Would you buy a Lambo to attract women if you could?

[Sunnypoo]

You mean a Honda Civic won't cut it?

An SI will, they can't tell the difference. Cars are a guy thing not a women thing.

 

[samspade]

Here's the thing Sam. His claim is false because it lacks a qualifier.

He should said, "50k for a watch is way too much IF it comprises more than X% of your net worth."

Even for investing purposes, this revised statement might be true depending on X.

I'll buy that.

 

[zekko]

Here's the thing Sam. His claim is false because it lacks a qualifier.

He should said, "50k for a watch is way too much IF it comprises more than X% of your net worth.

No, I said I THINK $50,000 is too much for a watch, but if someone else wants one they can get one. I've said this several times, I don't know how much clearer I can be. To me, this whole thread is about personal preferences, and I gave mine.

Besides which, the OP's question was about buying things TO IMPRESS WOMEN. I have no desire for a Lambo or a Rolex for myself, let alone to impress a woman with it.

 

[Spaz]

Only a nerdy social retard thinks he needs accessories to attract women.

All you need is the ability to carry yourself like a boss.

Your face can be as plain as John Doe but if you walk like a boss, talk like a boss, stance of a boss, mindset of a boss etc...u r the boss of men.

And all women will want a piece of that man - his mere presence vibes power.

Now as for the Lambo, if a man has extra cash that he could afford to lose, buy it and dump it after the novelty wears off.

Then get a new toy to play. Repeat and rinse as time passes.

 

[jnMissouri]

Fvck no. Put money into assets that appreciate not depreciate.

Very well put.

 

[jnMissouri]

Huh? I didn't ask a question. I'm not the OP.

I am the OP and don't think I asked this question before. I think this guy might be confused.

 

[user43770]

Here's the thing Sam. His claim is false because it lacks a qualifier.

He should said, "50k for a watch is way too much IF it comprises more than X% of your net worth."

Even for investing purposes, this revised statement might be true depending on X.

I assume there are many filthy rich men out there who would agree with zekko.

 

[guru1000]

No, I said I THINK $50,000 is too much for a watch, but if someone else wants one they can get one.

To add “You think,” is irrelevant as we know you thought of it.

Still a false statement absent a qualifier.

Now if you wrote something like Tyte’s statement, “many filthy rich men out there would think that 50k for a watch is too much,” then it might be true. Notice he uses the word “many,” and not all. Also absent “many,” his statement would be false as some filthy rich might think otherwise.

You may think I’m splitting hairs here but I’m not. Qualifiers and understanding distinctions are critical when making arguments as many posters read these words and develop all or none belief
systems without exceptions which can lead to dangerous territory when situations arise that may benefit them.

For example, you did the same thing with the psychopath thread. You stated PUAs admire psychopaths. This statement is false because emulating some—not all—behaviors does not make one a psychopath nor an admirer of one. Yet in your mind they are of the same. You were unable to distinguish and understand this. Yet if a reader believes your words, they would feel shame for being or admiring a psychopath when they clearly weren’t.

 

[samspade]

You may think I’m splitting hairs here but I’m not.

Yes, you are. @zekko clarified his opinion. If you only want to argue against his first post and nothing subsequent, that is your prerogative, but then you're the one who's failing to think and operate critically. He's not running for president or under oath, and can expand on or clarify his posts if he was misunderstood or unclear.

You also misquoted @zekko ("ridiculous"), and yourself gave two inconsistent arguments (taste, then sound investment). I didn't press it because I didn't want to split hairs - it's a silly thing to argue, really. You're a smart man with a keen argumentative mind, but don't be hoisted with your own petard. You are arguing over a man's opinion, which cannot be proven true or false, since only he knows it to be so. If I go to the supermarket and say "$7.99 is too much for a hanger steak," it's a reasonable assumption that this is my opinion. I won't buy it, but someone else may. Ergo, the approval or disapproval of a proposed selling price is subjective and not a fact. Even if a council of soviets determine the price by law, you still have to decide whether you want to buy it or not.

 

[guru1000]

Yes, you are. @zekko clarified his opinion. If you only want to argue against his first post and nothing subsequent, that is your prerogative, but then you're the one who's failing to think and operate critically. He's not running for president or under oath, and can expand on or clarify his posts if he was misunderstood or unclear.

You also misquoted @zekko ("ridiculous"), and yourself gave two inconsistent arguments (taste, then sound investment). I didn't press it because I didn't want to split hairs - it's a silly thing to argue, really. You're a smart man with a keen argumentative mind, but don't be hoisted with your own petard. You are arguing over a man's opinion, which cannot be proven true or false, since only he knows it to be so. If I go to the supermarket and say "$7.99 is too much for a hanger steak," it's a reasonable assumption that this is my opinion. I won't buy it, but someone else may. Ergo, the approval or disapproval of a proposed selling price is subjective and not a fact. Even if a council of soviets determine the price by law, you still have to decide whether you want to buy it or not.

Yes Sam I misquoted Zekko in “the price is ridiculous.” He did state “the price is too much.” Although “ridiculous” and “too much” sometimes mean the same thing, they don’t always. And so I was incorrect in that misquote. You see, it’s not so hard for one to admit when they are incorrect. Why can’t Zekko?

However, here, Zekko did not clarify his position as you proffered by adding qualifiers, rather he attempted to justify his position by adding “I think.”

“Spending 50k on a watch is too high” is false as in in some scenarios for some people it is not true.

“PUAs admire psychopaths” is false as by some practicing some traits inherent in psychopaths does mean PUAs admire psychopaths.

As to opinions not being true or false, that is incorrect when applied to objective reality. As a hyperbole, I may have the opinion that I could fly without assistance, but the objective reality is I can’t.

 

[zekko]

However, here, Zekko did not clarify his position as you proffered by adding qualifiers, rather he attempted to justify his position by adding “I think.”

Look at it this way then: The OP asked the question "Would YOU buy a Lambo or a Rolex?". I answered it - "No I wouldn't", and I gave my reasons for it. That's all there is to it. I was not trying to take a position saying "No DJ should buy a Lambo or a Rolex", in fact I repeatedly said otherwise.

This is different than the psychopath thing, where yes, I maintain that PUAs hold up psychopaths as role models. If you want to discuss that some more, let's take it back to the other thread.

The watch thing seems to be a sticking point. I think $50,000 seems like too much to spend on a watch. I did not say I could not afford one. I did not say no one should spend that much on a watch.

I did say I'm sure there are better investments than a watch, and I'm sure there are. But even if there weren't, I wouldn't invest in one because I am not a connoisseur of $50,000 watches. I would have to research it thoroughly before I would even consider it. But someone would have to convince me first, because I have no interest in buying a $50,000 watch. Maybe you can buy one and turn it over for double the money. I have no idea, I'm not saying you can't. I'm just saying I have no interest in one. I'm perfectly all right with you having a closet full of them if that's what you want, okay?

 

[guru1000]

Look at it this way then: The OP asked the question "Would YOU buy a Lambo or a Rolex?". I answered it - "No I wouldn't", and I gave my reasons for it. That's all there is to it. I was not trying to take a position saying "No DJ should buy a Lambo or a Rolex", in fact I repeatedly said otherwise.

This is different than the psychopath thing, where yes, I maintain that PUAs hold up psychopaths as role models. If you want to discuss that some more, let's take it back to the other thread.

The watch thing seems to be a sticking point. I think $50,000 seems like too much to spend on a watch. I did not say I could not afford one. I did not say no one should spend that much on a watch.

I did say I'm sure there are better investments than a watch, and I'm sure there are. But even if there weren't, I wouldn't invest in one because I am not a connoisseur of $50,000 watches. I would have to research it thoroughly before I would even consider it. But someone would have to convince me first, because I have no interest in buying a $50,000 watch. Maybe you can buy one and turn it over for double the money. I have no idea, I'm not saying you can't. I'm just saying I have no interest in one. I'm perfectly all right with you having a closet full of them if that's what you want, okay?

Negative.

You didn't state the reason why a lambo or rolex or anything is foolish to buy to attract women. I would have agreed with this. Rather, you made bald statements:

And $50,000 is too much to spend on a frigging watch.

and then later:

Not the point. I don't think any watch is worth spending $50,000 on. It tells time, and maybe shows a little style. I don't buy a solid gold toaster.

Both of these statements are factually false.

If your intention was to address the OP, then you should have.

 

[Who Dares Win]

Too stressful in terms of managing the car and protecting it from thiefs or vandals, that would made me too streesed to focus on sex.

That would work on a restricted environment like a wealthy area where only rich people live or attend.

 

[zekko]

You didn't state the reason why a lambo or rolex or anything is foolish to buy to attract women. I would have agreed with this. Rather, you made bald statements:

Look, dude, I've told you what I meant. Yes, I think $50,000 is too much to spend on a watch, frigging or otherwise. But I was talking about my preferences. Someone else might not think it's too much to spend on a watch. Someone else might not think it's impractical to buy a Lambo. I do. Maybe I didn't express myself clearly, but I'm telling you straight up now: I'm speaking of my own preferences, not for what anyone else should do.

 

[guru1000]

Look, dude, I've told you what I meant. Yes, I think $50,000 is too much to spend on a watch, frigging or otherwise. But I was talking about my preferences. Someone else might not think it's too much to spend on a watch. Someone else might not think it's impractical to buy a Lambo. I do. Maybe I didn't express myself clearly, but I'm telling you straight up now: I'm speaking of my own preferences, not for what anyone else should do.

Would you think otherwise if the watch’s appreciation outperformed your current investments? With due diligence, the answer I would hope to be yes.

That’s my point. Your preference is based on a unilateral view. Hence, our discussion.

However, I dig into you in this thread not based on this one bald assertion alone, rather a combination of threads where no distinctions are made. So nothing personal toward you, just opening up perspectives.

 

[ohrein]

Women don't give a fvck about cars. Yeah, they'll attract gold diggers or show a woman you are financially sound, but if you've got the personality of a brick and can't give her an orgasm then a Lambo won't help you with women past the first ten seconds.

 

[ohrein]

Look, dude, I've told you what I meant. Yes, I think $50,000 is too much to spend on a watch, frigging or otherwise. But I was talking about my preferences. Someone else might not think it's too much to spend on a watch. Someone else might not think it's impractical to buy a Lambo. I do. Maybe I didn't express myself clearly, but I'm telling you straight up now: I'm speaking of my own preferences, not for what anyone else should do.

Money is relative. To most people, $50k is a lot of money. You ever worked in the high rollers of a casino? $50k to some people is like a coffee to an average person. To some it's less money than you could physically represent! Positional goods are aimed at people who can buy them like they're coffees. A Lambo to someone with a seven figure income is cheaper than a Toyota for a low income earner relatively speaking. Money is worthless if you're not using it to purchase things.

 

[zekko]

Would you think otherwise if the watch’s appreciation outperformed your current investments? With due diligence, the answer I would hope to be yes.

Someone would have to do a very good job of convincing me that it's something I need to be looking into, and I don't want a bunch of watch salesmen banging on my door. Then I would have to research and educate myself on the subject before even considering if it would be a good match for me. I'm no expert on investing, but I've read some things. I've never heard or read anything that says to me "Zekko, if you want to make some real money, you need to get into expensive watches". Maybe it's just a well kept secret.

Money is relative. To most people, $50k is a lot of money. You ever worked in the high rollers of a casino? $50k to some people is like a coffee to an average person..

Yes, you're right of course. My intent was never to say that a watch wasn't worth $50,000 to anyone. In fact, that thought never even crossed my mind. Obviously a lot of people have bought them.

You have to understand, I respect frugality. I respect philosophies like those espoused in The Millionaire Next Door. The idea is to combine a (hopefully) high income with a sensible lifestyle. The guy's got the money to buy a Lambo, but he drives a 2008 Buick instead. Putting aside thinking of watches as investments (Guru), I don't see any reason to pay more than $300-500 for a watch. I mean I will splurge on certain things, but those are things that I uniquely appreciate. Otherwise, if you call me a cheap b@stard, I'll take it as a compliment.

 

[The Duke]

Here are some personal, actual experiences about expensive colognes, watches, and cars and how women react:

-I bought this expensive looking Rolex Daytona watch at a pawn shop for $25 simply because I liked the way it looked. It doesn't even work but I get frequent compliments from women when I have it on. And I flat out tell them how I bought it from a pawn shop in a seedy neighborhood for $25 and it doesn't even work. I don't know if they believe me or not, but I always get them laughing. The women that know what kind of watch it is are always the gold digger types.

-I wear a very expensive cologne that women of all ages stop and compliment me on. Its so good I rarely tell people the name. Once again, the women that know what it is are always gold diggers.

-A buddy and I were at a high end bar one nite. We both hit on the same chic. Neither of us got anywhere. When we were ready to go, I asked the valet to bring my car up. My car is expensive and draws a lot of attention. About the time my buddy and I were getting in my car, out walks the girl we both hit on and got nowhere with. But now she is showing super high interest. She waves and smiles and says "hey guys I didn't know." ahh lol didn't know what? Silly hooker was now interested because her perception changed and now she thinks I have money. I let her know I wasn't interested and she was in my way.

-I have driven this car down the street of a busy bar district and women will come up to me when I am stopped and hit on me. I've had girls on dates try to get my attention and yell all sorts of things. It happens almost every single time.

The problem is the type of girl these things attract. They are mostly gold diggers and they will expect you to buy them nice things to keep them attracted. If thats what you want, then have at it. I'd skip the shiny things if you really aren't into them and just rent a few hotties off Seeking Arrangements.

 

[Crown]

@Howiestern: What's so bad about that ? Free attention and preselection.