[signalsignal]

My take on what he wrote was that people (in sales) will do for themselves first, their friends second (if anything is left over or what they can't personally grab), and everyone else last.

Thinking this way helps me keep my confidence when another party tries to sell me on a plan to "help" me when I can't understand how they will personally profit by their plan. So I can refuse their "help" with confidence knowing I can't possibly be missing out on anything.

[Vandy_Travis]

That is a very succinct summary, thank you for that.

I was actually asking about this from the opposite person's perspective. I didn't catch the "in sales" part -- did I just miss that, or am I missing a larger context of his theory? Having missed that piece of info, I was wondering what this theory says about my own motivations (I would categorize myself in the 3rd category, where I try to help my friends. But shouldn't I question my own motivations, given this outlook?)

I suppose it's reasonable to question one's own motivations pretty regularly, anyhow.

[signalsignal]

Thanks. I just assumed if value is being transferred, as money/assets rather than experience or knowledge or something else intangible, then the transfer involves "selling". That is just my default assumption in business.