4 ms·

Except if the person you're negotiating with is willing to pay more than your initial offer. then they would happily pay you less than what they expected to

CapitalistCartr 12y ago
Wall Street has an expression: "Bears make money; Bulls make money; Pigs get slaughtered." Its OK to leave a little money on the table. If I'm willing, even happy to take the job as described for 100k, that I might have pushed him up to 125k is probably not relevant. Other factors in the job will be more important by that point.
- notahacker 12y ago
  Sure, a successful negotiation almost invariably results in a situation where they'd have been willing to offer even more if they needed to, and you'd have been quite willing to accept less. But rushing to be first put an offer on the table that is lower than the offer they were about to make you is almost[1] invariably stupid. And at the risk of stating the obvious, most contract negotiation isn't like employment in that pretty much all the party paying the fee is offering is the cash. [1]the exception being where there's a good chance that appearing to be "fair" or "cheap" will help you get a better offer in future, or prevent you from being gazumped at the last minute.
  - loganu 12y ago
    Where is that exception that appearing "fair" or "cheap" helps you? If there's another candidate equally qualified and liked by the company, they company will hire the cheaper one - but as a candidate, you shouldn't bank on this situation happening. If you were hired as a "cheap" employee, when a new position or opportunity comes up, you would have to negotiate yourself up to your fair-market value and then some in order to get that better offer. Better to start high and work higher than come-from-behind with a low price anchoring your value.

4 ms·

Except if the person you're negotiating with is willing to pay more than your initial offer. then they would happily pay you less than what they expected to

by anishkothari 12y ago

CapitalistCartr 12y ago
Wall Street has an expression: "Bears make money; Bulls make money; Pigs get slaughtered." Its OK to leave a little money on the table. If I'm willing, even happy to take the job as described for 100k, that I might have pushed him up to 125k is probably not relevant. Other factors in the job will be more important by that point.
- notahacker 12y ago
  Sure, a successful negotiation almost invariably results in a situation where they'd have been willing to offer even more if they needed to, and you'd have been quite willing to accept less. But rushing to be first put an offer on the table that is lower than the offer they were about to make you is almost[1] invariably stupid. And at the risk of stating the obvious, most contract negotiation isn't like employment in that pretty much all the party paying the fee is offering is the cash. [1]the exception being where there's a good chance that appearing to be "fair" or "cheap" will help you get a better offer in future, or prevent you from being gazumped at the last minute.
  - loganu 12y ago
    Where is that exception that appearing "fair" or "cheap" helps you? If there's another candidate equally qualified and liked by the company, they company will hire the cheaper one - but as a candidate, you shouldn't bank on this situation happening. If you were hired as a "cheap" employee, when a new position or opportunity comes up, you would have to negotiate yourself up to your fair-market value and then some in order to get that better offer. Better to start high and work higher than come-from-behind with a low price anchoring your value.