The fact that the buyer, after correctly formulated the promise of the seller, decided to buy the goods, does not mean anything. He has not yet decided this completely, this is only a preliminary decision.
What is the matter? Now, he is thinking from whom and on what terms he is going to buy, and whether this product is good. And here he does not like everything. The second decision-making cycle has begun.
As in the previous cycle, the first thing the buyer thinks, is there any threat in this deal. And then he finds out, yes, there is a threat! The reaction is simple: “If I buy this product here and now, on these terms, I am in danger!” This reaction is so far purely emotional. It is caused by the work of the amygdala. But for the buyer, the danger is real!
An alarm immediately arises from the anterior cingulate: the earlier decision "to buy" does not fit in with the newly identified threat. The resulting conflict needs to be urgently resolved, and the frontal area of the brain is included in the case. Logic quickly finds a solution, “Let the seller concede to me, and the danger backs down!”
Then speech comes into play, and the buyer announces a hint of the concession he needs. This hint sounds like an objection, "I will not buy your product for such-and-such reason." The subtext of this objection can be expressed as, “Guess what I don't like. Guess how much you need to deviate from your terms. If you need to sell your goods, then concede. If the concession is sufficient, maybe I buy your goods.” Naturally, this subtext is not pronounced, rather implied.
Now, the seller faces a crossroads where each choice is worse than others. A fork of five ways: turn and leave, convince the buyer, manipulate the buyer, concede, or identify and solve the problem that the buyer has encountered.
Four out of five "opportunities" are empty, only the last one is solid: to identify and resolve the problem for the buyer. Let's find out why so.
Buyer's Gains and Costs | Sales Philosophy. Solid vs. Empty | Turn and Leave