I agree with this

Quote
ferragamo79
they other side comes back with a reasonable offer and it is easy to say, "just split the difference"

and they get higher than what was proposed

They did that with our health benefits at work:

Side 1: No more benefits for families just employee (yikes)

Side 2: We just wanted lower premiums and better coverage

Side 1: OK we will keep family benefits, but no change

They win

Some are going around saying, well 25 M is outrageous, I would like to see someone trade for him at 25 M, 25 M is demi-god money (kidding ). Or they say he is demanding 25-ish, which is the same thing.

Only a few of us are saying 21 M is too low.

But they are both negotiating stances in a tough negotiation.

Exactly right, if they aren't both stupid and screw this up, they will meet somewhere in the 22 M to 24 M range.

So why act like 25 M is this permanent, line in the sand final demand? Yet some are doing that I think. Acting outraged that someone would ask for 25 M when it's clear that's a negotiating stance that will take him to something in the middle. And meanwhile ignoring the fact that 21 M is low, given the parameters at work. Selective outrage sounds odd to me, it just does.

It's 21 M v. 25 M now, and, the normal expectation is to see where they meet after each leaves their respective extreme.




....



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 07/29/2018 09:29PM by zn.