Despite our illusions of independence and control, it’s possible to manipulate people using a variety of psychological tricks—heck, that’s what the entire advertising and marketing industry is built on. So it stands to reason that a little light mind control could make things go your way a bit more often. When you dig into supposed psychological tricks, however, you often get mired in a lot of pseudo-science and dubious claims. But while it’s true that you’re not going to be controlling minds and hypnotizing people into doing your bidding any time soon, there are psychological tricks that do really work—and that are backed by scientific evidence.

If you’re looking to gain a little bit of an edge in your everyday life, here are some mind tricks that actually do work.

Create a debt

If you want to make someone do something for you and meet resistance, one trick you can employ is to create a debt by doing something for them first. This hinges on what’s known as the Norm of Reciprocity—basically, the pressure people feel to return a favor. An easy example of this is when someone cleans your windshield when you’re stopped at a light, and then asks for a tip. You didn’t ask them to clean your windshield, but once it’s done, you feel pressure to reciprocate.

You can create this debt in a wide variety of ways. Servers in restaurants jot personal notes on your bill to create a debt of goodwill, encouraging larger tips. Companies offer free trials of products and services because they know that once you use the product, you’ll feel a debt and be more reluctant to cancel or return the item. So next time you need someone to do something for you and you sense their reluctance, do something for them and you’ll increase your chances of success.

Mirroring

Yes, something used by Andy Bernard on The Office is a legit psychological trick with science backing it up. Personality mirroring, or The Chameleon Effect, is when we unconsciously mimic the people around us—their postures, attitudes, and other behaviors. We all have a tendency to do this because of what’s known as the “perception-behavior link,” wherein observing a behavior increases the likelihood that we’ll repeat it.

You can use this to your advantage by consciously mirroring people you’re trying to influence, matching their mannerisms and other behaviors. This increases trust and will make you seem more authoritative and trustworthy, because you’ll literally remind people of themselves.

Over-ask

Are you trying to get someone to do something? Try the Door in The Face (DITF) technique. You use this trick by first asking your target for something much harder or more outrageous than what you really want—something they’ll doubtlessly refuse. Then, back down and ask them for your original desire. The chances that they agree are now much higher because of DITF, which pivots off the Norm of Reciprocity discussed above (the name of this technique is taken from the concept of people slamming the door in a pushy salesperson’s face). When you downgrade what you’re asking, it’s perceived subconsciously as a concession—which creates a debt. People will have a strong urge to erase that debt by agreeing to your “lesser” request.

Repeat yourself

If you’re trying to convince someone of something, one of the most powerful psychological tricks you can employ is what’s known as repetition bias. Basically, the perceived legitimacy and truth of any statement increases the more frequently it is repeated—in other words, the more you repeat even blatantly untrue or incorrect information, the more likely people will start to believe you. This results in what’s known as the “illusory truth effect,” and the last few years have shown just how powerful it can be even when dealing with huge populations that have access to factual information. So the next time you need to convince someone of something, just repeat it doggedly—you’ll eventually wear them down.

Imply scarcity

The scarcity principle is one of the most common examples of blatant psychological trickery we encounter on a daily basis. Any time you see an advertisement that promises something is limited—in time or quantity—it’s using the scarcity effect against you. It’s easy to see why this works: We tend to place more value on something when we think it’s rare. When you’re told that an opportunity only exists for a short time or in a limited supply, your fear of missing out (FOMO) hits hard, and you almost instinctually want to avoid it.

While this is most useful with marketing products, you can also employ this trick in other ways. You can trick people into spending time with you by implying that you can’t fit them into your busy schedule, for example.

Speak with confidence

Being thoughtful about your vocabulary choices when speaking can have a huge impact on how you’re perceived, and how often people do what you want. We often unconsciously “hedge” when we talk, using phrases like “I think” or “I’m not 100% sure, but...” This gives your audience wiggle-room to doubt what you’re saying and to perceive you as less than reliable.

On the other hand, using confident phrases like “I know” or “I believe” will make your arguments seem more authoritative even if nothing else changes in what you’re saying. In other words, your statements might be as dubious as before, but because you’re stating them so confidently, people will have a stronger tendency to believe you.

Use names

If you get the sense that someone’s attention is wandering from you, or if you want to ensure that they’re focused on you no matter what else is going on around you, try using their name. Science tells us that hearing our name pivots off the “Cocktail Party Effect,” which describes the way we instinctively filter out all other stimuli when we hear something interesting—and our own names trigger this effect in spades.

That’s why salespeople are usually trained to repeat your name often as they deliver their pitch to you, and you can use this simple technique to ensure that people are paying attention and feel engaged with you as you speak. Your audience may not even realize why they remember their conversation with you so well, or why they failed to notice other people in the room while you were speaking.

Be present

If you’re trying to establish a bond of trust with someone, you can use something called “affinity” to trick people into trusting you. Affinity is a sense of familiarity people have when they’re used to seeing you all the time—the more “present” you are in their lives, the more likely they are to feel close to you and to trust you.

For example, an experiment was conducted in which four women posed as students in a class. The women did not interact with any of the other students at all—they merely showed up. The impostors attended different numbers of classes, and at the end of the term, the other students were shown photos and asked their opinions. The women who had attended the most classes—who had been most “present”—triggered higher levels of affinity, even though they hadn’t spoken to anyone.

Dish the compliments

One of the trickiest mind tricks involves something called spontaneous trait transference. In a nutshell, this means that people tend to view you with the adjectives you use on other people.

So, if you want someone to see you as smart, start calling other people smart. If you want to be seen as confident—or even attractive—describe others using those terms. Over time, everyone will start to view you through the lens of those comments. Keep in mind that this works in reverse, too—if you spend your days crankily insulting other people, those around you may start to view you in a very negative way.

Touch

Want to influence people? Try some subliminal touching. Subliminal touching is simply making casual interpersonal contact while interacting with someone. Touching their arm or shoulder briefly has been shown to make people instantly feel warmer toward you. While you often hear this advice in the context of dating and romance, it’s a powerful mind trick any time you’re trying to be perceived in a positive light. For example, a study conducted by the University of Mississippi and Rhodes College found that waitresses in a restaurant who lightly touched their customers received significantly larger tips.

There’s no true mind control, but you can use these real, real mind tricks to deliver yourself some advantages. Just remember that other people are probably using these same tricks on you.

Jason Cottrell is CEO & Founder of Myplanet, specialists in digital transformation programs that tackle complex commerce challenges.

Back in the spring, I offered my take on why the adoption of composable commerce platforms has gained significant ground. And since then, its proliferation hasn’t stopped. Even key monolithic players like Shopify are capitalizing on the value of composable principles to deploy new platforms and APIs that may seem headless or even composable. Ultimately, this led to confusion about how composable technologies actually work. So when it’s time to consider new commerce platforms or tech vendors, it’s wise to do your due diligence.

Granted, doing so can be a challenge. The commerce tech glossary is dense, people frequently conflate or misunderstand common terms, and—let’s not forget—all-in-one commerce platforms can masquerade.

To that end, here are three misconceptions around composable commerce to help you make more informed decisions for your brand.

Myth 1: Headless is composable.

Composable commerce is a relatively young term that describes a particular commerce architecture paradigm rather than a specific technology. Composable commerce isn’t owned by anyone, and it’s only through organizations like the MACH Alliance and commerce tech companies that the notion of standards can emerge. Despite these standards and the growing popularity of composable commerce architectures within retail, you may have come across different terms that refer to this same concept.

• Modular architecture.

• Curated commerce suite.

• Microservices architecture.

Because these terms capture the essence of composable commerce, they aren’t misnomers. But when people start using headless and composable interchangeably, you can run into issues. This false equivalence can be compared to saying that flour and cake are the same; while flour is a primary ingredient of cake, it doesn’t make a cake what it is. Like a cake, composable commerce is the sum of its parts, with headless (the flour) being a key element.

Before we get hungry, let’s revisit what headless actually means.

Headless is a term used to describe a commerce architecture where the front-end and the back-end operate independently of one another.

In practice, this means that a single back-end—which contains components like a content management system (CMS) and customer data platform (CDP)—can integrate with any number of front-ends through the use of APIs. In other words, retailers can design a different customer interface for each touchpoint they might have: mobile apps, in-store kiosks, wearables and more. This freedom is what makes omniretail possible for retailers—they’re able to provide a seamless customer experience regardless of where their customers are.

Composable commerce goes even further by allowing retailers to curate a modular commerce suite using the best vendors for each job—from checkout and promotions to commerce engine and fulfillment. Unlike headless architectures, composable commerce architectures operate within an open ecosystem of commerce tech experts and vendors. Besides offering support and guidance for your solution, accelerators provide access to pre-built integrations to speed up time-to-value.

Myth 2: Monoliths can be headless.

The DNA of monoliths dictates that they can never be truly headless; they can’t provide an all-in-one platform for their users and be modular at the same time. Although these all-in-one platforms sometimes advertise headless functionality, they are ultimately opinionated. Any “modular” components or custom solutions have to work within the confines of their architecture—whether it’s their native code, APIs, console or templates.

All-in-one commerce platforms were built to support websites, but since the introduction of mobile technology, we’ve seen an explosion of additional channels—each warranting its own front end. So while it might be possible to leverage APIs to connect each front-end, it’s important to consider whether or not those APIs are an extension of the platform’s functionality. In contrast, a headless solution is capable of supporting any number of front-ends across any number of channels, including those that are still in their infancy (e.g., the metaverse).

Many providers of monolithic platforms also have their roots in the pre-headless era, before cloud technology established itself in commerce tech. The downside of this is that these providers have their systems on-premises, so they’re not built API-first in the way headless technologies are. In the end, the foundations of monoliths often come with inherent limitations.

Myth 3: Composable is always the best choice.

Although Myplanet are experts and advocates in composable commerce, I’d be hard-pressed to recommend composable commerce to every brand. For some brands, all-in-one commerce platforms can address their needs just fine. For others, an entirely custom build might be the ideal solution, provided they have the appropriate resources for such an undertaking. But increasingly, composable commerce is the right choice for many brands, given how dynamic the world of retail has become.

The ideal use-case for choosing a composable commerce architecture is an omniretail brand that has reached a certain level of business complexity and digital maturity. What that looks like in practice can greatly vary, but some common qualities include:

• Operating in multiple countries and/or markets.

• Operating across multiple channels and touchpoints.

• Using multiple currencies or revenue models.

• Having a willingness to invest in technological innovation.

• Wanting to dedicate your tech strategy to managing a dynamic, curated suite.

Brands often start to consider a composable commerce solution when their current tech platform can no longer address their unique business needs or changing customer expectations. They’re limited to the current offerings or future features roadmap of their platform, and they may even have to compromise on certain services or features. Not only does this impact elements like a brand’s day-to-day design decisions or ongoing operations, but it also limits future growth opportunities.

Making Informed Decisions

As the composable commerce ecosystem continues to grow, so will the need for retailers to stay up-to-date on the latest trends, tech, and best practices. Whatever your digital strategy or tech roadmap looks like, your choice of commerce platform should be at the forefront. But at the end of the day, technology shouldn’t be a limiting factor for you—it should elevate and empower your brand.

Forbes Technology Council is an invitation-only community for world-class CIOs, CTOs and technology executives. Do I qualify?

A four-year bachelor’s degree has long been the first rung to climbing America’s corporate ladder.

But the move to prioritize skills over a college education is sweeping through some of America’s largest companies, including Google, EY, Microsoft, and Apple. Strong proponents say the shift helps circumvent a needless barrier to workplace diversity.

“I really do believe an inclusive diverse workforce is better for your company, it’s good for the business,” Ginni Rometty, former IBM CEO, told Fortune Media CEO Alan Murray during a panel last month for Connect, Fortune’s executive education community. “That’s not just altruistic.”

Under Rometty’s leadership in 2016, tech giant IBM coined the term “new collar jobs” in reference to roles that require a specific set of skills rather than a four-year degree. It’s a personal commitment for Rometty, one that hits close to home for the 40-year IBM veteran.

When Rometty was 16, her father left the family, leaving her mother, who’d never worked outside the home, suddenly in the position to provide.

“She had four children and nothing past high school, and she had to get a job to…get us out of this downward spiral,” Rometty recalled to Murray. “What I saw in that was that my mother had aptitude; she wasn’t dumb, she just didn’t have access, and that forever stayed in my mind.”

When Rometty became CEO in 2012 following the Great Recession, the U.S. unemployment rate hovered around 8%. Despite the influx of applicants, she struggled to find employees who were trained in the particular cybersecurity area she was looking for.

“I realized I couldn’t hire them, so I had to start building them,” she said.

In 2011, IBM launched a corporate social responsibility effort called the Pathways in Technology Early College High School (P-TECH) in Brooklyn. It’s since expanded to 11 states in the U.S. and 28 countries.

Through P-TECH, Rometty visited “a very poor high school in a bad neighborhood” that received the company’s support, as well as a community college where IBM was offering help with a technology-based curriculum and internships.

Story continues

“Voilà! These kids could do the work. I didn’t have [applicants with] college degrees, so I learned that propensity to learn is way more important than just having a degree,” Rometty said.

Realizing the students were fully capable of the tasks that IBM needed moved Rometty to return to the drawing board when it came to IBM’s own application process and whom it was reaching. She said that at the time, 95% of job openings at IBM required a four-year degree. As of January 2021, less than half do, and the company is continuously reevaluating its roles.

For the jobs that now no longer require degrees and instead rely on skills and willingness to learn, IBM had always hired Ph.D. holders from the very best Ivy League schools, Rometty told Murray. But data shows that the degree-less hires for the same jobs performed just as well. “They were more loyal, higher retention, and many went on to get college degrees,” she said.

Rometty has since become cochair of OneTen, a civic organization committed to hiring, promoting, and advancing 1 million Black individuals without four-year degrees within the next 10 years.

If college degrees no longer become compulsory for white-collar jobs, many other qualifications—skills that couldn’t be easily taught in a boot camp, apprenticeship program, or in the first month on the job—could die off, too, University of Virginia Darden School of Business professor Sean Martin told Fortune last year.

“The companies themselves miss out on people that research suggests…might be less entitled, more culturally savvy, more desirous of being there,” Martin said. Rather than pedigree, he added, hiring managers should look for motivation.

That’s certainly the case at IBM. Once the company widened its scope, Rometty said, the propensity to learn quickly became more of an important hiring factor than just a degree.

This story was originally featured on Fortune.com

More from Fortune:

A 2007 flashback: home flippers are in trouble again

Managing Gen Z is like working with people ‘from a different country’

The Renault Nissan empire once held together by fugitive Carlos Ghosn may slowly be unraveling

PayPal tells users it will fine them $2,500 for misinformation, then backtracks immediately

By The Valuentum Team

International Business Machines Corporation (NYSE:IBM) has become a fundamentally different business in the past few years, one focused on providing hybrid cloud computing offerings. The company is a stellar free cash flow generator which enables IBM to reward investors via generous dividend increases, with shares of IBM yielding ~5.1% as of this writing. Substantial near-term headwinds remain, largely due to the various exogenous shocks seen of late (such as major inflationary pressures, rising interest rates, supply chain hurdles, and raging geopolitical tensions), though IBM is still worth considering as a high-yielding income generation idea.

IBM's Key Investment Considerations

IBM solves business problems via integrated hardware/software solutions that leverage IT and its knowledge of business processes. Its solutions help reduce a client's costs or enable new capabilities that generate revenue. The company was founded in 1924 and is headquartered in New York.

Back in 2019, IBM bought Red Hat (a top provider of open source cloud software) through a ~$34 billion deal which made IBM a contending hybrid cloud provider. IBM is looking to seize what it describes as a ~$1 trillion hybrid cloud opportunity, and exact growth in this area has been encouraging. IBM's revamped management team is working hard to turn things around after the company made various blunders during the 2010s decade. Its current Chairman and CEO, Arvind Krishna, has done a solid job righting the ship at IBM since taking on the top role in 2020.

In November 2021, IBM spun off its legacy business tax-free to shareholders as a new publicly traded entity, Kyndryl Holdings, Inc. (KD). Initially, IBM retained a 19.9% stake in Kyndryl though the firm intends to exit that position within 12 months of the spinoff.

Earnings Update

On July 18, IBM reported earnings for the second quarter of 2022 that beat both consensus top- and bottom-line estimates. Its GAAP revenues rose by 9% year-over-year to hit $15.5 billion with strong growth at its Red Hat, various consulting services, and hybrid infrastructure offerings being key here. When removing foreign currency headwinds arising from the strong US dollar seen of late from the picture, IBM's non-GAAP constant currency revenues were up 16% year-over-year last quarter. IBM's portfolio optimization efforts are having a very powerful impact on its financial performance.

The firm's GAAP gross margin fell by ~185 basis points year-over-year last quarter, falling down to 55.4%. However, economies of scale helped drive its GAAP income from continuing operations up by 81% year-over-year in the second quarter, rising to $1.5 billion. There is some noise here due to the separation of IBM's legacy businesses (via the spinoff of Kyndryl) from its core operations. Keeping that noise in mind, IBM's underlying operations have performed quite well of late.

During its second quarter earnings call, IBM's management team noted the firm now forecasted that its full-year free cash flows would come in near $10.0 billion in 2022, at the low end of its previous forecast. IBM generated $3.6 billion in free cash flow (defined as net operating cash flow less 'payments for property, plant, and equipment' and 'investment in software') while spending $3.0 billion covering its dividend obligations during the first half of 2022. Its modest share repurchases during this period were related to tax withholding purposes as the new IBM is focused on retaining cash to invest in the business. We appreciate that IBM's dividend obligations remain well-covered by its traditional free cash flows.

The company exited June 2022 with a net debt load of $42.8 billion (inclusive of short-term debt, exclusive of restricted cash). One of the biggest risks to IBM's dividend is its large net debt load. IBM had $7.6 billion in cash, cash equivalents, and current marketable securities on hand at the end of June 2022 which provides the company with ample liquidity to meet its near-term funding needs.

IBM continues to expect that its constant currency revenues will grow decently this year (in the mid-single digit range), though sustained foreign currency headwinds are expected to offset strong demand for its offerings, to a degree. Over the long haul, we forecast that under its new management team, IBM will return to stable revenue growth which in turn should see the company's free cash flows swell higher. That would allow IBM to boost its dividend in a sustainable manner going forward, though we caution that its net debt load could limit the size of any future payout increases.

Dividend Analysis

The Dividend Cushion Ratio Deconstruction, shown in the image up above, reveals the numerator and denominator of the Dividend Cushion ratio. At the core, the larger the numerator, or the healthier a company's balance sheet and future free cash flow generation, relative to the denominator, or a company's cash dividend obligations, the more durable the dividend.

The Dividend Cushion Ratio Deconstruction image puts sources of free cash in the context of financial obligations next to expected cash dividend payments over the next 5 years on a side-by-side comparison. Because the Dividend Cushion ratio and many of its components are forward-looking, our dividend evaluation may change upon subsequent updates as future forecasts are altered to reflect new information.

In the context of the Dividend Cushion ratio, IBM's numerator is smaller than its denominator, which suggests weak forward-looking dividend coverage. However, given IBM's strong and stable cash flow profile, we view its forward-looking dividend coverage favorably when considering IBM's ability to tap capital markets into account. Should IBM stumble for any reason, its ability to make good on its payout may be in danger.

IBM's Economic Profit Analysis

The best measure of a firm's ability to create value for shareholders is expressed by comparing its return on invested capital ['ROIC'] with its weighted average cost of capital ['WACC']. The gap or difference between ROIC and WACC is called the firm's economic profit spread. IBM's 3-year historical return on invested capital (without goodwill) is 41.6%, which is above the estimate of its cost of capital of 9.2%.

In the chart down below, we show the probable path of ROIC in the years ahead based on the estimated volatility of key drivers behind the measure. The solid grey line reflects the most likely outcome, in our opinion, and represents the scenario that results in our fair value estimate. Assuming IBM's exact portfolio optimization efforts go as planned, the firm's ability to generate shareholder value (which historically has been impressive) should continue to improve.

IBM's Cash Flow Valuation Analysis

Our discounted cash flow process values each firm on the basis of the present value of all future free cash flows, net of balance sheet considerations. We think IBM is worth $136 per share with a fair value range of $101-$171 per share. Shares of IBM are trading moderately below our fair value estimate as of this writing.

The near-term operating forecasts used in our enterprise cash flow model, including revenue and earnings, do not differ much from consensus estimates or management guidance. Our model reflects a compound annual revenue growth rate of 3.4% during the next five years, a pace that is higher than the firm's 3-year historical compound annual growth rate of -10.3%.

Our model reflects a 5-year projected average operating margin of 17.6%, which is above IBM's trailing 3-year average. Beyond Year 5, we assume free cash flow will grow at an annual rate of 2% for the next 15 years and 3% in perpetuity. For IBM, we use a 9.2% weighted average cost of capital to discount future free cash flows.

IBM's Margin of Safety Analysis

Although we estimate IBM's fair value at about $136 per share, every company has a range of probable fair values that's created by the uncertainty of key valuation drivers (like future revenue or earnings, for example). After all, if the future were known with certainty, we wouldn't see much volatility in the markets as stocks would trade precisely at their known fair values.

In the graphic up above, we show this probable range of fair values for IBM. We think the firm is attractive below $101 per share (the green line), but quite expensive above $171 per share (the red line). The prices that fall along the yellow line, which includes our fair value estimate, represent a reasonable valuation for the firm, in our opinion.

Concluding Thoughts

The steady decline in IBM's legacy business since 2010 represents a major reason why the firm spun off Kyndryl in November 2021. Going forward, IBM will need to prove that as a leaner and more focused enterprise, it can maintain solid revenue and operating income growth over the long haul. We think that will be the case, though substantial near-term headwinds remain. Investors looking for an income generation idea backed up by a strong cash flow profile should take a closer look at IBM.

Founded in 1911 as a Computing-Tabulating-Recording Company, International Business Machines (IBM) needs to keep its finger on the pulse of the development of information technology not to be ousted by younger tech giants like Google, Microsoft, Apple, and Amazon. With the advent of the internet, IBM needed to widen the spectrum of its products and services to retain its strong position in the tech field. Although the company lost its dominance, having only a 5% market share in 2021, as opposed to 68% shared by Microsoft, Amazon, and Google, it has many spectacular achievements to its credit. IBM holds more patents than any other technology company and takes pride in employees who have earned five Nobel Prizes, four Turing Awards, five National Medals of Technology, and five National Medals of Science. And it had been the top tech company for longer than any of the titans dominating the market now. 

Also called “Big Blue,” IBM indeed has an impressive pedigree. After starting to produce hardware at the beginning of the last century, it thrived in this business for decades and became the leading provider of mainframe computers worldwide. IBM’s gross income had inexorably grown in the last part of the twentieth century, expanding from $14.450 billion earned in 1975 to $71.940 billion made in 1995. The company’s revenue skyrocketed to the record level of $106.9 billion in 2011, after which it has steadily been declining amidst its transition into new technologies and lines of business. To move with the times and survive the competition from other tech titans, IBM gradually shifted its focus from hardware to software and services. It began to devote more energy and money to cloud-based services and cognitive computing. IBM focuses now on offering primarily network services, application services, cloud services, digital workplace services, business processes and operations, technology consulting services, and AI services. IBM Watson, a cognitive system capable of answering questions posed in natural language, has become the company’s high-visibility offering in the technology field. IBM has a strong faith in Watson, promoting the system as a benevolent digital assistant that would help hospitals, offices, factories, and farms. The company’s white paper referred to Watson as “the future of knowing.”

To see how well IBM has prepared for, what it calls, the new age of understanding, study the statistical data presented below.

Sources: IBM, Wikipedia

IBM (IBM) was upgraded Friday by TheStreet's Quant Ratings service. Long-time Real Money subscribers have come to learn I like to combine investment approaches. No one investment approach (fundamental, technical, quantitative) is perfect and better results can come from blending or combining different methods.

Let's see what could Boost the charts of IBM keeping in mind this quantitative upgrade.

In the daily bar chart of IBM, below, we can see that the shares have moved in a broad sideways trend the past 12 months. The 200-day moving average line has slowly moved up and then down in what could be considered a neutral band.

The On-Balance-Volume (OBV) line has also moved sideways suggesting a balance between buyers and sellers. The Moving Average Convergence Divergence (MACD) oscillator is currently in a bearish alignment below the zero line but the trend of the past year has been sideways.

In the weekly Japanese candlestick chart of IBM, below, we can see a broad sideways trend to trading the past 18 months or so. Trading volume has slowed in the past few months and the weekly OBV line shows a decline from February. So far prices have held relatively steady but that may not continue if weakness in the broader market averages continues.

The MACD oscillator is slightly above the zero line and looks like it will cross the line in the near future.

In this daily Point and Figure chart of IBM, below, we can see a possible downside price target in the $109 area. A trade at $122.47 is needed to refresh the downtrend.

In this second Point and Figure chart of IBM, below, we used weekly price data. Here a price target of $108 is shown.

Bottom-line strategy: IBM could continue to trade in a broad sideways pattern but further weakness cannot be ruled out as weak market conditions can mean that traders sell first and ask questions later.

Get an email alert each time I write an article for Real Money. Click the "+Follow" next to my byline to this article.

Call them the wonder boys. They’re in the business of manufacturing the effect.

Derek McKee, Franco Pascali and Zach Davidson may look like clean-cut 20-somethings kicking back in an Arts District loft on a Friday night. They’re decked out in designer leisurewear, swig coffee and pass a nicotine vape between them, and the reminiscences and laughter come quick and repeatedly.

“Dude, we have so many good memories!” Davidson says, slamming his hand onto the marble dining table they’re gathered around.

Except the vast tabletop is scattered with about 17 decks of playing cards — some of them unused and still plastic-wrapped, others well-worn — and as they talk, each nonchalantly wields an open deck in his hand, manipulating the cards into extravagant, almost sculptural arrangements.

Davidson, McKee and Pascali are highly trained working magicians, and the moves they’re performing are called “cardistry,” a visually dynamic, kinetic art form that’s part juggling and part “card flourishing,” the latter referring to how magicians manipulate playing cards to deliver their acts oomph when performing tricks.

Cardistry, however, needs no tricks; it’s an art form unto itself. McKee, Pascali and Davidson — who met more than a decade ago through the Magic Castle’s Academy of Magical Arts Junior Society, which mentors young magicians — perform around the U.S. and have mastered some of the most difficult cardistry moves.

There’s the judo flip, spinning and flicking the cards with one hand; the flower fan, achieved by bending the cards lengthwise while spreading them out to create a three-dimensional fan; and L-cuts, a glorified shuffle achieved by sliding cards upward with one’s pinkies.

To watch them all go at it at once feels a bit like sitting inside of a pinwheel in a windstorm, bits of multicolored plastic flipping and whirring erratically across one’s field of vision.

“We’re always in the pursuit of wonder,” McKee says, cutting a deck over and over again with one hand, his fingers rapidly crawling over the card edges as the segments become increasingly slimmer. He’s blasé about it, slunk down in his chair and eyes directed elsewhere, as if subconsciously tapping a pencil on the tabletop while talking.

“It’s psychology and sleight of hand,” Pascali says of magic. He flicks the cards into the air with one hand so they form geometric, three-dimensional shapes. Poof: suddenly, a Cubist-looking flower!

“It’s a creative, intellectual endeavor,” adds Davidson, swiftly fanning the deck out on the table, then wiping it closed with one quick swoop.

Tonight’s get-together is what magicians call a “magic jam.” It’s a chance to connect with other like-minded magicians and share tips while honing skills. Often magicians will work through a challenging trick at a magic jam, or get feedback on a line of dialogue for a show.

At bigger jams, often held in the backrooms of bars or restaurants, there might be more than a dozen magicians, at different stages of their careers and of varying skill levels, in attendance, with legendary performers mentoring up-and-comers.

But magicians are nothing if not protective of their secrets, and newspaper reporters — particularly those with photographers in tow — are generally not welcomed at such events. Tonight’s more intimate jam, at McKee’s home, is purposeful. The focus? McKee’s upcoming show.

McKee has just wrapped up a show, “This Is Only a Trick,” which ran for six months at the Hollywood Roosevelt’s Cinegrill Theater. The contemporary-style show included new spins on classic magic tricks, with plenty of audience participation and a hip-hop, EDM and pop soundtrack. He’ll be debuting a new iteration of the show at Art Beyond Survival gallery in the Arts District on Oct. 28.

But first, he must figure out how to reformat the material, which played to an audience of 80, for a more intimate crowd of 40.

“I think I can still do card manip there,” McKee says.

“Have you thought about cups and balls as the start of Act Two?” Davidson asks.

“Yeah,” McKee says. “I’d love to do this very beautiful, sitting-at-a-table cups, set to the Willy Wonka song, to close out the show.”

Derek McKee, center, and fellow magicians Zach Davidson, left, and Franco Pascali hone their sleight-of-hand skills and work out reformatting challenges for McKee’s upcoming show, to be held in an Arts District gallery.

(Myung J. Chun / Los Angeles Times)

McKee, 28, has a young Leonardo DiCaprio-like, brooding golden boy look to him. He grew up in Littleton, Colo., where he hung out at — and later worked in — a magic shop from age 10.

He’s been performing magic internationally since age 13 — including in Las Vegas and privately for the likes of Elton John and one Dubai prince, who flew him to the United Arab Emirates for a show when he was still in high school. He served as a magic talent scout for NBC’s “America’s Got Talent” for three seasons. He also produces playing cards through his company, “Pure Imagination Projects,” which has sold more than 250,000 decks, he says, since 2013.

The 25-year-old Pascali, a self-described magician, cardist and visual artist, grew up in Glendale and was bitten by the magic bug as early as 4 years old, though he didn’t pursue it until he was 7, after seeing a David Blaine special on TV. He rebelled from magic for a few years, occupying himself with skateboarding and video games instead; with his baggy, brightly colored sweater and shaggy bangs cascading from under a black baseball cap, he still has a skater look to him.

But then he got serious about magic at 14, and it’s been “nothing but full-throttle, increasing exponentially passion” since. Pascali now makes a living “piecemeal” from performing at L.A. venues, such as the Magic Castle and Black Rabbit Rose, as well as at private events, teaching magic on Zoom, doing consulting and freelance work for other magicians and magic companies, and manufacturing playing cards through his company, Cartelago.

Davidson, 24, considers himself to be an entrepreneur — and with neatly cropped hair, black pants and a fitted black T-shirt, he looks the part. He grew up in Westwood and is the only one of the group who followed a conventional path and graduated from college — he studied business at USC. He’s now the founder of a venture-backed crypto startup called, not surprisingly, Presto, which aims “to make crypto feel like magic.” But Davidson still performs magic at private events two to three times a year.

“Zach is easily the most adult one of us!” Pascali says.

“That’s not true!” Davidson protests, laughing.

“There are so many different paths of making magic in life,” McKee adds. “I’d argue that it’s not my profession, it’s my lifestyle. Everything revolves around magic.”

Magic has clearly been the binding force in these men’s lives, whether that’s meant hours spent perfecting tricks — McKee and Pascali say they still practice a minimum of five hours a day, 10 to 12 if there’s an upcoming show, whereas Davidson practices on a spot basis — time spent performing onstage or, simply, time spent engaging in magic as a social adhesive like tonight.

Close friends mean that much more to this group, they say, because to get to their skill level, they — most working magicians — spent hours upon hours, entire days, as kids sitting alone with a deck of cards, practicing tricks in front of a mirror with sweaty, calloused hands.

It’s paid off: These guys are purists, they say, meaning no gimmicks or devices to manipulate cards or two-sided coins to aid their tricks.

“We’re like, ‘Gimmick? We’ll do it for real!’” Pascali says.

“We spend countless hours doing something that could easily be accomplished with a gimmick,” McKee adds, “but it’s way more interesting for us to do it just with a solid deck of cards.”

As he talks, slipping playing cards between his fingers, McKee’s hands tremble slightly from having consumed so much caffeine. Coffee is the magician’s drink of choice, everyone agrees. “It keeps you awake and alert and on your game,” Davidson says.

Which is evident in tonight’s grand finale.

“Name a number between one and 52,” Pascali says, his face sparking with expectation. I choose 32.

He begins dealing cards, face down, on the table and asks me to say “stop” at any point. When I do, I’m given a card that he hasn’t seen. (Jack of diamonds, don’t tell.) I place the card back into the deck. A round of cutting and deck shuffling ensues.

As Pascali performs, McKee and Davidson are beaming and nodding their heads encouragingly. They continue to swirl, fan and flip cards in their hands while watching Pascali — it’s like an unconscious cardistry tick.

“The pursuit of wonder,” McKee mutters under his breath.

At the trick’s mind-boggling climax, Pascali has me pick up another, open but untouched box of playing cards elsewhere on the table. He asks me to remove the deck, face down, and turn the cards over, one by one, until we’ve reached the 32nd card. Which — poof! — is the jack of diamonds.

I fall back into my chair, speechless. The Times photographer is so baffled, he jokes that it’s time for him to depart.

All three magicians burst into ebullient, synchronistic laughter so fresh and boyish, it’s as if they’ve just seen the trick for the first time; there’s collective pride over its success.

“In this world, now, there’s not many things you can point to where it’s, ‘Wow, that really gives me a sense of awe,’” Davidson says. “Magic, for me, has always been the throughline. Even amidst all the chaos in the world, there’s still this one thing that provides a sense of wonder. I think that’s very human.”

And with that, the wonder boys start up again, and the cardistry will continue into the wee hours of the morning.