|
|
|
|
|
|
by tptacek
5229 days ago
|
|
|
Unfortunately some of them can involve just being easy to work with. A classic bizdev trick: schedule meetings at inconvenient times or in inconvenient circumstances; if the other party accepts, they want a deal to happen. Similar logic applies to contact negotiations. Which sucks, because being fully diligent is can also set the "hard to work with" bit and kill the deal too. It's likely that the best way to handle this is the simplest: renice the M&A conversation down to 19 or 20, beneath everything else you're doing; be legitimately annoying to work with, conveying the impression that you don't need the deal because it's the truth. |
|
|
Very true. Of course if a party makes this mistake they can easily put the fear of god in the other party by changing their pattern of response.
If you tend to reply in a quick fashion and appear very eager and then all the sudden there is radio silence the other side will intuitively know something is wrong. (Ever have that happen with dating where the girl all the sudden doesn't respond as quickly and you know something is up..)
The mistake that most sellers make is assuming that someone's eagerness is locked in. That a party doesn't change their mind or doesn't have another circumstance come up that makes a sale unlikely at any price. (Similar to what the OP was saying.)
No deal is done until the fat lady sings.
The domain in the example I gave I recognized would have no other buyers essentially. So I advised to close the deal as quickly as possible even though a little money was left on the table. But many sellers simply won't take that advice they are gamblers.