I cannot remember correctly if this was the same Lee that lied on his CV, and still got hired ???? I had no respect for AS after that 
Have You Noticed Over The Years That Sugar Likes "Loudmouths" But Never Hires Them?
2 of 2
He didn't seem to care for the guy who went out the first week this year (David? Paul? Can't recall!)
Originally Posted by Jepson:
“It's funny how the fact that we don't know if Chris's negotiation was just luck or based on actual knowledge has blinded us to another very important point.
If he made the decision based on a correct assessment of the information available it wasn't actually that shrewd. I don't mean that it was not correct but that it's something I'd expect anyone capable of a reasonable GCSE maths grade to be able to work out easily.
Because we don't know if he made the decision based on credible information and because we don't know if he really understood what he agreed to we've ignored the fact that even if he had good information and understood exactly what he'd offered (we never heard him give a reason for the 20% off the top) it was actually a very obvious decision to make.
It seems he's getting a great deal of kudos in some quarters for a fairly obvious business decision.”
“It's funny how the fact that we don't know if Chris's negotiation was just luck or based on actual knowledge has blinded us to another very important point.
If he made the decision based on a correct assessment of the information available it wasn't actually that shrewd. I don't mean that it was not correct but that it's something I'd expect anyone capable of a reasonable GCSE maths grade to be able to work out easily.
Because we don't know if he made the decision based on credible information and because we don't know if he really understood what he agreed to we've ignored the fact that even if he had good information and understood exactly what he'd offered (we never heard him give a reason for the 20% off the top) it was actually a very obvious decision to make.
It seems he's getting a great deal of kudos in some quarters for a fairly obvious business decision.”
I agree. Its obvious the agency may be crucial if you do the maths. The maths then tell you that the 20% offer is likely to work for you - if you assume the agency will do roughly what it did and just not divert your custom to someone paying them 35%. If you can't do the maths though, and have no idea who will sell what, its a leap in the dark - or a case of mispeaking working. How are you shrewd if you know the answer or don't know the answer? A shrewd guess might be based on getting part of the logic, but it can just mean you tossed a coin and got lucky and there's no evidence here that any logic was behind the 20%. offer. Even if it was a shrewd offer, based on some understanding, there were lots of oher offers , some better or safer for the team, that could have been made.
Not sure they teach that sort of maths in GCSE? In ye olde ays I think it was in additional maths and we forgot how to do it as soon as we passed the exam......
Originally Posted by thenetworkbabe:
“Not sure they teach that sort of maths in GCSE? In ye olde ays I think it was in additional maths and we forgot how to do it as soon as we passed the exam......”
“Not sure they teach that sort of maths in GCSE? In ye olde ays I think it was in additional maths and we forgot how to do it as soon as we passed the exam......”
It's really just arithmetic. If you can't do the algebra then you just do a few experimental calculations.
Even if you do know the algebra you'd normally feed in a few trial values as a sanity check.
What's amusing is to imagine the boardoom scene if they'd lost:
Sugar (incredulously) You gave them 20% of everything? What the hell were you thinking? It's obvious that's a ridiculous arrangement. You haven't got a bloody clue. You're fired!
2 of 2
