Answers seem to be all over the board. Which I believe has real world implications.

And to add one more layer to this question, notice that there is a "playing chicken" aspect to it. Which means paradoxically that if you are trying to maximize your bankroll, you should probably ask for less if the driver is very rich.

999,999.57

Hypothetically

Disappointed nobody's posted the obvious answer.



That aside, I was thinking along the lines of David's last post--if it's Bill Gates by the side of the road, is he less inclined to give you a huge chunk?

On the one hand, the difference to him between netting (say) $500K and $900K is pocket change. OTOH, he might just write off the whole $1MM to bad luck and you're getting nothing (and liking it).

Yeah, considering the circumstances I wouldn't charge more than I would if I didn't know what the well dressed driver was set to lose (assuming he was dumb enough to tell a stranger) either.
On the other hand, if I found an ebay merchant selling a painting for $500 that I knew was worth $1M, I'd pocket the difference.

Good to hear. This place can make fairly standard decency seem like alien behavior at times. I suspect it's an internet thing that makes people see it more as a business transaction than about kindness. In real life I suspect a few more more would see it more straightforwardly about helping a fellow human who's car has broken down.

Maybe we would get different sorts of answers if the hypothetical was an ordinary looking person in terms of wealth, who needed to get to a job interview 10 miles away. For this hypothetical they offer $50 and you can choose 0, $20, $50, $100 or $120. what do you take?

See now that is where we differ. As I would find that unethical to do that.

I don't think I could do that. If I knew the person had a rare item worth a million and it was in a yard sale for $500, I doubt I buy it. Or I buy it, go get it appraised and then offer the original seller half.

To me that is very different than negotiating one to one with another business guy who REQUIRES your service or he loses his deal. You are not taking advantage of him as he holds all the power and can tell you to go f*ck yourself if he wants. You might be driving a hard bargain but you can be sure he did too, prior.

But it is a business negotiation unless you just do a favour. The moment you negotiate your time for payment it IS a business negotiation. I find it very weird to attach decency to business. i mean you don't have to be unethical but negotiations are about Supply and Demand and you happen to have an enormously value of Supply that is in massive demand.

I mean, fine if you want to give all your power away in this instance. That is your right. But I don't see it as a decency issue if someone just does not surrender all their power.

It is a favour. I'm not a rescue service,Ii've just stumbled across someone who's car has broken down. I'd accept compensation for my expenses and the hypothetical is quite a lot of hassle so I'd probably accept a 'drink' as we might call it in blighty.

It is not a business opportunity but in any case I'm not fan of power as per the UBI point.

Sure, I can imagine plenty of circumstances where I'd do the same. That's why I qualified it with "merchant," meaning I view it as just business where he simply failed in due diligence as opposed to preying on granny's ignorance.

but what if they're a nazi and you can give the profit to charity

Agree to disagree. Or better yet, you are entitled to view it that way but others don't need to as well.

In my view it is clearly a transaction request. Is it fortuitous, sure. Are fortuitousness and often opportunistic opportunities an element of business transactions Absolutely.

If this gentlemen found the other person he was transacting with for the $1MM had an issue (his money wire was coming in late) and new he really needed this deal to close and there was room to push him up another million by threatening to walk from the deal, you have to believe he would seize it.

Ya we are on the same page then, especially if it was a pawn broker type shop that owned it. I would have to look into the eBay Merchant a bit as many are just individuals and as you say, if it is some guy hawking granny's funny looking pendant, not knowing it is valuable I probably buy it, get it appraised and then share the spoils with him, after the fact.

Yes, understanding your leverage and value in any business transaction is key. If you don't, you will end up giving away your power. And yes, the more the other party can simply walk away from the deal (scorched earth) the less leverage you have.


I wonder for those saying they would ask for basically 'cost plus', if they saw this guy on a 'tv interview' after and he was retelling this story and said something like 'ya I would have happily paid up to half of the Million, as this was now basically found money to me' (lost but now with a chance to recover) 'but in business you never negotiate against yourself', would they feel a bit taken advantage of?

I'm with you. I just went a step above by screwing him over and making myself more than the hypothetical maximum of ($1m - epsilon) in the process with my method. Business is business. Capitalism!

We already know he would have paid much more. He didn't take advantage of us and if he gave that sort of interview that's on him. On the other hand he might moan about the conversation on the trip and decide it wasn't worth a million.

Personally I dont even want the power you are so worried about giving away. If I had the choice I'd choose his car not breaking down.

How much time do you think you spend on any given day, on average, replaying the details of your life and coming up with fantastic alternate scenarios in which you are basically a fat bald James Bond?

There is an amazing joke in there, Inso0. But, we should probably just get back to the thread topic.

I must have missed the one where James Bond dabbles in day trading, although I think the villain (Le Chiffre) did try a similar scheme in Casino Royale.

I got temp-banned for making fun of d2’s fat, balding head, so be careful on this topic, Ins0.

This is why I send the mods flowers on their birthdays, amateurs.

I would not want to be bothered driving to LA. I would leave him there on the side of the road.

Thought of this, this morning. Assuming it's some kind of business deal, I might inquire during the ride down, and try to negotiate an equity stake if it sounded interested.

Truth be told, I'm probably more like nucularburro. No desire to go to LA.

On reflection the negotiations over music (assuming test match special isn't on) are most important.

I know of a real world situation where a person who was not a business person at all and had inherited a patent from their father was approached by two companies who were advised when they did a prior art patent search that they potentially might be tripping this patent.

These two companies where biggies in the Telco space and the one did not want to do a deal unless the patent question was addressed as they did not want to get sued after the fact and have to fight it out. There was a good argument they could win and avoid the patent but the risk was still there.

Ideally as companies they want the owner of the patent to just sign a waver and let them do their deal. But what ended up happening is they offered the owner (she was a teacher) a deal and she brought in a lawyer and an adviser and ended up negotiating a few hundred thousand dollars and just sold the patent which only had a few years left on it and was never monetized prior.


Very opportunistic seizing by her. She had inherited a patent she never did anything, and never thought she would. It was not even something she thought about. The patent might not even be defensible in this case (thus her 'need' is only speculative here compared to the REAL need of that driver) but she still saw an opportunity to get them to include her in the transaction and get paid in a situation, where perhaps she had no valid claim. So she forced them into a choice of paying a smaller amount now to de-risk the deal verses paying nothing but taking great risk that could scuttle the deal or cost them a lot more.

I am curious how the people who say they don't want this type of power in the prior example and who would just give it away would view this woman and what they might do in a similar situation?