then you must have some learning disability because it was very well written. if i were to explain it to someone, i would say that the main idea was that you have two parties, two houses. you walk into the other party's house and simply let them explain their reasoning to you. you are indirectly confronting them. and by letting them do the talking, they have to back up everything they are saying, which leads to "gotcha" avoidance and makes the other side slowly chop off their demands that are not based on the truth until you get to the core of their wants or needs without all the fluff and glitter around it. if the other party would be as good in negotiating as you, they would then come into your house and let you do the talking, exposing your bs, not just theirs. but since that does not happen, you end up victorious, in a sense.
Agree with cpursley. Voss’ “this is a real thing I did and this is how it went!” stories overwhelmed my bullshit-o-meter so badly that I put the book down about 2/3 through. I think I got a paragraph’s worth of actionable information out of the most-of-the-book that I read.
As far as I could tell, the book was an ad for his consulting & training services. Which means that it did its job perfectly, between all the boasting and the nuggets of an idea that are almost, but not quite, useful (“man, this just isn’t working… guess I better pay for some classes!”)
What’s the point of a “nuh-uh!” comment like this?
The forest ain’t there. It’s a PR/advertising illusion that vanishes as soon as you engage critical thinking.
That’s my opinion. You disagree. Ok.
“How can I see the forest?” LOL.
[edit] for others reading this: it’s not that I didn’t find anything useful in the book, just that the useful bits were rare and most of the book is unrealistic BS about how effective the techniques are, which were either made up (the “true” truck-buying negotiation story, oh man, what a whopper) or omitted other factors to make the advice from the book seem to have saved the day all on its own. You’ll get the wrong idea if you take the book at face value, plus you’ll have wasted a lot of time reading a whole book that could have been a couple pretty-decent blog posts.
