All right, welcome everybody. I am here today with Pat Steadman. Now, Pat is a dating and relationship coach for men. He says, I read people like books and help them change their story. Welcome, Pat. Thanks, Tony. It's good to be here. Tell everybody a little bit about yourself. So just real quick, I have a probably a fairly typical story for at least a lot of people who get involved in this corner of the internet. I didn't really understand anything about women when I was younger. I had a high school girlfriend. She kind of, she was very beautiful, but she sort of picked up me. So we had a relationship and I was very needy and kind of, some people would call it beta. And eventually that relationship ended and she broke up with me and I was completely devastated. I had no idea how I had gotten her and I had no idea how I would ever get a girl as attractive as her again. And so I was walking down the campus one day and I saw the game in the bookstore and without going into the details of the whole story, it's kind of, I got exposed to a whole different world and the idea that I could change who I was entered into my mind. And so I really went deep into it. First I was actually kind of trying to get her back, but then it just became like I got, I'm gonna date women and I'm gonna get good at this and really got a lot of my mentorship from people at the social man. So that'd be Christian Hudson, but particularly Nick Sparks. I trained at Nick and learned a lot about basically in-person attraction from him. And my start as a coach, I got into that area because at this point I was doing really well with women. And then I started to get serious with a girl who I would later marry. And I wanted to get into entrepreneurship and I was kind of like the biggest poster at that time and Nick Sparks is private group. And basically I put out there like I wanted to get into business, I didn't know what I wanted to get into. And they encouraged me to get into coaching because they said, you know, you've really been just been helping us out so much over the last two years. So I did it and I haven't looked back since. Okay. Well, that's a pretty good story and a good start to a sounds like a successful business. What is your most, I guess, asked question as a dating coach? Well, recently a lot of people have been asking me about girls and their lay counts and stuff like that. Most asked question in general though, most asked question throughout my career and things that I think most guys struggle with is anxiety and being able to, and that manifests as approach anxiety. But I think to really just stay kind of an anxiety around women in general and an issue with dealing with tension. Because if you look at escalation, people are like, well, I have a hard time approaching or they're like, well, I have a hard time escalating. But really the entire process, I mean, you can look at the entire, you know, seduction process as a series of going from tension, trust, tension, trust, tension, trust. And most guys really struggled to manage tension, to manage that energy within them. And so the same thing that stops a guy from being able to approach is the same thing that stops him on a deeper level from being able to, you know, go for the kiss or take her home. Okay. Now I want to ask you a question about the red pill. Would you consider yourself red pill or red pill? Well, I would consider myself red-pilled. I wouldn't necessarily, I wouldn't call myself red pill. I don't really associate with that label because they're, I think that the label has been sort of sullied. And I don't know, when people say that they're red pill, I'm always like, well, what do you mean by that? Because there's, one person's red pill is not another person's red pill. So there are some, you can call them like maybe the bitter red pillers and they will take an awareness of how women operate on a sort of like, what is the darker sexual impulse of a woman? What is a woman's sort of biological imperative, you might say. And they take that, but the problem is that they fixate on it. They don't integrate it. They don't see it in a broader context. And so the, basically I just don't think that they help guys to get better with women because by fixating on a narrow truth, they actually miss a bigger truth. And they're, I don't think that their direction leads guys to any sort of semblance of a good life with women. So I think it's important though to understand that. And where the mainstream goes wrong is the mainstream tries to pretend that this part of women, the shadow, and that's really how I like to describe it. I mean, the red pill, hypergamy, this is like the female shadow. And that's a thing that a guy needs to understand if he's not gonna get burned from a woman, burned by a woman, but if he just simply stays there, then that's not how you build a relationship. And it's not necessary to stay there. There's so many labels in the man's sphere. Everybody's labeled red pill. And what you maybe described would be called black pill. Is that correct? Isn't that kind of, like if you say when somebody kind of stays in that either angry state or that state where all women are bad, isn't that more of a black pill? That's a really good way to put it. Yeah, I mean, I usually see black pill in a political context, but it's true that you could make a strong case that a lot of these so-called red pill people are really just blackpilling. All this said, there are things, like I consider the red pill to be really fundamental knowledge, but the stuff that I do with my clients goes a bit beyond it. And I think that there's a context towards the red pill and it's a lot of the stuff that I'm going to be covering in the book. I'm trying to write a little slow the last two weeks, but we can talk about that, but the red pill to me is something that's necessary, but it's not the full picture. Okay, so you're using it as a tool, basically. It's one of your tools in your toolbox. That's exactly right. That's exactly right. I explore a lot of different, I suppose you could say different groups or different ways of dealing with stuff with women. I think that a lot of the things I've been looking at now, like I get a lot into deeper psychology, like Jungian psychology, internal family systems. So I do a lot of trauma healing with clients on top of the stuff I would do that's more tactical and that has to do with an understanding female psychology. So I wear a lot of different hats and I think it's one of the reasons that I do really well with clients because I can take them through almost every stage that they would go through with a woman, like really deep serious relationships, whether it's or whether it's harems or whether it's just going up and trying to date girls. I've sort of gone through the whole cycle and I understand where guys get stuck along the way. And so if I feel like, okay, this guy has some anxiety issue and just kind of talking through with him that's not working. So then I'll look for things that maybe would work. And I also, a lot of these things I've used on myself. So I'll work with people if I feel like they have something really interesting to teach me and I'll take it. And if it makes a shift in me, then I distill it and I pull it kind of into my broader toolbox. So. Gotcha. Yeah, that's interesting. Let me ask you another question. You have two different men, one's 21 and one's 51. Do you approach those guys different? Well, yeah, I mean, I think that, so the fundamentals are always the fundamentals. That doesn't change regardless of your age, but, and this is actually, it's a really good question, Tony, because I think one of the big problems with a lot of dating and relationship advice, and this includes a lot of things that you hear in the red pill, is that there's not a lot of context to how it's used. I am all about context. I don't think that you can actually determine the truth unless you understand the context of the situation because the truth is going to be like, how to approach something, what to do is based on that context. Okay. So a 51 year old, like man is gonna be in a much different stage of life than a 21 year old kid, right? It's very, very different. 21 year old's probably gonna be in college. So he's going to have to be dealing with the social dynamics of, college is a very specific tribal structure. So he's gonna have to understand the tribal structure of the school and how to, the social circle game is extraordinarily important in college. A lot of the cold approach stuff becomes more valuable outside of college, but in college itself, especially in moderate sized schools, you have to protect your reputation a lot. And so the big thing is really trying to get into the scene. So for kids in college who I've worked with, that's where we focus on and we do deep work as well. The other thing, of course, which is fortunate about somebody who's younger is that the psychological stuff is much easier to move. If you're dealing with someone in their 20s who has some psychological stuff going on, some baggage, the chances of moving through it are pretty much certain. If they're in their 30s, it's gonna take a little bit more work, but it's still totally doable. 40s, it starts to get tough. And 50s, it can be really hard to shift a guy's mental state, an emotional state, because there's been so much accumulated baggage. But for someone in their 50s to answer the question more directly, you're not going to obviously be talking about that tribal structure. And for him, his social system is gonna be very different.  So he's either going to have to go to like kind of get specific spots where he knows that the women he's interested in are gonna go to and kind of make himself a regular there to meet women that way. He's going to either, or he's gonna have to, I mean, if he has a bigger network, he can still meet other women, but he also has to be aware that maybe there's gonna be some divorced women in the mix. If he's dating much younger, there are things he can do for his profile online if he wants to do that. But yeah, the context around what he's gonna be doing, and also, of course, another piece of context is what is he looking for? Is he divorced?  But wouldn't that be probably a guy in his 50s that's reaching out for dating coaching has probably just had some trauma? Most likely has gone through a divorce, I would imagine. Been married 30 years and then it's over. That most likely or the end of a serious relationship. Also, I have had people, guys though who have, I mean, the range of my clientele, I go from guys who are virgins and have a really hard time. They've never done anything with a girl. They've had a hard time even talking to girls for a while. I've gone to that to guys who are excellent with women.  And but their problem is more of a quality issue that they're not attracting the women that they really want or they have a hard time creating the sort of relationship that they want with a woman because of some emotional blocks. So it goes from some sort of like basics to very advanced stuff. And some of the guys have been in their 50s on the latter category. Okay, so you would coach a man also that's getting a divorce. And I'm gonna add to this question. What about, have you just ever told anybody or not getting a divorce or having a, let's say he's having a problem with his marriage. Have you ever told anybody it's over? That's it. Like, get out, get out. I always make it clear that people are gonna make their choices. Like one of the things that I do with coaching is I don't, you know, a lot of people think coaching is, I'm gonna give you some advice about something. This, I'm gonna tell you what to do. And that's what some people do for coaching. I don't really think that that's effective. And it certainly doesn't allow you to, I mean, maybe it does some things, but I mean, a lot of people kind of know, I mean, they've read stuff and maybe you put a little bit more force to it and your energy makes them accept it a bit more. But really what people make bad decisions, not usually, partly because of knowledge, but a lot of it is really just emotional patterns. Like they can't receive it. So if someone's in a really dysfunctional relationship and they're having problems, they wanna get it fixed, they kind of already know that they should leave it and I can tell them what's going on and that this is where it's going. But I'm also aware that they may have to work through the pattern and so the way that I kind of describe it is, it's like I'm throwing a rope around them and they're gonna go in the quicksand. So I'm like, I know you're gonna go in the quicksand. So here's the rope, like I got you and I'm gonna tell you what's gonna happen. And so go ahead if you wanna experience it, go and experience it, but experience it with awareness.  They're like, yeah, but like, I mean, maybe you're right, but I have to touch it. It's like, okay. Whereas, but now they understand like, yeah, don't touch the stove. So in the context of like a relationship falling apart I will tell them what the situation is, but they always have to make their own choices with it. But if a guy comes to me and he's like, can you save my marriage? I will, I don't ever say that to people. I don't ever agree to that. What I say is that my job here is to make you into the kind of guy that can have a good marriage. And I'm gonna show you what you can do to lead her. And to lead this relationship in a different direction. But at the end of the day, it's up to her if she wants to come along. And I can only guarantee that if you do the work that your life is gonna get better, I can't guarantee that the relationship is going to be, you're gonna save the relationship. Cause unfortunately also a lot of guys come to me after things are already, not all, but many come to me when things are already pretty critical. So it's like, I got stage four cancer, can you save me? Like, well, it took a long time for you to come in. Do you ever find that somebody's not telling you the truth? In other words, they're just, they're not, you're putting it together, but something's just not right. And they won't actually tell you everything they need to tell you. Absolutely, absolutely. Sometimes it's because they, sometimes it's not because they're, they're not like lying to me usually, but they were withholding information. And I ask a lot of questions with people cause I really want to understand, like I said, like the context is really important if I'm gonna help them. And so I ask a ton of questions to try to really understand the situation. If somebody is not giving me information, I can tell it there's a discrepancy. And I have, sometimes it's there because there's a lot of shame and there's blocks. And so I can help to, I can dig it out. Like people don't put things past me. But I tell clients coming in basically that you're not going to be able to hide stuff from me. So don't waste our time and just tell them. Yeah, it makes sense because if they're not telling you everything that's going on, how can you help them? Yeah. They might be looking for a specific outcome in trying, basically trying to, to, I guess, just kind of trick you into thinking, okay, this is what's happened. But I guess if you ask them the specific questions, you can find that out pretty easily. Yeah, and the good news, Tony, is that at this point in my career, I've started to polarize my audience pretty well.  Now, Mike, my sensor is even more aligned to it.  Maybe it's just somebody else that they would prefer to work with. But let's just say that's not, I'm not the kind of person that they think about going to. And if I get somebody who comes in, you know, I'm pretty good at saying the standards for them or pushing them out. Like I don't want to work with them if they're really just have no self-awareness. So I've been getting your emails. I've looked at your websites and I noticed you do, you handle all spectrums of dating, relationships. Let's talk about something that probably, I'm gonna say probably maybe 60% of all men are doing and that's online dating. So how do you coach a guy with that? Well, online, so people, you know, I think every guy, if they're being honest with themselves they're going to every coach, right? Every guru in this corner, they're gonna emphasize that there's certain areas that they're better at than others.  You know, I'm good. I'm proficient in day game. I've picked up girls off the street. I've dated girls I picked up. I am not, you know, crowdsor, right? And I would never pretend to be. So if somebody really wants that, you know, either they should only work, you know, they should work with somebody else in that capacity or they should maybe work with both of us, whatever. But my two big things that I really excelled at were social circle game and online dating. So social circle, I mean, I just, I know how to build networks very, very quickly, make lots of friends. And I've kind of went from the bottom of that of like having no friends to being really big with that. So I also understand how to go from like zero to hero, so to speak. But online, I also did really well at. And I think it's because I'm very good at reading subtext and making inferences about people. And I've also got a good cadence for writing. So with clients, one of the big things I'll do with clients, and for the record, I want to say, I don't think that guys should rely on online dating. I like it as like a portion of the portfolio. I think of it like an investment portfolio. I like it, you know, as maybe being 20 to 30%. It's good for guys who especially more attractive guys to get leads and to get some practice, but you're always going to be getting lower quality than you would be gaining in real life online. So it just, that needs to be understood by people. It is the low hanging fruit and, you know, the low hanging fruit isn't the right. Why is that? Why is that?  Where, what has the lowest barrier to entry is going to get the most mediocrity, right? To be great at anything, to get like the best rewards, you have to be, you have to excel in a niche that other people are not willing to go into. So for instance, the guys who get really good at day game, I mean, you will meet girls who you would never meet otherwise, right? And you can attract them. That's a skill that other guys don't have. And so, and people aren't willing to put the work in. I mean, if you're doing cold street approach, that is a lot of work. That is a, so, so there's that. Whereas everybody, like your average person is just going to go online, right? So it's easy enough to throw up a profile. A girl who doesn't really have much of an interesting life. Like the really, the girls that have really interesting lives and have a lot of stuff going on. And yes, I'm generalizing, of course, there's exception. But they're generally not going to go online because they have bigger social circles and they're meeting, you know, cool people through that. So you just kind of have like a lot of mediocrity that goes online. And, you know, I don't think it was always quite that way. But now it's so mainstreamed that, yeah. And women also, there's three times as many guys as women on there. So women are getting like deluged by messages. And so their own self-importance is inflated. So, but one of the things I work on with guys is making their profile really, really tight. And also reading girls' profiles and helping them to understand like who this girl is. When you see this girl, what do you notice about her? Making inferences based on what she's written, where she's been, how she looks, how she dresses. So that can be really good to help guys across the board with reading people and making assumptions. And so yeah, that's a piece that I do. Also helping with messaging, although tackling texting my book, does a job of going into that, it's like $5. Tell me about that. It's called, you're the author of Tackling Texting and the 14-Hour Course, the Pat Steadman Masterclass. Yeah, so I have two things out right now. Got a book coming out in a couple of months. That's like, that's gonna be like a real proper book. I look at Tackling Texting, which is my first published piece. It's a book, but it's really more of a manual. And I say that not to downplay it because it's really good. Like it takes you from when you get a girl's number or when you match with her all the way to the date, gives examples, it goes through deeper sort of principles to hold and gets very, very tactical. But it is like a manual. It's something that you can reference really easily and go through it. So I think it's wonderful, but I kind of put it in that box. Then I have, of course, the Pat Steadman Masterclass and that's a more premium thing. My coaching clients also work with that. And that's 14 hours. It's actually about to get expanded to probably close to 20 hours.  So, but at any rate. I have a question for you about texting. And this is, because I've been asked this question and I've been asked this by different guys. I don't wanna say do any coaching, but because people know that I'm involved in the Manusphere and involved with men in 21 convention, they reach out to me for advice just by, just because I'm involved in that. And they've asked me, can you escalate during texting? I mean, should you escalate during texting? I know I do, but I've had that question asked to me, what's your deal on that? So when you say escalate, you mean like sexually escalate? Yeah, sexually and basically escalating either can be sexually or escalating to actually move the date forward. Cause most guys who do online dating know that a lot of women are just, they just wanna chat to get past the chat buddy. Okay, gotcha. So my, a little spoiler, the two key things to keep in mind with texting is that you only text a girl to get her on a date or to add value. And the only reason you add value is to get her on the date. So it's really everything goes back to Gaynor in person. It is one of the worst things that guys do is that they don't have any sort of direction with their texting. It's they let the girl sort of dictate the aimless pace of things. And the girl doesn't want that. I mean, she'll take the attention and she'll go and chat with you at least for a while until she gets part of it. But it's a totally a way to kill the attraction. So everything with texting is the spike. It's like the spike attraction. And then when you get that investment to use that investment to move forward towards the date. Everything that you're doing is towards that trajectory. So yeah, I'm very everything. The book is basically designed to get the girl on the date. That's the entire purpose. Sexting is more of an advanced skill. And frankly, I think it's optional. I mean, like I've done it and I've done it well.  But for a lot of guys, they want to get to that. And it's just, you can do that in person, right? And there's a lot of, if you don't know what you're doing, you're more likely to mess things up from sexting than you are to improve your situation. So I don't consider it an essential piece, but it can be fun.      That's funny. Also, I noticed you seem to be a pretty spiritual guy. And reading your stuff, you're into like, and I don't know, I guess, I don't know if you're Christian or not, but you are a spiritual guy, but I notice you talk about any vibrations, low and high vibrations. How does that all work into what you're doing? Well, it's a big part of, it's like a little bit of a teaser for the book coming out, but energy is, okay, so let's try to, like a lot of people get scared off by this because they think it just sounds like nonsense. It's woo-woo, they're very rational. They wanna know the facts. If I do this thing, I should do this thing. And then maybe they move towards, okay, this is female psychology, and so they can rely on psychological triggers. But when you start to talk about energy, it's like, what is this guy talking about? Now, how can I use it? Like they can't even relate to it. Seems impractical. But at the same time, there's an acknowledgement that there are naturals, right? There are guys who are good with women, got no idea what they're doing, but they're just good with women, right? And from the guys who really get experience out in the field, people like Krauser, right? They will start to acknowledge that, well, really what she's looking for is your vibe. That's what she's drawn towards. And they're like, okay, I kinda get it, you gotta improve your vibe. But a lot of people fall short with it and they get, they go into things like, you gotta get in state. For the record, I'm not against that, I think, but when people say you gotta get in state, well, all they're saying is you gotta raise your energy level. So there's implicit acknowledgement that energy plays a role with this stuff. It's that if you approach it, or in that vibration, because vibe is vibration, but people get scared off when you sort of use more of these hippie terms with it. But the reason it matters is because, based on where your energy level's at, and I can explain this a little bit, but based on where your energy level's at, is going to determine everything about how you should approach a woman and about basically where her own kind of psychology's at. So you can sort of distinguish it between low, middle, and high. Low vibration stuff is like where you would get, the very bottom you have like shame and guilt, you're gonna have things like lust, you're gonna have anger, you're gonna have a lot of the things that are often classified as sins, but are really just like pain points that people pretend to project outward or project inwards. They don't feel very good about themselves. And when people are in this lower level, then they're much more influenced by biological triggers, right?  Or they're gonna care about, to an inordinate amount status, right? It's not that as if these things never matter, of course they always matter, but there's a greater emphasis on them, on these lower areas because there's less awareness and there's more emotional trauma. And so a lot of the red pill describes women at their lower vibration stage. Now, as you get towards mid-vibration as a guy, most of the guys in the manosphere who are outside of that bitter corner are gonna be clustering around here. And it's really like you can, if you were gonna separate into low and high, you would consider the mid to be high because this is where people have jumped into courage, they're moving away from fear-based behavior and they're taking risks. Like the guy who says, I need to get better with women, I'm gonna start cold approaching, he's moved into courage. So he's moved out of that lower victim field. And here things in this midfield, things get a little bit more muddled because you have now, you have the biological aspect of women that still plays a big role, but then you also have more other higher things. And you can see that a woman is not just defined, the women who are in this sort of area, they're not just like gold diggers, right? But if you lose your job and you kind of fall off the wagon, they might start to move away, right? So there's more of like a mixed thing in there. And that's where most of my work has taken place. But there is also on the higher end and when you move towards the higher end, it's really like you're motivated by really just joy and love and you're very positive and just really making people feel love for themselves around them. And when you move to this level, relationships are very, very different. I mean, and it's not to say that it's a spectrum, right? And you're dealing with pockets constantly from the lower areas, but some of the things that people talk about, like this is how you get a girl, it's like this is how you get a girl when she's at this vibration state and you're at this vibration state.  So yeah.  And within five minutes, I can tell I don't wanna be here another five minutes. Is that kind of what you're talking about too? Is it like I'm getting just a horrible vibe from her? And can we mistake that for the hell with it?  I mean, that can be an option also, can it? It can, right? I mean, this is the thing. To thine own self be true. For some guys, or at least in some situations, that's what he's looking for and he'll go forward and he'll do it. It'll be fine with it, right? It won't make a difference to him. I found a lot of guys will go forward with that though because they feel like they have to. It comes from usually a lack of abundance in other areas like, oh, while this girl's here and she sucks, but I wanna get my nut off. And then what tends to happen is that they either don't worry about themselves afterwards or they actually have some performance problems while trying to do the act because they're out of alignment with themselves. So, but I mean, I'm very much open to people like, I try to help people figure out their path and where they wanna go. And I think that people need to work through things and experience things in order to move past them.  She's got bad energy. Maybe she's having a bad day and you caught her at a wrong time, but probably it's more of a baseline thing because even on a bad day, people usually aren't so far off from where they would normally be. Yeah, that's interesting. I mean, when you started explaining it, I wasn't quite sure until you started explaining it. I kind of what you meant, but I do know and you can get that with a friend or whatever.  It's everything. It's in everything. You can see it in, you know, the difference between a politician and a statesman, there's a lot of variation with people. And, you know, I don't think some people like it because they like to put things in a really logical container, but I mean, I'm a logical person, but I'm also like, I think that reason is also a false God and that a lot of people get trapped. And I've seen people who have just destroyed themselves trying to take a materialist view of humanity and a materialist view of dating. I mean, it just does not bring happiness. Even if you get laid a lot, does not feel very good. Yeah, but you do coach guys that just want to get laid, period. Oh, yeah. Yeah, no question. I don't want to hear coaching things too. No question, but, you know, I will say that usually it's like, I need to go get, I want to like go out and play the field, but usually there's something like deeper down the line that they're interested in, usually, not always, but usually the guys who, and this is why I think it's important that people figure out who they want to work with when it comes to coaching because there are some guys who like they are, like their entire thing is based on like clubs, right?  You know, that's, like if a guy says I want to get as many notches as possible, like we're almost certainly not a good fit because that's very different as far as I'm concerned I want to go and play the field for a bit. Okay, gotcha, okay, yeah, but that guy would probably be somebody who is not good with women at all and probably hasn't been with many women at all, I would imagine. Well, that's usually true, it's usually true because what they're doing is they're creating some sort of fantasy. They think that if they get that like, like 100, 200 notches that they're going to feel like a man. They're going to feel like women like them that they're good with women. So that does usually play a part, but there are some people who, you know, where they are sort of at with their energy and with their goals is different. And, you know, we all have a resonance towards some people or others based on, you know, we can see like this person, the way that they operate, that's the kind of relationship that's the kind of dynamic I want to have. And I think that that's where people should really, should, if you're looking for mentors, you should look at people who, if not are living how you want to live, you can see parts of them, you can resonate with their energy on a certain level that you want to go with it. So, and that all happens very unconsciously. A lot of it's just that we don't pay attention to it. Right? Yeah. Now, I've met you at 21 convention and let's put it this way, you gave me a good vibration. And one of the reasons why I could see you were passionate at what you do is there was times where people were sitting around the pool and I saw you on your phone, walking, pacing and coaching guys while you were at 21. When other guys were relaxing. So to me, I noticed those things I do. I tend to pick up certain things about people. You know what I mean? Some guys, and not saying that other guys don't deserve a vacation or to relax, but you were all business the whole time. I mean, I did see you on the phone a lot and I did ask you one time and you had said, oh, I've got a coaching call coming up. So I saw you pacing around, around the pool area. So, to me, that tells a lot about a person that they're into what they're doing. That's cool that you noticed that. It's impressive. Yeah, it's actually something I've been trying to work on is to give myself a little bit, like to really make sure I take a day off where I can really just unplug from it because I was starting to get drained. I would have some days I'd have like 10 hours straight of calls. We were talking about this, I had a coaching call before this interview. I have one in like 10 minutes. So I've been trying to, part of my own kind of growth has been saying aside more time for myself so that I can serve better. It's kind of like a boundary thing for me because we're always learning, we're always growing from this. But I really do care about, I really care about my clients. It's like, I love them, I love them. And that was real, that was obvious to me. I mean, that was obvious when I saw you. I mean, you were on the phone quite a bit. And to me, I don't think that's not disrespectful but it's respectful to your clients and everybody that you're working with. So I think that's very respectable to do that. Now you're gonna be speaking at the 21 convention and I got it right here, the 22 convention.  Oh man, well, I'm still working on the details of the speeches but where I think I'm going with the 22 convention is I'm gonna be talking about basically a woman's need to do things that make herself happy, like actually happy in order so that she is not going to be trying to drain a man's energy. Because one of the things that, talking about the energy thing, I mean, if you wanna get into esoteric masculinity and femininity, men are sort of like life and women are death. And that's not in a disrespectful way. It's just like a yin-yang kind of thing that men tend to have a problem, like the man puts life into the woman who then life comes out of that and a man sort of seeks out this release, right? His labor and life is kind of like his reward is death. Men are always kind of seeking out this emptiness. And women are always seeking out to try to get energy from guys. And so you have this situation where men have a hard time controlling their energy like porn, et cetera, porn, drinking, whatever. And women have a hard time cultivating it. And so I'm gonna be talking about women really dealing with a lot of their emotional pains and emotional baggage, because the problem that women face is that they don't have honest communities like the man's fear is. The man's fear is at its worst, a little bit to rah-rah, black and white, one dimensional, but it does attempt to tell people the truth, right? On a regular basis, it's all about the truth, which is a very masculine energy, right? But in female communities, and I've spent time in them because I'm always trying to learn, okay, a lot of the energy healing stuff comes from female communities, but they tend to have a very hard time with telling women the truth and saying like, hey, this is something you have to deal with. And so in my speech, I'm gonna be trying to provide that very gently, gently, because you gotta be gentle with women. Yeah, yeah, yeah, yeah. So it's kinda like what you're saying, so what you're saying by that is, let's say, I mean, to me, this is just a typical example. You could have one girl who's beautiful and everybody's seen this, and then you have one girl who's completely out of shape and is an absolute wreck, and she'll say, oh, how do I look? Oh, you look great, girl, you go.  I mean, we've all heard that. And to me, that's almost, that's really competition between two women. Oh, yeah. That's where it is. So it's not really, oh, you're good, girl. No, it's more of a competition is what I think. Oh, you said it, Tony. I mean, they sabotage each other left and right, and it is, it's just awful. I think it's awful. But the other part of it is that if you are honest to a woman without the right, without approaching it the right way, and I'm not talking about in like, necessarily a personal relationship because at that point you should have enough buildup, but if you're just telling like a girl, like a friend, you have to be, you have to really get buy-in from them. Like whenever, like girls will ask me dating advice, and I'll be like, do you really want my advice on this? Like, yeah, I'm like, are you sure? This is like, do you really want to hear it? And then they kind of brace themselves and they're like, yes, like I want to hear the truth. And then I can tell them, then I can say like, you're not dressed well, and you need to lose 10 pounds. Right, I can say something like that, or I can say, you know, this is not what guys are looking for when you're trying to provide this, but you really have to get buy-in. Otherwise, what they do immediately is they, it just devastates them. And they'll very often, you know, and they could try to, they could try to make some sort of character assassination campaign, but the reality is I don't tell people things unless they want to hear them. I learned that lesson. And you're not doing it maliciously. I mean, when somebody says, I'd like to hear it, a lot of times they can take it the wrong way, but sometimes letting people know, and the difference is basically what you're saying is that, you know, as men, we're gonna tell women actually the way we feel and what we want where a woman speaking to another woman will sugarcoat it. And so there's gonna be no sugarcoating here, but it's gonna be a little bit gentle, so you're not, you know. Right, right. I mean, women today, they don't really have a lot of men who would tell them these things. And they don't really have, I mean, because the reality is that, okay, a woman can't trust another woman her age to tell her the truth, rare exceptions. Like one of the most rare, it's beautiful when you see it, but I feel bad for women and I'm talking to female friends, they feel the same way. It is a reason why women will often try to become friends with men, even though they're very muddied waters. But they, like, it's very difficult for a woman to find another woman her age, who she can trust, who is going to not try to stab her in the back. Whereas men, men have enemies, but they also have like brotherhoods and loyalty and whatnot. Male friendships are much more robust than female friendships. Women historically were, you know, there's all sorts of mythology around this, but older women were supposed to tell younger women the truth about how things work.  That would have been mythologically considered to be like an evil witch. But because that's like a lot of older women have sort of been brainwashed into it. They don't tell younger women the truth. And so that entire honesty culture has collapsed. And it collapsed for men too, but men are really doing much better job with this honesty than women are. Because I think the manosphere, one of the reasons it's really good is because it's creating a new culture of men telling the truth versus like the kind of weak, spineless guys who won't say what they want from a woman and won't dare to hurt a woman's feelings because what if she gets pissed off or gets offended or... Well, this is gonna be interesting. And I look forward to seeing you again at the 21 convention in October. Pat, tell everybody how they can contact you, reach you, all your platforms. Yeah, I'm on Twitter at Pat underscore Steadman. That's S-T-E-D-M-A-N. And also my email list, sign up for that. I usually send out about three emails a week on average. With the book, it's been a little bit slower recently, but I'm gonna kick that back up again next week. That's patsteadman.com slash optin. So patsteadman.com slash optin and at pat underscore Steadman. So, but Tony, I mean, thank you so much for having me on and I'm looking forward to seeing you at 21 and 22 con too. I think, I don't know about you. I think that this year is gonna be crazy because of all the stuff going on. I think 21 con is always good, but this year, like I really, people who are thinking, oh, I don't know if I'm gonna go, you don't wanna miss this one. Like I just feel it. I don't know why. I agree. So. I agree. Yeah. Well, it's, especially the year we've had, I mean, this is gonna be a great time, a great release for everybody. Everybody's gonna gather and just have a great time. Not only that, you're gonna learn something. You're gonna learn about yourself. You're gonna learn about relationships. So there's anything, everything good can come from it. So I encourage everybody to buy a ticket and I will leave links down below in this video for anybody wants to attend and see Pat and you can have dinner with Pat. You can have a drink with Pat. So that's the way it works with 21. There, everybody's available. Yeah, I'm very accessible. But I do appreciate your time. Yeah, for sure. I appreciate your time and I will see you soon. Yeah, thanks again. Yeah, thank you.


Going on everyone Sam here late in sports cars dripping 23 puny Chronicles baseball hobby 8 box freak number 8 random team style There's a look again at your random results as always you can find those on the website under the results tab as well as the link in chat It's good. Look everybody. Let's do it Tom see picking up a bunch of personal. Thank you Tom Let's do it some baseball and got origins divisions later on tonight two cases Six and eight to go on those also have a bunch of random team breaks of origins as well One-of-one Jose Rodriguez Nice one there for the White Sox. Congrats on that in the classics one of one Here you go White Sox That's Mary Ann M Jackson holiday Jersey Gabriel Gonzalez Jersey Auto for the Mariners nice one there 13 of 99 199 is Francisco Alvarez JC young bill Lee. I know you Capita 199 Kevin Alcantara Steve Carlton nice one there one-of-one America's pastime majestic going the Phillies There you go, Philadelphia. Hell yeah, man Phillies is gonna be Ryan B. Congrats Ryan Good stuff there my friend America's pastime majestic mark Steve Carlton one-of-one on card as well there Colson Montgomery and Dustin Badroia is South Frilich America's pastime rookies pink go into the Brewers Congrats Milwaukee on the redemption. There you go brew crew So 199 Carlos Viagra Neto Stardil Curtis Mead Who one of ones in that one box? Oh not at all man Jacob Barry to 199 That is a trade umbrowski to 100 for the Astros on the red foil and Brooks Lee to 199 Every time he walks out of the bathroom. Oh, he's going to wash his hands because I did Ethan solace to 25 He'd help opening the door. No to 99 is Brooks Lee He's like 40 pounds Points coming up here everybody ran to all at the end Miguel blaze to 99 the Red Sox Nick Gonzalez to 99 and mark McGuire Lera say a Suzuki and Jackson holiday to 99 nice one Orioles. That's a Baltimore Very nice. Very nice Baltimore Orioles Arelvis Martinez crown signatures to 99 for the Blue Jays. I swung up the Jays and Nomar Garcia bar that is going to be Evan Carter nice one there one of one going to the Rangers Yeah, number three and two and two boxes Unbelievable congrats to the Rangers Brent C. What a time to get this man. Holy crap laundry tag one of one So risotto to 199 Cartaya and Jet Williams Good Lord man Good Lord team to go on Origins Number eight What up? Oh, oh That's just a bot man Spence what up Spence? Texas Ranger top Louis J. I know Honestly, I don't know about that. It was more like There's One-man show Jersey story 150 What are we doing? Green to five Daniel Espino and No more cursive Approve that you prove that what no, I did not I would have denied it Nice Jackson Cheerio to 199.  Oh, yeah. Oh, yeah, man. Here comes this guy. Oh, yeah, shady You caught us red-handed man So 100 is Jim Bunning tie Madden go into the Tigers Mason win To 199 any Pajas and Tim salmon Gabriel Gonzalez Anthony Solomento On the auto for the Pirates Bradley and some more base there Soda strum No ma and Dennis Eckers leads you at 99. Yeah, I know It's just a battle with a bunch of brick walls, man It's just a battle of brick with brick walls shady Yeah Cole young 75 Drew Jones There's Jose can say go to 75. Yeah, people that say that they They pickaxe walls and don't go through doors. Yeah, that's for sure Jose Ramos chewed 100 That is a Diego crack tie. That's a 99 Really you You solo solo clutching Spencer Jones for the Yanks Spencer Jones Yankees This is the one 99 does that ruin the counting gross for you. Yeah Okay, Doughty go into the Blue Jays I don't doubty. This is an auto The 99 no Margaritia far Logan Tana to 199 Bob Feller Get everybody 15 to go 15 to go on origins number eight Billy Paul Merrow blue Nolan Ryan to 99 15 to go on origins number eight everybody half case random team style hundred dollars a spot Raphael for call nice one there to 49 for the Dodgers Raphael for call and Tyler Gentry Yeah He was never like a star but it was always like you'd like having service you were going to like Going deep in the playoffs.  Oh Yeah What are your thoughts today? It's two things really Francisco Alvarez Royal Signatures hollow silver go into the Mets. Stop remarks Loja Loja remarks to your car tired of 25 That's Cade Horton on the psychedelic short print Zack neto to 150 no to 100 to 199 Steve Carlton and JC young to 199 What are you more in the mood for it's gonna have to be pizza because I had Chinese like Roger Green to 25. Yeah, we can do that. I just can't do it Jackson holiday on the jersey card. I'm down I want to get those jokers in on it, too. Yeah Dillon Beavers on the obsidian autograph for the Orioles That's one there Andrew H for the spot in number eight. We are down to 14 to go Andrew. Thank you Andrew 14 to go in number eight Make able Sorry, sorry cam Sorry David Ortiz the case comes you And Shulish Joe Jackson 199 Usually skunk you like if you tell you get the Rangers and what's it called an arm and get her like you usually do Usually get you something that was brutal Nobody likes Florida should just stay around to 100 Silas are doing. Oh and Murphy on the jersey to 99 Me and Sam are working together 49 Frank time all the time all the time Cameron said Sean how much to put Sam at number one Yeah, usually it just happens me at number one too. Yeah Clearly Watson for the Marlins still nice one there Marlins clearly there's a lot of people that want to be on there So I Knocked off some of the clowns from here. I say clowns. I mean clowns. Oh, yeah Paul Mahler Yeah Jacob Barry to 199 Yeah Trash the year Brady house future Kings to 99 on card auto for the All week long. I heard that To 199 Torrey Hunter and Jacob Barry de la Cruz. There we go Alvin to 199 congrats on that Congrats Alvin to 99 is Justin Moreno Davison de los Santos a Andy Pajas and Pete curl Armstrong to 199 as well You can make this alley over here. I just got pulled as well Two boxes left everybody here we go L a de la Cruz again for Alvin with the Reds Gabriel Gonzalez obsidian rookie autograph or prospect autograph for the Mariners base that is to five of Frank Viola five of five for the twins. That's one Minnesota on the clearly and Tim salmon to ten for the Angels Tim Salman so many of you Sugano Ellie and Dennis Eckersley silver Ray Lankford America's best nice one there to 150 on the auto That's Cadnals Ray Lankford rich ass for the spot number eight down to 13 everybody. Let's go rich 13 to go now everybody 13 to go for call Drew Jones Colton Couser to 199 and Henry Davis got redemption of Brooks Lee America's pastime Prime material signatures green go to the twins. Nice one there. That could be number five potentially Nice one there. Congrats on that going to the twins To 100 199 Ricky Henderson really amazed. I don't think so. Hope it to be honest. I don't think so Kim Didi didi didi No more Garcia para Joe Maurer Daniel Susak and Tori Hunter to 75. I don't remember though to be honest Robert W with a spot number eight down to 12 everybody 12 to go 12 to go Let's get that sold out everyone 12 to go to go on Origins on the power tie. There you go. At least you got a good workout out of it First chronicles is great break. It's not for you yet. True true true Would you have shana forget guardians and somebody right? This one's really sad. This is the best one of the day so far zack neto to 50 on the auto uh griff mcgary to 25 bill masarovsky What's up shane Yeah, probably ross kiner jackson merrill for the Padres to 49 future kings To 10 10 of 10 each row nice one there for the mariners and mariano base Ripken jet williams and purple rhino ryan sandberg to 50 To 100 lou brock got burp bligh 11 on the game use jersey for the angels Base and george breck base base tyler sodastrom for the athletics nice one there To 199 i 100 of greek and Warming bernabelle to 199 for the rockies And tim salmon trust me it is not fun 22 to go in origins number nine everybody 22 to go in number nine And we got 10 11 and 12 as well And then a couple of full cases and how you leave for the Phillies to 199. All right quick random. We've got the Um Uh points go into one team and then the non mlb cards. We'll go to another team All right, so we're gonna roll the dice everybody whatever teams on top after seven times We'll get the points and the second team will get the non mlb cards. So one two three four five six and seven fillies gonna get the points And then the braves will get non mlb fillies and braves. Congrats on that All right We've got uh purple eye lovin le de la cruz Owen murphy jackson holiday deal cartaya time added Uh brooksley and jackson holiday again wasn't three one of ones as well Uh, we had a Tyler sodastrom jackson maryl uh, zack netto Hey, ray linkford gabriel gonzalez brady house cleol watson dylan beavers polton kausser uh rafael for call a Cade dowdy, uh spencer jones anthony solometto uh jackson cheerio wan bin show or Elvis martinez gabriel gonzalez redemptions of south frelec uh francisco alvarez and brooksley And we had an le de la cruz auto 199 The reds we had a one-of-one jose rodriguez for the white socks Uh one-of-one majestic pastime um or america's pastime majestic marks of steve carleton for the fillies And then a one-of-one uh laundry tag auto evan carter america's pastime for the Rangers that'll do it for the break everybody. Thanks again for the filp up next full case divisional


Hello, this is LaptopMedia, and today, we will show you how to open the Acer Swift 3 and what's inside of it. This notebook's bottom panel is held in place by 11 Torx head screws. After you undo them, pry the panel with a plastic tool, and lift it away from the chassis. Please remember, it would be of great help to us if you just hit the like button and subscribe to our channel. That would motivate us to make even more and better videos for you. Here, you get a 53 watt hours battery. It lasted us for nearly 11 hours of web browsing, or more than 9 hours of video playback. As you can see, removing it is a simple task, as it's only secured in place by the will of God. Unfortunately, the memory here is soldered to the motherboard. On the bright side, the 16 GB RAM we got works in quad channel mode. As for the storage, there is a single M2 PCI-EX4 slot that supports Gen4 drives. Cooling wise, there is a single heat pipe, connecting to a pretty large heat sink. If you'd like to see more disassembly videos of the latest notebooks we would highly appreciate if you hit the like button and subscribe to the channel.


Hi, I'm Wesley Russell, I'm here with Blackstar today. We're looking at the HD20 Mark II combo, we're going to be dialing in some jazz funk goodness with the two clean voices and the ISF feature.


My name is Brent Scorup and thanks for having me today here. Hopefully you want to learn something about spectrum. So I'll be taking you through little spectrum 101 to begin with a little bit about spectrum history, how we got here, talk about spectrum policy today, some bills that are out there, and finally what spectrum policy will look like in the future. And this is becoming a big topic. Senator Thune just released a bill with Senator Nelson last week, I believe, about this. So what is spectrum? Spectrum is the medium through which electromagnetic waves travel and what the government, what the FCC does is it allocates spectrum licenses out to people and so a license is a right to exclude others from that bandwidth. So for example, if the FCC auctioned off a license for spectrum from five megahertz to 15 megahertz, 10 megahertz band in the Washington DC area, if I won that license, I would be the only one that could put equipment that transmits on those frequencies. No one else could without my permission, people could buy the right to have their own equipment there, but I have the right to exclude others. It also means from other spectrum bands. So in Washington DC, if someone had zero to five megahertz, they could have their equipment there from five to, excuse me, from 15 to 20, they could have their equipment there. And also my five to 15 megahertz, another licensee could have them Baltimore or New York or whatever. So spectrum is scarce, not everyone who wants it can use it at the same time. Like real property, it can be bought, sold, leased, divided, subdivided and most people don't realize you deal with spectrum every day. So the FM dial, if you wanted with those numbers mean 88 megahertz to 108. If you're listening to the radio on your commute, that's the frequency, so that's the megahertz. The FM radio dial is 20 megahertz, 88 to 108. Mobile carriers have, on your smartphones, you're transmitting on the airwaves from about 700 megahertz to 3,500 megahertz, 3.5 gigahertz. And the carriers have various, they don't have the entire span, but they have various bands in there. Most popular Wi-Fi band is at 2,400 megahertz. It's 100 megahertz wide band that is used for Wi-Fi on the most popular band. So who's seen this chart before? Few people. This is the United States Frequency Allocation Chart. All these boxes with text in it, those are not who owns the spectrum, that's what services are allowed. And so at the bottom top, you've got the low band spectrum, the very long wavelengths, and at the bottom right, it gets higher as you go left to right, and at the bottom right, you have very high frequencies, and you can share more, that's why there's more boxes down there, you can share the high frequencies. And within there are all kinds of services, hundreds of services, and so basically on every part of the US, there are dozens, potentially hundreds of wavelengths being used in this room at this time. This is another chart, this is from GAO, basically showing the same thing. On the far left hand side on the bottom, you've got the low frequencies, on the far right you've got the high frequencies, this is just very compressed. They also blow up a section of the spectrum, that's, this is called the beachfront spectrum, it's called beachfront because this is very high valued, everyone wants it, government, commercial, and GAO puts a few illustrations of what services are in there.  So there's increasing demand for spectrum throughout, but especially the beachfront spectrum. It's a very valuable input for government, for commercial government users, I mentioned some of the applications, GPS, communications, public safety. On the commercial side, wireless broadband is driving most of the demand, so as recently as 2008, only 10% of people had smartphones. Today's about 70% of people in the US have smartphones, and smartphones are a huge consumer of data, especially video, video is a huge consumer of data. Actually voice is not, doesn't use much data, but video does, and that's driving a lot of consumer demand, and that's a picture of a cell phone tower that you see in the city or out in the country, and that's what those are. So demand is increasing, but supply is constrained by physics and by policy. So a fiber optic cable, which often wires those cell phone towers, has about 2,000 times the capacity of all the wireless spectrum that's allocated for the wireless carriers. So basically you have a 2,000 lane highway going down to one for wireless. The average cell site in the United States is shared by about 1,000 users at the same time. And that's a problem because all it takes is a few people watching high definition Netflix to consume all the bandwidth on that tower, it's just a handful of people. So we need more spectrum. It's not always been allocated efficiently, as I'll point out in a minute. So how do carriers increase spectrum? It's not infinite, as I said, but you can increase efficiency, you can use it more intensively. So you can upgrade technology radios, this is what's happening. Our phones are now 4G LTE, which is an upgrade from previous 2G and 3G a few years ago. Long-term evolution, it's a standard, it stands for long-term evolution. It's a set by standards body, a global standards body, and just so equipment suppliers know how to design the radios, so that works around the world. Good question. You can increase capacity by building more towers. As I said, there's a lot of sharing going on for each tower, hundreds of people for each tower. If you build more tower near another one, instead of it being shared by 1,000 people, it's shared by each one shared by 500. And so you've increased capacity that way. So, and a lot of people don't realize this. So a substitute for more spectrum is building more towers. But building towers is expensive. FCC estimates about a half million dollars total cost to have a new tower. This is something policy makers start to look at, how to make it easier for companies to build infrastructure, to build towers. Senator Thune has a bill that requires agencies to streamline their permission to allow carriers to put towers up. So that's one thing you can do, and you can also buy more spectrum. Now, building towers, buying spectrum are both very expensive, and we'd like to make it as cheap as possible. I'd like to impress on you that spectrum is not sexy's topic, but it is the lifeblood for a lot of these technologies down on the horizon. Inefficient spectrum use is a national problem. I'll talk in a minute about the history and why that is. But, big part of it is the US government holds about 60% of it, of the beachfront spectrum, likely worth hundreds of billions of dollars. Economists have estimates about what the value is to free some of that up. One study says freeing up just 10% of that would result in a trillion dollars of economic value. Harold first got Roth, who was a former FCC commissioner, he's an economist, he's at the Hudson Institute in town, estimates that inefficient spectrum use exceeds trillion dollars. So we're talking real money here. So more spectrum means more innovation. And as I said, it's expensive to get spectrum, it's expensive to build infrastructure. By freeing more of it, you make it easier for companies to experiment, deploy new things, internet things, reliance spectrum, drones, driverless cars, augmented reality, where you might have glasses that give you real-time information as you look around. These are all on the horizon. I mean, some of these are here today. Drones are starting to get out, and they're using this long-term evolution standard in a lot of cases, but it's costly to deploy. It's costly for carriers. They don't always want to give up spectrum that their Netflix viewers want. So the more the better. And it does drive technology by freeing it up, which is why I'm here talking about the importance of it. So how did we get here? In the 1920s, spectrum was not very regulated. Basically, if you were, there were some maritime applications, ship-to-shore communications, and some amateurs experimenting with it. But in the early 1920s, technology improved, broadcast radio became possible. You put up a tower, blast a signal out, and companies actually started doing this so that they could sell radios to people, and that's how it started. So in the early 1920s, radio broadcasters started, hundreds started popping up.  Commerce would sign off and it was yours. Part of the problem was, well, from Congress's point of view, courts started recognizing these licenses as owned by the people who got licensed. And there were a lot of reasons, but one of the reasons Congress in 1927, nationalized, I should say, socialized all the spectrum in 1927, gave it to the Federal Radio Commission, was courts were starting to recognize property rights to spectrum. And so it's the first paragraph of the Communications Act says there are no vested property rights to spectrum. It's owned by the American public, administered on behalf of the public by the government. So a few years later, the Communications Act created the FCC, which superseded the Federal Radio Act and took over their responsibilities. So, spectrum policy then was, you'd have administrative hearings about how to allocate spectrum, so it was technology-improved. You could use more spectrum. Broadcast TV came on the scene. You had public safety using these communications networks. The FCC would listen to the public. They would say, what spectrum do you need? How much do you need? And they would have hearings and give it to the most, what they considered the most beneficial system. They would give it for free. These administrative hearings were called beauty contests. You're rewarded by, if you made the case, that you deserved it. Rollercoaster, a few decades later, famous economist, one Nobel Prize wrote an essay, one of the most cited essays in economics. Well, this one was Federal Communications Commission. He looked at how the FCC was doing this, giving away spectrum for free and made the point, spectrum is scarce. That's not a reason to regulate it. We don't, grain is scarce, beef is scarce, and these are allocated by the market system. He pointed out, markets could probably handle spectrum allocation as well. And he was not treated well at the time when he said this. There was famous, there was congressional hearing and Senator Asif, this was a big joke that he was making. And, but eventually he won the day. 1993, Congress finally allowed the FCC to auction off spectrum to its highest valued use. So the idea is whoever values it most will bid the most and deploy it in ways that are efficient. So auctions are allowed, it's gotten a lot better. I will say, the spectrum chart of all the allocations, a lot of it is still the legacy services that were given away for free. And there are secondary markets, so a broadcaster today that was given it free in the 40s sells it for a lot of money today. So it's not free for the current licensees but they're also not paying the full market price. And that's the commercial side. The federal side, federal spectrum is administered by the president. He delegates that responsibility to the Department of Commerce and the NTIA within the Department of Commerce. But in practice, the agencies have a lot of discretion over how they use their spectrum allocations. And it's hard to find how federal allocations work but it looks like the NTIA generally did the same thing the FCC did, what do you need? Make your case and it would allocate it that way to the agencies. So federal spectrum is administered by the president, non-federal spectrum administered by the FCC. It's not just commercial but also state spectrum, state public safety, utilities, this sort of thing. A decision about whether spectrum is federal or non-federal is decided informally by the NTIA and the FCC. So some of the history, we'll talk about spectrum policy today, here's that chart again. And in a minute you'll see why there's a lot of interest in spectrum. If you keep your eye on that black circle, last year those two white slivers of spectrum sold for over $40 billion. I couldn't draw the slivers thin enough actually with the illustrator but that amount of spectrum sold for $40 billion. That band, that long band is the so-called beachfront spectrum, the most valuable stuff. So that was last year, the auction concluded in January 2015, AWS three auction. The big bidders were AT&T, Verizon, Dish and T-Mobile. 15 megahertz spectrum. $7 billion of that was earmarked for a nationwide public safety network. $20 billion of that went to pay down the debt. So very valuable, there's a lot of demand here. Here's that chart again from GAO that kind of blows up the beachfront spectrum. So now I'm gonna zoom in on that beachfront spectrum which I've boxed there, I've divided it into three so it fits on the page. And I'll show you those slivers again on the bottom left, you can kind of see them. That's what's sold for $40 billion in the beachfront spectrum. So use of the beachfront spectrum. There's about 3,200 megahertz total depending on how you count. About, and I'm approximate with all this because it's not always clear what you count but about 20% is used for mobile broadband. About 10% is used for broadcast TV. So these are your TV broadcasts. If you don't have cable or satellite and have rabbit ears antennas, ABC, NBC, PBS, that sort of thing that's what's using about 10% of the beachfront spectrum. The issue is, and the FCC realizes this, not many people watch broadcast TV anymore. The vast majority of people have satellite or cable. So, and I'll talk about it in a minute, they're trying to buy spectrum from broadcasters and resell it to the wireless carriers. And finally, the big use of the beachfront spectrum, about 60% has a dominant federal use and that's according to the presidential council of advisors on science technology. And government agencies will point out correctly they exclusively hold only 18%, approximately 18%. But as PCAST says, the agencies aren't great at sharing spectrum. So the other percentage is shared between non-federal and federal users, but the federal use effectively, PCAST says effectively precludes commercial use of that spectrum. So you'll hear these different numbers. Agencies will say 18%, others will say 60. That 60% comes from the fact that you can't really use the federal spectrum that well when you're sharing it with them. Because they have a lot, there's a lot of interest in this. The values that are attributed to it, NTIA is analyzing at the direction of the president about 30% for possible sharing and relinquishing for commercial use and broadband and wifi. So I mentioned 60%, I've blacked out where the federal users are and it looks about 6%. You can't take it too literally, but the blacked out area is about what's, cannot be used very easily for commercial use. So the beach front, as I said, about one to 2% of the beach front spectrum sold for $40 billion last year. There's a lot of value to be squeezed out of that. It's the idea, but 6% is not available for commercial use, wireless broadband use. Dozens of agencies use it. They've got thousands of assignments from the NTIA that I've listed the big nine agencies that use it there. DoD is a big one. And getting back to COS, some markets allocate scarce things all the time. The issue here and the economic concern is that spectrum is underpriced for agencies. So it's underused, presumably, it could squeeze a lot more efficiency out of the federal spectrum. It's not entirely freed agencies. They pay $122 a year for every assignment, but that's really underpriced for what they hold. And channeling COS, agencies purchase other things that approximate the market rate. So vehicle fleets, labor, pencils, paper, office space, somewhere around the market rate. And the idea is you could also do this for spectrum. So some recent spectrum action and actually this first one, the incentive auction is not a bill. It's a law in 2012, Congress passed an act allowing the agency to do what's called the incentive auction. And so basically, and this is going on next month, the FCC will go to the broadcasters and say at what price can we give you money to either stop broadcasting or compress your signals, share with other broadcasters and free up spectrum. So they'll do that next month. And then over the next few months, they'll pack everyone together and clear the spectrum and then go back to the carriers and say how much will you pay for all the spectrum? So they want to buy low, sell high, government pockets, the middle is very complex. And literally the global countries are watching and see how this goes because a lot of countries are dealing with this, they have legacy services that aren't as popular as they once were and they want to figure out how to get it into carriers hands. So it's complex, we'll see how it goes. Everyone's wishing for the best, but it's not clear how this will go. So one bill, and I've got a few bills here. This is not all of them, but some more interesting proposals I've seen. The Federal Spectrum Incentive Act from representatives Guthrie and Matsui. One interesting idea that they have is allowing agencies. So what we've been doing is going to NTIA saying, what spectrum can you spare? NTIA says we can spare this. Agencies will clear out that spectrum, it'll be auctioned off to the carriers. So the Guthrie and Matsui bill says, well when that's auctioned off, I mean agencies don't benefit, I mean they have to go through all this hassle and what's in it for them. So to incentivize them to give up more spectrum, they propose giving the agencies a 1% cut of the auction proceeds to use for sequestration cuts. It's an interesting idea. I think 1% is probably inadequate to get a lot of buy-in, but I think this is a good direction to go. The Wireless Innovation Act from Senator Rubio has an idea that NTIA will track the opportunity cost of spectrum. So just to get numbers, or heads around what agencies are using, give some proxy of what agency's spectrum is valued at. So agencies have to report that, say our spectrum is worth so and so million and it'll just give Congress everyone a better idea of how it's being used and whether they can use alternative systems or share with other agencies and that sort of thing. The Mobile Now Act, which I think came out last week from Senator Stoon in Nelson, it's got a lot in there, but some of the highlights, it would make 255 megahertz available for wireless broadband in four years, under six gigahertz, so not quite the beach front, which is under three gigahertz, but it could be some beach front as well. That bill also has provisions that would make it easier for wireless carriers to deploy on federal land, like I mentioned, to streamline the process, get applications and standard fees. It also requires the Department of Commerce to get a report about how to incentivize agencies to use spectrum more efficiently and get them to share or relink a spectrum. And I'll close by talking about a few of those things and what we can expect to see in the future and what might come out if that bill passed, what Congress would say about how to do that. So in the future what we see, I've focused a lot on federal spectrum just because there's a lot of beach front is in federal hands and I think policy will focus on federal spectrum, what we've done for the last 15 years or so. So like I said, go to NTIA, ask what can the agencies spare? NTIA says our agencies compress, go to some other band or some other alternative. Then that spectrum is auctioned off. So clearing the agency is auctioned off. That's worked fairly well. It's getting tougher because agencies are getting more compressed and more compressed. In 2004, to alleviate some of that pressure from agencies, Congress allowed some of the auction proceeds to go for the relocation exercises that agencies were doing and the middle class tax relief act in 2012. So agencies, even with that, we're saying it costs a lot to plan these relocation activities. And so Congress also gave them money in 2012 for those planning costs. I expect we'll also see more commercial federal geographic sharing and this idea is, so geographic sharing, if say Tennessee Valley Authority, which has communication systems, is operating Tennessee, they're not using the spectrum in California. And so the idea is you could auction off the spectrum in California to wireless carriers and as long as they avoid Tennessee, there's no problem. So geographic sharing is possibility. It's not ideal because carriers like to have nationwide footprints and it makes it more complicated for phone use. I mean, they have to, it's much more complex, but it is an option and it's been done in the past. Densify networks will be a big thing. This is a big part underlined the Thune bill is carriers will densify networks. So like I said, a thousand carriers share or a thousand people share every cell phone tower, build more towers, get more infrastructure out there. We'll see more of that because you can use more spectrum more efficiently when you reuse spectrum in that way. So we'll see a lot of that, especially you get much higher capacity. Policymakers are looking at the very high bands where you get much more capacity, but it doesn't penetrate walls as well. So there's trade offs either way. You know, one proposal that's popular and this was part of the PCAST proposal is unlicensed dynamic spectrum sharing. The idea here is, and it's been proposed for years, but there's a lot of complexity. The idea is take Tennessee Valley Authority in Tennessee, instead of just allowing carriers or broadband for Wi-Fi device makers only in California and around Tennessee, they could be in Tennessee, but the radios, they would have cognitive radios that when they sensed the federal agency operating, it would stop transmitting and prevent interference. Engineers are working on it, very smart people are working on this. It's a long way off, PCAST says doing this would take decades fully implement. And so it's a possibility. There's a lot of people excited about it. You'll probably hear this if you talk about spectrum policy with people, especially agencies are excited about this, but it does inject complexity and the technology has a ways to go. And you also have, I've got a note here, the legacy device problem. So Wi-Fi is non-licensed technology. As long as it's a low power, you don't need to go to the FCC and get formal permission, and you can deploy Wi-Fi everywhere. The problem with someone like, and they're trying to get around this problem, so you've got all these Wi-Fi routers out there, but you can't really have a new service come in there because you're gonna have a lot of upset Wi-Fi users. So the problem is, there's never been allocation of unlicensed spectrum because you don't know where the devices are. You can't clear people out whereas you can with licensed spectrum. So this is a problem I'm trying to deal with. You may have heard of the TV White Spaces kind of experiment that the FCC is doing where they're forcing the unlicensed users to check a database, and there'll be a list of these devices and where they are. So that's one possibility. We'll see where that goes, but again, this is at the beginning of stages. One idea economists have proposed is GSA for spectrum. So this idea would be, there's an agency that holds all federal spectrum, kind of like GSA rents out office space to agencies. The GSA for spectrum would lease out spectrum to the agencies at approximate market rates, and then they would optimize their networks, have the best technology, that sort of thing because they're paying for it. Again, this is a long-term idea. It would take a while. I mean, this is pretty abrupt change in how things are done. One, and I'll conclude with this. One proposal I like, and it's not my idea, but I wrote a paper about it. You'll find summaries around. So I'll plug that. It's a proposal from FCC Commissioner Rosenwursel who's on the FCC now. It's called overlay auctions. So the idea here is, use market forces to incentivize efficient behavior. So take the Tennessee Valley Authority, they're operating in Tennessee. You would auction off maybe a regional, or say a regional Southern license. So a carrier would bid, would buy a license for the entire South, but they would be told, you can't operate in Tennessee until you've convinced the agency to sell that spectrum to you or condense their activities in another band. And you can pay the agency. You can pay them, you can give them equipment if that gets them to get out. So you'd have regional license, you'd also have the exclusive right to deal with the agencies who are in certain bands in certain locations. When Commissioner Rosenwursel proposes, I thought that was interesting. So I did paper about it. It turns out these overlay licenses have helped free, these have not been done on the federal side. Let me be clear. They've been on the commercial side though, where you have legacy services, utility companies. You could use this for broadcasters where the carriers bid, they bid for a license and then they pay the others to get out. The issue on the federal side, a big issue is Ms. Lane's Receipts Act, which says basically, agencies can't go selling their stuff and pocketing the cash. I mean, there's problems with that. So as a general policy, that gets in the way that might need to be modified or that would need to be modified for this proposal. But as I say in my paper, this is not unheard of. Actually Congress allows, for instance, the VA can sell hospitals and or portions of hospitals to commercial hospitals. And they do that. So there are these carve outs and a few years ago they allowed, when military bases closed down, they allowed DOD to sell military bases and keep the or portion of the sales. So it's not unheard of. I think it's an interesting idea. I hope you guys find it provocative and you can read my paper for more on that. And so just to wrap up, I went through some Spectrum 101, talked about the history, why we're here.  There's a lot of pent up demand. There's a lot, consumers want more mobile broadband. They want more, they want more TV options. They want more broadband options and you can accomplish that by freeing up more Spectrum. And finally I talked about Spectrum policy in the future, some pending bills and why I think overlay auctions are worth considering. And with that, I'm happy to take questions and my email address is up there if you ever wanna chat. And yeah, I have to take questions.


Hey everyone, it's Gabrielle over here at Oxford Toyota today for our pre-owned vehicles of the week this week We're going to highlight Toyota four-runners. So we're gonna go ahead and start with this one right here This is a 2020 Toyota four-runner. This is an SR5 The exterior color is called midnight black metallic. This one is certified Now you are going to have alloy wheels. You'll have Bluetooth Now there was a clean car fax One owner That interior is in a black cloth Mileage on this one is ten thousand four hundred and forty two the price is forty eight thousand For our second vehicle. This is a twenty twenty one Toyota four-runner TRD off-road four-wheel drive Extra your color is in a Barcelona red metallic. So you're gonna have 17-inch alloy wheels This is Toyota certified So you're going to have Bluetooth Back-up camera clean car fax That interior is in a black and graphite Mileage on this one is twenty thousand six hundred and fifty eight the price is fifty seven thousand For our last vehicle, this is a 2016 Toyota four-runner SR five That extra your color is in a black You'll have your alloy wheels There's gonna be Bluetooth back-up camera clean car fax That interior is in a sand beige Mileage on this one is fifty six thousand four hundred and seventy nine the price is thirty nine thousand three hundred and seventy nine Now if you all have any questions on any one of the three that I just went over feel free to let us know all of our contact information Will be right here. Thanks you all for watching. We'll see you all soon. Bye