One of the things I liked about the Church I grew up in
was the transparency of the flow of money.
In that spirit,
I want tell you about we do business in The Movement.
It’s a little all over the place.
I think you’ll like it, though.
If you are employed by someone else,
you are not getting paid what you’re worth.
Employers, as a rule of thumb,
hire an employee that makes them
more money than they cost them.
For that reason, in THE MOVEMENT,
we don’t look corporate and we don’t do corporate.
Instead, we cooperate – as partners.
If money is exchanged, it is between partners.
We won’t employ because it goes against what we teach -
following one’s own body.
If you’re working for someone else
then you’re following their body.
And if you follow any other body other than your own,
you’ll break your body.
I think you’re worth far too much to be breaking yourself.
How much ARE you worth?
There’s a metric for that.
On Selling, Worth and Value
It may not be the best metric
but it is most certainly a metric.
Whatever someone will pay,
that is what you’re worth.
At least at that moment to that person.
On Time / Money
When you’re selling yourself, you are selling your time.
Sometimes it’s time you’ve already spent:
as in a book or video you’ve produced.
Other times, it is time you’ll spend:
as in coaching or training.
It is awfully hard to put a value on that, your time.
Predictably enough, it is highly associated to
how much money you already have
or time you have left.
If you have a lot of time and not much money,
your value and thus your price will be low.
If you have a lot of money and not much time,
you will value your time more
and the price you require
someone to purchase it for
will be a bit more.
I want to be paid what I’m worth
and I want to pay others what they’re worth.
Not a penny more nor less.
THE MOVEMENT’s business model reflects that.
And once again, the problem pops up:
How much to pay for what?
How much do I value that skill?
How much do I value that person?
On Game Theory
Game theory offers us some insight.
There is a game where Player 1
is given a sum of money
and Player 2 knows the amount.
Player 1 is told
he can share as much
or as little of the money
as he’d like.
There is a catch.
Player 2 must approve
of Player 1’s decision.
Only if Player 2 approves of
Player 1’s decision
will both Players get to keep
whether it be divided
if Player 2 receives any money from Player 1,
Player 2 should accept the offer.
It’s only logical.
But that is not what happens.
After all, we’re not logical.
In some cases, if Player 1 doesn’t share up to 40%
of what he is given, Player 2,
at his own personal expense,
will reject the offer.
Not very logical…but very human.
That’s how much we value equitable sharing.
by some variation of the golden rule
and most certainly a use of my mirror neurons…
I decided that if one thing cannot happen with another,
is one thing really worth more than another?
there are some gaping holes in that logic…
but I agree with the spirit of it.
On Division of Profits
You can’t make money
if you don’t have something to sell
someone to produce that something
and someone to sell that something.
Let me ask you,
between creating it, re-creating it and selling it…
which one of those is more valuable?
And by how much?
And remember if someone disagrees with you…
you may not be able to make money with them.
With that in mind,
Here’s what was come up with:
Intellectual Property: 1/3
Marketing / Selling: 1/3
If you came up with what is being sold, you get a 1/3
If you are teaching/performing what is being sold, you get a 1/3
If you are selling what is being sold, you get a 1/3
Equitably sharing of equity.
Just like the Gym Movement Protocol,
This is what we’ll follow until there is something better.
Do you know of something better?
If you don’t, then why not follow this model?
It may cost a little bit of money in the beginning,
but I predict it will make you far more in the long run.