A little simplify the situation with strategies. We specify the tasks.The task of the negotiator No. 1: Hide all your points of need and find out the points of need of your opponent. All tricks are directed only to this.Additional axiom: if you are a seller, you are initially weak, because your main point of need is obvious – the conclusion of a contract. That is why your task is more difficult and interesting. The strength is the one with the money. We must become a strong point. And it is possible.Task Negotiator number 2: Give your opponent to win! But on your terms.Let’s return to the occasion with the cakes. This is a common situation in FMCG. Hand-twisting, positional bargaining. I have alotofexperience working with large customers. Including with networks. And because for the visualization of principles I often cite my own cases.Case of the authorI give a little in a simplified, structural, form. In it, I will give some “top view”, explaining the essence of what is happening. Negotiations with the main buyer of the first three federal network. Commodity segment FMCG. Skoroport. Positioning is initially middle + up-middle. Carrying both samples and marketing kit. That is, before the negotiations there will be both the first contact and the presentation. This is normal.We met. Main buyer, grocery buyer (assistant), manager. Baer himself is positioning hard. Position. Sphere of influence. Short questions on the merits: “There are many of you here.” Spreading assistant. Immediately clear – the ceremony will not. Negotiations will be tough. If I give even the slightest slack, of course.Diagnosis: the presence of the first person with the “retinue” – interest in the transaction. Spacing assistants – weak organization of the process of interaction with suppliers. Two points of need. But the first is veiled. Reasons for interest may be different. Assumption – the backlog from the plan, you need to increase sales. And what increases sharply sales in hypermarkets? New! (Preparation gives an understanding of the values of the people with whom you are negotiating.)Short presentation. The main message: “You didn’t have such a product on the shelf” – maximum distancing from competitors. The negotiations focus on comfort in work, clarity of management, fast delivery, merchandising. (We press on the second point of need.)Transition to prices. And, of course, – the first blow to discounts. Attack opponent: you understand what company came. We are not interested in this price. We need maximum discount. (Baer is already ready to hear the familiar “we are only ready to do 35% for you.”)Protection: what discounts? This is a special price for you. We do not have a retail price list. The final prices for similar products in different regions vary significantly. If we discuss discounts – we will discuss your mark-up. And who am I to dictate your markup to you? (Attempt to “pull fish out to the shore.” If I started discussing discounts, I would have been confined to the wall with traditions: “We do not work with counterparties at a discount below 48%” and would be pulled out to our “shore” where I would not have chances into something other than “well, another 5% and hands.” A competent counter-attack linked the concepts of “discount” and “mark-up” and “failed” the attack, replacing the target with a dummy.)Attack: our product is newer, better, and therefore more interesting for the buyer. (“And that means” is a logical link. Justification of the thesis.) At the same time, you can make a good markup on it with a margin for any shares. The turnover per square meter will be at least three times higher. In product terms. In cash – depends on the final price. You can evaluate yourself. (Testing the point of need. The weak side is becoming strong. It offers money.)Protect your opponent: everyone says so. They promise mountains of gold. But the buyer decides. And the buyer likes good prices.Diagnosis: no one says so, otherwise there would have been a counter reception. While common phrases. Fish slowly drags on our “shore”. And already disoriented. But I want discounts. And without them to agree is not comfortable. Will look further our weaknesses. You need to give the decision in the hands of your opponent. So, somewhere you have to be fools.Attack: you know, if you are sure of an increase in sales with a decrease in price – 10% of the price is charged for write-off and return. (In fact, 30%.) If we sign a contract without refund, then I am ready to remove these 10% from the price. How do you like this sentence? (Baer understands that 10% of returns is too small a figure, that with the best scenario for this product group there will be at least 15-25% of returns that will fall on our fragile shoulders. And here we are stupid, and she’s on horseback.) For boosting – some low price guarantees. After all, discounts are a way to get a guaranteed minimum price on the market.Attack: plus we guarantee under the contract that no network with which we are negotiating now will receive such prices for the entire duration of the contract.