"Just as rationally, I can declare that I'm not sure if you're "just shilling". Fair enough. I apologize, and will continue answering assuming you're talking i

"Just as rationally, I can declare that I'm not sure if you're "just shilling". Fair enough. I apologize, and will continue answering assuming you're talking in good faith. "I have never said that he is lying. I have implied that the situation might be aggrandized/exaggerated, or a very atypical one-off, absolutely." Patrick has explicitly said it wasn't a one off, and stated very explicit rates. So if you are implying that this isn't true, I'm not sure how that isn't implying he's lying. (And I will point out that many of the people in this thread also think you are calling him a liar - rationally speaking, if the way you communicate leads a lot of people to a misunderstanding of your statement, I suggest that you might want to change something). But let's not quibble over semantics. I'm fine calling it "exaggerating" if you prefer, and I'd argue just as strongly that he isn't exaggerating. "Now you claim that there's all sort of evidence of these $10K, $20K, $30K, $40K per week engagements. There is none. Absolutely none, beyond a cofounder and a serial booster who suddenly claims to have lots of experience being a consumer of consultants." So, Thomas being Patrick's partner is very new. He was for many years the head of a company, during which time he also said he hired Patrick. Again, this was long before they worked together. You can verify that Thomas' company existed, and was acquired, here: http://www.csoonline.com/article/2135259/security-leadership/ncc-group-acquires-matasano-security.html http://www.csoonline.com/article/2135259/security-leadership... I'm also not sure what a "serial booster" is in your statement, I'll be happy if you can clarify. I can't explicitly prove the engagement rates, but if you want an example of a very well known and respectable company that explicitly talks about Patrick being their consultant, you can read Patrick's article on Fog Creek Software's blog, which starts: "Editor’s Note: Patrick McKenzie has done some work with Fog Creek last October and this May, focusing on improving our marketing." http://blog.fogcreek.com/our-marketing-is-up-fog-creek-and-what-we-did-about-it/ http://blog.fogcreek.com/our-marketing-is-up-fog-creek-and-w... Again, all I'm saying is, rationally speaking, lets look at the evidence - despite your protestations about Thomas being Patrick's partner, this is a very new development. Thomas has been talking about Patrick for years, and verifies Patrick's rate. Thomas is verifiably the owner of a consultancy that was acquired, also making him able to verify those rates. Fog Creek, a large software company, also talks about Patrick working for them. That's another verificaiton that he's worked with these kinds of customers (not verification of the rate, though). By the way, Patrick didn't "suddenly" talk about these rates - he's been talking about charging at least $10k per week for a few years, but only recently mentioned the specific prices. Here's a question - what would it take to convince you that Patrick is not exaggerating? Cause at least from where I'm standing, it looks like all the evidence points in one direction. This is without even looking at the fact that lots of other well known members of the community have met and talked with Patrick, and vouch for his honesty and his methods. Also not looking at the ton of content which a lot of people have used to better themselves. For the record, I also owned a consultancy, which was acquired by a large company. I didn't charge Patrick's rates, but I have no doubt they are achievable (in certain lines of work, mind you).