Something niche to my field (custom furniture and woodworking) is that RAISING prices can increase sales. Wealthy clientele want both a piece that is quality, but also something "worthy" of gracing their home.
A mentor of mine had beautiful, handmade pieces for 600$. He was still in his "starving artist" phase and kept slashing prices to make some money back. He had lunch with a friend who was a painter. he discussed the amount of time (30 hours) and materials that went into these pieces and they weren't selling for even 600$. She immediately told him he was insane and to jack up prices. He told all the stores he was showcasing in to raise the prices from 600$ to 3000$. He sold ALL 10 of them in 3 months.
Pricing is a careful balance of charging what is fair, and what the client expects to pay. If you are building a dining table for a client that has $500k worth of art and paintings covering the walls, he is expecting to pay in excess of $50,000. If you quote him $10,000, hes gonna get cold feet and go to someone else charging more.
Same phenomenon in this video. Banksy selling pieces for 60$ on the street and barely sells any. His pieces usually sell for $20k
https://youtu.be/7mxJT2uXtrE?si=m0RexNfLI2EBIydf
People are HIGHLY class oriented and kind of stupid. The price is not the piece but what it says. They want a piece that says "I'm rich as fuck".
Upvoting posts that really aren't that great.
Thanks. ....hey, wait a minute.
Allowing yourself to be wrong. Especially as a male.
Instead of trying to figure out a way to still kind of be correct, you just objectively reconsider the facts.
It made me a better adult. I prefixed a lot of my statements with "I think" or "I believe" to emphasis the possibility for me to be wrong. And I'm more inclined to ask questions. (Which sadly gets a lot of people riled up because they have a hard time believing I'm not doing it sarcastically.)
Try using "to the best of my knowledge", I find it is indicating that your knowledge is not complete.
But it also indicates you have thought of the situation.
This has been a lifelong habit for me and something I respect and appreciate and think virtuous in others, but I'm starting to think I should train myself out of it. Saying "I think", or "to the best of my knowledge" frequently seems to broadcast "I'm just guessing at random without thought" or with some people it seems to convey "I'm wrong about...". It also very often seems to encode "it's best not to listen to the remaining words of this sentence in case my wrongness is contagious".
As frustrated as I sound by this, I kind of get it I suppose. I thought I was indicating humility and a willingness to change the opinions or ideas I express if the conversation partner has reason to challenge them, however it seems in many cases it just indicates a lack of confidence in my statements. They perhaps might argue that they never thought I was arrogant or lacking in humility to begin with and of course I could be wrong, but everyone could so specifically bringing it up or alluding to it unnecessarily like that just suggests you're trying to mask that you have no idea what you're talking about. I suppose one might also say that the willingness to change your opinion in light of a challenge to it is supposed to be a given so there's no point trying to show that either. I don't know if anyone really thinks any of this, but there's probably something like that operating subconsciously.
Good point, but it doesn't have a natural sounding translation in my language, although I do use "as far as I know".
Is bothers mehow intelligence is too often percieved as the opposite.
Not a specific one, but Cialdini's book the principles of persuasion, is probably the best book on psychology, and it's centered on a short list of these "tricks" that cause an automatic "click-whirr" response in humans.
The power of "yes, and ..."
Basically when you are being accused of something, or need to shift how someone is perceiving you, instead of saying "yes, but ..." You should try 'yes, and..."
Not only does it take the attention away from the negative, but it's helping in building up new ideas.
Lawyers hate this one trick.
Improv artists love this one trick
If you're walking towards someone on the street and you want to avoid the whole "I'm going left you're going right" dance - DO NOT make eye contact with them and glance toward the way you intend to go. They will automatically go the other way and you won't bump into anyone ever again
Typically people of driving age move to the side of the road they drive on, ( in that country) in a pedestrian situation.
Where it falls down is tourists in your city when e.g. you are from US and they are from UK etc.
this also works for navigating large crowds! you look slightly down and the direction you want to go and watch entire crowds part for you. some people will be oblivious and you may have to walk around them, but for the most part, people being able to subconsciously see where you want to go will make them move out of that way for you.
Now playing The Verve - Bitter Sweet Symphony
Taking a walk every day helps improve the mood on my dopamine deprived brain.
Sometimes the person you really need to trick with psychology is yourself.
If you are in a debate and you want to nudge someone towards your opinion, or at least away from theirs, without triggering the typical emotional defence behaviour which ruins rational discussions, calmly ask objective questions which point towards problems in the arguments of your partner.
From my experience, I found this certainly helps to keep discussions civil and make people think rather than just judge emotionally, even though this is not a one-fits-all tool.
(A) Such questions can be used to inquire about the reasons for a statement or opinion, which can provide you with a broader argumentative "attack surface" and might weaken your discussion partner when they discover that their point of view is not as sound and good as they thought it to be.
This basically boils down to principles of epistemology. "How do you know?"
(B) Another use is to include facts or opinions in such questions which counter the argument of your partner and let them re-evaluate it.
Two simple examples:
- "Why do you think that wolves are dangerous for humans?" (A)
- "How does this fit with research which shows that wolves avoid humans and don't see them as prey?" (B)
That way you don't necessarily present yourself as an opponent, since your own opinion is not directly verbalized. Instead you hop into a more neutral role, where you ask genuine questions and show interest in the other person's point of view. Combatative counter arguments are rephrased and hidden that way without the other person realizing it.
This is a good one.
People just want to be accepted and loved. Use this knowledge to get almost anyone to do what you want.
Observe their body language. Do they cross their arms a lot? How much eye contact do they make? Do they shift around when talking? Do their eyes dart around the room?
All these are clues about their personality and disposition and you can tailor your communication to them depending on how receptive they are. Do they laugh easily? What makes them laugh? Do they talk a lot? Do they talk about themselves?
Finding out to what degree of extrovert/introvert they are can go a long way into successfully manipulating anyone around you to do what you want.
It’s how I’ve made friends and how I’ve dated women with variable rates of success.
When in an argument, wait for the other person to stop talking then maintain eye contact and say nothing. They'll feel the need to fill the void and keep talking after a few seconds, but this move throws them off balance and helps calm them down. Also works great with angry customers at retail jobs.
Also, when you suspect someone is lying to you. After the silence, they'll often try to cover up the lie because they suspect you've figured them out.
I can get people to tell me their life story and trauma within 10 minutes of meeting them.
Someone tell me what psychology trick I'm doing so I can stop doing it!!!!
Social engineering 🥳
I get this too! I don't judge them, I listen because they've probably been wanting to do that for a long time. Another thing that happens with me is that "tough" types will approach me and start acting really friendly with me, whereas with other people they're always angry and intimidating. I think there's something about me that's really disarming but like you, I have no idea what it is!
listening
oh no..
I have no idea why but this happens with most people in my family and we can even trace it back to my great grandma.
I think it does come down to listening actively, but also by sharing a sense of openness and vulnerability. When you're honest about yourself with others, they're more likely to be honest with you.
u/Sharkeatingbreakfast
Autism is genetic, and many undiagnosed autistic children will become much harder to diagnose as adults because they will over adjust from their social awkwardness and become incredibly active listeners.
They'll often be told they're "easy to talk/open up to" because they maintain great eye contact, nod along and give little responses throughout a story.
I'm not saying you're autistic necessarily, but the experience you're explaining is one that I've had and many people I've known have had
“Langer demonstrated this fact by asking a small favor of people waiting in line to use a library copying machine: “Excuse me, I have five pages. May I use the Xerox machine because I’m in a rush?”
The effectiveness of this request-plus-reason was nearly total: Ninety-four percent of those asked let her skip ahead of them in line.
Compare this success rate to the results when she made the request only: “Excuse me, I have five pages. May I use the Xerox machine?” Under those circumstances, only 60 percent of those asked complied.
At first glance, it appears that the crucial difference between the two requests was the additional information provided by the words “because I’m in a rush.”
But a third type of request tried by Langer showed that this was not the case. It seems that it was not the whole series of words, but the first one, “because,” that made the difference.
Instead of including a real reason for compliance, Langer’s third type of request used the word “because” and then, adding nothing new, merely restated the obvious: “Excuse me, I have five pages. May I use the Xerox machine because I have to make some copies?”
The result was that once again nearly all (93 percent) agreed, even though no real reason, no new information, was added to justify their compliance.”
Excerpt From Influence Robert B. Cialdini, PhD
Many of my friends are familiar with this study, and an inside joke of ours is to, when asking for something, end it with “because reasons.”
I managed to skip the entire line at Ohare security screening by just walking past people waiting patiently while I repeated "sorry, plane is boarding, excuse me, boarding, pardon me..." etc. Nobody bothered objecting and got out of the way for me.
My incoming flight was delayed, and immigration took forever, so once it was time to get to my connection the plane had started boarding. After security I had to run, and I got to the gate just in time.
This is more of an unwritten rule of airport security lines, the staff will let you through if you tell them you're plane is boarding.
Better not argue with this idiot
"Sure"
Being nice to people makes them happy to be around you.
Master manipulator. Needs to be contained
Love your sense of humour. :-)
@TehBamski the way having 2 eyes lets us see 3D
Seeing this comment once... was enough. But a second time? Sheesh. /j
Be kind and use people's names. Also, just asking for stuff.
You'd be amazed how far it will take you just to ask for something, using a person's name, and being kind about it. Demand something and people will be reluctant to give you a thing.
A good retail one: don't say "sorry for your wait." Say "thank you for waiting" or "thank you for being so patient".
Something to do with... it makes people feel good about themselves if they think they've done something for you, which in turn makes them more likely to keep being patient.
I might be in the minority, but it is painfully obvious and pisses me off when companies do this. I’d much rather get an apology than a comment on my own emotional regulation while taking zero accountability. They’re basically saying it’s my fault for being annoyed.
I don’t think a retail manager would appreciate, “Thank you for remaining calm as your car took unexpected damage” over “I’m sorry I hit your car,” so why do they think I’d prefer the former for them making me wait?
This works with signs, too. “Keep off the grass” is the least effective, followed by “please keep off the grass”, with “thank you for keeping off the grass” being the most effective.
So similar thing I learned in sales. I avoid using the word "help" because if you ask something like "is there anything I can help you with"? The word "help" subconsciously makes them feel like you are implying they are weak, vulnerable, and need assistance. Where as if you ask them "is there anything I can do for you"? The word "do" has a more positive connotation and implies that you are offering a service or a gift, which more people are likely to agree to.
I have never thought of it this way, thanks i think ill take this on board.
I often don't like it when customer service people say this to me if I have been waiting to resolve an issue that is the company's fault, because my waiting is barely a choice; the company screwed up and now I am 'forced' to spend time getting it resolved.
Only apologize or thank me when it's personal and sincere. (The size of the business matters a lot in if the apologies or thanks feel genuine.)
Someone told this to workers at a cafe I go to occasionally. They don't usually have a particularly long wait which makes it seem insincere and a little ridiculous.
Another fun trick I learned in sales is that if you're trying to get someone to purchase something, instead of having them focus on whether or not they should get something, change their question to something else.
For example, I used to sell phones. Instead of having people try to figure out if they want the newest Samsung or not, I would take the phone in two different colors and ask if they liked it in blue or black instead. Putting it in their hands let's them imagine having the phone already and the question changes from should I purchase this phone to what color do I want?
I'm quite sure this can translate to other questions and decisions people ask themselves
This same trick was actually a plot device in That 70s Show (S1E11). Red learns to use it, and immediately starts making sales.
This is sometimes known as thinking past the sale, and works exactly for the reasons you said. A similar trick is to ask about the accessories they want for the phone they haven't yet decided to buy.
Suspiciously similar to a trick parents use on their children. "Do you want to eat the peas first or the carrots first?" Gives them the illusion that they made a choice about what to eat.
Did this in computer sales. Within a few sentences I would know that you would be buying one of three computers off my shelf.
Oh I just need something for word and internet.
Well let's look at <expensive>, <cheap>, and <the one you should obviously buy>. There are 40 computers on this floor, but you now have to pick from the three I chose for you. Out of those three, there is one right answer.
Now lucky for them I was trying to steer them to the best computer for them, because I was not on commission and didn't care about sales numbers, but this is a frequent sales tactic. Next time you're on a car lot, try to see if you're shown more than 3 cars out of the hundreds on the lot.
Yea. It's simple when you change the question from "do you want to buy X?" To making the assumption that they already will buy it and now the only question is "what color will you be buying?"
Procrastination.
answering questions in an accuate way that still leaves the asker with no real additional information.
Law school?
If you don't want to answer the question, say "I don't know, what about you?" and they'll start talking about themselves, and you won't be in the spotlight anymore.
If you want someone to approve something, ask for something over the top outrageous and then when they expectedly say no, you „compromise“ to the thing you actually intended.
The ole cock-thumb.
The soctatic method. It forces people to actually think about their position in an argument
I don't like the Socratic method as it is employed in classrooms. I think the method of questioning is fine, and dissecting a subject can be fun with the right group and foreknowledge, but most instructors absolutely suck at making sure all students are up to speed with whatever is being discussed.
I don't see its value as a teaching tool without a strong enough instructor to prepare the students for its use and to guide the discussions in a productive manner.
Every professor I've ever had who used this method basically wasted class time with fill in the blank response questions. These are not higher order thinking discussions and do nothing to actually broaden understanding of whichever subject is being discussed. It seems like a cop out for the professor to me, at least how I've seen it used in multiple major universities.
I've had better Socratic discussions while high as fuck with my buddies after class than when we were actually in the lecture hall.
The Socratic method is used extensively in medical training to the point that I think most doctors wouldn't think of it as the Socratic method but rather just as the way you speak to students and trainees.
I can't imagine how it could work in a lecture hall, it's best used one on one or at most small groups.
Which kind of "best" is your "best"?
