Post: #1

Wall Street Playboys has an interesting post on personal finance and how it relates to dating, the premise being that ultimately you need to make a certain amount of money to be able to spend a certain amount of money to consistently date more attractive women.

Here's some commentary from the conclusion of the post:

Quote:If you can spend 1.5x the median wage in your city (not save but spend on experiences) then you will have no problems dating in the 7 range. If you can get into the 5x median range and are in shape with solid social skills, you’re going to be sending girls into voice-mail consistently.

– For a 7: ~1.0-1.5x median wage ; For an 8: ~3-4.5x median wage; For a 9: 5.0x+ median wage

– If you cannot find a way to date attractive girls while spending 3x+ the median wage in your city, the problem is personal. You should be able to obtain dates easily by having better ideas, better venues (concerts, major events, private parties, charity events) and better logistics

Post: #2

Game trumps money, period. Sure money attracts a certain type of women and is a valid reproduction strategy, but ultimately, to have access to the best quality women you need game.

Post: #3

Money enables game the same way it enables style. You can dress very well without spending a lot of money - but it takes a lot of time and effort. On the other hand if you have lots of cash you can buy anything you want but if your aesthetic sucks you'll still look like shit. Money makes certain aspects of game easier but it doesn't give you game.

Post: #4

I think some of us are missing the point of how money buys better access that WSP is making. More money gets you access to better venues with more social proof, whereas just day gaming someone is not going to come with the additional benefit of that social proof or even access. It quite simply would take more work without money.

Guys can game all they want but if their selection is 90% 6s....

Post: #5

(04-20-2015 04:15 AM)jariel Wrote:  Wall Street Playboys has an interesting post on personal finance and how it relates to dating, the premise being that ultimately you need to make a certain amount of money to be able to spend a certain amount of money to consistently date more attractive women.

Here's some commentary from the conclusion of the post:

Quote:If you can spend 1.5x the median wage in your city (not save but spend on experiences) then you will have no problems dating in the 7 range. If you can get into the 5x median range and are in shape with solid social skills, you’re going to be sending girls into voice-mail consistently.

– For a 7: ~1.0-1.5x median wage ; For an 8: ~3-4.5x median wage; For a 9: 5.0x+ median wage

– If you cannot find a way to date attractive girls while spending 3x+ the median wage in your city, the problem is personal. You should be able to obtain dates easily by having better ideas, better venues (concerts, major events, private parties, charity events) and better logistics

Read the whole post.
There is something to what they claim, but most of it is bunk.

The biggest thing that sticks out to me is age factor. As many here will attest, it is somewhat easier to snag 7-10 girls that are younger. (17-20) Even easier with the appearance of money. Especially inter-racially. The older the woman, the more that money matters.

They also talk about dating. Not getting bangs. Dating, which usually implies keeping them to some degree. Whether you are keeping them in your stable or team of girls, a main girlfriend, STR/LTR, potential wife candidates, etc. All of those are much different than getting an off the record bang. Plenty dudes with solid game bang hot chicks they cannot keep for a litany of reasons. Lack of social circle or social/family lineage, wrong skin color or ethnicity, wrong educational background, wrong financial standing, not ideal height or looks, etc. Just because you can smash, does not mean you can keep. Lots of black guys have this problem with white girls, which leads to another point.

Black guys in America making 100K+ basically have much of the same dating limitations a tall and handsome black guy making 50K or less has. Making 150K+ is no different than 100K. This is SMV at work. Within dating black women, the richer brother can do much better and pull really hot black women if they can see your income on display somehow. The more educated they are, the better it works. Ghetto ones tend to associate wealth with bourgeois people and usually fuck up the opportunity somehow. Problem is a sista making 70K+ will usually shit test the hell out of you and may possibly piss you off before you date her enough to your own satisfaction (enough bangs, you wanted a LTR be she is too annoying, etc.) Trying to avoid displaying your value is a double edge sword and many of any ethnicity will drop you into an ordinary nigga bucket very quickly. Wearing a 20K Breitling watch while wearing sweatpants and a tshirt, may intrigue a certain white girl or a sharp black woman for all the wrong reasons too. The black woman will be looking to lock you down hardcore if she is smart enough to know better.

Being black with money offers no real shortcuts. Game is a must. Buying bottles at a club makes you no different than the wannabe rappers that are selling dope, wearing ice, and fronting like they really have legit money. Driving around flossing with a new Benz, BMW, and fast sports cars, might get you robbed or unwanted attention. Women that you really want that see your car will not give you much attention unless you can somehow get parked and catch them off guard inside a building or something similar, before they forget your face. This is harder to pull off than talking about it.

Being known for having alot of money inside a large black social circle is a big detriment. You will be getting stuck with the liquor tabs and getting friendzone by bitches looking for free shit when you all go out, before you can even make decent approaches. They may even attribute you as a dork or nerd behind your back, if you make your money off IT or Finance. A sales dude with mad bank usually has enough mouthpiece to get away with alot of shit, and usually tends to be taller like most sales people. They are also used to being turned down too which is strong game fundamentals. Dressing like a rapper or wearing flashy icy watches, earrings, etc. can get you 7+ gals with asses and probably the ghetto personality to match, but are we talking about dating or smashing? A more subtle low key good gal with education, may dismiss you quickly for that thinking you are a thug wannabe or a dope boy.

For women outside black women, the proper way to leverage your money is to match your bankroll with educational pedigree, excellent presence, speak multiple languages, and work the hell out of social circle game (work/professional and collegiate). Either that or prey on endless supplies of 5-6 yuppie-liberal/emo goth women in places like SF, Seattle, Portland, Austin, etc. For a bunch of reasons hardcore feminists like successful black men. I dated a few before I became redpill without really trying, and one had chased me down. Lot of work eh? Even when you catch some nice birds, they will bust your balls enough to make you dump them after a while.

White dudes with money have more options I think, but I think it also depends upon where they live and how they display that. Country dudes with alot of land and cattle/livestock, driving around in a 60K+ 4X4 truck are a dead giveaway. They are not fooling anyone except ignorant city folk. Guys with large fishing boats are not fooling anyone either just because they tow it with a F-150 instead of a Range Rover. They cannot downplay what they have easily either. Former military guys, get chased because women know they have no debts, college or otherwise, and tend to have plenty cash in a Credit Union account somewhere. Not having any direct combat experience is a plus because they know you won't have PTSD, although some will like the tough guy that pulled some tours in Fallujah that runs his own HVAC or mechanic business.

I am starting to think that while black rappers talk alot about gold-diggers, I think white guys with money have it much worse than any black guy or rapper. Some of these women are so well trained by their mothers to go to college ride the carousel hard, drink, and party hard, then lock down a beta that has money. They can spot a high earner from a mile away. They are like secret agents going super deep undercover. They talk innocent as fuck and put on excellent dating masks, black, Asian, or Latino women cannot reproduce. They cheat before and even after a wedding. Divorcing after a few kids (to nail down the lock) and will initiate the divorce to the husband's surprise, talking about they are not happy anymore. Your average white guy in the Manosphere is super afraid and averse to any marriage. While you average minority is not scared, but just mostly picky or cautious.

These divorce raping white women have many white guys on edge and many go well out of their way to downplay their wealth or give women the idea they are a gullible beta that will pay for them, knowing damn well they are just pumping and dumping this chick. Don't believe me? Start keeping score on comments in RVF and other popular Manosphere sites on anti-marriage comments.

Anyway, the Wallstreet playboys, obviously regard money differently than men with more complete game. We would stack the money they make to be location independent for the rest of our lives. That and date on the cheap, running slick kinds of baller game because we want to minimize cost and maximize returns. RVFers are min-max assholes because we know better. These guys are mostly lazy and just want shortcuts. As long as they are not wife hunting like this, it really doesn't matter in the end, they still get the same results we get more or less.

Post: #6

It's all relative. When you're young, game is a supplement to lack of funds. When you get older, money supplements game. Let's put it in context:

18 y.o. guy- No money. Bad logistics, takes public trans, mows his own yard, cook meals at home, limited on movement. This is perfectly fine, as he has more time than money, so use that to hone game skills and get creative. We've all been there.

30 y.o. guy- 100k salary. Good logistics, pays someone to mow yard, has nice ride, eats out more often, unlimited movement. Doesn't see the point of 15 hrs of daygame when he can achieve the same goal with $200 and one night in the bar. There are far more important pursuits of happiness than getting laid, and as the older you get, you'll want to let your money do the work of getting laid.

It seems almost taboo on the forum to use money instead of game. But my definition of game is using any and every means you have in your arsenal. Don't get mad over guys with bankrolls. Step up your career and join the club. I used to get frustrated in SoCal when dudes would roll up in a new $50k car. Chicks would gravitate towards them. Instead of getting bitter I stepped it up and bought a Harley. Not to get laid, but the residual pussy that came from it was phenomenal. It basically did most of the work, so instead of spending all night approaching, I could sit, relax, enjoy a beer, and converse with my mates. Those are the memories I cherish, not pulling a random ditzy bar ho that I could never remember her name.

Post: #7

Lol Good luck trying to game 8-9s with just game.

Post: #8

Money is a game multiplier, just like good look, no doubt about it. Wont do shit for you if you have no game and might even attract some shady golddigging bitches who will ruin your life. But if you have a modicum of game it makes life a hell lot easier, so why not?

Plus I think we all appreciate the finer things in life. If I'm making 100k and a girl is being nice and interested I dont mind taking her to a steak house. Its all about the attitude though. She has to earn it.

I think RVF doesnt like flashing money is because it is very easy to give girls the wrong idea and give off the provider vibe that attracts the wrong type of girl, or bring out the bad side from the right girl. It needs to be used with precision and wit, something that a shit ton of rich guys dont have.

I had this blonde French girl told me about how a guy she doesnt even know took her to a 150 euros dinner to "get to know her" where she ate her stuff and was on her phone the entire time, and never saw him again. That is a very bad use of money no matter how you cut it. That $ however if used to go to an upper lounge and isolate a high quality girl who gives you good solid IOI however would be a good idea.

Most people I know who are filthy rich never spend $ unnecessarily, but when it comes the time to drop big bucks they go all royal.

Post: #9

There's a line right at the beginning of this post that I think is extremely important but might be overlooked by those reading it quickly: "Four ways to attract girls: 1) looks, 2) social skills – “game”, 3) relative status and 4) money. That breaks it down quite well. Instead of arguing about which one is “more important” we are going to focus on money in this post. You should always work towards maximizing all of your four categories. However. We assume you are *at least* at the median in the other three categories."

For those of us who are lucky enough to have found this forum, as well as other game resources, it is given that we understand at least the fundamentals of game, as well as some ways to improve looks and relative status. Despite the increasing breadth of material on the subject, most men have absolutely terrible game with girls. If you don't believe that, just take a look at the Tinder profile of a girl in your rotation (or a friend of hers). Recently a rotation girl's friend showed me her Tinder account, which had over 900 matches and a plethora of terrible messages from guys - this girl was a 4 and 50 pounds overweight. It's amazing to see the level of thirst that even completely average or below average girls receive on Tinder. I don't even want to see what the profile of a 7+ looks like.

WSP is saying that if you make the assumption that you're at least decent looking, have at least average game, and have some relative status, you can improve the quality (or amount) of pussy that you're getting by accumulating and spending more money. And for the top quality girls (9s+), at least a decent bankroll is virtually a necessity. All of that is neither controversial, nor groundbreaking. The issue is that most men don't have the other 3 aspects at a median level, and it takes some time in order to improve that. Money alone won't cut it, and even WSP readily admits that at the end of the article. But, at a certain level, the marginal returns to game start to decrease, and one needs to work on the other aspects as well (such as money). The real question is what exactly that point is.

Post: #10

Two words, Distant Light.

WIA

Post: #11

A Playboy pays 1.5x the median wage of his city for a 7? Female SMV inflation is worse than I thought.

Why not go to Amsterdam and pay 60€ for a 10?

Post: #12

(04-20-2015 12:43 PM)N°6 Wrote:  A Playboy pays 1.5x the median wage of his city for a 7? Female SMV inflation is worse than I thought.

Why not go to Amsterdam and pay 60€ for a 10?

Cause she's a hooker?

Post: #13

(04-20-2015 12:46 PM)el mechanico Wrote:  

(04-20-2015 12:43 PM)N°6 Wrote:  A Playboy pays 1.5x the median wage of his city for a 7? Female SMV inflation is worse than I thought.

Why not go to Amsterdam and pay 60€ for a 10?

Cause she's a hooker?

A more honest one that those who respond to 1.5x median salary.

One is a pay as you go account while the other is a fixed term contract with a costly break clause.

Post: #14

The lack of basic understanding here is astounding.

Let me break it down. To say that you need money "to get 8's and 9's" is profoundly ignorant. How many low-life, biker type thugs have you seen riding around with 8's or higher on the back seat of their Harley? Personally I've seen quite a few.


Just like men, women prioritize different things. Gold Diggers(Ho's) are going to prioritize having money. If you don't have enough cash or social status you aren't even going to get your foot in the door....they're also extremely good at finding what they want. They can quickly estimate how expensive your clothes are, how much your watch costs, and they know where the exclusive clubs that rich men hang out at are. If you have money this type is extremely easy to get in bed, which is what WSP is talking about.


Good Girls are kind of in between. They're the type that wants a marriage, relationship, and the kids. What they want is a man that they trust to lead the family and who makes them feel confident about his vision and direction. For them either money or good earning potential is an important factor because that type of girl will, at the very least, want to feel comfortable in her belief that you can provide for them. Others will set a higher bar and want a guy who can give them a nice house in the suburbs and put the kids through private school. In either case having money isn't going to make up for being an unfeminized, beta schlub: they evaluate men as potential fathers and men with no game or no alpha make terrible dads.


Freaky girls probably care the least. While the 50 shades fantasy of being used by a rich guy is appealing, it's only a contributing factor. Their main motivation is thrills(although they're not above using sex to get perks). Since that is their priority they'll choose to be fucked in the ass by an entire motorcycle club at once any day over sleeping with a well off, boring, beta with no edge.

Dalaran is on point Money is no substitute for actual masculinity at game. It'll get you a gold digger but it won't get you to that place where a girl is crazy devoted to you and will do anything just to make you happy. If you want prove of that just visit a shopping mall in Vegas: You'll see tons of obvious betas(guys who did well in tech) being almost dragged from one expensive store to another by their attractive girlfriends/wives....who are very obviously NOT in love with them.

Post: #15

The way this is written it comes across as mental masturbation, not serious game advice. Contrast and compare:

1. Money allows you to have more style with less effort, which indirectly translates into hotter girls? Sure.

2.

Quote:– For a 7: ~1.0-1.5x median wage ; For an 8: ~3-4.5x median wage; For a 9: 5.0x+ median wage

Post: #16

Those making marriage comments don't understand the fundamental rule, West coast I'd all against government recognized marriage. In addition he places more emphasis on making money over gaming girls... As time is limited so making the most of your time is what matters.

Post: #17

"Team No Appetizers" should be all over this.

If WSB's premise is true, then the only reasonable conclusion that can be drawn from Team No Apps, is that its members are dating at-best average females, with the data likely skewed more towards below-average.

What say you?

Post: #18

Yeah, this article is bullshit and just perpetuates limiting beliefs. The only part I would agree with, as that you get older you definitely need to have a decent lifestyle. Let's face it, its near impossible for a 50-60 year old guy to be banging models without some serious cash and lifestyle going on.

Money is useful in the basics(nice centrally located crib, the peace of mind of financial security, and just being able to live a decent lifestyle). No shit, a girl would rather have a fuck buddy with his own clean crib, as opposed to fucking someone who lives in a seedy part of town with roommates. Heck, it's the same the other way around, I'd rather date a girl who's got her shit together than a girl who's so broke that she lives in a flophouse.

And yeah, money is also useful when you have a ton of it and are able to create an awesome lifestyle.

But there's a huge fucking zone between having your basics handled and being a big baller throwing mansion parties with all the coolest people in town.

By trying to use money to girls you're setting yourself up to be used by gold diggers. The guys who fuck the hottest girls aren't the investment bankers in a suit who gets bottle service the 1 night of the week he's not overworked, but rather the nightlife or entertainment industry guys who are constantly around hot women.

Not to mention that this whole post just reeks of encouraging simp behavior. Mental masturbation like this doesn't help your cause. How many young guys think that making money is going to make their sex lives better?

Another important aspect to remember is that the most entitled girls are the 28-32 year olds looking to get married. Those are the girls who are looking for the stable provider. The hot as fuck 18-22 year olds? They don't give a fuck, and will be very happy you have a nice clean crib and can cook them some good food.

Money is the foundation for you to be satisfied with your life, as without it you constantly have a low level financial anxiety. The moment you start to try impress girls with cash, is the moment you turn into another simp that shes going to roll her eyes at.

Remember that girls whose entire lifestyle revolves around extracting resources from men(like strippers), still fuck broke ass dudes who make their pussy wet. Very often they're spending their own money on these dudes.

Post: #19

Regarding girls, money is a supplement to game; not the other way around.

Regarding lifestyle, girls are a supplement to money.

I think the disparity here is that WSP is stating the most important thing to be proficient with girls is money. Maybe for lifestyle (behind health that is), but not for girls. Though of course the two, game and money, will complement each other, and offer you opportunities you couldn't otherwise get with just one alone.

But, to argue money is more important than game, you'd have to ask what measure would this be based on. Getting dates? Yes. Being dating material for women? Yes. But overall sexual and emotional engagement that all of us want to our own subjective measures, you'd have to ask this guy:



^^How did money (and status!) over game work out for him in the long run?

Contrast him to the following, who had neither money, nor status, but had game:



(I am talking about the movie Casino for those unfamiliar).

In the end, it's a waste to argue whether you should have one or the other. Of course you should have both.

But to argue that money is more important than game for girls (remember, girls and not lifestyle) I think is an erroneous notion.

Besides, the prime girls between ages of 18-23 couldn't care much about money, as has already been mentioned. Unless you exclusively go for 9's, you're not going to be limited by just having game on its own.

In contrast, give a guy a bunch of money and 0 game and see where that gets him; besides an eventual gold digging and unfaithful wife.

**
For the record, I actually really like WSP. Especially because WSP advocates lifestyle>women at all times.

But money isn't everything.

Post: #20

(04-20-2015 01:11 PM)Handsome Creepy Eel Wrote:  The way this is written it comes across as mental masturbation, not serious game advice. Contrast and compare:

1. Money allows you to have more style with less effort, which indirectly translates into hotter girls? Sure.

2.

Quote:– For a 7: ~1.0-1.5x median wage ; For an 8: ~3-4.5x median wage; For a 9: 5.0x+ median wage

We men always seem to want to make up rules and formulas but it just doesn't work that way. Articles like this make me wonder if these people even go out.

Post: #21

(04-20-2015 01:39 PM)jariel Wrote:  "Team No Appetizers" should be all over this.

If WSB's premise is true, then the only reasonable conclusion that can be drawn from Team No Apps, is that its members are dating at-best average females, with the data likely skewed more towards below-average.

What say you?

Oh snap. Shots fired! Will Tuth and company dare to defend their position?

Post: #22

(04-20-2015 02:45 PM)TravelerKai Wrote:  

(04-20-2015 01:39 PM)jariel Wrote:  "Team No Appetizers" should be all over this.

If WSB's premise is true, then the only reasonable conclusion that can be drawn from Team No Apps, is that its members are dating at-best average females, with the data likely skewed more towards below-average.

What say you?

Oh snap. Shots fired! Will Tuth and company dare to defend their position?

Post: #23

(04-20-2015 02:45 PM)TravelerKai Wrote:  Oh snap. Shots fired! Will Tuth and company dare to defend their position?

Keep in mind, this is not my assertion.

Their assertion is to get a date with a hot chick, you need to be coming to the table with shit like concert tickets with backstage passes to Drake at The Garden.

If your date is hot, you're willing to spend more money; the contrapositive to that would be, if you're not willing to spend to money, then your date isn't hot -- Team No Apps.

This is an interesting debate, I'll probably reserve my full thoughts for one of my sessions as it ties into something I want to talk about.

Until then...

Post: #24

(04-20-2015 01:39 PM)jariel Wrote:  "Team No Appetizers" should be all over this.

If WSB's premise is true, then the only reasonable conclusion that can be drawn from Team No Apps, is that its members are dating at-best average females, with the data likely skewed more towards below-average.

What say you?

Screw apps, I drop a dime on a nice seafood dinner, we fly to Cabo waking up to the roll of the Pacific Ocean.

...but I exclusively date 10's. And I don't mean old ass girls like Katherine Webb 10's...

I mean 19 year old 10's.

Team no apps

Post: #25

This thread is getting interesting