The first number or idea we encounter pulls later judgments toward it.
More quotesThe first number colonises the conversation. Everything said afterwards must live near it, argue with it or spend time escaping it.
“Our fee is £120,000.”
“That is absurd.”
“What did you expect?”
The buyer had expected £70,000. After hearing £120,000, an offer of £85,000 feels disciplined. The conversation now occupies the seller’s scale.
In the damages experiment, a $5 million demand produced an average award of $440,000. Raising the demand to $1 billion moved the award only to $490,000. The extra zeroes achieved little. At some point ambition becomes theatre and credibility starts leaking.
A low anchor can be just as damaging. One early estimate of effort may compress the later plan even after scope expands. Teams then negotiate tasks inside a number chosen before anybody understood the work.
That is the missing part of “anchor high”. The first number matters, but plausibility decides how much of it survives. A benchmark tied to scope, alternatives or comparable deals gives the other side something to examine. A wild demand may shift the range and turn the negotiation into a trust problem.
Before the next meeting, the buyer writes down comparables, constraints and the point at which walking away makes sense. That independent figure cannot remove anchoring. It does prevent the seller’s opening from being the only number with a history.
Reasons matter because they can be challenged. “£92,000 because these three additions require six weeks” invites scrutiny. “£120,000 because that is our premium level” mostly invites a different supplier.
“We can justify £92,000 from the added scope.”
That number is not immune to the anchor, but at least it has parents. Comparables and scope give the buyer somewhere to stand besides the seller’s opening demand.