The idea that the criminals need to maintain a reputation doesn't make sense to me. Every negotiation is about the best alternative each party has to an agreem

The idea that the criminals need to maintain a reputation doesn't make sense to me. Every negotiation is about the best alternative each party has to an agreement. If someone has a plausible alternative to a ransom, like restoring from backups, they will take it, regardless of the reputation of the adversary. If someone doesn't have a plausible alternative to a ransom, then they might as well pay it even if the chance is infinitesimal. Since in either case, the behavior of the victim is unrelated to the level of trust they have in the criminal gang, there is no incentive to be "professional" and trustworthy. This might not apply if the gang actually is tied to a nation state and/or has political motives. But if they are purely profit maximizing entities, then they should not be expected to concern themselves with a reputation for keeping their word. Somehow people forget that the victims don't choose who they are victimized by.