Best BJ Strategy

Yes my friends. Your eyes does not deceive you. We are actually going to talk about oral sex.

Sir. You want more of it? Don't push your woman toward the sensitive zone. It won't do any good trying to "force" her. And you are going to get just the opposite result that you are seeking. Get clever about it. Shave the entire area.

When your woman gets to see that the area is all nicely clear and smells good, two things will happen to you. 1. she will tend to go down there more often. 2. She will tend to stay down for a longer period.

Believe me I live to tell. It works.

That is part of being a strategist. Strategy can and is applied to every aspect of your life. Its a commitment. A way of life.

Oh! And what if you woman is not the "type" doing that? Well lets not be a pussy here and lets call a cat a cat. Here I will answer with my cheese cake parable.

Lets say you love cheese cake. But your woman does not like it at all. And she says that as long as you live with her, you will have to avoid cheese cake. You love her. So you comply. You might resist the temptation. You may resist for a week, a month even for years. But sooner or later you will hear the cheese cake calling. And you're going to have to make a very important decision for yourself.

Avoiding the matter won't take it away. You're just borrowing time.

Poker-Faced

A new study argues that poker is a game of skill, not chance.

Is Poker "a gambling game, pure and simple", as a judge in Louisiana called it in a much-cited 1910 judgement? Or is it a game in which skill plays an important role? The answer may help determine whether online poker games should be covered by a law that prohibits Americans from gambling over the web.

So far, judges have tended to agree with the 1910 precedent. Futurerulings will determine the prospect of a $6 billion industry. Yet there has been very little research into this subject, in part because of the paucity of data.

A new study by an economist, Steve Levitt, author of "Freakonomics", and Thomas Miles, his Chicago University colleague, uses data on those who look part in the 2010 World Series of Poker, an annual contest in Las Vegas. Last year it attracted over 32 000 payers and gave out more than $185 millions on prize money. Because the tournament is open to anyone who pays the entry fee, its participants have varying levels of experience and differing records of success or failure.

Messrs Levitt and Miles divided participants into two groups. The first included those who, based on lists of the top players in 2009 and the results of previous tournaments, could be thought of as "high-skilled"; the second was everyone else. If poker were truly a game of luck, then the winnings of the 12% of entrants marked as specially gifted ought not to have differed significantly from those made by the rest.

But the opposite proved to be true. Those who had done well before did well in 2010, too. Whereas ordinary players made a loss of 15.6%, the skilled made a return on investment of 30.5%, suggesting that poker is after all a game of skill. The economists say that similar tests of persistence in returns have also been used to detect whether mutual-fund managers have genuine expertise. In contrast to the case of poker, they point out, those tests have tended to find "little evidence of skill in this domain".

Case Study - Actor Ashton Kutcher

I've been talking for a little while about the strategy of not putting all you eggs in the same nest (talking about work and occupying a day job). That one must diversify one's sources of income because if your employer get rid of you. Then you will at least have another source of income. And you can walk out with you head high, a slight smile on your face and the assurance that your financial life is not doomed.

I am not the inventor of this principle. Far from it. But I find that so few people practice it. The standard model I see in the world is: a married couple, borrowed to their neck to get the house, two cars, two kids, an education and a dog... the American dream. Both work a day job. Both live from pay check to pay check. And both are exposed dramatically if one of them loose their job.

I'm advocating another way of life. One with no debt. But also one with multiple sources of income. And I think we are still too few living like that. But not for actor Ashton Kutcher.

The guy is not only a famous actor through his role on "That '70 Show" and "Dude, Where's my Car?" But he is also on of the most insightful investor according to David Lee, co-founder of a Silicon Valley investment firm. He invest into Silicon Valley start ups. And he takes his investments seriously. He's in there to make money. Which is good.

So the guy is clever enough to know that a job in the acting industry comes and go. And one must not rely on it. And it gets worst when you age... So he decided to... diversify. And that is exactly what I mean when I talk about the multiple revenue income philosophy. But he is not alone. I've seen it quite a few times with actors and comedians. I know one diversified in real-estate. I know another that bought an entire stores chain. One again started a magazine. And I know a singer that started a baby food company with her husband aside of her singing career.

So what is it that artists understood that others didn't in the remaining industries? They understood that work is precarious and one must see to one's self for one's future income needs. But why is it that artists understood that and the rest of us don't? Is it because they are smarter? I don't think so. Its because of the nature of their industry. It goes by the contracts. So you never know what contract will be next or if there will be a contract at all. So you plan ahead. But we, day jobbers, we are paid by the week. A steady weekly salary. So after a while we tend to assume that the regular pay check will continue to come without interuption indefinitivelly. Until the day we come to work and hit a closed door with a statement pinned on it:"OUT OF BUSINESS".

Never get asleep my friends. If you do have a day job, that's good. It is very rare these days with the state of the economy. But be smart. Think farther than that: live below your mean; be frugal; accelerate you debts payments; get at least two other means of income (without killing yourself at work). Never be dependable of anyone. That is the recepe of true freedom.

Beging for a job, that is not freedom. Sending hundreds of resumes and receiving may be two or three refusal letters, this is not freedom. Being selected (by HR), that is not freedom. That's worst. That's below dignity. And asking permission for two weeks vacation, that is not freedom.

Are you proud of the fact that you don't need your parents' allowance to live anymore? Then why are you proud of depending on your company's weekly allowance?

Get clever. Like Ashton Kutcher.

Kaizen Strategy

Kaizen is a japanese word meaning "improvement" or "change for the better".

We all want to become better people. But most lack the method. Or we go randomly about it or based on needs or worst, imperative. We also take a slack approach about it. "This year I will stop smoking". Or "This year I will start to train and put a prime on my health". And next thing you know, we drop out. Again. And we experience a feeling of failure. Again.

Sounds familiar? Don't worry, you're not alone.

So how can one improve, get better and put all the chances on one's side to avoid quitting? Simple. Lets apply the Kaizen process to our own life. The Kaizen process consist in four easy steps:

1. Plan

2. Action

3. Measure

4. Analyse

Its as simple as that. First you plan the change you want to make. Then you must take action. Your actions will bring results that you must record and measure (Which I don't). And finally you analyse the results and correct the action if need be.

But Kaizen also means moving forward step by step. So it is not designed to make big changes happen overnight. It is made to evolve in increment, step by step, day by day. And down the line the change will be huge. But you wouldn't feel it because you lived it by small increment. And this is the mistake I made all my life when I wanted to make a change.

For example, I always say that I want to have the body of a greek god. So I start to train like mad, going to the gym four or five times a week. And then, after six weeks of this regime, I stop all together. Then I have to start all again...

But if I go by increment: I will jog once a week. Then twice. Then mesuring my progress, this will give me joy and push me to jog for a third day. But this time my motivation will be propelled by results. I will WANT to do it, instead of doing it because I HAVE to do it. That's an enormous difference in perspective. And I think that it hold the key to success.

Lets start right now. I know that the part that need most improvement in my body (the part that I know that if I improve it, it will dramatically change the aspect of all the rest) is my belly and my abdominals. But for some reason I just can't seams to start working on that body part.

I have at home the abs part of the P90X training. I just can't seam to start it. But as of tomorrow. I will do one rep of on set of the first exercise on it. And record my results.

I shall apply this strategy to everything I want to undertake and accomplish in my life.

Chubby or top 10? A very interesting dating strategy.

VS

This week-end I witnessed a very interesting conversation.

I went out with two of my friends for a beer and have a little chat. My friends are considered handsome boys and have no problems in dating beautiful women. But they have both a diametrally opposed strategy about it. One of them (Eric) likes small, chubby and not too fuzzy about make-up women, but very cute ones. The other (Joseph) is attracted by tall, long hair, drop-dead beautiful top-model type women.

So came a discussion between them that I witnessed. I was moving my head right to left like I was watching a tennis game.

Eric said that he prefer the short and more... discreed ones because he feels that they are more true, close to their heart and they tend to be more "giving women". They have more consideration on what their partner feels and wants to make sure that he is happy. They are women that puts value on one's innerself and are not attracted solelly by the physical aspect. "And", he says, "as an added bonus, since they are women that are somewhat less popular with men, you get the benefit that your're girl won't be hit on each other minute thus the temptation to jump the fense is less."

"Non sense!" Said Joseph. "I like drop-dead women because they tend to be more sure of themselve, know more what they want and are not affraid to go get it." He continued "when they get out with a guy, you can be sure that the guy is special because there is so many fish in the ocean that they are very careful in the picking. Thus when they end up with a guy, in the girl's head, its the one and for the long term." And he concluded "and the added bonus is that they are hit on so much that they get immuned against it. So I know that when my girl has a girls night out, she's there for the fun, the dance and that's all."

Eric: "Wait a minute. Are you implying that when the chubby kind women goes out, she is more prone to be unfaitful?"

Joseph: "No. What I am saying is that the chubby does not get hit on as much as the model. Therefore when she gets hit on, it affects her much more than the model and thus creates a more dangerous situation for you."

...

And the conversation went on... on sports, women again, politics, women, philosophy and then of course... women.

But what I got from my friends conversation is a very interesting "insssurance policy against cheating" strategy in dating . Lets recap. If you date a more natural woman, you are less likely to be cheated on because since she gets less offers, the risk is less. The downside to this (according to my friends) is that this strategy can backfire if the woman actually gets hit on. Since it is more "rare" (once again according to my friends) for her, the temptation to give in will be higher.

On the other side if you date models, they get immuned against flirts. Therefore you get more chances that she will be fateful if you're THE one for her. The downside of this is that if you are not THE one for her, or if she wants to get even with you for some reason, or she wants to hurt you in some ways, then she just have to go out and roll her hips a little, and you're history in no time.

Which strategy is best? Honestly in this case I don't know. Both have their pros an cons.

But what is interesting is that it gives an interesting hint on the hidden computation part of our brain when it comes to relationships. Because my friends had this conversation very genuinelly without back thoughts. They were not aware that what they were verbalizing, is their internal premisses of odds calculations in a relationship. Odds of being cheated on or not... And in some ways, it affects their choices of potential dates.

Of course one has to realize that this is an over simplification of relationships and women characters. One must not take this to the letter and apply it as is.

But this is nevertheless interesting... for a Strategist.

Links of the week

John Stossel Fox Business: Atlas Shrugged - Part 1

John Stossel Fox Business: Atlas Shrugged - Part 2

John Stossel Fox Business: Atlas Shrugged - Part 3

John Stossel Fox Business: Atlas Shrugged - Part 4

John Stossel Fox Business: Atlas Shrugged - Part 5

John Stossel Fox Business: Atlas Shrugged - Part 6

Hank Rearden state of mind

Just watch this video from Atlas Shrugged.

Hank Rearden comes back from work. He poured the first drop of the new Rearden Metal. A colossal achievement for human kind. And he decides to give a gift to his wife made of the first drop of the first pouring of the Metal. And look at he reaction.

I can't help but to feel lonely has he is. For that's exactly how I feel with my own family and significant other.

Henry Rearden comes home.

Book Review - Killing Giants

Tales about little guys who overcome huge odds to defeat a gigantic person, business or army are as old as time. People love underdogs and want to see an upset, writes branding expert Stephen Denny in the introduction to Killing Giants, which outlines smart and often sneaky strategies small firms can use to tip the odds in their favor when they are competing against an established competitor with deeper pockets.

Small firms are nimble, creative by necessity and often willing to do things that huge corporations can't - or won't - do to capture clients. These can include taking advantage of the marketing and advertising an established firm has done to develop a product and nurture a market for it, by convincing customers at the point of sale that your product will better meet that need than will the giant's.

what makes Killing Giants a useful and entertaining book are its case studies. Each chapter describes a situation, such as lauching a new, but different, product in a highly competitive market (cleaning supplies, candy bars, an airline); conceptualizes a strategy (fighting dirty or polarize on purpose), and gives examples of small companies in that situation and what they did to manoeuvre their way to snatch the giant's customers or successfully carve out their niche.

As Denny notes, not every case will apply to your situation, but some may be dead-on. They'll all get you thinking.

Souce: Laura Ramsay, Financial Post.

Case Study - Cyril Ramaphosa

Born in a black township in 1952, Cyril Ramaphosa rose to become South Africa's leading trade unionist, switching to politics and then to business after the end of apartheid. He became one of the country's richest men, and is still occasionally mentioned as a possible future president. Nowhe is the face of McDonald's in Africa's biggest economy.

Mr Ramaphosa, who once said his favourite meal was a fish with salad, will own and run all the American burger giant's operations in the country, including 132 outlets. He will have a 20-yearfranchise and a mandate to "turbocharge" growth. The price of the deal has not been revealed. Since opening its first restaurant in South Africa in 1995, McDonald's has struggled against fierce home-grown competition. Famous Brands, its main rival, has more than 1100 outlets, operating under such names as Steers, Wimpy and Mugg & Bean.

Mr Ramaphosa, a lawyer by training, founded the National Union Mine-workers, building up to become Sout Africa's most powerful union. He helped bring about apartheid's peaceful end as one of the African National Congress's main negotiators, By the time he was elected to parliament in the country's first fully democratic elections in 1994 he was already being tipped as Nelson Mandela's likely successor, but he lost out to Thabo Mbeki.

He promply resigned his political posts and went into business. With his formidable connections, negotiating skills and charm, he took to it like a duck to water. He was one of the first to benefit from the ANC government's black economic empowerment (BEE) policies, building an empire in mining, energy, property, banking, inssurance and the telecoms. With investments said to be worth 1.55 billion rand ($224m), Mr Ramaphosa had joined the 31-strong club or rand billionaires. His wife is the sister of Patrice Motsepe, another BEE tycoon and the country's firstblack dollar billionaire.

Deals like the McDonald's one seem to fall into Mr Ramaphosa's lap. As well as servingas executive chairman of his own Shanduka group, he has a string of non-executivechairmanships and directorships of some of the country's biggest and best-known companies, including Bidvest, a giant food-service and distribution business. He is also a member of Coca-Cola's international advisory board. both positions should serve him good stead in his new job. Although South Africa's media continue to talk up his presidential prospects, he says he has no interest in returning to politics.

Does South Africa media really need any more fast-food joints? The World Health Organization reckons 62% of the country's men and and 73% of its women are already overweight, making it one of the fattest countries in the world. Almost a quarter of men and two-fifths of women are obese. But then, as President Jacob Zuma has shown with his three large wives and one equally large wife-in-waiting, in South Africa big is beautiful.

Source: The Economist, March 26th 2011

I know now the date of my death

I am scheduled to depart from this Earth on June 21, 2088. This means that I still have 77 years to live, which is more than what I’ve lived so far. And since I was born in 1968, this means I will die at age 120. Which is more than anyone I eared of so far!

I can live with that!… sort to speak.

Here how it happened. I received a SMS the other day stating “We have calculated the date of your death. According to our calculation, you will die on June 21, 2088…” This is some sort of weird advertising for some sort of service they offer. At first I laugh when I saw that. But then it made me think. Imagine if we would all know our death date? Wouldn’t we want to make the most of it between our birth date and the fatidic date? Since we don’t know what is our expiration date, we live on the impression of immortality. And we can see it everywhere: save now for when you’ll retire; people caring more about futile activities instead of working on themselves and on others; people working nine to five and damning their cubicle job instead of breaking free and doing what they like… etc…

I find that knowing the date of my death gives me an advantage. Since I know when it will end, I can plan ahead and make sure I will be able to do everything I want to achieve before the departure date.

Uneasy with this post? GET OVER IT!! Just give yourself a good kick in the butt. Stop applying the ostrich strategy by putting you head in the sand. It will do you no good. Face it! Face the inevitable with a sharp eye, you back erected and your chin high. It WILL happen either you like it or not. Either you think about it or try to elude the idea. Look right in the face of the ineluctability. And stand your ground: “I will make the most of it while I’m here and there is nothing you can do about it in the mean time!”

Now take a piece of paper and write down everything you have postponed so far in your life but are dear to you heart. Then apply Nikes strategy: “Just do it!”

“What is the purpose of life” you ask your self? “What is the meaning of life?”

The answer is very easy.

The purpose of life are to pass on you genetic code and remain alive. Period! That’s it.

What is the meaning of life? None! There is no meaning to life. But wait! Since there is no intrinsic meaning to life. This means that there is no meaning to life OTHER than the one YOU settle for YOUR SELF!

Now THIS is a powerful thought isn’t it? Can you imagine the spectrum of freedom this gives you? You are free to undertake just what ever endeavour you want for yourself. So now that you have the answer to the most profound questions of existence, stop wondering about it and go out and do something of your life. Just what ever feel right for you before your expiration date.

So… You’re a push-pen?

I cannot help but it hurts me at some point. Yesterday my 16 years old boy asked me "dad, what do you really do at work?" So I explained to him that I am in charge of the Quality department for my department. "Ok but what is it that you actually do?" He replied. So basically I… do reports. "So…" my son replied, "You’re a push-pen?" And then he went to say "I really do want to end up like this, pushing pens…"

I cannot help but in hurts me at some point.

I know that for a fact and for a long time now. I even call myself a "glorified personal assistant" for I produce reports that are way under my brain capacity and of my formal training. You might call it a Qualitiy specialist, Quality Manager, Quality Strategist, what ever. At the end of the day you end up producing reports to people that will seldom read it.

I always wanted to be a model for my kids. And I must admit that, on this topic, I failed.
Thus my renewed vigour in becoming a successful business man. One who shape the world to his values and one with increasing power on his surrounding instead of the other way around like most people live. That will be the teaching I will pass to my children. Not the singular image of an insipid cubicle push-pen.

Wanting to be a model to my children is a great motor and motivator. I shall not deceive them.

P.S. The reason why I am a push-pen right now is because I’m on brain strike. An Atlas Shrugged’s John Galt’s like strike. For those of you who read the book, you will understand.

Given my experience in the corporate world I came to the conclusion that it does not deserve my brain and I shall use it instead to propel myself on my own, starting my own company. But I cannot explain that to my son. Not now. He doesn’t have the professional experience and the knowledge of Ayn Rand’s book to understand my stand.

May be one day…

Projekt 26 - Obituary of Albert Bachmann

When England was under the constant Nazi attacks and pressure, Churchill asked for a resistance plan to be put in the eventuality that the Nazi would invade England. Little is known about this resistance plan. And of course this was never used. But I find it of good defense strategy for a nation, any one of it, to have a resistance strategy parallel to the regular army.

Imagine your home land being invaded. And your home land's army forced to retreat. Now you live in an "occuped" zone. You want to do something for your country but you don't know what. You would want to resist but you don't know who you can talk to. Is my neighbor a true patriot or is he a simpatizing coward? But if you actually are already member of a resistance party, you know your people, your are trained with the regular army. Nor to perform regular army's tasks, but to collect information, deliver messages, even... transform yourself into a terrorist against the invader.

This is exactly what Albert Bachmann did during the Cold War. Here is the obituary of a very colourful persona. And food for thoughts.

Albert Bachmann, Switzerland's least effective but most colourful spymaster, whose dread of a Soviet invasion led him to create a secret intelligence service and guerrilla force unknown to the Swiss government in the 1970s, died on April 12 2011, in Cork, Ireland. He was 81.

His family, in an announcement printed in the Zurich newspaper Tages-Anzeiger, said he died after a brief illness.

Bachmann, who held the rank of colonel, brought dash and panache to Swiss spy craft in his relatively brief but highly eventful leadership of Swiss military intelligence. A communist in his younger days, he became a hard-line cold warrior after the 1968 Soviet takeover of Czechoslovakia, which he regarded as the dress rehearsal for a full-scale invasion of western Europe.

After being appointed to run Swiss intelligence in 1976, he created Project 26 , a secret army of 2000 resistance fighters trained to wage guerrilla warfare against Soviet troops in the event of an invasion.

To ensure the survival of the Swiss state, he bought Liss Ard, a 200-acre estate near Cork, to serve as a refuge and headquarters for a government in exile and, in the basement of of its two Georgian houses, a vault for Switzerland's gold reserves.

Loyalists regarded colonel Bachmann as a fearless visionary. Others agreed with the intelligence agent who dismissed his former boss as "a glorified Boy Scout who saw evil everywhere and believed that he alone possessed the absolute truth about national defence."

Colonel Bachmann came to grief after sending one of his operatives, a management consultant named Kurt Schilling, to spy on Austrian troops carrying out maneuvers near the town of St. Polten in November 1979.

The need for cloak-and-dagger screcy was unclear, since the Austian goverment had invited observers from all over the Eastern bloc to watch the operations. Schilling, equipped with maps, binoculars and a notebook, nevertheless spent several days snooping around military barracks and command posts before the Austrian police pounced.

Called "the spy who came in from the Emmentaler", a reference to Switzerland's most famous cheese, Schilling was put on trial for espionage. His mission, he hold the court, was to gauge the ability of the Austrian Army to resist a Soviet attack.

The affaid proved deeply embarrassing to Switzerland, and colonel Bachmann was suspended. Further investigation into his activities exposed Project 26 and related initiatives.

All were a complete surprise to the Swiss defence minister, Georges-André Chevallaz, who found them so outlandish that their architect was briefly suspected of being a double agent.

Colonel Bachmann was soon forced to resign, bringing down the curtain on one of the more intriguing chapters in the history of the cold war.

After being forced into retirement in 1980, colonel Bachmann moved to Cork, where he dealt sucessfully in real estate.

"He was an amazing character with a great sense of humour - but a lot of people thought he was a retired banker and not an intelligence officer," a local resident told The Irish Independent.

Source: The New York Times

The Mirror Strategy, beware of what you might find

Have you ever found that, in a relationship, sometimes, there is always one partner that does most of the effort for the relation compared to the other?

We've all seen that. Perhaps you lived it. And if you feel that you are actually living it right now, here's a trick: The Mirror Strategy. But be warned. This could be the start of a spiral down to the end of you relationship! Use this with caution.

The Mirror strategy consist of mirroring your most significant other's affection patern. If he/she gives you affection, you give some back. If he/she don't, you don't. Its as simple as that.

There is two ways on how your significant other might respond to that. First he/she can realize that you're getting farther and colder, and he/she might want to win you back by giving more love, attention and affection. If it is so. Then you made your point. Resume with your relationship, you know it's worth it.

The second response is a significant other that mirror you back. If it is so, you have two ways to deal with it. First you end the "cold war" and resume to your relationship the way it was. Willing to accecpt the consequences of this relationship. Second, you continue the mirror strategy in giving even less attention and affection.

This last path is dangerous. You can end up in a spiral down of less and lesser attention and affection from your significant other and you to him/her. At the extreme, this can spiral down to the end of the relationship. If it does, would you have provoqued the end of the relationship? You might. But the true question is, if the significant other doesn't respond to less and less care and affection, is this relationship worth it?

That's for you to find your own answer.

Why Scundrels rule?

I caught an article in the paper titled Why scundrels rule. Its a must read if you want to know what it takes to stake out the crowd and make it happen where most people fail.

It is also a good way of life: you do what you want, how you want it. But there is pitfalls that must be watched. It is said that those who make it (not all of them but most) have a particular trait with psychopaths. They do what they want regardless of the opinions of others. And that I find is one of the most important aspect in getting an edge. How many times did I see capable people renouncing just because they where afraid of what people might think.

I have one simple example of this that happened this week. I'm in a group that is forming to go to the Kilimandjaro. We decided that we would sell stuff to finance the project. We have no cause. All the money belongs to us. We don't ask for charity, we give value for value: you like our product, you buy it and we are happy to sell it to you. Period. What we do with the money is none of the people's business.

But there is one of the girl in the group this week that quitted. She was uneasy with the fact that we are not giving the money to a cause of some sort. So she was affraid of being taken for selfish because we were keeping the money.

See? This girl is willing to let go of a once in a lifetime trip because she is afraid of what people might think of her.

THAT is the mark of failure. THAT is the signs of weakness. All grat people I've seen in history were able to atchieve what they did because they gave little importance of what people might think.

Read the article. Its worth reading. And it gives good advises if you want to get a strategic edge on how to live you life.