Maverick Negotiation Volume One

1
DISCLAIMER AND TERMS OF USE AGREEMENT

The author and publisher have used their best efforts in preparing this report.
The author and publisher make no representation or warranties with respect
to the accuracy, applicability, fitness, or completeness of the contents of this
report. The information contained in this report is strictly for educational
purposes. Therefore, if you wish to apply ideas contained in this report, you
are taking full responsibility for your actions.
EVERY EFFORT HAS BEEN MADE TO ACCURATELY REPRESENT
THIS PRODUCT AND IT'S POTENTIAL. HOWEVER, THERE IS NO
GUARANTEE THAT YOU WILL IMPROVE IN ANY WAY USING THE
TECHNIQUES AND IDEAS IN THESE MATERIALS. EXAMPLES IN
THESE MATERIALS ARE NOT TO BE INTERPRETED AS A PROMISE
OR GUARANTEE OF ANYTHING. SELF-HELP AND IMPROVEMENT
POTENTIAL IS ENTIRELY DEPENDENT ON THE PERSON USING
OUR PRODUCT, IDEAS AND TECHNIQUES.
YOUR LEVEL OF IMPROVEMENT IN ATTAINING THE RESULTS
CLAIMED IN OUR MATERIALS DEPENDS ON THE TIME YOU
DEVOTE TO THE PROGRAM, IDEAS AND TECHNIQUES
MENTIONED, KNOWLEDGE AND VARIOUS SKILLS. SINCE THESE
FACTORS DIFFER ACCORDING TO INDIVIDUALS, WE CANNOT
GUARANTEE YOUR SUCCESS OR IMPROVEMENT LEVEL. NOR
ARE WE RESPONSIBLE FOR ANY OF YOUR ACTIONS.
MANY FACTORS WILL BE IMPORTANT IN DETERMINING YOUR
ACTUAL RESULTS AND NO GUARANTEES ARE MADE THAT YOU
WILL ACHIEVE RESULTS SIMILAR TO OURS OR ANYBODY ELSE'S,
IN FACT NO GUARANTEES ARE MADE THAT YOU WILL ACHIEVE
ANY RESULTS FROM OUR IDEAS AND TECHNIQUES IN OUR
MATERIAL.
The author and publisher disclaim any warranties (express or implied),
merchantability, or fitness for any particular purpose. The author and
publisher shall in no event be held liable to any party for any direct, indirect,
punitive, special, incidental or other consequential damages arising directly
or indirectly from any use of this material, which is provided as is, and
without warranties
Copyright Influence Mastery Inc.

Table of Contents
Foreword
...................................................................5
Part 1: Getting Started
..........................................16
Historic Gambit
.....................................................21
Creating Breathing Room During a Negotiation
...22
Part 2: Building Momentum
.................................40
Historic Gambit
.................................................40
The Deal They Cant Resist
..................................42
Historic Gambit
.....................................................48
Aiming for the Middle Ground
.............................52
Sweetening the Deal
..............................................55
Dont Fall for the First Offer
.................................58
Giving the Right Kind of Feedback
......................63
Aim for Genuine Negotiation, Not Fisticuffs
........70
Agreeing and Adjusting
.........................................75
Part 3: Advanced Maneuvers
................................86
Historic Gambit
.....................................................86
Be an Unwilling Buyer/Seller
...............................88
The Grip and Release Technique
...........................97
Using (Imaginary) Authority to Your Advantage
108
Service and Reciprocity
.......................................137


The Maverick Way of Splitting the Difference

...141
Part 4: Sealing the Deal
.......................................150
Turning a Disagreement into a Profitable Exchange

.............................................................................150
Breaking Down Stalemates
.................................155
Ending Deadlocks
................................................164
Historic Gambit
...................................................171
Heroes & Villains
................................................181
Part 5: Tightening Loose Ends
............................193
Tidbits of Benefits
...............................................193
Taming the Concession Monster
.........................202
The No Sale Technique
....................................211
Leading the Other Party to a Favorable Close
....220
The Distraction Principle
.....................................228
Key Points of Maverick Negotiation Volume 1
..238
Conclusion
.........................................................242

Foreword
I will tell you first that the foreword you
read in this program will be the same one
you see or hear in all of my programs.
Its not because Im too lazy to create one
for every program (well maybe a little).
No seriously, the reason you will see this
same message (and I encourage you to
read it every time you see it) is because its
the same message I want to relay every
single time we connect.
While the programs I create may be
different from one other, my overall
strategic goal will always be the same; to
get you to think a little differently about
the science, art and dynamic of human
communication and how it can change
your life when done right.


The when done right part has to do with

both creating an influential mind set and
then actually being able to execute what
you learn with confidence and precision.
By the way, heres my email address and
cell phone number if you need me:
paul@influentialmind.com
(646) 306 - 7997
So lets get to it.
First and foremost I want to say thank you
for investing your time, money and energy
in this program.
I realize that there are a million other
things you could be giving your attention
to right now but instead youre choosing to
spend it here with me.
Now I made you a few promises when I
first introduced this program to you.

And I intend to do whatever it takes to

keep those promises.
How am going to do that?
By incorporating the five elements that (in
my opinion) are missing from just about
every other product or resource on the
market related to what I teach.
Without a clear understanding of these
elements, everything you read, listen to or
study is essentially done for entertainment
purposes at best. At worst, its time wasted
never to be regained.
With a clear understanding of them and
their importance, this information will
come alive from the book or the speakers
and become a part of your identity
equipping you with powers and abilities
that will seem almost supernatural in terms
of human communication.

You will feel completely relaxed and

confident in social situations.
You will look forward to meeting new
people and figuring out how you can form
relationships with them that will serve
both of you physically, emotionally,
financially, spiritually and mentally.
You will begin to see yourself as a
powerful figure capable of commanding
complete control over any interaction with
another human being but consciously
knowing how strong your power is, will
instill a sense of responsibility in you to
use it with good will to help people rather
than manipulate them.
Truth is, you wont have to manipulate
them. You wont have to coerce or force
them.

They will trust you and listen to you

because you are the most credible and
influential source of whatever it is that you
represent and stand for and because there
is an influential, inviting positive energy
that surrounds you. They will truly enjoy
being in your presence.
You will gain a new sense of predictability
in your life and start to realize that
everything you desire is within your
control. Its not luck, chance or external
factors that create your success; its you
and your ability to effectively connect with
others.
You will feel a greater sense of pride and
self worth knowing that you can not only
use your abilities to positively impact your
life but you can do the same for others by

helping them see opportunities that are

surrounding them more clearly.
You will have a greater understanding of
human behavior and what drives it.
You will feel at ease with the fact that you
will now have a new thought process that
opens the doors to many different ways to
utilize the power of positioning and
repositioning yourself and your products,
services and opinions to that you get a
yes faster, easier and more often.
So what are these five elements? They
make up what I call the
UARMS model.

10
They include:
U - Understandability
A - Acceptability
R - Relate-ability
M - Manageability
S - Sustainability
Now realize first that while I am the
person creating the awareness of these
elements, its going to require a joint effort
from the both of us to actually make them
come alive and positively serve our
relationship.
In other words, they will require
contribution from the both of us with
respect to our roles in the relationship.
Let me explain.

11
Understandability - The information that

Im sharing with you has to be delivered in
a way that is very easy for you to
understand. If I gave you a note with the
directions to find a million dollars that was
right under your bed that simply said
Hey, take a look under your bed. Theres
something waiting for you there but I
wrote it in a language that you couldnt
understand, it wouldnt serve you. The
same applies here and with just about
every other piece of information that
comes your way.
This one is clearly on me and Im going to
use everything Ive learned about writing
and speaking to accomplish this goal.
Acceptability - Ok this one is on you. You
have to be willing to accept your role as an
influential person. This is true in cases
where you already feel you own this role


12
and in cases where this is all brand new to

you. The information that Im going to
share with you is time tested and driven by
science. Its not magic. The key to making
it work is your acceptance of it in your
life. Accountability also ties into this on
both our ends. You have to be accountable
for following through with what you agree
to do and I have to be accountable in
delivering on what I say I will do for you.
Relate-ability - This one requires a little
from the both of us. The information has
to be relatable to your personal
circumstances and life. If its not, you will
lose interest and move onto something that
is more relatable. I will cover this by
giving you examples and analogies. You
will contribute by always keeping your
level of awareness open and using your
imagination to think about how you can


13
apply what I teach you to your particular

life.
Manageability - Again, this one will
require work from the both of us. The
information needs to be managed
effectively meaning you have to feel
comfortable and trusting in the fact that
you can actually perform the techniques
that youre learning. This is a big one
because a lot of times, people read this
stuff, are amazed by it but then can't
actually use it in real life to get results
either because they forget it or theyre too
scared that they will mess up or get
caught. I will solve this problem by giving
you step by step action plans to memorize,
become comfortable with and execute.
You will solve this problem by taking the
action that I ask you to take and following
the plan exactly as Ive laid it out.

14
Sustainability - Again this will be a joint

effort. You have to know and feel
confident in your ability to sustain your
ability to execute what you learn. That
happens by circling back to the first four
elements. The better you understand, are
able to accept, relate and mange the
information, the more sustainable it will
become.
Youll realize that its not going to get old
or lose it's potency. Youll understand that
what you learn is something you can use
for the rest of your life because it will
become a part of your new identity.
I look forward to unlocking the potential
residing in the both of us so we can in in
turn create a long lasting, trusting, equally
beneficial relationship.
-Paul Mascetta

15
Part 1: Getting Started

Negotiation is defined as conferring with
another party so as to arrive at the
settlement of an issue or matter.
Negotiating is an essential social skill
especially in business and personal
relationships. This particular skill allows
people to produce favorable results when
they interact with others. Every day,
millions of people engage in negotiations
to get the most benefit from social
interactions.
Regular people like you and me and
representatives of big businesses all
engage in negotiations. Generally
speaking, only two things can happen after
a negotiation. First, the matter can be
settled with one or both parties gaining a
benefit or second, a complete stalemate

16
may arise and both parties ready

themselves for another negotiation at
another time (with the help of a mediator).
Simply put, negotiating with others is
inescapable because it is in our nature to
want to get the most out of our social
interactions. But the problem is, most
people dont know how to negotiate
properly. There is a big difference between
being just forceful and being persuasive
during a negotiation.
Negotiation can be likened to war for the
simple reason that it requires a lot of
thinking and strategy. You need a general
blueprint if you want to succeed in
negotiating better outcomes for yourself
during social interactions. If you dont
develop your own negotiation skills, you
will have a very difficult time getting

17
ahead in terms of manifesting what you

need when you talk to people.
And this is what Maverick Negotiation is
all about. Maverick Negotiation centers on
fulfilling the need for more precise
negotiation strategies wherever the
negotiator may be. The situations and the
parties involved in the negotiation may
change, but the strategies remain the same.
The only thing left to do is to learn the
strategies by heart and make them a part of
your natural communication repertoire.
There are two things that you should keep
in mind before you start using any of the
strategies contained in this book. The first
thing you have to keep in mind is that it is
never too late to improve your personal
negotiation skills.

18
Maverick Negotiation can be learned and

mastered by any person regardless of his
experience with linguistic strategies. It
doesnt matter if you have never tried
being persuasive before.
As long as you are willing to learn and
practice, you will be in a prime position to
become a Maverick Negotiator in a few
weeks time. I cant say days because no
one becomes a Maverick Negotiator in a
matter of days.
If I said that, I would be lying because it
takes a lifetime to learn these strategies
through trial and error. We are actually
speeding up the process by laying down
the actual language structures you need to
add to your communication repertoire to

19
ensure that negotiations will end in your

favor.
Now, the second thing that you have to
remember is that in the game of
negotiation there will always be some
level of risk. Risk is inherent in human
communication. Is negotiation like
gambling? Not necessarily but there is
always some risk involved.
There is risk because you want to gain
something of genuine value after the
negotiation. If there is something valuable
to gain during an interaction, the other
party would want that benefit or
advantage, too. Again, it is only natural for
people to want to benefit from social
interactions.

20
Historic Gambit
When the Persian Gulf War was in full
swing, the US government was raring to
go all out on Saddam Hussein. Then
president George Bush in one of his state
addresses demanded three things from Mr.
Hussein: that he leave Kuwait in peace,
that a legitimate government be put in
place where he left and that reparations be
made for all the war damages incurred.
Of course, if it were this easy, then there
would be no need for tanks and artilleries.
But that was the point Bush was playing
it smart. He knew that Hussein rarely
made concessions especially to foreign
powers and most especially not to the
United States.

21
But that was the whole point President

Bush was creating breathing space for the
on-going dialogue between the two parties.
If he made only demanded a minimum of
requirements from Mr. Hussein, he knew
that he would get absolutely nothing. But
by demanding more than what he knew he
could possibly get, he was setting himself
up for a better chance of success.
Creating Breathing Room During a
Negotiation
One of the most important rules of
Maverick Negotiation is that you should
never put yourself in a position where you
cant move anymore. This is a very
common error when novice negotiators
enter into uncertain interactions with

22
power negotiators or people who have

been negotiating with others their whole
life.
Novice negotiators tend to trap themselves
by allowing very little breathing room
during actual negotiations. Your first
protection against this type of situation is
by demanding more than what you
actually expect to get from a negotiation.
Interestingly enough, this is one of the
most effective negotiation strategies that is
overlooked almost all the time. The reason
why it is overlooked is quite simple
people tend to think that it is only logical
to ask what is normally expected in certain
situations. For example, if you bought
something online and it took 2 weeks
longer than usual to get the item from the
online store, why would you demand that

23
online store send a freebie to compensate

for the wait?
Well, let me ask you this why not? There
is no written rule that says that you can
demand more than what is usually
expected. And if you demand more than
what is expected, you automatically give
yourself breathing room during a
negotiation.
Because during negotiations it is common
for parties to feel that they can never go up
in terms of their demands to the other
party. They can only go down. So if you
are already down in terms of your
demands, you would be coerced to go
down even further. And this is no way to
protect your position as a Maverick
Negotiator.

24
Increasing your demands in terms of

magnitude and quality of the benefit or
value involved will also help you
determine your maximum acceptable
position within the negotiation. The MAP
or maximum acceptable position is the
limit, so to speak, for both parties.
If you exceed the MAP intentionally or
unintentionally, the risk of the other party
walking away increases exponentially.
You must always remember that during a
negotiation, the other party can always
walk away and when you leave the
interaction with nothing, you havent
exactly gained any benefit from all your
hard work.
The MAP is always important during a
negotiation because interaction like these

25
is always a hodgepodge of straight, logical

thinking and emotional impulses.
It is essential that you latch on to a
particular position that would provide the
maximum benefit to yourself but still
remains acceptable and logical to the other
party. Your position within a negotiation
has to make sense to the other party
always!
Dont think for a moment that there is
always a way to come out on top even if
your negotiation position has far exceeded
what people have expected in the first
place.
If you are negotiating with someone that
you know absolutely nothing about, save
for his name and perhaps the nature of his
work, your initial negotiating position

26
should be high enough to allow you to

readjust your approach during the actual
negotiation.
Why should you aim for the highest
possible INP (initial negotiating position)
if you have little or no relevant
information about the other party? The
first reason is that you could always have
grossly inaccurate assumptions about the
other person.
For example, if you are negotiating for a
better price for a used car, you may be
thinking that the car salesman is going to
bow down to your will because his
workplace is far from new and seems to be
on the brink of collapse.
But what if the car salesman is actually a
thirty year veteran salesman? What

27
happens to you when he brings out his

own negotiation arsenal during the
interaction? What if he drives up the price
because he generally knows more about
car models, mileage and car brands than
you?
Of course, this is just a worst case
scenario if you are intending to get a
better car deal. But it is always possible
and the fact of the matter is that no one can
ever fully comprehend what the other
person might be thinking. We can only do
so much to deduce what type of strategy
the other party is using to get into a better
bargaining position.
The second reason why you should aim for
a higher initial negotiating position is that
you will be able to better adjust your
approach and demands based on what the

28
other party can agree to. Because as you

negotiate with the other party, you will
learn more about what he needs and what
he can actually provide at the moment.
You can use this vital information to
gradually modify your own position to suit
the situation. Because lets face it it
would be utterly pointless to demand
something outlandish if the other party
cannot even come close to accepting your
demand. You might be able to say that the
other party will walk away knowing that
you are very assertive during a negotiation
but at the end of the day, you also walked
away with nothing.
And heres the thing if the other party
knows nothing about you, the other partys
own demands will be high, too. Dont give
in or give up the negotiation if this is the

29
case. This kind of situation is challenging,

but it would be good practice for you as
you continue to expand your skills as a
Maverick Negotiator.
It would be helpful to view the outlandish
demands of the other party as a signal that
the other party wants to know more about
what you can do for them.
It is a matter of continuously adjusting
your position so that you will still be able
to walk away with the most benefit.
Trust me this is the best end-goal for
every interaction that involves negotiations
because some negotiators end up giving
far too many concessions and they end up
with a losing proposition. This completely
detracts from what one would expect from
a skilled negotiator.

30
Now, it is also vital that you inject

sincerity into your words from start to
finish. This might sound a little strange
since at the outset negotiation seems to be
hard science. Its really not. Negotiation is
a subtype of human communication that
has its own unwritten rules based on a
persons milieu.
As such, it involves not only conveying
information it also involves influencing
peoples emotions and general thought
patterns. At the core of negotiation is
influence and before you can arrive at
influencing another person, you need to
utilize a persuasive strategy that will lead
the other party to the direction that you
want to pursue.

31
Sincerity is important because it drives

down the natural mental defenses that
people use during negotiations. A
defensive negotiator would be rigid and
may even become a little hostile if things
dont go as planned. Sincerity breaks
down this risk by hinting that something
beneficial or advantageous might come out
of the interaction.
The mere hint of hope is usually enough to
keep negotiations going. Of course, no
negotiator in his right mind would say
outright that the other party will get
exactly what he wants. But then again, you
wont gain anything at all if the other
party ends up leaving the negotiation table.
So the best thing to do is to implant the
subconscious message that there is
flexibility involved in the negotiation and

32
you are willing to work with the other

party so long as the other party is also
willing to make some concessions in your
favor.
This works both ways. If you are buying
something, sincerity in your words will
convince the seller that you really want to
give him some business.
If you are the seller, hearing sincerity will
help ease the tension involved with a
possible stalemate. Sincerity, in a nutshell,
is the warm fire that keeps the negotiation
machine from freezing over. It is the oil
that keeps the cogs and wheels turning
until good outcomes are finally produced.
Lets go back to the concept of developing
your MAP and asking for more than what
is expected in any given situation. Here are

33
some more reasons why you should never

be wary of implementing this strategy:
1.
People have this apprehension to

increase their demands because they
are afraid of being embarrassed or
ridiculed. Granted, some negotiators
will make you feel this way. But this
doesnt mean that the approach itself is
unsound.
When another negotiator is vigorously
reacting to a big demand, that means
he is working towards adjusting your
demand to what he can actually
provide and that is a good thing
altogether because he wants the
negotiation to actually work. That
means there is a possibility of you
being able to walk away with what you
want after the negotiation.

34
2.
Another good reason for increasing

your demand is you want to get the
best possible outcome from the
interaction. And why shouldnt you get
the best outcome? If you place a high
value on yourself and your endeavors,
there is no real reason not to desire the
higher advantage during a negotiation.
Your self-worth and your values will
shine through if you know how to
handle negotiations well.
For example, if you were trying to
convince a client to shift to your
company even if your services are
more expensive than the competition,
you can lay down a higher demand so
you can subconsciously implant the

35
message that your company can deliver

far better results than your competition.
Of course, you would have to prove
this later on so as not to appear as a
fraud, but that is a completely different
aspect of human relations altogether.
3.
The third reason why you should

always try to exceed your actual needs
during a negotiation is to avoid a
deadlock.
Often, uncontrolled deadlocks can lead
to both parties walking away with
nothing. Again, this is the worst thing
that could happen to you as a
negotiator because we always want
you to walk away with something after
you have done your job during a
negotiation.

36
Walking away with nothing means you

gained nothing of value and you have
to exert extra energy on the next dialog
to get what you really want. An
uncontrolled deadlock may also mean
that the other party will proceed with
its own plans without considering your
input or demands.
4.
The fourth reason for creating a peak

negotiating position is you want to give
the other party the impression that he
or she is in control of the situation.
How will this work?
Think about it if you start the
negotiation with a huge or even
outlandish demand, the other party will
attempt to cut your demand down to
size

37
Until your actual demand (the one you

havent revealed) manifests. You will
attempt to battle it out with the other
negotiator until you are cut down once
again to your original demand. You
walk away with the benefit and the
other party feels as if it had won that
day!
Negotiation requires a lot of patience,
energy and time this is probably the
reason why a lot of people start off a
negotiation with their absolute best offer.
From the perspective of someone who has
never studied the fine arts of negotiation,
this might seem like a very good idea.
After all, who can refuse a genuine, good
offer?

38
Let me tell you this anyone (and I do

mean anyone) can walk away from any
offer, good or bad. It is important for you
to remember that in any communication
scenario, the center of the interaction
should always be the listener, not the
speaker (you). If you put yourself at the
center, you will not be able to focus on the
feedbacks of the other party.
Always remember that you are not the
most important person during the
negotiation the other party is. 9 times out
of 10, you are going to miss important
information if keep you just focus on what
you want as opposed to hearing out what
the other party is trying to tell you.

39
Part 2: Building Momentum

Historic Gambit
The year was 1982 and the United States
government was having a conference with
members of the Mexican government
because they were about to default on a
huge debt amounting to more than eighty
million dollars.
The Mexican government at that time was
unable to satisfy the payment structure
agreed upon by the two parties. Ronald
Reagan and Paul Volcker from the US
government decided to offer another
solution to the problem. They wanted
Mexico to pay using petroleum so that the
reserve in the US will increase
significantly.

40
Jesus Herzog, who was negotiating for the

Mexican government found no reason to
refuse this request. The US government
however, also wanted the Mexican
government to pay a hundred million
dollars in negotiation fees.
Naturally, the president of Mexico
exploded when he heard about the second
requirement. He said that he would never
pay the US government any negotiation
fees. In the end, the Mexican government
agreed to pay half of the original sum
fifty million dollars.
The US government used several
techniques to get the Mexican government
to hand over fifty million dollars in
interest (cleverly disguised as negotiation
fees). They effectively created a deal that
the other party cannot resist!

41
The Deal They Cant Resist

If the first step to a good negotiation is
overstating your position in terms of what
you are demanding from the other party,
how can you utilize this approach in such a
way that the party will acquiesce to what
you want without actually realizing it?
The secret is creating a deal they cant
resist. How is this possible? It all boils
down to how you state your demands and
how you adjust your position during the
negotiation. Your MAP should not be your
initial position at all.
For example, if you are trying to license a
piece of software to a big company and
you want at least $15,000 for it, you must

42
not start the negotiation by saying I can

license my work to your company for
$15,000. If you do this, you are
establishing your MAP at $15,000. You
cannot go any higher than this, only lower.
That is the unwritten rule in negotiation.
You never go higher, you can only go
lower especially when it comes to sales
and acquiring monetary compensation for
products and services. Your initial position
should be much higher than $15,000.
Instead of saying I want $15,000 you
should say I need $20,000 before I
release my work to your company. Why?
When the company begins negotiating, the
price of your work will begin to slide in
small increments until it finally reaches the
$15,000 mark.

43
The other party may try to downplay the

value of your work and the price might
drop to $10,000 This is a common
gambit that you should not accept at all. If
the original value is $20,000 and the
gambit states that only $10,000 should be
given, the next logical step would be to
split the difference and that would be
$15,000!
In this situation, your MAP or maximum
acceptable position would be at the
$15,000 mark not $20,000. You dont
have to let the other party in on your MAP
at the beginning of the negotiation. If you
do, any breathing space you have will cave
in on you and you are left no choice but to
acquiesce to the steadily declining offers
of the other party. If your initial position
was $15,000 and the other party says

44
$12,000 you cant say I changed my

mind, I want $20,000 for my work.
Even Bill Gates (in the early years of his
career) will tell you that this doesnt
happen especially when you are dealing
with big businesses. The offer doesnt go
up it can only go down. So before even
stepping into the office of a potentially
powerful negotiator, determine your MAP
(maximum acceptable position) and make
an offer at the opposite end and wait for
the fine art of negotiation to take effect.
What is truly beautiful about this approach
is that you will walk away with what you
need and at the same time, the other party
will feel as if it has always had control of
the situation.

45
The other party may hallucinate that it has

won the round but all you really did was
offer an imaginary position to secure your
actual MAP (maximum acceptable
position). This is an old technique in
influence and persuasion that was just
redressed to fit the context of negotiation.
It is actually a language strategy you
give the listener something to oppose so
that he wont say no to your offer directly.
If it still sounds a little foggy, let me give
you another example. Let us say you were
trying to sell a car to someone who seems
to be on the fence but is eager enough to
hear you out for over an hour.
Instead of asking something like are you
going to buy this car?, you would be
better off using statements like these:

46
Would you like the blue model or the

beige model?
Would you like to sign the contract with
this pen or should I get a fresh pen from
the office?
Notice that the question will you buy the
car? is nowhere to be found. We are
actually assuming that the buyer already
wants to buy the car and he has already
agreed to the idea.
We are leading the subject by bypassing
the expected question. More often than
not, the new options are sufficient to
distract the subject. He will furiously
enforce his position (I hate beige, I want
the blue one it looks much better!) but at
the same time, he is sealing the fact that he
will be buying a car from you.

47
Historic Gambit
Your number one priority as a Maverick
Negotiator is to always be prepared. This
might sound corny, but we can take a leaf
out of the book of the Boy Scouts.
Boy Scouts are taught to be ready for
common emergencies and they are able to
respond well because they exerted effort to
become prepared by studying what they
have to study. Preparedness is your
number one defense especially if you are
negotiating with a higher authority.
The importance of preparedness can be
seen clearly back in 1996 when the
Teamster Union of UPS decided to
negotiate with the logistics giant to gain
better employment opportunities.

48
Like other giants of the time, UPS was

taking advantage of the fact that it could
continue hiring part time workers for long
periods of time so that it could save on
benefits and other perks that came with
full time employment. The Teamster
Union knew what it was up against so it
did several things to prepare:
1.
2.
The union performed extensive

research as to how the company was
hiring for many years. They arrived at
exact numbers of part time employees,
how many were being given regular
employment status, etc.
The union distilled the most important
insights they gained from research and
disseminated this information to union
members through meetings and email.

49
In the end, the union members

understood exactly what they were
fighting for.
3.
The union also brought up their case to

the public who became acutely aware
of the massive problems brought about
by UPSs establishment employment
strategies. Public support was
definitely high prior to the strikes.
When UPS was finally ready to sit down,

the Teamster Union was so knowledgeable
about the issues that they werent afraid at
all to deal with the power negotiators
brought by UPS. The first big concession
that UPS wanted to offer was to subcontract work in some areas.
Essentially, they were offering bigger
wages to the union members. The

50
Teamster Union refused because they

knew that if they accepted, only a few
areas of the company would be available
for regular employment.
In the end, the following outcomes
emerged from the negotiations:
1.
2.
3.
4.
5.
10,000 part time employees became

regular employees
10,000 employment opportunities were
given to both union and non-union
members
Union workers were now able to enter
jobs that were facilitated by technology
Part time employees received a higher
hourly wage from $8 to $8.50. If the
part time employee stayed for five
years with UPS, the total increase in
his hourly rate would be $4.10.
Old vehicles were upgraded

51
6.
7.
8.
9.
Drivers who needed to work on federal

holidays were to be given added
remuneration
Medical leaves, paternity leaves and
maternity leaves were increased.
Disciplinary actions were stopped for
accidents and injuries that occurred
while on the job.
Mandatory overtime was also
abolished for full time and part time
workers.
Aiming for the Middle Ground

Now, I know many of you may already be
saying that this technique doesnt work all
the time. Yes, I have to agree that we
cannot assume that negotiating techniques
will always play out perfectly, 100% of the
time. But if you are not aware of what the
other party is thinking and you are not

52
completely sure where you stand in terms

of persuading the other party, this is the
best initial positioning you can ever attain
in a negotiation.
Aiming for a mutually beneficial middle
ground is difficult but it is one of the
cornerstone strategies in negotiation. If
you aim for middle ground, both parties
will be happy and you can maneuver so
that the other party will feel that it is full
control of the situation.
I have to emphasize this again and again
because people generally do not like to
feel that they are no longer in control of a
situation. When a person feels that he is
losing control of a dialog or negotiation,
he becomes more defensive and
suspicious.

53
The internal obstacles to agreement and

compliance enlarge and multiply in a short
period of time. That is how the human
mind works. You have to anticipate this if
you want to succeed as a Maverick
N e g o t i a t o r. Yo u c a n n o t a p p r o a c h
negotiation from a purely logical
perspective because 90% of the time,
many people do not think from a logical
perspective.
They base their decisions from emotional
impulses. Emotion as you may already
know, is far beyond the realm of the
rational and logical. In fact, emotion is one
of the key traits that separate the
subconscious mind and the conscious
mind. But believe it or not, when emotion
leads the way, the logical, waking mind
follows without a hint of resistance.

54
Sweetening the Deal

Many people imagine negotiation as this
monolithic approach that can be used like
an architectural blueprint of sorts. This
does sound like a good description at the
outset because we are dealing with real
strategies in Maverick Negotiation.
But I apologize for shattering this ideal
image it is not a monolithic approach at
all. Borrowing from one of the more
popular metaphors of the philosophers
Deleuze & Guattari, negotiation is more of
a rhizome than a uniform, monolithic
approach.
Rhizomes are dynamic and lack any
predictable structures. Therefore, they are
the perfect metaphor for negotiation in
general. So remember if a book or a

55
person tells you that there are ten/one

hundred secrets to great negotiation, that
book or person is barely scratching the
surface.
To illustrate this fact, Im going to share
with you a strategy that is so simple yet so
effective that it has actually been used by
power negotiators around the world for
decades. This strategy is called the
reduction principle and it is quite simple.
Here is the strategy: a deal often becomes
more acceptable after you take away some
components.
This strategy is based on the fact that
people are generally willing to accept a
deal if seemingly unnecessary components
or details are removed. This approach to
negotiation is also tied integrally with the
fact that people are often willing to accept

56
less if they still end up getting what they

really need from a negotiation.
So the next time you make an offer during
a negotiation, try to add some stuff to the
table that originally wasnt in the
package. After making the table a bit
more cluttered with additional offers,
gradually remove the clutter and see if the
other party becomes more willing to
accept the original offer.
You will see just how effective this
technique is when the other party
expresses its relief that the clutter is
gradually being removed from the
negotiation table.
Whats interesting is that often, negotiating
parties seem to experience amnesia once
the clutter is removed. People generally
become so preoccupied with feeling

57
relieved that the additional components

have been removed that they forget that
they were actually refusing the initial offer
before.
Dont Fall for the First Offer
If you really want to come out on top, you
have to remember to never agree to the
first offer that the other party throws at the
table. This principle applies to every
possible scenario and I do have to remind
everyone that you have to show at least
some level of resistance even if the other
party is giving you the sweetest offer you
have heard in a while.
Do not agree to the first offer even if you
are pressed for time and you really need to
acquire the advantage or benefit from the

58
interaction. Why? Because two things are

bound to happen if you do jump at the
other partys first offer.
Here is an example to illustrate my point.
Let us say that you were looking for
vintage golden records to decorate your
newly renovated entertainment room.
You put a wanted to buy ad on some
websites and someone rings you up with
some mint condition Elvis Presley golden
records. The owner of the Elvis Presley
golden records drives up to your home
carrying the mint condition items.
You are secretly jumping for joy because
you know for a fact that it is hard to get
the real thing in mint condition. The owner
of the records is carrying a total six golden
records. They price each at $300. Your

59
budget was $3,000 and this is a much

better deal than you had expected. You say
yes and the owner of the golden records
drives away $1,800 richer.
Like I said before, two things are bound to
cross your mind after you agree to the
other partys first offer. Both of these
things are bound to drive you nuts, too.
The first common thought that people
think after a seemingly easy negotiation
was that they could have gotten a better
deal had they stood their ground and asked
for a better price, better bargain, etc. The
second common thought was that
something was wrong with the situation
itself and that leaves you with a lot of
room for doubt as to why the other party
was giving a seemingly unbeatable offer.

60
Trust me, you do not want these thoughts

hanging over you after a negotiation.
These thoughts could reduce your
confidence as a negotiator because you
will always be thinking of the would
haves and could haves of your past
negotiation.
This particular rule is not complicated at
all just dont agree with what was
offered to you first. Because chances are,
you could still get a better deal if you only
try. The only situation where you should
just say yes is if someone is holding a gun
at your face and he is asking for you to
hand over the keys to your car.
Better not risk it in that kind of situation!
But in all other situations, you must
always give yourself the benefit of trying
to get a much better deal even if the offer
in front of you seems to be completely

61
reasonable already. I know for a fact that

not everyone is keen to do this since there
is this fear that the other party might
withdraw the sweet, first offer.
This almost never happens. Remember
offers can only go down, not up. So if the
other party is offering $1,000, it logically
follows that you can only go down and
your MAP must be somewhere between
the lowest logical offer and your safety
zone (your target figure).
If you agree to the first offer, it is also
possible that the next time you meet the
other negotiator, you will have a tougher
time getting a good deal from him because
he will think that he could have gotten a
better deal, too. This works both ways. If
you are capable of feeling that you may
have done better as a negotiator, the other

62
party is capable of feeling the exact same

way.
It might appear that immediately accepting
an offer is an efficient way of concluding a
negotiation on a positive note. A
negotiation can end quickly if the other
party agrees to the first offer. But this may
not benefit you at all in the next round of
negotiations. So always remember to be a
true Maverick Negotiator Always resist
the first offer!
Giving the Right Kind of Feedback
I have been personally asked this question
millions of times before how should a
negotiator react to the first offer? In the
previous discussion I emphasized that you
should generally resist the first offer. You
can easily express your resistance to the

63
first offer by flinching immediately after

the other partys initial offer has been laid
down on the table.
When people read about this reminder for
the first time, I often get a lot of responses
like this is a no-brainer.
And it is a no-brainer like many of the
basic strategies of negotiation. But the
problem here is that people often forget
these no-brainer strategies when they are
finally on the negotiating table and they
are feeling the heat from a formidable
negotiating party.
It is so easy to forget these simple
reminders so I made it a point to really
drive home the message in the first few
sections of this volume. Remembering
these strategies will literally spell the

64
difference between getting a merely

acceptable deal and the ultimate deal of a
lifetime.
Now, going back to the first idea that I
raised in this section, how can you show
your resistance to the initial offer? Easy
all you have to do is recoil. Recoiling from
an offer can be shown in a variety of
subtle (and not so subtle) ways.
But generally speaking, as long as you are
recoiling from the first offer, you are in a
good position to get what you really want
from the negotiation. Why must a person
recoil or flinch when an offer (good or
otherwise) is given for the first time by the
other party?
Simple: when a party gives the first offer,
that party is usually interested in only one

65
thing your reaction. The first offer is like

the spark of electricity that charges the
negotiation table. It kick-starts the
interaction and your reaction will allow the
other party to adjust his offer. Always
remember that during a negotiation, both
parties are learning from each other
continually.
The initial positions are great starting
points but in the end, what really
determines the conclusion of the
negotiation is what both parties learn from
each other. At this point in time, I
endeavor everyone to simulate a heart
attack when a first offer is given.
Of course, this is an exaggeration but you
probably get my point. Show no pleasure
or happiness at the first offer. If you
cannot openly express your displeasure at

66
the first offer, at least look neutral. Do not

show the party that you are literally
breaking down your own defenses because
he gave such a good offer in the first place.
Recoiling from an initial offer can be
expressed either through verbal language
or nonverbal language. Verbal language is
definitely an important part of negotiation
because you cant express numbers and
details by shrugging your shoulders or
smiling.
Nonetheless, let us not forget that 50% to
70% of what is actually being said is
expressed nonverbally. So let me just
clarify what I said earlier you cant
express details with nonverbal language
but you can definitely express a wide
spectrum of emotions and other
information using nonverbal language.

67
Nonverbal language is excellent in the

context of negotiations because seventy
percent of the time, people are visual
thinkers. Western culture is a highly visual
culture and the importance of appearance
and images is more highly regarded today
owing to the compression of
communication via the Internet.
People are more dependent on visual
signals because that is how modern
communication has evolved thus far.
When a person negotiates with another
party, he is not paying attention to smell,
taste or even his sense of hearing. He is
acutely aware (consciously and
subconsciously) of the visual signals
coming from the other party.

68
So if you can express your resistance to

the initial offer in a way that can be plainly
seen by the other party, you can definitely
solidify your own initial position during
the negotiation.
It is important that you give off precise
visual cues. Here are some examples of
visual cues that will signal that you are
recoiling from the initial offer (remember,
you are not resisting the content of the
offer you are establishing your position as
a Maverick Negotiator):
Steeple position (joining the tips of the
fingers and placing your elbows on the
table so that your joined hands are near
your chin or mouth)
2. Looking away from the negotiator
momentarily as the offer is laid out
1.

69
Keeping the eyes semi-closed as you

listen to the offer (this signals
disinterest or even boredom)
4. Shaking your head slightly
3.
These are just a few of the signals that you

can use during a negotiation. Use a signal
that you are comfortable with and be
consistent. Once you have established your
position within the negotiation, you can
begin considering the actual content of the
offer.
Aim for Genuine Negotiation, Not
Fisticuffs
Too often, novice negotiators get into a
position where they become very hostile
and confrontational towards the other
party. It is easy to become hostile

70
especially if the other party has made an

outlandish offer.
But since you have been reading Maverick
Negotiation, you now know that the initial
offer is often only bait and is only used to
gain access to your mindset.
Your reaction to the first offer is like a
chance for the other party to take a peek at
your cards. Do you have several aces? A
royal flush? The other party would like to
know so they make an initial offer that is
often unacceptable or too sweet to see just
what you are made of.
More often than not, negotiating parties
start off with an offer that is on the
extreme opposite of what is usually
thought of as acceptable. If this is the case,
again, simply recoil from the offer and

71
work towards adjusting the cards on the

table so you will get the most benefit.
Do not make the mistake of creating the
impression that you are an unyielding
tower of might that is out to squeeze the
other party for every penny they have.
If you do this, then that is exactly how you
would be viewed a fiendish ogre not fit
for the negotiation table. Such an attitude
towards negotiation will encourage fear
and loathing because that is how people
react to hostility and negativity in general.
You can definitely come across as a
powerful and intelligent negotiator without
having to express anger, hostility or severe
impatience. You can retain your human
face despite of the pressure behind any
type of negotiation.

72
And heres another important reason why

you should keep your cool you will be
able to think more clearly if you stay calm
throughout the negotiation. One of the
things that I have learned from my long
experience with negotiations is that the
more hostility you express, the harder the
negotiation gets.
There is a big difference between being
persuasive and being downright nasty.
Avoid the latter because you will not get
anywhere. The best negotiations end with
mutual benefit and least casualties from
both sides, if you get what I mean.
Another reason why aggressiveness and
hostility have no place on the negotiation
table is that people tend to feel that they
have to prove another person wrong if they

73
have been completely blocked at the

outset. For example, if someone comes to
you and says I want to buy your new
luxury car for $3,000.
You would probably feel the urge to drive
away the other person especially if you
have stated that your price for the car is
$10,000. If you become too aggressive, the
other party might walk away or he might
reciprocate your aggressive behavior. He
will become preoccupied with proving that
you are wrong to price your car that way.
So instead of having a good negotiation on
your hands, you will have an equally
aggressive party that is hell-bent on
proving that he was right and you were
just plain wrong. This is not the path of a
Maverick Negotiator at all. This type of
situation is counterproductive and trust

74
me, you will be drained after such a

negotiation because the other party wont
be focused on arriving at a mutually
beneficial settlement.
Agreeing and Adjusting
The easy way to respond to an outlandish
offer is by exploding and raining
brimstone on the other party. I sympathize
with people who feel this way because that
is our nature we are emotional creatures.
However, I endeavor you to stifle your
emotions because you are not in just any
ordinary social interaction. There is
something valuable or beneficial at stake
during a negotiation and it is important
that you do not compromise your position
within the negotiation by wearing your
heart on your sleeve.

75
What should you do if the other party

opens the negotiation with an awful offer?
There are two kinds of feedback that you
can give that will help preserve a strong
position without necessitating the need for
hostility or aggression.
The first strategic feedback is simply
saying nothing. You can show a little
recoil from the offer but if you feel like
biting off the other persons head because
of the outrageous offer, dont say anything
until he is done laying down the details of
the awful offer. By staying mum about
what you are thinking, you are effectively
keeping the other party in the dark.
Some of you might be wondering
shouldnt you be preoccupied with
informing the other party of what you are

76
thinking as well? Not necessarily. You see,

it is one thing to relate to the other party
what you need.
But as for giving away your position
within the negotiation? That is a
completely different matter altogether. In
terms of your approach to establishing
your position within the negotiation, the
less the other party knows, the better.
If you want a more active approach to
countering a horrible initial offer, there are
three steps that you must take in
succession to shift the balance during the
negotiation. Assuming that the other party
has dropped its horrid offer on the table, it
is time to move fast to make sure that the
other party understands what you think of
the offer:

77
1.
2.
The first step is to simply agree with

the party. Do not be confused. I am not
telling you to drop your guns and just
surrender. All Im saying is that you
can feign agreement so as not to kindle
any harsh resistance from the other
party. Say something non-committal
like yes, I hear you, please continue.
Agree to something to keep the other
party talking, that is all you have to do
immediately after the offer has been
made.
The next step is to state that other
people have also felt the same way
about the issue before. For example, if
you represent a software company that
specializes in online sales tracking, the
other party might be implying that they
can only manage 1/3 of your asking

78
price and any more is highway

robbery.
Instead of giving into the urge of
snapping at the other party to show that
they are dead wrong with their
assumptions because your company
works double time to produce the best
results, here is a better reply:
Many people have felt the exact same
way about this service package. In fact,
we have had so many questions before
as to why our company seems to be
more expensive when it comes to
providing this type of service.
As you can plainly see, you are not
trying to fight the other party. Up to
this point in time, you are still agreeing
with what the other party has said. Are

79
you yielding? No. Are you giving in to

their demands? Not particularly.
So what are you doing if you are not
yielding to the demands of the other
party?
You are simply showing that you are
not openly resisting whatever they
said. The other party might understand
that you are not accepting the offer but
based on your words and body
language, you are not resisting either.
H o w s t h a t f o r c o n f u s i o n a n d
overload?
3.
The third and final step is to shift the

balance by upending the logic of the
other partys initial offer. This can be
done by providing clear details why

80
your offer is more sound and logical

than the initial offer. The goal of this
step is not to embarrass or humiliate
the other party for making such a
ridiculous offer.
Rather, it is done to convince the other
party to defect to your side instead of
following the old route which is
obviously not the best route at all.
How can you accomplish this? Easy.
Heres a template that you can follow:
Despite the fact that many clients are
saying that our services are more
expensive than our competition, we
have found that one hundred percent of
our clients big and small become fully
satisfied with the kind of service that
we give because we not only make sure

81
that your project requirements are

satisfied.
We make sure that whole software
system we put in place is as strong and
sustainable as can be. We never create
software frameworks that will crumble
when new technology rolls in.
We always have the future in mind so
we make sure that what we build now
can easily be expanded and upgraded
for many years to come. You can look
at the data we have prepared for you to
see just how efficient we are in this
field
The third and final step closes the deal for
the initial offer. If you have done your
research and you have prepared sufficient
data or information for the other party, the

82
initial offer would now be less relevant

and less plausible because of the weight of
your own words Considering you have
not formally made your own offer yet!
The key to a successful negotiation is
never aggression or force. Force might
have worked for dictators because they
inspired fear and they used power to
physically and mentally harm others.
Maverick Negotiation is never about using
brute force to get what you want.
Negotiation in the context of what Im to
teach you in Maverick Negotiation is
centered on science of persuasion and
influence. Force has no place in
negotiations at all.
Why? Because humans are hardwired to
react with equal force or more when they

83
feel that force is being used upon them. To

illustrate this valuable point, I want you to
raise both your hands at chest level.
Are they up? Good. Now I want you to
place the tips of your fingers against each
other. The tip of the left index finger must
connect with the tip of the right index
finger and so on until all your fingers are
firmly connected with each other.
Now here is really fun part. I want you to
outdo yourself by pushing against each of
your hands. The goal is to beat one of
your hands. Push and struggle against
yourself! As you may have felt while
performing this exercise, it is nearly
impossible for one to bend ones fingers.
Why? Because whenever the left hand
feels the force coming from the right hand,

84
the brain sends out a complex yet precise

motor signal that allows the left hand to
react with equal force (or more). This
happens over and over again and as you
struggle more, your brain ensures that
equal force is exerted every time one hand
experiences a pushing force.
You can imagine how a living, breathing
person would react if he felt aggression or
any form of force. Thats right whether
he likes it or not, he will react by exerting
force of his own.
He cannot escape this inevitable fate any
more than he can escape breathing.
Because this is how we are designed as by
nature. This is part of our survival package
so it is virtually impossible to stop the
impulse to resist any type of force.

85
Part 3: Advanced Maneuvers

Historic Gambit
During the real estate crunch some years
ago, even wealthy moguls like Donald
Trump were worried that the crunch was
going to affect their businesses and they
were going to lose a lot of money if they
didnt have enough real cash to flow
recirculate.
Donald Trump at that time was particularly
worried about not having enough cash to
outlast the crunch. He was looking into
liquidating one of his properties (St.
Moritz Hotel). He had another hotel not far
from the St. Moritz Hotel, the Plaza Hotel,
and he had no real use for the St. Moritz
anymore.

86
Another mogul by the name of Alan Bond

came along and expressed interested in
taking the St. Moritz from Mr. Trump.
Even though Donald Trump was relieved
that one Alan Bond had come along to buy
the St. Moritz, he knew that he could get
more if he played the unwilling seller.
So when Mr. Bond came knocking on
Donald Trumps office, asking about the
St. Moritz Hotel, Donald Trump promptly
refused. He said he wanted the St. Moritz
for his grandchildren but to be fair, he was
willing to hear out how much Alan Bond
was willing to pay for it.
Donald Trump originally spent seventy
nine million dollars on the St. Mortiz
Hotel on his first acquisition. After the
negotiations, he walked away with a total
of one hundred sixty million dollars and he

87
had enough cash to outlast the real estate

crunch in New York.
Be an Unwilling Buyer/Seller
In an ideal world, a buyer or seller who
shows that he is happy to be doing what he
is doing will automatically get the best
deal of his life.
Unfortunately, this rarely happens when a
person shows that he is excited or
enthusiastic about buying or selling
something. What usually happens is that
when a person shows any level of
enthusiasm, the other party lowers the
offer to get the most benefit.
So remember in the world of negotiation,
showing that you are happy and positive
may not necessarily mean that you will get

88
a good experience while negotiating with

others.
More often than not, enthusiasm is taken
as a sign that you are willing to take less
than what was estimated and the other
party might be keen to stick to a much
lower offer precisely because the buyer/
seller has already shown interest.
Interest in the context of negotiation is
equal to acceptance of an offer. Even if
you do not say it out loud, you can
accidentally let out the birds by not
controlling your verbal and nonverbal
expressions.
For example, if you were talking to a used
car salesman and you keep saying the
price is way too high for this old junker
while beaming and stroking the exterior of

89
the SUV you have been eyeing for two

months, you are definitely not sending the
right message to the other party. Your
words are saying no but your whole
body and even your voice are saying I
want this so bad, give it to me!.
Regardless of what you are feeling about
what you are negotiating for, you must
always keep your emotions in check when
bargaining with another party. Remember,
you are primarily watching out for your
own interests and that is what the other
party is also doing.
So dont expect the other party to think I
want to give this guy a break so Im going
to give him 25% more than what he is
asking. That is not going to happen any
time soon unless you are five years old
and you are asking your doting grandfather

90
to give you two cookies instead of one for

cleaning up your toys in the living room.
In a nutshell, if you want to get the best
results, you have to watch out for your
own interests from start to finish. Do not
think for one second that you can rely on
the other negotiating party to see things
your way. This applies most especially to
business negotiations where parties
involved are naturally more inclined to get
the best possible position early on in the
dialog.
So going back to an early point that I
made, you need to remember that in order
to become a true Maverick Negotiator, you
have to show that you are an unwilling
buyer or unwilling seller. Here is a
scenario that will clarify this strategy.
Lets say that at one point in your life you

91
became really engrossed in collecting

expensive sports memorabilia.
But things changed and you find yourself
constantly worrying about the moths
appreciating your collection more than
you as you become more preoccupied with
other things you have to do like work and
your new baby, etc. In short, you dont
have the luxury of time and money
anymore to maintain your collection.
One day, a neighbor of yours sees you
cleaning some of your collections out in
the yard. It turns out that this neighbor was
mad about the same sports team that drove
you nuts back in the day. He says wow
that is an impressive collection youve got
there! That is probably the biggest stash I
have seen in my life. Are you selling

92
those? Cause Im pretty sure I will buy

them for the right price that is.
Given your current situation, you might be
tempted to jump at your neighbor and say
something like please take my collection!
I need to free up space at home! But since
our focus is to get the best possible
position within the new negotiation, it
would be best to play the role of the
unwilling seller.
How can you be an unwilling seller in this
situation? Instead of smiling and showing
relief that someone has come along to buy
your collection, act in a neutral manner
and just acknowledge the other persons
interest. By acknowledging the other
persons interest, you are simply being
civil you are not exactly expressing that

93
you want to sell your collection in the first

place.
The next best step at this point in time
would be to show your collection to the
other person. Let him drink in the sights
and textures of the collection. Immersion
in the object of desire builds even more
desire and excitement. You would want to
build these two components in the other
party so that he would be at a disadvantage
during the negotiation.
When the other persons interest is at its
peak, you have to establish your first solid
position within the negotiation: I am not
sure if I can ever part with this collection.
These memorabilia have been with me
since I was twenty years old! I can see that
you definitely are a power collector
yourself and you also look like someone

94
who knows how to take care of mint

condition memorabilia. So to be fair to
you, if you do want to buy all or some of
my collection, what is your best offer so I
can think about it?
Phrasing your opening offer in this manner
actually increases the price range for your
collection. The worst thing that could
happen is that you accidentally lower the
perceived value of your collection by
being too eager with the sale in the first
place.
This strategy actually solves one of the
more challenging puzzles of negotiation,
which is how can a negotiator improve
the perceived value of what is at stake?.
Of course, it is a given already that all the
parties involved in a negotiation perceive

95
the object of the negotiation as valuable.

But if you are the one in possession of that
object, you must do everything you can to
increase its perceived value. If you
accomplish this, you will be able to
increase your chances of walking away
with a much better outcome on your
hands.
Playing the role of the Unwilling Seller or
Unwilling Buyer not only improves your
initial position during the actual
negotiation. This approach also
concretizes your chance of getting a bigger
benefit even before the actual dialogue
between the parties begins.
Who uses this technique, you might ask?
People in business and real estate often use
this technique to gain leverage in a field

96
where money flows freely but the

competition can be fierce. Each potential
transaction must be dealt with carefully to
bring the highest possible benefit.
If you think your time on the negotiation
table has a high value, it would be best to
guard your initial position before you even
start laying down your cards on the table.
Always ask the other party about their best
possible offer because without it, you
wont be able to agree to their offer at all.
The Grip and Release Technique
Let us say that you are at a disadvantaged
position within the negotiation because the
other party doesnt need what you are
offering urgently. Would it be possible to
still walk away with a good deal even if
the other party has already stated that he

97
doesnt really need what you are offering?

Yes.
The Grip and Release Technique can be
used when the other party has stated that
he doesnt need what you are offering but
is interested in it nonetheless. There is
definitely a moderate level of interest in
what you are offering. However, there is a
definite lack of excitement and emotional
investment in the negotiation.
In a perfect world, people would jump at
whatever we can bring to the negotiation
table. Unfortunately, in the real world you
can easily get thrown out of a dialogue if
your offer doesnt look valuable at all. So
the trick here is to make the other person
feel that he has to prove himself in order to
acquire what you are offering.

98
It might sound like a strange twist to a

negotiation (and it is) but nevertheless, the
Grip and Release Technique does work.
Before I reveal to you the simple words
that you can use to radically change how
another party perceives your current offer,
let me explain the mechanisms involved.
First of all, a negotiator who has made it
clear that he is not completely interested in
what is being offered will definitely feel as
if he is in charge of the negotiation. And
this may not be far from the truth if you
allow the other party to take control of the
proceedings. But heres the thing this
particular gambit or position within the
negotiation game has a chink on its armor,
if you will.
That chink in the armor is the general
desire of people to prove themselves in

99
every situation. Instead of begging the

other party to reconsider, we are going to
do the exact opposite. We are going to
back up and grip the other party by asking
him to prove himself worthy of what you
are offering.
How can you do this? Here is a scenario to
illustrate how this strategy can be used
during a negotiation:
Let us say that you started a new flour
distribution business and you were trying
to get delis and bakeries to order from you.
You have already emphasized your
commitment to quality and you have
definitely done you research in terms of
knowing what local businesses in your
area need. But the big problem is that most
of the local businesses in your city already
have flour suppliers.

100
This fact leaves you in a very tenuous

position of being needed by no one. You
are at wits end and you feel like giving up
because this is your third negotiation for
the day and so far, you have exactly zero
bites yet.
The representative of the third business
that you have approached is reading your
offer and has slid it back with the words
your offer is plausible but right we
already have a flour supplier However,
it may be a good idea to have another
supplier so the first one doesnt control the
prices too much. I would be willing to
order 300 pounds of flour from you for $1
per pound.
Deep inside you are just jumping up and
down because another business has finally

101
seen your hard work in preparing a worthy

offer. The price isnt bad at all But
something is stopping you from shaking
the other persons hand. Other businesses
are able to sell their flour for $2 or more
per pound.
What do you have to say to get a better
deal, given the circumstances?
Since the cat is already out of the bag, you
have nothing to lose So heres the
statement that will spell the difference
between an acceptable bargain and a really
good deal:
I apologize but you will have to do better
than that
After dropping this statement, all you have
to do is stop talking and wait for the other

102
partys response. Do not try to justify why

you said that and dont try to be too
apologetic. Keep your emotions in check
during this crucial phase of the negotiation
and most importantly, stand behind what
you said!
Before I get any violent reactions, let me
reiterate a few points. The first point that I
would like to reiterate is that negotiation is
rarely without any risk. Remember
negotiations are intrinsically risky because
there is always something of value at
stake. You wont be wasting your time at
the negotiation table if you werent about
to gain something from the exchange
right?
So if you are thinking: this move is far too
risky, the other party might just walk away
from that kind of talk, dont be too anxious

103
because chances are, the other party will

actually try to prove that he is worthy of
your offer! Its strange but more often than
not, people sent to negotiations might be
good at specifics skills (e.g. accounting,
etc.) but that does not mean at all that they
are adept in negotiating.
If the main negotiator of the other party is
a novice, he will say well, I can go up to
$2 per pound if you put it that way. I dont
represent a small business, were pretty
big if you look at our annual sales. Big
words from a negotiator, but if you look at
the situation closely enough, which party
is actually yielding to whom?
Now, there will be times when the other
negotiator appears to be more
knowledgeable in the subtle and covert
arts of negotiation. There is a possibility

104
that the other party will respond with

something like how big do I have to go to
get the goods?. If this happens, dont fall
into the trap of responding with a dream
figure you had in mind. Because it is still
possible to get a much higher figure than
that.
You can get a much higher figure in this
situation, if and only if you are able to
bounce back your earlier statement to the
other party. Essentially, you will have to
make a way for the other person to break
the ice with regards to how much will be
given for what you are offering.
You can remain neutral in terms of your
body language and verbal expressions.
You can also just smile and say like I
said, you have to go bigger to get it. Just
make sure that you say it in a way that
hints that you want the negotiation to end

105
well. Do not deliberately challenge the

other party because that increases the risk
of closing the deal on a bad note.
The more quiet you are after you have
dropped the bombshell, the better off you
will be. Do not be intimidated if the other
party clams up immediately after you say
you have to go bigger if you want this
offer. Many novice negotiators commit
the mistake of becoming too anxious if the
other party becomes too quiet.
This anxiety stems from the fact that when
a person is saying nothing, the stream of
communication grinds to a halt. You can
still get some information by observing the
other persons nonverbal language but of
course you still need the concrete message
and that can only be formally delivered by
verbal language.

106
Unless the other party grabs you and says

get out of my office, you are still in a
very good position to get what you want
But you have to wait for the other person
to respond first. Why? The reason is very
simple: when a person breaks the ice, he is
rarely able to stop. Talking after a long
silence is like shoveling copious amounts
of coal into the fuel pit of a train. The train
will just keep going and going!
Whenever I share this piece of information
with budding Maverick Negotiators, I
always get this question: should you strive
to get a little more than what you aimed
for during a negotiation? My answer is
yes, especially if you are negotiation
contracts and better pricing for your goods
and services.

107
Small increases in the price of goods and

services translates to bigger annual profits,
remember that. So whenever you succeed
in getting better contracts whenever you
negotiate, you are ensuring your business
success in the long term.
The Grip and Release technique can be
used in almost any scenario. You just have
to know a little bit more about the other
party in order to use this technique well.
So do your research and make sure that
you read the other partys feedback well
during the negotiation.
Using (Imaginary) Authority to Your
Advantage
You have probably encountered this
scenario before: you try to make an offer
and you are so sure that you are going to

108
succeed in the negotiation but you end up

walking home empty-handed that day
because the other party has to show your
information to the board of directors.
Using authority as a reason not to make an
immediate decision during a negotiation is
probably one of the oldest strategies in the
book But this doesnt mean that it
doesnt work. It is a very common tactic
and yet it enjoys a special place in the
world of negotiation because it just works.
Like an old, well-oiled machine, this
strategy has continually proven itself
worthy of discussion and debate.
A person who has never tried negotiation
in a pressurized setting (e.g. a business
contract is at stake) will probably think
that the ability to make a firm decision
during a negotiation is much better than

109
having to continually defer to a higher

authority. And lets face it it does sound
cool to say I am a recognized decisionmaker in the company What I say goes.
Despite the seeming advantage of being
able to make straight decisions during a
negotiation, it is important for you to
realize that in this particular context, being
the boss or the main man does not
necessarily mean that you will
automatically have the most advantage
during the exchange.
Why? Because if you state that you are the
one who makes all the decisions means
you are placing yourself in the direct path
of the other partys ammunition. You will
become the target and because you are the
one making the decisions, the other party

110
will not rest until they get a definite yes

from you.
All this might come as a surprise to you
and I dont blame you for being surprised
at all. Modern society places a lot of value
on the ability to make decisions.
People who endeavor to climb up the
corporate ladder know that as they achieve
better positions within companies and
organizations, they become less
accountable to people like department
heads and managers. So it is only natural
for many people to feel that in order to
become a good negotiator, one must have
absolute power in terms of making
decisions.
But again, I have to remind everyone that
if you openly express that you are the one

111
responsible for making decisions in your

company, business or organization, you are
actually weakening your position within
the negotiation because the other party
knows that it can employ a wide array of
tactics to gain compliance from you.
So in the end, it is not really in your
interest to go about saying that you are the
main man. Sometimes, playing the
underdog greatly strengthens your
bargaining position because the other party
will then have to guess what the authority
is thinking, based on what you are saying.
Yo u r b r e a t h i n g r o o m d u r i n g t h e
negotiation will greatly expand, as well.
Now, I have to be honest not a lot of
people are willing to pretend that they do
not have the final word when it comes to
making decisions. This applies most

112
especially to business owners who have

worked so hard to make their business
flourish. And yet, I have to ask each and
every one of you to do exactly this when
you are negotiating.
Dont be the boss. Dont act like you word
is the final word. Because if you do, the
other party will know instantly that all that
has to be done in order to close the
negotiation on their terms is to make you
comply, not anybody else. It might be
difficult at first but as you get the hang of
this strategy, this technique will definitely
be a regular tool in your negotiating
arsenal.

113
When you say that you are not the final

decision maker, you are also making the
other party work harder to convince you
that their offer is worth bringing up to the
higher authority. Because you are just an
envoy or messenger, your responsibility is
just to convey what the other party is
saying even if there is no real higher
authority involved.
Am I asking you to make things up? Yes,
if you need to. This minor deception is
necessary during negotiations to ensure
your position will remain stable during the
exchange.
I wouldnt want you to step into a
minefield just because you are really the
decision-maker in your company or
organization. It doesnt matter if you dont
really have a boss to contact after the

114
meeting. What is important is that you

emphasize that the final word will not
come from you. It will come from
someone else.
The playing field changes when the other
party learns that a higher authority is
quietly listening in on the dialogue. You
also become less of a target and more of a
possible accomplice because the other
party now has a reason to woo you into
saying yes to the offer. The other party will
also be willing to add a few concessions to
the offer so you would drop a good word
for them when you talk to the higher
authority (again, even if there is really no
higher authority to begin with!).
Now, at this point in time, you might feel
as if you are ready to use this covert
strategy to your advantage. Before you set

115
out to rule the negotiation table, a word of

advice: never and I do mean never
mention a specific name or position when
referring to higher authority. I cannot
emphasize this enough. Never say that you
are referring to a manager, president, CEO,
etc.
Instead of saying that you have to ask a
specific person, use a vaguer term like
board of directors. As long as the term
that you are using is well-known in
business culture, you should be fine.
Terms like sales committee and head
associates are excellent for this strategy
because the other party will not be able to
just say make the call and we will talk to
this person.
If the other party would have to deal with
a whole group of people (imaginary or

116
not), they wont demand to converse

directly with the higher authority. Instead,
they would leave that tedious (yet vital)
task to you.
Here are some important reminders when
using the higher authority strategy on the
negotiation table:
- As I have stated before, it would be best
to refer to a vague authority when
negotiating. Do not refer to a specific
person because that puts you at a tenuous
position.
What if the other party starts asking
questions like how do we contact this
person? What is his name? What exactly
does he do? Instead of referring to a
single person, refer to a group of people
with a relevant description.

117
For example, if the other party is

requesting for a loan, say that you have to
check with your loan committee. If the
other party is trying to sell you something
that might cost thousands of dollars, say
that an acquisition committee has recently
been assembled in your company and they
are in charge of making decisions on new
acquisitions and company purchases.
It is utterly frustrating for a negotiator to
find out that he is not actually speaking to
someone who can make a clear-cut
decision regarding a matter. In essence,
you become a mere messenger to the
higher power in the organization and in
some cases, the person in front of you
might actually be a messenger, too!

118
Some of you might be wondering, what

should you do if the negotiator knows you
are the business owner/manager/project
leader? Are you trapped, then? Have you
no other resort but to admit that you are
the one responsible for making the
decisions in the business?
Actually, no. You can still say that you
have to check with a specific group within
the business because you have relegated
decision-making to this committee/person.
Owners of big businesses rarely carry the
burden of performing all the decisionmaking duties alone.
So the other party will still understand and
more importantly, believe that you still
have to give their proposal offer to a
higher authority. You dont even have to
elaborate your explanation just give

119
them a one-time explanation and leave it at

that. The mystery surrounding the higher
authority will force the other party to
produce a better offer with more
concessions to help seal the deal.
Another reason why I want you to refer a
vague group of people like a pricing
committee is that we do not want the other
party to think that you are worthless on the
negotiation table.
Think about it. If you say its actually my
manager who makes decisions about
things like this, what would the other
party think of you? The knee-jerk response
would probably be why have I been
spending the last 2 hours trying to impress
this person? He is not even the one making
the decisions!

120
All of this has been a waste of time. That

is the most common reaction to a
misplaced gambit. If the other party thinks
you are a worthless negotiator because a
specific person is the real decision-maker,
your value in the eyes of the other party
will be greatly reduced. From a giant, your
size (value-wise) would probably be
reduced to a gerbil.
Avoid this mistake at all cost. If you make
it appear that you have a direct connection
to a group that makes the final decision on
the matter, you will be able to increase
your valuableness on the negotiation table.
- The second important guideline that I
would like to share with you is to never
back down from an obvious challenge to
your assertion that a higher authority has
to be consulted with first before a decision

121
is made. There will be times when a

negotiator will say when will the pricing
committee meet to discuss what we have
been discussing? Do they meet twice
monthly or monthly? When can I expect a
clear answer?.
Questions like these are a direct challenge
to your position as a negotiator. Some
negotiators are just genuinely curious as to
when a decision will be made. Others want
to find out if you are telling the whole
truth regarding the matter.
And still others are just trying to pin you
down as to when a possible compliance to
the offer will be given. Such questions
obviously increase the pressure on you.
Dont buckle just because the other
negotiator seems to be cracking your

122
negotiating armor. Say something noncommittal like the committee meets on a

regular basis, but they perform several
functions and your offer will be discussed
at the soonest possible time. You dont
have to provide an exact day or time for
the decision. If you do that, you would be
at a disadvantage because you wont be
able to review the offer well before
making a decision.
- What if the other party was using the
higher authority tactic on you? You can
counter this move by challenging the other
partys worthiness in terms of receiving
what you are offering. Say you will have
to improve your offer if you want to
acquire this offer.
This automatically increases the pressure
on the other party because they stand to

123
lose the offer completely. If the other party

had been sitting with you for the last three
hours, chances are the organization or
business being represented by the other
negotiator has a real need for what you are
offering in the first place.
If you increase the pressure on the other
party, the imaginary authority might
evaporate completely or the other party
might agree to some concessions that were
refused earlier.
- You can also use this strategy if you want
the other party to give the lowest possible
price on a product or service. You can say
that your higher authority is already
considering good alternatives because the
other party was late in moving in with an
offer for an identical product or service.

124
You use hope as a key feature of your

negotiation. If you drive down the value of
what is being offered but you show them
some glimmer of hope if they make a
really good offer, there is a chance that the
other negotiator will adjust his position
immediately.
- Another useful strategy to counter the
potent higher authority strategy is by
clarifying the details even before the
negotiation has begun. Many novice
negotiators are more preoccupied with
befriending the other party to get into a
better bargaining position during a
negotiation.
This is a bad move because no one goes to
negotiations to make a friend. More than
anything, negotiations can be likened to
war because both sides are gearing up for

125
the offensive. A good negotiator knows

when to keep quiet but he also knows
when to release his array of persuasive
tools.
In order to effectively block the higher
authority strategy, you need to deal with
the possibility of it being used even before
formal negotiations begin. This is what
you have to say I would like to clarify
something. If our offer satisfies what your
business/company/organization needs,
there would be no other reason for you not
to accept it today, is that correct?
This is only a template so it would be best
to appropriate the message based on the
context and what you know so far of the
other negotiator. Avoid coming across as
intimidating or hostile.

126
You are just asking a very simple question

and all that you require at that point in
time is a simple yes or no. If all goes well,
the other party will probably respond with
an offhand yes of course to your
question. That offhand response will seal
the deal for you and will also protect your
position within that negotiation.
By saying yes of course, the other party
is openly admitting that no other higher
authority is involved in the negotiation and
that a direct decision can be made on that
day.
If the other person suddenly says wait, I
have to talk to my partners about this
you can counter that easily with at the
beginning of our negotiation you have
made it clear that if our offer satisfies your
requirements, a swift decision can be made

127
today. This will really put a sufficient

amount of pressure on the other party.
To avoid the possibility of being
completely embarrassed, the other party
will most likely choose to examine your
offer closely one last time before he
accepts. Remember you werent the one
who said that a decision will be made that
day. You just asked an intelligently crafted
question and the other party was kind
enough to give you the answer that you
really needed at that point in time.
There is a general tendency for people to
fulfill their personal commitments. This is
your advantage when you use this counterstrategy on the other negotiation.
Even an offhand answer like sure we will
accept the offer if it fulfills our

128
requirements automatically creates a

commitment to follow through with what
has been said. The other party cant just
say hey I forgot that there is some
committee involved. The other party will
know that such statements will sound like
a downright lie and obvious deception is
never welcome on the negotiating table.
- What if you are unable to get the other
person to commit to a swift decision
regarding the issue at hand? What if the
other negotiator has anticipated your
strategy as well? There are three clear
steps that must be taken in order to handle
this volatile situation.
Because if you do not disarm the higher
authority strategy, you will have to make a
lot of concessions because you dont know
if there is a higher authority or not. In the

129
grand scheme of things, you have to make

sure that you will put your best foot
forward if there is indeed a committee
involved but I dont want you to
experience such a weakened negotiating
position at all. Here are the steps.
1.
A persons ego is often his downfall

So we are going to use it to weaken the
other negotiators ability to hold on to
the higher authority strategy. If the
negotiator says that some board or
committee has to approve your offer
first before any acceptance or
compliance is given, ask the other
person since your company/
organization has sent you here, they
seem to trust you very much, dont
they?

130
This will prompt the other negotiator to

say yes, because he wont be willing to
say that some other person is more
trustworthy than he is when it comes to
bringing home good results.
Another approach would be to ask the
other negotiator do you think your
boss or manager will have to look at
what you are doing here before this
deal is approved at all?. People hate
the idea of being under any authority.
So whether there is higher authority
involved or not, the other negotiator
will most likely say no, they trust me
enough for this type of thing.
2.
If you cannot convince the other

negotiator to commit to giving you a
swift decision on the same day, have
him commit that he will support your

131
offer one hundred percent when he

brings it to the higher authority.
This statement should do it quite
nicely: you will put in a good word for
my offer, wouldnt you? If your offer is
good enough and you have mutual
benefits in mind, the other negotiator
will see your statement as an act of
good faith and he will respond I will
definitely do my best to have this offer
approved.
3.
The third and final step in dissolving

the higher strategy approach would be
to try to nail down the exact person
and reason why your offer will not be
accepted.
I know this sounds a little zany given
the fact that we definitely dont want

132
our offers to be rejected. Ask the

negotiator that you need to close the
negotiation with some paperwork that
will be sent directly to the higher
authority.
The paperwork will be a subject to
document that will instruct the higher
authority to reject the offer for
whatever reason within a 24 hour
period. The tricky part here is that they
actually have to provide a very specific
reason why they will not take up your
offer and they have to do it within 24
hours of receipt of the paperwork.
There is no reason why the other party
will not be able to pass on paperwork
for you. If they refuse, ask for the
addresses and names of the committee

133
members so you can send the

paperwork yourself.
Some of you might be wondering at this
point in time: what should be done if the
other party is showing a lot of resistance
and objections? Let me clarify this point a
little before I close our discussion of the
higher authority strategy.
Objections are generally considered not
beneficial to negotiations because they
tend to delay the decision-making process.
However, I have to emphasize that
objections in themselves mean the other
party wants what you are offering.
Seasoned salesmen know that when a
buyer is just gleaming and beaming all the
time, he is just probably window shopping.

134
But when a customer begins complaining

and insulting what you are offering, then
you have at least 50% assurance that this
person is actually going to shell out some
dough because deep down, he really wants
what you are offering.
So I am not saying that you should
welcome objections because these
definitely have to be dealt with swiftly
when they come but you should also take
objections in stride because they signify
that the other party is really interested in
what you are bringing to the table.
Finally, here are some adjustments that

you can make when you come face to face
with equally tricky negotiators.

135
Problem: The other party has made an

offer and is asking for an answer on the
same day.
Solution: Give him the option of waiting a
week or two for the committee to arrive at
a decision or he can change his offer so
that you can give the go ahead on the same
day. Power is split between you and the
higher authority.
You can approve really good offers; offers
that are out of your league are passed on
to the higher authority. Since no one likes
waiting, the other party will most likely
opt for the adjustment of the offer or
proposal.
Problem: The other party is forcing you to
say yes.

136
Solution: Tell the other party that if you

are going to be pressured to give an
answer right then and there, the answer is
definitely going to be a no. But if they can
wait, there is a possibility of compliance or
agreement.
Service and Reciprocity
One of the more unfortunate things in
negotiations is that favors or service done
in good faith often lose their value very
quickly.
So if you made a concession in the form of
a service or positional adjustment, the
service that you have performed for the
other party will most likely lose its value
as time goes by. And Im not talking about
weeks or months here Not even days!

137
It is estimated that that the perceived value

of service begins to slide down really fast
after the first two hours after the service
has been rendered.
So if you are thinking that your favors will
have a bearing a week from now, you are
definitely wrong unless the favor that you
did has a monetary value or you saved
someone from being eaten by a ravenous
crocodile in a raging river.
The value of a service is at its peak as it is
being performed and as the outcome is
emerging. But once the service has been
done and the recipient of the action or
service is already enjoying the fruits of
your labor, the value of what you just did
will rapidly decline and trust me, the other
party will begin thinking that what you are

138
asking in return is much more than the

actual value of what you did.
Of course, this is not how the other party
perceived the service before because he
really needed your help. But keep in mind
that this has nothing to do with ethics,
morality or any of those things. It is
actually part of the general human
mindset.
Generally speaking, intangible things are
less valuable than stuff that can be
touched, used or in some cases, spent or
saved. You cant say that the other party
should hold on to your paper like a real
contract. No one in their right mind will do
such a thing for you.

139
So before rendering any service at all to

another person, you have to remember
these key pointers:
1.
2.
3.
Negotiate the reciprocal favor that the

other party will give you in return for
your service.
Finalize the specifics of what you want
in return and hold the other party
responsible for pulling through with
what he has promised.
Be firm with what you want in return
and if you do not get a commitment
from the other party, dont do him any
favors.
Because if he cant make a
commitment before the service is
performed, his interest in reciprocating

140
any favors will evaporate as soon as

the service is done.
The Maverick Way of Splitting the
Difference
Splitting the difference is definitely one of
the more popular concepts in the field of
negotiation because it really personifies
the idea of fairness between two parties. In
America, splitting the difference is
synonymous with saying lets split this in
half and be done with it.
Well, I would like to let you in a secret
that is not exactly our approach in
Maverick Negotiation. We will be using
the concept of splitting the difference but
we will be doing it so that you will still be
able to get the maximum advantage when

141
a deal is finally struck. Here are the

guidelines for using this approach:
1.
2.
First of all, splitting the difference

doesnt necessarily mean you have to
do 50-50. You could, but only if you
would be at an advantage if you do so.
Most of the time, a 75-25 split is
considered more beneficial than a
50-50 split during a negotiation, where
you get 75 and the other party gets 25.
Remember the goal is to get the
maximum benefit from the negotiation.
If 75-25 isnt possible, getting 60-40
would get you better leverage than
50-50.
It is possible to split the difference and
keep splitting as you adjust your
position within the negotiation. You

142
can keep splitting the difference until

you have reached your MAP or
maximum acceptable position during
the exchange. As long as you are using
a variety of techniques to boost your
position within the negotiation, you
shouldnt have too much trouble
asking for concessions.
3.
While it might sound like a good idea

to become assertive and start splitting
the difference yourself during a
negotiation, dont. Let the other party
start the splitting of the difference so
that the other party will feel in control.
Because the more in control the other
party feels, the more in control you will
be. Remember, when a person feels
that he is losing control of a situation,
he becomes more defensive. So just let

143
the other party lead the way and

gradually shift your position
afterwards.
4.
Ideally, it should be the other party

who should initiate the split of the
difference. This doesnt mean that you
have to be completely quiet near the
close of the negotiation. Instead of
completely clamming up, try to nudge
the other party to initiate the split. Here
is a scenario to help illustrate this
point.
Let us say that you were trying to sell a
contract for $25,000. Your boss tells
you that you can go down to $20,000
but that would be the absolute limit on
the contract. The other party is saying
that it can do $20,000.

144
You are happy that the other party has

agreed to the minimum price for the
contract, but the original target was
$25,000 and youd like to be the better
negotiator and bring back this contract
for that amount. How can you make
the other party increase the bid for the
contract?
You can say We have already spent so

many hours discussing the details of
this contract it is such a shame that
we cant actually close a deal because
of a $5,000 difference. At which
point, the other party will most likely
say that I agree, so what do you say to
splitting the difference?.

145
This is crucial the other person wants

to split the difference (he has initiated
it) but you have to take control
immediately of the initial split. So if
you need want to add $5,000 more to
the final price of the contract, you need
to split it by at least half at the first
opportunity: Hmmm I think I kind
of get what you are saying. Split the
difference does this mean that we
will be going up to $22,500, is this
correct?
When the other party acquiesces to the
new figure which is $22,500, you can
use the higher authority approach to
delay the decision-making for at least a
day. During the second round of
negotiations, you have a choice
accept the $22,500 and go over the
minimum or split the difference again.

146
How can you split the difference

without incurring the ire of the other
party?
Use the higher authority technique: I
have worked hard with committee for
hours yesterday to get $22,500
approved but unfortunately they told
me that they would lose money if we
go anywhere below $24,000. Its is
very unfortunate that we have to close
this given the $1,500 difference.
Again, because you have emphasized

that only a small price difference is
blocking the way of a successful
settlement, a split would be in progress
once again. Wait for the other party to
respond and at the first sign of a split,

147
clarify the final price of the contract

($24,000) and be ready for the signing
of the contract.
This is only a simple scenario so
always remember that you can do so
much more with this technique when
you begin applying it in the real world.
This technique almost never causes
any headaches because the splitting of
the difference will always be initiated
by the other party, not you.
In essence, the other party will be the
one responsible for creating a better
deal, not you. So the other party wont
feel that it is being controlled or forced
in any manner. Whatever the other
negotiator feels after the exchange is
no longer relevant because it would be
appear that you have relinquished full

148
control of the exchange to the other

party!
5.
Do not try to be too pushy with the

splitting of the difference because if
you want this technique to really work,
the other party should feel that it had
actually won the negotiation and not
the other way around.
If the other negotiator feels that he is
being trapped or manipulated, a split
wont occur, trust me. Even if you
resolve to the higher authority
technique, the other negotiator will no
longer make concessions because he
will feel that he is being actively
deceived during the negotiation. No
one likes to feel that he is being
deceived, ever.

149
Part 4: Sealing the Deal

Tu r n i n g a D i s a g re e m e n t i n t o a
Profitable Exchange
To n o v i c e n e g o t i a t o r s , a s i n g l e
disagreement can feel like the end of the
negotiation (and in some cases, the end of
the world). One of the things that I have
learned over the years is that in order to
become a true Maverick Negotiator, you
need to be able to differentiate between the
common stumbling blocks during a
negotiation.
Not every disagreement can result in a
deadlock. Sometimes, its a simple
impasse that you are dealing with and the
situation must be dealt with correctly if
you want to succeed in getting what you
need from the negotiation.

150
Because if you treat an impasse as a

deadlock, both parties will walk away with
nothing because you will stop working
towards a good resolution for whatever it
is that you do not agree with.
Remember an impasse results when the
other party gives an offer or detail that you
find completely unacceptable. In short,
there is simply a problem or a series of
problems that have to be fixed before the
negotiation can end on a positive note. The
existence of problems (big or small) does
not necessarily mean that you will lose the
negotiation.
On the contrary, if there are objections and
problems, that means the other party still
wants to interact with you. The other
negotiator still hasnt bid you farewell and

151
that means there is still hope for the

negotiation.
Here are some guidelines for handling
impasses during a negotiation:
1.
The first thing that you should know

about impasses is that essentially, they
are just problems of varying degrees.
So you approach impasses as you
would any problem with a solution.
It would be fairly easy to become
hostile to your fellow negotiator if an
impasse is reached and it might even
feel as if a deadlock has already
occurred. But 9 times out of 10, the socalled deadlock can be solved if you
take apart the objections one by one.

152
2.
Instead of becoming hostile to the

other negotiator, use the sweep away
technique to make room for solutions.
Objections and problems in general
can make the negotiation table
cluttered so you need to sweep away
the clutter so both negotiators can see
things more clearly. Instead of
becoming stuck on the major problem,
start addressing the smaller problems
that both of you have mentioned
throughout the negotiation.
Propose solutions for these smaller
problems first and build that much
needed momentum. When you are able
to blow off some steam and the other
party is seeing some progress in terms
of solving the smaller problems with
what you are negotiating, that would

153
be the time to speak to the negotiator

about the main problem which had
been responsible for the impasse.
3.
It is very important that you craft your

sweep away statements carefully so
you can divert the other negotiators
attention away from the main problem.
A tried and tested formula for this
would be: I completely understand
what you are feeling right now about
___________ but let us set that aside
for just a minute and talk about
_____________________, which is
also worthy of our attention. This issue
is also important for ___________, is
this correct? Once the other
negotiator has been distracted, you can
begin tackling the smaller problems
and you can definitely begin to lay

154
down some of the best solutions you

have for these smaller problems.
Breaking Down Stalemates
Stalemates are another common problem
in negotiation because both negotiators
will begin to feel that nothing beneficial is
coming out of the negotiation itself. A
stalemate can occur for a variety of
reasons, not just because both parties are
not agreeing to the terms of the different
offers.
For example, a stalemate can occur if one
person is unable to understand the benefits
of an offer and the other party is at his
wits end as to how to explain the specifics
of the offer. The two parties can continue
talking for hours and the negotiation may
even continue to the next day but if

155
nothing is done to address the stalemate

itself, its possible that no favorable
settlement of the issue will be achieved.
Being in a stalemate also means that one
or both parties have lost their momentum
within the negotiation. There might be a
breakdown of communication within one
group of negotiators or the other group just
doesnt understand the approach of the
other party. Here are some ways that you
can change the direction of a dialogue that
seems to have stalemated:
1.
The number one cause of a stalemate is

the people involved in the negotiation.
Obviously, you cannot request people
from the other negotiation team to just
leave.

156
So what you can do is to change the

people within your own negotiation
team. If you go to negotiations alone it
might be a good idea to ask someone
who is as equally talented at
negotiations to take your place.
A fresh face and a new perspective just
might dissolve the stalemate that has
frozen both parties in place during the
negotiation. Just make sure that you
tactfully excuse yourself from the
negotiating table.
Avoid dropping statements like You
know what, Im just tired of this
exchange so someone else is taking my
place this afternoon. Good luck to that
guy, God knows he needs it!.

157
Even if you say such things in jest, the

fact of the matter is that the other party
will take such statements as an insult
and you wont make any progress if the
other party has been personally
offended by you.
2.
The environment also has an effect on

people. So if you have been trying to
settle the same problem over and over
again for the past three days in your
office, why not suggest a change of
environment? Talking in a great
restaurant with good food never hurt
anyone.
And frankly speaking, good food
always improves a negotiators mood.
If the other party is from another city
or state, show the negotiators some

158
genuine hospitality and see if that will

have an impact on the other party.
3.
There are times when a member of

your own negotiating party is causing
problems. If one member from your
team has personally offended anyone
from the other party, it might help if
you got rid of that team member for the
time being. Dont whack your team
member for offending the other team
because even annoying negotiators
play a crucial role in the context of
negotiations.
Think reciprocity and concessions.
Once the thorn on the side is gone the
other party will be more open to
discussing the problematic issues that
are causing the stalemate. This may not
have been possible at all if you allowed

159
that one team member to stay on the

negotiation table.
4.
Sometimes, the pressure of a

negotiation can really get to a person
so much that he has a hard time
thinking straight.
If you think the other party has become

so saturated and exhausted, its time to
give the other party a little breathing
space. Change the topic and have a few
laughs (if at all appropriate or
permissible) just to break the
monotony of the negotiation.
5.
If the negotiation is business-related, it

might be helpful if you offered small
concessions or some beneficial,

160
structural modifications to the other

party.
For example, if you had been
requesting for 50% down payment for
the contract, you can reduce the
percentage to 40% just to breathe new
life into the negotiations once again.
People might generally fear change but
in the context of negotiation, positive
changes can actually spell the
difference between a successful
dialogue and a stalemate.
Some negotiators are a little leery
about offering payment-related
concessions to the other party because
it might seem that you are giving the
other party a bigger slice of the pie.

161
But in reality, there are instances when

one company/business/organization
has financial difficulties and a
restructured financial plan just might
help that business close a deal with
your own company or organization.
Viewed from this perspective, you
easily see how you can help close a
tight negotiation by simply being
sensitive to the current status of what
the other party is actually representing.
6.
If the other party is worried about the

perceived risk involved in what is
being offered, then it might be a good
idea to offer something that will offset
the risk. Guarantees are excellent when
it comes to this type of problem. For
example, if you represent an
electronics distribution company, you

162
can offer the other party a reduced

restocking agreement.
Reduction of risk can end a negotiation
on a positive note most of the time.
Often, parties are only waiting for
certain details to be brought up and
resolved.
It can be frustrating that some
negotiators seem to be more concerned
with hiding the problems than
resolving them but that is the nature of
negotiations and we cant really force
other people to think like Maverick
Negotiators.
7.
Analyze how the negotiations have

been going so far. It might help if you
modified your plan of attack just to
change the course of the exchange.

163
For example, if you have been offering

so many concession and the other party
is just not responding to your
concessions, why not make a few more
demands?
If you have been making a lot of
demands in the past few hours, it might
help if you gave a few concessions to
keep the other party interested in what
you have to say.
Ending Deadlocks
A deadlock occurs when two or more
parties involved in a negotiation have
given up all hope of a favorable resolution.
When a deadlock occurs, parties involved

164
are generally ready to call it quits so they

can finally leave the negotiation table.
You might be thinking if a deadlock
occurs then there is no hope and it would
be futile to continue working with the
other party. Well, sometimes this is true
especially if the other party seems to be
more concerned with your demise rather
than on an agreement that is mutually
beneficial.
Believe me, you will eventually encounter
such negotiators. Not being able to come
up with a solution in such situations is not
a sign of weakness. It is a sign that the
other negotiator is bent on enforcing only
his requirements and a one-sided
settlement of the matter.

165
If everything else has failed and you are at

a loss as to how to fix the negotiation, your
only recourse would be to bring in a
mediator.
A mediator is different from an arbiter. An
arbiter is someone who creates a solution
that both parties must accept regardless of
what they may think of the solution. A
deadlock ends because a third party is
brought into the scene and that third party
will have the power to nullify any
complaints from either side.
Most of the time, regular negotiators cant

just say that they want to bring in some
smart arbiter to finally solve the problem.
Unless you are willing to bring in your

166
legal team to formally request for legal

arbitration, chances are you will only be
able to bring in a mediator to the
negotiation table.
A mediator is a third party that will help
settle the issue by working closely with
each of parties involved. The mediator will
be responsible for gathering any loose
ends that may have been missed by both
parties during the entire negotiation.
Many negotiators absolutely detest the
idea of bringing in arbitration or
mediation. Why? Because negotiators
have a general conception that the
existence of mediation during a
negotiation means that at least one of the
negotiating parties are weak in terms of
solving problems and creating good
solutions.

167
If this is how you perceive mediation, I

endeavor you to simply discard this old
perception of third party mediation
because if a deadlock occurs and you force
the other party to keep talking even if the
other group is already visibly hostile, you
are going to end up with a very nasty
situation on your hands.
Bringing in a third party to mediate the
negotiation will ensure fair play and will
also ensure that no party will try to give an
offer that is not mutually beneficial to both
parties.

168
Here are some reminders when bringing in

a mediator to a negotiation:
1.
Accept the fact that you need

mediation. The mediator is not there to
prove that you have poor negotiation
skills. He is there to ensure that both
parties are able to arrive at a fair
settlement of the issue. If you are not
concerned with arriving at a fair
settlement at the negotiation table, that
is a sign that you do not know what
you are doing as a negotiator.
One of the most important traits of a
Maverick Negotiator is knowing when
to call for mediation. A true negotiator
knows when a deadlock has occurred
and when it does, only a neutral third
party will be able to help solve the

169
problems that have arisen during the

negotiation.
2.
3.
The mediator should be approved by

both parties, not just your negotiating
team. Even if you have the home
team advantage, do not abuse your
power to call the shots just because
the negotiation is taking place in one of
your companys conference rooms.
The other party must see that the
mediator that has been brought to the
negotiation table is neutral. If the other
party feels like the mediator has some
hidden agenda of some sort, the
negotiators on that side of the fence
will do everything in their power to
oppose any input from the mediator. If
neutrality is not established, the other
party will most likely view the

170
mediator as a spy of sorts and that will

result in further conflict.
Historic Gambit
There are special times when a deadlock
actually forces the other party to make
concessions and adjust their own position.
One good example of this situation
occurred in 1996 when three Red Cross
workers were kidnapped and held captive
by the rebel group SPLA-Barh al-Ghazal.
The three Red Cross workers were then
working at an encampment that took care
of wounded soldiers. At first, the SPLABahr al-Ghazal wanted one hundred
million dollars in ransom for the three Red
Cross workers.

171
The Kenyan government did not want to

make such a concession and the ransom
demand dropped to two and a half million
dollars. Congressman Bill Richardson
from the US stepped in to help.
He travelled to the exact area where the
Red Cross workers were being held
captive. Naturally, members of the SPLABarh al-Ghazal used intimidation tactics to
try to get the two and a half million dollars
ransom that their leader Kerbino Kwayn
Bol wanted.
Congressman Bill Richardson knew that
even if it was possible to acquire such an
amount just to free the Red Cross workers,
he would be setting a bad example for the
world.

172
Making large concessions to people who

regularly terrorized villages was never a
good thing. So instead of trying to
negotiate directly with the SPLA-Barh alGhazal, Congressman Richardson simply
kept quiet and just sat under a tree.
Eventually, the kidnappers relented and
they released the Red Cross workers in
exchange for the following items:
-
5 tons of rice
Four used jeeps (rugged utility vehicles
with diesel engines)
Nine radios from the Red Cross camp
Health survey of the people in the rebel
camp
The hostages were freed and no cash was

g i v e n o n t h a t d a y. C o n g r e s s m a n
Richardson may have created a deadlock

173
on purposed, but he walked home a

winning negotiator that day.
And the whole world now knows how
even a deadlock can be used a Maverick
Negotiator to gain the upper hand even
under the most pressurized situations.
Enforce Reciprocal Action
Giving concessions is a fact of life when it
comes to the negotiation table. No matter
how hard we try to stick to our original
offers, people will continue to demand
some concessions during a dialogue. Its
natural for negotiators to want a better
deal And most of the time, fellow
negotiators are open to giving concessions.
There is nothing wrong with adjusting
your position strategically, if it wont harm

174
your goal. But I have to remind all

Maverick Negotiators that you must
enforce reciprocal action whenever you
give concessions. Remember our rule
regarding actions?
The value of an action decreases rapidly
after the benefit has been received. So
even before that happens, you have to
enforce reciprocal action by demanding
trade-offs.
Some people might view this particular
guideline as a bit draconian but I assure
you, if the other party has the right to
demand for concessions you definitely
have the right to demand for trade-offs
immediately.
You can even state the trade-off before you
agree to any concessions. That is how

175
negotiations work and if you want to come

out on top, you have to remember this rule
by heart.
Asking for a trade-off is easy. Here is the
formula:
That sounds fine, but I have to consult
first with ______________, so let me get
back to you on that. If _____________
does agree with what you propose, what
will do for us in return?
As you can plainly see, asking for a tradeoff requires four techniques combined. Let
us analyze the formula so you can see how
our past discussions will help you craft the
best negotiation statements of your life.
The first part of the formula is centered on
expressing agreement. As we have already

176
discussed before, it would be best if you

always agreed to something to reduce the
conflict during any interaction.
A non-committal agreement will work in

most cases but you have to make sure that
you do not fall into the trap of agreeing
that you will not be referring to the
decision of a higher authority. And that
brings us to the second part of the formula.
When someone asks you for a special
benefit or concession or even a tiny
adjustment on your current offer, you need
to remind the other party that you are not
the direct decision maker some higher
authority is actually listening in on the
negotiation.

177
This will help expand your breathing space

during the negotiation and the pressure on
you to make an immediate decision will
also rapidly dissipate because you are not
responsible for making any instant
decisions during the actual negotiation.
The next component in the formula is the
unwilling seller/unwilling buyer gambit.
You have already expressed agreement and
you have stated that the decision of a
higher authority must be given before you
can make the concession. Now would be a
great time to give the other party a
glimmer of hope So we give the other
party hope. We say that if your side agrees
to the concession, what will they give
back?
This question is extremely important
because you are establishing a formal

178
agreement between the two parties. If you

can get this inked down on paper, thats
fine but if you are dealing with individuals
from other cultures that prefer handshakes
over signed contracts, adjust your
approach accordingly.
The more important thing here is that you

get the other party to seal the deal in terms
of reciprocal action. You will be closing
off any chances of the other party not
offering any reciprocal benefit after you
have done your part in sweetening the
deal. Remember you must always get
something in return if you adjust your
position for the other party.

179
What if the other party is too smug

because you are the one who approached
them in the first place? Do not back down
so easily if you cannot get the other
party to offer anything concrete,
emphasize that the concession may not be
carried out if no clear benefit is promised
in the first place.
This is not hubris at all it is simply
stating fact. You represent a business or
organization who has agreed to provide
something under certain conditions. If any
of these conditions are modified because
of a concession then it logically follows
that something concrete has to be offered
to ensure that the interests of the
organization or business are also protected.

180
Heroes & Villains

Nothing could be more annoying than
having to deal with a nemesis on the
negotiation table. A villain is a character
from the other party that is hell-bent on
twisting your words so that you will end
up giving more than what you are prepared
to give during the negotiation.
A villain can also be someone who is so
unpleasant that his mere presence is a
burden on the negotiation because he
keeps saying the wrong things at the most
inopportune moments.
A villain can definitely offend the other
party so much that the other negotiators
can be prepared to walk if you let the

181
nemesis stay for a long period of time on

the negotiation table.
Many negotiators are prepared to lash out
at a fellow negotiator who seems to be
giving the other negotiating team a hard
time.
But did you know that having a villain on
your team can actually be quiet handy?
Before I get any violent reactions from any
of the budding Mavericks in my team, let
me just clarify: a villain is handy because
he will help set the stage for the arrival of
a positive agent the hero.
Without a villain, the arrival of a hero
character on the negotiation table will not
create a huge impact on the other party.

182
On the flip-side, if you bring in a fellow

that will cause some problems for the
other party and you get rid of this
character somewhere down the line, you
will be able to set the stage for a great
dialogue after the villain has left the
negotiation table. This technique can be
seen easily in Hollywood movies where
tough mugs are involved.
Picture this a random thug (obviously
not too bright or literate) is brought into a
police station for questioning. The police
knows that a much bigger criminal is
pulling the strings and the thug in front of
them is just a pawn. So they begin
questioning the thug but he just wont
budge because he knows that he might end
up in the slammer with little or no hope of
getting out.

183
The first interrogator is violent he

screams a lot and he even threatens to hit
the thug with his pistol. He ends up with
nothing but the thug is visibly shaken.
Hes the villain in the thugs story. The
first police interrogator is the guy that the
thug would rather not see again.
When the first police interrogator leaves, a
second interrogator enters the scene. This
time, the interrogator seems kind and easygoing. He speaks in a low voice and he
seems to be genuinely interested in helping
the thug.
He says you know what, there is a big
chance that you can get out of here without
black eyes When the big guy comes
back you just have to tell him who ordered
the hit and you will be home free. Trust

184
me. The thug believes him and the rest, is

history.
Of course, the second interrogator is
simply playing the role of the hero because
he wants to help out his colleague. In
reality, he is aligned with the objectives of
his own team. He just made it appear that
he was secretly helping out the other
camp.
This illustrates perfectly what the hero
character is all about in the context of
negotiation. As a Maverick Negotiator you
have to learn how to maximize the
potential impact of all the negotiators in
your team.
Of course, you cant play both villain and
hero in the story. There has to be another
person that the other party will dread. The
villain creates the undesirable atmosphere

185
and the hero will provide the relief from

the villain once he leaves the negotiation
table.
Now, if you cant pull in someone to play
the role of the villain during the
negotiation, you can still use this
technique by creating the villain in the
other negotiators mind.
You can play the part of the hero
immediately and say that you will be the
bridge between the stricter higher
authority and the other party. By playing
the role of the good guy, even if the other
negotiator will not completely believe that
you are a neutral individual, you will be
able to facilitate the settlement of the issue
at hand much more quickly.

186
What can you do if someone else is using

the hero/villain technique on you? Should
you allow yourself to be pulled into the
ruse? Should you adjust your position to
accommodate what the other party is
doing?
Here are some guidelines to help you
handle someone who is using this
technique during a negotiation to gain the
upper hand:
1.
If you catch the other person, expose

his ruse by saying please dont use the
hero/villain tactic on me, lets us just
sit here and talk about the main
problem and lets see if we will be able
to come up with a good solution for it.

187
Usually this is enough to prevent the

other person from using this technique.
Embarrassment is a very powerful tool
on the negotiation table. I dont
encourage everyone to use
embarrassment on a regular basis but if
someone is trying to use this technique
on you, then you have to protect your
interests. Better not risk it because
eventually, this technique will force
you into making some concessions that
will benefit the other party.
2.
You can definitely counter the hero/

villain technique with the same
technique. If the other negotiator is
saying that a higher authority is
causing problems or someone in his
negotiating team is making things hard,
you can do the same.

188
You can say that a committee is

breathing down your neck and the only
way that you can make any
concessions is if they make specific
concessions. That way, if they are
going to ask for any favors there will
automatically be a trade-off that will
benefit you.
3.
If you think you can pull it off, go past

the negotiator and contact the higher
authority. It doesnt matter if you cant
get ahold of the actual acquisition
committee.
Contact the supervisor or manager that
you know and tell him that the

189
negotiators are playing hero/villain

with you.
I have to tell you though this
particular step can cause problems so
do it only if nothing else is working. If
you dont have any choice and you
have to negotiate with just one person,
you have to end his ruse by asking his
superior directly.
4.
If you are dealing with two or more

people and one of the negotiators is
doing the villains routine, you can
easily dissolve the technique by saying
I am getting a lot of confusing signals
from your group and I wont allow you
to continue giving me mixed signals.
From now on, whatever that guy says
will also be attributed to you and you. I

190
am going to treat all your feedback as

one. If they are using the villain/hero
technique, I am sure that the villain
will become much nicer and more
accommodating after you have given
them your final word regarding their
approach to the negotiation.
5.
If you dont want to embarrass the

other party by revealing that you know
what they are doing in the first place, it
might be helpful if you just let the
villain finish his piece.
Eventually, your non-responsiveness to
the approach of the villain will exhaust
the villains own team members and he
will be sent away or silenced. The
other party gains nothing from using
the technique and you are free to

191
continue enforcing the most favorable

position in the negotiation.

192
Part 5: Tightening Loose Ends

Tidbits of Benefits
The best time to ask a little more from the
other party is after you have successfully
gotten a deal in the first place. So if you
want to get more benefits from one
particular exchange, you have to make
sure that you ask at the right time
otherwise, you wont be able to get the
maximum benefit from the dialogue.
Imagine the negotiation as a treasure hunt
of sorts. You dont ask the other guy for a
better share of gold and jewels before you

193
even find the actual treasure. You ask

when the other guys jumping up and
down out of relief that there was a treasure
in the first place and it has finally been
located.
That is the psychology behind tidbits of
benefits or what is known in the world of
negotiation as nibbling. As the name
implies, tidbits of benefits is a strategy that
allows a negotiator to get a few more
concessions just before he says goodbye to
the other party.
What is interesting about the concept of
nibbling is that generally speaking, people
find it easier to give more concessions
after they have agreed to do something for
the other party.

194
Studies have shown that people are more

likely to agree to more demands after all
the pressure of arriving at a major
decision has finally dissipated. People are
more likely to agree with what you want
because they dont want to restart the
whole negotiation process. In short, people
generally want to get it over with and
agreeing to some concession is much
easier than having to negotiate all over
again.
As a Maverick Negotiator you must also
remember that the more effort you put into
a negotiation after a decision has finally
been made, the better the results.
The extra effort that you give after a deal
has been struck will definitely improve the
outcomes of all your other deals and will
ensure that you will get the maximum

195
benefit out of every negotiation that you

handle.
Nibbling for tidbits of benefits can also be
done before you end the negotiation for
that day. Let us say that you are really
close to arriving at a favorable settlement.
Just before you say goodbye to the other
party, you can pull out a document to
discuss the details of a smaller deal that
they might be interested in. Nibbling is a
great way to get the approval of the other
party right before the big deal is struck. It
prepares the other party mentally for the
big decision.
Just make sure that whatever you are
offering during the nibbling phase has low
risk and maximum benefits. Otherwise, the
other party might feel that you are just

196
increasing the risk associated with their

transaction with you. But if you focus on
giving the other party a small, win-win
solution to one of their problems, you are
definitely on the right track.
The big question now is: is it possible for
other people to be using the same
technique during negotiations? Yes.
Because despite the potency of this
technique it is actually one of the most
common negotiation tactics in existence.
It is common because we first learn about
it when as children. Children are great
negotiators because they have fertile
imaginations and they have a natural talent
for wheeling and dealing.

197
Once a child understands the concept of

giving something in return for something
else, the wheeling and dealing begins.
Children are also sensitive to the feedback
of adults so they learn very quickly which
negotiation strategies work and which do
not.
Unfortunately, we lose our natural knack
for negotiating with others as we age
because adults typically discard wholesale
anything that is related to childhood.
Watch how children wheel and deal and
you will definitely learn a thing or two
about negotiating.
Here are some guidelines to help protect
your side from any nibbling behavior from
the other party:

198
1.
2.
Do not put yourself up as the main

decision maker. Even if you are the big
boss of your business, emphasize that a
committee is in charge of studying and
approving new deals and acquisitions
and you are just an agent (for all
intents and purposes) during the
negotiation.
Be firm in laying down your
requirements and what you are willing
to give. Do not give in when you sense
nibbling behavior after a deal has been
struck. Chances are, the other party
wont reverse the deal just because you
refused especially if the concessions
that are being requested are not really
connected to the main issue that has
been tackled in the negotiation.

199
3.
4.
Never rely on handshakes and nods

during a negotiation especially if you
are discussing important details. All
details should be approved and signed
by both parties so the other party wont
nibble on you after the deal has been
struck.
Give the other party a deal they cant
refuse so they would find no reason
to start nibbling on you. People
generally feel that they need to nibble
because they think the deal is a little
one-sided. If you are getting all of the
main benefits and the other party only
has a cupful of advantages after the
deal, you need to change a few things
yourself.
Giving concessions in this scenario is
much better than have to deal with

200
random nibblings that can cause a lot

of inconveniences and inconsistencies
down the line.
For example, a client might decide to
request for additional payment
paperwork just so he wont have to pay
immediately. That is one form of
indirect nibbling and the other party
feels entitled to it because deep down,
the negotiators dont feel satisfied at all
with the deal that they have been
given.

201
Taming the Concession Monster

Concessions are important when
negotiating but it is also a well-known fact
that too many concessions can ruin your
position and your negotiation goals.
Here are some guidelines that you should
remember to avoid destroying your own
position when you negotiate with others:
1.
Dont be a predictable negotiator.

Avoid giving concessions that follow a
particular pattern. For example, if you
want to give the other party a discount,
dont do it regular increments.
Heres a scenario that will help draw
out this point. Let us say that you were
trying to sell your collection of rare
golden watches. Initially, you had

202
priced your collection at $20,000 but

you are fine with $15,000.
One buyer was really interested in
buying your collection and was willing
to pay in cash. This got you really
excited and you open up the
negotiating table for this new buyer. Of
course, the buyer is interested in
getting a discount. You are a
reasonable guy so you give him a
$1,000 discount if he pays in cash.
He asks you for a day or two to decide
and you let him walk away so he can
make a decision in peace. Some hours
later the same buyer calls you up and
asks if you cut down the price again for
some reason or another.

203
He seems eager to buy the whole

collection so you cut down the price
again by $1,000 with the condition that
he buys the whole collection as soon as
possible.
The buyer then approaches you and
tells you that his wife is blocking the
purchase if he needs to pay $18,000 for
the whole collection. He says that his
wife will only agree if you give him
another discount.
And you do the price goes down by a
total of $3,000 before the sale is made.
To some, that amount of money might
seem insignificant compared to the
amount of money that was gained.
But did you get the maximum
advantage during the negotiation? No.

204
Unfortunately, this type of scenario is

far too common in the world of
negotiation because people tend to act
based on pre-determined patterns.
Patterns make people feel secure and in
control.
You might be in control in terms of
what type of concession you are giving
the other party but because your
concessions follow a regular pattern,
the other party will attempt to take
advantage of that.
Like a boulder rolling down a hill, it
may be difficult to stop it once you
start giving into too many requests for
concessions.

205
2.
Concessions that are far too large can

cause problems for you as well during
negotiations. Lets say you were trying
to sell your laptop computer for
$2,000.
Your friend wants to buy it but not
before you have given a substantial
discount. You slash $500 off the price
and you are fine with $1,500 but he
asks for another discount.
You say okay, Im going to ask for
just $1,100 for my laptop and that is it.
That is my rock bottom price. Your
friend is probably thinking that if you
could slash $900 off the price like it
was nothing then you could probably
give some more discounts.

206
Whether you can or cannot give any

more discounts doesnt matter to the
other negotiator. The way you have
given concessions communicates that
you have a treasure trove of
concessions to give away.
If the other party starts thinking this
way, your position will be weakened
and the other party will start playing
hard to get because he will think that
you still have more concessions to give
him and you are just holding out on
him.
3.
Some negotiators feel that they can

make one huge concession and that
would be the end of it. No one really
benefits from giving away huge
concessions.

207
The best deals are struck if a position is

adjusted bit by bit until an agreement is
reached by both parties. So if you are
thinking that you can make your job
easier by just giving your absolute best
offer, the other party will not see it that
way at all.
So if you are willing to give a $2,000
discount, make the concessions few
and far in between. Make one big
concession followed by a several small
ones.
That way, you can taper the flow of
concessions and make sure that
whenever you make a concession, the
other party will reciprocate with an
equally beneficial action on your
behalf.

208
4.
Some veteran negotiators say that they

hate negotiating. Dont believe this for
one brief moment.
If a fellow negotiator says that all he
needs from you is your best possible
offer because his company does not
negotiate with suppliers and other
companies, start with your initial offer
and let him ask for concessions.
Once he starts asking for concessions,
the other party would have already
obliterated his own statement that he
does not negotiate. Check mate.
5.
Before making any concessions, make

the other party work for it. Dont let
smiles and requests get the better of
you.

209
By making the other party really work

for your concessions, you are
communicating that you have a limit
and once they hit that limit they are no
longer going to get any more
concessions from you.
They can continue trying but they
know that as they receive smaller and
smaller concessions they are going to
eventually hit bedrock and that would
be the time that they have to accept
your offer or walk away.
Being firm in your position is
important because if you keep
adjusting your position just because the
other party wants you to, you are going
to lose your potency as a Maverick
Negotiator.

210
6.
Plan your negotiations carefully even

before the meeting. Know what your
goals and limits are so you will have a
clear idea as to how to handle the other
party.
If you do not know your goals and if
you cannot tie up these goals with your
limits, you might end up with a losewin situation where only the other
party walks away happy with the deal
that has been struck.
The No Sale Technique

There will be times in your life when you
feel the pressure to close a deal and
because of this pressure, you will be
willing to pay for things at full price.

211
If you are going to pay for stuff at full

price on the negotiation table, what is the
point of negotiating at all? The fact of the
matter is that people convene on the
negotiating table for one reason alone to
get the better advantage.
One of the sneakiest techniques in the
book that almost always brings home the
bacon is the no sale technique or the
withdrawal close. The no sale
technique is a devious tactic used to put
the pressure directly on the other
negotiator so that he would readily accept
the other partys offer. Here is a scenario
to show you how this technique works.
Let us say that you were trying to buy a
used car for your daughter or wife. You
have a really good car model in mind and

212
you have actually found a seller who was

offering the car for $7,000.
You were prepared to pay $10,000 for it
but when you hear that the owner was
willing to sell it for $7,000 you
immediately tell him that you cant
possibly buy an old car for $7,000.
You say that your absolute limit for the car
is $5,000. The owner of the car says that
he has to consult with his wife and kids (in
this case, they are the higher authority).
So you meet again with the car owner the
next day and he says my wife has done
some research and it turns out that the
market value of our car is actually quite
high. We have estimated it to be around
$12,000. That is our new price for the car.
Take it or leave it.

213
The new price causes a shudder in your

spine. You are shocked that the car owner
had withdrawn his original offer and had
actually gone up to $12,000. You have
already told your family that you have
found the perfect little car and they are all
waiting for you to drive it home. Now you
are stuck between a rock and a hard place.
You cant go home and tell them that you
lost the car because you wanted $5,000 for
it. The wife will be really angry with you
and she will probably not understand what
you were trying to do as a Maverick
Negotiator.
Instead of imagining what would happen if

you didnt bring home the car, you ask the

214
owner if he can give you a concession

because $12,000 is just too much. He
plays the hero character in your exchange
and says if you buy this car today for
$7,000 Im going to take one for the team
and give it to you, friend.
You jump at the opportunity and you are
just happy that you were able to drive
home the car for less than $10,000. But
wait you didnt get any real concessions
from the exchange.
In fact, the owner of the car was able to
get his original price for the car. By hiking
up the price of the car to $12,000 he was
able to sell it to you at full price
effortlessly.
Your own internal turmoil was his capital
and he took advantage of the fact that

215
people were expecting you to bring home

the car that day.
You didnt lose a lot of money the day you
bought the car since your budget was more
than $7,000. But on the negotiating table,
you had definitely lost to the withdrawal
close.
This is how powerful this technique can
be. Im sure you are ready to utilize it for
yourself so here are some reminders when
you do so:
1.
T h e w i t h d r a w a l c l o s e d o e s n t
necessarily mean that you are going to
literally walk away from the meeting.
No, it simply means that you will be
withdrawing an offer that you had
made earlier.

216
This offer can be a concession, a price,

etc. In short, you are going to withdraw
your offer because you cant agree
with what the other person wants.
The withdrawal close is most effective
when use the higher authority move as
well. It is hard to explain why you
changed your mind but it is easy to
justify why a committee changed its
mind.
The higher authority is always viewed
as inscrutable and powerful and all
the other party can do is work with
what the higher authority has
approved.
2.
If you want to get the most out of this

technique, your first position or offer

217
should be your MAP or maximum

acceptable position.
For example, if the lowest figure you
can accept is $5,000, you must not use
this as your initial offer because the
other party will definitely try to drive
the figure down to below $5,000.
If you think that $10,000 is the most
that you can get for what you are
offering, use $10,000 as your initial
position and use it as your lowest offer.
3.
Make your initial offer and wait for the

other party to ask for a concession. If
your initial offer was $10,000 and the
concession is for $7,000, tell the other
party that you cannot make a decision
on the same day but you will definitely
bring the issue up to the higher

218
authority. On your next meeting,

increase the figure a little just to
jumpstart the negotiation. From
$10,000 make it $13,000.
Just make sure that you have a good
reason why the fee was increased in
the first place. At this point in time you
can cite human error as the reason why
the price became $13,000. Wait for the
other party to react to the increase in
the figure. When he asks for a
concession, slowly adjust your position
so that it becomes $10,000 again.
Ask the other party if they would like
to take advantage of the $10,000 mark.
There is a very high probability that
your fellow negotiator will opt for
$10,000 instead of $13,000. Its only
logical and at that point in time he

219
would have forgotten all about the

$7,000 he had wanted on the first
meeting!
Leading the Other Party to a Favorable
Close
Maverick Negotiators should be
knowledgeable not only in the various
strategies needed to acquire the best
possible advantage during a dialogue a
truly powerful negotiator must also know
how to create the perfect environment for
a favorable close.
One of the things that many people dont
know is that often, negotiators are driven
by irrational drives (and their ego, too).
So if you have done everything you can to
make the deal more appealing and

220
acceptable to the other party and you still

cant get the other negotiator to say yes,
then its time to actively lead him so that
he will finally accept your offer. Here is a
situational example that will help explain
this common conundrum.
Let us say that you represent a factory and
you were trying to sell to a business that
needed a large quantity of your products.
You were invited to the owners office and
he had told his staff that he was going to
use all his willpower to negotiate a really
good deal for the business. Everyone was
expecting a spectacle and the owner really
felt good that he could finally put all his
years of experience with the business to
good use.

221
Unfortunately for him, you are a Maverick

Negotiator and soon enough, he is unsure
if he is really getting a good deal or not
so he just says no to everything you say.
He becomes inconsistent and you can see
in his body language that he is refusing
because he feels that he doesnt
completely understand why your offer
sounds so good.
His ego is in the way of closing the deal
and you are aware that the clock is ticking
hours are rolling by and the business
owner is just holding on to that last strand
of resistance because he doesnt want to
look like he doesnt know what he is
doing.
He plays a few tactics on you but none of
them work. He doesnt want to admit
defeat so he makes one last effort to save

222
face as a negotiator. He asks for a big

concession that was nowhere near your
best offer.
In situations like this, what must you do as
a Maverick Negotiator? Should you go
ahead and make that last concession and
give in to the pressure? Or should you
handle the problem differently?
The answer to this problem is actually
quite simple: offer a tiny concession and
nothing more. Ignore any random requests
just before the close and just offer one
final concession right after you ask the
other party to sign the deal.
So if you are from the factory, you can tell
the other party that you can expedite the
delivery of the goods within the week if

223
they decide to go along with your best

offer.
You must emphasize that the tradeoff for
you would be to deliver the goods earlier
even if you had already planned to deliver
it that week. But this particular fact
doesnt matter at all because your goal is
to simply lead the other negotiator so that
he feels that he is control and that he is the
winner of that particular negotiation.
In order to take full control of the situation
it is important that you stick to small
concession only. Dont fall into the trap of
offering big ones just because you want
the negotiation to finish already. If you
have spent the last three days talking to the
same person about a single contract, you
might as well spend another hour ironing
out the last few wrinkles that are

224
preventing the other party from closing the

deal in your favor.
When a negotiator feels lost, he refuses
that is the primal instinct in negotiation.
By saying no, a negotiator is trying to reestablish some degree of control over the
situation. It doesnt matter if you have
been talking for hours for the last three
days. What matters is that he feels that he
is in control.
A small concession right after the deal is
struck is also effective in lessening buyer
remorse. Buyer remorse hits us all and
sometimes, that feeling that you are going
to regret buying something creeps up on
people just before the deal is made.
Concessions nullify buyer remorse
because the mind will process the

225
concession as something of additional

value and that makes everything seem
better than before.
Once you have made the small concession
and the other party has finally agreed to
sign the contract, you must remember to
congratulate the other party for a job well
done. Do this sincerely and ignore the fact
that you gained the most benefit from the
exchange. Remember the other party has
to feel good that he went ahead and
accepted your offer despite some
apprehension.
Use simple words that will describe how
well the other party was able to handle the
negotiation. Dont overdo it though be
sincere but make sure that you dont come
across as patronizing or anything like that.
Help the other negotiator convince himself

226
that he has done a good job and he has

gotten the best possible deal at that place
and time.
Being kind and sincere after a negotiation
will also ensure that if ever you do
encounter the same negotiator in the future
again, he wont be out to win against you,
specifically. Negotiation might feel like a
contest of sorts but it shouldnt be treated
in this manner at all.
Why? Imagine yourself leaving a trail of
defeated negotiators those people are
going to make sure that they will get the
upper hand the next time you negotiate
again.
This will happen if they feel that they have
been ground to fine dust during the

227
negotiations. So it would be best to keep

the other party happy and just
acknowledge that they have also done a
good job. If you had to use several
techniques to get the best deal, then its
like that you were dealing with a powerful
negotiator too.
The Distraction Principle
Tight focus is one of the most important
traits of any negotiator and that is the
reason why we will be discussing the
distraction principle in this section.
The distraction principle is used to gain
extra benefits during a dialogue that would
have otherwise been impossible because
the other party would have rejected the
concessions outright. Think of the
distraction principle as a perfect way to

228
carry out your secret agenda during a

negotiation. How does this technique
work?
Easy you use a decoy to distract the
other party so that they would struggle
against the decoy. The decoy can be funds
availability, time constraint or some other
detail that would make the deal virtually
impossible or extremely difficult to carry
out. Heres a scenario to help you visualize
how the distraction principle is carried out.
Lets say you were trying to buy new
machinery from a new supplier. The
negotiator from new supplier is kind
enough to extend a $5,000 discount
outright because you were a new customer
and you were requesting for more than a
dozen large machines. However, you still

229
wanted to save a few thousand dollars

more.
What do you do? You distract the other
party by mentioning a specific detail that
will take their focus away from their initial
position. Lets say you complain about the
delivery time of the equipment. The
normal delivery time is one month because
all of the equipment are imported from
Europe.
You say that you are going to lose money
if you wait that long and you need
everything in two weeks. The
representative from the supplier says that it
is impossible. You agree that it is
impossible and that is why you see no
reason to shift to another supplier because
your committee already has a supplier in

230
mind and that supplier can deliver in a

shorter period of time.
Do you see how the distraction principle
works? You have created the perfect type
of conundrum that would render the entire
negotiation useless unless a concession is
made. The real issue (for you, at least) is
that you want to save more money with the
deal.
The representative of the new supplier is
becoming more anxious by the minute and
you excuse yourself from the negotiating
table to speak with some committee. You
come back to the negotiating table some
minutes later with some good news.
Your committee (the higher authority) has
agreed to the price and the delivery date of
one month, provided that the supplier

231
wave any shipping fees and customs

charges that may be incurred by your
shipment.
The negotiator from the other side is just
ecstatic that a solution was found.
Shipment fees are definitely not something
to stop a big sale!
The negotiator gladly shakes your hand
and agrees to your last-minute
modification of the deal. You save
thousands of dollars in shipping fees
because you played your cards right and
you acted like a true Maverick Negotiator.
As you can plainly see from our current
scenario, you were able to use the
distraction principle because you created a
seemingly impossible problem that would
immediately end the negotiation. The other
party cant risk walking away with

232
nothing, so a last minute concession was

made just to save all the hard work that
had already been invested in the exchange.
In the process, you saved a lot of money
and the other party got what they wanted.
Some of you might be thinking along the
lines of deception but let me clarify first:
the negotiator on the other side of the
fence had every opportunity to say no. The
other negotiator could have just said that if
they cant bring good business here, they
would just leave and no hard feelings.
So even if we are using Maverick
strategies in combination, we are not
forcing anyone to do or say anything at all.
We are just leading other negotiators to
specific directions. The decision to make
the jump is entirely up to the other
negotiators, not us.

233
You can use this technique in a variety of

situations, not just in selling or business in
general. Just make sure that you have a
goal in mind and you weave this goal into
the situation that you will create during the
negotiation.
Your true goal should be hidden from plain
sight always focus on the distraction and
make it as believable as possible so that
the other negotiator will pay close
attention to it. The moment the other
negotiator loses focus on his offer or
position that would be the time to present
the solution to the problem.
How does one create the perfect
distraction? Your general knowledge as a
negotiator is definitely useful but dont

234
forget to do some digging, too. Your

knowledge of the other negotiators needs
and values is also important in creating a
good distraction.
For example, if you are speaking to a
business owner, then this person is
probably more concerned with quality
more than anything else. Money is
secondary so you can create a distraction
that is based on the quality of service or
goods that he will be receiving from your
company or organization.
Another important reminder that I would
like to bring up here is to never feel as if
you have to make a big concession just
because the other negotiator showed some
signs of flinching.

235
Remember flinching is a common tactic

in negotiations. You flinch at the first offer
- that is the unwritten rule. The first offer
often represents the MAP or the maximum
acceptable position, so you should feel free
to flinch as well when the other party
presents its first offer of the day.
Also, dont fall for this technique yourself.
If a power negotiator is trying to distract
you from the main issue, just set aside
what he is saying so you can focus on the
real issue. If you continually fall for
decoys, trust me you will end up making
unnecessary concessions.
Some negotiators will try to use a red
herring on you as well. A red herring is a
decoy that is much worse than a mere
distraction.

236
This type of decoy was meant to confuse

and deceive the other negotiator so that a
big concession will be made before the
deal is struck. If you think another
negotiator is using a red herring on you,
ask the negotiator for specific details to
see if the problem is real or not.
If it is a fake problem, the other negotiator
will not be able to provide specific details
or even names of the people involved. If
this is the case, you can confidently sweep
away the red herring so you can again
focus on the main issue at hand.
The other party may try to bring up the
issue again but you can always say that
you are more interested in solving the
main issue and the other issue they are
raising can be discussed at a later time.

237
So you are not telling the other party that

you are not willing to discuss the problem
at all. You are simply telling the other
party that you are willing to discuss that
other issue at a later time.
Key Points of Maverick Negotiation

Volume 1
1.
Your initial offer should never be your

lowest offer, price-wise. Always
identify your MAP or maximum
acceptable position before making your
first offer. If you are selling something,
your initial offer can only go down
unless you use a specialized technique
involving other strategies to bring it up
for a potential double profit.

238
2.
3.
4.
Agreement is a powerful tool on the

negotiation table. By agreeing to
something you are setting the stage for
an easier negotiation because the other
negotiator will feel that you are there
to support their cause.
A vague higher authority is always
better than a specific one involving a
name and telephone number. Avoid
giving any specific details when citing
a higher authority because the other
party might go over your head and
speak to this higher authority.
The more you work on your
negotiation skills, the better you get
so read and apply as often as you can
to make these strategies feel natural.
No one else can help you become a

239
better Maverick Negotiator but you

(and experience on the negotiation
table of course).
5.
6.
Always be sincere when negotiating

with others. Dont gloat when you gain
an obvious advantage over the other
person.
Heroes and villains are key characters

in the game of negotiation. In the event
that you cannot bring in another person
to the negotiation table to play the role
of the villain, you can play the hero
and you can assign the role of villain to
a fictitious higher authority. What is
really important is that you will be able

240
to emphasize the need for concessions

in order for the deal to push through.
7.
Never make huge concessions up front

because this will definitely weaken
your position. Concessions are best
provided in small servings and should
be few and far in between.
The value of your concessions is
evaluated based on the quality of the
concession and how easily you were
able to give it. If you dont know how
to control concessions, people are
going to attempt to get too many
concessions from you and that is never
a good thing.

241
Conclusion
This brings us to the end of our time
together.
My hope is that I have delivered the same
negotiation strategies that I have used
throughout my entire life to never be
outtalked or outmaneuvered in a way that
is easy to understand and apply.
My other hope is that you make good use
of these strategies because they do work
and they will arm you with the power that
you need to get ahead in life.
Now to be completely honest, there are
countless other strategies that could be
added to this list but since my goal is to
keep it easy and simple, I chose only the


242
most effective pieces of information as I

did not want to overwhelm you.
I did however include an arsenal of
additional (and slightly more advanced)
strategies in the second Volume of
Maverick Negotiation.
If youd like to know more about how you
can access that volume, use the special
link below:
VIP Access Link
Until next time, I wish you the very best in
all you do.
Paul Mascetta
Convert Human Communication Into
Power.


243

244

Maverick Negotiation Volume One

Uploaded by

Document Information

Original Title

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

Maverick Negotiation Volume One

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

1

DISCLAIMER AND TERMS OF USE AGREEMENT

Copyright Influence Mastery Inc.

Copyright Influence Mastery Inc.

The Maverick Way of Splitting the Difference

Copyright Influence Mastery Inc.

Copyright Influence Mastery Inc.

The when done right part has to do with

Copyright Influence Mastery Inc.

And I intend to do whatever it takes to

Copyright Influence Mastery Inc.

You will feel completely relaxed and

Copyright Influence Mastery Inc.

They will trust you and listen to you

Copyright Influence Mastery Inc.

helping them see opportunities that are

Copyright Influence Mastery Inc.

Copyright Influence Mastery Inc.

Understandability - The information that

Copyright Influence Mastery Inc.

and in cases where this is all brand new to

Copyright Influence Mastery Inc.

apply what I teach you to your particular

Copyright Influence Mastery Inc.

Sustainability - Again this will be a joint

Copyright Influence Mastery Inc.

Part 1: Getting Started

Copyright Influence Mastery Inc.

may arise and both parties ready

Copyright Influence Mastery Inc.

ahead in terms of manifesting what you

Copyright Influence Mastery Inc.

Maverick Negotiation can be learned and

Copyright Influence Mastery Inc.

ensure that negotiations will end in your

Copyright Influence Mastery Inc.

Copyright Influence Mastery Inc.

But that was the whole point President

Copyright Influence Mastery Inc.

power negotiators or people who have

Copyright Influence Mastery Inc.

online store send a freebie to compensate

Copyright Influence Mastery Inc.

Increasing your demands in terms of

Copyright Influence Mastery Inc.

is always a hodgepodge of straight, logical

Copyright Influence Mastery Inc.

should be high enough to allow you to

Copyright Influence Mastery Inc.

happens to you when he brings out his

Copyright Influence Mastery Inc.

other party can agree to. Because as you

Copyright Influence Mastery Inc.

case. This kind of situation is challenging,

Copyright Influence Mastery Inc.

Now, it is also vital that you inject

Copyright Influence Mastery Inc.

Sincerity is important because it drives

Copyright Influence Mastery Inc.

you are willing to work with the other

Copyright Influence Mastery Inc.

some more reasons why you should never

People have this apprehension to