Loading video...

Video Failed to Load

There was a problem loading this video. This could be due to a temporary network issue or the video might be unavailable.

The “it’s anti-competitive” argument is pretty funny when the overwhelming majority of clubs voted for the rules in the first place because they believed the alternative was anti-competitive too. Clubs including Newcastle, before their takeover, supported them. You can disagree with the rules. You can campaign to change them,... but while they exist, they’re the rules every club has agreed to compete under. What you can’t reasonably do is defend rule-breaking simply because you dislike the rule that was broken. That doesn’t answer the cheating allegation at all, it just deflects attention away from the conduct itself. If the rules are wrong, change the rules. Don’t excuse breaking them after the fact and pretend that criticism of the cheating is somehow the real problem. Hideous stance.show more

Terry Flewers

162,122 subscribers

193,969 views • 10 days ago •via X (Twitter)

News & Politics Sports

Anya Rossi• Live Now

Private livecam show

34 Comments

PoolieMags10 days ago

“Newcastle before their takeover, supported them” We were owned by Mike Ashley so no shit that he voted for them

Σίσυφος10 days ago

It's funny that folks like Shearer that are supposed to be educating the average Joe on the street about these issues, seem less knowledgeable than the average Joe on the street. "punditry"!

Arsenteta10 days ago

They’re also lying. Villa and Newcastle have to constantly sell their best home made prospects because they over pay for bang average players. Have done it for well over a decade and then wonder why they don’t go to the next level

LFC Rank10 days ago

The logic just isn’t there at all, like a lot of lazy punditry. The gap between clubs revenues in the premier league is far far smaller than the gap between owners wealth, so letting clubs spend based on owners wealth is far less of an even playing field.

Soul Of 8910 days ago

9 years ago, Newcastle in the Ch'ship + financial trouble. Now, they're regularly in the CL and won a domestic cup 7 years ago, Villa financial trouble + playing in the Ch'ship. Now regularly compete in Europe and won a European competition They are benefiting + competing

Robin Blake10 days ago

Many voted under threat of the ESL.

bil.prag10 days ago

i clearly remember Shearer defending Arsenal having to play by the rules and sell their best players every year, "It has been like that for some time. A club that contested the 2006 Champions League final and used to battle for the highest domestic honours are now mere also-rans. They can't even claim bragging rights in North London - Spurs are now the team that thrills in that part of the world," the former England forward pointed out. Shearer also stated Arsenal could no longer boast of their possession and passing-based approach to the game, as they have not added any silverware to their trophy cabinet in the last eight years. "The defence for Arsenal has long been the fact that they 'play football in the right way'. But I've always hated that nonsensical term. The right way to play football is to win and Arsenal have not been doing that enough in major competitions for some time. Eight years without a trophy and counting," Nah, of course he didn't, he called them a failure.

Ryän10 days ago

Think it’s more of a moral v logical argument if what your saying is that you agree the rules sucks so then essentially your options are cheat or never be successful then what other options are there ?

Chantuelle10 days ago

"Manchester United can spend the most on players because they have the huge revenue..." Where has Micah been? Manchester United are fucking BROKE because they haven't been run sustainably..

Dean Woods10 days ago

Only the Newcastle rules were brought in the day after the takeover!!! Not that they aren’t targeting clubs or anything 😂

Jason Brimacombe10 days ago

It’s “anti-competitive” because they can’t spend whatever they want, if they could spend £1b every transfer window and no one else had the means to they’d be happy. 🤦🏼‍♂️😆

Adam Jenkins10 days ago

😂😂 Shearer hating United. Micha always making it about United

Kye10 days ago

Is Shearer retarded? Newcastle have spent €830 million in the last 5 years. Pretty impressive for a club that was in the championship 10 years ago

💟Byron Bowers10 days ago

Anybody seen the state of LIV golf recently?

Danny10 days ago

But Newcastle also voted in favor of PSR at the time

Fred ⚫️⚪️10 days ago

They really shouldn’t just let anyone have a Twitter account.

Citi Zen10 days ago

The rules are anti competitive, they were only brought in in 2013 to try and curb City and Chelsea, and they’ve been changed a number of times to catch out City and keep other challenger clubs like Newcastle and Villa in their place.

Goomba10 days ago

Any other position than the one detailed above is wrong

Peter Brix10 days ago

🎯

Xavier vander merwe10 days ago

where in his brain have we been able to go again, we spent loads on mcguire wasnt a fit could we just go oh well right off the 80 mill and sell him on the cheap, we couldnt only city "can afford" that .We spend 55 mill on mount not been fit the entire time and he is still here.

Thomas Boettcher10 days ago

That’s exactly it.

OutlawBebe10 days ago

1, the rules were put in place to protect clubs like Everton from going under when Usmanov was sanctioned, which almost happened 2, AFC/LFC/MUFC spent so much to keep up with City, and none made a profit. Removing City will even out the spending, wait and see

Dave Spart10 days ago

The clubs didn't vote for them the owners did These owners are often US citizens looking to maximise profits They are happy to allow their fellow US owners at the ESL cartel clubs make a fortune as long as they do too They don't care for English football

Sparx10 days ago

Surely if they aren’t abiding by any rules then city could make as many mistakes in the transfer market as they can afford

Michael Marshall10 days ago

This is exactly the point about Newcastle.. all their fans think PSR was only brought in to stop them!! The rules were there years earlier and they would have 100% voted for them under Ashley, only changed their opinion when the Saudis came in, suddenly the rules weren’t right!

PepCity10 days ago

Easy for united fan to chat shit here

Raheem Farooq 🇬🇧10 days ago

💯

Xavier vander merwe10 days ago

city spent a how much on rainders 12months later he was gone, Maarmoosh 2 goals and they sold him. no other club can turn around a ±70 mill asset in 15 months... but ita united/arsenal/liverpool who are to blame for this not the fact that cheaty... some people

5th Goal of Sanogo10 days ago

Am i right in saying Newcastle are in the top 20 richest clubs in the world. Think of all the clubs behind them.

ROB ⚫⚪10 days ago

With MIKE ASHLEY that didn’t want to invest in the club, of course he voted….. Easy to talk when your club are 1 billion pounds in debt and still allowed to spend hundreds of millions a year, despite having awful seasons….. You have no idea Terry. PS Man U are shite

Clarky10 days ago

Squinty eyes talking shite again, big 6 world wide revenue is much more than Villa & Newcastle, what have they done to build their revenue, absolutely nothing.

Matt10 days ago

Rory Jennings made the great comparison that the 20mph speed limit is stupid. You can openly say it’s stupid. Still doesn’t give you the right to drive at 40mph just because you think it’s stupid.

JFreezy10 days ago

Nonsense from shearer. Clubs aren't afforded to make mistakes over and over again unless you're man city. Look at united, arsenal spent years and years living by their means and have only just started being able to spend big consistently. Why don't Newcastle do the same?

sheldem10 days ago

Turkeys don't vote for Thanksgiving ofcourse existing clubs voted for rules that protect their own status quo and stop new investment. That doesn't make it fair competition it just proves how rigged the system is. I thought you had a functional brain but nope 🙅‍♂️ your du. mb asf

Related Videos

We are the crazy ones, the misfits, the rebels, the troublemakers, the round pegs in the square holes… the ones who see things differently — they’re not fond of rules… You can quote them, disagree with them, glorify or vilify them, but the only thing you can’t do is ignore them because they change things… they push the human race forward, and while some may see them as the crazy ones, we see genius, because the ones who are crazy enough to think that they can change the world, are the ones who do. — Steve Jobs, 1997

We are the crazy ones, the misfits, the rebels, the troublemakers, the round pegs in the square holes… the ones who see things differently — they’re not fond of rules… You can quote them, disagree with them, glorify or vilify them, but the only thing you can’t do is ignore them because they change things… they push the human race forward, and while some may see them as the crazy ones, we see genius, because the ones who are crazy enough to think that they can change the world, are the ones who do. — Steve Jobs, 1997

SuzanneNFTs

17,971 views • 2 years ago

If you’re going up against an opponent that is not playing by the rules — cheating — it is malpractice to not do something about that. It is dangerous. They are substituting the rule of law for the rule of Don!

If you’re going up against an opponent that is not playing by the rules — cheating — it is malpractice to not do something about that. It is dangerous. They are substituting the rule of law for the rule of Don!

Governor Newsom Press Office

223,297 views • 1 year ago

🚨 Socialists Run as Moderates, Rule as COMMUNISTS Victor Davis Hanson: “If they can’t win by the rules, they don’t change. They try to destroy the rules because they’re nihilists. It’s the history of socialism. They always run as moderates. Then they get in power and they rule as communists. That’s the truth.” 👉

🚨 Socialists Run as Moderates, Rule as COMMUNISTS Victor Davis Hanson: “If they can’t win by the rules, they don’t change. They try to destroy the rules because they’re nihilists. It’s the history of socialism. They always run as moderates. Then they get in power and they rule as communists. That’s the truth.” 👉

Laura Ingraham

182,462 views • 2 months ago

YOUR REACTION: Trump on ABC News debate on September 10: "We're thinking about it. They also want to change the rules. You know, the deal was we keep the same rules. Now, all of a sudden they want to make a change in the rules because she can't answer questions."

YOUR REACTION: Trump on ABC News debate on September 10: "We're thinking about it. They also want to change the rules. You know, the deal was we keep the same rules. Now, all of a sudden they want to make a change in the rules because she can't answer questions."

Simon Ateba

62,049 views • 2 years ago

This British leftist says that if an immigrant rapes someone it is ultimately the fault of the West for destroying their home country through colonialism. “You know why some people are broken? Because Western countries broke them. We took away their education and their ability to understand right and wrong probably bombed the How the hell are you going to demand someone follow the rules when we blew up the school that probably would have taught them those rules?”

This British leftist says that if an immigrant rapes someone it is ultimately the fault of the West for destroying their home country through colonialism. “You know why some people are broken? Because Western countries broke them. We took away their education and their ability to understand right and wrong probably bombed the How the hell are you going to demand someone follow the rules when we blew up the school that probably would have taught them those rules?”

Drew Pavlou 🇦🇺🇺🇸🇺🇦🇹🇼

33,921 views • 15 days ago

🚨 BREAKING: Sen. Mike Lee is saying if the Senate GOP gets tough and enforces EXISTING Senate rules, the MAGA agenda can be passed with a simple majority of 51 votes "If we enforce the cloture rule, we can end the cloture abuse! [60 votes for cloture]" "Require them to debate. The MINUTE they stop debating...you can call the vote, a simple majority! We need to get BACK into that business." DO IT! NO EXCUSE! Mike Lee

🚨 BREAKING: Sen. Mike Lee is saying if the Senate GOP gets tough and enforces EXISTING Senate rules, the MAGA agenda can be passed with a simple majority of 51 votes "If we enforce the cloture rule, we can end the cloture abuse! [60 votes for cloture]" "Require them to debate. The MINUTE they stop debating...you can call the vote, a simple majority! We need to get BACK into that business." DO IT! NO EXCUSE! Mike Lee

Eric Daugherty

659,404 views • 9 months ago

.James Talarico: We can disagree on budget policy. We can disagree on education policy. But if you rob people of their voting rights, that means we don't have a shot in the next election to make our case and change the power structure. [...] What they're doing in Texas is they are redrawing the lines in the middle of the decade, which is unprecedented. It's like changing the rules after halftime because you're worried that the other team's going to win the game. It's cheating. Charlamagne: I think more politicians should say that.

.James Talarico: We can disagree on budget policy. We can disagree on education policy. But if you rob people of their voting rights, that means we don't have a shot in the next election to make our case and change the power structure. [...] What they're doing in Texas is they are redrawing the lines in the middle of the decade, which is unprecedented. It's like changing the rules after halftime because you're worried that the other team's going to win the game. It's cheating. Charlamagne: I think more politicians should say that.

Team Talarico

34,412 views • 2 months ago

The EU is banning $XMR. Personally, that’s the biggest green flag a privacy coin could ever get. Let me explain. It’s official. Under the EU’s new rules, every regulated exchange has to delist privacy coins, including $XMR, by 2027. Loads already have. Something like 73 exchanges dropped Monero last year alone. Now you’d think that kills it, right? No exchanges, no access, price collapses. Except the exact opposite happened. Monero went up 120%. And here’s why. A ban like this only touches the middlemen. The regulated exchanges, the custodians, the companies that have to follow the rules. That’s all they can reach. What they cannot touch is the actual coin. And this is the bit people miss. It’s true of crypto in general. Your own wallet. Person to person. The decentralised swaps. All of that sits outside their reach. On-chain, crypto doesn’t know what country you’re in and doesn’t care what any government says. There’s no off switch. No company to lean on. No headquarters to raid. Nothing to actually shut down. That’s the whole point of this technology. Governments can lean on the exchanges, the middlemen, the regulated companies, because those have to follow the rules. But the chain itself just carries on. Accessible. Block after block. Completely indifferent to any of it. The real green flag is this. The EU doesn’t want you to have Monero. Think about what the EU is actually doing right now. Pushing more and more control over your money. More surveillance. More restrictions. More of them deciding what you can and can’t do with your money. And Monero is one of the only things that lets you keep your money actually private. Actually yours. So when a body like that is so desperate to get rid of Monero, it must be disrupting too much. They’re not banning it because it’s useless. They’re banning it because it works. And because it takes their control away. That’s the green flag. Not the fact that they can’t kill it. The fact they so badly want to

The EU is banning $XMR. Personally, that’s the biggest green flag a privacy coin could ever get. Let me explain. It’s official. Under the EU’s new rules, every regulated exchange has to delist privacy coins, including $XMR, by 2027. Loads already have. Something like 73 exchanges dropped Monero last year alone. Now you’d think that kills it, right? No exchanges, no access, price collapses. Except the exact opposite happened. Monero went up 120%. And here’s why. A ban like this only touches the middlemen. The regulated exchanges, the custodians, the companies that have to follow the rules. That’s all they can reach. What they cannot touch is the actual coin. And this is the bit people miss. It’s true of crypto in general. Your own wallet. Person to person. The decentralised swaps. All of that sits outside their reach. On-chain, crypto doesn’t know what country you’re in and doesn’t care what any government says. There’s no off switch. No company to lean on. No headquarters to raid. Nothing to actually shut down. That’s the whole point of this technology. Governments can lean on the exchanges, the middlemen, the regulated companies, because those have to follow the rules. But the chain itself just carries on. Accessible. Block after block. Completely indifferent to any of it. The real green flag is this. The EU doesn’t want you to have Monero. Think about what the EU is actually doing right now. Pushing more and more control over your money. More surveillance. More restrictions. More of them deciding what you can and can’t do with your money. And Monero is one of the only things that lets you keep your money actually private. Actually yours. So when a body like that is so desperate to get rid of Monero, it must be disrupting too much. They’re not banning it because it’s useless. They’re banning it because it works. And because it takes their control away. That’s the green flag. Not the fact that they can’t kill it. The fact they so badly want to

Rypto

53,175 views • 24 days ago

VP Vance on the upcoming midterms: "The choice in this election is not between this set of policies that are good and this set of policies that are not so good. The choice in the election really is between crazy people who are trying to rig the game and common-sense people who you may have disagreements with from time to time, but at least they're rooted in common sense. The Democrats are saying — they're actively bragging — that they don't like the rules of the game [...] the rules don't allow them to run roughshod over the American Constitution, so they want to change the rules."

VP Vance on the upcoming midterms: "The choice in this election is not between this set of policies that are good and this set of policies that are not so good. The choice in the election really is between crazy people who are trying to rig the game and common-sense people who you may have disagreements with from time to time, but at least they're rooted in common sense. The Democrats are saying — they're actively bragging — that they don't like the rules of the game [...] the rules don't allow them to run roughshod over the American Constitution, so they want to change the rules."

Townhall.com

11,154 views • 1 month ago

8 years back, I spoke to jack schwager, the man behind the Market Wizards series. Sandeep Rao - SEBI Reg. RA🖖 spoke to him again recently on In The Money, and it was an interesting conversation. Market Wizards is probably the only book I've read multiple times when I was trading actively. The one thing that stood out to me from the video was the debate between systematic vs. discretionary trading. There's a common assumption that the best traders are rules-based, meaning they follow a fixed set of rules. The logic is that this helps them keep their emotions in check so they can follow the signals dispassionately. But what Jack found among the traders he interviewed was that almost all of them were discretionary traders. They had rules, but they knew when not to follow them. Meaning, they knew when their approach wasn't working and when they had to change the "rules" they were following. The one purely systematic trader he ever profiled kept changing his systems. He once showed Jack the equity curve of the original system he made his first money on. It went straight up while he traded it, and straight down after he abandoned it. If he had stuck to it with blind discipline, he would have been wiped out. At the very least, what this shows is that there isn't just one way to make money. There are numerous approaches that work, and you ultimately have to figure out what works for you and stick with that approach until it stops working, because nothing works all the time. People change, the markets change, and so do the strategies. Full episode link in comments.

8 years back, I spoke to jack schwager, the man behind the Market Wizards series. Sandeep Rao - SEBI Reg. RA🖖 spoke to him again recently on In The Money, and it was an interesting conversation. Market Wizards is probably the only book I've read multiple times when I was trading actively. The one thing that stood out to me from the video was the debate between systematic vs. discretionary trading. There's a common assumption that the best traders are rules-based, meaning they follow a fixed set of rules. The logic is that this helps them keep their emotions in check so they can follow the signals dispassionately. But what Jack found among the traders he interviewed was that almost all of them were discretionary traders. They had rules, but they knew when not to follow them. Meaning, they knew when their approach wasn't working and when they had to change the "rules" they were following. The one purely systematic trader he ever profiled kept changing his systems. He once showed Jack the equity curve of the original system he made his first money on. It went straight up while he traded it, and straight down after he abandoned it. If he had stuck to it with blind discipline, he would have been wiped out. At the very least, what this shows is that there isn't just one way to make money. There are numerous approaches that work, and you ultimately have to figure out what works for you and stick with that approach until it stops working, because nothing works all the time. People change, the markets change, and so do the strategies. Full episode link in comments.

Nithin Kamath

72,249 views • 2 months ago

Asmongold says it’s not his problem if WoW players are creating racist guild names or spreading jokes if they’re pretending to be associated with him, telling them to just report them and let the devs handle it in World of Warcraft: Forever Beta 👀 “I’m gonna be very clear. I’m not gonna go around and micromanage you. I’m not going to tell you what you are and are not allowed to say. This is not my problem. I’m not your dad. Obviously, nobody supports breaking the rules of the game. Other than that, it’s not my issue. I don’t care. Go report them or something like that, and if they are breaking the rules, they’ll get suspended”

Asmongold says it’s not his problem if WoW players are creating racist guild names or spreading jokes if they’re pretending to be associated with him, telling them to just report them and let the devs handle it in World of Warcraft: Forever Beta 👀 “I’m gonna be very clear. I’m not gonna go around and micromanage you. I’m not going to tell you what you are and are not allowed to say. This is not my problem. I’m not your dad. Obviously, nobody supports breaking the rules of the game. Other than that, it’s not my issue. I don’t care. Go report them or something like that, and if they are breaking the rules, they’ll get suspended”

Prism

1,251,769 views • 14 days ago

Noem: If you look at what the definition of domestic terrorism is, it completely fits the situation on the ground Tapper: How can you assert for a fact within hours before any investigation? Noem: The facts of the situation are that the vehicle was weaponized and it attacked the officer. You don't get to change the facts just because you don't like them.

Noem: If you look at what the definition of domestic terrorism is, it completely fits the situation on the ground Tapper: How can you assert for a fact within hours before any investigation? Noem: The facts of the situation are that the vehicle was weaponized and it attacked the officer. You don't get to change the facts just because you don't like them.

Acyn

51,085 views • 9 months ago

Clinton: We agreed upon rules based on the fact that it was going to be a closed hearing at their command, and one of the members violated that rule, which was very upsetting, because it suggested that they might violate other of our agreements.

Clinton: We agreed upon rules based on the fact that it was going to be a closed hearing at their command, and one of the members violated that rule, which was very upsetting, because it suggested that they might violate other of our agreements.

Acyn

106,735 views • 7 months ago

“Our tax manual is 22,000 pages long. Hong Kong’s is 500. Half the problem is you don’t know your own rules because there are so many of them.” Rupert Lowe exposes the chaos of Britain’s tax system. Do you agree it’s time for change?

“Our tax manual is 22,000 pages long. Hong Kong’s is 500. Half the problem is you don’t know your own rules because there are so many of them.” Rupert Lowe exposes the chaos of Britain’s tax system. Do you agree it’s time for change?

British Unapologetically 🇬🇧

25,785 views • 3 months ago

Rep. Anna Paulina Luna reveals the two rules every new member of Congress is handed the week they arrive, and Stephen A. Smith can hardly believe what he’s hearing. LUNA: "Every Congress, every two years, the House will come together and kind of come up with the rules of the game." "A lot of members of Congress don't learn that when you first get elected, they just kind of bring you up here and they tell you two things: Never vote against the party and never take down a rule." SMITH: "They actually say that?! Hold on, hold on, Representative. They actually say to you? 'Never vote against the party.' They actually say that to you?!" LUNA: "Yeah, but it's not just us. The Democrats do it too, which is why you see the inner-party fighting. I'd say that Congress is more like a parliament than anything." "And then they'll tell you, 'Don't use the rules and techniques that you're given, because then you're not going back to normal order. We need to make sure that normal order is given.'" "Well, that just means that they want you to shut up and color."

Rep. Anna Paulina Luna reveals the two rules every new member of Congress is handed the week they arrive, and Stephen A. Smith can hardly believe what he’s hearing. LUNA: "Every Congress, every two years, the House will come together and kind of come up with the rules of the game." "A lot of members of Congress don't learn that when you first get elected, they just kind of bring you up here and they tell you two things: Never vote against the party and never take down a rule." SMITH: "They actually say that?! Hold on, hold on, Representative. They actually say to you? 'Never vote against the party.' They actually say that to you?!" LUNA: "Yeah, but it's not just us. The Democrats do it too, which is why you see the inner-party fighting. I'd say that Congress is more like a parliament than anything." "And then they'll tell you, 'Don't use the rules and techniques that you're given, because then you're not going back to normal order. We need to make sure that normal order is given.'" "Well, that just means that they want you to shut up and color."

The Vigilant Fox 🦊

674,883 views • 2 months ago

🚨 EMILY COMPAGNO NAILS IT PERFECTLY: “They CAN’T EVER WIN on the merits, so all they do is CHANGE THE RULES.” Dems are melting down over fair redistricting maps in Louisiana and elsewhere because they know their race baiting, open borders agenda gets crushed when the playing field isn’t rigged in their favor. Gerrymandering was fine when it helped them, now it’s “Jim Crow 2.0” when Republicans play by the same rules. The Five

🚨 EMILY COMPAGNO NAILS IT PERFECTLY: “They CAN’T EVER WIN on the merits, so all they do is CHANGE THE RULES.” Dems are melting down over fair redistricting maps in Louisiana and elsewhere because they know their race baiting, open borders agenda gets crushed when the playing field isn’t rigged in their favor. Gerrymandering was fine when it helped them, now it’s “Jim Crow 2.0” when Republicans play by the same rules. The Five

Gunther Eagleman™

19,379 views • 4 months ago

When Russia plays by the rules too well, they just change the rules. At the 2018 Winter Olympics in PyeongChang, Zagitova built her free skate in a way that squeezed every possible point out of the rules. All her jumps were placed in the second half, where they earned bonus points. It was a very smart and perfectly executed move. After that season, the International Skating Union limited how many jumps could get the second-half bonus. People started calling it the Zagitova Rule.

When Russia plays by the rules too well, they just change the rules. At the 2018 Winter Olympics in PyeongChang, Zagitova built her free skate in a way that squeezed every possible point out of the rules. All her jumps were placed in the second half, where they earned bonus points. It was a very smart and perfectly executed move. After that season, the International Skating Union limited how many jumps could get the second-half bonus. People started calling it the Zagitova Rule.

Rina Lu🇷🇺

2,567,759 views • 7 months ago

$I hear so often from the Dommes I work with that they struggle with people online fetichizing them and simply seeing them for how sexy and beautiful they are. They project their fantasies and their desires onto you. That stops immediately once you move the attention from you to them. From 'look at me' to 'I see you'. What does that look like? When you create content, think of them and what this scene or that narrative is evoking. What will they learn from you? What they want is not to passively watch how sexy you are, but for you to train them, to give them instructions, to teach them, to guide them, to be in charge, to command them. This is not being an object but the main subject. The Authority figure. How is your content already doing that. The sexy photos can still be there, they are important to already capture des attention. But what you do with that attention once you have it, is where the power dynamic is established. Positioning yourself as more than a stunning Goddess, but actually a woman who has a voice, opinions, perspective, a philosophy, a way to doing things, teaching them what you like, how you like it, why you like it, already makes them want to be that for you. You hold the attention, you hold the power, so you direct it. And for that, you want them to know you get them and you know what lives within them... that creates the desire for you to be the one exposing it. You instantly build trust. Not because you demanded it, but because you earned it: you showed them you know what you are doing. You have experience, you understand them. They are not told to come see you, they are seduced into it. They desire it. And they will work for it. This will attract better clients (real subs) and instead of you trying to get their attention, they will work to earn yours. If you want to learn more about power dynamics, building a brand as a Pro or the psychology behind BDSM, you can now access all my trainings and classes in one place for a fraction of the cost of The Dominatrix Academy. And you can reinvest the total amount towards the Program. Message me [SECRET] for the details. This offer is not available on my website.$

I hear so often from the Dommes I work with that they struggle with people online fetichizing them and simply seeing them for how sexy and beautiful they are. They project their fantasies and their desires onto you. That stops immediately once you move the attention from you to them. From 'look at me' to 'I see you'. What does that look like? When you create content, think of them and what this scene or that narrative is evoking. What will they learn from you? What they want is not to passively watch how sexy you are, but for you to train them, to give them instructions, to teach them, to guide them, to be in charge, to command them. This is not being an object but the main subject. The Authority figure. How is your content already doing that. The sexy photos can still be there, they are important to already capture des attention. But what you do with that attention once you have it, is where the power dynamic is established. Positioning yourself as more than a stunning Goddess, but actually a woman who has a voice, opinions, perspective, a philosophy, a way to doing things, teaching them what you like, how you like it, why you like it, already makes them want to be that for you. You hold the attention, you hold the power, so you direct it. And for that, you want them to know you get them and you know what lives within them... that creates the desire for you to be the one exposing it. You instantly build trust. Not because you demanded it, but because you earned it: you showed them you know what you are doing. You have experience, you understand them. They are not told to come see you, they are seduced into it. They desire it. And they will work for it. This will attract better clients (real subs) and instead of you trying to get their attention, they will work to earn yours. If you want to learn more about power dynamics, building a brand as a Pro or the psychology behind BDSM, you can now access all my trainings and classes in one place for a fraction of the cost of The Dominatrix Academy. And you can reinvest the total amount towards the Program. Message me [SECRET] for the details. This offer is not available on my website.

Ms. Malissia

17,569 views • 5 months ago