Skool is a community-based learning platform where creators share courses and offer communities of fans and students.

In this review we analyze whether Skool is good for the typical TPM audience: smart, ambitious, and high-agency men who benefit most from deep, high-ROI resources.

And, based on our analyses, we’ll also share whether it can benefit more elite creators.

Is Skool legit? Yes, but… Not good enough for Power University

Intro

Skool itself is just infrastructure, and it’s a good infrastructure, and constantly developing.

The real question is: what kind of creators and communities does it attract and reward?

That’s what I looked into when I considered Skool as an option for hosting TPM’s video courses and/or the community.

This review shares the results of my analysis.

1. Skool is only “OK” for course delivery

And it doesn’t replace a dedicated content management system.

So right off the bat, it was “no” for Power University.
Power University the course is the main part of our value delivery.

Skool offers “good”, but more basic options for information delivery. It seemed to me that it’s best for single-video lessons.
It has more limited options for text, extras video embeds, and has no quizzes.

The focus of Skool is on the community.
And it shows.

When it comes to the main course VS community, it’s also about values for me:

2. Communities of Fans, Rather Than Empowered Men

Many communities on Skool are built around a charismatic leader personality.

In TPM’s analyses, these types of leaders can have dark-triad traits, and their interest may diverge from what best serves their communities.

See an example from a fomer top Skool “guru” here:

Hamza Ahmed: I see myself as a cult leader (…) this is like a genuine fuc*ing cult

Another top community is literally called “(founder name) cult”.

As much as cult followers may titillate the founder’s ego, we stand for the opposite.
We develop individuals here, not tribesmen. Men who are going to be leaders themselves, not followers.

P.S.: Hamza deleted the original video.
I don’t think it’s cool to share a video one has deleted, but it provides an important case study for this analysis.

2. Communities are of average quality

This is a law of most large communities:

Distribution of Skool community members, with most of them being average

But that curve may be optimistic for Skool because the top 10% of men aren’t in there to begin with.

Most members in Skool’s self-help communities are more likely to be naive beginners, which means that one can hardly learn from other community members.
It’s blinds leading the blinds.

Furthermore, the few communities I checked were promoted as “support-crutches” for the members’ mental health and self-help efforts.
And the leaders didn’t seem exactly paragons of mental health-.

At best, it’s a low-level ceiling self-help.

Including:

2.2. Disempowering followers’ fandom is common and encouraged

This is the pinned post on the Skool community:

Sam: vote on the best “skool parody” video

The options to “laugh” about are parodies of Breaking Bad, Friends, and Happy Potter.
P.S.: I haven’t seen a single one of them because I was busy living my life and building this business.

And clicking on it we get the parody videos featuring the founders and top creators:

A bit self-referential -narcissist-ish maybe?-.

All the top comments feature various GIFs and memes.

For the record, my gut reaction to this is “Why should I give a f*ck about your self-referential parody”.
If I join a community about the platform I’d expect pinned on top tutorials and best “how tos”.

Those top comments help users acquire the various prizes and awards -ie.: a book and a handnote from Sam the man himself. Wow!-.

And it’s a game every other guru/leader repeats in their own communities (keep on reading).

2.3. Pervasive meme culture doesn’t align with our approach

As above.

Memes and GIFs everywhere.

The #1 community at the time of writing is literally about animes of shredded men:

Not exactly top masculinity

2.4. Boosterism & “cold-shower self-help” doesn’t align with our approach

Several communities I’ve seen promote basic, run-of-the-mill self-help.

Including:

• (Over-)optimization myths
• Struggle porn
• Community-based encouragement “if you’re lonely” or need a push
  • “You can do it” type of support and self-help

We’re not too big into encouragement or cold showers type of self-help here.

Nothing against them, and I even do cold showers.

But we don’t see them as instrumental in advancing in life.

We focus instead on what we think is instrumental. The mindsets and hard skills to acquire respect, status, and attraction.
And the Machiavellian thinking to facilitate goal-achievement and life advancement in all areas.

2.5. Friends & nepotism over quality

Some big and early community founders are very close to founders and owners.

One of them is a Evelyn.
I’m sure adds ton of value.

However, the percentage of her posts that end up pinned seemed a bit too much:

This one was simple “you can do it” boosterism.
Did it call for a pin?

3. Top teachers rarely are top experts

… At least the ones I saw.

And the ones promoted on the first page.

And you know as they say: if you wanna hide a body for good, bury it in Google’s second page.
If that applies to Skool the experts may as well be dead on the Skool’s water :).

Take business for example:

I don’t recognize any business owner here.
And not even the most popular business-courses names and providers.

3.2. Top dating teachers were dubious

Same for dating and relationships where I have more experience.

Not a single name I recognized.
And the most successful community founder was a “high-energy type” PUA who ran a prank channel.
In a video he complained about being banned in multiple locations in his hometown. And taught others how to live while he disclosed depression boutes in 2 of the handful videos I checked.

Please note: no dissing on these people.
I wish them the best.

What I’m judging is the expertise as teachers and content providers.
And if I’d have to bet money, I wouldn’t be on A, them having reached top-level expertise. And B, I wouldn’t bet on those courses containing much valuable information -at least compared to what’s easily and freely accessible anywhere else-.

These dynamics may be normal for the beginning of a learning platform such as Skool.
Few people with a thriving business, an awesome life, or a large audience may want to join a new and untested platform.

However, Skool may struggle to attract top talent in the future as well:

3.3. Skool may always struggle to attract top talent…

… Because top talent has power and leverage.

And why should they go to Skool instead of having their own platform?

Instead, Skool may be stuck with “middle of the bell curve curse”.
Such as, they provide an enticing value proposition for those who have a sizable-enough following, but not large enough to do their own thing.
And they appeal to the beginners starting out.

Exceptions always apply, but… I haven’t found many :).

These may change if Skool becomes THE place to go.
But from what I’ve seen, it’s far from it.

3.4. Skool has no metric to promote teachers based on quality

It seems to me Skool focuses on income first, and community size second.

It may be a fair approach.
However, it’s not good for us.

I feel TPM brings massive quality to a more limited audience (for now, at least).

So the discovery algorithm may penalize us in favor of more guru-esque teachers who gather more shee… Followers :) 🐏

4. The focus of Skool is “make money”. “Be an expert” and “add value” don’t feature

And it shows in the communities.

Alex Hormozi said he had “nothing to sell you” when he started in social media.

Back then it may be largely true, but it’s the opposite with Skool.
Alex may want to be careful with the tons of people who may seek to use him to sell you:

Some Skool creators who made top 10 monthly revenues seek Alex Hormozi pictures to gain social proof

That may be totally fine if those creators and communities have true value to provide.

It may be the case for the man in the picture.
And I’m sure it’s the case for many communities.

HOWEVER, as a whole, it’s not the feeling I got:

5. Some Skool courses are pseudoscientific woo-woo

Even on the top page, many courses didn’t exactly inspire trust, expertise, or… Usefulness.

From the first top page:

Skool boasts on the front page courses on astrology and manifestation

Fair enough, this is the bottom… But still the top page.

But I wouldn’t want those anywhere.

And… it’s not like the ones above are much better.

We’ve got:

• Coaches teaching others how to coach. Sam Owens being the founder, don’t hold your breath for that to disappear :). (P.S.: Iman Gadzhi was one of Sam’s private students. Do of that what you want)
• Make money online courses taught by people who make money online teaching others how to make money
• Trading schools and systems -not gonna judge how good they are, but I’ll tell you this: I wouldn’t put my money into their systems :)-
• …

So, yeah, we’ve got a who’s who of the Internet seedier underbelly here.

Could we be the exception joining Skool?
In doubt, Power University in its full feature form stays here :)

And can Skool ever attract any top teacher with that on the first page?

5.2. Skool games incentivize ponzi-like communities

Alex Hormozi is chasing me with Skool Games ads:

Alex Hormozi promotes Skool Games parading the creators who made the most money

It says that it’s free, and that the “game” rewards successful creators, who then teach you how to succeed in Skool.

That’s NOT an incentive to bring true successes to the fore, in my opinion.
It strictly promotes as teachers the successes within Skool.

That is great for the winners.

But for the learners?

Given the teachers available, I think the odds are low you’d get any true expert or winner to teach you.

Instead, I’m afraid, that approach promotes MLM-type ponzis.

5.3. High-pressure sales tactic reminds of MLM

I joined a few communities only.

And the amount of notifications, emails, and PMs I get make me want to run the other way:

The approach of some Skool communities to chasing prospects feel like skinny dipping in Pirana-infested waters :)

All promising crazy results… That I didn’t even ask for.

In the interviews I listened to many mention how they give tons of value away for free -mimicking Alex Hormozi’s model maybe?-.
But I only had two questions I asked on several groups and I didn’t see all that free giving :).

6. Skool gamification doesn’t promote learning, it dumbs it down

Alex Hormozi said Skool uses gamification to make learning addictive.

As per their own (quite fun) Skool parody, Skool replaces the negative dopamine addiction of social media, with dopamine addiction that’s good for you.

That’s a noble cause.
And it would be great if it worked.

And maaaybe it does work.
A bit.

In that sense, I admit, our title here maybe overly critical.
And there may be benefits of “gamifying learning”.

Such as, the “dumbification” side of the gamification approach pulls learning down.
But the learning also pulls and the dumbs upward.

However, from what I’ve seen, I’m not convinced Skool’s way of doing it provides any meaningful impact.
(Keep on reading).

6.2. Waste your time playing the points game?

Case in point:

A whole top community is dedicated to gaining points by engaging more:

But at least we get another example of a community that doesn’t jibe well with our values and approach.
This creator makes 4.5k/month while his followers do all the work of engaging with each other.

And many communities I’ve seen play this same game to inflate engagement:

Skool “teacher”: comment “movie night” below and I’ll send you my list <—- technique to drive up engagement to get as many comments as possible

Why can’t he write that publicly?
Because it’s all a game to drive up engagement.

No real learning, just using the followers to drive up engagement.
Something I’ve noticed from several other community leaders.

That may be OK if there is also lots of wisdom to gain.
From what I’ve seen though, there wasn’t much concrete wisdom and giving in many of these communities.

Hopefully, if TPM joins in, we can be one of the exceptions :).

7. Creators must relinquish control to Skool

This is true for any third-party platform.

You upload your course, build your community and business there…

… And then you’re fully dependent on them.

Maybe they decide to hike your price.
Or kick you out.
Or they go belly up, or they won’t promote you anymore…

And then you’re screwed.

I’d rather not create such a huge depending on my business.

When Skool Works Well

While it doesn’t align with our audience of non-beginners who need advanced tools rather than motivation, Skool may work much better for:

• Beginners needing accountability
• Beginners who benefit from daily encouragement
• Creators monetizing influencer-first brands <— Note: This works for the creator, not necessarily the audience
• Fans who just want more of their favorite influencers

Overall: High Noise, Low Signal

TPM takes the opposite approach: high signal, low noise.

We put a lot of work and effort into our products.
We’re NOT a small course with community encouragement.

We’re a world-class course with an optional small community.
Few of our customers are even interested in the community side.
I suspect we appeal far more to “sigma types”, and people with busier lives who don’t wanna spend too much time in online forums.

At TPM, we have hundreds of handbooks and resources to back our products.
Power University is one of the most scientific self-development courses in the world.
And we’ve re-worked our product over the years, taking hundreds of students’ feedback.

I doubt many others put this amount of work into their products.

Because of the above, I concluded that Skool may not pull us up, but drag us down.

Exceptions Apply Based on Community

While the average Skool community is not a fit for smart, high-agency men, every community is different.

So, depending on community and creator, you may also get high-value, high ROI communities that genuinely help you develop and grow.

SUMMARY

Most Skool communities are not a good fit for ambitious men and high-power men because they’re high noise (community of learners), low-signal (average platform for courses), and built around the influencer’s charisma.

From TPM’s perspective of an ambitious and smart man, this makes Skool a poor general platform.

However, while this applies for a general overview of Skool, each community is different. And while I haven’t personally seen any, exceptions most likely apply.

From a creator point of view, we decided to have a community and a simpler course, but not our main courses.