[zseward]

(I'm the author.) That's a totally fair point about the subject headings, Larry. They're intended to make the emails more accessible and scannable, but of course they oversimplify things. On the other hand, these emails are ultimately more about being Steve Jobs than winning a negotiation.

And thanks, Dan. Much love to DocumentCloud for making the OCR of those PDFs super easy.

[larrys]

I liked the piece but my take is a bit different since I practically make a living by doing negotiations primarily by email. (Email is perfect it allows you to remove facial expressions and tone of voice which can be a drawback if not perfectly executed. Not to mention having to think on your feet and not be able to do what I describe below).

One thing that I do do is to very very carefully choose my words and analyze and interpret the words of others to divine meaning and hidden meaning. [1]

As such I simply don't believe that Jobs just fired these emails off I can almost assure you that as much effort went into this as goes into writing a Presidential speech or a chapter in a novel or a scene in a movie.

I do that, it works for me quite well, so I can't believe that at this level it isn't being done and I am somehow unique.

While it's entirely possible that Jobs wrote this on the fly more than likely it was a much thought out or even team effort where every thing was discussed and considered or Jobs perseverated.

I did like the format and you should definitely do more of this.

[1] A small example is this statement "Maybe I’m missing something, but I don’t see any other alternatives. Do you?"

The addition of the "do you?" and the "Maybe "I'm" is critical in that sentence. Without both the emotion on the part of the recipient is much different and would be more negative and consequently less likely to come to an agreement.

[ScottBurson]

Very interesting post.

For most of us, I'm sure writing such an email would take the kind of effort and consideration you describe. (It would probably take me a week.)

But I wouldn't be surprised if Jobs spent so much of his time negotiating and was so talented at it that he could pretty much just dash something like that off -- with every detail right.

[larrys]

Side suggestion for you. You are using bountyoss.com for what you do, I strongly suggest you lock up both bountyboss.com and bountyos.com as well. (bountybos.com and bontyos.com might also be a good idea but the other two definitely.)

[ScottBurson]

Thanks for the suggestion, but I don't think I understand. You really think those are likelier typos than, say, "buontyoss.com"? Where does one stop? (I do have "bounteoss.com".)

In any case, the site has had $0.00 in revenue to date. I don't think protecting variations on the domain name is my biggest problem :-)

[larrys]

bounteoss.com is good.

No hard and fast rule where you stop. In general the traffic counts more than the revenue (other than you need money to do the variations). The more people typing in the more people likely to typo. Other thing is not even typos it's visually what somebody sees and then types. For example for some reason my brain thinks "boss" so I am likely to type that. That's just me. Personally I like "bountyboss" as well for some reason. It rolls off your tongue (and that's important btw.)

I point out simply because you don't want to wait until it's to late (and of course I have no idea where you are at in this project so the advice could also apply to someone with more traction! Good luck it looks nice.).

[q_revert]

also, there isn't a single typo in jobs' emails (at least anything immediately obvious), whilst in comparison murdoch's responses seem sloppily written and careless.. as you've pointed out, it does seem as though a lot of effort went into jobs' emails.. and in the end, it would seem the effort paid off..