The Millionaire Fastlane
leoexplor.es
leoexplor.es
. The style is very 'motivational speaker', written by a self-confessed 4-time MLM 'business owner' - lots of fluff and padding - and what is with the 'Laws' he keeps making up? And the long drawn out explanations with terrible analogies?
. Nice tone of misogyny throughout. Yay!
. Much of the content is obvious and covered in the most basic of entrepreneur guide material. In fact, this link is so useful because it sums up all the most useful parts of the book. Trust me, the words surrounding these are of no further value.
Read it, sure, even skim read it, but don't expect any answers if you're already up to speed on the basics of scalable business models and the need for hard work to get where you're aiming for.
For those of you curious about the book, just read the sample chapters given in his forum, or listen to the audio book sample. Make your own conclusions.
For one thing this is the book venture capitalists don't want you to read.
http://www.amazon.com/Start-Small-Stay-Developers-Launching-...
One of the things I like about it is that it is not a "get rich quick" book. Indeed, one of the quotes I highlighted is "strive to build a startup that generates $500 per month in profit". That really resonated with me, because it sounded like something that I could aim for, rather than "YOU TOO CAN MAKE BAZILLIONS!!!". Even if you want to make bazillions, you've got to pass $500 a month at some point!
It was a little bit too self-help-y in tone for my taste, but it didn't feel scammy like "4 hour work week" (and the book mentioned in this OP sounds), and has lots of basic, practical advice.
That sounds like 100% marketing schtick.
Not to mention the many times he quasi-advocates actually starting MLM structures. I can quote the book if I need to. I'm now wondering if you actually read it!
Well the author needed that before he went on to sell his company for XX million.
A lot of people make mistakes on the road to wealth, we can't all be as smart as you were at 17. That's why he wrote the book to help people skip some of those mistakes.
Has anyone seen that pending comments feature in use yet?
The median average annual earnings for an author in the UK is about £12,330 ($20,300). With the ease of self-publishing platforms like Kindle and the proliferation of promotions and sales at traditional booksellers (bookshops, supermarkets, etc) that figure is falling. If you want to be financially wealthy writing a book is a really bad way to go about it.
They sell seminars, keynote talks, services etc, it is a form of lead generation and an expert positioning tool.
There is a cap on how many hours anyone can work in a day/year. If you are charging hourly for your time, you are capped.
If you want to make it more Fastlane, you'd turn it into a sellable seminar video series that can be created infrequently and sold forever via memberships, DVDs, etc.
Note that I'm not for or against books or seminars. Not my area of expertise. I'm just stating that a lot of people in this thread are misunderstanding what MJ means by Fastlane.
The reality is you have to figure out what is going to sell. I have no interest in writing books, but if I did, and I wanted to make money. You can bet it's not going to be a technical book. I'll be going after a market that is large and hot, think books like Harry Porter or 50 shades of gray.
Make no mistake about it, the business doesn't start until the book is done, the business is not writing the book but selling the book. Most authors just write and then sit and hope it get's popular. You have to hustle and push and sell and sell, so it get's popular.
I watched MJ write this book, he mentioned he was going to write it on his forum, then he did. Did he make any money? Nope! Then he got into marketing/sales mode and pushed it, and it sold. Got lot's of review on amazon and sales took off, I don't know his numbers but I betcha it's much much larger than your average technical books.
I won't be surprised if he is well into the 5 digits. He also self published, so he's collecting pretty much most of the income. How did I reach 10k? 4 hour workweek has sold about 1,350,000 copies and has almost ~3k reviews, amazon MJ's book has a little bit 1/6th ~500+ reviews on amazon. They both have 4.5/5 stars.
The same is true for books. For example this book.
Personally I think building up modest wealth over your entire career might be a surer and more reasonable strategy than the "get rich or die trying" model the author proposes, since the latter involves a good amount of luck and seems to work only for 1 % of the population.
I live in a city that had some major flooding recently. I volunteered to help pump out water and clean basements. I did this in primarily two neighbourhoods. A very affluent neighbourhood with multimillion dollar homes. The other neighbourhood was middle class, 30-50 year old bungalows.
In the affluent neighbourhood, the neighbours all hated each other. It seemed like at some point, everyone had done something to piss off someone else. We set up a large pump on a driveway and were told by the neighbour that we had to move the pump since it was on their side of the driveway (which they were not using). The neighbour also moved the 4 inch pipe into their neighbours garden which basically acted as an excavator until we noticed it. It was actually upsetting to see in times of such crisis.
Other the other hand, and you likely can predict how this story will go, the middle class neighbourhood was full of community, helping hands and people willing to go out of their way to assist others. It actually came to a point where there was too much help. People were driving around with coffee and home made sandwiches which they couldn't give out because 3 other cars with the same had just driven by. People were thankful and would rush across the street to help you move a heavy refrigerator.
I realized over that week that if getting rich means hating your neighbours/being hated by your neighbours, having no one to reach out to, maybe I don't want to be rich. At least not financially rich.
Or at least not in that neighborhood. You have an anecdote... that's all. I'm sure there are others that match it, but being a dick to your neighbors and having neighbors that are dicks to you is not a necessary pre- or post-condition of financial wealth.
You can end up in that situation regardless of how much money you make. What you should probably take away from that experience is that you value community and wish to have positive interactions with your neighbors; perhaps financial wealth shouldn't be a priority for you, but I don't believe this situation could really inform you on that point.
So I think you are right, maybe it's better to be the richest in the middle class neighbourhood, then the poorest in the upper class neighbourhood.
First off, MJ recently discussed in his forum (which I no longer frequent, I like it here better) about how he had too much stuff, and was happy just hanging out in his GF's small apartment. So even very wealthy people can have these types of existential crises.
Now here's my untested thesis that I'd like to blog about:
In the US, there was a study that shows something like "happiness stops growing after 75k".
There are several reasons, but I feel that a large part of it is that once you have over 75k income, you start buying more things which end up causing you more problems. That Mercedes that always needs repair? That big suburban house that needs constant work? Wife wants to go on vacations, pressure to have kids, etc etc.
So now you're making 125k, but you're no happier than someone making 50k. Because:
* You're working harder for the 125k
* You have more crap cluttering your life, and it keeps breaking and finding ways to abuse your time.
* You're invited to more parties and social events, especially if you have kids.
YET, you're still not making so much money that you can afford to have someone handle the small stuff for you. So you're awash in crap and tiny things and the next thing you know, you're not doing what you truly enjoy. you're running errands.
So it becomes a Mo' Money Mo' Problems type situation.
* One solution is to live minimalistically. Something I personally prefer.
* Another solution is to get rich enough and have an assistant, cook, maid, etc do the small stuff for you, so you can enjoy your time again instead of running errands all day. This is also what I'm going after.
* A third solution is to move to a cheaper country.
Anyway, the point is, you don't need to be rich. But if you want the "stuff", you're going to get a hell of a lot of headaches that go along with it, unless you're seriously ballin enough to not give a crap about hiring people to do the nonsense work. Otherwise, you're just paying for more work for yourself.
That's my little offtopic thesis. I need to get back to work now.
I'm not saying don't invent or write books either. Just don't bet your life on it.
He's proposing that 1. If you don't think it is possible for you, it will never be. 2. Getting rich (financially) requires a LOT of hard work
On the subject of saving and investing wisely, he reminds the readers that investment works on compound interest. It is good to invest, but the more you put in, the more you get in return and it is a pretty slow process.
It is good to be smart with money and invest wisely, but without high risk, there would be little high reward.
It seems like a lot of people are dismissing the book without looking at the contents of it... (sort of brought it on himself with the title)
Also, the book is NOT saying getting money is the end-all. He emphasizes the important of health, family and freedom (which may or may not mean money for people)
For my sins, I read it. And it was painful. But he doesn't say what you remember he did. You took away the wrong message. He belittles the 'slowlane' approach of building up wealth through compound interest, encouraging you to build a business that scales first (then look at compound interest to consolidate). Much of what he says makes sense, if not completely obvious, it's just the endless fluff and ego I couldn't stand.
If the guy used normal language, had it edited well [1], didn't impose his ego everywhere through misogyny, dubious self-anecdotes, a continuous stream of prententious and laughable 'Laws' and didn't have a complete lack of self-awareness that he might have just got lucky in the dotcom boom, not overlooking his respectable work learning to code for his own golden-ticket website (a limo hire business), then I might have appreciated the book. But then, that's a different book.
I've nothing against the guy, I can see he's charismatic in a way and probably attracts the young and naive in droves, but I just don't think it's the healthiest of outlooks on life and encourages the hero-syndrome of the self-obsessed, rather than the respectable achievements of the generous and giving.
I've only ever written one other bad review, for a speed reading book [2], and it tried the same trick: all fluff and no substance. It probably says more about me that I keep checking these books out 'just in case' they have some useful insight. They rarely do.
--
[1] It's obviously more of a pleasure to read something that has been made with care, and not full of this kind of awkward phrasing: "I don't espouse my world vision on them" (first example I could find).
http://www.reddit.com/r/Entrepreneur/comments/21bghh/notes_f...
I'm not an entrepreneur, maybe a wanna be which is why I keep choosing start ups to work for. What I am curious about is why there is so much resistance to a balanced approach that doesn't require you to go all in without a plan for mitigating the risk your are taking on.
I totally get not playing it safe, all the big names in tech seem to have done this and made fu money. But I'm not that smart and even less connected. (I suspect most folks on here lack the connections that the big names in tech had before they made their $ - I could very well be mistaken about this and it's importance to starting up and striking a jackpot) so, I don't get not having a plan that looks at the long term consequences for all the potentail outcomes and plans accordingly.
I'm really interested in your feedback on this if you have the time.
All sorts of schemes are possible; its not a no-brainer that a balanced approach is the best for everyone. In fact I'm certain its not.
You try to tell them "It's ok, I can swim. If it rains I can go back on the beach for a while. There aren't any sharks here, at least not now. "
But they don't listen, they sail on.
See what I did there? The corporate employees can only see the risks, and greatly overestimate the danger. The swimmers (entrepreneurs) can't really convey how normal it is to them, to be swimming in those waters, to actually enjoy it.
This conversation happens a lot, where someone comfortable in their career can't conceive of jumping overboard and trying anything else. There's not a lot you can say, coming from such different points of view.
Is it not possible that you can spend all your money/time/effort chasing a lotto ticket and never have the winning numbers or even numbers that can support you when you get a curveball in life? Is it not possible that your opinions or your life circumstances could change enough that you need something more than a lotto ticket?
I would just hate for someone in their early 20's to not even consider all their alternatives. There is quite an intense sentiment online that corporate life is a dead end. I left the corporate world almost 10 years ago and am on my 5th start-up I guess, I'm not sure how to judge them any more but my 'career' is the high risk / higher reward whilst my wives is the aggressive mutual fund to use a poor analogy. When I had a health issue several years ago, without her insurance it would have been devastating and none of the start ups I have worked at since leaving BigCo have had health insurance that would have helped.
My point in carrying on in this discussion is that one should carefully consider all the possible outcomes and adjust plans accordingly. And selling the next generation on the defacto certainty that if they keep trying to start up they will be ok is a dis-service to them just because it works for you.
Anyway, I said what I said and now i'll go to the beach even though its not raining.
Also, the backup plans I envision involve more than one person and I realize that working with your partner isn't an option for everyone.
No it requires making something useful to other people that you can sell to them. You really should read the book.
Airbnb (hardwork and launching 4 times? nah just luck) Dropbox (solving a hard problem? nah just luck)
"That's why it's better to be frugal and invest wisely" This concept is explored in depth in the book.
It's called wealth in a wheelchair and is highly dependent on the stock market and property market (things you don't control performing favourably for you).
Lots of people had made social networks in the past. Why did Facebook succeed? Partly because it was well designed. But also because it was in the right place at the right time to build momentum early on. That's the lucky part.
Success takes hard work. But hard work isn't enough.
The parent post would probably propose that this differentiating factor is, at least partially, luck.
I know full well that there are many more examples, but I think the total of millionaire-making companies compared to the total is abysmal.
Does it mean that only those at Airbnb and Dropbox (and Whatsapp, Twitter, etc...) worked hard and well ?
I think luck still plays a role.
Working hard and solving problems is a necessary condition, not sufficient.
And yet, he suggests buying property to rent as a method of the Fastlane. Ask a small-time landlord if renting their property in a halfway efficient market is making them rich.
I don't have a problem with the first half of the article, discussing the philosophy of getting rich. It's when he seems to delve into practical advice (write a book! rent out a house!) that the author seems to lack a sense of financial matters.
Yes, you absolutely can say the same about the stock market. In fact, the historical compound annual growth rate of the market, adjusted for inflation, is almost 7%. That's over 100+ years. I don't have the data in front of me, but I'll bet the market returns crush real estate returns over that period.
You'll have to explain how these people managed to accumulate such wealth "quickly" through real estate, unless it involved flipping houses during one of the biggest housing bubbles in economic history, of which there were massive amounts of losers on the other end of these transactions (aka bagholders). This era produced a ton of "real estate gurus", but it will prove to be an anomalous period. But, taking the economic environment in context , it was a great, clever way to make a fortune; akin to telling someone to sell Tulips in 1640. I just think the idea that "buy real estate, get rich" is naive. The real trick is figuring out the next real estate, or Tulip, early in the cycle.
TINSTAAFL. There is nothing magical about expected real estate returns, and they are in line with any other investment vehicle when adjusted for risk.
It's everything I wish I had read at age 20. Except it didn't come out until I was about 28 or 29. At that point, I'd just spent the last half dozen years learning all of those lessons myself.
Behind the marketing fluff and silly title (which has been quite successful for him), MJ absolutely nails it. People either "get it" or they don't.
For some of you, it might seem like common sense:
* Separate your time from your income stream. *
Build a flexible, scalable business that you control that has a hard path to entry, yet can scale beyond its own man-hours.
Don't be too put off by the title. There's a ton of people, myself included, who would benefit from reading it.
To be fair to the author, he is not saying that just by reading the book or following simple rules everybody can be a millionaire.
Hard work and a sound strategy are still required, and not every second person has the discipline or ability follow up.
There is about an article a day saying something similar on HN, so I think I will follow his advice and not spend my precious time by reading the book.
People on HN will probably find it redundant and repetitive, but for people on the street, living paycheck-to-paycheck, on food-stamps, etc., this book can really open someone's eyes.
MJ's forum, The Fastlane Forum, is an incredible helpful resource for anyone. If you don't read the book, at least check out the forum. It will be well worth your time.
I'd prefer if bullet points were used sparingly though, you could just make use of headings and paragraphs. A very long list of points looks unstructured and is more difficult to read.
You can still be prudent and take risks. And let's be honest, saving up millions for my future cancer treatments isn't how I envision using my hard earned dollars. I see the author's point there...
I think this is an unnecessarily deterministic view of happiness. It seems to imply that every person has a set of randomly assigned, unchanging things that make them happy. If you happened to get assigned happiness from frugality, then lucky you! But if not, then I guess you'll have to find a way to get really rich to buy all the thing that make you happy, too bad.
In fact, if you aren't happy living a frugal/basic lifestyle, you probably won't be happy with an extravagant, wealthy lifestyle either. Happiness comes from within.
Twitter bio: "Partner @SusaVentures. Before: 2nd non-founding engineer @LinkedIn → @Google → early engineer @Factual. I love travel, good food, reading, and helping others. Palo Alto, CA · codingvc.com"
Archive.org link: https://web.archive.org/web/20130623133054/http://leoexplor....
I see it as a set of criteria to analyze any project by to see if it can potentially scale. If you focus your time on business that can scale, you improve your chance of making big bucks.
http://www.thefastlaneforum.com/community/
He gives away sample chapters of the book, or if you like listening, the first chapter is also in audio format.