Why successful men use [companions]

Ran across this interesting discussion about why many high-earning men often opt out of the dating pool and into the hobby world:

ep #1: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-Z62YOHP1uc
ep #2: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mKCg3amDDy8

I thought the second episode, starting at about the 10:00 mark, was particularly pertinent to the thread from a couple of weeks ago ("Help me to understand this") where the OP attempted to understand why some guys are so willing to pay, from his perspective, inflated provider prices. In short, the presenter--a psychologist with an interest in human behavior and relationships--breaks down the economics of a traditional date versus a hobby one and describes why the $1000/hr companion can actually be a bargain relative to a man's success.

Dating is legal "prosti******" and marriage is a demonic scam. High value men have more options to begin with. Women look for the top 10% to 1% of men. Most women can't handle the repercussions of being in a relationship with men of that status. I've talked to some women who used to be in a relationships with millionaires. One of them told me she didn't like that he was always busy. I don't know what she was expecting. Now she is divorced and doing this. Women like attention, but high value men are too busy to give them the attention they need. Not only that, but those men are the ones all the other women want.

Dating is a job interview that doesn't guarantee a high success rate. The guy goes on all these dates, buys her gifts, buys her drinks, and he could be rejected and still not get any sex. If he reveals how much money he makes, the female could activate her gold digger mind and try to manipulate him emotionally for attraction. That is a form of hypergamy. Dating is unnatural and so is marriage. No other mammals on the planet do it. They are too busy trying to survive in the wild and build families. The main objective of dating is to find a partner to build a family, which ultimately means going down the path of marriage for most humans. Unfortunately, this is also the era of "hookup culture." Marriage is a paper contract that gives full benefits for women and no benefits for the men. If she gets bored, she could divorce him, take his children, and take his money and assets. I've literally talked to women who divorced their husbands because they got bored or he lost his job and couldn't provide anymore. Then you have the girls who say they have to wait to get married before having sex. Especially with the "nice" or "good" guy. It's all bullshit. The only girls I know who are truly waiting are devout Catholic girls. If Brad Pitt, Chris Hemsworth, or Lebron James walks through the door, every female in the room will be all over them. A date isn't required for those men, nor is marriage. Marriage is definitely more expensive long term. It also has higher consequences. Why would any man get married today? It's stupid.

As for the one thousand dollars, I would never pay that much. If I was a millionaire, I still wouldn't pay that much. That's because I have my own limits and dignity I established. That's Las Vegas money. You could spend $800 on multiple dates with multiple women and not get any physical action. You could pay a cheap $100 to $200 and at least get something in the "hobby" business. You also don't have to deal with the emotional and mental baggage and trauma. No, just do your thing and move on to the next one.

If a woman finds you attractive, she will have sex with you and spend time doing activities with you. You won't have to wait for marriage and you won't have to date. Also, the high value men know most females today are not worth dating due to social engineering, social media, and extreme feminism. Most of them are not wife material.

Dating, marriage, relationships, and children are a waste of time and money. It's not worth the stress, conflict, or loss of money. Why would an intellectual, wealthy man waste his time and resources playing Russian roulette with girls?

I listen to this guy's podcasts and was going to post links to all three episodes in this series when they were all out.


Podcasts are usually sort; I can listen to one while cleaning up after dinner. They focus primarily on dating and what he calls the "sexual marketplace" and the transactional nature of male-female relationships. He's one of those guys who puts together two and two, shows you it's four, and has you wondering why you didn't see what was so obvious for yourself.


dormGE, you sound like you might be one of this guy's disciples.

I think best arrangement is to find a woman who loves you but gives you permission to play as long as you come back home in evening haha....only way to save institution of marriage and therefore continuation of DNA lol.

I listen to this guy's podcasts and was going to post links to all three episodes in this series when they were all out.


Podcasts are usually sort; I can listen to one while cleaning up after dinner. They focus primarily on dating and what he calls the "sexual marketplace" and the transactional nature of male-female relationships. He's one of those guys who puts together two and two, shows you it's four, and has you wondering why you didn't see what was so obvious for yourself.


dormGE, you sound like you might be one of this guy's disciples. Originally Posted by Sir Lancehernot

I have no idea who this guy is or what you're talking about.

The title of episode 2… thanks for the education and thinking.

As I say often you shouldn’t always expect the same person to fix food, clean the house, cut your hair or blow you. Skill sets are what they are.

(Full disclosure I have no cosmetology training, can’t cook & don’t clean )

1) You buy back your time and energy that goes toward regular dating
2) Unlimited quality and variety
3) Almost no headaches compared to regular dating

Adam Smith told us this in 1776 — division and specialization of labor.

“It is the maxim of every prudent master of a family, never to attempt to make at home what it will cost him more to make than to buy...What is prudence in the conduct of every private family, can scarce be folly in that of a great kingdom.”

Successful men don't pay women to have sex with them, they pay them to go away.

Successful men don't pay women to have sex with them, they pay them to go away. Originally Posted by Vanilla Gorilla

BIG FACTS!!

I say, any clue when episode #3 will come out?

For those interested, he dropped episode #3 a couple of days ago: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DwBozMsO9iM

There were a few things that struck me in episode #2, which, as I mentioned, reminded me of the "rates" thread from a few weeks ago, where the OP was asking why guys are so willing to pay high prices ($400+ per hour) for what in many cases is a lackluster performance from a mid-looking provider. Although most of that discussion devolved into addressing why providers set their rates at the levels they do, I still think OP's question was more about why guys pay it at all.

While I think there's some merit to the oversimplified answers, "Because they want to" and "It's the market," the good doctor brings up some deeper points. One is that, for high-earning men, the rates become negligible relative to their income (wages, investment returns, etc.). In his example, his lawyer friend makes $1300/hr, so to pay a $1000/hr provider, he need only bill a client of his for ~45 mins of work. In other words, it's no big deal because he can easily recoup the outlay rather quickly. Most of us can't do that. As a percentage of our income, that rate (even $400/hr) is too high and it would take a lot of work to create discretionary income to that extent.

Another point that I hadn't thought of is the mindset. As a man starts making "F-You Money" (shoutout to Jim Collins), he often has a switch in his financial mindset. He stops thinking about how much money he can save by not doing something, to how much time he can recoup by spending it. That recouped time can then translate into making more money. So he stops thinking about a $400/hr provider as, "If I see someone who only charges $300/hr, I'll save $100." Instead, he sees little difference between a $400 provider and a $1000 provider because he'll save time either way (versus dating) and he can easily generate income to cover the cost. An extra bonus for him is that the $1000 provider is usually younger, fitter, and prettier than her lower-cost counterparts. I think many of us fall somewhere in-between. Sure, we could pay the $1000 provider, but we don't want to. We're not at a point where our mindset has switched.. ha.

This was the best of the three, IMO. I can't relate to the high-income guys who are buying back their time, but I can relate to him saying "a transactional relationship in no way invalidates the possibility of authentic possible regard ... in fact, some of the most satisfying relationships in people's lives are relationships with those they pay" (citing bartenders, barbers/stylists, local restaurant owners as examples), and, conversely, there are plenty of people in non-transactional relationships (e.g. marriage) that have little or no positive emotional component. They stay in them because the exit costs (financial and emotional) are so high. He says one guy figured that, after the settlement and alimony, he paid is ex about $50,000 for each time they had sex.