Is Fastlane even 'Fastlane' anymore?

[BigMoneyMoves]

The Millionaire Fastlane is now 10+ years old, and with 1,000,000+ copies sold as well as many other creators copying, reformulating and reselling the information provided by the book. My question is: Is it even Fastlane anymore?

Don't get me wrong, i think the points in The Millionaire Fastlane are incredibly helpful and maybe even more relevant today than ever. But now, I feel like every single person on the planet is trying to go 'Fastlane'. From creating 'AI- startups' to 'building' a personal brand' the tsunami of entrepreneurs is making it close to impossible to stand out.

However even if you did stand out, the immense competition is lowering the demand and profitability of your business.

What made people millionaires years ago can (if you're lucky) barely replace a normal job. I might be exaggerating now, but the competition will only get worse in the future as content creators keep pushing the idea of starting a business and getting rich quick.

The things that were Fastlane 10 years ago now violate the commandment of entry.

This doesn't make The Millionaire Fastlane useless, but I do not think that the best way to become a self-made multi-millionaire in the future is through slightly value skewing some online service/product. But rather extremely creative and innovative ideas that stick out in values skews not yet fully explored.

Lastly, I think the demand for high quality and scientifically proven value rather than marketing will become an important factor in clearing out the massive amounts of competition today.

Feel free share your opinions on the subject.

 

Dislike ads? Remove them and support the forum: Subscribe to Fastlane Insiders.

[StrikingViper69]

People pushing BS won’t change anything.

All these people “starting businesses” are mostly buying dumb influencer programs on how to use a telephone.

MF is about more than selling yoga mats with different colours to the competitors.

The reason it’s a great book is that it identifies principles which applied to the ancient Greeks, applies to people today, and will still apply in 1000 years time.

 

[BigMoneyMoves]

People pushing BS won’t change anything.

All these people “starting businesses” are mostly buying dumb influencer programs on how to use a telephone.

MF is about more than selling yoga mats with different colours to the competitors.

The reason it’s a great book is that it identifies principles which applied to the ancient Greeks, applies to people today, and will still apply in 1000 years time.

While I agree with you, don't you think there is a higher and growing amount of competition today than 10 years ago. And with books like the millionaire Fastlane as well as an ever more capable AI, creating and knowing how to make a good business will be easier and possible for anyone with barely any effort.

Even though the principles from Millionaire Fastlane still applies and will apply in the future, it will not be enough if everyone is aware of them.

Sure, everyone is a bit of an overstatement but i have the assumption that more and more people are learning about or similar versions of the fastlane.

 

[biophase]

The things that were Fastlane 10 years ago now violate the commandment of entry.

Can you name a few things that violate the commandment of entry now that did not 10 years ago?

 

Dislike ads? Remove them and support the forum: Subscribe to Fastlane Insiders.

[GuitarDude]

Sure the specific businesses that made you money a few years ago may be more competitive, but this doesn't change the fact that the principles MJ talks about are applicable today. Every day opportunities come and opportunities leave, the key is to take hold of the correct one at the correct time.

The CENTS framework, building wealth through business instead of putting it into a mutual fund, using technology as leverage, etc. all have not changed and will not change.

 

[BigMoneyMoves]

Can you name a few things that violate the commandment of entry now that did not 10 years ago?

Yeah sure,

But to clarify i don't disagree with anything MJ says i just think it's important to note that the market i changing and therefore businesses that used to be fastlane no longer satisfies the commandment of entry and therefore are barely 'fastlane' any longer.

Businesses like starting a website for renting limousine's would've been perfectly aligned with the commandment of entry 10 years ago since it was pretty hard to do. It required a good amount of coding and web developing skills as well as insight into a not so developed market of online renting services.

Today creating the same website can be done by anyone in a matter of weeks or even days. With easy to learn no-code website, step by step youtube tutorials tailored to your exact need or Ai tools. This coupled with a high competition on pretty much any online service or product makes it (in my eyes) not so fastlane anymore.

 

[BigMoneyMoves]

Sure the specific businesses that made you money a few years ago may be more competitive, but this doesn't change the fact that the principles MJ talks about are applicable today. Every day opportunities come and opportunities leave, the key is to take hold of the correct one at the correct time.

The CENTS framework, building wealth through business instead of putting it into a mutual fund, using technology as leverage, etc. all have not changed and will not change.

yeah exactly!

So while the CENTS framework stays the same, the businesses it applies could change over time

 

Dislike ads? Remove them and support the forum: Subscribe to Fastlane Insiders.

[Supa]

What may have changed is that there are more people now trying to chase money by other terms than working a job. But that's not Fastlane. So why should it affect what is Fastlane?

 

[Aidan04]

Yeah sure,

But to clarify i don't disagree with anything MJ says i just think it's important to note that the market i changing and therefore businesses that used to be fastlane no longer satisfies the commandment of entry and therefore are barely 'fastlane' any longer.

Businesses like starting a website for renting limousine's would've been perfectly aligned with the commandment of entry 10 years ago since it was pretty hard to do. It required a good amount of coding and web developing skills as well as insight into a not so developed market of online renting services.

Today creating the same website can be done by anyone in a matter of weeks or even days. With easy to learn no-code website, step by step youtube tutorials tailored to your exact need or Ai tools. This coupled with a high competition on pretty much any online service or product makes it (in my eyes) not so fastlane anymore.

You should rephrase your argument, and go read Unscripted .

Of F*cking course CENTS won't apply to what it applied to 10 years ago. Starting MJ's limo business today would be idiotic.

AI tools do make things easier for software development and writing text, removing a barrier to entry, but can AI build physical products? Can AI start a lawn mowing company? Can AI create new and innovative technology? Can AI run a restaurant? I could go on and on.

These principles will always hold up, it's just the businesses they apply to will change as technology advances and companies (such as Amazon or Shopify) remove barriers to entry.

Lead the change, don't follow the herd.

 

[BigMoneyMoves]

I should rephrase my argument since I don't think my point was interpreted the way I intended it, and I fully understand that because of how I formulated myself.

I am not challenging the principles of the CENTS framework. I agree with them.

And it is obvious that the demand for services and products change. Therefore some businesses that were Fastlane 10 years ago would not be Fastlane if created today.

I think that with more and more people reading The Millionaire Fastlane and therefore more and more people using the principles provided by it. More(/or even extremely) unique strategies in building and providing value to a business is necessary to stand out (in addition to The Millionaire Fastlane ).

If you think this is obvious or stupid i apologize.

 

Dislike ads? Remove them and support the forum: Subscribe to Fastlane Insiders.

[StrikingViper69]

While I agree with you, don't you think there is a higher and growing amount of competition today than 10 years ago. And with books like the millionaire Fastlane as well as an ever more capable AI, creating and knowing how to make a good business will be easier and possible for anyone with barely any effort.

Even though the principles from Millionaire Fastlane still applies and will apply in the future, it will not be enough if everyone is aware of them.

Sure, everyone is a bit of an overstatement but i have the assumption that more and more people are learning about or similar versions of the fastlane.

It depends what you mean by competitors.

Are more people than even getting an Amazon Seller Account or a Shopify store?

Sure.

Are more people than even ever creating a product that is valuable? Per capita, I highly doubt it.

Fastlane isn't about competing to be the one millionth person to create a SMMA or "do dropshipping". It's about identifying needs and delivering value that can scale.

 

[Antifragile]

I am confused. At first I read your post as this “Henry Ford already invented assembly line, so it’s no longer Fastlane to use assembly line”.

Innovation occurs on the periphery. Where ideas mix and create new ideas.

By that logic Elon Musk should not have started a car company at all.

Your argument is very confusing.

I should rephrase my argument since I don't think my point was interpreted the way I intended it, and I fully understand that because of how I formulated myself.

I am not challenging the principles of the CENTS framework. I agree with them.

And it is obvious that the demand for services and products change. Therefore some businesses that were Fastlane 10 years ago would not be Fastlane if created today.

I think that with more and more people reading The Millionaire Fastlane and therefore more and more people using the principles provided by it. More(/or even extremely) unique strategies in building and providing value to a business is necessary to stand out (in addition to The Millionaire Fastlane ).

If you think this is obvious or stupid i apologize.

Thanks for trying to clarify.

I am still lost as to what you are trying to say. With a catchy title like is Fastlane even “Fastlane”? And your “BigMoneyMoves” handle here… I expected more.

Why don’t we back up a step or two:

• Why are you here? Meaning, in the ideal outcome, what is the best you hope to achieve from being on this forum?
• What business (or businesses) have you failed? What successes do you have to share?
• Are you just doing mental jerk-off post or is there an underlying problem you need our help with? Meaning, is this a theoretical question you are “just pondering during the boredom of the days” or is this a practical “holy crap, I tried applying CENTS to this and it didn’t work, can someone help me understand what I did wrong”?

The framework of CENTS holds. No one ever in any of the books or here said that it should be easy. And I disagree with your assessment about AI making it “easier”. Lastly, some of the most successful businesses members on this forum run aren’t even online businesses or have anything to do with tech. Tech helps but it’s just one tool in a toolbelt.

May I suggest you read some GOLD threads and recalibrate?

 

[Kevin88660]

The Millionaire Fastlane is now 10+ years old, and with 1,000,000+ copies sold as well as many other creators copying, reformulating and reselling the information provided by the book. My question is: Is it even Fastlane anymore?

Don't get me wrong, i think the points in The Millionaire Fastlane are incredibly helpful and maybe even more relevant today than ever. But now, I feel like every single person on the planet is trying to go 'Fastlane'. From creating 'AI- startups' to 'building' a personal brand' the tsunami of entrepreneurs is making it close to impossible to stand out.

However even if you did stand out, the immense competition is lowering the demand and profitability of your business.

What made people millionaires years ago can (if you're lucky) barely replace a normal job. I might be exaggerating now, but the competition will only get worse in the future as content creators keep pushing the idea of starting a business and getting rich quick.

The things that were Fastlane 10 years ago now violate the commandment of entry.

This doesn't make The Millionaire Fastlane useless, but I do not think that the best way to become a self-made multi-millionaire in the future is through slightly value skewing some online service/product. But rather extremely creative and innovative ideas that stick out in values skews not yet fully explored.

Lastly, I think the demand for high quality and scientifically proven value rather than marketing will become an important factor in clearing out the massive amounts of competition today.

Feel free share your opinions on the subject.

E-commerce and SAAS has been the biggest market for potential aspirants, and even though it is more crowded today there are still people doing well in it.

AI related field opens a lot of opportunities.

Cryptocurrency projects, services are opportunities as well.

Of course there is acquisition of boomers’ client base in fields that you are familiar with.

 

Dislike ads? Remove them and support the forum: Subscribe to Fastlane Insiders.

[MJ DeMarco]

Business is dynamic, but the principles remain the same.

There are people here who made fortunes in blogs. That opportunity isn't as strong as it once was.
There are people here who made fortunes in creating YT channels. That opportunity isn't as strong as it once was.
There are people who made fortunes in Amazon FBA. That opportunity isn't as strong as it once was.
There are people here who "retired" self-publishing. That opportunity isn't as strong as it once was.

And now there are people here who will make a fortune in whatever else is emerging, and whomever is selling shovels to the gold diggers.

The year is different, but the story and industry simply changes with the times.

And BTW, Fastlane is as, if not more, relevant today than it was 10 years ago.

Because more people recognize it, doesn't make it any less viable.

That's like discovering the healthiest diet for longevity and then saying, "Well, everyone does that diet now so it no longer works."

 

[Black_Dragon43]

The Millionaire Fastlane is now 10+ years old, and with 1,000,000+ copies sold as well as many other creators copying, reformulating and reselling the information provided by the book. My question is: Is it even Fastlane anymore?

Don't get me wrong, i think the points in The Millionaire Fastlane are incredibly helpful and maybe even more relevant today than ever. But now, I feel like every single person on the planet is trying to go 'Fastlane'. From creating 'AI- startups' to 'building' a personal brand' the tsunami of entrepreneurs is making it close to impossible to stand out.

However even if you did stand out, the immense competition is lowering the demand and profitability of your business.

What made people millionaires years ago can (if you're lucky) barely replace a normal job. I might be exaggerating now, but the competition will only get worse in the future as content creators keep pushing the idea of starting a business and getting rich quick.

The things that were Fastlane 10 years ago now violate the commandment of entry.

This doesn't make The Millionaire Fastlane useless, but I do not think that the best way to become a self-made multi-millionaire in the future is through slightly value skewing some online service/product. But rather extremely creative and innovative ideas that stick out in values skews not yet fully explored.

Lastly, I think the demand for high quality and scientifically proven value rather than marketing will become an important factor in clearing out the massive amounts of competition today.

Feel free share your opinions on the subject.

I’d argue Fastlane is a lot more popular amongst brokies than amongst the rich. Most successful business owners out there have never heard of fastlane… it’s still very much on the periphery.

90% of the users of this forum are brokies and people working jobs. Maybe unpopular, but it’s true. There are a few big hitters amongst the veterans, but that’s it really…

That, of course, doesn’t mean fastlane is not valuable. I’d say it has immense value for thenright target audience. But it does mean that your argument that fastlane has destroyed the opportunity to get rich is nonsense.

Also, I don’t think MJ wrote his books to teach people who already had businesses how to make the cash. His books are meant to teach those who never had a business why it may be worth considering, get them to believe they can do it, and then take action according to some principles that will up their odds of success.

That’s all it is.

But rest assured that the vast majority of successful businesspeople have never read fastlane. Sometimes I ask my clients if they read fastlane. And most are like “fast what?!”

Think of Fastlane as an attempt to democratize entrepreneurship, and give the brokies the tools they need to succeed. I remember somewhere in TMF MJ saying that it’s basically what he wishes his younger self (a kid from a regular American family) knew about business.

 

[Aidan04]

I’d argue Fastlane is a lot more popular amongst brokies than amongst the rich. Most successful business owners out there have never heard of fastlane… it’s still very much on the periphery.

90% of the users of this forum are brokies and people working jobs. Maybe unpopular, but it’s true. There are a few big hitters amongst the veterans, but that’s it really…

That, of course, doesn’t mean fastlane is not valuable. I’d say it has immense value for thenright target audience. But it does mean that your argument that fastlane has destroyed the opportunity to get rich is nonsense.

Also, I don’t think MJ wrote his books to teach people who already had businesses how to make the cash. His books are meant to teach those who never had a business why it may be worth considering, get them to believe they can do it, and then take action according to some principles that will up their odds of success.

That’s all it is.

But rest assured that the vast majority of successful businesspeople have never read fastlane. Sometimes I ask my clients if they read fastlane. And most are like “fast what?!”

Think of Fastlane as an attempt to democratize entrepreneurship, and give the brokies the tools they need to succeed. I remember somewhere in TMF MJ saying that it’s basically what he wishes his younger self (a kid from a regular American family) knew about business.

Can confirm, I am a broke university student trying to bootstrap my business hahaha

 

Dislike ads? Remove them and support the forum: Subscribe to Fastlane Insiders.

[rory182]

For every book, course, or anything that pushes any idea of building a business, how many people take action on these ideas, potentially fail continuously for years and keep going?

How many start successful businesses, have a bad year and keep going? <0.1%?

Just because you're exposed to this information, it doesn't mean everyone is doing it or making even one sale.

This is the same for everything in life, everyone has the information to build a business, lose weight, learn a skill. You don't see everyone applying it.

"creating and knowing how to make a good business will be easier and possible for anyone with barely any effort."

Building a business that stays consistent for a long period of time is hard. Do anything with barely any effort, and you'll find out the results very fast.

 

[Jon822]

Objects change their position by being acted upon by forces. It doesn't matter if ten years go by or one hundred, noting different positional states doesn't have any effect on the underlying forces. The Fastlane is a book about financial forces so it will always be relevant.

 

[Kevin88660]

I’d argue Fastlane is a lot more popular amongst brokies than amongst the rich. Most successful business owners out there have never heard of fastlane… it’s still very much on the periphery.

90% of the users of this forum are brokies and people working jobs. Maybe unpopular, but it’s true. There are a few big hitters amongst the veterans, but that’s it really…

That, of course, doesn’t mean fastlane is not valuable. I’d say it has immense value for thenright target audience. But it does mean that your argument that fastlane has destroyed the opportunity to get rich is nonsense.

Also, I don’t think MJ wrote his books to teach people who already had businesses how to make the cash. His books are meant to teach those who never had a business why it may be worth considering, get them to believe they can do it, and then take action according to some principles that will up their odds of success.

That’s all it is.

But rest assured that the vast majority of successful businesspeople have never read fastlane. Sometimes I ask my clients if they read fastlane. And most are like “fast what?!”

Think of Fastlane as an attempt to democratize entrepreneurship, and give the brokies the tools they need to succeed. I remember somewhere in TMF MJ saying that it’s basically what he wishes his younger self (a kid from a regular American family) knew about business.

I agree that fastlane is about democratizing values that are outside of the informed minority group.

If you grow up as a third generations of business owner family you intuitively understand concepts like entry barrier and need like bread and butter. Or if you are in entrepreneurship club since as a teenager and you know all the techno entrepreneurship buzz word from a to z. You understand fastlane concepts in other terms without knowing fastlane.

The issue is 99 percent of the population does not. Venturing into business usually means getting into the hottest idea at the point in time. Many young people back in 2014-2016 opened a cafe with parents money, burn it to the ground in one year, and concluded that business is risky and never touch it again.

Navigating as an uninformed will face a lot of distractions such as MLM and other get rich schemes sold by guru.

 

Dislike ads? Remove them and support the forum: Subscribe to Fastlane Insiders.

[biophase]

Yeah sure,

But to clarify i don't disagree with anything MJ says i just think it's important to note that the market i changing and therefore businesses that used to be fastlane no longer satisfies the commandment of entry and therefore are barely 'fastlane' any longer.

Businesses like starting a website for renting limousine's would've been perfectly aligned with the commandment of entry 10 years ago since it was pretty hard to do. It required a good amount of coding and web developing skills as well as insight into a not so developed market of online renting services.

Today creating the same website can be done by anyone in a matter of weeks or even days. With easy to learn no-code website, step by step youtube tutorials tailored to your exact need or Ai tools. This coupled with a high competition on pretty much any online service or product makes it (in my eyes) not so fastlane anymore.

Creating a website was always a low barrier to entry. That was the same 10 years ago. It actually was 20 years ago.

10 years ago, was creating an app like Uber.

You could argue that it is very easy to create an app like Uber today. But I think you are confused with what the commandment of entry really means. In this case entry into the space is not gated by the app creation. It is gated by adoption.

 

[heavy_industry]

You're starting from the wrong presumption that success is only for those who have access to some secret knowledge.

There are no secrets. Everything is in plain sight.

The rules of war, as well as the rules of economy, have been set in stone since the dawn of humanity.

SUPPLY AND DEMAND

Money, in whatever form it happens to be (gold, paper, digital, etc.), will flow from those that consume, to those that produce.

Bring value into the world, and the world will throw money at you.

---

"X, Y, and Z are not profitable anymore so I can't get rich" is a stupid argument. A very stupid argument.

Technology changes, demand changes, and what the world needs changes. But what doesn't change, is the fact that the world will ALWAYS need something.

Knitting sweaters is no longer economically viable. Neither is selling lamp oil, nor the manual farming of crops, nor programming using punched cards.

Industries rise and fall, as demand rises and falls. But as long as there will be problems in the world, there will be opportunities.

---

"Too many entrepreneurs, and high competition because of business courses" is yet another stupid argument.

Human competence and focus have dropped exponentially in the last 20 years. It has never been easier to be successful. Anyone with an ounce of wisdom, focus, and discipline will run circles around their competition.

The so-called new wave of "entrepreneurs" are nothing more than covert consumers, looking for their next delusional money-chasing joyride.

 

[Panos Daras]

But rather extremely creative and innovative ideas that stick out in values skews not yet fully explored.

What data supports your claim? In the area where I currently live, most millionaires work in the FARMING industry, and 22% are employed. Please stop making assumptions.
Look at what other people rich in your area are doing. If it falls within your circle of competence (or close to it), do that but better! No need to reinvent the wheel.

 

Dislike ads? Remove them and support the forum: Subscribe to Fastlane Insiders.

[Awakened2022]

A punch to the gut of us third-world inhabitants who applaud the government whenever it hands out hoes.
Manually farming crops is what I am doing and I can attest to the fact that while the demand for the products is there, one needs ungodly sizes of land to smell the fast lane.

 

[rpeck90]

It is gated by adoption.

Such an important distinction.

Most businesses fail because they are unable to acquire enough high quality customers cheaply enough over a long enough period to keep the lights on. Whilst many founders get around this in the beginning by doing most of the work themselves, the fact remains that jumping from a small, independent, business into something that can scale requires a lot of "background" work in order to set up the processes/infrastructure that can handle it.

Perhaps one of the most pertinent demonstrations of this is Shopify. Shopify has fooled a LOT of "entrepreneurs" into thinking they have built a business when, in reality, they are almost entirely dependent on the infrastructure Shopify has invested millions into developing & maintaining. Thus, whilst many Shopify eCommerce stores make a lot of money, one of the reasons for that is they did not need to make those huge investments into the technology beforehand.

The draw of eCommerce (and even the likes of apps) as a "low barrier" business is exacerbated by the continued reduction in start-up costs due to the likes of Shopify. However, as you've mentioned, that has not made it "easier" to become successful with one - you still need a way to attract enough high quality customers at a margin that can sustain the development of the business. Most can't do this, hence why the failure rate is so high.

One of the big things I've noticed is the "best" companies tend not to be the flashiest, but those who have invested the most into their backend. Competent companies have capacity, talent and a vision which gives them the ability to increase the scope and scale of works they undertake. This applies to almost every business. For example, in my work as a software dev, every project I've undertaken has been used as an opportunity to further develop my codebase. Now if anybody with a similar problem reaches out to me, I can provide a solution quicker than anyone else. That can be further developed into platforms/systems, which is where things start getting interesting.

If you contrast that with how "most people" treat that sort of work -- entirely dependent on something like Wordpress, they have almost zero leverage and, thus, are unable to scale beyond being a glorified job. @Black_Dragon43 is an excellent example of how that works in practicality. I suspect @Oso too but know nothing about his background.

I think, and I don't have direct experience of this yet, the core of continued business success is figuring out a way to acquire extremely valuable customers cheaper/faster/better than the other guy. The quantifier of success, essentially, then becomes a case of developing the systems & infrastructure to keep those people paying you. Ergo, in the Shopify example above, using Shopify to get a multi-million dollar eCommerce store running is fine... but how do you take the profits from that and extend what you're doing? In @Black_Dragon43's case - how would he scale beyond LinkedIn?

In fact, I was watching a video of Steve Ballmer's talk at Oxford Union the other day (to refresh my memory on something he said) and he suggested something similar: -

View: https://youtu.be/pKqUnL62TOE?t=78

"[when you acquire a company], you're really buying a customer asset"

I think the primary problem for anybody with business aspirations is being able to marry the ability to provide a world class service with the means to scale it. Although many can probably do the first part with some dedication/focus, the latter is - by far - more difficult, as it requires being able to sell at scale & delegate to a team that can be trusted to provide said service, which most can't do.

This is why the likes of Ballmer is worth $100bn despite being illiterate with much of the technology he was selling; Bill Gates' technical prowess gave him the ability to go out and acquire the customers. You even hear about how this dynamic worked back in the early days of Microsoft - Bill was super reticent to hire people, Ballmer went all out...

Business 2.0: My Golden Rule: 3 Steve Ballmer

I’d argue Fastlane is a lot more popular amongst brokies than amongst the rich. Most successful business owners out there have never heard of fastlane… it’s still very much on the periphery.

90% of the users of this forum are brokies and people working jobs. Maybe unpopular, but it’s true. There are a few big hitters amongst the veterans, but that’s it really…

That, of course, doesn’t mean fastlane is not valuable. I’d say it has immense value for thenright target audience. But it does mean that your argument that fastlane has destroyed the opportunity to get rich is nonsense.

Also, I don’t think MJ wrote his books to teach people who already had businesses how to make the cash. His books are meant to teach those who never had a business why it may be worth considering, get them to believe they can do it, and then take action according to some principles that will up their odds of success.

That’s all it is.

But rest assured that the vast majority of successful businesspeople have never read fastlane. Sometimes I ask my clients if they read fastlane. And most are like “fast what?!”

Think of Fastlane as an attempt to democratize entrepreneurship, and give the brokies the tools they need to succeed. I remember somewhere in TMF MJ saying that it’s basically what he wishes his younger self (a kid from a regular American family) knew about business.

I wouldn't necessarily limit the catchment to people starting out, although they obviously do make up the majority of who'll be interested in the book. The big thing I associate MF with is building a "real" business that can scale. By "real", I mean an actual company that has profits, not some BS social networking site or crypto coin.

Of the various business things I've read, people I've talked to and experiences I've had, nobody has even come close to explaining "how to do it" like MJ. The philosophy behind the book, the community attached to it and its attribution to value provision is unique. Further, and crucially, the means to apply it is demonstrated practically - many "business" books are vague on practical application because they're not written by people with applicable experience.

I've found the majority of people "in business" are mediocre and found a "thing" that they could paid to do, which they subsequently rode all the way to retirement. Many boomer businesses were started this way -- lack of global competition allowed them to acquire customers without needing to compete outside their locality. The Internet and the proliferation of AI, freelancing etc, has eroded this, which is what I presume the OP's post was about.

For people looking to start a business today, there are many things to consider which previous generations did not need - such as whether your business is able to work in certain geographic regions (IE can I sell my products in the US?), whether someone in a country with less overheads can do exactly the same thing as you and undercut you etc.

Thus, I think there are two types of people interested in MF: -

1. Those who want to escape corporate enslavement (lifestyle business)

or (like me)

2. Those who want to build a legitimate company that can scale

In the wider world, most people do not fall into either camp because they don't believe that a lifestyle that is not practiced by 99% of the people around them is possible. They've been brainwashed into ploughing money into a retirement fund, buying an expensive house and using a job as their only means to pay for it.

For the few that managed to get a business started & running in that group, many didn't innovate anything and are only able to sustain it because they have access to consumers who'll pay high prices for whatever they're selling (ref: the Shopify stuff above). If they had to make significant investments, they wouldn't be able to keep the business going.

Creating a massive company requires being able to deliver world class (typically unique) service at scale. This will generally require capital, which automatically disqualifies 99% of people because they either don't have the money or want to take the risk. Instead, they look for "low risk" alternatives which explains the proliferation of shit-tier courses & books.

If you've enlightened yourself to the degree that "normie" life repulses you, or are eager to grow a business based on massive risk + innovation, where do you go? As far as I have found, this community is the only one with a practical framework/basis from which to do it. There are undoubtedly others, but I've yet to find one so keen on value provision etc.

 

[Black_Dragon43]

The big thing I associate MF with is building a "real" business that can scale. By "real", I mean an actual company that has profits, not some BS social networking site or crypto coin.

Yes and no. I don't consider my business to meet CENTS, at least not when I started it. Especially C and E. Now I'm much closer to meeting E, because so much work and assets have been produced that I have attained differentiation that cannot be attained by a new starter in any reasonable amount of time. C is very hard to meet, almost by definition I don't meet it, since I primarily rely on another service for the medium on which the work is done. Theoretically, I could be put out of business immediately. Practically, my needs align enough with theirs that this is very unlikely, though it is possible that I would need to adjust due to changes of policy (one major change did happen, which almost put me out of business last year).

I think the critical thing to starting a real business is having access to capital. It doesn't matter if you gain that capital due to a windfall of people paying you which gives you sufficient time and resources to exert control (like I did), or because you got an investor.

I could start you a BS restaurant chain (least profitable business according to stats) and be successful – just give me $3M. Most people severely underestimate the doors money can open.

Of the various business things I've read, people I've talked to and experiences I've had, nobody has even come close to explaining "how to do it" like MJ. The philosophy behind the book, the community attached to it and its attribution to value provision is unique. Further, and crucially, the means to apply it is demonstrated practically - many "business" books are vague on practical application because they're not written by people with applicable experience.

With this I agree. However, I will underline that it's very difficult to say "how to do it", because the "how to do it" most frequently involves getting a big windfall of cash at some point, whether through landing on the right opportunity, being connected with the right people, or having access to the right investors. Once that happens, having things snowball from there becomes relatively easier.

I worked for a local company with my first agency many years ago, back when they were doing $500K/year. The company was managed by an ex-Honda sales manager, who was brought in when the owner made his first $100K/year revenue. The owner started the business by dropshipping contact lenses that changed your eye color. Like the most money-grabbing, non-fastlane opportunity you could imagine. But it was enough to give him sufficient cash to do the rest. They have since pivoted into a slightly different niche, but I kept in touch with them since we sort of became friends – every year since inception they've more than doubled in size (doubling is sort of the bare minimum). They're now at $60M/year. And, likewise, their DEBT doubles every single year. Their total debt is bigger than their yearly revenue, around $70M atm. And I'm not privy to this information, but I wouldn't be surprised if one of their relatives holds an important position at the bank who is giving them all this cash...

Do you think it's hard to double when you have so much money coming in? I don't. Do you think the owner ever read fastlane? Nope, he didn't. He did read Blue Ocean though, and I remember him thinking that contact lenses that change color were a "blue ocean" (*facepalm*). Anyway, they're building physical stores, that's how they grew so much. Not because they care about control, but simply because they couldn't secure the distribution otherwise.

Take the other huge company UiPath, which I'm pretty sure you've heard of. I have a lot of INSIDERS info from there. Once again, it's merely a question of money. The moment UiPath got funded, they started exploding from $200K/year to $1M/year to finally where they're at today $400M/year. But, look at their stock price. 70% down since they were listed. Which is no surprise. The low-level employees were ordering $10,000 bottles of Dom Perignon when traveling, this is back when they were hardly making $1M/year. And I'm sure the VCs and the management made handsome returns off the foolishness of the retail investor.

Is that fastlane? Nah. It's just money. The right investors don't just give you money – they make introductions. Imagine this big-hitting investor picking up the phone to say PwC, calling his buddy from college, and being like "Yo John – remember when we spoke about XYZ? Well I have just invested in this amazing company that solves that problem, you guys need to get them in!" – Done. $1M contract already added. Investor already basically got his money back. So regardless of how much "value" you provide, you cannot get that deal. Because it's not about the value – sure, you do need to solve their problems and have people working on making things fit their needs and what not. But that's, so to speak, the bare minimum. That alone will not get you the deal.

That's why if you have enough money, almost anything can be successful. Even something like the Segway, which quote on quote failed, I bet even that made some people millions of dollars. If you can get near the stream of a lot of money, you will find a way to keep some of it for yourself. Why do you think mayors and politicians in so many countries have so much money, including in the UK? Because their signature controls the flow of many millions of dollars (in some cases, like for London, I imagine probably closer to billions), ergo, they can find some way to get some of that to themselves, more or less "legally".

It's just like the war between Russia and Ukraine. So long as Zelensky can continue making deals and getting funding from the West, Russia cannot win. The moment the funding stops, they're screwed. The key is the money.

 

Dislike ads? Remove them and support the forum: Subscribe to Fastlane Insiders.

[NervesOfSteel]

The Millionaire Fastlane is now 10+ years old, and with 1,000,000+ copies sold as well as many other creators copying, reformulating and reselling the information provided by the book. My question is: Is it even Fastlane anymore?

Don't get me wrong, i think the points in The Millionaire Fastlane are incredibly helpful and maybe even more relevant today than ever. But now, I feel like every single person on the planet is trying to go 'Fastlane'. From creating 'AI- startups' to 'building' a personal brand' the tsunami of entrepreneurs is making it close to impossible to stand out.

However even if you did stand out, the immense competition is lowering the demand and profitability of your business.

What made people millionaires years ago can (if you're lucky) barely replace a normal job. I might be exaggerating now, but the competition will only get worse in the future as content creators keep pushing the idea of starting a business and getting rich quick.

The things that were Fastlane 10 years ago now violate the commandment of entry.

This doesn't make The Millionaire Fastlane useless, but I do not think that the best way to become a self-made multi-millionaire in the future is through slightly value skewing some online service/product. But rather extremely creative and innovative ideas that stick out in values skews not yet fully explored.

Lastly, I think the demand for high quality and scientifically proven value rather than marketing will become an important factor in clearing out the massive amounts of competition today.

Feel free share your opinions on the subject.

The strong do what they can and the weak suffer what they must. - Thucydides

 

[rpeck90]

Yes and no. I don't consider my business to meet CENTS, at least not when I started it. Especially C and E. Now I'm much closer to meeting E, because so much work and assets have been produced that I have attained differentiation that cannot be attained by a new starter in any reasonable amount of time. C is very hard to meet, almost by definition I don't meet it, since I primarily rely on another service for the medium on which the work is done. Theoretically, I could be put out of business immediately. Practically, my needs align enough with theirs that this is very unlikely, though it is possible that I would need to adjust due to changes of policy (one major change did happen, which almost put me out of business last year).

I think the critical thing to starting a real business is having access to capital. It doesn't matter if you gain that capital due to a windfall of people paying you which gives you sufficient time and resources to exert control (like I did), or because you got an investor.

I could start you a BS restaurant chain (least profitable business according to stats) and be successful – just give me $3M. Most people severely underestimate the doors money can open.

CENTS or not, you have a business that...

1. You started yourself from nothing
2. Employs a team of people in skilled work
3. Has grown significantly due to your own proclivities (IE opportunities you created)

In my view, that's a "real" business.

It may not be world conquering at present (IE room to grow) but it's ABSOLUTELY something you should be very proud of and - importantly - you have all of the ingredients for it to go parabolic. Oh, and most of the business is conducted in your second language.

In fact, I was going to reply to your LinkedIn feedback thread the other day but got side-tracked -- there is a company I found which reminded me of you: Up to 50 jobs - as one of Europe’s fastest growing tech firm opens in region - Prolific North (Home). Started in 2016, they're now at $70m in revenue with 1,500 staff. They do software but no reason why you couldn't achieve something similar.

To clarify - I think of a "real" business as one which a founder or founding team starts from nothing and has a creative element which can be used to grow it through prudent investments. I may need to change that definition, but I mean companies that have the ability to further their growth through internal leverage, rather than relying on market forces.

In your case, the primary driving force is you. That much is obvious - you are the face of the business and your work has driven it forward. You have made the various investments into the backend processes in order to get the business to a point where it has a team that's able to deliver a service that is in demand. The LinkedIn side of it is just the mechanism you've found that fits best with your style. Even if you were selling hotdogs in Times Square, it is likely the same sort of people would show up to pay you because they're buying "you", not the fact you've found a method to help LinkedIn growth.

I doubt the ability of someone else to replicate that simply because they have not invested the time/energy into setting up the backend infrastructure like you have. That infrastructure is why you are at the level you're at, and what I was referring to in the first part of my post - it takes significant foresight, appetite for risk & bullheadedness to do that stuff.

Most companies don't make those investments, which is why they struggle to grow.

I think the critical thing to starting a real business is having access to capital. It doesn't matter if you gain that capital due to a windfall of people paying you which gives you sufficient time and resources to exert control (like I did), or because you got an investor.

To just pick up on this, whilst what you've explained is correct, I think you're missing the one thing which I was really getting at --> expertise & experience cannot be bought (on a personal level). To receive investment is fine... but if you're not able to deliver on the growth aims an investor expects, you won't be in business long.

You likely don't see this because you are someone who is able to deliver, but most cannot. Whether someone gets introductions or deals based on a prominent investor is moot without that ability - just look at Elizabeth Holmes.

Consequently, I would argue that whilst capital is definitely important, you don't need a huge amount to get started. You and I both have not raised any outside money. Whilst you're doing infinitely better than me financially, we both did a similar thing to get the money together to move forward; grind - you did your copywriting work, I did a ton of affiliate sites and then moved into software projects & freelance work.

I'm still in that phase now, but am slowly starting to come out of it. Would an investor have expedited that process for me? No, because I would not have had the experience or expertise required to fill out the backend side of the business -- which would have lead me to spend a ton of money doing so.

Here's an example from my own life: -

This was one of the products that started helping me move forward. It didn't make huge amounts of money, but was quite a decent product and I managed to get a good software company to make an excellent version from Ukraine. Very similar to CCleaner.

The above picture was taken inside a Currys store (basically largest electronics retailer in the UK). The reason why we were able to get it into Currys was because my friend told me that "we should start looking at getting our products stocked in retailers". I eventually found the email for John Browett, the CEO of Currys at the time, and sent him an email explaining we had sold 3,000 copies and that we were looking for retail partners. He passed it onto his buying team who basically waved it through.

Remember, I initially sold this as an Internet product - entirely digital. I had no experience packaging products or anything. When I eventually heard from Currys that they wanted a certain number, I had to get it packaged and sent to their distributor. To do this, I found a branding company online and made the box mockup above. It was so bad that I had to pester the distributor to use their GS1UK account to generate a barcode.

Once I had the packaging design, I sent it to the branding guy and told him to send the finished pallet to Currys' distributor. Literally zero checks on my end as to whether the product worked, how the packaging looked etc. First time I saw it was when I took the above photo. I even rewrote a part of the distribution contract to include a clause to allow us to use the data gathered from the product to sell affiliate products (I was 21 when I did this with zero legal training)....


All of that was done on our own dime and whilst it didn't really do well financially because I had no clue about the "backend" stuff I alluded to above, the fact is that the willingness to take those risks gave us the opportunity to do it.

I doubt that any investor would have helped with that, apart from making the process much more convoluted. The various processes, investments and infrastructure we had already set up contributed to us being able to do it.

--

With this I agree. However, I will underline that it's very difficult to say "how to do it", because the "how to do it" most frequently involves getting a big windfall of cash at some point, whether through landing on the right opportunity, being connected with the right people, or having access to the right investors. Once that happens, having things snowball from there becomes relatively easier.

By "how to do it", I meant outline the nature of how business works on a fundamental level - IE provide value, productocracy, etc. Obviously, every business & journey is different but I do believe, as MJ pointed out in his post above, the fundamentals remain regardless of trend.

To put it into context, when you have mainstream media celebrating people that raise $100m for an app, it's easy to think that starting a business is out of reach for most people. My opinion is that, with the right attitude, ability to persevere, expertise and network, the majority could do it. How far they get depends on the investments they make after they start seeing some money, but the Fastlane doctrine, in my eyes, is the notion that, given enough grit, there is room for anyone who seriously wants to make progress... MF provides a "framework" through which to approach it.

I do not believe that someone at your level would require a cash windfall, not at the level you're alluding to at least.

Some cash, absolutely, but not how you're painting it to be. Excellent people always find a way - and it's more to do with momentum, network and infrastructure investment than cash in the bank.

--

Is that fastlane? Nah. It's just money. The right investors don't just give you money – they make introductions. Imagine this big-hitting investor picking up the phone to say PwC, calling his buddy from college, and being like "Yo John – remember when we spoke about XYZ? Well I have just invested in this amazing company that solves that problem, you guys need to get them in!" – Done. $1M contract already added. Investor already basically got his money back. So regardless of how much "value" you provide, you cannot get that deal. Because it's not about the value – sure, you do need to solve their problems and have people working on making things fit their needs and what not. But that's, so to speak, the bare minimum. That alone will not get you the deal.

Fastlane, in my view, is a euphemism for circumventing the status quo and building a strong, independent company based on the provision of genuine value.

Sure, there may be certain businesses which adhere more to the CENTS thing or whatever, but at the end of the day, I think it's a mistake to ascribe what is basically a creative process to something so rigid.

For example, your business may not have the "C" part of CENTS......... so? It's making you money and you're living a great life because of it. Who cares if it it doesn't match the specific nature of MF.

Regarding your examples, yep, they're likely cash grabs. That's fine. But in terms of what you or I are building, I think the underlying principals of Fastlane are extremely important.

--

It's just like the war between Russia and Ukraine. So long as Zelensky can continue making deals and getting funding from the West, Russia cannot win. The moment the funding stops, they're screwed. The key is the money.

Obviously this is a very different topic but I think there is more to it than just "money". The US arms industry is monumental and produces some of the most effective & advanced weaponry known to man. The Patriot, from what I've seen, is a game-changer along with a multitude of other systems. Whilst these weapons require hard currency to produce, without the industrial base & expertise behind the scenes, none of it would matter.

Indeed, most of the money that's been "given" to Ukraine isn't cash but loans and other IOU's with strict stipulations on where it can be spent... mostly with US arms companies like Raytheon. My understanding is the accuracy & effectiveness of the Western weapons has offset the numerical advantage the Russians have, which is why they're so important.

 

[TheOrchestrator]

Objects change their position by being acted upon by forces. It doesn't matter if ten years go by or one hundred, noting different positional states doesn't have any effect on the underlying forces. The Fastlane is a book about financial forces so it will always be relevant.

Is that sorta like asking if physics no longer works because too many people know about it now?

On a serious note though, I totally understand the feeling. What's really behind that question is the fear "Am I too late?!?"

As someone who has fallen on his face many times, but is still trying, allow me to humbly offer a few points for why I no longer wrestle with this thought.

- You gotta be careful about judging your regular "internet experience" as concrete proof of anything. If you were to spend about a week googling videos about quantum physics, watching YouTube videos on it, searching for it on Reddit and Facebook, you'd then start to stumble across more of the same type of content due to how the search algorithms work. Mix in our natural reticular activating system (RAS), and you'll start to think that everyone on the planet is now talking about quantum physics. No, not really, it's just the internet, and your brain, giving you more of what it thinks you're looking for.

- Secondly, there are tons of "gurus" out there using the same words, phrases, or concepts that are used in books like Unscripted , but it's not because they truly live that stuff. They are mostly "list-sellers", trying to pull you into their scammy sales funnels and keep you hooked. They aren't producing more "fastlaners". They are just distracting them and wasting their time and money. Most of your so-called "competition" are busy trying to follow someone else's "system", which is usually a system that doesn't work anymore, hence why the guru "wants to teach it to you." There are many people on this very forum who are going to finish reading MJ's book and get really excited about getting started but will then immediately get trapped and pulled in by the nearest guru, MLM, or trading scam, because they never fully internalized the principles. You don't need to worry about competing with those people.

- Finally, at any given moment, there's usually only like 5-10 types of businesses people are obsessing about on the internet, when, in reality, there are like hundreds, maybe even thousands of ways to get started that most of the crowd isn't talking about. Just a few weeks ago, I had a great conversation at a gas station with a guy who built his business out of cleaning up dog poop (and other wastes) from residential lawns and business-owned lands. I don't remember the business name, but he got my attention because his entire pickup truck had some hilarious branding on it that told you exactly what he did. It turned out that he has 6 other employees driving around the city in these same trucks right now (I live in a really big city), and that the only reason he was driving this one was to drop it off for maintenance work. He doesn't even drive the trucks anymore! What's also interesting is that he said he now had some extra time to work on another business venture he's putting together. How many people do you hear talking about doing stuff like that?!

It's just fear. Shake it off.

 

Dislike ads? Remove them and support the forum: Subscribe to Fastlane Insiders.

[Black_Dragon43]

CENTS or not, you have a business that...

1. You started yourself from nothing
2. Employs a team of people in skilled work
3. Has grown significantly due to your own proclivities (IE opportunities you created)

In my view, that's a "real" business.

It may not be world conquering at present (IE room to grow) but it's ABSOLUTELY something you should be very proud of and - importantly - you have all of the ingredients for it to go parabolic.

I see, yes I agree with you.

Oh, and most of the business is conducted in your second language.

This isn't correct. English is basically my first language. I think in English and I can speak and write English better than my mother tongue. Not to mention I've been educated my entire life pretty much (apart from my first 3 years of school) in English. So for all intents and purposes English is my first language.

To clarify - I think of a "real" business as one which a founder or founding team starts from nothing and has a creative element which can be used to grow it through prudent investments. I may need to change that definition, but I mean companies that have the ability to further their growth through internal leverage, rather than relying on market forces.

Yes that's all true – the creative element is exactly what you need to grow when you're small. But sometimes, that creative element is found by chance. It's not always entirely your merit.

Here's an example from my own life: -

Love this example. Why didn't you try and scale it or build add-on products? Once you secure distribution for a product with a certain retailer it becomes significantly easier to push other products through.

And yeah, obviously placing advertisements WITHIN the product (& packaging) itself would've been the winning move to create upselling opportunities, or even encourage referrals.

You're the kind of guy who could make lifechanging money with a simple micro SaaS. Solve a specific problem for a niche audience. And just focus on marketing. It's not the product that will be holding you back, but the distribution. Solve the distribution issue, and you'll make a lot of money.

If your SaaS sells for $29/mo if you just get 1,000 users that is $29,000/mo, most of which will be pure profit. And if you can get to 1K users, you can certainly double or triple that.

By "how to do it", I meant outline the nature of how business works on a fundamental level - IE provide value, productocracy, etc. Obviously, every business & journey is different but I do believe, as MJ pointed out in his post above, the fundamentals remain regardless of trend.

I also agree with this. As I said the first time, I haven't come across another book that articulates this. But still – starting a successful business is very hard. And honestly, I think out of reach for the majority of people because they would find the effort required inhuman. Even I may not have gone down this path if I knew from the beginning all that it would take. Of course once you're on it and gained certain skills and what not, it's easier to stay on it.

But, say you took me, stripped me of my skills / contacts, and put me in, say, Argentina, with no possibility of leaving, and blessed me with flawless Spanish and just $1,000 to my name... I would find it virtually impossible to rebuild in 2-3 years. Sure, in 10-15 years it's possible. But 10-15 years isn't a short time haha.

And keep in mind. Despite my intelligence, my path hasn't been easy. I've seen many average people around, they simply wouldn't be able to do what I've done. Much like you I can write contracts, understand balance sheets, create & implementing marketing plans, do public speaking, create websites, program, etc.

Now how many people do you know who can do all these things, all rolled up into one person? I can count them on just one hand.

So if even with all these skills and intelligence it's hard, how much harder is it for an average person, who is good at just one thing? Say an average person, who is just good at being an accountant. They have almost no chance without a cash windfall.

If you take me with all my skills and intelligence, and bankrupt me, I'd be able to make $10K/mo in a few months just by going back to writing copy for people. In fact, someone once dared me to prove this in 2020 or 2021, can't remember. But take the accountant above, if say he became a millionaire in real estate because he made a ton of money as an accountant which he reinvested... and take all his assets and money away. He'd be doomed.

It's why some people commit suicide when they go bankrupt. They KNOW they couldn't do it again, nor be able to live a life that is acceptable to them.

I do not believe that someone at your level would require a cash windfall

But you do require it – that's precisely how you can get started and build all the infrastructure that you talk about. Without it, you're basically at a standstill, selling some sort of service to make some small money to basically go on living. What you need to do is find something that grows explosively over a quick period of time, that basically creates excess profit and allows you to reinvest. There was a guy here from Greece you were talking to in the past – who made a ton of money running a Fiverr company doing product descriptions for Amazon FBA when it started to get big initially. He too had a big windfall of cash. Not sure what he's up to today. But I see this cash windfall in all cases of success – MJ's included.

Look at someone like Iman Ghadzi – most likely he inherited a large amount of money. That too is a cash windfall. Therefore building a personal brand was easy. Building his business and image wasn't hard – because he had the money. Now if you tried to replicate Iman Ghadzi's ascension, without his money, you'd find it virtually impossible.

In your case, the primary driving force is you. That much is obvious - you are the face of the business and your work has driven it forward. You have made the various investments into the backend processes in order to get the business to a point where it has a team that's able to deliver a service that is in demand. The LinkedIn side of it is just the mechanism you've found that fits best with your style. Even if you were selling hotdogs in Times Square, it is likely the same sort of people would show up to pay you because they're buying "you", not the fact you've found a method to help LinkedIn growth.

This is a very interesting way to think about it, and largely may be true. Thanks.

Obviously this is a very different topic but I think there is more to it than just "money". The US arms industry is monumental and produces some of the most effective & advanced weaponry known to man. The Patriot, from what I've seen, is a game-changer along with a multitude of other systems. Whilst these weapons require hard currency to produce, without the industrial base & expertise behind the scenes, none of it would matter.

Indeed, most of the money that's been "given" to Ukraine isn't cash but loans and other IOU's with strict stipulations on where it can be spent... mostly with US arms companies like Raytheon. My understanding is the accuracy & effectiveness of the Western weapons has offset the numerical advantage the Russians have, which is why they're so important.

Yes, 80% of that money is basically the US testing weapons and paying their own manufacturers.

 

[cikatomo]

I am not sure what your aiming too.

If you think scientific studies will make people buy then I bet there will be ads with scientific studies inside. Which goes back to advertising which is part of marketing.

Also world is not operating in vacuum, there's always something change. Once the competition becomes too high there will emerge another opportunity.