In reality, by being who you genuinely are you can earn living, if you're lucky, but to earn wealth you need to press and push and cheat.
Look, at the differences between CL and Java, Redis and MongoDB, Postgres and MySQL to name the few very popular examples. "Commercially successful" products invest heavily in creating, creating a misleading hype and other manipulations.
Being who you means to become a marginal, a hobbyist, with, perhaps, much above average abilities, in the best case.
But to make money you must pressure and bullshit people, because it is only by cheating you could get above-average returns. It is much easier and cheaper than to make something which is above average.
Look at that Java, ERP, or artificially inflated open source crap? This is how to sell. SAP has the best sales people it could hire. But once you're convinced to buy - you are locked for life.
It is all about tricks like SEO or MVPs, faked reviews or whatever, when you put words and hype ahead of the real things. And, of course, there are people, who are ready to do tricks instead of doing real things.
I'm not trying to say that it is illegal - trying to exploit fools is a legal practice, the problem is that it become a dominant one.
Writing a pleasant stories for fools instead of real product specifications and reference documentation is so common, that nobody even reads it anymore.)
You know, I used to be really cynical and agree with much of this. But over the last few years, I've come back to the middle. I think the story is more complex than this.
Yes, to build wealth you need to press and push--no one is going to give you anything for free and pre-buyers remorse can be a bitch. But cheat? I don't know about that--it depends on your definition.
If cheating is maintaining borderline outrageous profit margins, then yes, it helps to do that. But if cheating is something more along the lines of getting 50% up front for a project you underbid, then holding that money hostage while you proceed to milk the project with change orders every step of the way--then yes, that's cheating (and probably illegal-ish). Plenty of people operate this way but I think it's a pretty bad way to do business--both from an economic standpoint and a how-did-you-get-to-be-such-a-terrible-person? standpoint. And then of course there's the run-of-the-mill cheating that is enterprise software marketing departments, but if that's your worst sin in life, I think you're probably doing ok.
And while there are plenty of cases of crooks making out like bandits, there are just as many about pretty honest people making out like bandits as well. Compare Mike Milken and Warren Buffet for example. Or from tech, the guy that started color vs pg. As far as what I've read about both of them, they seem like rather different personality types, but both of them seem to be doing ok financially.
So yes, nothing is cut and dry, and anyone that says you can't make a lot of money via semi-legal stealing is dead wrong, but I really don't think this is the only--or even the most expedient--way to get rich. Speaking personally, I prefer sitting around coming up with ways to build value for customers instead of coming up with more clever ways of fucking them.
>"but to earn wealth you need to press and push and cheat."
It's impossible to agree with such hard-line statements like this. Extraordinary wealth is possible to create through honest work, intelligence, and luck. I'm sure you don't believe Google, Tesla, SpaceX, and IBM all cheated their way into their positions.
There is a lot of truth to some of your points though. Scanning through the Fortune 500, more than half of these companies do seem to "press and push and cheat".
While I agree with the sentiment, the basis for the argument is clearly factually inaccurate. There are plenty of successful salesmen who sell products that cannot possibly benefit the buyer - c.f. boiler room operations, etc. When you ignore or distort obvious facts to make a much less obvious (but possibly true) point like "sustainable sales practices are more accretive over a long enough period" you make people who read your article wonder what else you say has been fabricated to support your position.
Let's flip it around: to give out good advice, you need offer it based on actual experience and not just suppositions. (not necessarily true either, but it sure seems like it would strengthen your argument)
Perhaps it would be better to say: "a salesperson is unlikely to maximize their potential selling something that they don't believe actually helps the customer"
There are great salespeople the world over selling products they don't believe in — after all, great products tend to sell themselves — but you can bet your bottom dollar they'd be doing an even better job if they did believe in the product.
Based on the sales people I have known, most would pretty much say anything to close a deal. Though the really good ones seem to be able to convince themselves that the product they are selling really is awesome. As soon as they stop selling that product they go back to their old opinions on it being a POS.
An assertion of fact can be right or wrong, but it can't be a fallacy. He's saying that not believing in your product will cause you to fail to make sales, not that it will disqualify you from greatness by definition.
tl;dr: Believe in your product and don't be afraid to charge appropriately.
All solid advice and adding more to the 'believe in your product' concept, the reasoning for this is incredibly simplistic. If you are attempting to sell something you don't believe adds any value or benefit, it will be instantly obvious in your pitch unless you happen to be a fantastic liar and that's what led to the stereotype of the used-car salesman.
Minor nitpick: Mamet was never attempting to present Roma as a fantastic salesman. He knows the audience can see the deceitfulness. He's actually showing a 'behind-the-scenes' view of how liars have gained the edge in the sales world.
>David Mamet must not have known a lot of salespeople, to have this view of what a good salesperson is, because that is definitely not how great salespeople work.
If I wrote a story about a politician who committed suicide, would you say "You must not know a lot of politicians, to have this view of what a good politician is, because suicide is definitely not what makes a great politician"?
Mamet wrote a story about salespeople where all of them have highly dubious ethics ranging from being outright thieves to being conmen, and the most successful of the lot is willing to destroy someone's life to earn himself a cadillac.
From some of the other comments, it sounds like I misinterpreted Mamet's intent - he apparently wasn't looking to generalise to all salespeople - but still, it seems to me the comment is fair based on this particular piece of evidence.
It's hilarious that the writer uses subtly flawed logic to convince the reader that shady and unethical salespeople simply doesn't exist in the real world.
Successful salespeople don't pressure or bullshit the
prospect into a sale. They are persistent, but they are
always focused on achieving a deal where it will benefit
all parties.
I couldn't agree more. I ranked first in sales at my company for a quarter, before they promoted me. While some of my peers used scare tactics, intimidation and downright lying to close the deal, I was always prepared to walk away from deals. I never suggested anything that wasn't in their best interest because I was thinking long-term. Funny how customers see this genuinity and come back after shopping around. Referrals were often the result, while my peers had customers with buyers regret. They hit their quota by the end of the day, but lost in the long-term. On a side note, your title may be a little misleading. It should say "Sales come out of genuinity" as the current title implies that knowing how to sell is something inherent, whereas it's something I taught myself.
Thanks for your comment! Fair suggestion about the title, though I think even though your title is more accurate it somehow seems even worse than the current title (I'm not happy with the current title either).
If anyone has suggestions for a better title, let's have them...
Very good article. For all of you who are now just starting to jump on the bandwagon of enterprise tech, this is an extremely valuable lesson. Sales is really hard, it's very emotionally painful (and jubilent), and requires a lot of humility. But just like building products, it's all about getting in your customer's face. Do it early and do it often.
Great post. Especially useful for a lot of us "engineering" types on HN who may not think of themselves as sales people. Turns out that if you're a problem-solver, you can be successful in sales. You just have to think of the customer's problem holistically, and from their point of view.
dschiptsov|13 years ago
In reality, by being who you genuinely are you can earn living, if you're lucky, but to earn wealth you need to press and push and cheat.
Look, at the differences between CL and Java, Redis and MongoDB, Postgres and MySQL to name the few very popular examples. "Commercially successful" products invest heavily in creating, creating a misleading hype and other manipulations.
Being who you means to become a marginal, a hobbyist, with, perhaps, much above average abilities, in the best case.
But to make money you must pressure and bullshit people, because it is only by cheating you could get above-average returns. It is much easier and cheaper than to make something which is above average.
Look at that Java, ERP, or artificially inflated open source crap? This is how to sell. SAP has the best sales people it could hire. But once you're convinced to buy - you are locked for life.
It is all about tricks like SEO or MVPs, faked reviews or whatever, when you put words and hype ahead of the real things. And, of course, there are people, who are ready to do tricks instead of doing real things.
I'm not trying to say that it is illegal - trying to exploit fools is a legal practice, the problem is that it become a dominant one.
Writing a pleasant stories for fools instead of real product specifications and reference documentation is so common, that nobody even reads it anymore.)
dave_sullivan|13 years ago
Yes, to build wealth you need to press and push--no one is going to give you anything for free and pre-buyers remorse can be a bitch. But cheat? I don't know about that--it depends on your definition.
If cheating is maintaining borderline outrageous profit margins, then yes, it helps to do that. But if cheating is something more along the lines of getting 50% up front for a project you underbid, then holding that money hostage while you proceed to milk the project with change orders every step of the way--then yes, that's cheating (and probably illegal-ish). Plenty of people operate this way but I think it's a pretty bad way to do business--both from an economic standpoint and a how-did-you-get-to-be-such-a-terrible-person? standpoint. And then of course there's the run-of-the-mill cheating that is enterprise software marketing departments, but if that's your worst sin in life, I think you're probably doing ok.
And while there are plenty of cases of crooks making out like bandits, there are just as many about pretty honest people making out like bandits as well. Compare Mike Milken and Warren Buffet for example. Or from tech, the guy that started color vs pg. As far as what I've read about both of them, they seem like rather different personality types, but both of them seem to be doing ok financially.
So yes, nothing is cut and dry, and anyone that says you can't make a lot of money via semi-legal stealing is dead wrong, but I really don't think this is the only--or even the most expedient--way to get rich. Speaking personally, I prefer sitting around coming up with ways to build value for customers instead of coming up with more clever ways of fucking them.
smilliken|13 years ago
It's impossible to agree with such hard-line statements like this. Extraordinary wealth is possible to create through honest work, intelligence, and luck. I'm sure you don't believe Google, Tesla, SpaceX, and IBM all cheated their way into their positions.
There is a lot of truth to some of your points though. Scanning through the Fortune 500, more than half of these companies do seem to "press and push and cheat".
CamperBob2|13 years ago
Wow. Someone's projecting, it sounds like.
trotsky|13 years ago
Let's flip it around: to give out good advice, you need offer it based on actual experience and not just suppositions. (not necessarily true either, but it sure seems like it would strengthen your argument)
dagw|13 years ago
This seems very much like a No True Scotsman fallacy.
aes256|13 years ago
There are great salespeople the world over selling products they don't believe in — after all, great products tend to sell themselves — but you can bet your bottom dollar they'd be doing an even better job if they did believe in the product.
jiggy2011|13 years ago
bcoates|13 years ago
Peroni|13 years ago
All solid advice and adding more to the 'believe in your product' concept, the reasoning for this is incredibly simplistic. If you are attempting to sell something you don't believe adds any value or benefit, it will be instantly obvious in your pitch unless you happen to be a fantastic liar and that's what led to the stereotype of the used-car salesman.
Minor nitpick: Mamet was never attempting to present Roma as a fantastic salesman. He knows the audience can see the deceitfulness. He's actually showing a 'behind-the-scenes' view of how liars have gained the edge in the sales world.
swombat|13 years ago
mistercow|13 years ago
If I wrote a story about a politician who committed suicide, would you say "You must not know a lot of politicians, to have this view of what a good politician is, because suicide is definitely not what makes a great politician"?
swombat|13 years ago
From some of the other comments, it sounds like I misinterpreted Mamet's intent - he apparently wasn't looking to generalise to all salespeople - but still, it seems to me the comment is fair based on this particular piece of evidence.
olavk|13 years ago
unknown|13 years ago
[deleted]
epicjunction|13 years ago
swombat|13 years ago
If anyone has suggestions for a better title, let's have them...
mbesto|13 years ago
personlurking|13 years ago
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qa9dttNx1S8
reubenswartz|13 years ago
unknown|13 years ago
[deleted]
spinchange|13 years ago
SparrowOS|13 years ago
[deleted]