Thursday, 23 January 2014

Getting Laid For Free, Ain't Free

The Rule is: if it flies, floats or fucks, rent, don't buy. The reason is that buying planes, boats and wives (weddings) is expensive, all three have high maintenance and running costs, and unless you're very lucky, you can lose a lot of money on disposal.

What counts as "renting"? Any arrangement where the man is not responsible for the expenses and debts of the woman. Co-signed the mortgage? You've bought. Had a child together? You've bought. Married? Guess what? Sharing a flat and bed together? Grey area: if she's working and expects to pay her share of rent, you're still renting her. Given her a key to your place, let her move in some clothes and receive official mail there? Dodgy. Try not to do that.

Renting runs from one-night stands to paying escorts to living-together-without-contracts. In London, good-quality escorts go out for £250+ an hour. That's the benchmark. Pay more than that per lay and you need to re-examine your choices - unless you're very rich and are paying for very high quality, as you can in this town.

In London or a big city, Night Game costs drinks, nightclub entry and taxi fare, just to play. That's pretty much at least £60 - £100 a shot. The Notch / Night rate may be better, but even at 20% that's still around £400 a notch.

Day Game is a whole other thing. If you do it systematically, it's financially horrible. The hidden cost here is that Krauser's spare time is not free: he's an IT contractor in Financial Services and those guys make upwards of £400 a day. He could be earning six figures annually, but chooses not to. It's a rare contractor who works all twelve months a year: let's assume he could work six months a year. If I've followed his year right, he's done a three month earning stint in 2013. In nine months he gets thirty lays, so in six he gets twenty. The extra ten notches are the benefit of his chosen lifestyle. The extra ten notches cost around £25,000 in lost post-tax income. That's £2,500 a notch. Yikes! And those notches are almost all one-time: all those girls who are "on their last night in London"?

So one-night stands make no economic sense in a Big City, unless you are doing a job that exposes you to a large number of women whose social control is lowered and to whom you have tempting status or looks.

Relationships spread that Notch acquisition cost over a number of Lays, but add maintenance and running costs. As long as that running cost stays below £250 / week, you're ahead. The hidden cost comes from the fact that very few people go straight from one MTR to another. There might be six sexless months between each one. While an MTR is running, it's an economically-sound source of sex, but when it's not, we're back with escorts, Night Game or chastity. So to the acquisition and running costs of an MTR, you have to add the cost of sex between the one that's just finished and the next one. Cheaper, but no Aldi.

Looking at the cost of sex isn't considered polite. Men don't really want to admit that sex costs them money, and women don't want to admit that the sex they provide has an identifiable cost to the man. It's all too close to prostitution.

So here's the trick everyone pulls on themselves. They tell themselves they are not going to the club or the bar to get laid: they are going for the booze, the music and the event, and if they get laid, that's a bonus. Same with any other method or venue for pick-up. I'm going to go for a walk in St James' Park - if I happen across a pleasing young lady there, that's a bonus. If I don't, I've still had a nice walk. Go out looking to get laid and anyone will come back disappointed: so let's pretend we're not. That way, one night stands are always free, just like they were back in university.

2 comments:

  1. Good analysis and I agree with most of it.

    "In London, good-quality escorts go out for £250+ an hour. That's the benchmark. Pay more than that per lay and you need to re-examine your choice".

    But is paying for sex (and time) with whores really strictly comparable to sex with women who are with you because they like you or at least find you sexually attractive and who you've gone out and 'seduced'?

    "The extra ten notches are the benefit of his chosen lifestyle. The extra ten notches cost around £25,000 in lost post-tax income. That's £2,500 a notch. Yikes!"

    Krauser, like many PUAs, clearly enjoys the thrill of the chase and the satisfaction of the 'conquest'. Perhaps also he's just no longer a slave to money and chooses to work long enough only to finance whatever lifestyle he chooses, whether it's having fun chasing skirt in Eastern Europe or playing video games in his apartment?

    Why do men choose to slave away in high stress jobs anyway? To obtain enough status and wealth to attract and maintain women (or in most cases, one woman with constantly diminishing SMV)? Of course, men will pretend otherwise..

    "I'm going to go for a walk in St James' Park - if I happen across a pleasing young lady there, that's a bonus. If I don't, I've still had a nice walk. Go out looking to get laid and anyone will come back disappointed: so let's pretend we're not. "

    A lot of truth in that again, but perhaps still you're overstressing the point and, in this case, underestimating the possibility of integrating the pua lifestyle into one's normal day to day life.

    Anyway, excellent and stimulating article and the general conclusion is sound. It will be interesting to see if Krauser replies to it (he's seen it - I came here via his twitter).

    ReplyDelete
  2. Good article. Even though I disagree, I think it's an interesting train of thought. I posted up a response on my blog. Thanks for stimulating my mind!

    ReplyDelete