume that [175:37] everyone's you and that winning for me [175:40] is is the same as winning for you and [175:44] and it and I think the the times that I [175:47] talk about this I I know that my my [175:51] message won't resonate with everyone and [175:52] that's okay but it's for the few people [175:55] who were like me and felt like everyone [175:57] told them there was something wrong with [175:59] them and I still get people to tell me [176:00] there's something wrong with me and if [176:02] wrong means not normal then yeah you bet [176:05] but it's more so that like you are [176:07] different and that's okay and I think [176:10] that if you're if you're okay with that [176:12] then it unleashes this whole new realm [176:15] of possibility of being able to do what [176:17] you want and kind of like I had the you [176:20] know you do a 100 of these and you look [176:21] at the top 10% do 100 of these look at [176:23] the top 10 [176:24] percent that was my way of trying to [176:26] operationalize happiness because it was [176:28] this ephemeral thing that when I was 18 [176:32] 19 20 21 22 I struggled a ton with I was [176:34] very depressed I looked at you know [176:37] religion I looked at a lot of different [176:38] things and this is common for people at [176:40] that age [176:41] and um I I came up with a mantra for me [176:45] at that time which was [ __ ] happiness [176:47] now people then hear this and I'm sure [176:49] this will get taken out of context but [176:52] that was basically like this release [176:54] moment for me where by continually [176:57] chasing happiness it always existed [176:59] outside of me and so it was always this [177:01] carrot that was in front of me that I [177:02] could never really get to and so by [177:05] saying [ __ ] happiness I was like it's [177:09] unattainable I'm just going to work and [177:12] I'm just going to do the stuff I want to [177:13] do and when I started doing the stuff [177:15] that I wanted to do I looked up years [177:17] later and I was like I kind of like my [177:19] life and I was like is this what [177:21] happiness is and I was like I don't know [177:24] but I think one of the the major plights [177:26] of humanity myself included is the [177:29] expectation that life should be [177:30] different than it is and so we we we [177:33] create this idea that whatever we have [177:36] right now is not what it should be and I [177:40] think should is the is the root of all [177:42] pain is that all the things that we [177:45] think should happen but aren't is our is [177:48] basically the measurement of our pain [177:50] and so I've tried to eradicate should [177:52] from my life should for other people she [177:54] should do this they should do that um [177:57] and just just lean into is it just is [178:01] this way I work period not I should work [178:03] more I should work less I should work [178:05] differently I should see my mom more I [178:06] should call my dad more I do this and if [178:09] something changes I will change and so [178:11] unconditional shoulds now if there is a [178:13] condition of like if you want to make [178:15] more money then this is a high higher [178:17] likelihood you you might want to [178:18] consider doing this those are things [178:20] that I don't consider in that category [178:21] but just the generalized shs of he [178:25] shouldn't do that he should he should [178:27] build a family he should have kids he [178:29] should have gotten married earlier he [178:30] should have gotten later he should have [178:31] married someone different he shouldn't [178:33] have the the life that he has he [178:35] shouldn't work this way according to [178:38] what and so for me that is my my theory [178:42] on life on on on happiness work and love [178:45] has been very unified because I love my [178:48] work so much [178:50] that I got out of a relationship and [178:55] when I you know started dating Ila I [178:57] said I am not willing to change this and [179:00] so you have to be willing to deal with [179:03] me working this way or this won't work [179:06] because my relationship with my work is [179:09] the most satisfying relationship I have [179:11] now people will hear that and be like [179:12] well that's because he's never [179:13] experienced True Love or Whatever [179:15] Whatever Whatever narrative they'll [179:17] they'll say but it's like you haven't [179:18] lived my life and I haven't lived yours [179:19] and I don't project anything onto you um [179:22] but I I like I like I love what I do and [179:25] I like I get attacked for liking what I [179:27] do so much and I like working a lot and [179:30] and it's because they have negative [179:31] associations with the word and that's [179:34] that's their own history of of of their [179:36] experience with the word but I see my [179:39] goals and my relationship with my goals [179:41] as one of the most sacred things that I [179:42] have because I see them as a [179:43] relationship with [179:44] myself and so those those proxy ones [179:48] someone comes in and says hey you know [179:51] sweetie you've been working too much [179:53] according to what why should I stop [179:55] right um now let's do this other thing [179:59] and people will probably see this as a [180:01] they'll put whatever labels they want on [180:02] it but like I just said this is what I [180:04] would like to do with my life and if you [180:05] can incorporate yourself into that that [180:07] would be amazing and so my second date [180:09] with Ila after we talked about business [180:11] for 4 hours on our first date was I said [180:14] I'm going to be working all day it'd be [180:15] cool if you worked with me and she just [180:18] worked next to me she had her own thing [180:19] but she just worked beside me and I was [180:21] like this is nice and over time [180:23] eventually was like hey maybe you want [180:25] to work on my thing with me and she was [180:27] like yeah that sounds good it was a [180:29] little bit more than that but like [180:30] fundamentally I got her to to switch [180:31] switch to to working on it with me and [180:33] at that point what we got to talk about [180:36] was what we were creating together and [180:38] to me that's been you know the Journey [180:39] of my life and it's been it's been [180:41] amazing and um I'm not saying it works [180:43] for everyone I say it probably doesn't [180:45] work for most people uh but it has [180:47] worked really well for me and it would [180:49] make sense for me that my path would be [180:51] different than most people's because I [180:52] don't behave like most people and so I [180:54] would have to have a different formula [180:56] for how I drive you know meaning or Joy [180:59] from my own life and since I don't [181:01] believe in inherent meaning um just the [181:04] meaning that we choose to ascribe to [181:06] things then it's up to me to create that [181:09] meaning within the work that I do and so [181:12] the reason acquisition. comom was all [181:13] based on and it was during that year [181:15] where I just basically had nothing to do [181:16] where I was like what do I want to do [181:16] with my life because I don't need to [181:18] work anymore and that was you know we [181:20] taken 40 out before the sale and then we [181:21] obviously got the sale so like I don't [181:23] need to work I like to work and I I try [181:27] to spend I look at you know I had this [181:29] boss that told me this and was one of [181:31] the one of the catalysts for for looking [181:33] at life this way she said I had just had [181:35] like a good weekend or something and I [181:37] came in like chipper and she said well [181:39] you must have had a good weekend and I [181:40] was like yeah it was it was good and she [181:43] said this it was like an off-handed [181:45] comment she said I'm pretty sure the key [181:47] to happiness is living as many days in a [181:48] row like that as you can and it was [181:51] actually like really operational like I [181:53] could I was like I can use this like [181:54] what are the good days how do I live as [181:56] many of those days in a row as I can and [181:58] so I've you know I've been attacked for [182:00] like saying that I don't really enjoy [182:01] going on vacation very much um and it's [182:03] because like I just want to get I just [182:05] want to get back to doing the thing that [182:06] I really enjoy doing and I remember we [182:08] Lea and I went to uh Mexico uh this year [182:11] for a week and it's always during the [182:13] week of Christmas cuz no one works and [182:14] it drives me nuts and I've just like [182:16] I've I've just given up trying to get [182:17] you know get to work because even if my [182:19] team will work cuz my team will because [182:21] they they're crazy too other teams won't [182:23] and vendors won't it's aain anyways and [182:25] so while we were there all I came out [182:26] with was like this is for other people [182:28] and not [182:29] me comma and that's okay ear WR when we [182:33] were talking about s a long r no it's [182:35] beautiful because it so a couple of [182:38] takeaways from it but earlier on we were [182:39] talking about being a great content [182:40] creator is a byproduct of Having the [182:44] courage to be yourself and from that [182:46] what everything you just said solo yeah [182:48] I also gleamed something similar which [182:50] is being happy MH requires the same [182:55] thing which is the courage to be [182:56] yourself and in both in the previous [182:57] analogy you said everybody is unique [183:00] yeah and that is their value as it [183:02] relates to showing up in marketing or [183:04] with whatever product they have but also [183:07] when I think about Alex's story your [183:09] story and all you went through with your [183:11] father and the early experiences in that [183:13] consultancy firm the gym the fur place [183:14] you worked logically from first [183:17] principle [183:18] the that's going to make you happy [183:20] because you are completely unique is [183:23] going to be completely different from [183:24] everybody else right like to varying [183:27] degrees depending on how you sort of [183:29] defining your early experiences are but [183:30] I actually think we talked about the [183:31] courage of being yourself there's also [183:34] the courage of being happy MH and with [183:37] the courage of being happy you have to [183:40] withstand public pressure the shoulds [183:42] you said from your parents whatever from [183:43] social media especially if you become a [183:45] bigger [183:46] Creator to actually just listen how you [183:48] feel every day can I can I throw [183:50] something out that I think might like so [183:52] this blew my mind so I was in around [183:55] that same period of time I because I [183:57] talked to everybody I could to try and [183:58] get context on this and so I I called a [184:00] friend of mine up um or not a friend I [184:02] would say acquaintance that I got [184:03] connected with who'd sold his company [184:05] for hundreds of millions of dollars [184:06] really bright guy and one of the [184:09] questions I asked him I said so how do [184:11] you how do you drive meaning from your [184:15] life and he said and that really really [184:19] shook me um which doesn't happen that [184:21] much given him my worldview he said why [184:23] do you think that life needs to be [184:26] meaningful and it was just this really [184:28] interesting question which is basically [184:29] that I had an unspoken demand of the [184:31] universe life should be meaningful I [184:34] should be happy and so it's the shoulds [184:37] that we don't even know that we think [184:38] and say that are the ones that chain us [184:40] the most like hardcore and so my [184:43] favorite quote of all time which is [184:45] probably at the front of a few of the [184:46] books that I have and probably be the [184:48] one that'll be on my my Tombstone is a [184:50] permutation of an or Orson Scott Card [184:52] quote which is we question all of our [184:54] beliefs except for those that we truly [184:55] believe and those we never think to [184:57] question and so I would say that a lot [184:59] of my entrepreneu career even just human [185:01] Journey has been what are the beliefs [185:03] that I so so inherently believe that I [185:06] don't don't even see them I don't even [185:08] think about the should and so when he [185:10] said that to me I was like whoa I have [185:13] had this inherent demand of the universe [185:15] that my life be meaningful [185:18] and now people would hear this and be [185:21] like they have their shoulds and they're [185:22] going to say well it should be [185:23] meaningful and I'm like why according to [185:26] what and if we look at history history [185:28] pretty much sweeps everyone under the [185:30] under the bed like within a hundred [185:32] years and within a thousand years [185:33] basically everyone and the people that [185:35] we remember we remember some of their [185:37] works and we go a 100,000 years in the [185:40] future or 10,000 years in the future [185:41] probably unlikely that we will be [185:43] remembered in general and that is [185:45] solving for the idea that we need to be [185:47] remembered again we have to why and so [185:51] my solving has been for um degrees of [185:54] freedom and uh responsibility so what [185:57] are the things that I can control and I [185:59] will do the very best of my ability to [186:01] try and do the things um within my [186:04] control to ideally make other people's [186:06] lives better and my own in the process [186:08] now that is a choice rather than a I [186:11] demand that of the Universe um and this [186:13] gets really abstract and heady really [186:15] fast and so I will try and you know [186:17] bring us back down to Earth but by by by [186:21] demanding that life be meaningful by [186:23] demanding that I be happy when I [186:26] understood that I was demanding these [186:28] things and and pursuing them that they [186:29] were outside of me by saying I need to [186:32] do this that I created inherent space [186:35] that I could never Gap I could never [186:37] close and so by trying to forget or [186:40] eliminate the demand is where it was the [186:43] first time that I experienced those [186:46] things and so IED to keep them out of my [186:48] head to the greatest degree possible so [186:50] that I can be inside of them that sounds [186:53] weird um rather than in [186:56] Pursuit and so that um and so the times [186:59] where I derive the most Joy from my life [187:02] if I'm if I'm optimizing for that which [187:04] is I wouldn't necessarily say that I am [187:06] optimizing for Joy um I think Williamson [187:09] was like you definitely optimize for [187:10] purpose or meaning or something like [187:12] that and [187:13] um I I kind of reject a lot of it mostly [187:16] because I do what I have been rewarded [187:18] for doing in the past and so because I [187:20] have a behaviorist view of the world [187:22] which is that everything boils down to [187:24] behaviors um why do I do these things I [187:27] do these things because when I have done [187:29] them in the past I have enjoyed the [187:31] result and so I continue to do things [187:33] that I've enjoyed the result of and if [187:34] other people have done things that they [187:36] enjoy the result of then I encourage you [187:37] to keep doing them and I also encourage [187:39] you to not project that other people [187:41] need to also do those things and that [187:42] they will experience the same result as [187:43] you because they might [187:45] not Alex thank you oh [187:48] that was such a a beautiful way to end [187:50] and um I I've it's so interesting [187:53] because if if people attack you for that [187:56] I just wanted to give my own perspective [187:57] is when I hear you say these things [187:59] about not not enjoying holidays and yeah [188:02] um things about your relationship with [188:04] Laya and how how that happens for me I [188:08] feel even if I don't agree with 100% I [188:10] probably get to 95% to be honest with [188:12] you the fact that you're telling me that [188:15] you're different makes my difference [188:17] whatever it might be [188:20] feel acceptable do you know what I'm [188:23] saying I I 100% know what you're saying [188:25] because because when I heard you say [188:26] these things and I go oh my God Alex [188:28] feels like he's different from the [188:29] normal too we might not be me and Alex [188:31] aren't the same but we both feel [188:33] inherently like we're not playing by the [188:37] rules and therefore in some way getting [188:39] life wrong based on this like public [188:41] Narrative of the way we should live our [188:44] lives I thought amazing I remember [188:46] watching the video where you talked [188:47] about not like in going on holidays and [188:49] being like absolutely obsessed and me [188:50] thinking oh my God I'm so [ __ ] glad [188:52] he said that because deep in my heart [188:54] somewhere I felt a guilt yeah oh I you [188:57] know a guilt and I'm like where did the [188:58] guilt come from I'm doing it something [189:00] that I love every single day but I feel [189:02] guilty well I feel guilty because of [189:03] other people's shs right so please Alex [189:06] despite the um despite any critics that [189:08] might be out there please continue to [189:11] have the courage to be yourself CU you [189:13] have no idea how it's making a group of [189:15] weirdos that feel like they don't fit in [189:18] feel heard and understood for their [189:20] variance well that is my yeah I mean [189:22] it's I I make it for [189:24] them we have a closing tradition on this [189:26] podcast as you know where the last guest [189:27] leaves a question for the next guest not [189:29] knowing who they're leaving in [189:31] for god I'm laughing because it's so [189:34] ironic [189:36] okay great what is the meaning of [189:41] life well the short answer is obviously [189:44] 42 um but um [189:48] um I actually do think it's [189:52] learning um because if we think about [189:55] what learning is it's that you're [189:57] exposed to new conditions that over time [190:01] change your behavior and so you are [190:03] different now than you were 10 years ago [190:05] because you've learned more things and [190:07] so if we think about the meaning of life [190:10] as what is the output of life so I [190:13] actually do really like this so people [190:16] talk I can relate this to business of [190:19] course I can really what's the meaning [190:21] of life to business but what is the [190:24] meaning of a business the purpose of the [190:26] business is is whatever the output of [190:29] that business [190:31] is that's the meaning it's it's what the [190:34] output of that business is and so if the [190:38] mission like with uh Elon is like to get [190:40] to Mars then the output of the the [190:43] mission is that people get to Mars and [190:44] so that's the meaning of that business [190:46] and so the meaning of life in general [190:49] for me I think for All Humans is that [190:52] the output of experience is [190:55] learning and [190:57] so we will learn regardless whether we [191:01] want to or not we learn Learning Happens [191:03] whether you want whether you like it or [191:05] not you will learn um and I think that [191:08] that's where I would just leave it and [191:10] the question is are you learning the [191:11] things that you [191:12] want [191:14] amen I highly recommend people go and [191:16] check out the new format you launched on [191:18] your YouTube channel it's um titled [191:19] building a $1 million business for a [191:21] stranger in 56 minutes it's kind of like [191:23] a new take on Shark Tank but it's more [191:25] actionable more practical it's what you [191:27] referenced earlier and I know it took [191:28] you many many many many hours yeah to [191:30] perfect it but it's a really interesting [191:31] format that I think YouTube is seeking [191:34] because it's so actionable and practical [191:35] and I'd highly recommend I'll link that [191:37] below but i' would also highly recommend [191:38] people go and check out these books I [191:39] mean they've been to say they've been [191:41] Smash Hits is a mass massive [191:42] understatement um thank you Mil I just I [191:45] mean I just see it everywhere I fit feel [191:47] like it's a prerequisite of any [191:49] entrepreneurs toolkit when they're [191:51] starting and they're trying to figure [191:52] out Frameworks for scaling a business [191:55] making sales generating leads and I know [191:57] there's another one on the way which you [191:58] won't tell me about but I know it's [192:00] coming this year which is volume three [192:02] of this this format and I'm [192:03] exceptionally excited to see it and for [192:05] any entrepreneurs out there that are [192:06] looking to get in business with you I'd [192:07] highly recommend they go check out [192:08] acquisition. comom because there's so [192:10] much there regardless of where you are [192:11] in the cycle whether you're starting out [192:13] whether you're scaling up whether you're [192:14] looking for advice acquisition. comom is [192:16] the to be thank you Alex for your [192:18] generosity I appreciate it and thank you [192:20] for all that you do thank you for being [192:21] weird and different because like that's [192:23] again that's the value that's all the [192:25] value in the world um we don't need more [192:27] of the same we need people that have the [192:28] courage to be themselves and the courage [192:30] to be happy um and that's exactly who [192:33] you are and I really really appreciate [192:34] it thank you so [192:37] [Music] [192:38] much isn't this cool every single [192:41] conversation I have here on the DI of at [192:43] the very end of it you'll know I ask the [192:46] guest to leave a question in the Diary [192:49] of a CEO and what we've done is we've [192:52] turned every single question written in [192:53] the Diary of a CEO into these [192:56] conversation cards that you can play at [192:58] home so you've got every guest we've [193:01] ever had their question and on the back [193:04] of it if you scan that QR code you get [193:07] to watch the person who answered that [193:10] question we're finally revealing all of [193:13] the questions and the people that [193:15] answered the question the brand new [193:18] version 2 updated conversation cards are [193:21] out right now at Theon conversation [193:23] cards.com they' sold out twice [193:25] instantaneously so if you are interested [193:27] in getting hold of some limited edition [193:29] conversation cards I really really [193:31] recommend acting quickly [193:34] [Music] [193:47] oh