Sharing is Caring
As we should have already guessed, tech nerds have found a way to sell shares of themselves to strangers. That’s right, as of October 2019 you can invest in individual people through an online platform called Human IPO.
The concept is relatively straight forward: as individuals advance in their career, their time becomes more valuable. Human IPO seeks to create a market where investors are able to capitalize on the time and earning potential of high performing individuals. Moreover, the site claims that “human capital” is a commodity often overlooked. Companies always claim that their people are the most valuable element of their business, and Human IPO is aiming to make that truer than ever.
Logistically, Human IPO is a platform where you can find new human investments. Through their site you can scroll through new opportunities and purchase ‘shares” (or hours) of someone’s time. Truthfully it looks like a dating app chalked full of unreasonably impressive bios.Like any investment, the value of your purchases will fluctuate based on the market and demand. The hope is that you buy someone who continues to become worth more and more each year. To borrow an example from The Hustle:
“Let’s say you bought 10 shares — 10 hours — of Mark Zuckerberg’s time back in 2003, before Facebook launched. Probably pretty cheap. But now that 10 hours with Zuck is worth millions.”
An interesting component to this model is the shareholder’s ability to use their purchased hours. For example, instead of selling your shares, you can redeem your hours as physical time with your investment. Again, to use the Zuckerberg example, an hour spent with him in 2003 might not have done much good, but now scheduling that meeting could be career-changing. Besides the potential ROI of young talent, Human IPO offers the ability to hold on to time with people who may become huge names a few years down the road. A savvy investment for your own career when, ten years from now, you can go golfing with a CEO or force a world leader to come to your birthday party.
Million Dollar Man
Before Human IPO existed, Mike Merrill used a similar model to become the first ever “publicly traded human”. Over the last ten years, he has accumulated 805 shareholders with financial interest in his well being. For Mike, however, offering his time wasn’t enough. For the last decade, he has allowed anyone with shares to vote on his day-to-day actions.
Why? Great question.
Beyond the money he was able to make by “going public”, Merrill sees his shareholders as a kind of personal advisory board. In Merrill’s own words, “I have a powerful decision-making engine of people who can give me feedback or advice about anything.” He has a point. I mean, how nice would it be for strangers who have a financial stake in your success to help guide you through tough choices? Kind of like the episode of Friends where Rachel decides she needs her friends to make all of her dating choices on her behalf. It takes the guess work out of major decisions.
Merrill’s experiment isn’t restricted to his professional moves in the way Human IPO seems to be. As shareholders, his owners (feels weird to phrase it like that, but I’m doing it anyway) have requested a say in his dating life, personal choices, and even wether or not he should get a vasectomy. Here is a recent snapshot of some of the voting motions presented to his board:
From his personal trading site
Personally I think he should have gone for the fanny pack, but maybe I’m not as savvy...
To me, this whole set up feels a bit icky. It's one thing to ask for investments in your future, another for that financial contribution to allow for a say in your personal life. But, I also understand the point of view of the investors. If I have money riding on your life, you best believe I want to know what haircut you plan on presenting in your next interview.
Over time, Merrill’s share price has seen growth, but it fluctuates like any other market would. The Hustle points out that demand often increase when he gets publicity, skyrocketing to a high of $18/share. If you’re interested, you can literally get a piece of that ass here: https://kmikeym.com/.
I also want to point out that it’s some mind blowing ego shit to think that you can sell shares of yourself now that may warrant a return for your investors. That's the kind of confidence I aspire to. When Merrill came up with this idea, he was working a day job and was seemingly directionless. Imagine thinking, in the middle of a “little identity crisis” (his words) that someone would want to buy stock in how your life plays out. Incredible. It worked out pretty well for Merrill, and I think we should all strive for that level of faith in our abilities.
I See It, I Like It, I Want It, I Bought It
If you find this all slightly disturbing, that’s because it is. As interesting as the Human IPO model sounds, there are some obvious dystopian vibes to selling pieces of your life to strangers. Scrolling through Human IPO itself is a bit like booking entertainment for a birthday party, only marketed to corporate investors. Concerning.
People who are pro Human IPO have some great points.
All of this is true. Investing in people is a great way to show support and provide opportunity to those with promise. It’s also mutually beneficial. You have a stake in the outcome of this person’s career, and they, in turn, have people looking out for their earning potential. It’s like mentorship on crack.
It's an interesting pitch, and I’d be lying if I said I wasn’t interested in seeing my market value. …BUT we can’t ignore the underlying problems of selling part of your life and assigning worth to individuals. All of the pros get a bit dodgier when you start to think about the start values of new talent and the amount of control a high paying investor may want for their shares.
Presently, people looking to sell their time on the platform are able to offer up to 500 hours at their own specified share price. This rectifies a few concerns of having your life taken over by key shareholders, as 500 hours only equates to about 20 days of time. There is no guarantee, however, that that restriction will stay in place.
The bigger issue is that Human IPO is working on an algorithm that uses LinkedIn and Glassdoor to automatically determine the values of users.
Alas, assigning costs to people is a tricky business. At what point does determining the value of a person become too reminiscent of human trafficking? Or, maybe a more obvious issue, how do we eliminate systemic racism and gender biases to this valuation of people?
We know that wage an opportunity gaps exist for minorities and women. Stats Canada notes that women make $4.13 or (13.3%) less per hour than men. The racial divide is similar, with “university-educated Canadian-born members of a visible minority” earning 87.4 cents for every dollar earned by their white peers. This gap is often also evident in the opportunities afforded to people in minority groups. This means that their LinkedIn and Glassdoor accounts may not yield the same cost analysis that a white man might for the same work.
Even on social media there can be discrepancies in the amount of likes and followers awarded to black performers. The drag community, for example, is notorious for having racially biased fans. Black queens often have way fewer followers despite having the same exposure as their white sisters on Ru Paul’s Drag Race.
Obviously these tendencies extend well beyond drag, but that’s a fact I’ve always found interesting as an avid RPDR viewer, and I wanted to tell you about it.
When we look who may be in positions to invest, we also can’t deny that there may be a preference in who is supported. Ie: “that young white guy reminds me of when I was young and white, so I’ll support him”
Technically Human IPO is offering the same opportunities to all of their users by allowing diversity on their site, but it’s challenging to imagine a way where assigning costs won’t perpetuate an overvaluation of white male talent. It seems problematic purely in the sense that you can’t separate the cost of individuals from the systemic conditions that are preventing them from getting opportunities in the first place.
Peep This
A few articles have made the connection from Human IPO to Peeple, which is an app I’ve often joked about creating, and have now discovered actually exists….Peeple is essentially “Yelp for Peeple”. Yikes.
Launched in 2016, Peeple claims it’s a place to build your reputation, be it romantically or otherwise. By creating a profile you can collect reviews from coworkers, employers, friends, ex-lovers etc.. to create a database of references. Like Human IPO, this sounds appealing, but there is an underbelly to this world that’s pretty obvious.
For starters, cyberbullying, identity theft, and biases.
Also, if you pay enough for your subscription, you are able to access any and all negative reviews that come onto your page via Peeple's "Truth License". This means anonymity in ratings isn't guaranteed. So what's the point? How can you ensure a truthful review, and why would you set yourself up for personal attacks?
Imagine, if you will, that you are a spiteful ex looking to seek revenge. Maybe you're wearing a yellow jumpsuit and holding a samurai sword. What would you do if you have access to an online platform purely designed for you to write out your thoughts on this person as long as you had their Facebook information. Probably not anything great.
Brand and Snap
While all of this seems like a straight-to-DVD dystopian thriller, there are elements of these platforms that we should take to heart. Mainly, knowing how to market yourself. If we can look to any positivity in this story, Human IPO and Peeple have heightened the importance of personal branding and understanding your own worth.
While problematic value attribution may be an inherent part of these new platforms, so too is the ability to pitch who you are to strangers. Why would you want to buy someones shares? Because you deeply believe that that person can succeed. Though the issue of race and gender bias plays a role, there is also an opportunity to position yourself as your own brand and potential gain financial support from people who are aligned with your messaging and goals.
Personal brand is something everything can and should curate. What are you for? What are you against? According to Forbes, good personal branding comes from being specific, genuine, and consistent in what you have to say. For example, you are likely to find a pun in anything I write.
Consistency is a factor that I think is often forgotten. Do you act the same way across all of your social media platforms, for example? It would be delusional to think that anyone is limiting their searches to LinkedIn or the platforms that you want them to find. More likely, they’re looking at your online presence as a whole. Your behaviours may slightly change over the medium, but limiting your controversial take on reproductive rights in one place may not be a great strategy. Literally putting your eggs in one basket.
This consistency extends itself to your behaviour offline as well. If you come to work (log-in to work?) with a quiet demeanour and beige clothes everyday but pop off on Twitter every night, it’s not the best look. It’s confusing and hardly consistent or genuine. Which one are you? Twitter ho, or office wallflower?
Is The What I Look Like?
Projecting the right image physically is also factor. I recently read a book by Sylvie Di Giusto called “The Image of Leadership”. It sounds shallow, but her main thesis is that different industries have different values, and so too does your style. Aligning your wardrobe with your goals is the easiest way to build an image that will lend itself to success. For example, a president starts dressing like a president well before they take office. It’s the classic “dress for the job you want” model that we’ve all heard of, but in a more individualized way.
To dig a little deeper, what is the one word you want people to think of when they think of you? Do you think you present yourself that way to strangers? Di Giusto’s point is that different positions have different words associated with them (reliable accountants, luxurious sales people etc…). If you personify a word that is related to your goals, people will have an easier time envisioning you in that position and will help you get there quicker.
For you, maybe it’s “creative”, or “caring” - whatever it is, you can bet there’s a way to present yourself that fits with that word that can be applied to your style, your online footprint, and your entire personal brand.
I would add that understanding your strengths is also key. Not only what you're good at, but which strengths are the most appealing to the people you are trying to meet. Creating a successful brand is just as much about knowing what sells as it is what you like. Your love of the Kardashians is probably less valuable, for instance, than your ability to build budgets when it comes to showing the world who you are - though there is room for both in the full scope of your image. When you’re marketing yourself, you have to go through the process of contouring: highlighting what works, and shading what isn’t as relevant. Putting your best face forward is a skill in and of itself, and there’s a reason it takes practice.
Like felt, personal brand is a process (that was a deep cut reference to Two Old Queens, for anyone who needs a new podcast) You have to constantly curate, adapt, and fix. It’s only in the last few months, for example, that I felt like I’ve created any kind of unity in what my interests are. That came from a ton of introspection, breakdowns, and forcing you all to read my thoughts each week…
Not everything is going to work, and not everyone will like your brand. People have a preference in choice of milk, so they will be drawn to certain brands over others. For instance, I did a “Brand Scan” with Brand Yourself to see how “hireable” my online persona is. They said to look out for these posts:
Fair enough.
That said, I work in a creative industry. Honestly, I don’t know that I care to be working for someone who doesn’t think those posts are hilarious. I mean come on. I’m sure lots of places would also take issue with this newsletter having a sexual pun in its name, but that’s fine. I use this platform to talk about women’s sexual health, workshop some jokes, and play with puns.
I know my worth, I know my brand, and I know what direction I’m heading in, so I can get over the fact that my Mini Me costume may eliminate my eligibility to run for office.
Chanel Your Best Self
Luckily, I’m also not trying to sell my time for shares (yet). Maybe I would have a harsher point of view on my own image if I knew an algorithm was going to assign me a value or that my followers were rating me online. I get nervous that this kind of pricing model will continue on platforms beyond Peeple and Humann IPO. It’s one thing to seek out shareholders and reviews, it’s another when this kind of thinking bleeds into how we’re hired, given salaries, or promoted. I have to hope that we are avoiding the kind of future that can determine how important you are by scanning your digital footprint, but, in the age of likes and followers as currency, part of me thinks we aren’t too far off from that model.
No matter what, you can control how you are seen. You can also determine your own worth. Understand what you bring to the table, and don’t be afraid to ask for it. As women, far too often we accept whatever is given, but there is so much more room to elevate yourself when you have set your own standards.
Remember ladies, there is an age old adage we all had hanging in our university dorms for a reason:
"Keep your heels, head, and standards high" - Coco Chanel.
