Tweet
I got a call yesterday from a reseller (I'm going to call her Intrepid) on pre-pay terms who demanded net-30 terms (e.g. we send them product and they have 30 days to pay for it). She explained that due to the length and nature of their relationship with us that net-30 was now "required." She didn't mention WHO imposed this "requirement," of course.
Next she stated that she "couldn't" order unless she obtained net-30 terms. Again, I don't know what was physically preventing her from placing a prepaid order, perhaps the same entity that imposed the above "requirement?"
And, oh yes. She HAD to order that day, which meant she needed net-30 terms that day. She had talked to somebody (I suspect Mysterious Someone: The Phantom Employee (TM) was involved here) and "they" (note the way she dodged indicating the gender?) promised to grant her net-30 terms.
So I asked Intrepid for Mysterious Someone: The Phantom Employee's name. She couldn't remember. I suggested it might be Mark, since he is our reseller liaison. She jumped at that and said that Mark promised her terms, but never answered her emails.
Naughty Mark.
Luckily Mark was working in his home office yesterday and available. I offered to transfer Intrepid to him and get it all cleared up. She balked. Now why would anyone balk at being transferred to an employee who has the power to give her what she wants?
Yeah. I thought that too.
So I very politely told her that her only choice was to talk to Mark. She wasn't pleased because she needed to place the order today and what if Mark wasn't available? Was there someone else who could grant terms in the office that same day? Because time was of the essence.
Sadly, no. Mark was the only person who could do what she wanted. I urged her to talk to him and, if he didn't answer she could call us back. I did not indicate that she would have to pre-pay if she called us back and Mark hadn't approved terms. Like crossing bridges, arguments are best left to when you arrive at them.
She finally agreed, I transferred her and gave it no more thought that day.
Today Mark came into the office and I asked him about the caller I had transferred to him yesterday. He filled me in on three facts she never mentioned to me:
1. Mark had told her "no" to net-30 terms no less than twice by phone and once by email (see #3).
2. She was very argumentative and nasty when told "no."
3. He did, in fact, answer the email she sent him and received a return receipt to it.
Keeping the above in mind, what did she do when Mark picked up yesterday? Why she immediately accused him of never answering her email. The delay made getting net-30 terms a "matter of urgency" because she was running out of time to place the order.
Mark, being human, took the bait. He continued the irrelevant email argument. It kind of went like this:
Mark: I sent you an email on March 8.
Intrepid: No, you didn't.
Mark: Sure I did. I got a return receipt.
Intrepid: You sent it to someone else, not me.
Mark: The email I replied to was signed Intrepid Dumbass and the email address was intrepid.dumbass@fubar.com . Are there two Intrepid Dumbass's in your department?
Intrepid: I have somebody else read my email for me.
Finally Mark realized he was being taken onto a tangent and dropped it. He asked what he could do for her. She said she needed to place an order and needed net-30 terms. He told her she was welcome to place a prepaid order.
She said it wouldn't be possible to place a prepaid order. He told her he understood and wished her a good afternoon. Her reply was, "I can't believe you guys can afford to throw away business like this. I'm prepared to place a large order with you and you think you can just walk away like that?"
Mark mentioned that he wasn't walking away. He was totally prepared to do business if Intrepid was prepared to use a credit card, cut a check or wire money to us.
Then she tried, "We've been one of your most loyal resellers and we won't buy from you again."
Mark indicated that three orders in three years hardly makes them loyal. That was a mistake. Intrepid latched onto it and ran.
She asked Mark to tell her how many orders would make her "loyal." I guess hoping to trap him into some sort of verbal commitment. He told her that our "loyal" resellers know our software in and out. The don't just sell it when a customer asks for it; they promote it. They also follow through with support and training to make sure the customer is happy with the software and able to use it effectively...
She cut him off. As Mark intended, she realized she'd never be bothered doing any of that.
She came back by giving us "one last chance" to make the sale by giving her net-30 terms. Mark said "no." Again. Some more.
She hung up unhappy after this parting shot, "It must be nice being so high and mighty that you can afford to turn away business."
A couple of words of advice for Intrepid:
Negotiating from a position of power means you walk away after the first "no." Continuing to insist we change our minds tell us that you have a customer who wants our product or are trying to win a bid which requires our product. We know that if you don't buy from us, your customer or the agency soliciting bids is going to buy from another reseller, who will then buy from us. We aren't going to lose the sale, you are.
If you would rather lose a sale than pay up front, that tells us that you are either unwilling or unable to pay. Either fact indicates that extending credit to you is a bad idea.
Update: It looks like Intrepid was trying to win a bid (which we suspected). We got the exact same order from another reseller; one of our best ones too.
I also took a moment to look Intrepid's company up on the web. It's huge. $2 billion in revenue. I guess they're used to being able to dictate terms to their vendors. :eyeroll:
Next she stated that she "couldn't" order unless she obtained net-30 terms. Again, I don't know what was physically preventing her from placing a prepaid order, perhaps the same entity that imposed the above "requirement?"
And, oh yes. She HAD to order that day, which meant she needed net-30 terms that day. She had talked to somebody (I suspect Mysterious Someone: The Phantom Employee (TM) was involved here) and "they" (note the way she dodged indicating the gender?) promised to grant her net-30 terms.
So I asked Intrepid for Mysterious Someone: The Phantom Employee's name. She couldn't remember. I suggested it might be Mark, since he is our reseller liaison. She jumped at that and said that Mark promised her terms, but never answered her emails.
Naughty Mark.
Luckily Mark was working in his home office yesterday and available. I offered to transfer Intrepid to him and get it all cleared up. She balked. Now why would anyone balk at being transferred to an employee who has the power to give her what she wants?
Yeah. I thought that too.
So I very politely told her that her only choice was to talk to Mark. She wasn't pleased because she needed to place the order today and what if Mark wasn't available? Was there someone else who could grant terms in the office that same day? Because time was of the essence.
Sadly, no. Mark was the only person who could do what she wanted. I urged her to talk to him and, if he didn't answer she could call us back. I did not indicate that she would have to pre-pay if she called us back and Mark hadn't approved terms. Like crossing bridges, arguments are best left to when you arrive at them.
She finally agreed, I transferred her and gave it no more thought that day.
Today Mark came into the office and I asked him about the caller I had transferred to him yesterday. He filled me in on three facts she never mentioned to me:
1. Mark had told her "no" to net-30 terms no less than twice by phone and once by email (see #3).
2. She was very argumentative and nasty when told "no."
3. He did, in fact, answer the email she sent him and received a return receipt to it.
Keeping the above in mind, what did she do when Mark picked up yesterday? Why she immediately accused him of never answering her email. The delay made getting net-30 terms a "matter of urgency" because she was running out of time to place the order.
Mark, being human, took the bait. He continued the irrelevant email argument. It kind of went like this:
Mark: I sent you an email on March 8.
Intrepid: No, you didn't.
Mark: Sure I did. I got a return receipt.
Intrepid: You sent it to someone else, not me.
Mark: The email I replied to was signed Intrepid Dumbass and the email address was intrepid.dumbass@fubar.com . Are there two Intrepid Dumbass's in your department?
Intrepid: I have somebody else read my email for me.
Finally Mark realized he was being taken onto a tangent and dropped it. He asked what he could do for her. She said she needed to place an order and needed net-30 terms. He told her she was welcome to place a prepaid order.
She said it wouldn't be possible to place a prepaid order. He told her he understood and wished her a good afternoon. Her reply was, "I can't believe you guys can afford to throw away business like this. I'm prepared to place a large order with you and you think you can just walk away like that?"
Mark mentioned that he wasn't walking away. He was totally prepared to do business if Intrepid was prepared to use a credit card, cut a check or wire money to us.
Then she tried, "We've been one of your most loyal resellers and we won't buy from you again."
Mark indicated that three orders in three years hardly makes them loyal. That was a mistake. Intrepid latched onto it and ran.
She asked Mark to tell her how many orders would make her "loyal." I guess hoping to trap him into some sort of verbal commitment. He told her that our "loyal" resellers know our software in and out. The don't just sell it when a customer asks for it; they promote it. They also follow through with support and training to make sure the customer is happy with the software and able to use it effectively...
She cut him off. As Mark intended, she realized she'd never be bothered doing any of that.
She came back by giving us "one last chance" to make the sale by giving her net-30 terms. Mark said "no." Again. Some more.
She hung up unhappy after this parting shot, "It must be nice being so high and mighty that you can afford to turn away business."
A couple of words of advice for Intrepid:
Negotiating from a position of power means you walk away after the first "no." Continuing to insist we change our minds tell us that you have a customer who wants our product or are trying to win a bid which requires our product. We know that if you don't buy from us, your customer or the agency soliciting bids is going to buy from another reseller, who will then buy from us. We aren't going to lose the sale, you are.
If you would rather lose a sale than pay up front, that tells us that you are either unwilling or unable to pay. Either fact indicates that extending credit to you is a bad idea.
Update: It looks like Intrepid was trying to win a bid (which we suspected). We got the exact same order from another reseller; one of our best ones too.
I also took a moment to look Intrepid's company up on the web. It's huge. $2 billion in revenue. I guess they're used to being able to dictate terms to their vendors. :eyeroll:
Comment