Recently, I struggled with the idea of whether or not to do a daygame bootcamp. When I started doing daygame over a year ago, I wasn't aware of any bootcamps near me, so I had to tackle beginner issues such as approach anxiety on my own, with only materials such as Roosh's Day Bang and Daygame.com's Blueprint to guide me. Now that I'm trying to go from approach machine to intermediate, which requires sub-communication competency (among other things), the thought of getting a master to help me became alluring - especially when Daygame.com held bootcamps here in the USA.
But then I read the following:
Choice quotes that were relevant to me:
"Success with women is based on habits, not knowledge or a few experiences."
"It takes time to learn. It doesn’t matter how much money you pay, money will not internalise what you need, money will not develop your skill, and money is not a shortcut."
There are other nuggets of wisdom in those posts, but these were the most relevant for me. At the end of the day, I decided that at this point:
1) I still know my sticking points, such as sub-communication, so the amount of money for a bootcamp would only be worth it if I didn't know them.
2) I should enjoy (or at least live with) the learning process. Stop being so needy that you're willing to spend lots of money for something you should've learned from experience and the much-lower-cost materials you already bought.
3) Learning to be good with women is like learning to be good at a sport or a musical instrument. Nobody would go on a football or guitar bootcamp and expect to learn much! Everyone's default there is to train regularly with some guidance, preferably a coach, but possibly just materials. Why is it different for daygame?
This leads me to believe that in the future, daygame will be taught in lesson format, instead of bootcamp format. Now there's a product idea ...