Please or Register to create posts and topics.

Sales is NOT seduction: sales and seduction have limited overlap

This is a very interesting topic when it comes to people and life skills and something which I feel is deeply misunderstood.

See Gary Vaynerchuk talking about sales and seduction here:

It does take some good understanding of human nature and psychology to see how the two intersect, after all.

P.S.: needless to say, don't listen to what he says, it's total cr@p (and no offense to Gary Vee, you can definitely heed his advice in different realms :)..

Sales and Seduction Overlap

Sales is a people's skills.
Seduction has much to share with people's skills, too.

So, of course, there is somewhat of an overlap.

Someone who cannot sell because he can't understand and connect with people can hardly be very good with dating (and relationships). And the opposite is true as well.

However, the two are also very different.

Sales & Seduction Differences

In sales, the final power tends to reside more with the buyer, usually.

Salespeople can also openly pitch the product and still sell.
Men who do better in seduction don't usually pitch themselves too openly but let the nonverbal do the talking for them -and maybe the flirting-.

Mindset Differences Between Seducers & Salesmen

The best seducers don't see sleeping with a woman as "making a sale".
And albeit most often the woman is still the one that must consent to sex -and hence the decision maker-, the good seducers don't think of the process as "selling themselves".

They see it as a dance where both of them play together.

Also read:

Who Says Sales & Seduction Are Similar?

Who is it then that confabulates sales with seduction and sex as "signing the dotted line"?

It's usually salespeople who understand little about women (and human psychology in general).

You will mostly hear salespeople who are not very good with women (or not very well versed in psychology) draw parallels between sales and seduction.

As soon as I heard Gary Vee in that video I immediately thought "this guy doesn't know shit about seduction".

Let Sales Be Sales... And Seduction Be Seduction

Personally, it also bothers me to hear people talk about seduction as sales, or of sleeping with women as if it were the sealing of a deal that you need to "win".

It de-humanizes the interaction, de-humanizes her and takes all the poetry and romanticism from Seduction.

Do business with sales.
Make love with seduction.
And let the two stand apart as they should be.

Stef and selffriend have reacted to this post.
Stefselffriend
Have you read the forum guidelines for effective communication already?

Unlucky that the Gary Vee video is disconnected (for right now), it might have helped make this thread more valuable. I'll have to see if I can find it when I get the time.

Adding to the main point of why sales is not seduction, there's a sales technique taught by many sales trainers called "future-pacing".

It's a process of defining the prospect's wants (WANT = get them to tell you WHY it’s important to them and the benefits and impact it will help them create if they achieve the outcome) and needs (NEED = get them explaining what they feel they NEED from you so you know what to ‘sell them’ and also see if you can actually help them with what they need!).

Here's an example of how it might work on a sales call:

Mr. Salesman: "So what I want to understand now, Mrs. Prospect, (future-pacing) if you were able to have the best 12 months of business what would (value the salesman provides) be able to help you achieve for you and your business? What would that look like?"

Mrs. Prospect: (answers question which effectively causes her to sell herself on their product/service)

Mr. Salesman: "OK, could I just ask then, in relation to (her 12 month objective), if you could achieve that goal, what would that enable for you and your business (or family, or future etc).”

Mrs. Prospect: (answers question and effectively becomes more emotionally invested in this negotiation)

That's future-pacing in a nutshell.

And, in this video, you can see a man attempt to use what seems to be future-pacing in order to get sex from his wife of eight years (who's now looking for a divorce):

 

Her: "I don't want you to come in, so either stay outside or go."

Him: "OK, come out here, (Her Name)."

Him: "Why don't you want me to come inside?"

Her: "Because I just don't want you to. Boundaries, you know, I already told you and I'm sticking to that."

(minute mark 2:37)

Him: "OK. Are you saying that because...are you sure you just don't want me to come inside because I come inside you're going to want to fuck?" (uses sex as his "sales" value-proposition)

Her: (no ladder = three "no"s) "Not at all. Not at all. Nope. You have the wrong idea."

Him: (future-pacing) "Let's say we did fuck."

Her: "We're not going to."

Him: (tries to future-pace again) "Hypothetically speaking."

Her: "No. We're not going to (His Name)."

And, as the dating coach said:

Casey: "So, what he asks through these next couple minutes is...if we were to do XYZ wouldn't that feel amazing?"

That sounds like textbook future-pacing to get the prospect—in this case his wife—more emotionally invested in the negotiation.

And, as you might have guessed, especially from the no ladder, he didn't close that deal.

Matthew Whitewood and selffriend have reacted to this post.
Matthew Whitewoodselffriend

Funny but interesting interaction! Thanks for sharing Ali.

He should have turned the no-ladder around with some of these techniques:

  1. Don't let the "No" become real
    • Move the conversation back to chit-chat and then re-invite
  2. Go big: Turn the tables

Her: "I don't want you to come in, so either stay outside or go."

Him: "OK, come out here, (Her Name)."

Him: "Why don't you want me to come inside?"

I think when handling logical objections like in business, you can solve an objection more logically.
Uncover the objection, dig deeper, and find out how to solve the underlying issue.
But an emotional objection like this, when you thread-expand on that, you may meet more resistance.

What he did was thread-expand upon an emotional objection that would probably get stronger with each "no" as what Ali said, "the no ladder".

He also future-paced upon the wrong issues.
What if he switched the frame and painted a picture of a better scenario:

Her: I don't want you to come in, so either stay outside or go.

Him: Let's go out for a drink. (or some food)
Remember that place we went to on our anniversary.
What made you enjoy that time?
We sit & chat.
You can leave anytime.

How Future Pacing Is Different In Seduction?

There's a similar technique from Casanova Seduction techniques, 15. Pace Future Reality & Establish Romance (AKA: “Fait-Accompli”).
It can be an effective technique with a different spin in seduction.
But it was executed poorly by this man, mainly because he thread-expanded upon the objection.

I believe an effective frame would be painting a picture of how you and the woman would enjoy your time together.
Rather than a salesy approach of why she should spend time with you.

The Equivalent of Seduction in Business

I think finding cofounders, hiring, and fundraising are more akin to seduction in business than sales.
Because you are finding people to join you in a journey as the outcome of the persuasion.
Rather than getting people to use your product or services.

Maybe yes in complex, enterprise sales where the customer is more like your project partner.

There's also an interesting article on why salespeople make bad fundraisers.
I don't fully agree with the article though I see what the author is trying to say.

That Gary V was taken from one of his Linkedin posts.

Back then I was having around a couple of salespeople who were good at sales, but poor at seduction, and they constantly liked to draw parallels between how sales worked, and how it was the same in the seduction -it was probably a game to show a public seductive persona they didn't have in real life-.

So when I saw that Gary V video I thought "oh, not again", and it was the exact same dynamic: Gary V is probably a good salesperson, but he doesn't have much seduction knowledge or, he's admitted himself, experience -not a criticism on Gary, he's a cool guy, I like some things he says, and he could have plenty of women today-.
That vide also showed that the parallel just didn't work.

To be precise, there is some overlap between sales and seduction.
Of course, there are important parallels among all types of peoples' skills, and who's good at one, usually is not clueless at the other (I'm sure Gary is not clueless on dates). But still, there are also important differences and what's good in one is not always good in the other.


P.S.:
In the short frames I've listened to that video example, the guy wouldn't have been effective at selling a product either.
He got stuck in trying to sell against the wife/prospect's direct rejection, thread-expanding on the "no" rather than trying sidestep, minimize, or undo the no by taking a different approach.

Edit:
The only reason she kept staying is because it was the wife and they had a history.
A prospect would have been far more annoyed and/or weirded out and would have shut the door in his face much sooner.

Have you read the forum guidelines for effective communication already?
Quote from Lucio Buffalmano on April 26, 2021, 5:46 am

Back then I was having around a couple of salespeople who were good at sales, but poor at seduction, and they constantly liked to draw parallels between how sales worked, and how it was the same in the seduction -it was probably a game to show a public seductive persona they didn't have in real life-.

So when I saw that Gary V video I thought "oh, not again", and it was the exact same dynamic: Gary V is probably a good salesperson, but he doesn't have much seduction knowledge or, he's admitted himself, experience -not a criticism on Gary, he's a cool guy, I like some things he says, and he could have plenty of women today-.
That vide also showed that the parallel just didn't work.

To be precise, there is some overlap between sales and seduction.
Of course, there are important parallels among all types of peoples' skills, and who's good at one, usually is not clueless at the other (I'm sure Gary is not clueless on dates). But still, there are also important differences and what's good in one is not always good in the other.

Would you say leadership skills have more parallels with seduction skills than sales skills?
Drawing from your article on
How Leadership Gets You Girls

Then again, someone can be good at leading in one circumstance but not so good at leading in another circumstance.
Not sure how productive it is to draw analogies in people skills.

I believe it's productive in the sense if you want to develop general people skills to be a good leader across many scenarios.
For example, what we learn about power dynamics is very transferrable across cultures, geographies and ponds.

Though, to be good at leading in a particular situation or just adapting to it, it's more helpful to think

What do I need to learn about the people, dynamics, context, etc to be a good leader/member for this team/situation?

rather than assuming you can carry over your skills & experiences and automatically be a good leader in a different scenario.

This prevents you from growing entitled to "being a good leader" and "having power across all social situations".
It nurtures a growth mindset.
Saying sales and seduction are the same may stem from a fixed mindset.

So I'm thinking

  1. Do draw your people skills & experiences from one scenario to another
  2. At the same time, think about what you need to learn or tweak in a new scenario

What do you think?

Maybe this should be on another thread since this thread is more specific towards the extent to which sales and seduction have similar dynamics.

Processing...