You know I attended one of these things 20 years ago. It had a positive influence on me. Not because I bought their stories, however many did, because I started reading and listening to smarter people. Not these folks.
I did the Dale Carnegie class. I really enjoyed and got a lot of benefits from it. A gal I w*rked with took the same class and referred to it as "walking naked through hell".They're fine for a "power of positive thinking" guru.
Though Napoleon Hill or Dale Carnegie will give you the same approach for a lot less money.
Besides, from what I understand ER.org is completely free and you'll learn all you need to.
Yes, it is definitely a wealth seminar - for whoever gets the $75 - $1,500 fees.
I have heard Gary V on a podcast and he's entertaining.
Don't know much about any of these people.
You never know maybe one would gain a nugget of info if one goes to the seminar!?
It is possible some people benefit from them (besides just the speakers). Otherwise hundreds of people wouldn't keep going to them!?
A bunch of negative nellies on this thread.
Actually I'm not really a negative nellie, I'm pretty new to the investment and wealth management game so I'm usually pretty open to listen to individual approaches.
My problem is what makes these guys qualifies. Nick Foles? is he really an investment expert? or is he going to give me the story about how he went from almost retired nfl backup QB to super bowl darling. And Les Brown is probably famously known for being married to Gladys knight (of Gladys knight and the pips fame) and squandering her dough.
I have never attended any “free dinner” investment/empowerment evening. There is plenty of investment/empowerment information on the internet.
+1+Negative Nellie here.
Just not a fan of paying someone money to blow smoke up my ass. FI is simple, but can be very hard for some folks (keep up with the Jones, etc). As soon as someone starts telling me "it's complicated," or, "there's a secret sauce," my bullshit meter pegs out.
Scenario 1: I pay $100 to hear professional speaker Tony Robbins speak (wealth seminar). He's become wealthy from his speaking. He has some humor, some information I find interesting, some information I don't.
Scenario 2: I pay $100 to hear professional speaker Jerry Seinfeld speak (stand up comedy). He's become wealthy from his speaking. He has lots of humor, some jokes I find funny, some jokes I don't.
What's fundamentally different about these essentially identical activities?
One is a misogynistic pig and one is not. Honestly, watching the video of Robbins talking about how he has friends who hire less qualified men over more qualified but attractive women was disgusting. I’m glad he apologized but I’ll take Jerry Seinfeld over that any day.
One is a misogynistic pig and one is not. Honestly, watching the video of Robbins talking about how he has friends who hire less qualified men over more qualified but attractive women was disgusting. I’m glad he apologized but I’ll take Jerry Seinfeld over that any day.
IMO the fundamental difference is intention. One is intending to entertain using his skills, the other is intending to "hustle " through his skills.Scenario 1: I pay $100 to hear professional speaker Tony Robbins speak (wealth seminar). He's become wealthy from his speaking. He has some humor, some information I find interesting, some information I don't.
Scenario 2: I pay $100 to hear professional speaker Jerry Seinfeld speak (stand up comedy). He's become wealthy from his speaking. He has lots of humor, some jokes I find funny, some jokes I don't.
What's fundamentally different about these essentially identical activities?
+1 on behalf of my DGF.