When i read over the "Live 8" case I knew i was going to have my work cut out of for me. This is not an easy case to argue due to the fact that my company, and the company I was negotiating against both dealt with the humanitarian aspect. I thought that because I had the product in question I would have the upper hand in the situation. I tried to follow the negotiation check list in order to outline how to approach the negotiation.
A. About You
1. What is your overall goal? My overall goal for this negotiation was to either have the website sold for a price high enough to cover the cost for my companies expansion into Europe, or have a strong advertising force with the deal to help secure a investor for the funds.
2. What are the Issues? The issues at hand have to deal with the domain name live8.org. My company currently owns that domain name and the the concert series that saw success in the 1980's, live aid, is putting on another concert with the name that both our companies share Live 8. Live 8 wants access to our domain to help promote the concert series, but we disagree with the way they go about aid. We feel that people need to take responsibility for their own actions and should not be reliant on wide scale aid. I am also worried that by allowing access to the website Live 8 will be widely associated with the concert series, and creating issues in the future.
3. How important is each issue to you? These issues are very important to us. When people mistake our company for the other we are very eager to point out the difference and correct the person.
a) Issues: The domain name live8.org, the companies, while in the similar field, are two different entities, we believe people should take responsible for their own actions, and we worry that if given access to the domain name live8.org the larger entity will be the name associated and not our own.
b) Ranking: 1: The companies represent different ideologies
2: The concert series will be more associated with the name Live 8 and not ourselves
3: The actual domain name itself
c) 1=45
2=35
3=20
d) 1: This issue is difficult to work around, due to the fact that i would be asking Live 8 to change their entire business model. The best case scenario for this is for them to change the overall practice of the business which is not ideal
2: This issue is more manageable to obtain. In order for the domain named to be relinquished there will have to be some sort of notice of our company in order to get our name to the estimated billions of people expected to be watching the concerts in all medias.
3: This issue, while important, is the least valuable to me. There are many ways to work around this issue. With simply changing the wording from "Live 8" to Live eight" this is not the most ideal outcome, but a manageable one to handle.
e) 1=45
2=40
3=15
f) The scores increase if all aspects are achieved at an ideal level
g) When I negotiated with Bart, I tried to keep this scoring system in my mind. This helped me remember which aspects that i found were the most important.
4. What is my BATNA? I think that my BATNA would be the fact that if I can not reach a deal, that i can simply just keep operating my business at the same capacity that I have been. After all, they are the ones that approached me
5. What is your resistance point? I think my resistance point is if i settled for less than Paid to create the domain name, or if that the other company would not advertise my company.
B. About the Other Side.
1. How important is each issue to them? I feel that my biggest issue ,in dealing with the different forms of charity, is a non issue for them. They view this as we are on the same side, and therefore should not have to even consider this as an issue. I also think that my second issue is not that important to them. The more publicity that they get the better. If there name is the one associated with this deal, that would greatly benefit them. The third issue however, I feel is their biggest concern. The whole reason this negotiation even occurred, is due to the fact that they want our domain name. I feel that they would want to achieve this by acquiring for as little as possible.
2. What is their BATNA? I feel that their BATNA would be pursuing the two domain names that they already have. It was disclosed me the two on going issues that were occurring, and that would probably be the best alternative if they could not receive our domain name.
3. What is their resistance point? I feel like there resistance point would be buying the domain name for the price in which my firm needs for its international ventures. I don't think that they would want to pay more than the domain name is worth.
4. What is your target? I feel like my target would be somewhere where both of our needs are being met. One in which we are not just giving them the rights to our domain name, but at the same time not trying to make a profit of the venture either.
C. The Situation.
1. What deadlines exist? Who is more impatient? The other party is far more impatient. My firm already has the product in question. We have no real urgency to get a deal done. The deadline exists for the other party.
2. What fairness norms or reference points apply? The fact that both of our firms strive on helping our fellow man we both are not seeking out a big day over this.
3. What topics or questions do you want to avoid. I want to avoid talking about how much i originally paid for the domain name. Although 20,000 dollars was a lot for my firm, i would expect more if I was selling the name in which someone would see success with.
D. The relationship between the Parties
1. Will negotiations be repetitive? The negotiation will be consist of one session. We will try to resolve the issue at hand with one sit-down.
2. a) Can you trust the other Party? Although I do not know the other party, I have no reason to distrust him.
b) Does the other party trust you? I feel that the other party would feel the same way as I feel about them.
3. What do you know about the other parties styles and tactics? I know very little about the other parties styles and tactics. This will equal a challenging debate.
4. What are the limits to the other parties authority? From what i can infer, I do not see any limits to the other parties authority, other than financial limitations.
5. There were not other party members in which to consult the above issues with.
No comments:
Post a Comment