Saturday, December 13, 2014 Aftermath (II): How not to do damage control

To follow up on my last post, Aftermath (I): Look at their gullible followers!, we'll now look at the response by the "CEO" "Andy Yosha" of It all started with this comment from the last thread on the forum we were looking at:
Nevertheless, I'm investigating this.... it's seems absurd to me that Tom would hire an actress.... the guy is good at daygame and that kiss isn't even that great.... the only explanation I can think of that she found out about it after the fact and for some reason put it on her resum?.... I have no idea.

That's hilarious. Did "Andy Yosha" think his followers have no capacity for rational thought, or does he have a hard time thinking clearly himself? I was pleased when one of their forum users questioned that argument:
That doesn't make sense. She would of listed him as "Tom Torero" in that case. How would she know his real last name?

Of course it doesn't make any sense that she knew his full, and real name. It makes even less sense that she would add this video to her portfolio if she "found out about it after the fact".

On the plus side, "Andy Yosha" posted his correspondence with his instructor. It could as well be fake, but it shows "Tom" claiming it wasn't true. Well, proof was posted that the video was indeed fake.

Now Tom is the fall guy and no longer works for Business as usual? There are just a few problems. One is Andy Yosha being rather concerned about the actress listing her engagement on her portfolio. He claims she has "done absolutely wrong":

Care to explain? She has done nothing wrong at all as she was paid for that gig. The people who have done wrong are found within

Now, talking about the "fall guy thing". The problem is that Tom wasn't acting in a vacuum. No pun intended. First, someone else was filming. So, who was it? Maybe Andy Yosha himself? Thus, at the very least one other person knew about this. Besides, we're talking about "two hours of filming" according to the message, so there arguably were several takes. Who selected the best take of that scene?

Further, I have a hard time believing that this was an exception. It was the one incident were they got caught. Now look at that video again, if you want, and if it's still on YouTube. It's not impressive at all. So, if they have to hire an actress to get "results" like that, why would anyone make the assumption that anything else was legitimate just because they haven't been found guilty yet. It's like catching some kid cheating on algebra, and then having his parents claim that their boy has mastered calculus. It doesn't make any sense. If you have to fake the very basics, how is anyone going to believe you anything at all anymore?

Well, PUA followers are among the most gullible on the Internet, so we shouldn't expect too much from that incident. However, judging from some of the posts on the forum, some people seem to be waking up, finally.


  1. If he can afford to pay £100, he must be making quite a bit off of his website.

  2. This is disappointing to me. I was always a big follower. If he is good why would he have to pay to get something like that on film. The video isn't even impressive. Maybe he always was a fake. Disappointing for us guys who thought you could actually get really hot women without looks, money or status.

  3. Have a look at this Aaron:

    Apparently, the cameraman was indeed in on the whole setup. But wait, it gets interesting. Turns out the cameraman was very close to Tom but not employed by daygame. Look at Andy's response to the thread (which is the last post before he locked it):

    "After speaking with lots of people I have discovered the identity of the cameraman, and yes, he did know about the whole thing. It's not someone who works (or has ever worked) with, but one of Tom's friends, but I'm not going to say who as I don't have hard evidence that I could publish."

    This leads me to believe that the cameraman is another pua teacher. Why else would he bother to out him ( the cameraman) if he had enough evidence? It doesn't seem like the cameraman was just some random friend of Tom. It was someone with connections to the PUA community. My guess is it's either Krauser or Jabba.

    1. Lol, that's funny.

      Andy Yosha is such a moron. He must think his groupies are mentally retarded. I'd be willing to bet Andy knew about the video the whole time.

      Take a look at Jon Matrix. Perhaps he has some fake videos too? They always claim even a "good looking guy" like Jon needs game. Jon is very short (like more than 5'8 I would guess) is a skinny twig and going bald. He is well below average in the looks department, but then again, these "really good looking guy" claims about him come from the likes of Krauser, Tom Torero and Andy Yosha.

      On a side note, what happened to Nick Savoy from Lovesystems?

      Guy looks he can't say no to McDonald's these days. Funny thing about Nick is that he always looks like he doesn't believes what he's saying. Really impressive Nick, talking about fashion when you are wearing a sloppy t-shirt with a stretched neck.

      Nick also says in another video, "Women do not like looking at naked pictures of men". One again Nick misses the boat on something :P


Note: Only a member of this blog may post a comment.