Sometimes I wonder whether the wealth and influence patterns inherent within so-called ”opportunities” — be they investment, business or otherwise — are more of less inevitable.

The more time passes, the more it seems like a similar pattern always emerges.

The Pattern...

There are ”the founders,” and they are pretty much always the shoo-in millionaires.

Then there are the ”pioneers,” who just happened to be front and center at the right time, and ”took a chance” on something possibly untested and untried… but promising looking. They, too, are destined for some degree riches… even if the overall project doesn’t turn out all that well. There are maybe 100 of them, maybe a little more, depending on the overall scale of the project.

Then there is the next +/- 1,000 ”early adapters” who work well and in many ways become the dominant actors in the project, and often turn out to be the most active and hardest working. They generally do ”pretty well” but by no means become super rich. But their participation is certainly worth their while, and they usually hang in there, in the long run.

And then there’s… everyone else.

The Disillusioned Masses...

Everyone else, who see these top groups succeeding, and consequently want to be part of the show… only to discover that even with an exceptional amount of effort, it’s hardly worth their while to even be there. Or, at least, they experience the rude awakening that the entirely true statement like "Our top performers make $100,000+ a month!" has absolutely no bearing on their reality.

They are also the ones most likely to start using words like ”it’s a scam!” to characterize the opportunity, because their results are nowhere near those of the groups who preceded them.

Some of these late comers — who may number in the hundreds of thousands in well publicized opportunities — might labor on for months and years, growing increasingly frustrated at the futility of their efforts.

And it’s not because they are ”freebie seekers” or looking for ”pie in the sky.” But they system is and always will be, skewed against them.

Life in Hivelandia & the Pareto Principle

Here on Hive and LeoFinance, you might say they are represented by some of the fairly gifted content creators who keep contributing, even though their quite viable posts rarely are rewarded with more than maybe a dollar. Meaning that they are effectively agreeing to bust their butts for 50 cents an hour.

I remember that particular outcome well from "another life" in which I was active in network marketing (or MLM, for the older folks!).

Which, of course, brings us back to the good 'ole "Pareto Principle," although the reality of life typically presents us with a far steeper curve than the "80/20" rule would leave us to believe.

On reflection, I imagine the Pareto Principle applies well in a true meritocracy where rewards are directly related to effort (or investment) put forth but how often is that the actual reality of life?

Of course, one possible exception to the pattern might apply to someone who's already a "600lb gorilla" who simply buys their way to one of the top tiers of earning/influence. But to what degree does that qualify as a benefiting from a true Opportunity?

Not so much, I would venture.

As I have rarely had the good fortune to be on the front wave of something new, I learned to adjust my expectations and completely ignore the "amazing claims and tall stories of success" when I get involved in something! It's one of the few ways I can keep my sanity and not get disappointed and frustrated!

=^..^=

CuratorCat, May 18th, 2023

Posted Using LeoFinance Alpha