#28- CEO Tactics in Bollywood Romance | American Girl Reacts

0:00 All this talk of doll, of hunger, of food brings up a recent alleged whistleblower in the news. Food, food delivery DoorDash allegations. You're hungry for the dates. I don't know if it's true or not of course, but let's just say it certainly doesn't make me want to DoorDash myself some doll at the moment. But it is familiar to where we last left off with our Bunny. Bunny scarcity driven ruled by desperation that made him chase much and often less specificity, less standards, poorer outcomes. So a whistleblower is claiming that Doordash's internal systems and algorithms are designed to quietly exploit drivers, desperation and customer trust, especially around pay, tips and data.

1:39 A recent whistleblower alleges DoorDash uses things like desperation scores and algorithmic levers to push lower pay to drivers who seem financially trapped or more likely to accept bad orders. The same reporting describes hidden fees and opaque pricing, arguing the platform is structurally set up so that the people with the least leverage, gig workers and often restaurants, shoulder the most risk and cost. I'm not going to get into what has already been proven in other investigations regarding completely different issues such as tips and payments and multi $1,000,000 settlements right now, or go into other current lawsuits and current allegations separately that are related to data usage and data breaches.

3:08 As this came to mind for a specific reason and I have brought it up now for a specific reason. I I'm not going to talk about the other allegations or settlements because they aren't related to where I'm going with this. Now. It is responsible for me to note that DoorDash publicly denies using anything like a desperation score to set pay and frames the viral whistleblower narrative as misleading or false, while also saying it is reviewing concerns about transparency and worker treatment. So there you have it.

4:15 A lot there, but why did this stick out to me? And what does it have to do with all, with food, with hunger, with Bunny, with Ye Jawani? Hey Jawani. The whistleblower claims DoorDash tracks behavioral metrics. How often you accept or decline jobs, how quickly you grab low pay orders, when and how long you stay online, etcetera. From this, the system allegedly in first a desperation score. A desperation score. You can't make this stuff up. How badly does this person need money and how likely are they to accept bad offers?

5:29 How likely are they to accept accept bad offers? Needs and weaknesses being monitored and then used to give worse deals. Oh wow. Oh no Oh no no no. This whistleblower is alleging something. Something that makes me lose my appetite entirely and actually makes me a bit physical physically, I'll optimization. Optimization of exploitation. Not so hungry anymore, are you? Yeah, me either. This whistleblower is alleging a possibility of data analysis of behavior being used to push lower pay, worse routes or more manipulative incentives at the drivers.

6:54 Least able to say no. Least able to say no. Yeah. Yeah. Well, we aren't going to talk now or in general about this issue, what's going on, what it means about real, real desperation here, OK, regarding survival in this real world situation, about basics. Certain things are not choices, even if we wish they were. Let me be clear, what I do want to talk about is not about alleged exploitation with a company in the workforce financially with less choice and more basic need and survival. Something that should not be condoned or normalized in my personal opinion.

8:09 And discuss how bad agents in alleged situations and scenarios that if not true here, could be true elsewhere. How bad actors, villains in the real world doing wrong and making poor choices can, in a way, reflect other entirely different aspects of life. Like we talked about with money, desperation, hunger, desperation scores, choices. What we accept and how our behavior can communicate what we will tolerate. Exploitation. Put your safety gear on, folks. We're going in. And Ye Jawani. Hey, Dhawani with Avi Aditi accepts crumbs.

9:28 Yeah. She takes whatever time, attention and chaos he gives. And the more she accepts, the less he has to offer. Her desperation lowers her bargaining power. The whistleblower claims DoorDash does something similar. It watches drivers behavior, how often they accept low pay orders when they're online, how quickly they grab bad offers, and uses that to infer who is a desperate

10:12 allegedly. Those drivers allegedly then see more bad offers offered to them and worse pay structures. In both cases though, the system, whether it's a person like Javi or a system company like DoorDash, learns who will tolerate bad terms and then keeps feeding them those terms. High cost, low reward, exploiting desperation early. ADT stays in A1 sided dynamic because she's in love and afraid to lose even the crumbs she has. Her acceptance effectively trains Avi to treat her as optional dashers who out of necessity by the way, except most offers.

11:28 Even the worst offers that may not be as worth it are effectively, if such is true, training the algorithm that they can be pushed harder. The alleged desperation score is training turned into code. In both scenarios, what you accept becomes the new baseline. The system doesn't spontaneously become kinder all of a sudden, unfortunately. In this case, it adapts to the lowest level of resistance.

12:22 Rough. I mean, not our best moments as humans, yeah, but we must keep going. Oh man, we can do this. Aditi's pivot is deciding she deserves specific things being chosen. Imagine that. Respected what? Emotionally safe? Unheard of, right? And that's when Taron even becomes visible as an option at that point. And her ROI on love, what she gets back or what she gives improves.

13:24 And so we all learn together here as we watch and analyze the behavior and then in part the motivators and drivers of behaviors of those doing the watching per SE. We all learn here. Sometimes, oftentimes, maybe even most times, better terms only appear once you stop agreeing to bad ones, even if that involves real short term pain. Ouch. Not super ideal. Not what I was hoping for here. Don't let go of my hand. We can do this. An alleged desperation score. She'll always be there. I don't have to change, right, Avi?

14:31 Ah, Avi. We get it, Avi. But Avi, our girl Aditi deserves better for what she's giving. Come on, Aditi. Grab our hand, girl. This is the moment, girl. Your moment girl. Move from learn desperation. I'll take anything from him to learn to worth. I will choose someone who chooses me back. It appears to be the case, a clear possibility that at times systems and people will optimize around whatever level of self respect you demonstrate. At times algorithms treats accepting less as a permission until something disrupts it.

15:48 Time to renegotiate love your life, your choices, your losses, your wins, your time, your energy, your terms. Change your ask your minimums, your contract, shift your ROI, reprice yourself. That's right. Let's talk business in the spirit of cold, in the spirit of hard, the spirit of corporate. We see you, DoorDash and friends. Let's talk numbers, shall we? Let's take right and wrong out of it. Let's put humanity and meaning aside. Hold the feeling. Hold the personal biz. It's not personal, right?

17:02 Abby, honey, in this situation here for our girl at TT, you are simply high cost, low return investment, a high probability of capital loss, what could be described here as a bad cost benefit profile, heavy outflow with weak and quite frankly negative returns, high risk, high volatility assets with intangible returns. You heard me. You're bad for business honey. Aditi's earlier attachment to Avi resembles the sunk cost fallacy. Years of friendship and unspoken love make it tempting to keep investing just because she already has.

18:11 Her pivot is a textbook cut your losses move. Ignore sunk emotional costs and ask, given current and future prospects, does this still justify further investment? The answer is no, so she exits that position. In markets, smart investors use screens and criteria. Minimum return, maximum risk, acceptable time horizons. DT starts doing the same with people. Not just I like him, but does he choose me, respect me and improve my life. It's OK Time to reallocate to a better risk adjusted asset. We are all about that positive ROI over here.

19:24 Avi, your current terms are denied a good risk return trade off expected benefits that exceed the cost of diversified stable portfolio, prioritizing the sustainable over speculative speculative gains. Taron, you're up. The juice ain't worth the squeeze if the juice don't look like this.

20:00 Hey, thirsty. Now seriously, why did this song come back into my head now? The juice isn't worth the squeeze idiom. It's basically the cost benefit ROI return on investment, a simple profitability measure that compares how much you gained or lost on an investment to how much you put in. Is what I'm getting just actually worth what this is costing me? Squeeze in decision making? A causal cost benefit analysis. Weigh the benefits against the cost and if the benefits don't clear the bar, you don't do it.

21:05 In investment terms, the juice isn't worth the squeeze Is saying the expected return is too low for the risk and effort involved. Negative, very poor ROI. The DT with RV is exactly this. Massive emotional squeeze, unreciprocated love, chaos, worry for almost no real Jews, respect, commitment, stability. Which makes the deal objectively bad once she stops romanticizing it. The moment she stops being desperate and raises her standards, she is implicitly sane. With Avi, the juice is not worth the squeeze.

22:10 With Darren it is. That shift turns her into a rational allocator of effort. She stops investing in low yield asset and redirects her squeeze toward a place where the Jews daily experience treatment life outcomes is actually abundant enough to justify what she gives. Ever seen Shark Tank? Shark Tank is an American business reality TV series. Entrepreneurs pitch their products or companies to a panel of wealthy investors called sharks in hopes of securing funding in exchange for equity or other deal structures.

23:12 It can be a good time. Well, it isn't lost on me that many what would be termed Shark Tank rejects later become multimillion dollar companies. That's right, same product, same founder, but now they grow with other investors, loans or just customer cash. Instead of that original harsh deal, the original offer with a negative ROI deal. Time showed us all that some were wise enough to see, to feel, to know it in that moment. If they had accepted, they would have sacrificed huge long term value, ownership control, future profit for a relatively small check and some TV driven buzz.

24:21 Their low emotional desperation scores shaped their behavior and decreased losses or possible exploitation, Like remember Door Bot now Ring on Shark Tank. So we watched as Jamie Simonov comes in with Door Bot early Ring at the time asking for $700,000 for 10% Kevin O'Leary. Like I said, one of the wealthy investors on the show's panel, a shark, as they're called, offers $700,000 as a loan with interest plus a royalty, not clean equity. While other sharks completely pass on investing in this product idea, Simonov rejects the deal and leaves with no shark, no deal, no investor.

25:35 The squeeze was heavy debt and perpetual royalty for relatively little juice. One investor on harsh terms. So he decides the ROI on that capital is not worth the long term drag. And so a loss, right? This sad, sad ending of no deal, right? Wrong. Like I said, door but door but becomes Ring and is later acquired by Amazon for about 1 billion dollars. Yeah, a possible outcome which only arrives because he refused to sell himself short and was able to, a Shark Tank founder said. I appreciate the offer but I'm going to decline and then build a massive company later.

26:48 The business world version of Aditi finally saying this is what I'm worth and I'd rather walk away than sign a bad deal on myself. DoorDash and Ring cameras. That reminds me of another story. Crazy story, actually, which I'll have to get into soon. We must talk about what it really means. It's a lot. Remind me to talk about DoorDash girl, will ya? But anyway, that's funny. Amazon's Ring company, a home security and smart home company best known for its video doorbells and security cameras. Rings gaze is like on your physical environment and per these shocking, disturbing and unverified, might I say allegations by this whistleblower.

27:58 Right now, Doordash's gaze may be on behavior under economic strain. As we start this new year and aspire for more in life, and especially from ourselves, let's keep our eye on the prize. Let's watch ourselves and analyze our own data, our behaviour and our patterns to improve our own outcomes, our ROI, our well-being, our investments, and our safety. Because we're no shark on a panel of wealthy investors, but we know a good investment when we see one.