Why We Trust Fraudsters!

[@PBoyle]

Sign up for The Daily Upside using this link: bit.ly/3HjLdfZ

[@antonystringfellow5152]

Just to let you know, I am subscribed and have the notifications turned on for this channel but I have no notification for this video, 16 hours after it was uploaded.

[@Omar_Little]

you say "eccentricity" wrong

[@petersuvara]

Keep it up Patrick. You’re well above those like CoffeeZilla and Spencer Cornelia. Focused professionalism with a solid education in the field backing it.

[@petersuvara]

Elon musk fits a lot of what you mentioned.

[@game5201]

Please do a video on Steinhoff

[@chancerobinson5112]

“It is harder to convince people they have been fooled than it is to fool them in the first place.” - Mark Twain

[@tomlxyz]

I've always wondered how true that is. Sure, if you have someone gullible. But if you have someone sceptical?

[@TRUEbASNER]

@@tomlxyz it's intended as a generalisation, skeptics are usually a minority, so for most people it applies.

[@CarlMcKenzie]

Are you sure you credited that correctly?

[@SeanBeatsMapson]

Stop blaming people who have been fooled. Blame yourself for not being able to show them they have been fooled. Let’s stop blaming eachother and start bringing people out of this delusion.

[@GregMoress]

For those who disagree.. How many religions are there? Well, they simply all cannot be true. Yet everyone believes their* lie (I mean religion) they were taught at age 8. Once *it becomes 'believed' you cannot convince a person that their religion is false... Even if everything it is based upon is verifiable* madness.

[@marcusmoonstein242]

I'm 54 years old, and I've been targeted three times in my life by con men. The only time they got me was the first time and it was for a trivial amount of money (luckily!). Years ago I watched a police documentary about the detectives who investigate this type of crime, and the lead detective gave some warning signs of a potential con: 1. Humans are by nature mutually helpful and also like to make easy money. Con artists know this and so often craft a story about how you can make lots of easy money while simultaneously helping other people in some way. Basically, you'll be convincingly told that you can make tons of cash and feel virtuous about it at the same time. 2. There is often a convincing reason for time urgency. You will be told that you only have a short period of time to take advantage of this once-in-a-lifetime opportunity, and if you don't act quickly you'll regret it for the rest of your life. This appeals to FOMO and discourages the mark from digging deeper into the story. (Note that this doesn't always apply as some con-artists will spend years building up a relationship with their mark). 3. The con artist will often try to take the mark outside of their familiar surroundings. Unfamiliar surroundings increase sensory overload, and this leaves less cognitive resources available to critically examine the story. Often combined with time urgency. 4. The con artist will usually take the mark outside their field of expertise. It's very difficult to BS a farmer about farming, but easier to con them about the vast mineral wealth hidden under their land. 5. The con artist will often flatter their mark by telling them how astute, smart or lucky they are to invest in this enterprise while other people are too stupid to see the opportunity right in front of them. Who doesn't like to be told that they're smart?

[@stage6fan475]

Thanks for this. Very consise from the detective. Did you write it down?

[@marcusmoonstein242]

@@stage6fan475 Nope, the first con artist who got me combined all these together in a very well designed story. When I watched the documentary about a year later I matched the aspects of the story I had been told with what the detective was saying, and the main points just stuck in my head.

[@danaphanous]

@@marcusmoonstein242 Thanks for writing that up! Nice concise summary of red flags. I don't think I have been conned so far unless you count giving a little money to "homeless" who often had stories that may or may not have been true, but my parents always told me something similar. #1: If it's too good to be true it probably is #2: Never make quick decisions if you can help it, and especially when it comes to money. It is always worth taking your time and doing a thorough analysis. #3: If someone is asking for money and stirring up emotions/urgency, walk away. That's almost always a huge red flag. If someone is rushing you, it usually is for sketchy reasons, a reasonable person would give you time to look into it more as they would have confidence in the business opportunity they are presenting. That doesn't identify all con men. As you said Marcus, the patient can take a long time building up the relationship/trust. But that will eliminate the vast majority of off the street cons as they are spreading their marks wide and generally won't purse someone that doensn't have the profile they are looking for. Just by insisting on taking your time and doing research, you will cause them to walk away. They will probably do so exhibiting strong feelings (disgust, anger, annoyance...) as they know those can cause someone to capitulate. You just have to tell yourself you probably dodged a con and not let it get to you. No reasonable person will ask for snap investment decisions.

[@scorch4299]

OG con man Donald Trump is gonna run in 2024, and people STILL buy into him. Its nuts.

[@colonelweird]

Some of this reminds me of a very low level con I've been seeing for almost 40 years: guy comes up to you on the street and says his car ran out of gas & he's desperate to get home, just needs a few bucks for gas. He talks very fast and sounds truly pitiful. It worked on me the first time, but when I heard the exact same story again and again, I realized it was bs.

[@dcnative1618]

My number one red flag is anyone or anything telling me to "Hurry! Act now before it is too late! Don't miss out!" Any pressure to rush into a commitment is a big red flag. And part of that includes efforts to pressure someone to make a decision based on emotion rather than common sense. And also to stay away from making important financial decisions when tired or distracted. Lastly ask questions. Some people are afraid of appearing stupid but "pride goeth before the fall." I don't care if someone thinks I am as dumb as a bag of hammers. And in fact this can be an advantage because often con artists get careless when they think their mark is dim.

[@abrahamstuvwyz6693]

That's basically what my father used to say: the good contracts are the ones that remain good even after you spend one night sleeping over them before signing (in both the sense that you get some time to think them through and that the other party is willing to wait and let you think it through before closing the deal).

[@petrhorak3268]

This! I once went to a “reputable” used car seller company which was located next to a car making company Škoda factory. They had “certification” from the manufacturer as a “honest” blah blah “every car is verified, trust me bro”. So I went to this dealership. They seemed honest. So I told them I am interested in this car and I went for a test drive. So I did a reservation for this car. The next day I got a phone call and the salesman started to pressure me to buy it fast “there are like other 10 people wanting to buy, it is a great deal”. This made me wary and I had an instinct I smell some BS. I went digging and searching for the car “EAN”. I found out that the car was crashed earlier and that it is a “commission sale” which doesn’t fall under the guarantees of the used car dealership. I backed out of this. I went after 6 months around the car dealership and found out that the car was still there and nobody bought it. So even the claim of the salesman that there is high demand for this car was a lie. Don't trust a “certificate - we are honest” BS. I bought a used car from person with gold chain around his neck who looked a bit “sleazy”. I contacted people who bought from him and everyone vouched him. I did the same digging for his used cars and everything was OK as he told me. He didn’t pressure me to buy. I found out that person who didn’t look trustworthy was a genuine person. And that the salesman in a suit with “certificates” was the grifter.

[@mvs9122]

We shouldn't dismiss the media and their lack of professional journalism. They promote people and never challenge their absurd assertions. The part about Kevin O'Leary, pure gold.

[@steverl22]

Journalism isn't real.....the media is here to keep the sheep busy.

[@zpgJiggleBilly]

Then you just add, why do people listen to the media? Why don't you/they challange their assertions?

[@rtqii]

Calling Jim Cramer

[@apacheattackhelicopter8185]

Huh? Patrick just described how investigators traveled to Wirecard office locations in remote countries and investors just dismissed their findings. You expect media to spend a small fortune on an investigation like this only for people to accuse them of lying and side with fraudsters?

[@juniorjames7076]

How do we know the government (or deep state) itself isn't in on the scam or heist?

[@vbrown6445]

As a fundraiser for non-profits that provide services for youth and poor communities, I often apply for grants from large companies like these investors. They usually require audits, financials, board lists, and lists of other donors, among lots of other info, before they'll even THINK of granting a non-profit $10K. They'll even question budget expenses like living wages and benefits for staff. Then they'll act like it was such a heavy lift and sacrifice for them to allocate $300K among 50+ non-profits in one year. But then turn around and make statements like these to their shareholders, that it was just a drop in the bucket for them to lose millions by investing in these scammers.

[@mr.pavone9719]

What do you promise THEM in return? With scammers they at least get to hear about all the money they're going to make. With a legit charity, all they get is a tax write-off, a little PR and maybe some semblance of feeling like a good person.

[@theultimatereductionist7592]

You remind them incessantly what THEY (hedge funds) HAVE ALREADY GOTTEN from doing NO real work, yet 99% of society does all the real hard useful work that builds their buildings, provides them with running water to drink and so their toilets will work, etc. and therefore it is time THEY pay back what THEY owe society.@@mr.pavone9719

[@helloicanseeu2]

@@mr.pavone9719 correct, greed overpowers common sense in most scam stories, it keeps repeating until it is not funny anymore.

[@cheezemonkeyeater]

To be fair, 80% of the non-profits in this country are, in spirit, though they follow the letter of the law, also fraudulent. And they know this because they take advantage of the fraud for tax breaks.

[@Ln-cq8zu]

Yes, and also people like Elizabeth Holmes were already fairly rich and moved is the social circles that investors also frequented.

[@extreme5026]

I love getting a scam ad during this video about how scammers trick us. It’s like a pop quiz in the middle of a university lecture to see if you were paying attention.

[@loh1870]

It's like a rigged game but I agree with the rest

[@Itried20takennames]

For Theranos, I think there was a desire to see it as a story of “bright, college drop-out newcomer comes in and shows all those stuffy so-called “experts” how its done.” While you cant implicitly trust experts, knowing a field doesn’t make you a good or bad person, there is a strong and kind of odd theme in the US that “not being an expert” is somehow better than spending 10 plus years to actually understand a complex field.

[@moonman2022]

It's not *that* odd. There's corruption everywhere. We can all see that we get lied to a lot, especially by corporations. If an honest expert manages to get some real information to us then more power to 'em, but you'll understand if we don't just immediately take you at your word.

[@rjs_698]

The problem is that "experts" are rarely innovators. Most technological progress in made by the proverbial "two blokes in a shed" who ask "why not?" rather than coming up with, possibly irrelevant, reasons why it won't work. The Wright Brothers, two bicycle mechanics, were the first to achieve powered heavier than air flight rather than Professor Langley, the Smithsonian's preferred choice. The Wright Brothers were actually really good engineers but we only understand that in retrospect. The problem is that we sometimes don't grasp that for every dreamer who spots something that everyone else has missed there are 99 who have come up with something that doesn't work. None of this matters much if people are wasting their own, or their friends' or family's, money; the problem starts when someone like Elizabeth Holmes manages to convince the people looking for the next big thing that what they're doing is going to work and that they deserve lots of money. I look at the amount of venture capital being put into the eVTOL space at the moment and remain astonished at the way that it's all about selling the dream of a flying car rather than asking questions about why the current solution (the helicopter) has only achieved a modest amount of market penetration and what level of reduction in both acquisition and running costs is going to be needed in order to improve on that significantly. The question, even with someone like Holmes, is when does a dreamer who wastes large amounts of other people's money turn into a con-artist?

[@SM-nz9ff]

@@rjs_698 huh? the Wright Brothers are a prime example of an expert in their field....

[@rjs_698]

@@SM-nz9ff - Then why did the "experts" at the Smithsonian Institution spend 40 years denying that the Wright Brothers achieved the first heavier than air powered flight? They were outsiders and resented for it. If you actually read what I wrote I acknowledged that they were excellent engineers. They read up on all the previous work and did lots of experiments. They were also extremely secretive about exactly what they'd done until Wilbur's tour of Europe in (I think) 1908 and Orville's (sadly fatal) demonstrations to the US Army at the same time. My point was, and remains, that it was very easy to dismiss them at the time as two bicycle mechanics who wouldn't publicly demonstrate exactly what they'd done and must therefore be charlatans. Incidentally all the European pioneers immediately acknowledged that they must have been telling the truth after Wilbur's displays and that's why Flyer 1 was exhibited in the Science Museum in London until the 1940's.

[@tipodeincognito5660]

@@rjs_698 Expert is, by definition, someone who know a great deal, or better, has a lot of experience on something. If want to know how a surgergy works, for example you'll probably fare better asking a surgeon that the first guy you cross in the street. He could be wrong, but god dammit, people see this in extremes.

[@foobarFR]

One big red flag : the use of FOMO. If the person doesn't want, or even doesn't let you have time to consider and think about a business proposition or discuss it with your relatives (ie : talking to your wife/husband, etc.), flee FOMO is the easiest way to get scammed.

[@ashleygordon3467]

My father always said ‘those who speak often about honesty and integrity usually possess little of either’. Forty years later I can say his advice is universally true. The second I detect any mention of honesty, integrity, greater good or self proclaimed worthy values, I run a mile. Now the business scene is rife with claims of superior social values. Believe it at your peril.

[@charlesreid9337]

if anyone doubts this just google any megachurch pastor. or hell most fundamentalist religious leaders

[@sgttomas]

Truth

[@安然-x9t]

from experience this is soo true

[@marymccartor9373]

Not just the business scene, but also the political sphere.

[@erinpilla]

Oh no I always speak of those two values and really strive to be honest in my dealings, my work. No one can say anything about me. On the other hand I know people who are well no pun intended honest that they scam people and steal. Now I am getting confused

[@carolgebert7833]

One red flag I look for: When I am told to stop thinking. "You don't need to think too hard about this one." or "The experts all agree that..." or "The evidence is overwhelming" without actually presenting any evidence.

[@fsaldan1]

And if you don't believe they accuse you of having sold yourself to the oil companies, or something similar.

[@ivancliff2514]

The same rule applies to god claims and religious ideas. Zero good empirical evidence and “don’t think too hard about it.” These are indeed red flags at a minimum. Folks believe the cons because many of them have been primed to dismiss critical thinking and considering uncomfortable ideas from a very young age.

[@Kittiesinclair5]

Yes. I was once told ‘we dont have to provide any evidence to support our decision’ after I asked for evidence.

[@melissaa152]

Or how about: Sure, we will release the data in 75 years.

[@TahtahmesDiary]

I've stopped presenting evidence as a random person because I've come to learn I could reference 1000 sources and dig up a Rosetta Stone to prove my point and some people will still believe a comment on the internet over verified facts of decades.

[@sapphiron21]

My parents got fooled by a ponzi scheme when they were young and raised me to be extremely prudent with my finance. No such thing as "easy money" and "low risk, high return", only "if it seem too good to be true, it probably is". Never really appreciate those lessons until i managed to dodge a banking scandal involving fraudulent bond which affected 40000+ people who lost most if not all their life saving from it.

[@armchairwomanmao2922]

What kind of bond was it

[@sapphiron21]

@@armchairwomanmao2922 not really sure if i got the english term right but i believe its called non-guaranteed (correct me if im wrong) bond. Not only did that bank that acted as the intermediary violated the law by selling it to non-professional investors which mostly just regular folks in this case, they also marketed it as extremely safe. They also worded it as another form of VIP saving account with higher interest rate to lure people who were just trying to make a regular deposit. The company selling said bond went belly up in a huge corruption scandal and now those bonds are worth less than the paper they are printed on.

[@citywitt3202]

@@sapphiron21 oh was that JustISA with the 8% interest rate when the base rate was 0.25%? There were a handful of those which were essentially bale bonds that were massively over promoted to retail investors via social media, I remember commenting at the time on one of their posts they shouldn’t be misleading in their marketing, as they were making it sound like a sovereign credit risk rather than junk debt from someone who’d just been given jail time.

[@sapphiron21]

@@citywitt3202 it was a vietnamese real estate group, think of a smaller version of Evergrande if you will. They were using the country most popular private bank to sell their bonds to ignorant people trying to open saving accounts, instead of going through a proper exchange due to their poor financial state.

[@OnTheThirdDay]

Reason TV put out a funny video about regulations and people getting tricked. The moral was that people should be financially literate

[@Zeerse_Chef]

I saved my mum from a con a few months back. Somehow they had got hold of a shareholder list with my dad's name and number (who has passed some time ago) and claimed that due to a takeover of the company, her tiny number of shares had multiplied many times in value, all she had to do was send them several thousand £s to get the larger amount. She was suspicious but she was half convinced. They had tried to convince it was sensitive share price information and sent her an NDA even with docu-sign to make it more seem more legitimate, no doubt to try to avoid her even speaking to me about it. They were based in the US and the FCA here was aware of them but only listed them as trying to sell un-licensed investment products, disappointingly, despite me reporting them as attempting fraud, that remains the only warning on the FCA site. Bottom line is, organisations who genuinely owe you money, never need you to send them money first.

[@tattletalestrangler8084]

What???? Are you saying the nigerian prince who promised me 150m dollars if i send him 100 dollars google play giftcards lied to me????

[@jacobprice2579]

One of the saddest moments in my professional life so far was speaking to an elderly pensioner who had most of their retirement savings basically stolen about 10 years ago. “He just seemed so trustworthy, I had such confidence in him”. That’s what makes these people such parasites.

[@DoDo.444]

What kind of heartless human does this.

[@patienceobongo]

Buy my magic beans, they're safe and effective.

[@christophertaylor3150]

How sad

[@bmoshareholderappleshareho855]

@@patienceobongo I suppose during the tulip mania, everybody was saying, "You gotta buy tulips! You gotta buy tulips! It's the way of the future."

[@simonxag]

Sadly, many parasites are ordinary people making a living. They are recruited into industrialized scamming operations run openly as legal businesses. Most of the characters who ring you from India are like that. If their consciences are a problem they're fired. If they make trouble there's company security. And the cops are on board with this: it's an industry bringing vast money into the country from abroad and resulting in political influence. After all, who objected to the East India Company.

[@stereomaster4231]

SBF looks like the type of college roommate who didn't shower for 6-8 days then one day you find him using your toothbrush

[@robertbeisert3315]

The guy who drinks your milk from the carton and eats your leftovers, complaining that it's too spicy for him.

[@fullmetaltheorist]

This seems too specific. Did this happen to you bro?

[@stereomaster4231]

Lol, thanks for reading

[@williamdrum9899]

Probably because he never brushes his hair 😅

[@chironjo]

Wow; great comparison.

[@ogzombiebreakfast]

Dear Lord, I got an ad during this video but I was looking at a different screen and 100% thought you were showing an example of one of these fraudsters and the rhetoric they use.

[@echelonrank3927]

was it the fake elon musk ad ? double your crypto 🤩 . what if i dont have crypto ?🤔

[@oonaamookhao]

“If it sounds too good to be true, it probably is.” Words to live by.

[@blurredsquid]

Well said… if it’s 1) low risk… 2) short duration… 3) high returns… run for the hills and don’t look back…

[@WilliamWizer]

@@blurredsquid if it's (1)low risk and (2)long duration, it doesn't matter how the returns are, don't wait. run like the devil is pursuing you.

[@superscatboy]

Remove the word "probably" and you're on to something.

[@oonaamookhao]

@@superscatboy It’s a quote that my Economic professor gave my class as a graduation parting gift before we enter the rat race. It’s seared in my subconsciousness and I use it as a radar to identify fraudsters.

[@superscatboy]

@@oonaamookhao It's good advice, just one word too many.

[@joeblow9657]

Canadian here: a big issue is that a lot of business side fraudsters aren't heavily punished or even investigated at times. You'd be surprised how readily government will give out grants and interest free loans to businesses that can't repay them (without collateral). It's sort of an old boys club in the sense that as long as there's not too much fraud we don't punish fraudsters because a decent potion of business actors are engaging in it but not enough to ruin the high trust market exchange.

[@blogdesign7126]

Damn this sounds like how VC's operate south of the Border in the USA.

[@roadbone1941]

@@blogdesign7126 I'm looking into venture capitalists, and I am SHOCKED at the levels of jaw dropping stupidity. I constantly hear stories like: >"I gave _____ 500,000,000$ because he shook my hand firmly". Does the company make a profit? "who cares" Does it have a board of directors? "I donno" Does it have a product/service people want? "no, but the CEO rents out a club/bar every weekend which means he's a heckin eccentric genius" No wonder these people get scammed.

[@ericschumaker5126]

There’s an expression in the business world that describes this well: “Pigs get fat…hogs get slaughtered.”

[@joeblow9657]

@@rasurin Pretty much. Got to make sure we screw over those poors on inconsequential sums of money instead. I hate Canada so much!

[@jnauttube]

My red flag is overly complex business models. Like enron if you ask, "so how is it you make your money" and the answer is, "it's complicated", run

[@benfel9403]

I have experienced this human behavior first hand when I was trying to raise funds for my tech startup. I was presenting my realistic business plan with plainly and honestly assessed and presented risks outlined clearly. I really struggled to raise the funds. Whilst in one meeting with a group of investors, I noticed all they talked about was another company they had all invested in. That company did not present the truth and played on greed etc. I could see how unsafe the investment was after 10 mins but all they did was fight over who was getting more stock etc. It was like children fighting over a shiny toy in the playground and these are businessmen in charge of billions! In the end, 18 months later, the company totally collapsed and it turned out they had never even built a product in the first place! A big less on learned there!

[@1queijocas]

I don’t understand how that is possible. These big investors have the money to pay someone (or a company) to investigate for them. How does one invest billions without checking the facts?

[@Cherryblossoms110]

@@1queijocas Because an idiot with a lot of money is just an idiot with a lot of money

[@arturovillaluz2053]

In the movie "Boiler Room" there was one investor who said, "forget the info". Many investors are afraid to regret that they didn't invest in something that was "really good".

[@amandarose4469]

Nikola is another one he left out. Sounds like the company.

[@sacb0y]

@@1queijocas Sales does not discriminate on income level.

[@Jannikheu]

People will always trust people who look confident and can tell good stories.

[@patienceobongo]

Like newsreaders

[@imperialkhmer6146]

Religious and political leaders

[@farmalmta]

I read an article years ago written by a con artist on how fraudsters play on three weaknesses, which nearly everybody has to some extent or another: 1) greed 2) desire to be liked 3) desire to be the hero. Once they figure out your primary motivation and weakness, they're expert at playing up to it. He said that the worst result for fraudsters is when they encounter a person who simply says no and sticks to it. Trying to mentally joust with a con artist is just playing into their strengths. Simply say "no" and nothing else AND STICK TO IT. Just "no". They'll move on to more gullible marks.

[@jackhargreaves1911]

Well said

[@blakksheep736]

Thank you.

[@erinpilla]

I agree. When conmen see you about to call their bluff they become aggressive. I've experienced enough to believe in OP's post

[@sookendestroy1]

I personally take the "I'm sure this is a scam until proven otherwise route"

[@strategic1710]

Agreed. I assume something is bullshit until proven otherwise.

[@theultimatereductionist7592]

Agreed. Shame we have to now assume guilty until proved innocent with regard to companies that do no real work: just push money around.

[@gguckmfguyiijh]

You will still get scammed some day

[@adamh1228]

yep

[@whensomethingcriesagain]

Yeah, that's called due diligence.

[@Trekkie-md2fr]

“People want an authority to tell them how to value things, but they choose this authority not based on facts or results, they choose it because it seems authoritative and familiar.” ― Michael Burry

[@mechanicalmonk2020]

Like Michael Burry

[@honkhonk8009]

Whats the altnerative other than just looking out for patterns. BBB certificates should be given out more often nowadays imo. Cant trust the government to do their basic work anymore.

[@PointsofData]

​@@honkhonk8009 research lmfao. In this day and age, there is little you cannot research for yourself, even by jumping on Twitter or a subreddit and asking questions. And if you can't find a satisfactory answer then don't trust whatever it is you were initially researching.

[@chabelitapitufina1342]

The sad truth about trusting fraudsters, is very simple. The problem is that most people have a tendency to trust people that look a certain way and talk a certain way. In other words people that either look like us, people we admire, look up to or people we would like to look like or be like. The sad part about this is that many people who TRULY deserve a chance, don’t obtain a much needed opportunity because they don’t have the right look or simply don’t portray the success image that many believe they should portray. People sadly believe that the right outfit, briefcase, shoes or car, makes you trustworthy and successful. Once we stop judging the physical look of a person, and focus on what’s on the inside, we will make much better investment choices and less dumb mistakes!

[@TheBigdog868]

Book is judged by cover

[@civotamuaz5781]

Lmao imagine believing strangers

[@useodyseeorbitchute9450]

"Once we stop judging the physical look of a person" Actually quite a few hints are already given this way. But it should be only used as first filter, to pick those whose character you should even bother to carefully asses.

[@TheThreatenedSwan]

Have you ever seen fraudsters? They don't look that great. Things like intelligence, honesty, and looks are correlated even if for example some white collar crimes are committed by more intelligent people because they're the only ones capable of doing them

[@renacleerican7824]

" L'habit ne fait pas le moine."

[@pedroroque8681]

The reality of it is, most scammers never get caught. The entire world runs on lies and luck. We tend to look at these scammers with distaste while being completely oblivious that they’re a tiny fraction of a much larger pool of dishonest people who run the world.

[@justine_holloway]

very true

[@Mohammadalhajj55555]

Patrick Boyle …. You, my good man, are a goldmine of comedy. The extra dose of professionalism and informativeness is a nice bonus.

[@gnuPirate]

He is also a goldmine of fascinating informativeness and professionalism, with comedy as an added bonus... I agree.

[@bc-guy852]

But he's specifically said, in a recent episode, that he's annoyed by the comments about his humour - this is serious business analysis!!

[@tomlxyz]

Him having this dry humor, when he said "totally free" for the sponsorship I felt like he was being ironic even though I knew it was just an ad

[@annesuekocoyle1956]

I worked in a pub in London in my youth. Managers were the nastiest meanest couple you ever did meet. Most of us working there were transients from the commonwealth countries working for £3 an hour. But they treated their assistant manager like the golden child, who was, I suppose, a younger version of themselves, white, drove a fancy car, charming, lower middle class Londoner striving for upper middle class status. Turned out he was defrauding them the whole time. I still think that if they hadn’t been so full of suspicion and ire at their staff the whole time, they might have been more clear-eyed about the people they let in to their trust.

[@rdallas81]

Work. At a bar. No wonder.

[@helenelarsen25]

When "people begin to take shortcuts because they feel they can trust the people involved" ... it is very true and spot on as a clear indicator. Thank you sir for your insights!

[@Yatukih_001]

My experience with scam artists runs as follows. 1. The scam artist is trusted by a politician. 2. The scam artist wins a sum of money but never shares anything. 3. The scam artist promises you a better world. 4. The scam artist wants you to put something into your body, which is usually something hazardous. 5. Once you deny what the scam artist wants from you, EVERYONE around you begins to call you names. During this time, the scam artist confronts his hoax in public. 6. During the name - calling process, using basic means of transport like airplanes, cars, etc. becomes hard for you. 7. Years later the same people as the ones who trusted the scam artist distrust you, because the scam artist has been telling lies about you.8. Every month you see the scam artist in the media. You see his face, you know it´s him but you are unsure if you should report it to the police. 9. The scam artist works for an organization you have trusted your whole life, until you find out its all untrue.10. The scam artist is scared of you because you detected him. Once he knows you have detected him, he calls you ´anti´- and then, he uses any noun which is added to ´anti´ to devalue you. Scam artists can be incredibly hard to catch, but sometimes you have to go underground and keep a safe distance from them to research them and find the right contacts to expose them.

[@patrickmckeag3215]

"Many A-List celebrities plus Kevin O'Leary". I laughed out loud!

[@chrisUyehara]

lol, me 2

[@piggsinablankie]

I know, I cracked up over that.

[@HarryAmber]

I logged in to comment on that one 😂

[@OntologyofValue]

Fantastic episode Patrick! The problem is: no matter how intelligent we are, we are still fragile to fraudsters as they always speak to our emotional mind - and we are not in full control of our desires and emotions. Even if you are conned once, it doesn't mean that you will get immune to conmanship... And today, in the times of deep fakes, this becomes even more of a problem.

[@JCNvid]

I worked for 3 years for a conman. A)They used honestly, it's true, believe me, etc really often. B) they get bored with business data, because they work on other principles than sound business C) they are always coming up with new gimmicks. New lies, new products, new shinny things to avoid talking about issues. D) they like to discuss popular topics so that other feel they are on top of everything, even if they know zero about the topic. E) they will always try to pay for lunch.

[@patienceobongo]

Thanks, handy. Bullshitting about everything is expected. Why pay for lunch? So you always owe them due to furst impression?

[@JCNvid]

@@patienceobongo Paying for stuff is a way to boast their success. They want to make sure you know they can pay for everything because life and their business is doing really well. Even if they pay credit on 90 days. Its all about status. You can see this with griffters (SBF used cheap cloths and cars, yeah, but bought everything for their staff and overpaid them - not an accident). there are other tell signs... at a specific company I worked @ end of the month the pressure for quick sales and crazy prices went up, meetings with production department went down. One would assume that their would be a big push for production to make a end-of-month push, but it was the opposite.

[@oliversteiner9019]

A-D are spot on, see the orange moron….except E…that one doesn’t pay for anything

[@scorch4299]

hmm...seems like i can take advantage of E

[@StrayCatInTheStreets]

Sounds like most CEOs

[@thecooletompie]

Another red flag to check is whether soft bank has invested into into it.

[@dungbui1341]

Lmao very true

[@That_One_Guy...]

Japanese company SoftBank ? or something else ?

[@dungbui1341]

@@That_One_Guy... yes

[@hendrikd2113]

Or if MBS is buying in to use it on the line.

[@robertagren9360]

blackrock vanguard, softbank. They're investment companies. It's safer to invest on the fall of the company. As example the stock market always drop, these increases of volatility is caused by low cash flow. When the stock rises it drops and these drops is what they earn money on. The stock is overvalued when rising by 70% in a single day and the stock can only drop even lower because there's no cash flow. The stock market is odd in this way that losses in money increases the stock as debts are paid. It think that since it has paid debts it's able to make new loans. The stock rises since it's traded on an even lower rating than told. That's why failures of companies are reliable. Over time high valued stocks are low valued as it has been sold more times than bought. This is why buying the dip , catching the knife is for companies you won't hold. Every time someone does this they increasingly drop the value. That is eventually going to spiral in a volatility who may go in any direction.

[@brettstarks1846]

“A-list celebrities, plus Kevin O’Leary.” ROFL, love the dry wit. You’ve definitely earned a subscription!

[@jojotheoj]

My red flag: Do I struggle explaining the concept I’m being sold? If it only makes sense in the presence of the “seller”, something is wrong. This is relationship advice, too. Toxic people use confusion as a tool to lure you into relying on them for that sense of congruence we all crave.

[@aarondavis8943]

The key word is _coy._ When people avoid certain questions, there's something wrong. It's pretty simply to spot unless your own biases blind you.

[@simontang5487]

As a Canadian I can relate to the Canadian Paradox. I was fresh out of school and running the business center for an international trade convention. We had a business center where people could use the fax machine (yes that old). A business man ask me to use the fax machine. He did and said he need to run to another meeting but will return to settle the charges. My supervisor was incredulous how "Canadian" I was.

[@cdreid9999]

Americans tend to worship greed. But even here there are lotso of examples of that culture being superior. A lot of farm stands, newspapers etc put out cash boxes with a sign that says insert cash here. And noone rips them off.

[@StarlightEdith]

Did he come back?

[@shahabmos5130]

@@StarlightEdith the other guy was not canadian .

[@honkhonk8009]

Im Canadian too. Love this country but one thing i hate abt it is our absolute slave mentality towards authority. Americans are perfectly fine replacing their power structures with decentralized ones, while we desperately cling onto whatever instutition sounds authoritative enough.

[@Anti-FreedomD.P.R.ofSouthKorea]

Sounds like Holmes should have built Theranos on Canadian grounds instead!

[@seanhunter111]

In sillicon valley there is a huge emphasis on disruption and iconoclasm so they were ripe for Theranos. I was once asked (at a board meeting of a fintech) by a sillicon valley investor why I was hiring finance people and not more engineers. I had to explain to them that we already had enough engineers and since we were doing finance, it also helped to have people who knew how to do finance. The investor was skeptical. Secondly I had a friend who was nearly hired by Theranos. He was interviewed by Elizabeth Holmes and during the interview she said to him that if he wanted he could fire everyone in engineering and just hire his own people. It struck him as so psychopathic he passed.

[@RmsOceanic]

I'm also reminded of Nikola Motors, who promised not only hydrogen-engine trucks at a decent price, but a whole network of hydrogen fuel stations across the USA, and on the back of these promises got a stock valuation of $34 Billion, despite the only evidence of any of this was footage of a truck later revealed to be just rolling down a hill.

[@jc.1191]

That was such an obvious fraud to me. The name, lack of any sales. It screamed all hype to get money for ipo investors to cash out.

[@knobjockey6882]

One of the worst parts about it was the reputational damage done to hydrogen as an energy technology. We know the tech works and big auto industry names like Hyundai have working hydrogen cars, but Nikola was riding the cheap VC capital wave rather than making tech that works.

[@realGBx64]

This rings like an other company named after the same person selling “full self driving” that is actually “fool manual intervention”.

[@ohdearearthlings1879]

@@realGBx64 Musk is far from perfect, but he does deliver product. Tesla Model 3 is a great Mum's shopping cart and by the time young lads buy it second hand, it still will not have a noisy exhaust pipe or a spare tyre.

[@realGBx64]

@@ohdearearthlings1879 it is an overhyped crapbox with panel gaps the as wide as thumbs, entertainment panels that are not automotive grade and malfunction after a few years. Musk “delivers a product” in the way Theranos did: it is far from the hype, much more mundane, and only affordable because Musk convinced politicians to put subsidies into this before they ever had a carbon neutral grid. The whole thing is a grift.

[@thunderb00m]

Kevin O'leary shade is 100% justified

[@noelcunniffe4675]

Did you also catch the reference at the very end of the video? Classic subtlety

[@djsmithe]

Kevin is just a cartoon now. I was kind of disappointed he didn't mention Elon.

[@morten1953]

@@djsmithe what do you think the last part was about?

[@djsmithe]

@@morten1953 If you're talking about the red watchband and the red pocket square, I'm almost curtain that Kevin O'Leary. Patrick likes poking fun at Kevin.

[@205rider8]

@@djsmithe Elon produces tangible products with components supplied by many companies. Tesla also as verifiable cash flow and cash on hand. Along with a board of directors and audit firm. One is a sucker with virtually no common sense of they compare SBF and Musk.

[@davidhollfelder9940]

My Motto: “It is more dangerous being bliss/routine in a familiar place/setting, than being wary/prudent in a dangerous place/setting.” - my experience in IT and Social Engineering

[@mikeynth7919]

The "dress well" works in situations where people expect that as the dress code. "Dress like the role you are playing" would, I think, be more precise.

[@migy5031]

The jabs at Kevin O’Leary never fail to crack me up. 😂

[@jbinmd]

But how could he leave it unsaid that Kevin is Canadian?

[@btrtrading8734]

Me too 🤣🤣🤣

[@anotherpace]

@@jbinmd esp when discussing the Canadian Paradox of being susceptible to a certain type of con...

[@mvl9591]

O’Leary is spinning a narrative to cover his own ass. He’s being sued.

[@CaptCanuck4444]

Agreed. That guy SUCKS.

[@jonathandewberry289]

Yes, when I was a younger adult and came from a high-trust society, I had no awareness of scammers, con-men and this kind of thing. A certain scenario had this nice looking young woman approach me asking to invest in a situation. The point here, in retrospect, she was running those '10 rules for a con' and pretty much in that exact order. She asked me about some frustration in the situation and being annoyed by it I blabbed away about what I thought and she listened like it was important (it wasn't really) and she listened with that very intrigued and a kind of 'excitement', a bubbly popping attention. At some point I did mention something about politics and she totally agreed with it saying she also blamed that particular municipal government. I mentioned something about my pastor saying something and she asked what denomination and then said she was also raised in that denomination! Now the funny thing is that this is where something went wrong because she did make some sort of sexual flirt or joke, some kind of sexual hint but it threw me off a bit. I think that's when really looked her over and yes indeed I can still remember she was very tidy! Like unusually tidy, neat, clean clothes, well-combed hair, like too much, too good for the time and place and scenario. I think she notice it threw me off and something like 'aha, just joking, i have a crazy sense of humor so anyway...' See, I didn't know any of this stuff. these 'rules' or anything so it was instinctively I made like I needed to get something done and eat or something. Over the next few hours of the layover I noticed her and her boyfriend were criss-crossing around the airport striking up things with various people. There was something going on where they were trying to get someone to share a hotel coupon or discount and follow them to a hotel but I never got the final 'closer' because I think I'd reacted in some way she decided made her drop me. I was eliminated for whatever reasons. I suppose that does bring up that important point: sometimes trust that 'gut instinct' that something seems 'off' and something you can't quite identify in some objective way, but you just know something isn't right. Don't be afraid to go with that now and then.

[@PointsofData]

If they make me feel weird I cut them off, regardless of the type of relationship. I don't have the emotional, psychological or financial means to deal with the issues they're likely to bring me.

[@jimgreene1545]

When I was young I came across several compulsive liars (thankfully ordinary ones not asking for money) in the same stretch of a few months. Each was exposed to me. At the time it puzzled me that such people could exist, I had had high trust. Ever since it has left me with skepticism about people bearing a bit too interesting or coincidental a life story.

[@jacobdaboss8413]

From my experience most people wants life to flow easily, frauds are experts at exploiting that.

[@rodwallace6237]

RE Ten Commandments. Notice how much emphasis was placed on listening? IBM taught its sales people to listen to the customer, the customer then thought the sales person was real smart. Con artist are experts in reading people. Either individually for a long con or a group.

[@helenadavis5782]

One of the biggest red flags I have found is when someone interrupts frequently. Once or twice is nothing, but consistently interrupting, particularly when a question is being answered is the hallmark of someone attempting to steer a conversation and exert control. BTW Love your videos Patrick!

[@musictech85]

I agree. I often pause and think before I answer a question. Shifty people will get nervouse and try and answer for me before I have a chance to get a word out.

[@krisspkriss]

You have a good point. Personally, I try to notice these things and often will start to give them breathing room to be that butt-in-ski. I just slow down the beats per minute on my speech, maybe even add a hint of a southern draw to make is seem more natural and relaxed. I might even give a full bar or so of silence when asked a question, before I start my slow roll answers. This also throws off their baseline when they are trying to cold read you. This also works very well when dealing with the police. Occasionally, I will be asked why I am putting in a comedic pause before I say anything. Hit in the head... trouble processing audio information... just need a moment to parse things that are said by others. What is really interesting is when they create a convoluted and overly complex speech pattern immediately afterwards. That right there is prime material for identifying intent and the ease to which their will swicth to being more coercive.

[@jesusrebornkilledbornagain7889]

I think that's a fair take. It's also important to be cognizant of ADHD being a thing too. If you look at someone like Linus Sebastian (LinusTechTips), he interrupts people often because of his ADHD but is running a very transparent and successful business which supports many families. In addition to that, he has tried to run his business with a set of values that I think most reasonable people would agree with.

[@stinky59]

someone else already replied with a similar comment but… if someone consistently interrupts people all the time, then that’s probably not malicious behavior. interrupting people frequently isn’t trying to steer a conversation, it’s a symptom of adhd. even with years of therapy and meds i still do it. i feel embarrassed about it and i try to curb the behavior but sometimes it just happens anyways. if i have a question about something i just HAVE to say it, even if the other persons still talking. at least i’m self aware enough that i usually go “sorry for interrupting you but-“ i think the difference between interrupting as a red flag and interrupting as an adhd symptom is if they’re doing it impulsively or if they’re doing it intentionally. if someone is just blurting out whatever they think, that’s harmless and they are probably not doing it on purpose. but if it sounds like they’re consciously planning to interrupt the conversation to cause a disturbance or get the other person to stop talking, that could be different i guess.

[@zoeydeu2261]

I interrupt people in conversations sometimes, because I have poor memory. If I don't ask them after they've said something, I'll literally forget. The only time I don't interrupt is when I can take notes, so I can write down/type what I want to ask them later. Not all interruptions are due to malice!

[@if6was929]

There's an even more baffling aspect to a con: the victim can realize, right from the beginning, that they are being conned but they go along with it anyway. The con doesn't have to be refined, the conman doesn't have to be particularly adept and other people can spot the con, yet, some people will willingly follow the con, despite being aware of the glaring red flags. In those cases its just a numbers game, the conman keeps looking for a mark and after a certain number of tries, they know that they'll get a hit, just like in sales.

[@letthetunesflow]

Canada also has the institutions with fairly high public trust. People are willing to contact regulatory/enforcement agencies when they are defrauded, and have a reasonable expectation of at least something being done about the fraud. We may not always expect something big being done when we individually report minor fraud as Canadians, but we do seem to have had some decent success at bringing investigations and regulatory actions against companies repeatedly committing a wide range of illegal crimes… So where by we may be easier targets for fraud, we do seem to on the whole trust that our government agencies will at least do something about illegal business practices that are reported, especially after repeated complaints. It’s much easier to trust that businesses will not defraud you if you have the backing of proper enforcement agencies discouraging, enforcing, and regulating businesses. It may be easy to defraud Canadians, but it is much more difficult to avoid being caught by the police and/or enforcement agencies. Things don’t seem to get to very out of hand either, as any overt fraud will be actually dealt with, especially once it catches the attention of the media. There is sadly a huge problem of low level fraud perpetrated against our most vulnerable citizens like our seniors… It’s sad to see our amazing seniors kindness being exploited by these evil phone/email scammers… It has to be the most pressing issue in Canada when it comes to fraud! Fraudsters will always take advantage of weaknesses within society, Canada must takes more action against these fraudsters who have ingeniously decided to protect themselves from our effective enforcement agencies, and that’s by operating from overseas… This sadly makes our trusting society who’s main anti fraud systems are those based around effective enforcement VS a distrustful population, sadly this opens up a massive vulnerability, that of scammers/fraudsters operating with impunity from overseas, wells outside the reach of law enforcement…

[@josephpeeler5434]

The govt isn't going to save you on the end. The regulatory bodies are a confidence game. Your unflinching, naive trust in govt is why an authoritarian like Trudeau is in power.

[@BakkarTech]

Well said...but paying 30% of my salary to government for those agencies. Is a lot more expensive, for me then getting conned once and learning from it. Compared to a 3rd party(government) doing so at an ever-expensive rate for the ignorance of a nation's population as a whole.

[@antoniolewis1016]

@@BakkarTech Gladly willing to pay 30% of my salary for a good cause like that. Bonus is that the government covers healthcare too.

[@DarranKern]

Cope

[@DarranKern]

@@BakkarTech based. 🖕🏻 canada

[@Biggischkris]

Love that 0.5 sec photo of Cathie you sneaked in there. Thats the type of comedy that keeps me hooked on your videos! 😂

[@tfreej920]

Oh, no! I missed it! What is the time stamp on that part?

[@jb9652]

@@loupasternak Indeed. She's undeniably dangerous.

[@Biggischkris]

@@tfreej920 10:58 “wand of innovation”

[@tfreej920]

@@Biggischkris Thank you! 😂

[@softwarerevolutions]

you have to see the easter egg in the latest blackrock video and tell us

[@xchazz86]

It’s not about trust anymore, its out of control excessive greed and incompetence making all the bad decisions. When the incentives models are bad the outcomes will always be worse.

[@ericlefevre7741]

Patrick, you are describing what I have come to refer to as "The Ferengi Paradox" after I realized that the Ferengi were the most honest and trustworthy race in the Star Trek Universe, even as they were described by everyone as dishonest liars.

[@rileymcphee9429]

The best con is one that gets the victims to buy in with their own egos and identities. That way when things start to get exposed, the victims will do everything to protect the perpetrator in an effort to protect themselves.

[@anna_in_aotearoa3166]

Really good point!! It's not just financial & emotional investment that fraudsters elicit from victims, but identity investment. As you note, that means many people will perpetuate or ignore a fraud rather than admit they were duped, or were just greedy... 😔

[@yaceya]

Interestingly, about lower level con artists my impression was often opposite: that they often target people with distrust of society, sometimes even with different level of directness suggesting that the victim will gain money by convincing that the victim is actually on the same side of the scam and money will come from somewhere else.

[@marklafferty4031]

I have been in sales in two different capacities in my career and I can recognize a con operating in my midst. Most recently in the financial services business I had a younger individual that was setting the world on fire in our office. I initially was happy for this individual as it appeared he had his act together and built a reputation of being generous, likeable and hardworking. But something just wasn’t clicking as to do what this individual was doing year in year in terms of business. This person left to start their own financial services business and existing files were assigned to various reps within the area to try to keep clients at the firm. To everyone’s amazement the practices and conduct in those files butted right up against every compliance rule in the industry. While not crossing the line of breaking the law this individual could have been certainly sued by many clients for not acting in their best interests. As one co- worker said it was all a “ shit show”. It was a assembly line that every individual got a full ensemble of all products offered whether needed or not. Clients put their trust in you to act in their best interest and may not have the knowledge to know if a product offered his suitable or not. This individual was counting on conning the client with his charm being knowledgeable and social contacts to railroad people into executing strategy’s they didn’t need or were unsuitable for them. Again if the clients don’t know how poorly they are doing unless they are some what knowledgeable. The individual probably left 20 million of return on the table for his clients by not doing his job and managing their assets properly. Instead the person was too busy running on to churn out another client instead of doing his duties properly. Clients usually fire you for not keeping up with expected market results but companies won’t.

[@roc7880]

rule no 1 for me in seeing a con artist is do I see myself in them? a fraudster will always try to look like you and convice they share your taste, assumptions, beliefs, choices, values, and principles, and if they do while being fun, it is always a red flag. trying to please people too much is a sign of having dark intentions.

[@faheemsardar]

I've spent a long time in the finance and investments industry which included forensics. some of the red flags are 1. A very good story, which usually has very simple negatives, 2. A person who keeps waiting for you, sphieling till to agree with them, 3. Impossible aspects that are talked about but never shown 4. a deal that is simply too good 5. perhaps the most important for me has been, 'is this person a liar?' - works for me.

[@MrWeezy312]

Two huge red flags is if a person is A pressing for a something to be done in impulsively or is pushing a fear of missing especially if they are pretending that it is not a risky or a sure thing. B If they try and isolate ppl who are the marks and remove those are potential troublemakers who ask questions that hit to near to the mark. This is almost always a bad sign.

[@namenloss730]

haven't you heard it would be financially insane to not buy a tesla right now in 2016 because FSD will turn them into 100% ROI robot taxis ?

[@heythave]

@@namenloss730Robotaxi is rolling out on August 8, 2024. You can use your Tesla in the network if you bought the Full Self Driving feature.

[@MrWhangdoodles]

When somebody seemingly knows every answer to your question, even the ones you throw in randomly. Being "too" well prepared. I've lied enough to know that that's a red flag.

[@genkiferal7178]

You are the *best* . Your dry wit is endearing and your audacity to tell the truth is alluring. keep "doing you".

[@misterbeach8826]

I once had a co-founder who ended up in jail. Embezzlement, document forgery, etc. He was much older, more experienced. He was a former family office financial advisor, actually, a successful one. However, he lost all his fortune when he tried to play big with Russian schemers on his wealthy clients... Then he met me, a young engineering student who planned to found a healthcare startup. A brilliant idea that instantly made us famous among BAs and VCs, where I met ministers, health insurance VPs, etc. Everyone joked that I'd be a billionaire soon. What happened next was so weird that it took me ages to accept it... His CV was impressive but partially a big lie. Talking to him about his embezzlement later on, I've noticed how self-diluted he was: it was when the lawyer told me that the biggest schemers believe their own stories, which makes them so difficult to spot. Not only that. He was way more experienced in legal matters than my lawyer and myself... It was a horrible, painful experience at court, ranging across multiple lawsuits where he tried everything to smear me and to force me to give up on all claims. But eventually, I had to tell the billionaire investor (today, a close friend of mine) about what he did (which he tried to prevent), and a few years later, he went to jail (briefly, though). Today I own a few companies with one of the top 5 tech corps as a partner. But that story back then, he and his friends (because he surrounded himself with similar individuals), and whatnot... It taught me some valuable lessons, about the law too. Judges do not care much about such cases because of how technical they are. Document forgery may sound impressive in a novel, but a judge almost never asks for a forgery test because it only complicates the case. So, unless it is about billions, like SBF, forget the films and novels: the judge will try a mediation every few months, to lower the costs and close the case. And you are left one with nothing, even if it is not your fault. In turn, it means: do a better due diligence than Sequoia Capital. ;)

[@gibbogle]

self-deluded

[@greebj]

sounds like the story that happened to someone I know, though not on the same scale (this was board politics at an industry association body) I played Letters back and forth with these corrupt muppets and their Sydney law firms for a year and it taught me far more about the law than my 6 years of Uni degree ever did. They would just non-respond and cover with a new confected re-interpretation of history. The lawyers and auditors were just as filthy and entrenched in their position as the corrupt board members were. They had their shields up protecting each other at all costs. The conspiracy behind the scenes was clear and the lies, fraud, and breaches of corporations law that had occurred were prima facie actionable. But the corporate regulator ASIC was not interested even though we handed them everything on a platter with a fully referenced brief. We were amazed. So these muppets got away with it because risking $50K on starting Federal Court action (against a corrupt executive with a history of hiding embezzlements, legal fees and settlements in false financial reports hiding truth from members) was just not worth it.

[@myusername5]

So he knew more about legal matters than your lawyer?

[@anitat9727]

Dang. How did you fight it?

[@sstorm1328]

@@myusername5 that is easy to do....lawyers know nothing about the real world or how to get legal stuff done and done. They look for problems, not solutions, which is why they are costly and worse than useless. Most legal problems start with their input.

[@kclark777v]

Red flags for me: the person always appeals to my pride, greed, sexual desire, or desire for power and control. It doesn’t matter if it’s for altruism or not. They always make the appeal through these baser things for an advantage. The best defense IMO is to honestly check my feelings and motives - then ask good questions and resist being lazy in getting answers. The last thing is being willing to pass up a good deal in favor of boring investment strategies.

[@genkiferal7178]

excellent. most of us are hung by our own ego. i still have to check my desire to look and feel better than i am...or else get played for a fool. Recently, I allowed a coworker to play me when he appealed by my desire to have my good ideas respected. It hurts most that I was my own worst enemy - not the coworker who fooled me. Humility is our own best friend if only we willingly embrace it.

[@roc7880]

the biggest red flag is when someone tries to convince me they share the same beliefs and principles like me while being funny. we will never raise a shield when seeing someone from the same tribe telling a joke.

[@knarf_inc4790]

What I've learned from this video is that if you see that the CEO starts wearing a black turtleneck, sell all your stocks and run!!!

[@heythave]

Not true if it was Steve Jobs.

[@jimgreene1545]

He was eccentric and extremely gifted at selling and persuade wer stuff he was passionate about. She was dumb enough to interpret him as a pure con artist like she is and copied his act for her scam.

[@Jonwisniewski04]

Not checking if there’s a board of directors is really insane. They should all be out of a job. I mean, that’s absolutely ridiculous.

[@reverendflashback1731]

Your videos are so exceptionally good that I wouldn't think for a second of skipping the passage about your sponsor. It would be simply ungrateful to someone who provides me with such valuable information for free as you do. It's a pleasure to watch your videos, brilliant in style and content, no matter what the topic. Thank you!

[@TheTim466]

Well, merely not skipping does not do much on its own. I think the success will mostly be measured in new signups. Of course not skipping will likely increase the chance of actually doing so.

[@thomasa5619]

He’s either already been paid for the sponsorship, or is also paid based on signups It makes a bigger difference if you wait 30 seconds through the KZbin ads as skipping then definitely doesn’t pay Patrick

[@Eden519]

Same. It’s a conscious decision I take every time

[@gnuPirate]

Same, might even pick up a subscription with the Daily Upside.

[@OnTheThirdDay]

I watch the ads for this reason: to support those I am grateful for

[@garyworthington840]

Thanks!

[@PBoyle]

Welcome!

[@NaZtRdAmUs]

"if its too good to be true then it probably is"

[@fyt54321]

Theranos Board of Directors was a joke. A bunch of distinguished old men of political & military background with zero knowledge in biomedical technology. Completely unqualified board of grey eminences who were all too happy to take that money and those share options, thinking they would have one more distinguished line on their career emeritus resume, along with a few million dollars for doing almost nothing.

[@brightonbabe2139]

And she was a pretty girl.

[@tonybrown7241]

"Sincerity is the key thing, fake that and ya got it made!" - P.T. Barnum

[@aletheia6672]

Patrick, you put it very well when you talked about deference to authority and social proof. It is very frustrating because the interplay between scammers and their marks is such that, no matter how unscientific or ridiculous the claim, people will still believe it as long as it panders to their greed, vanity, prejudice, lust for power etc. In my opinion, not all marks of fraudsters can be considered 'victims' since these people are not merely passive but sometimes aggressively help to propagate the fraud, elevating the fraudsters into positions of wealth and authority. If you reveal the truth, they will not appreciate it, but instead gang up together with the fraudsters to discredit and destroy you.

[@Henry1965ism]

It's the same dynamic between narcissists and enablers. A lot of scammers have high narc tendencies like charm, confidence and can easily convince others of something. This appeals to the vanity of the enabler who is the 'victim' of the narc. This is why a lot of enablers of narcs will also defend them and as you said will often turn on you if attempt to tell them the truth. It's no accident that con artists, scammers and narcs share the common characteristics of charm, manipulation and lack of guilt or shame for their actions.

[@Patrick-bu5vy]

Well said. The Tesla stock ponzi is the best example of this…with tens of thousands of people financially invested in the stock highly active in perpetuating the propaganda that ‘Tesla is years ahead of their rivals’. It becomes a self-organizing misinformation machine with each player acting out of pure self interest - the more people they can convince, the better the financial payoff for them. Crypto is effectively the same.

[@h8thaway]

This brings to mind the Elon Musk cult.

[@KW-hk2jd]

John Carreyrou from the Wall Street Journal became suspicious of Elizabeth Holmes based on the fact that most people working in medicine don’t have breakthroughs until they are much older and experienced.

[@gmjackson1456]

I always look at 3rd party data that fraudsters have no control over, and I never tell them what impresses me.

[@fredrikb8285]

Best way to gauge some ones trustworthiness is probably to ask them if it would be OK for them to hold on to something for you for a while. Any trustworthy person would most likely consider this a burden. Same thing probably applies to a business. If someone calls and ask you "Hey, we really want to invest X amount into your business." Most trustworthy business owners with a sound business would probably consider this a burden too as if they needed the money for something, they would probably had been the ones calling, not the other way around.

[@pylex111]

Patrick, you get me every single time when you talk about SBF with his A-list celebrities and Kevin O'Leary too 😅🤣😂. You're my newfound hero. Keep up the great work.

[@rodwallace6237]

Don't forget the Kathy Wood cameo.

[@thewhitewolf58]

I do like how the conman rules are to be a patient and decently dressed person who agrees with any political and religious views tossed at them. Honestly that makes them seem like either the best friend or side character.

[@mysideacc2770]

I've seen a bunch of other youtube videos on the stuff covered here, but all of them were pretty critical so it never made sense to me why people ever fell for the obvious scams. This is the first one I've watched that explained it, and I feel like I understand these stuff a lot more now. Thanks for the video!

[@danielduncan6806]

When one is emotionally compromised it is difficult(impossible for some) for them to see that they are emotionally compromised. Say you are emotionally compromised and you are already in the grip of a scam. And I tell you that you are in the grip of a scam. It is incredibly unlikely you will hear or listen to me. Due to your emotionally compromised state, you falsely believe everyone but the people you already trust are liars. At that point, you are fodder for scammers. Once someone notifies you of the scam, it is not time to double down on the activity. Once notified, it is time to set aside your emotions, go on high alert, and investigate. If you ever find yourself defending a thing you do not personally own, you done fucked up.

[@Coastpsych_fi99]

That’s why it’s important to remember before investing 1) never invest into things you don’t understand, 2) never invest more than you can afford to lose, 3) make sure you understand your risk profile and temperament.

[@patienceobongo]

But if the television tells you its ok, take several fake injections

[@deshannon6402]

The classiest KZbin video I saw in 2022 bar none. No shouting or sh!t talking. Listen to this man.

[@yesiamsharon]

I started watching the CNBC show American Greed in 2007 when it started. It is still going. I think that says all that is needed about how con games will never end as long as humans are alive.

[@cgasucks]

"A sucker is born every minute."

[@mariapilarme]

I love the voice of the guy!!

[@yesiamsharon]

@@mariapilarme same!

[@diedforurwins]

Hey Patrick, Just wanted to say how much I love the stuff you put out. No fluff, no sensationalism... just cold hard facts. I was introduced to you through a video by coffeezilla, and have since become a fan. You are one of the few youtubers whos integrity never seems to be in question. Just saw this video at 120K in 18 hours and thought I'd come say congrats on all the well deserved success. Keep doing your thing and hope your channel continues to grow. Happy holidays my guy.

[@lordmelbury116]

I remember a documentary about a scam that happened in the piano world, where this concert pianist Joyce Hatto who hadn't performed since the 70's became very popular in the 2000's when she started making loads of recordings of piano music, which supposedly had been recorded in a garden shed while she was also battling cancer.

[@bruce0750]

I think in some cases, the investors knew that the business wouldn't work but invested anyway betting on the founders' capability to help them pump and dump. At the end of day, investors' end goal is to make money one way or another, if confidence scheme help them to pump and dump, some would do it. Softbank has been such type of investor.

[@csours]

The vision and mission of Theranos is beautiful, and that's what Holmes sold - vision. Scams don't have to be smart to convince us, they have to promise something that we need. From what I can tell, Theranos didn't "fake it till you make it" much more than other tech companies, but their chosen field was human health, and that's just too dangerous to fake. After seeing the absolutely predatory way they treated their employees, it's impossible to defend Theranos, even though it appears they were actually trying to work on the technology.

[@patriciaingraldi4719]

I'm so glad you were recommended on a reddit search I did. I am glued to your videos. The clues of a conman at the end of this video are priceless.

[@xelaxander]

In emerging tech, it's probably best to look out for incongruencies. A massive barrier of entry is acquiring expertise in a particular field, so BS talkers tend mix up terminology or describe concepts, that don't fit the situation at hand. You can't really expect a mathematical proof for each statement, but overall consistency and examination of the premises helps, too.

[@leesnyder9144]

I am confident my tech is good give me all your money. Silicon valley and tech investment relies on people not doing work like this.

[@Jim-Tuner]

The sales barriers in tech can often be greater than anything to do with the actual technology. Building and selling are both equal challenges.

[@pedroroque8681]

Incongruencies become difficult to detect on well communicated speeches. It’s really not so much about what the person says, but rather how it’s said and how it makes a crowd feel.

[@xelaxander]

@@pedroroque8681 But maybe don't base your investment desicions on speeches.

[@blackdandelion5549]

I am aware of this type of issue but I will say that for many who do not have a major education when people use "big words" and terminology or even explain things to them that do not apply to the current context, a person who is not well versed will find the fact that something was explained in a way they can understand to be a major plus and believe the person is intelligent, ethical, and kind in taking the time to explain things to a person who never graduated or got their degree in that field. It creates an idea the person can be trusted and many people are fooled by this.

[@Gutenmorgenside]

Nice one Paddy. These characters are fascinating but completely contemptible. Like the way SBF is trying to con everyone (again) into thinking he was incompetent but without the fraud. As you might say 'good luck with that'

[@patienceobongo]

Biden does that

[@jackseropian4905]

“A list celebrities plus Kevin o Leary” 😂

[@sasha-01]

20:17 1) be a patient listener 2) never look bored 3) wait for the other person to reveal political opinions and agree with them 4) same as 3 but with religion 5) hint at sex talk but never follow it up unless the other person shows a strong interest 6) Never discuss illness unless some special concern is shown 7) Never pry into another person's personal circumstance, they will tell you everything eventually 8) Never boast, just let your importance be quietly obvious 9) Never be untidy 10) Never get drunk

[@Jeffrey314159]

RULE #11 When advancing a fraud thru clever speeches to investors try to use vagaries and generalizations as much as possible. Do not mention false specifics that can easily be vetted.

[@HyenaDandy]

I would say (as far as things to look out for) one of the best things I can think of is not to assume everyone else is a liar, but to assume everyone else is an idiot until proven otherwise. This is part of the problem of the cult of the expert. We assume that because the former secretary of state and the current president say that Theranos is a good company, that they're a good company. But what the hell do those guys know? Barack Obama taught constitutional law and is good at giving speeches and winning elections. A former secretary of state is good at international negotiations. Why should I assume that those two are going to be able to vouch for a hematologist? Instead of looking at people's names, look at a vague description of their job. When you do have someone whose vague description is relevant, then use a more detailed example. Emit any actual accomplishments beyond attaining a title or job. A disgraced former (Whatever) and a highly respected, long-serving (Whatever) should both be called a "Whatever." So then let's look at Theranos. The Theranos board of directors including (per Google) 'former Secretary of State Henry Kissinger; former Defense Secretary William Perry; former senators Sam Nunn and William Frist; Richard Kovacevich, a former chief executive officer of Wells Fargo & Co.; William Foege, the former director of the Centers for Disease Control;' Should instead be considered as "A diplomat, a military engineer*, two politicians, a banker, and an epidemiologist." Then, anyone who has NO connection to the field, replace their job title with just "A rando." So, what we have is "Five randos, a military engineer, and an epidemiologist all say that this chemistry dropout is going to revolutionize Hematology." So... Why were none of the people vouching for her hematologists? *He became Secretary of Defense by convincing other people he could be secretary of defence). 'Engineer' could be relevant, hence why his specific field is important.

[@CobaltLobster]

I have that kind of personality that if someone is being nice to me, I know they're trying to scam me.

[@toduno927]

They literally just said people who think they can't be scammed are easier to scam omg

[@greebj]

@@toduno927 it depends on whether the scammer is after high volume or high value. Volume scammers will give up easily and move on to the next potential mark. But a lot more groundwork goes into high value targeted scams, these guys will know how to adapt when presented with skepticism and will probe away to break it down. Overconfidence in your ability to detect a confidence trick is one of the ways they can find a way through

[@toduno927]

@@greebj tbh i think anyone can be scammed, some more susceptible than others but saying u have some special personality to detect scams? bruh 👌

[@CobaltLobster]

@@toduno927 I didn't say I couldn't be scammed. I just know that someone smiling at me is trying. Try not to smile, you might have a chance. See how that works?

[@darinpearson2554]

​@@toduno927 apparently you aren't good at logic. @rorschach602 didn't say they couldn't be scammed. They said they assumed people being nice to them were scamming them. The exact opposite of your assertion. To quote you: omg

[@dandruff3414]

"A list celebrities, plus Kevin O'Leary" Caught me off guard 😂🤣🤣

[@lukedaniels7750]

I love the stock photo of a Frenchman reading a French newspaper entitled, ' French Paper', written of course in English. As a qualified Englishman, this is how I expect the world to be.

[@zippy-zappa-zeppo-zorba-etc]

My one run in with a fraudster, he said "don't trust those other guys, they're the crooks"

[@germanogirardelli]

The Canadian paradox has a counter-paradox; the italian one. Relatively low trust and a lot of high profile financial scams (parmalat, Cirio, MPS and many other banks).

[@faithgoga3983]

Interesting

[@Laotzu.Goldbug]

I think tge issue is that Italy may be "low trust' compared to Northwestern Europe and North America, but in comparison to the world at large it is very high trust, as is all of Europe.

[@alanamiel4927]

How about the American one. High trust high fraud in the stratosphere. Worldcom, Enron, Nikola, Citigroup, AIG, Lincoln S&L and on and on.

[@Magic_beans_]

15:10 “too smart or too well informed to be tricked” - I see this all the time in smaller ways. People think they’re being of pure rationality but really they’re just low enough in emotional intelligence that they don’t know their own emotional state and how it’s influencing them.

[@FobosLee]

It pisses me off that investors, institutes and people spend billions on objective scam, but really useful startups and companies are left in the dust. We need to change that!

[@steveng.83]

Love the explanation about the Canadian paradox. I honestly never heard of it before. But try to think of it from a personal perspective. Wouldn’t you rather fall sometimes for another’s lie, but be a happy trusting individual, than to always assume the other one is a lying individual. I see a lot of people around me who basically trust no one and live a substantially worse life because of it. I would rather be taken for a ride sometimes, but be a happy and trust giving individual, than always assuming that I’m being scammed while it is 99% of the situations not the case. Small disclaimer here: I’m only referring to situations were there is no money involved. Nobody’s going to touch my money, even with a stik!

[@jacobgeorge2998]

Same policy here. But betrayal can also be also!

[@BobfromSydney]

Well, I think it's easy to trust everyone as long as you don't have to give them money. With most of the transactions we deal with on a day-to-day basis we don't need to worry much, although if we are doing things like paying cash and receiving change, it's always worthwhile to check the correctness (I've caught mistakes many times in a past in this area). It don't feel any loss of happiness due to making a habit of verifying things. In fact I think it contributes to my personal happiness because I have less incidents to regret. I think it's very important to be careful when encountering new things - e.g. travelling overseas or making financial investments (including buying a home!) the scale of the risk entirely justifies the effort to be careful. It sounds like you are describing paranoia, which is a harmful mental condition whereas you can be CAREFUL without being paranoid. In the example of checking change after making a purchase, I don't do it because I suspect the cashier of being a thief, but rather that I accept there is a probability of error due to carelessness/tiredness/incompetence and wish ensure the correct amount is paid. I actually put the same amount of care when making a payment myself (if I am making a bank transfer I will double check the bank account details to ensure the account numbers are an exact match). I have seen many cases of people I know get bad modifications to their houses due to using unlicensed tradespersons to even consider hiring someone without first checking their license and reviews.

[@NevisYsbryd]

No. The scams will escalate in scale, severity, and malice alike over time with that attitude.

[@jacobgeorge2998]

@@NevisYsbryd I said that we should be careful about money management. But in personal affairs trust is very important, I feel.

[@NevisYsbryd]

@@jacobgeorge2998 Oh, trust is absolutely vital in _personal_ relationships. The human biology and psyche is predicated on it. That said, discernment is still necessary. Trust is not the same thing as blind naivete. Figuring out who you are willing to take the risk of trust with and who you are not is critical.

[@deez187]

I think you actually had it right the first time. "Blend in and be likeable". Anyone of us will overlook a multitude of red flags if the person isn't showing any obvious signs of malice and is a likeable/fun person to interact with. Even in law enforcement, based on how "likeable" the person is, will absolutely potentially impact conviction.

[@tomlxyz]

I'm from a German speaking area and have often read praise about Wirecard back then but I could never make out what's supposed to be so special about them. It was all just buzzwords without any actual explaination so I kept away from it and I certainly don't regret it

[@SF-eo6xf]

Their AI was excel sheets using vlookup Lol

[@oliversteiner9019]

Same with we work. & deliveryhero…. All blabla & zero special yet much hype

[@honkhonk8009]

Same story in California. First it was California selling out the entire energy grid to Enron while making it seem "too complicated for regular people to understand". Then it lead to California voting Republican for the first time in decades to get rid of the scam. Same shit happening nowadays where you got people contiously voting the same people into power an then crying when JP Morgan ends up gambling away their entire energy grid while nothing is done about it. Atleast texas energy grid failings were because of cost cutting. California's is due to blatant corruption bruh

[@samsonsoturian6013]

Some of my own red flags I spot liars: 1. Cliche success story (they're copying the people they envy). 2. Buzzwords (they don't know the topic as much as they pretend). 3. Vague vagueries (they make arguments they said something else later). 4. Repetition of vital info (they want to make sure you believe the lie). 5. Gratuitous statements of fact (introducing the key lie prematurely). 6. Gets angry when asked questions. 7. Wildly exaggerated success story (they're pushing a wet dream). 8. Sexing up the topic (it gets more people to go along with a scam than will care to admit it). 9. Contempt for authority of any kind. 10. Desire for immediate seizure of authority. 11. Delusions of possessing authority. 12. Cowardice (fierce words but leaves actions to others). 13. Illogical and wildly broad allegations (they think everyone is as guilty as they are). 14. Belief that extreme success is a reasonable life goal. 15. Contempt/condescension for their competition. 16. Contempt for ordinary standards of living. 17. Unwillingness to admit enemies may do good if it suits their interests. 18. Unwillingness to admit friends might have committed a crime at some point. 19. Perspective of history conveniently line up perfectly with whatever junk they're pushing. 20. No interest in investigations or record keeping of any kind.

[@rdallas81]

Seems a lot of attention was paid on these vanities-

[@elephantandcat]

10:58 >> That one second picture of Cathy Wood here, who appeared out of nowhere once you said out loud the 'wand of innovation' magic tantrum is pure subliminal genius. Please, do it over and over again 🙌🏻

[@BEYSeamaster1]

One of the best videos ever. I never stopped wondering along with a few friends how could some intelligent, educated, experienced, famous, even sometimes large MNCs be duped? (Trevor Milton comes to mind) You gave us the answers Patrick. Thank you so much. Omar from the good old USA.

[@fernandaalario5091]

I know, right? Blows my mind

[@jamesbriers696]

One of the key motivators that aid fraudsters is the investor/marks "Fear of Missing Out" on the latest gravy train. This is particularly prevalent with investors in new tech, especially venture capitalists. They seem to be of the type who are difficult to bamboozle, but once they are it almost impossible to un-bamboozle them.

[@Jeffrey314159]

When advancing a fraud thru clever speeches to investors try to use vagaries and generalizations as much as possible. Do not mention false specifics that can easily be vetted.