Marketing

How to sell?

Marriage is an unsuccessful attempt.
turn a random episode into something meaningful
long-term

A. Einstein.

In marketing, there are three distinct approaches to sales: transactional, consultative, and strategic. To understand the differences between them, let’s take the example of selling insurance. A transactional sale is what you see when you are offered “OSAGO” (mandatory car insurance in Russia). The text for translation: [1]. “In 5 minutes.” Transactional selling does not require the seller to have specialized sales skills. They simply meet demand. This is how cigarettes, gasoline, and food in supermarkets are sold. In these types of sales, the product’s characteristics are clear to the buyer before the purchase, and they can often accurately assess the product based on its appearance. A product that the buyer does not like can easily be returned, and the purchase price is usually insignificant. Transactional sales include all situations where the buyer is compelled to make a purchase for some reason and is therefore looking for the cheapest option rather than the best one. Additionally, most manipulative sales techniques are effective in transactional deals, where emotions, rather than reason, play a decisive role. The seller only needs basic math skills and the ability to operate a cash register. Even language skills are not necessary. Sellers in such a market are “hired.” When we talk about the sexual market, transactional deals are driven by the feeling of lust—a fundamental reproductive instinct that gives us pleasure from sex itself.

Consultative selling occurs when a product has distinctive features and is complex. This is the case with Auto-CASCO insurance. [2].

There are many conditions and exceptions. Different options for insurance coverage exist, and it’s important to understand what a “deductible” is and how a “payment” differs from “reimbursement.” In this case, the seller earns more because they provide consulting services to the buyer, and the buyer pays for this service as part of the price included in the product. The seller is required to have a thorough knowledge of their product, the ability to engage in conversation with the client by asking questions, and the skill to uncover the client’s needs and provide a solution. Typically, the buyer has limited options for returning the product, the price is high, and all its properties are revealed only after use begins. The seller’s job here is to persuade the buyer to make their choice. Emotions and manipulation are more likely to hinder the sale, although they may help the seller at the beginning of the negotiation process. [3]. In consultative sales, concepts such as trial batches, “test drives,” recommendations, and other methods are used to allow the client to evaluate a complex product before making a purchase. Salespeople in this market are recruited or poached from competitors. In the sexual market, consultative sales correspond to attraction—a more complex behavioral response that compels us to single out a particular partner from others and desire to possess them specifically, as they possess certain distinctive traits or beneficial qualities that are important to us.

Strategic selling is about selling solutions. In the context of insurance sales, it involves discussions with business owners about risk management solutions for their companies. This type of sale takes a considerable amount of time and requires the seller to understand not just the product, but the client’s business as well. In strategic sales, there isn’t a tangible product per se; rather, there is a decision-making process that impacts the company’s future and its long-term business strategy. Even if the decision is manifested in a physical form, such as a “new CNC machine,” it still necessitates changes in business processes, suppliers, and personnel.

When a buyer makes a strategic purchase, they are not in a state of coercion; they cannot be easily convinced. On the contrary, they are in a position where they can persuade anyone of the correctness of their decision. A seller engaged in strategic selling should not rely on manipulative techniques or appeal to the emotions or subconscious state of the client. The strategic sales process is lengthy enough for the buyer to recognize when and how they are being manipulated. Therefore, the seller must possess a level of knowledge and development that allows them to engage with the business owner on issues and solutions relevant to their business, rather than discussing the pleasant weather or the fact that it’s the director’s birthday and there’s a promotion of unprecedented generosity.

Such sellers are rare, and companies can only hope to have them on their team. They cannot be “hired” or poached; they cannot be recruited. Strategic sales, whether in the sexual market or any other, take a long time and are based on long-term relationships between the buyer and the seller. Few people can, without emotions, articulate why they are getting married or entering a partnership beyond simply saying, “because I want him/her.” Drawing direct analogies to instinctual behavior, a good sign of a strategic deal is the presence of love and attachment between partners—a situation where one sees the other primarily as a friend and companion, rather than as an object of exploitation or a provider of certain benefits.

It’s important to note that a seller is more effective the higher up they operate in the sales process. Many companies have entire sales departments, but between 50% and 90% of all sales are made by the company’s leader or a group of leaders. Naturally, they handle strategic sales and engage with decision-makers. Meanwhile, the entire department is often occupied with consultative sales, interacting at the level of purchasing departments or even secretaries, and with a larger number of contacts, they end up closing far fewer deals. In fact, there would be no deals at all in the absence of active demand if the salespeople were focused on transactional sales.

An interesting phenomenon is occurring in the sexual market. Women, who are accustomed to a high demand from men in their youth, often do not bother to elevate their approach beyond transactional sales and explore the “product” they are selling in order to transition to a level of consultative or even strategic sales. After all, strategic sales require knowledge not just of the product, but of the client and their needs. From the perspective of a business plan for reproduction, sales should indeed occur at a strategic level, as the decision to reproduce is irreversible; it changes one’s lifestyle or “business processes,” and the “product” being sold is merely a tool to achieve a goal, not the goal itself.

For men, the process is the opposite. Faced with high competition in their youth, they quickly learn the art of consultative selling, unless they are exceptionally handsome. This involves courting and showcasing all their masculine qualities, from the ability to support a family to physical strength and the skill to engage in meaningful conversation. However, as the demand for men increases, many men resort to “transactional” selling. After all, a man, more so than a woman, has the option to continue his life without participating in the upbringing of the children he has biologically fathered.

If women need to be absolutely certain that their partner meets their needs 100%, since they cannot have many children or give birth to children simultaneously from different men, a man always has a “second chance.” And a third chance. In fact, he can have as many offspring as he wants, depending on how many women he can impregnate throughout his life. For a man, the biological consequences of sex are not as dramatic as they are for a woman. This doesn’t mean that a man doesn’t make strategic decisions. The optimal reproductive strategy for a man likely involves choosing a “strategic partner” to have his main offspring with, but at the same time, nothing stops him from trying to reproduce whenever the opportunity arises.

If society sets the task for a woman to “get married,” or if a woman wants to do this for her own reasons, she should position herself as a strategic partner and engage in strategic selling, especially since this approach is more effective than others in the absence of active demand for the product. However, as mentioned earlier, many women do not move beyond the level of “transactional sales,” and their main thoughts in communication with men revolve around the dilemma of “to give or not to give.” If you ask such women what they believe attracts men to marriage, they quickly respond with “free and accessible sex,” demonstrating, on one hand, the persistence of the stereotype of female commodification (genitals in exchange for support) and, on the other hand, a complete lack of understanding of the “client’s business.” After all, no rational man would describe sex in marriage as “free” or “accessible.”

Often, as women reach maturity, they start to ponder what men want from them and turn to consultative selling. They begin to see themselves as complex products that can only be evaluated after long-term use, carefully positioning themselves based on their unique advantages and distinguishing features. For example, “the ability to perfectly darn socks,” “cooking delicious borscht,” or “performing prostate massages.” However, this is not strategic selling. Everything a woman can offer as a caregiver, “mommy,” or “prostitute” can be successfully obtained from other sources by men. Moreover, the optimal solution would be to diversify suppliers. Why endure a fantastic sock darner if her cooking is subpar? It turns out that a man is essentially “buying” a universal household appliance, which is already degrading for a woman, but in any universality, there is no ideal, and he ultimately gets less than he expected for the same money. Furthermore, any business would consider it an unacceptable risk to depend on a single supplier, who thus gains power over the business, and whose risks automatically become the buyer’s risks. Consequently, the “unique characteristics” that a woman tries to sell are not only not unique but also lead to a rational business behavior in men—an ongoing search for alternative suppliers.

Men face significant challenges as well. They too must evolve towards “strategic” sales if they want to reproduce successfully and pass on their genes to the next generation. However, as mentioned earlier, they tend to shift towards transactional sales as they age. Over time, they realize that they are valuable commodities in the sexual market and that even when married, they can still supply themselves in this market, and there will still be demand. Paradoxically, in modern conditions, this does not allow them to reproduce effectively or at all. What “strategic” woman would want to have a long-term relationship with a “transactional” man and engage in unprotected sex with him? Which family wouldn’t fall apart due to the revelation of infidelity? As a result of family breakdown, children who lack involvement from one parent inevitably lose their competitive advantages in the sexual market of the next generation, leading to a decreased likelihood of effectively passing on their genes to their grandchildren.

In essence

There are three types of interaction: transactional, consultative, and strategic. It’s important to be able to distinguish between them and use the appropriate one depending on the situation.

• Men and women exhibit different behaviors in the sexual market. Behavior evolves with age. A good deal is struck between partners who share similar behaviors, whether transactional or strategic.

• Borscht and sex are not what attracts men to marriage.

Mission

Always choose the hardest path – to You won’t encounter competitors there.

Charles de Gaulle

There is a very useful marketing tool called the “positioning matrix.” To use this tool, you simply need to answer the following 7 questions regarding what the company does or sells:

• What is this?
• For whom?
• In what cases?
• What does it give?
• What makes it unique/different from others?
• Why can’t it be done without this?
• What can be used as a substitute?

The answers to these questions should be crafted in such a way that no other competitor can provide the same set of responses with identical phrasing. Essentially, the answers to these questions represent the company’s mission. In the context of the sexual market, similar questions can also be addressed. The mission statement of marriage might be articulated as follows: People need each other for the production and joint upbringing of offspring, who will inherit the biological and cultural competitive advantages of their parents. In turn, by being in a marital relationship, they create a combined output of consumer goods that exceeds the arithmetic sum of the outputs they could produce separately.

By applying these three filters: biology, culture, and economics, one can effectively eliminate almost all of humanity from the list of potential candidates, or conversely, distinguish oneself from nearly everyone from a competitive standpoint.

Biology: the assessment of this parameter is carried out by an internal computer that is connected to consciousness through a channel that transmits only one bit of information: “yes” or “no.” Automatically filtered out are all individuals of the wrong gender, non-fertile, unattractive, unsuitable for sex, sick, antisocial, old, young, and so on.

Culture: the assessment of this parameter is made by consciousness, if it is, of course, involved in the choice. Often, it gets switched off, allowing the partner to capture the attention of deeper layers of the brain, and when consciousness comes back to itself, it receives from the biocomputer not just a “yes,” but a “yes, this is the one.” [4]. .».

Consciousness, when it is functioning, assesses the cultural potential during the phase of rapprochement. The partners’ cultures should be mutually interesting, complement each other, have a tendency for development, and not be radically different.

Biology and culture are already shaping a unique assessment of one partner by another. This assessment roughly translates to “beautiful and smart” or “handsome and intelligent.”

The economics of marriage was first described by economist and Nobel Prize laureate Gary Becker in 1992. According to Becker, an economic approach provides a comprehensive framework for understanding human behavior, something that many generations of scholars have long and unsuccessfully sought to develop. Becker’s calculations suggest that investments in human capital yield a higher rate of return than investments in securities. In his analysis, Becker operated under the assumption that human behavior is rational and purposeful, applying concepts such as scarcity, price, and opportunity costs to a wide range of aspects of human life, including those traditionally studied by other social sciences. The model he formulated became the foundation for all subsequent research in this field.

Becker focused on the concept of human capital. Human capital is the stock of knowledge, skills, and motivations that each individual possesses. Investments in it can include education, accumulation of professional experience, health care, geographical mobility, and information seeking. Essentially, Becker’s human capital is the culture mentioned earlier. In fact, spouses buy human capital from each other, which, like any capital, generates returns.

From an economic perspective, marriage allows couples to share the costs of acquiring expensive shared goods. Additionally, the care provided by the non-working family member for the working member should be such that the working member is more effective at their job—they have their “back covered.” This means that a level of care and household management must be provided that cannot be outsourced, or the risks of outsourcing outweigh the potential benefits. Moreover, when it comes to tasks that cannot be outsourced, such as managing personal finances, overseeing the home and its environment, shopping for clothes, furniture, gifts, and food, fulfilling social obligations, or providing parental care for children, these responsibilities require time. If the working spouse earns X money in one hour, then by spending their time on household duties, they are not earning that money at all. Thus, the non-working spouse, by doing household work, effectively contributes the same X amount of money to the family, allowing the working spouse to focus on their job without being distracted by domestic responsibilities. This concept is why it is considered fair to divide equally the property acquired during the marriage, even if one spouse did not earn money outside the home. The second spouse ensured that the first could earn that money.

By formulating your “this” using these three criteria, we are already answering the questions:

• What is it? — It is a unique combination of biological and behavioral data and culture, along with the ability to create greater good within the family than outside of it.
• For whom? For partners who like me, with a mutually compatible level and direction of culture, and a lifestyle that provides economic benefits from living together.
• In what cases? When I want to give birth to and raise healthy children, passing on a culture that is richer than my own, and do this in the most economically advantageous way.
• What does it provide? Biological advantages in subsequent generations and effective gene transmission.
• What makes it unique/different from others? The answer is already in the response to “what is it.”
• Why is it impossible without this? Without it, any other method of reproduction won’t yield equally effective offspring.
• What can be replaced? Nothing without compromising the result. With some compromise, there are various options.

Thoughtful answers to these questions, for instance, with an understanding of how my culture differs from that of others, can provide a straightforward response to the question of “where to find partners” or, say, “how to open a bag with a cat before buying the cat.”

In essence

To successfully market yourself in the sexual marketplace, you should answer the questions from the marketing positioning matrix. This will clarify who you need and who needs you. In reality, it’s not the color of hair or eyes that matters when choosing a partner, but rather other qualities.

Constantly maintaining and developing your unique traits will prevent your partner from finding any other reasonably better option in the sexual market.

If you haven’t been able to create a truly unique offering in the sexual market and you clearly see your competitors, you should consider developing some new features and traits that, combined with your existing ones, make you unique.

• No one will ever say, “I love you because you are just like everyone else.”

Mushroom model

The nasty mushrooms are the first to grow.

Korean proverb

The main question that arises in sales in any market, including the sexual one, is where to find clients. Meanwhile, bookstores are filled with guides offering tips on effectively hunting for members of the opposite sex, as if they are some kind of prey. Professional sellers have long realized that the search for clients should not be associated with hunting. Hunting only provokes aggression. To understand both the process and the expected outcome, the process of acquiring clients should be compared to “quiet hunting,” like mushroom picking.

Mushrooms are something truly special: they are neither plants nor animals. To gather them, you need to know which areas are mushroom-rich and which are not. Of course, you can just follow signs and omens, but it’s much more useful to think about what mushrooms need for growth and reproduction. Unlike plants, mushrooms cannot exist independently. They, like animals, feed on the remains of other organisms. People often think that mushrooms need light, warmth, and moisture. Indeed, mushrooms often grow in places where these conditions are abundant. But that’s only because such areas provide enough food for mushrooms, which don’t really need light on their own. The search for clients is very much the same. It’s quite ineffective to wander through the forest, or rather the market, looking for clients. It’s much better to simply know the “mushroom” spots where clients are plentiful—just pick one and engage!

One way or another, there are places where members of the opposite sex are in the overwhelming majority. There are more guys on hiking trips. There are more girls at the foreign languages institute. Want to get married quickly? Get into hunting, not nightclubs. Want to attract the attention of women? Spend your evenings in the philology department library, not at the bar. Do you need a mature woman who won’t burden you with attempts to marry her? Attend parent-teacher meetings at school. Do you need a colonel? Get a job at a military unit.

But before rushing out to search for mushrooms, people usually form an understanding of a few things in advance. Which mushrooms are edible and which are not. Should one expect a basket full of honey mushrooms, or is it still the season for undergrowth mushrooms? What does a porcini mushroom look like, and what is a fly agaric? Yes, that beautiful, bright mushroom that catches your eye. A mushroom? Yes. But, unfortunately, it’s inedible. The same goes for searching for partners in the sexual market: before you go looking for them, you need to know exactly what they look like. And you must understand that among people, just like among mushrooms, there are beautiful, bright, eye-catching ones that are actually poisonous fly agarics.

Mushroom pickers can be divided into several categories depending on their experience:

• those who collect everything and anything;
• those who collect only a few familiar edible mushrooms;
• those who do not gather certain edible mushrooms, knowing about their “lack of convenience”: butter mushrooms need to be cleaned thoroughly, milk caps are too fragile, and some species of row mushrooms will crunch with sand;
• those who go on a “quiet hunt” with a specific goal — to gather certain mushrooms of a particular size.

An exercise that sellers must definitely practice is to describe their ideal customer for themselves. Not the one that the seller needs, but the one for whom the seller and their product are necessary. An experienced seller wouldn’t even think about meeting with every potential buyer in a row. It’s like gathering every mushroom you come across in the forest; such behavior risks poisoning. The same happens in inter-gender communication: there’s a risk of demotivating yourself by meeting people who don’t need you at all. Those who will “stand you up” or “use you and leave.” It’s very difficult to sell yourself in an environment where “everyone around” says you’re not needed. The secret to the enviable success of many Don Juans is that they never chase after every skirt. They prefer to pay attention to those who are attracted to them. And, of course, they almost always succeed with women. A Don Juan, like any experienced seller, when evaluating a potential client, will consider how much time he will spend negotiating and closing the deal, how much time will be needed for coordinating delivery, paperwork, and other bureaucracy. And if a more “accessible” buyer is available, he will prioritize the client who is more promising—both in terms of closing the deal and in terms of future sales development.

The “mushroom” model is very fruitful for modeling the process of finding partners in the sexual market. For example, consider a man’s wallet size or his “perfection.” Wealthy prince-like bachelors or men who are ideal in other respects, much like a large porcini mushroom, are hard to come by. Similarly, women with “model looks” are also not easily accessible to most men. They are difficult to find; one has to spend a lot of time in the market to connect with the right people. It’s challenging to get to know them, competing for their attention is tough, and possessing an “ideal” is largely a matter of luck, independent of the will and efforts of the seeker. Yes, we know many stories of someone who eventually achieved their ideal. And, of course, the ideal will end up in the hands of one of those who aspired to it. However, it’s important not to take such stories as examples to emulate. After all, these stories say nothing about the hundreds or even thousands of those who, starting with the same initial conditions, were unable to reach the final outcome.

In sales, there’s a saying: elephant hunters die of hunger. This reflects a common mistake that salespeople make: envisioning an ideal but unattainable client and spending an enormous amount of time chasing after them, or as such salespeople say, fighting for them. Yes, it’s a sweet dream to make a lot of money right away by closing just one deal. Why sign small contracts for modest amounts when you can do it all at once? But unfortunately, large clients, aside from being elusive, have other drawbacks as well. Just like oversized mushrooms, big companies can be rotten. Corruption, bureaucracy, unsatisfactory decision-making speed, and a lack of people genuinely interested in the success of the deal—all of this makes large companies “inedible” for most salespeople. In other words, even if a salesperson finds useful contacts among influential people in the organization, they may wait for years before a deal is finalized (if it ever happens). People in the sexual market can also be rotten. Here, it’s not corruption but greed, not bureaucracy but caution and closed-off behavior caused by excessive societal attention to one’s persona, not a lack of interest in the deal but disdain for those who excessively show interest.

The second significant drawback of working with a large client is the dependency on them. Just like mushroom pickers who find a big mushroom and, having no more space in their basket, decide to throw out the “uninteresting small ones” to make room for the big one, or carry it in their hand. But when both hands are occupied, they can’t pick any new mushrooms. Often, women who marry wealthy partners find themselves living in a “golden cage.” By marrying someone who provides a steady flow of money, they become accustomed to their new circumstances. They allow themselves much larger expenses. Over time, a woman may find herself in a situation where leaving such a husband means serious problems, if not the collapse of all her hopes. Naturally, she will do everything possible to keep her monopolistic “elephant.” Ultimately, the situation may reach a point where the woman is willing to “sell herself” to him without profit or even at a loss, as losing her husband would lead to even greater losses. Is such a marriage necessary?

But the problem of finding a client doesn’t actually exist. Instead, there is a problem with the quality of handling potential clients. If a seller’s quality is low, then to achieve good sales figures, they need to have many potential clients, manage a database of such clients, purchase CRM systems, and so on. However, in the sexual market, no “seller” can physically “service” more than one “client” at a specific time. So it turns out that having more than one client at any given second is unnecessary. The presence of a second, waiting client for a “sale” won’t increase anything; it will only add chaos, as you can’t pick multiple mushrooms at once. It’s like going to the movies every day with a different man, only to end up getting pregnant by just one of them. Therefore, the task of finding a partner should primarily be approached from the perspective of reducing the need for new ones, or in other words, improving the quality of your work as a seller. No magical knowledge or skills in mushroom hunting will be beneficial if you can’t distinguish edible mushrooms from poisonous ones or if you go on a “quiet hunt” with a leaky basket. You won’t have prospects in selling yourself in the sexual market if you waste time on “macho” types or “losers.” Similarly, you won’t succeed if you don’t brush your teeth, take care of your hairstyle, nails, clothing, figure, and personal scent. This applies to both women and men.

And yet, it’s necessary to seek out new sexual partners. Most reasonable men and women are engaged in this very pursuit. However, they approach this task as if it were a problem, and as a result, they only exacerbate it. They envision the world as a fortress, with desirable men or women outside its walls, while competitors are bustling around outside, ready to attack. In reality, if you rise above the problem, soaring above the battlefield and fortifications, you can see that if the fortress is not attacked, the “besieged” will be more than happy to come out of it. Every person is on a quest; everyone wants to gain something. For many guys, it will be a revelation that, all else being equal, a girl is more likely to agree to go on a date with them than to refuse. For many girls, it will also be a revelation that if a guy has a girlfriend, he is likely not to deny himself the opportunity to interact with another woman. Knock, and the door will be opened for you. But knock gently. Remember that the speed of your approach should be slow enough not to provoke aggression, yet fast enough to be noticed. Think of mushrooms. You can’t gather them while riding a motorcycle through the forest, but if you walk too slowly, your basket will be empty.

If we continue to compare the search for a partner to mushroom picking, it’s important to remember that mushrooms don’t grow alone. Usually, you can find the next mushroom not far from the previous one. The mycelium or fungal network is a vast underground organism that, in order to reproduce, releases containers with spores—mushrooms—onto the surface. If we’ve found one mushroom, it’s very likely that there will be a second and a third nearby. The same applies to finding clients in the sexual market: the social circle of someone who has already “bought” you will likely include other potential buyers. There’s no need to stray too far. If someone is attracted to you, there’s a good chance that you will also appeal to someone else who shares the interests and passions of the previous partner.

If you search for mushrooms where everyone else does, you might find that those well-known spots have already been picked clean before you arrive. The worst way to pursue a man or a woman is to follow the same approach as everyone else. By attracting potential partners in the same way as others, you won’t stand out and will end up in an “arms race” with your competitors. Women should consider what makes them different from the other dozen girls sitting in an upscale bar, sipping a glass of water with a glamorous air, bought with the leftover money after paying off their iPhone and Prada shoes, hoping someone will finally notice them and buy them a proper drink. Men should also think about what sets them apart from other “real men” who are trying to hit on the beauty at the club. Why should she pay attention to them? Look at the entire range of ways to attract the attention of women or men, read books on the subject. And if you find any method that is deemed reliable, tried-and-true, and effective, confidently cross it off your list. Remember, if you act “like everyone else,” you’ll get the same results as everyone else. But that’s not your goal; you need to be better than the rest. Maybe it’s worth starting by simply being different. Yes, it might even mean being a “different worse” instead of “different better.” But… if you don’t take a shot, you definitely won’t hit. Try, improvise, just don’t get lost among the others.

As mentioned above, hunting is the worst strategy in the search for a partner. Game animals flee from the hunter, while domestic animals do not run away from their owners. While most people try to identify the “haunt” of potential clients and catch them there, it might be worth considering creating another equally comfortable haunt for them—exclusively yours. A cow began living with humans because, by choosing one predator, it gained protection from all other threats. A classification of mushroom foragers was provided earlier, but it did not mention the very last, highest category—those who cultivate mushrooms. Think about that.

In essence

• To find something, you need to know exactly what you need. There’s no need to create an extensive list of features and qualities. Focus on the most important aspects.

• When looking for someone, think not about why you need them, but about why they need you.

• Remember that elephant hunters die of hunger. The success stories of others mean nothing.

• There’s no point in looking for mushrooms with a holey basket. The outfit you present should be impeccable.

• Don’t search where everyone else is looking. Search where there are no competitors.

• Where there is one, there is also a second.

• Create conditions in which people will naturally be drawn to you.

Progress, but backwards.

Normal heroes always take the long way around!

The film “Aibolit-66”

Every person, as previously mentioned, possesses an instinct for intraspecies aggression directed towards their peers, regardless of gender. Almost always, a normal and expected reaction to someone approaching them quickly, whether literally or figuratively, will be to defend themselves or even to counterattack. In most cases, you can’t just walk up to someone and say, “I love you, let’s sleep together.” Intraspecies aggression will kick in, which, once transformed in the mind, will find a rationalization. The “victim” may dislike the person’s hairstyle, character, speech, height, weight, or clothing—what matters is not what specifically caused the dislike, but rather that this aversion manifested in their consciousness. What matters is the reason why the reaction of aggressive repulsion was stronger than the reaction of sexual attraction. Why did the defense system activate?

This system of defense can be compared to the Maginot Line with its fortifications, bunkers, machine guns, and underground communication systems. There’s no point in charging in headfirst. Fighting is not a method suitable for love. On the contrary, one should think about how to bypass this “Maginot Line,” get behind enemy lines, and make it protect you instead of against you. Usually, guys or girls approach the “Maginot Line” fully armed. In a tank made of trendy clothes, with armor made of makeup or expensive accessories, and ammunition for shooting with their eyes or belts of jokes and anecdotes. Is this wise? Perhaps it would be better to approach on foot, without disturbing the sentries? To go unarmed and in civilian clothes, so as not to be shot on the spot as an enemy? And also to bring along a little food in a bag to treat the soldiers on duty? After all, they are not our enemies. So we should love them, not fight against them.

There’s an old joke about husbands discussing how to sneak into their wives’ bedrooms at four in the morning without being noticed. One of the suggestions was to strip down to nothing in the hallway and walk into the bedroom backward. If the wife wakes up, just pretend that you’ve just gotten up and are heading to the kitchen for a glass of water.

However, how can we actually find ourselves on the other side of the defense line? Solving such problems in business is straightforward if we plan from the end, that is, from the goal we are striving for. In simple children’s puzzles like “help the bunny find the carrot,” the path is easily found by tracing from the carrot with a pencil rather than from the bunny. If we want to get somewhere, we need to look for the path from there, not the path to there.

Let’s consider a simple task: you need to be in Ensk on April 13th. What do you do? Buy a ticket and fly? Not quite! Actually, you start by planning, and you plan “backwards.” Here’s your reasoning: the flight is at 6:50 AM on Tuesday, so you need to be at the airport by 4:50 AM. Consequently, you should get into a taxi by 4:00 AM. This means you need to a) wake up at 3:00 AM, b) pack your suitcase the night before, and c) order a taxi the night before. Since you’re flying, you’re limited by the size of your toiletries for toothpaste, deodorant, and cologne. So, on Monday morning, you need to check if you have everything in your “travel kit,” and if something is missing, you should buy it on your way home. And so on, or rather, “and so earlier.” In other words, you manage your time by allocating the necessary amount for each task that needs to be addressed, so that you end up in Ensk on April 13th. Note that if you go to a bakery instead of a supermarket (or pharmacy) on Monday evening because you were tempted by the smell of fresh pastries, you won’t be able to fly—assuming that toothpaste is critically important for you.

However, in the “battle for love,” the opposite happens! People, trying to attract the attention of their chosen representative of the opposite sex, only think about the “taste of pastries,” the immediate impression, rather than the question that should actually be asked: “Will you marry me?” What happened just a second before this question was asked? Why was the asker completely confident that the answer would be “yes”? “Closing deals” is one of the most challenging skills for salespeople because, in most cases, they also do not plan “backwards.” They are not just “afraid” or “shy” about closing; they do nothing to create an opportunity to close the deal.

The idea of “thinking backwards” can be illustrated with a typical dialogue about selling a car. Compare the dialogue of a “fighter who is battling” with a dialogue structured “backwards.”

Here is the dialogue of the first seller:

— Good afternoon! Thank you for visiting the Audi showroom, home to the best cars in the world!

— Thank you, Audi cars do look really good, but I prefer Mercedes.

“Could you tell me why you prefer Mercedes above all?”

—I like his 8-cylinder engine.

— But Audi also has an 8-cylinder engine, which even won the top prize in 2009 for the quality of its injection system!

— The injection system isn’t the most important thing.

— Why?

— (irritated) Because all the components are important as a whole!

Пожалуйста, предоставьте текст для перевода.

In such a dialogue, it’s impossible to understand how it can lead to closing a deal. Dozens of sales books teach sellers to ask the question “Why?” After all, it’s an “open question,” which means it’s inherently useful. The idea is that after asking it, the client will reveal what truly interests them and share what touches their emotional strings. However, by asking this “why,” the seller fails to see the end goal and doesn’t plan backward. It’s somewhat like reading a 10-page book titled “Everything About Chess” and learning about the advantages of castling, only to try to execute it even when it could lead to checkmate in a couple of moves.

The following dialogue is a conversation in which the “film” will be played “backwards”:

— Please, turn left at the end of the corridor!

— Where is your cash register?

— If you can pay for the car today, we will arrange its registration within a day, and you will be able to pick it up the day after tomorrow.

— How soon will I be able to pick up the car after payment?

— Almost 150 Nm at 3000 RPM. What other questions do you have?

— What can I say, this little red A3 is clearly perfect for my needs. She will really like it. It has a wonderful interior, a good warranty, and great features. It has a quiet and economical engine, which, as you mentioned, provides what kind of torque?

— Let’s go take a look. (after the tour and presentation) So, can you tell me now what you like about this car, so I can answer your questions or discuss other models?

— No, come on, she needs a small car, like that little red one over there!

— You’re right, this is Audi’s pride today. Can you imagine a car with such an engine for your wife?

— Yes, for example, the sensational V8 model with its unique award-winning injection system!

— You said “in general,” so for you, is there something in Audi that you would like to have in your Mercedes?

— Well, I thought the Audi was more feminine than the Mercedes, although overall I prefer Mercedes.

— But excuse me, why Audi?

— A car for my wife.

— I noticed you arrived in a Mercedes. Are you looking for something in the Audi showroom?

If you find it difficult to read “backwards,” you can certainly read this dialogue in the normal order, starting from the first, bottommost line.

Notice the difference. In the first case, the seller claimed that Audi is the best car in the world, which triggered instinctive resistance from the visitor. In the second case, however, he made the visitor feel the need to justify themselves, and the defensive mechanisms were now working for the seller instead of against him. This is the essence of the “reverse” method: allowing a person to fall in love on their own, rather than trying to make them fall in love with you.

The “backward” method can be applied in business everywhere. This includes sales, as mentioned earlier, and business planning, where goals are set and then the path to achieving them is considered by breaking them down into sub-goals from the end and managing time or personal effectiveness. However, for some reason, when it comes to personal relationships, this method is usually not even attempted, with people relying on instincts or a sense of “it’ll work out.”

Girls struggle with how to get that specific guy to ask them out on a first date, while guys worry about how to ensure that particular girl won’t say no to their invitation. But the answers are simple and obvious if you think about it “backwards.” If you consider it from the end, it becomes clear that the girl has already gone on a date with someone she somehow knows well or has heard about. He is not a random person in her life. Conversely, the guy decided to ask the girl out because she has somehow taken up a significant portion of his time dedicated to socializing. He simply has no one else to ask out.

So, let’s take another step back. These people had quite a few reasons to communicate; for example, they often had the opportunity to pay attention to each other. Or perhaps they asked each other for favors a few times and expressed gratitude for it. Here, “taking a step back” is also clear: if they “paid attention” to each other, maybe it all started with “likes” on social media and innocent conversations about a topic relevant to one of them? If they asked for favors, it means they were interested in each other’s lives and problems and offered help? Taking another step back, we see a simple phrase, for example: “Hi, can I ask you for a favor?” Or: “Hi, your status on Facebook is strange; did something happen?” If this isn’t “the very beginning,” and no one has switched to using first names, then we need to dig even deeper to find the situation where they did switch to first names. And how did that happen? Another step back.

There is a very simple card trick where the performer pulls out the card that the spectator has chosen from the deck. The secret of this trick lies in the “backward” approach. The magician simply knows which card is on top of the deck and leads the spectator to gradually select a group of cards that contains the desired card.

For example, if the top card of the deck is the Jack of Clubs, the magician will ask the spectator to think of and name any two suits. If one of the chosen suits is Clubs, the magician will then ask the spectator to choose one suit from the two. If Clubs is not in the chosen pair, the magician will ask, “What suits are left?” — and Clubs will already be among the named suits. The magician will again ask the spectator to choose one suit from the two. When one of the suits is chosen, if it is not Clubs, the magician will ask, “What suit is left?” thereby prompting the spectator to name Clubs, while making them believe they chose that suit themselves. Then the magician will ask, “Name five Club cards.” If the group includes the Jack, the magician will ask the spectator to select three cards from the five. If the Jack is not present, the magician will ask, “What cards are left?” And this continues until the very last card. The last card — which turns out to be the Jack of Clubs — is revealed by the magician, surprising the spectator who thought they had named that card themselves.

Why does this trick work? Because the magician sees the goal and leads to it by playing “backwards.” He constantly asks himself, “What was the previous choice of the spectator that left the jack of clubs?” and guides the unsuspecting spectator along the only possible path.

Alec Baldwin’s character Blake in the film Glengarry Glen Ross delivers a speech that seems aimed at motivating the salespeople, proclaiming “ABC – Always Be Closing.” The film, a beautiful and emotional portrayal of the tough lives of real estate agents, was not made for the sellers themselves to watch. Similarly, the movie Gravity, which suggests that spaceships have handles for opening hatches from the outside, was intended for an audience larger than just a crew of astronauts. Almost all Hollywood films featuring Russians or Russia are rife with translation or cultural blunders. Cyrillic inscriptions often make no sense at all—they’re not meant for a Russian audience. Likewise, Glengarry Glen Ross (titled “Americans” in our release) was clearly made by people who have little understanding of sales and employee motivation.

The worst thing you can do in terms of motivation is to use the threat of firing, as Blake did, by showering salespeople with insults and boasting about how great he is. The worst approach to sales is to constantly try to close the deal—meaning, to get the buyer’s agreement. Unfortunately, the slogan “ABC – Always Be Closing,” coined for this film, was picked up by managers and sales trainers and resurfaced as a quote in another sales-related movie, “Boiler Room.” But why is this slogan incorrect?

It can’t be said that he is unfaithful. He is faithful in certain cases. If we are talking about transactional sales, then ABC is just right. And if in the sexual market transactional sales are meant to satisfy lust, then aggressive behavior like “Always close the deal” can be found both among pickup artists and prostitutes. The persistence of a woman of easy virtue to close a transactional deal is vividly illustrated in the film “The Diamond Arm” with the line “Tsigel, tsigel, ay-lu-lu.”

The film also illustrates the reaction of a potential buyer who is more inclined towards a consultative or strategic deal: “Russo tourist – a moral face!” Thus, the buyer’s reaction depends on how they perceive the deal themselves, rather than just how the seller perceives it. For successful sales, it is crucial for the seller to understand what type of deal the buyer is looking for. For instance, if a girl is oriented towards a transactional deal like “getting someone into bed for the weekend,” but the guy starts off slowly by inviting her to a museum, the deal is unlikely to happen, even though the guy would also enjoy a good weekend; he simply misread the situation.

The general rule of sales is that the more complex a product seems to the buyer, the more they tend to lean towards consultative and strategic sales rather than transactional ones. A person who is not well-versed in cognacs will hesitate in front of the supermarket shelf, listen to the sommelier’s advice for a long time, sift through bottles, trying to guess the contents by the label, return to the shelf several times, and indecisively pick something based not on their own taste but on guesses. In contrast, someone who knows what they want will act more straightforwardly – they will approach and take what they know. If what they want isn’t available, they will quickly determine which labels to trust and leave just as quickly. For an experienced buyer, this will be a transactional deal.

The sexual market operates in much the same way. The less experienced a girl is, the longer she will take to sift through potential partners, and her behavior will resemble that of a “consultative” or “strategic” buyer, even though there are no real grounds for a strategic deal, and this approach is not shared by potential partners. Despite her strong desire for sex, she might feel like, “Oh, there’s no one to do it with.” Guys looking for their soulmate often just don’t know how to approach a girl who has likely already figured everything out. She doesn’t make the first move purely for tactical reasons, not because she’s shy. The mismatch in the expected type of deal is one of the main obstacles on the path to two hearts.

The film Glengarry Glen Ross tells the story of real estate salespeople. For the salespeople themselves, who close dozens of similar deals, it may just be a transaction, but for the buyers, it is clearly a strategic acquisition. In real estate sales, the seller’s insistence on closing a deal is often inappropriate. It can actually drive away a buyer who needs time and comfort to make a decision. In consultative or strategic sales, a deal is almost never made during the first meeting between the seller and the client. Strategic selling is all about building relationships, and even two meetings may not be enough. However, if we meet but don’t sell, then what’s the point of these meetings? The truth is, we do need to sell. And we need to sell what can be sold transactionally. We need to take small steps toward the buyer.

In strategic and consultative sales, there are four possible outcomes of a deal: closure, rejection, progress, and postponement. One of the main mistakes salespeople make is failing to distinguish between postponement and progress. They often leave a meeting satisfied with the client’s agreement to “talk again later” or “have a call after the holidays.” The issue isn’t that salespeople should relentlessly pursue concrete progress from the client—there are specific techniques for that—but rather that they shouldn’t view such a meeting conclusion as a positive sign. Salespeople are often asked how the meeting ended, and they enthusiastically respond, “Oh, we got acquainted, found common ground…” That’s great, but what comes next? Such a meeting was a waste of time.

To understand what kind of progress we need, it’s worth looking at the process of closing a strategic deal in reverse. For example:

• We have a full house, the right number of kids, and we’ve been together for 15 years.
• We didn’t get divorced in the early years of our life together because, once the initial infatuation faded, we valued each other as friends and close companions.
• We are in love, and our honeymoon has been going on for a year now.
• Wedding
• We see in each other the parents of our children and/or we trust each other enough to manage a household together for a long time, which is why we have decided to get married.
• We have a committed relationship where each of us has found our place in the other’s life, and we introduce ourselves as a couple to our friends.
• We have shared adventures and challenges. We know each other “from another side.” We trust each other.
• We have had sex several times. Our tastes and desires match.
• We had our first time.
• We had our first kiss.
• We took each other’s hands and didn’t let go.
• We went on a second date.
• We had our first date.
• One of us suggested spending some quality time together.
• Someone gave the other a trinket as a token of attention.

When we build a deal “backwards,” the sequence of steps or desired progress is clear as day, and there are no questions about “what to do next.” The goals of each meeting are also clear. And, of course, if partners have agreed to a second date, it’s obvious that they are not opposed to each other, and progress should be suggested; otherwise, it would simply put the second partner in an awkward position. The rules of good manners already dictate the necessity of progress. Guys often don’t realize that if a girl agrees to go on a second date with them, she is already expecting to be kissed. They also often don’t understand that they are obliged to propose a second date if they held hands during the first one, especially after he offered her his hand to help her avoid stumbling, and she didn’t pull her hand back. By the way, girls understand these nuances much better than guys, as they generally have a more developed emotional intelligence. But they too, if they like the guy, should understand what that “little” goal of the date is. After all, you can “just be friends” for years, but nothing will come of it. Similarly, it can be pointless or even damaging to propose marriage before a trusting relationship has formed. It’s like offering a buyer, who is waiting for a consultative sale or, from a biological perspective, is in a state of dopamine attraction, a strategic deal or, in biological terms, an oxytocin dependency. For oxytocin to start working, or in other words, for attraction to grow into attachment, it is essential to go through a stage of shared experiences, where people have the opportunity to truly get to know each other.

It is precisely because there is a lack of a strategic perspective on the course of a relationship that girls and guys who are looking for a “husband and father/mother of their children” cannot find such a partner, as they simply do not progress in their relationships to the stage where this question is even relevant. You cannot determine whether someone is the “father/mother of my children” without getting to know them. Yet, they do not even try to get to know each other, rejecting everyone outright on the first date simply because “he doesn’t look like the father of my children.” All that needs to be done is to take the next step and walk away if that next step doesn’t feel right. But you shouldn’t reject the next step just because you think it won’t feel right. Look at the list of steps—it’s approximate. Understand what is still missing. Recognize how far the journey is from “we kissed/had sex” to “I see him/her as the parent of my children.”

A simple practice that significantly boosts sales effectiveness is for the salesperson to write down the desired and backup outcomes of a meeting before it takes place. People are often eager to rationalize and imagine that everything went wonderfully, thus deceiving themselves with their built-in happiness mechanism. This is why it’s important to record the desired outcome ahead of the meeting, so that later, with a clear mind, one can assess whether it was achieved or not.

The planned result should be specific, measurable, achievable, time-bound, and aligned with the overall goal. In goal setting, there is even an acronym “S.M.A.R.T” to describe a well-defined goal: “Specific, Measurable, Attainable, Relevant, Time-bound.” [5]. It seems that the text you provided is incomplete. Please provide the full text you would like me to translate.

A good outcome of the first meeting cannot simply be an agreement to “have a call.” However, a positive result would be an agreement to meet again with a specific purpose later this week, along with a plan to have a call tomorrow to discuss it. If you strolled through a flower exhibition and discovered that you both enjoy the opera or a particular movie, then that’s your goal. Therefore, during the first date, the conversation should be structured in a way that makes it clear what you have in common and how you can spend time together next time. In other words, let’s think “backwards” to understand how we should wrap up the first date.

In essence

• Plan “from the end.” This is the only way to overcome automatic aggression. Plan the steps to progress.

From a marketing and sales perspective, it’s important to clearly understand: a) what the partner is willing to “buy” at the next meeting, and b) what you can and are ready to “sell” from that.

• It’s important to know what type of relationship the buyer is looking for. You won’t be able to “sell” sex if the partner is looking for marriage. Similarly, “strategic” courting is inappropriate if the partner just wants sex.

• Write down the result you plan to achieve and then compare it with the actual outcome.

• Always Be Closing, but take it slow. This is important not only for making real progress in the relationship, which is often impatiently awaited by the other partner, but also for picking up on subtle hints expressed as delays instead of progress, indicating that “there’s nothing to catch” and it’s time to part ways quietly, without being pushy or trying to “sell yourself” at all costs. It’s better to remain friends than to end up as unfulfilled partners. You’ll likely help each other out again in the future.

Paint the pipe.

A well-documented bug is a feature. [6].

Programmer’s saying

Once, my friend had a problem with organizing her kitchen. She had done a beautiful renovation, pouring her heart into it, but all her dreams of a beautiful and perfect homey atmosphere seemed to be shattered by the ugly and awkwardly protruding gas pipe in the kitchen. It was impossible to hide the gas pipes behind drywall or plaster, and that pipe really stood out in a kitchen that would have been simply perfect without it.

Then my friend did the opposite. Instead of trying to hide or disguise the pipe, she painted it a bright red – exactly the same color used in the hardware of the kitchen cabinets. And, oh miracle, the kitchen became perfect, and the pipe looked as if it had been made just for that kitchen.

The pipe doesn’t have to be painted red. It can be painted white with black markings and topped with a pot of greenery – it will resemble a birch tree trunk. You could also paint scales and a snake’s head on the pipe – it would look like a python hanging from the ceiling. Another option is to decorate the pipe with several other pipes bent in different directions, complete with valves and a brass shine – that would create a steampunk effect. You can do anything to make the pipe work for you instead of against you. The very idea of not hiding but highlighting the gas pipe is the essence of solving many problems.

When you try to sell yourself on the sexual market, you start comparing yourself to more attractive options and feeling down. You think, my nose isn’t right, or my eyes are dull, or my hair is too dark/light. You shouldn’t make a problem out of that. Instead, you should turn it into an advantage. In cinema, there are many actors and actresses who aren’t blessed with model-like beauty, but who are confident in themselves and, importantly, that’s what makes them extremely attractive. Jean-Paul Belmondo, Alisa Freindlich, Liza Minnelli, Steve Buscemi – none of them are “ideal beauties,” and that’s their greatest advantage. They are recognizable. They are charismatic. They have their own unique presence. Who would they be if they were just standard Hollywood beauties? They would just stand in line like clones at auditions.

Marketing guru Jack Trout wrote an entire book to convey a single simple idea to his readers, which he summed up in the title: “Differentiate or Die!” The worst thing a man or woman looking to sell themselves in the sexual market can do is follow the trends, styles, and tastes of the crowd. Yes, it’s important to fit in with your peers. Yes, it’s important not to be seen as a “loser.” But just look at the photos of girls from the 80s. They all look the same! The same makeup with winged eyeliner. The same hairstyles with perms, the same shoulder pads, the same tapered pants. What’s the difference between them? None at all. They are all swimming in a bloody ocean of competition, instead of creating their own blue ocean where they could dictate the rules of the game.

Often, girls get very anxious about the small size of their breasts. They are right; her clone with larger breasts would definitely look more attractive in a culture that favors bigger busts. However, a small bust is like that gas pipe in the kitchen—it’s versatile and can be used in ways that no busty girl could manage.

Girls with small breasts try to make them look bigger. They dream of breast augmentation. They buy bras with padding. They notice that most of the women around them who have successfully married and given birth have noticeably larger breasts. But this is the very essence of cargo cult. Married women and mothers have larger breasts because they have given birth, not the other way around; they were able to marry because they had larger breasts. Moreover, after breastfeeding, breasts often “deflate,” and it’s impossible to go without a bra – what you get are noticeable but unattractive “spaniel ears” instead of appealing breasts.

And once again, the cargo cult mentality and ritualization of the phenomenon kick in for the girls. “Everyone wears bras, especially the busty ones – so I have to too.” “Everyone around has bigger breasts,” even though it only seems that way, since most have padding in their bras or, for those who can afford it, silicone under their skin. [7]. But a bra is primarily a device to make life easier for those with larger breasts and to prevent their breasts from sagging unattractively. For those with small breasts, a bra is not necessary at all. It becomes just an extra item in the wardrobe and does not serve its original purpose. It has simply turned into a ritualistic element of clothing, worn just because “I’m already an adult, after all, I have breasts now.”

A girl with a small bust has a very important advantage over others: she looks like a girl, and younger than her actual age, rather than like a cow that has given birth. This works on the male subconscious – “young, virgin, just what I need.” She has breasts, not udders. And it’s time to “paint the pipe red” and show off that bust to those around her while still staying within the bounds of decency. Should she take off her bra so that her protruding nipples boldly poke through her clothing?

After all, a large bust is nothing more than a fashion trend. [8]. . Just like the “insertable shoulder pads” of the 80s. There was once a trend for small breasts, which made women look younger. Women would bandage their breasts and compress them so they wouldn’t stick out too much. There were times when legs or buttocks were valued more than breasts. Even 30 years ago, it was quite clear that the idea of “big breasts” was some kind of American trend. In Europe, it wasn’t given much attention, and having very large breasts was not considered a sign of beauty or femininity at all. Interestingly, even today, 52.3% [9]. Men indicated that in their sexual fantasies, they imagined having sex with a woman with very small breasts. [10]. Текст для перевода: ..

Nowhere does any set of rules about “dress code” prohibit going without a bra, especially when the breasts are small. On the contrary, it forbids deep necklines, especially when the breasts are large. But it is precisely when a girl removes her bra that she discovers that “blue ocean” where there is no competition and where she sets the rules of the game. Going braless is not tacky or vulgar. It is not a vulgar provocation like a deep neckline or a super mini skirt. It is not bare shoulders, especially with cheap transparent silicone bra straps. It is, in fact, nothing. But it is noticeable, and it attracts attention in the right way—leaving a “mystery” and allowing a man’s imagination to run wild. Going braless works somewhat like stockings. From the outside, you can’t tell if a girl is wearing stockings or tights. But she knows. And this changes her walk, her behavior, and her attitude towards those around her. It changes in a very positive way, especially when it comes to marketing in the sexual marketplace.

The book “Blue Ocean Strategy,” published in 2005, discusses how to gracefully escape competition by stopping investments in “fashionable” or “trendy” competitive advantages. The authors, W. Chan Kim and Renée Mauborgne, are representatives of a leading European business school. The book illustrates the rapid growth and high profitability of companies that can generate productive business ideas by creating previously non-existent demand in a new market (“blue ocean”), where competitors are virtually absent, rather than competing with many rivals in low-profit markets (“red ocean”). After conducting 15 years of research, the authors demonstrate through 150 successful strategies over a span of 120 years across 30 industries how the embodiment of the “blue ocean” idea—stepping away from competition and discovering new niches and markets—leads businesses to success.

In the book “Blue Ocean Strategy,” the example of Cirque du Soleil is often cited as the most successful circus show in the world today. When the circus industry was mired in competition, trying to cram more tigers and elephants, clowns, variety stars, and even performances in multiple arenas into the ticket price, Cirque du Soleil stopped the “race for size” and completely moved away from the arena format. They began presenting shows as theatrical performances with a cohesive storyline. In doing so, they effectively combined the best elements of theater and circus, allowing them to break free from competition and even the very notion of comparing Cirque du Soleil to other circuses.

Using a small bust as an advantage is a typical “blue ocean” strategy, where a market participant steps away from the “arms race” and offers the market radically different characteristics and properties of a product that consumers desire. After all, no one says that breasts must be large. They should be firm, not sagging, and make a woman look younger and more attractive. By removing size competition from the agenda, one can easily surpass all other competitors in other important characteristics and capture the “cream” of the market.

Girls who decide to take off their bras often think that people will stare at them, but in reality, it doesn’t attract any more attention than usual. You could even ask male friends to understand their calm attitude towards this. But this works on a “second” level. And it works in other ways too. On one hand, the courage and boldness required to remove a bra gives a woman that confidence which is noticeable to everyone around and catches the attention of men. It’s about accepting yourself as you are, freeing yourself from the almost always unfounded fears of not being beautiful or attractive. This is what helps in building a career, getting married, realizing ambitions, and breaking free from habits and rituals. It’s a form of aggression directed in the right way. So, be prepared that by taking off your bra, you might unsettle all your friends. After all, it can be quite uncomfortable to be around someone whose success is clearly greater than yours, not just in words or appearances. Importantly, this approach cannot be replicated by any girl with a larger breast size. Moreover, her bra, which she is forced to wear, will hide her breasts from men, making her just like everyone else.

A large bust is a strong and effective attractor. It doesn’t even depend on gender. Everyone—both men and women—pays attention to a large bust. Moreover, it is more visible from a distance than a small one. This has been ingrained in our brains since infancy—it represents a source of food, safety, and good mood. It’s a universal problem solver. It’s no coincidence that the “standard” image of a shop assistant includes a large bust protruding from an unbuttoned robe. However, a bust will never be the reason to marry or not marry a woman. Any woman who opts for foam instead of a bra won’t complain that a man left her because he was disappointed in her breast size. The majority of women who have already married and had children will recall worrying about their breast size. Yes, there are some men who are obsessed with sizes, but they are extremely rare. They are the exceptions. Consider whether you really want such a man. Perhaps it’s better to keep such people at a distance, especially if you have a large bust that is likely to “deflate” after the first childbirth to the standard “spaniel ears.”

A small chest without a bra is also a strong attractor. And it’s clearly no less powerful than the breasts heavily advertised in glossy magazines and almost never seen outside of Photoshop. At the same time, there is an important distinction: the absence of a bra under clothing acts as an unconscious attractor that the mind cannot resist. A woman who showcases her nipples under her clothes is actually activating the strongest manipulative mechanism she has. And this leads her to success.

In essence

• There’s no need to hide your flaws. Moles, freckles, unusual facial features, a small bust, hair color, and other seemingly problematic aspects of your appearance can be used to your advantage. Embrace them as your unique selling points.

• Features related to poor health will not serve as competitive advantages. Therefore, it’s worth spending money on the gym, dentist, orthodontist, dermatologist, nutritionist, hairdresser, and orthopedist.

Wearing a bra for a woman with a small bust is more of a ritual she rationalizes than a rational and conscious action.

• It’s better to compete in the “blue ocean” you’ve created than to fight with competitors in the “red ocean.”

Conveyor

— It’s time for us to get serious. I’m tired of relationships. uncertainties, I’m tired of waiting…

— Whoa whoa, I just liked a photo!

Chat dialogue

The “sales funnel” mentioned earlier in this book is a very characteristic approach in transactional and often consultative sales. In strategic sales, one can also talk about a “funnel,” but it essentially doesn’t exist there. Strategic sales, due to the high value of the seller and the large cost of deals, do not allow employees to spend time on “cold calls” or “client meetings.” In strategic sales, the seller typically goes directly to a client who is likely to be interested in the solution being offered. There is no place for “cold calls”—only referrals. There is no place for “initial meetings”—the timing of those first meetings is often unknown, whether they happened five years ago at a tennis match or on a plane where neighboring passengers chatted to pass the time. There is no place for “needs assessment”—companies are usually in a state of significant transition and are looking for solutions to their challenges.

Strategic sales are largely about “hunting elephants” — it’s business with large clients who are ready for significant changes. Among salespeople, there’s a saying: “elephant hunters die of hunger.” This happens because an inexperienced salesperson, seeing the mirage of million-dollar deals on the horizon, forgets everything else and becomes engrossed in the chase for the “elephant,” interpreting the results of their interactions as good signs and omens that “everything will come together soon.” Caught up in what seems to be a promising client, the salesperson neglects everything else, including other potential clients. They also forget about the company’s profits and are willing to offer the sweetest discounts just to close that coveted contract. When the moment of bitter disappointment arrives, they find there’s no one to negotiate with — the journey in strategic sales from acquaintance to deal is too long for a salesperson who has abandoned their work with other clients to quickly find an alternative outlet for their efforts.

A good salesperson, despite being genuinely passionate about their one favorite client, never forgets to maintain relationships with other people and companies — not to sell, but to keep those connections alive, ensuring they always have 2-3 new potential clients in reserve. Even if they miss out on some due to being busy closing a deal with their “favorite” client, the ongoing process of seeking new clients will always yield 2-3 new prospects to replace those that have become irrelevant.

A similar situation is observed in the labor market. If there are 10 good salespeople in the sales department and no more open positions, the worst thing a manager can do is to stop recruiting and cease the search for new salespeople. Here are some quite realistic premises: a) it is difficult to find a new good salesperson in the labor market, and it takes at least two months; b) the turnover rate among salespeople is about 5% per month—often less, but sometimes it exceeds 10%. As soon as a vacancy opens up in the company, it means that: a) sales drop by 10% solely due to the absence of a salesperson; b) sales decline even further because the remaining team has to manage not only their own clients but also those of the departed colleague; c) the urgent need for a salesperson prompts the manager to offer a higher salary to the newcomer, and then to everyone else; d) the manager, frantically busy with recruiting, stops paying adequate attention to other important processes, leading to an even greater decline in sales, diminishing discipline and loyalty, and an avalanche of turnover, pushing the company to the brink of bankruptcy. The manager, overwhelmed, cuts his wrists, accidentally knocks over a desk lamp, which falls into a wastebasket and starts a fire. In short, everyone is dead.

A good manager, in order to prevent their relatives from witnessing the sight of their own charred corpse, acts differently. They never stop recruiting. They always have 2-3 candidates “fresh from the week,” ready to start working if they get a call with an offer. If a real star happens to be among the candidates, the manager doesn’t hesitate to replace their worst salesperson with that star. By constantly conducting interviews, the manager also learns everything about their competitors and the market. As a result, this manager’s sales always keep growing. Such a manager is able to say “no” to their existing salespeople who demand unreasonable raises or try to blackmail their boss in some way. And this manager won’t be forced to raise a salesperson’s salary just to fill a vacancy as quickly as possible.

In the sexual market, there seems to be a tradition of focusing on just one potential partner, with the search for a new partner only beginning after a previous relationship has ended. A single woman looking for a man and a single man seeking a woman often present a pitiful sight: searching eyes, low self-esteem, looking for hints of affection from those around them, and repeating the same strategic mistake—focusing on a single candidate, even if that candidate is merely flirting innocently without any intention of pursuing a deeper relationship. People around them, noticing or assessing through their internal biases that such a lonely individual is not in demand in society—after all, there’s a reason they are single—automatically reject them as a potential partner, worsening the already unfortunate situation of the bachelor or single woman. Who wants children with a partner who lacks social success? Who wants a partner whose presence will lower their status and invite gossip? For a lonely person, the value of acquiring a partner increases, and they are willing to make concessions, just as a seller might offer discounts to a desirable “elephant,” or a manager might provide better working conditions to a new employee. If a couple does form where one partner has been searching for a long time, it is likely to be an unbalanced relationship, with the “seeker” becoming the exploited party, which is far from what this “seeker” was actually looking for.

Focusing on one chosen partner is a very sensible strategy in the close-knit community of a primitive tribe: partners who have known each other well since childhood should demonstrate loyalty to one another, and there aren’t many options to choose from, especially since the nearest “alternative” is likely already taken by a competitor. However, in a modern anonymous society, where people do not know each other, where premarital chastity is not upheld, and where sex with another person is not considered cheating if the couple is not married, focusing on one candidate becomes a losing strategy. In such conditions, it makes sense to adopt a conveyor belt strategy.

If you have a potential spouse with whom you are intimate and plan to start a family, it’s worth continuing to seek out new partners until that family is established. You don’t necessarily have to sleep with all of them—your conscience, or instinctive moral behavior, is not something to be easily set aside—but it’s important to always have 2-3 candidates in reserve who are open to moving into a closer relationship with you. Naturally, if a relationship isn’t developing, it will fade away, so you need to constantly be generating new candidates—flirting, socializing, giving and receiving gifts, and showing and accepting signs of affection.

The constant presence of new potential partners boosts your self-esteem, puts you in a position of freedom to say “no,” demonstrates to your partner that there is demand for you in society, and, consequently, highlights the value of your genes. Strategically, if you ever need to part ways with your current partner, you can do so in a way that ensures you won’t be single for even a day, allowing you to switch to a new candidate before the formal breakup occurs. It’s similar to job hunting—it’s best to find a new job while still employed, rather than quitting and then searching while being unemployed with desperate eyes.

In essence

The “sales funnel” isn’t quite the right tool for finding a marriage partner.

At the same time, it’s important not to focus solely on the current prospective client. Not all potential clients end up making deals.

• Build a “pipeline” — a steady flow of qualified candidates.

To build a “pipeline,” you need to be a socially active person, make new acquaintances, and not be shy about going on dates or just hanging out in cafes with new people. People should know about you.

• If you are involved in strategic sales, always think about the pipeline of potential clients that you need to build to ensure your success.

Personal brand

In our case, when you run for a long time, you inevitably… you end up in another place.

Well, here, you know, you have to run with… all legs, just to stay the same to get to another place We need to run twice as fast.

L. Carroll. “Through the Looking-Glass”

To create a part on a 3D printer, you need plastic and a design file. The latter is clearly more important, as plastic is a common feature of every part. Everything living on our planet is made up of the same set of amino acids. It is only the information contained in DNA that makes an elephant and an ant so different. The saying “you can’t live on words alone” is no longer relevant—information literally feeds us now.

In the modern world, the lion’s share of the harvest of bread is provided by information rather than the seeds and soil themselves. This includes knowledge gained by breeders and geneticists, the chemistry of fertilizers, research, and then the application of research results—purely informational goods. Money is made from know-how, not from production costs. Knowledge obtained by meteorologists, the informational content of complex harvesting machinery equipped with navigators and onboard computers, and logistics are also crucial. Without all of this, the harvest would be ten times smaller, and thus we feed 90% of the population primarily through information, with only 10% coming from “material” bread. The influence of information on society will only grow each year. Even now, a family of farmers can easily manage tens of thousands of hectares, hiring combine operators and purchasing elevator services, effectively realizing the idea of producing food through information. At the same time, bread itself is not information, and knowing the chemical composition of fertilizer won’t fill you up if you don’t have a field to apply it to. So, what is information from an economic perspective? It is a managing resource, just as capital was not long ago. Before capitalism, land itself was such a resource. Before land, it was physical strength, also in and of itself.

In the relationship between the sexes, it’s exactly the same. Physical intimacy, while fundamental to these relationships, is largely only possible if there is a place to engage in it. The social taboo on sex in society can be summed up as: “You can only have sex in designated places.” We may not consciously recognize this taboo, but it leads to either mockery, condemnation, or it draws attention as a “bold experiment” if a couple is having sex outside of their bedroom. The location for sexual activity can vary, but without money, it’s unlikely you’ll find one. This often leads to awkward situations where cash-strapped teenagers are having sex in their parents’ home. However, if we focus solely on the material aspects of sexual interaction, it can lead to what people refer to as “the drudgery of everyday life” or “routine.” Sooner or later, most married couples realize that a pack of 12 condoms lasts them a year. If a pack with one condom is for teenagers, and one with three is for lovers, then a pack of 12 is for families: January, February, March… And people start to think about changing something.

Just like in economics, the key resource in family relationships is information. In this context, it refers to culture, or rather the differences in culture that attracted the couple when they established their relationship. If people have nothing to talk about with each other, then, at the most fundamental level, they will not have a relationship. After living together for a while, people often just replicate each other’s cultural differences and cease to hold cultural value for one another. If they didn’t decide to have children earlier, they likely won’t have them now—there’s no need for a second partner to pass on culture to their children. The poorer the culture of the couple, the faster the process of mutual alignment and cultural replication occurs.

Once again, businesses in the 21st century, the age of information, services, copy-pasting, and products manufactured in factories that are neither involved in the development nor the implementation of the product, face the same problems. Anyone can do the same as others. Any competitive advantage a company has will be instantly copied as soon as competitors realize that selling a similar product is profitable. The issue of copying has always existed. However, it has become incredibly easy to replicate others lately. Any technical solution, any process, any approach is not only easily copied but also becomes known worldwide as soon as you use it for the first time to attract customers. The day after someone tells their friends about visiting a restaurant with service in complete darkness, the same idea will “visit” the minds of hundreds of entrepreneurs. At the very least, the monopoly will shrink to a single city or even a neighborhood, and at most, in response to this concept, a dozen alternative and equally appealing ideas will be proposed. If previously the journey of an idea to those willing to copy it took many years, now consumers receive alternatives within just six months. The institutions that limit copying rights (copyright) and intellectual property are not having their best days. Society is currently undergoing a paradigm shift. It is not without struggle, with monopolies fighting for their profits, but it is changing nonetheless. Patent protection for ideas costs a significant amount of money, making it accessible only to large corporations, and even then, it does not demonstrate particular effectiveness. Small and medium-sized businesses are completely unprotected from copying. Winning a lawsuit against one copier will not lead to victory but to notoriety. And tomorrow, the one who defended themselves will face an army of those who will adopt their idea. In practice, especially in countries with poorly developed intellectual property institutions, a small company cannot even protect itself from those who shamelessly use the same company name, even if it is trademarked.

This business problem is well described by the founder of marketing, Philip Kotler, in his book “Chaotics.” In this book, he outlines the strategy that companies adopt to survive and thrive in the age of copy-paste. In such conditions, businesses must always stay one step ahead of their competitors, ready to launch a new idea just as the old one loses its monopoly. This is very costly, and not every business is capable of doing this. Moreover, it is not an option for sellers or businesses focused solely on sales. They can only hope that their somewhat unique approach to customers won’t be copied too quickly. While businesses could once rely on some degree of stability, now, in the times Kotler calls “turbulent,” the only way to stay in place is to run as fast as you can.

Another opportunity to win in the copy-paste market: include yourself as part of your unique offering. You can copy anything, but not personality. Why did Samsung, even when making products that were better than Apple’s, struggle to compete with Steve Jobs until his death, at least in terms of consumer affinity and loyalty? It was easy to imagine an Apple fan, but completely impossible to envision a Samsung fan.

Before Steve Jobs returned to Apple, the company was rapidly losing its market position. In an effort to stay afloat and somehow manage the burden of costs for software and hardware development, it tried to do what others were doing—license the production of its computers and components. But that didn’t help, and the licenses were revoked. Then Apple began using off-the-shelf hardware instead of custom-made components for its computers and adopted a Unix-based operating system, making it much easier to write programs for both Mac and Unix/Linux simultaneously, and even to run Mac OS on a regular PC or install Windows and Linux on a Mac.

With the release of the first Mac OS X, the issue of non-copyability became irrelevant. Attempts to stand out through device design no longer justified the inflated prices of computers, which could achieve 100% functional compatibility for less money. This was a turning point for the company. Mac OS X, warmly welcomed by the company’s fans, was essentially a swan song for the world of Apple. Something had to be done, as the battle in the personal computer arena was lost. Yes, Mac OS and Apple computers still exist, but they are practically compatible with the rest of the PC world, and choosing a platform is no longer a “life choice,” but rather a matter of fashion. If you don’t like Mac OS, you can always install Windows. And vice versa. Therefore, the company decided to enter new markets while it was still not too late.

The first player was the iPod. An unremarkable gadget that allowed users to listen to digital music. The key point is that this idea could be copied. From the outside, it might have seemed like a desperate move. However, it marked the beginning of a new success. Apple’s turnaround from decline to rise is often attributed to Steve Jobs, who had just returned to the company at that time. But a closer look reveals that Jobs’ influence on technology or business was minimal. This is mentioned in his biography, and even the dry data on patents shows that all the inventions implemented by Apple only listed Jobs’ name as a co-author in some cases. Everyone understands what it means when a leader is listed as a co-author…

Why was Steve Jobs needed by Apple? It’s unclear whether it was intentional or accidental, but Apple used him as a key element of its uniqueness. Everything can be copied, except for a person. The mass propaganda techniques honed in the mid-20th century were employed to create the image of a guru, a genius, a prophet. This is something that cannot be replicated. All Apple needed was to create and maintain the image of a prophet. Who would take on that role? Naturally, a legendary figure. How to find one? Dig through the archives. There he is—the legendary founder of the company. His role was public presentations and maintaining the image. That’s it. As a result, people who bought an iPod or an Apple computer were buying the confidence that they would possess technological perfection handed down to them directly from the hands of a genius and a prophet. With all else being equal, the choice of consumers was predetermined. Therefore, it was no longer scary to start investing in innovations again: the iPhone, iPad, and MacBook Air came to life. Yes, ultrabooks with far better specifications than the MacBook Air emerged on the market. But who would pay attention to them when it comes to prestige or confidence in quality? After all, other devices don’t carry a piece of Jobs with them.

Apple during Steve Jobs’ era employed both strategies: First, they never settled on a single product. By the time everyone was making compact music players, they were already creating keyboard-less phones. When all manufacturers had released touchscreen phones, Apple introduced the world to the MacBook Air, effectively creating a new market niche for ultra-thin and highly autonomous computers. By the time the term “ultrabook” was being used by nearly all computer manufacturers, Steve Jobs took the stage in his turtleneck, holding the first iPad. Secondly, Apple utilized the concept of a personal brand, an idea that has long been exploited in one of the oldest copy-paste markets—the clothing industry.

Both of these strategies are equally applicable in the sexual market. If you want to remain interesting to the primary consumer of your product, you need to constantly grow and do this alongside your partner, while also maintaining and nurturing your own uniqueness as an individual, becoming a personal brand. Only if people’s culture continues to be mutually interesting will their lives avoid entering a “tedious” phase. Books, travel, good movies, theater, more travel, and books—these are the things that make people human. If you want change, start by changing yourself. This is especially important if your partner also maintains their uniqueness and is in high demand in the sexual market. The personal brand of Alla Borisovna Pugacheva is a good illustration of how uniqueness alone can keep someone in demand in the sexual market, regardless of age, less-than-ideal character, or manners. If you are the spouse of a personal brand, you need to build your own brand, just as Raisa Gorbacheva or Jacqueline Kennedy did, or continue to be interesting to your spouse in terms of culture, which they can never replicate. Otherwise, you will simply cease to be interesting to your partner.

Often, when women marry “brand-name” businessmen, they envision an idyllic scenario: “I’m in the kitchen with the kids while he earns big money.” However, there is a hunt for such husbands in the sexual market. If a woman marries a businessman seeking stability, paradoxically, she may not achieve it at all. She either lives a stable life until she is discarded—hopefully with a good severance—or she has to grow and become a friend and partner to her husband, understanding his business and knowing what drives him. And this issue isn’t limited to businessmen. Sexist norms dictate to women: Kinder, Küche, Kirche. [11]. make women completely defenseless against the whims of men precisely because they become “kitchen appliances” and lose the most important thing they have in the eyes of their husbands — their identity. While the institution of marriage, supported by the church, once guaranteed women a lifelong contract, it is now very easy for a man to part ways with a woman who no longer interests him. Those who marry in search of happiness, hoping to avoid going to work every day, often condemn themselves to a life as a single mother, who, lacking any qualifications, settles for low-paying jobs that she is now forced to take just to survive and provide for her children.

Men have the same problems. If everything he does in life boils down to monotonous work and sitting in a stained T-shirt with a beer in front of the TV, then such a man stops being interesting to a woman. She either finds a lover, leaves the family, or takes up the art of chainsaw carving.

In essence

In today’s world, information is the primary commodity. Information or the content of a product can be easily copied.

• A successful marketing strategy in the copy-paste market is to always stay ahead of the competition so that others are always copying you, but you never copy them.

• In the sexual market, under competitive conditions in the struggle for a partner’s genitals, the value of the genitals themselves diminishes to the extreme. The cultural superstructure begins to play a role.

• Culture is easily copied, and spouses lose interest in each other once there’s nothing left to take from one another to pass on to their children.

• A successful strategy in a culturally burdened sexual market is continuous personal growth and self-improvement. A happy marriage does not tolerate complacency.

The text for translation: [1].Compulsory motor third-party liability insurance policy

[2].Car insurance against damage resulting from road accidents, natural disasters, and unlawful actions by third parties.

[3].You can read more about consultative selling in N. Rackham’s book “SPIN Selling.”

[4].It is quite likely that societies that are tolerant of alcohol gained evolutionary advantages precisely because alcohol, despite its toxicity, allowed people to bond with each other more quickly. After all, the aggression inherent in all hierarchically organized social animals hinders individuals from getting closer to one another.

[5].Specific, measurable, achievable, relevant, time-bound.

[6].Programming slang. Bug – an error in the program. Feature – a useful property of the program.

[7].Men have a similar problem with subjective perception; they believe their penis is smaller than others’ simply because they view their own from above, while they see others’ in the sauna from a more flattering angle.

[8].Moreover, a consistently large breast size serves as a tool for masking a woman’s fertile state. In other animals, as well as in many primates (excluding humans), the size of the mammary glands can indicate whether a female is capable of conception. Enlarged breasts are a sign that the female is currently nursing a young one and cannot conceive again. Males of other species, including primates, rarely mate with nursing females, as enlarged breasts do not attract them. Humans are the only primates in which females have permanently enlarged breasts (and males find this appealing). But what was the original purpose of this trait—was it to attract males, or perhaps to deter them, optimizing a monogamous sexual strategy? C. Owen Lovejoy. Reexamining Human Origins in Light of Ardipithecus ramidus // Science. V. 326. P. 74, 74e1–74e8

[9].What Exactly Is an Unusual Sexual Fantasy? Christian C. Joyal, PhD,*† Amélie Cossette, BSc,* and Vanessa Lapierre, BSc. Department of Psychology, Université du Québec à Trois-Rivières, Trois-Rivières, Québec, Canada.

[10].For the sake of fairness, it should be noted that according to the same source, 68.6% of men have fantasized about having sex with a woman with an extraordinarily large bust.

[11].Children, kitchen, church, pronounced as “kinder, küche, kirche,” or the 3 K’s — a German expression that describes the fundamental views on the social role of women in the German conservative value system.

• Sexonomics
• Content
• I am a product.
• Biology
• Psychology
• Marketing
• Mathematics
• Philosophy
• The World of Exceptions
• Bonus chapters