4 ms·

He read it too literally. The point is not 10k or any magic number. The point is "don't be desperate for money". The point is to view yourself as something valu

by hasenj 16y ago

He read it too literally. The point is not 10k or any magic number. The point is "don't be desperate for money". The point is to view yourself as something valuable. If you have no value for yourself, you'll be happy to get a low pay in exchange for a low-quality service. The more respect you have for yourself, the more people will respect you and the more valuable you become. His counter argument is basically like this (he's B): A: Doing X pays, just look at K (where K is a person) B: No, you can't do X, and don't look at K, he's a special case. A: Duh, he's special because he does X; he wasn't born special. Someone should coin a name for this kind of argument .. As JM himself notes, Linda Evangelista is not that special when it comes to prettiness or friendliness. He should've paused for a second to ponder how she became a brand. (For the record, I have no clue who this Linda girls is). Consider Steve Jobs. He says[1] he does not ship garbage. Why is that? Is it because he's rich and he can afford it? No, it's because this is who he is. He wasn't born rich; he got where he is because he could never ever produce garbage. A simple way to prove this is to consider: if he had shipped garbage through out his career, why would he stop now? Just look at Oracle and Microsoft. [1] http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Yu0qeb_rJYU http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Yu0qeb_rJYU

todayiamme 16y ago
I think that there is a genuine difference between refusing to lower standards for a product and refusing to be price sensitive in respond to the market. What Sebastian is advocating is a bargaining technique so old that my grandfather warns against it. What he's trying to imply is that there's a thin lying between hard bargaining and being insensitive to the realities of the market. Be careful on which side you fall.
- deleted 16y ago
  [deleted]
  - deleted 16y ago
    [deleted]
  - todayiamme 16y ago
    note: This is my viewpoint on the entire affair >>> I'm not advocating any bargaining methods. I'm advocating not being desperate, figuring out what your goals are, and I shared some stories that people apparently liked a lot. <<< We're all desperate in some way or another. >>>But as soon as you need money – and people know – you’re hosed<<< What I understood from your post was that you're essentially trying to engage in subterfuge making sure that the other person doesn't know your weaknesses. So, that you can reach your goals. That just makes me... sad. The thing is that yes they are some very, very nasty people out there and no you don't need to advertise how desperate you are, but this playing coy just feels fake to me. This isn't a reflection upon you or casting any judgement on your moral character, but I think that I wouldn't have the stomach to do something like this. It might sound crazy, but if I have to engage in a game to show strength in order to make someone else treat me like an equal. Then perhaps I don't want to be his equal? >>>Indeed, he is. Yes. But in the flunky capacity. This guy didn’t see me as a peer of his, apparently, and he doesn’t treat people underneath him very well.<<< Yes, in some practical scenarios you have to do it, and to be honest I do a variation of this everyday, but that doesn't mean I create a repetoire of tactics and add this long list of techniques to manipulate with another list on how to avoid being manipulated in order to get what I want. I just don't want my life to amount to that, and well professionally I would rather not engage in something like that. If I meet someone like that then I would rather keep my distance than have a relationship. If they want the product. Sure buy it, but I won't play this game. What I'm trying to say is that if I am desperate for money. Then I'm desperate for money. I won't turn that down, just to show someone that I'm worthy of something more. If I am then I'll get there. If not then I'll work harder to get there. I think this was what Jacques was trying to convey. People pay for how good you are. Not how good at poker you are. As that is really short term. Unless you have that genuine thing (in the case of the model a brand) no matter how you pitch it the money will evaporate. That's the most important piece of the puzzle in my opinion. Generating value. That aside, I just want to say that this is not an invitation for someone to screw me over. I won't play such games with them, but neither am I a fool.
    - endtime 16y ago
      >It might sound crazy, but if I have to engage in a game to show strength in order to make someone else treat me like an equal. Then perhaps I don't want to be his equal? Frankly, that's a terrible strategy. We're mammals with mammal brains and mammal signaling, and if you're going to choose to live in denial of that then you're handicapping yourself. I'm not advocating being an asshole, which is how you'll probably read that, but signaling desperation is going to make you less desirable in just about every capacity - not just in the working world but also when dating and even with friends.
- stcredzero 16y ago
  What Sebastian is advocating is a bargaining technique so old that my grandfather warns against it. [sic] It's one thing if it's a bargaining technique with nothing behind it. It's another thing entirely if it's a real reflection of underlying value. I think your point is that there is a difference. Agreed. Remember that the market is not perfect. It wouldn't function as a market in the real world if everyone made perfect decisions about value all the time, instantly. If you're going to command an information asymmetry, a good place to start is yourself. If you don't know yourself better than others, you have no business being an entrepreneur. It should be the other way around.
kenjackson 16y ago
Steve Jobs mixes garbage, the AppleTV/MobileMe, with things that look pretty but are garbage under the hood, iMac, with things that aren't garbage, iPhone. The beauty is that Jobs has created an aura where everything looks like gold.
- infinite8s 16y ago
  Wow, those are pretty strong words. By what justification do you call AppleTV/MobileMe garbage? Clearly they serve a need for people or they wouldn't be doing so well.
  - joebadmo 16y ago
    Not that I agree with the GP, but are they doing well? My understanding was that the ATV wasn't, and that MobileMe was pretty universally reviled.
  - kenjackson 16y ago
    I can literally put together a list of problems with them, but honestly would it matter? During the pwn2own discussion on HN people were seriously suggesting that the reason OS X goes down first every year is because it was on the most desired computer. That's like saying the reason that XBox had the RROD is because everyone loves playing it so much -- no manufacturing or design issues. And don't get me wrong, Apple releases some of the best products on the planet. But when they do do something that is subpar, most Apple fans simply see it as those on HN saw pwn2own. AppleTV is decent now, although I still prefer other boxes, but can you honestly say the $299 AppleTV wasn't garbage? Even at $99 the video quality was laughably horrible. Yet most Apple fans will call me a troll or fanboi for even the mere suggestion that AppleTV did not win WWII and kill the nazis.
- itg 16y ago
  This place is turning as bad as reddit. You can't even discuss technology without some fanboy frothing from his mouth.
  - 16y ago
stcredzero 16y ago
The more respect you have for yourself, the more people will respect you and the more valuable you become. This only works in the short term, unless you come out with some real value. In the long term, people recognize real value.
- tomjen3 16y ago
  In the long run, we are all dead. And this way we get a chance to demo our value before people shut down.
- hasenj 16y ago
  It's a self-fulfilling prophecy; like self-confidence. If you have no confidence, you're more likely to screw up. By simply having more confidence in oneself, one is more likely to do better, and reinforce his confidence.
joe_the_user 16y ago
The point is that there is a cost and there a benefit to being a brand. Being an honest/ordinary provider of an honest/ordinary service is easier. Have a skill, have satisfied customers who'll provide references. There are more people who will succeed doing this than there are people who become brands. On the other hand, a brand can be a great shortcut to extreme, wild success, the difference between millions and billions. And also being a brand can give a kind of success that is deeply dishonest and unbalancing (as Hollywood, modeling and various other pursues will show). Steve Jobs also makes the point that a brand is a simple point that evokes strong feelings in people. This allow the people to remember the brand. But by that token, it is inherently impossible for there to be a lot of brands since each brand is simple thing remembered by many people. Thus with millions of people in the world, there just are not going to be many people who are successful at being brands (indeed, the greater unification of the world, it seems there are inherently going to be fewer and fewer brands since any given brand can serve more and more people). And certainly, someone who successfully becomes a brand takes the simple idea and makes as much as possible "who they are". Yet given that human are complex and varied creatures, it's a onerous task for someone to continuous exemplify any quality, even "excellence". The stories of Steve Jobs screaming at subordinates do not make it sound like the existence of a Steve Jobs would be entirely pleasant despite his wild level of success in not just making money but changing the world. (On the other hand, I am impressed that Google's "don't be evil" seems to have so far stuck as quality they exemplify - seems like something you'd want to look at if you were to be going for a brand). I personally find a lot of Sebastian's posts here to exemplify a contempt for the less successful. That may be what it takes for him exemplify the relentless drive for success. And exemplifying that might really help him build his brand. I still wouldn't want to be that.

by hasenj 16y ago

todayiamme 16y ago

I think that there is a genuine difference between refusing to lower standards for a product and refusing to be price sensitive in respond to the market. What Sebastian is advocating is a bargaining technique so old that my grandfather warns against it. What he's trying to imply is that there's a thin lying between hard bargaining and being insensitive to the realities of the market. Be careful on which side you fall.

deleted 16y ago
[deleted]
- deleted 16y ago
  [deleted]
- todayiamme 16y ago
  note: This is my viewpoint on the entire affair >>> I'm not advocating any bargaining methods. I'm advocating not being desperate, figuring out what your goals are, and I shared some stories that people apparently liked a lot. <<< We're all desperate in some way or another. >>>But as soon as you need money – and people know – you’re hosed<<< What I understood from your post was that you're essentially trying to engage in subterfuge making sure that the other person doesn't know your weaknesses. So, that you can reach your goals. That just makes me... sad. The thing is that yes they are some very, very nasty people out there and no you don't need to advertise how desperate you are, but this playing coy just feels fake to me. This isn't a reflection upon you or casting any judgement on your moral character, but I think that I wouldn't have the stomach to do something like this. It might sound crazy, but if I have to engage in a game to show strength in order to make someone else treat me like an equal. Then perhaps I don't want to be his equal? >>>Indeed, he is. Yes. But in the flunky capacity. This guy didn’t see me as a peer of his, apparently, and he doesn’t treat people underneath him very well.<<< Yes, in some practical scenarios you have to do it, and to be honest I do a variation of this everyday, but that doesn't mean I create a repetoire of tactics and add this long list of techniques to manipulate with another list on how to avoid being manipulated in order to get what I want. I just don't want my life to amount to that, and well professionally I would rather not engage in something like that. If I meet someone like that then I would rather keep my distance than have a relationship. If they want the product. Sure buy it, but I won't play this game. What I'm trying to say is that if I am desperate for money. Then I'm desperate for money. I won't turn that down, just to show someone that I'm worthy of something more. If I am then I'll get there. If not then I'll work harder to get there. I think this was what Jacques was trying to convey. People pay for how good you are. Not how good at poker you are. As that is really short term. Unless you have that genuine thing (in the case of the model a brand) no matter how you pitch it the money will evaporate. That's the most important piece of the puzzle in my opinion. Generating value. That aside, I just want to say that this is not an invitation for someone to screw me over. I won't play such games with them, but neither am I a fool.
  - endtime 16y ago
    >It might sound crazy, but if I have to engage in a game to show strength in order to make someone else treat me like an equal. Then perhaps I don't want to be his equal? Frankly, that's a terrible strategy. We're mammals with mammal brains and mammal signaling, and if you're going to choose to live in denial of that then you're handicapping yourself. I'm not advocating being an asshole, which is how you'll probably read that, but signaling desperation is going to make you less desirable in just about every capacity - not just in the working world but also when dating and even with friends.
stcredzero 16y ago
What Sebastian is advocating is a bargaining technique so old that my grandfather warns against it. [sic] It's one thing if it's a bargaining technique with nothing behind it. It's another thing entirely if it's a real reflection of underlying value. I think your point is that there is a difference. Agreed. Remember that the market is not perfect. It wouldn't function as a market in the real world if everyone made perfect decisions about value all the time, instantly. If you're going to command an information asymmetry, a good place to start is yourself. If you don't know yourself better than others, you have no business being an entrepreneur. It should be the other way around.

kenjackson 16y ago

Steve Jobs mixes garbage, the AppleTV/MobileMe, with things that look pretty but are garbage under the hood, iMac, with things that aren't garbage, iPhone. The beauty is that Jobs has created an aura where everything looks like gold.

infinite8s 16y ago
Wow, those are pretty strong words. By what justification do you call AppleTV/MobileMe garbage? Clearly they serve a need for people or they wouldn't be doing so well.
- joebadmo 16y ago
  Not that I agree with the GP, but are they doing well? My understanding was that the ATV wasn't, and that MobileMe was pretty universally reviled.
- kenjackson 16y ago
  I can literally put together a list of problems with them, but honestly would it matter? During the pwn2own discussion on HN people were seriously suggesting that the reason OS X goes down first every year is because it was on the most desired computer. That's like saying the reason that XBox had the RROD is because everyone loves playing it so much -- no manufacturing or design issues. And don't get me wrong, Apple releases some of the best products on the planet. But when they do do something that is subpar, most Apple fans simply see it as those on HN saw pwn2own. AppleTV is decent now, although I still prefer other boxes, but can you honestly say the $299 AppleTV wasn't garbage? Even at $99 the video quality was laughably horrible. Yet most Apple fans will call me a troll or fanboi for even the mere suggestion that AppleTV did not win WWII and kill the nazis.
itg 16y ago
This place is turning as bad as reddit. You can't even discuss technology without some fanboy frothing from his mouth.
- 16y ago

stcredzero 16y ago

The more respect you have for yourself, the more people will respect you and the more valuable you become. This only works in the short term, unless you come out with some real value. In the long term, people recognize real value.

tomjen3 16y ago
In the long run, we are all dead. And this way we get a chance to demo our value before people shut down.
hasenj 16y ago
It's a self-fulfilling prophecy; like self-confidence. If you have no confidence, you're more likely to screw up. By simply having more confidence in oneself, one is more likely to do better, and reinforce his confidence.

joe_the_user 16y ago

The point is that there is a cost and there a benefit to being a brand. Being an honest/ordinary provider of an honest/ordinary service is easier. Have a skill, have satisfied customers who'll provide references. There are more people who will succeed doing this than there are people who become brands. On the other hand, a brand can be a great shortcut to extreme, wild success, the difference between millions and billions. And also being a brand can give a kind of success that is deeply dishonest and unbalancing (as Hollywood, modeling and various other pursues will show). Steve Jobs also makes the point that a brand is a simple point that evokes strong feelings in people. This allow the people to remember the brand. But by that token, it is inherently impossible for there to be a lot of brands since each brand is simple thing remembered by many people. Thus with millions of people in the world, there just are not going to be many people who are successful at being brands (indeed, the greater unification of the world, it seems there are inherently going to be fewer and fewer brands since any given brand can serve more and more people). And certainly, someone who successfully becomes a brand takes the simple idea and makes as much as possible "who they are". Yet given that human are complex and varied creatures, it's a onerous task for someone to continuous exemplify any quality, even "excellence". The stories of Steve Jobs screaming at subordinates do not make it sound like the existence of a Steve Jobs would be entirely pleasant despite his wild level of success in not just making money but changing the world. (On the other hand, I am impressed that Google's "don't be evil" seems to have so far stuck as quality they exemplify - seems like something you'd want to look at if you were to be going for a brand). I personally find a lot of Sebastian's posts here to exemplify a contempt for the less successful. That may be what it takes for him exemplify the relentless drive for success. And exemplifying that might really help him build his brand. I still wouldn't want to be that.