3 ms·
> this must be a grand conspiracy I didn't say it had to be a conspiracy, only that I find this hypothesis plausible in today's world. > the broker has no inv
by lisper 4y ago
> this must be a grand conspiracy
I didn't say it had to be a conspiracy, only that I find this hypothesis plausible in today's world.
> the broker has no investment in the intricacies of the deal
He certainly does. Brokers don't get paid unless their deals close.
> it’s totally plausible that the broker was saying whatever was necessary to get the deal done
Of course. It's still their responsibility to achieve clarity on what they are signing up for before agreeing. At the very least they should have done a sanity check on the terms and the bottom line.
- phphphphp 4y agoThe specifics of the arrangement with the broker are not disclosed but a reasonable guess is that the broker is taking a percentage. A percentage of anything is better than a percentage of nothing. Much like a realtor, the incentives of the broker and supplier are not aligned. If the broker cared about the outcome then the broker would have behaved very differently throughout the entire process. Saying the broker would behave in the suppliers best interests is like saying a sales person in a software business will behave in the best interests of the companies developers.