May 1, 2025 • 39 mins
The next pope will be chosen through a ritualized process involving secret ballots, smoke signals, and a lock-in at the Sistine Chapel. Nate and Maria talk about how the papal conclave works, and what it has to teach us about group decision-making and the dynamics of secrecy. They also discuss the studio deal for the new movie Sinners, and share their own top negotiating tips. Plus, they play a game of Would You Rather.
For more from Nate and Maria, subscribe to their newsletters:
The Leap from Maria Konnikova
Silver Bulletin from Nate Silver
Get ad-free episodes, and get your questions answered in an exclusive weekly bonus episode, of Risky Business by subscribing to Pushkin+ on Apple Podcasts or Pushkin.fm. Pushkin+ subscribers can access ad-free episodes, full audiobooks, exclusive binges, and bonus content for all Pushkin shows.
Subscribe on Apple: apple.co/pushkin
Subscribe on Pushkin: pushkin.fm/plus
See omnystudio.com/listener for privacy information.
Mark as Played
Transcript
Episode Transcript
Available transcripts are automatically generated. Complete accuracy is not guaranteed.
Speaker 1 (00:15):
Pushkin. Welcome back to Risky Business, a show about making
better decisions. I'm Maria Kanikova.
Speaker 2 (00:31):
And I'm made Silver.
Speaker 1 (00:32):
Today on the show, Nate, we are going to be
talking about the Conclave, not the movie, but the actual
process for choosing the next hope and more broadly, how
does group decision making work and what is the best
way of doing it.
Speaker 3 (00:49):
We'll also be talking about negotiation, using the prompt of
the movie Sinners. We're going to be talking about how
to negotiate a good deal for yourself.
Speaker 1 (00:59):
And at the end, we will leave you with a
little game that Nate and I are going to play
called would you rather? By the way, listeners, I apologize
my voice is a little bit shot. I am in
the middle of allergy season and just off of a
red eye, so I will be extra raspy today. I
(01:22):
still love you, and yes, that's what I'm going to
sound like for the pod, and.
Speaker 2 (01:26):
We talked about our red eyes. Drata, what flight did
you take? What time was your flight?
Speaker 1 (01:30):
My flight was at six pm. It was the only
direct flight to NIS from New York.
Speaker 3 (01:35):
I didn't know I had a fucking direct flight to Congratulations.
Speaker 1 (01:38):
Yeah, direct flights be Yeah. So I took a direct
flight to Nis and then took a car from Nice
to Monte Carlo. The other way to do it is
to take a helicopter, but we've talked on the show
about the dangers of helicopters and I did not do that.
And now I'm here for EPT Monte Carlo, which happened
to be my first ever international poker tournament. Back when
(02:02):
I started playing poker, my first ever international hendon mob
flagnate was from Monte Carlo. So I'm back to the
scene of the crime and I have never cashed the
main event here? Is this going to be the year will?
Speaker 2 (02:14):
Are you superscitious about that?
Speaker 3 (02:16):
Are you like, oh, there are certain venues where I
run well or certain events.
Speaker 1 (02:19):
Absolutely not. I think that that's a very self handicapping
way of thinking.
Speaker 2 (02:24):
The six pm flight, I think is the worst option.
Speaker 1 (02:26):
By the way, it's an awful it's hard to sleep, yeah,
it's really hard. But for me, taking a direct flight
is the least bad option. I would rather take a
direct flight to Nise than a later flight at a
more optimal time to Paris and then have to fly
to Nise. So sometimes you make the least bad decision possible,
(02:48):
which brings us to electing the pope, which directly ties
to the least bad decision possible. So Nate, the Pope
died as we know. Oh wait, yeah, oh my god,
I'm so sorry, breaking news story. JD. Vans killed the Pope.
Now I'm sorry. I shouldn't say that, but the Pope
(03:08):
did die day after meeting with JD. Vance. I take
it all back. We're not conspiracy theorists on risky Business,
or are we. Okay, So the Pope is dead and
now they must choose a new pope, and they do
this by a process called a conclave, and it's been
announced that is going to take place on May seventh.
We are taping this on April thirtieth, so a week
(03:31):
from now is when the conclave starts. And this is
how the process works. So there are around two hundred cardinals,
but only one hundred and thirty five of those are
actually eligible to vote in the conclave because by the rules,
they have to be under the age of eighty. A
(03:52):
lot of old cardinals out there, is what I'm hearing here.
Speaker 2 (03:57):
So you're saying is that they're too young to be
the US president.
Speaker 1 (04:01):
That is exactly what I'm saying, And technically speaking, any
Catholic male can be elected pope. Practically speaking, it's going
to be one of those one hundred and thirty five cardinals.
The way that it works is they vote up to
four times a day, but in the morning and in
the afternoon, and they can vote once or twice in
(04:22):
those sessions. And they basically have multiple days of meetings
that have already started leading up to conclave. Then they
seal the doors and the only people there are the
cardinals who can vote. And then they're also you know,
there's guards, there's a doctor. Everyone's sworn to secrecy. They're
completely cut off from the outside world. No phones, no news.
(04:44):
The place is swept for listening devices. You know, it's
like very like hush hush. And then the vote is
done by secret ballot, So everyone on a piece of
paper writes their choice for the pope, folds it up,
it's collected, the ballots are shaken, and then three people
will read the ballots. So one person will take a
(05:04):
ballot out at a time and will silently write down
what the name is. The the second person will also
write down what the name is, and the third person
will read it out loud. So this is to make
sure that the votes are tallied accurately. If there's a miscount,
so say one hundred and thirty five people vote and
there's only one hundred and thirty four ballots or one
hundred and thirty six somehow, then they destroy it and
(05:24):
do it all over. You need a two thirds majority
to become pope. After each vote, the ballots are burned
and smoke comes out of the chimney. The smoke is
either black if they have not chosen a pope, or
white if they have chosen a pope. This can take
quite a bit of time. The last two times it
took two days. One time it took two years. There
(05:46):
was a lot of infighting. They weren't actually in secret
conclave for that entire period, but that it took a
while to elect that pope. So, first of all, you
had told me before we started recording that you weren't
really familiar with this process.
Speaker 3 (06:05):
So now what happens pre recording says pre recording Maria, I.
Speaker 1 (06:09):
Thought, no, no, but this is but this is actually
I think it's actually a really it's good to just
have a fresh reaction, because you know, a lot about
decision making, So just fresh your your first reaction to
how this is structured. What do you think is this
a good way to make, you know, such a monumental decision.
(06:32):
What are we thinking here?
Speaker 3 (06:33):
Well, my first thought is that this is an easy
decision because there is a candidate named Pierre Batista Pizza Bala.
He's a fucking red hat looks kind of like a
pizza Pope slash hat, Like, how can you not name
that guy pope? He has a divine right, I think
I'm using that term incorrectly.
Speaker 1 (06:51):
No, Look, he's not the favorite, he's not the betting
market favorite. Night we can talk about it.
Speaker 2 (06:56):
I got all the money and Pizza Bala I tell
you that much.
Speaker 1 (06:59):
I mean, that's that's a pretty amazing name. I will
hand it to him.
Speaker 3 (07:03):
No, the process I am indirectly familiar with because it's
the same process essentially that like political parties used choose
a candidate in the event of a broker or contested convention.
Right there, you need a majority and not two thirty
said it was Maria. But still they go one ballot
at a time, and it can take a lot of ballots.
(07:26):
You know, in some of the conventions in the early
twentieth century, you could take more than one hundred, I think, right,
and like, there's a couple of dynamics that are important, right.
You know, One is that people are trying to through
the kind of veil of anonymity. Of course, I can
also have conversations on the side, right side channel conversations.
You know, they're trying to order their preferences.
Speaker 1 (07:48):
Right.
Speaker 3 (07:48):
Maybe I do think that Pete Sabala is my first choice,
but I'd rather have I'm just looking at some of
these other candidates. I'd rather have Peter Trix and them
Matteo Zupie, Right, and so you know, I am looking
for signals about how other people vote. You can also
have I don't know if this takes place in the conclave,
but it does in like political American context. You can
(08:08):
kind of play your votes to a different candidate, right,
I mean there are kind of you know, and a
minimum two dimensions that are important here.
Speaker 2 (08:19):
Right.
Speaker 3 (08:20):
One is you can have a more reformist pope like
Francis versus ones that are more traditional.
Speaker 2 (08:25):
That's one dimension.
Speaker 3 (08:27):
Then you have Italian versus Europe versus the rest of
the world. Right, you could have the first Filipino pope.
You could have the first black pope, for example, And
so yeah, I don't quite know how you begin to
kind of model the game theory of this. My guess
is that, like, there are some essentially random dynamics right
(08:50):
where someone's like, fuck it, I'm bored of keep voting
over and over again. I'm gonna shift my vote That
catalyzes a chain reaction of sorts. And my guess is
that if you kind of like somehow simulated this, it
wouldn't be deterministic.
Speaker 2 (09:03):
It would be somewhat stochastic.
Speaker 1 (09:06):
Yeah, well, first name, I have a question, and then
and then I'll reach when we're in the US political system,
when you need a majority. They're not sequestered though, right
like they're still they They are allowed to listen to
the news and everything. It's a little bit more open, right.
Speaker 3 (09:23):
No, Look, today they'd all be on their phones and
and there'd be a lot of implicit pressure. In the
old days, it was a proverbial smoke filled rooms. It's
one of the context in which that phrase kind of
comes from, Right, So you might have some degree of.
Speaker 2 (09:37):
Isolation.
Speaker 3 (09:38):
Yeah, Now it's it's tricky because everything you say is
on Twitter, and and you know the back channels can
be compromised and leaked to the press.
Speaker 2 (09:48):
Yeah, I don't know.
Speaker 3 (09:48):
I know, if there's like a pope, if there's a
Maggie Haberman of the Vatican or something, right who's leaking stuff,
there has to be some way to leak stuff.
Speaker 1 (09:58):
No, there's there's really no way to leak stuff these days.
So the you know, the idea behind the total sequestering
is to keep it secretive on their side, but also
to minimize the politicking that's going on. That said, I mean,
the meetings have already started, so you were saying that,
(10:19):
you know, you can pledge votes to a pope. That
absolutely does happen, and popees start, potential popes start building coalitions.
And even now we're still a week out and already
a number of that one hundred and thirty five eligible
cardinals have dropped out. Some have done it for health reasons,
(10:40):
but people are like already who can and can't vote
is a thing, because since it's two thirds, the actual
number really matters, right Like, it matters if all one
thirty five vote or if only one hundred and ten vote,
right Like, that's a big difference. In terms of what
you need for support, because even though the percentage is
(11:00):
the same, because we're talking about very personal relationships, absolute
numbers here matter, right, Do I need to get one
more vote? Do I need to get three more votes?
Like here? That actually does make a difference. So Paula
taking starts very very early, and I think that yes, sure,
(11:22):
sequestering them the day of the conclave accomplishes something. But
I wonder, like the moment that someone you know dies,
like the moment Francis died, can we just like see
what immediately gather them all there like it, start sequestering
because they.
Speaker 3 (11:43):
If they can't vote, I mean they get a break
at night, right, No they they stay there.
Speaker 1 (11:48):
No, they can't leave, so they they h it's completely
They have a dormitory on premises, so they sleep there
as well. So everyone everyone is there twenty four to
seven until the pope is elected. That's why they have doctors.
So so the only one of some of the only
people who are allowed in who are not the voting
(12:09):
cardinals are medical professionals in case something happens, because Nate,
we've already established that these are not young men who
are doing this, and so.
Speaker 3 (12:20):
There's always ways for information to leak.
Speaker 1 (12:22):
There is always ways for information to leak. And I
would go one step further. There are secret ballots, and
there are secret ballots. Right, so we are here, you know, saying, Okay,
this is your secret ballot. But first of all, they're
writing it by hand. And these are men who probably,
(12:46):
like I'm sorry, handwriting is recognizable, Like I hate saying
it's true.
Speaker 3 (12:51):
Friends just supposedly had very discentive like small handwriting, yeah everywhere.
Speaker 1 (12:56):
I mean, these are men who've been handwriting their whole life.
This isn't like a twenty year old who like grew
up on social media and never handwrites anything. Handwriting is distinctive.
You are, you know, they're sitting in an open room.
They're not going to voting booths. The thing is like
it's secret, but it's not secret, and you can still
exert pressure on people and people can still think they
(13:16):
still know how I'm voting, and like that sort of
psychological play is definitely a factor here. And I think
is you know, even though we're talking holy men, like
they are not above this, Like I'm guessing that that
voting and that pressure can get pretty damn vicious and
(13:38):
there are better and worse ways to make group decisions,
and yes, this is one of the better ways to
try to do it. But I think that we can
go a step further and try to really anonymize it
and take that pressure off so that you can't point
fingers and be like, see, I recognize your handwriting, Nate.
I know that you voted for mister Pizza because you
(13:59):
still like it and you don't be the bull. Good
vote for me.
Speaker 3 (14:03):
Yeah, look, there are there's a lot of theory about
how this supplies to the US Congress as well, and
the public nature of the voting process. Yeah, if you
had a private ballot, you might have had I mean,
Trump was impeached but not convicted. It might have been
convicted if you privately asked GOP centers what they thought.
Speaker 1 (14:23):
Right.
Speaker 3 (14:25):
So you know, as poker player, on the one hand,
there's like a party, It's like, hey, information, I'm a journalist,
so therefore therefore information is always good. We always want
to give people more information and they make rational decisions.
Whereas poker players, we understand that information has value and information,
the existence of information and the flow of information can
(14:46):
like can reshape the world.
Speaker 1 (14:50):
Yeah, absolutely, absolutely, And controlling the flow of information also
has a lot of value. Who controls the information and
what information gets shared and the order in which it
gets shared is also incredibly important. So let's just back
up a little bit, because you know, this group dec
is being made in secret, but the run up to
(15:12):
it is not in secret, and so we know, you know,
we can see the betting odds, we can see kind
of the stories, we see the headlines, we see of
the arguments for you know, all of your front runners.
Why you would want Pietro Perolin, who's currently the front
runner on most betting sites, versus Luis Antonio Tagle, who
(15:33):
is known as the Asian Francis. You know, they're that's
his nickname. You know, why you'd want one or the other?
The odds actually have changed. So when I looked on
the twenty second Tagle was actually the odds on favorite,
and now he's in second place to perilin so already, right,
people have been shifting. And what we know about decision
(15:57):
making is those early things matter, right, Like that is framing,
and that is kind of dynamics that actually can affect results,
Like if you can make yourself appear to be a
front runner early in a decision process that can actually
influence how the group makes a decision later on. You know,
(16:18):
that first mover advantage is absolutely crucial and can really
affect how people think and how they think other people
are thinking. Which is also a major thing here, right,
because also no one wants a two year long conclive.
So you're also trying to think strategically about this as
you would in any group decision. You know, how do
we get to this outcome faster?
Speaker 3 (16:40):
Yes, this is a big media pr thing too, right, Well, sometimes,
I mean increasingly you'll have people who are the subject
of a critical media story, right, and they will go
on their social media accounts and be like, yeah, I
just want to I mean, they'll be more delicate than
this way. I just want to preempt this. It's a
hit job. Or let's say, I just want to preempt
this by admitting I fucked this thing up, and you
(17:03):
know the subtext and softening a little bit. Why it's
not quite as bad as you think. I mean, yeah,
this and you know, perpecause people are kind of lazy
and it's costly to contradict people. I mean, we've probably
all been in a decision making process. Right, a meeting
where like maybe five people want I mean, take whatever
simple example you want. Five people want to get pizza,
(17:25):
one person wants to get Thai food, right, and then
like and for whatever reason, the Thai food fucking person
speaks up first and they're like, super fucking annoying. Right,
you can tell I want pizza. I'm in Chicago, something,
I got pizza, pizza on the brain.
Speaker 1 (17:37):
Here, you've got pizza on the brand.
Speaker 3 (17:39):
Yeah, even though it's none am Yeah, But anyway, absolutely,
I mean again that goes to the notion of this
it can be a bit random and stochastic, and like
having having a secret ballot with minimal I am skeptical
of zero information leakage is a way to diminish that.
But you know, maybe a conversation you have in the
(18:01):
hallway or things like that can have cascading effects.
Speaker 1 (18:05):
Absolutely, and let's actually also do the converse of that. So,
as I said, Cardinal Pietro Perolyn is currently the favorite
to be the next pope. He is, you know, Italian,
kind of a little bit more centrist, but still someone
who was close to Francis. You know, people think that
(18:28):
he's a nice choice now imagine I'm going to do it. Total.
We don't know what's going to happen in the conclave,
and we will never know because, as as we've already said,
totally secret. Imagine the first vote he is like number
four or something, right, Imagine he's actually very performs below expectation.
(18:49):
That also can have an outsized effect. Right when you
are a perceived front runner and that first ballot doesn't
go your way, that can also throw throw things into
disarray and really change the dynamic of the group decision. Right, Yeah, that.
Speaker 3 (19:05):
First I would imagine that that he would withdraw or
support would collapse after that. Right, it's like, okay, this
is a guy that probably ought to start out with
the head start, right, and if he doesn't, then there's
a big scramble where it's like a unexpected dark horse candidate.
If they got five votes out of nowhere, that probably
(19:27):
means that might be quite bullish, right.
Speaker 2 (19:31):
People.
Speaker 3 (19:31):
Now, people can also do say hey, I just want
to wait and see and prolong the process. Like in
the contextilitical conventions, they might nominate like a favorite son. Right,
you're a delegate from West Virginia, The governor of West Virginia,
is not a viable nominee, but you want to wait
and see what everyone else does and maybe like preserve
time for a viable candidate who is not the front
(19:52):
runner to gather support. Right, So you want to make
sure there's no first ballot pick, so you just vote
for your governor or something. Right, So people are pretty
smart about this for the most part.
Speaker 1 (20:03):
Yeah, that's actually an interesting broader question. In any sort
of group decision situation like this, does it make sense
to vote for the person who you think is kind
of likely to win and you'll eventually end up supporting
at first or does it make sense to just vote
for your preferred candidate and split the ballot, you know,
(20:27):
one hundred ways or or or whatever it is. What
is the strategically smarter decision? And yeah, Nate, if you
were to I mean, if you were to pick, would
you go with Perilin just because he is the betting
market's favorite.
Speaker 3 (20:43):
No, I like, I like the you know, obviously Pizzabella
pizza bala, excuse me, and then the how do you say,
I guess I go with him?
Speaker 1 (20:56):
Yeah, that's he was actually, Yeah, Asian Francis was my pick.
Speaker 2 (21:00):
Is there a vice pope?
Speaker 1 (21:02):
You know.
Speaker 2 (21:06):
Him will be right back after this break.
Speaker 1 (21:18):
Well, Nate, now we've talked to group decision making, let's
talk a little bit about negotiation. I have not seen
Sinners as the movie that's taken Hollywood by storm. You
have not seen it either, No, so for listeners who
haven't seen it, don't worry. There will be zero spoilers
because we have no idea what happens. The reason we're
(21:40):
talking about it is because Ryan Coogler created a clause
in his deal with Warner Brothers that said that in
twenty five years, the rights to the film will revert
to him, and so he will retain his rights. He
is not the first person to have done this. There
(22:02):
are some filmmakers like Quentin Tarantino who have been able
to negotiate deals like this, but it is incredibly rare.
It is something that is not seen often in Hollywood,
and people are up in arms saying, oh, these kinds
of deals are going to be the death of studios.
Speaker 3 (22:19):
You know about Totals Studio, but the fucking Disney Company,
and I feel about sympathetically for them as I do
for Harvard. If you've seen previous segments, and I don't
think the Trump administration is targeting the White or the
Walt Disney company, yet in the way he did for Harvard.
So so yeah, go go fuck yourself studios. Now I'll
never get a contract for anything.
Speaker 1 (22:45):
He didn't mean it, guys, he didn't mean it. Actually
know he probably he did mean it. He did mean it,
and I kind of agree. So so no, this is
a completely I think this is a completely ludicrous take
because what it's saying is that, oh, you know, after
twenty five years, the creator cannot have the copyright over
his creation. And people are you know, people are saying, oh,
(23:09):
this is this is totally crazy. You know, the studio
is the one that financed it, They're the one who
made the movie. And yet right there would be no
movie without the person who created it, without the person
who actually made the movie who wrote about it. Now,
I was thinking about this in terms of what you
(23:29):
and I do, Nate, which is write books. One of
the things you and I do. So who owns the
copyright to what you write?
Speaker 2 (23:40):
I guess the publish.
Speaker 1 (23:42):
Well, yeah, you retained the copyright.
Speaker 2 (23:45):
Eventually eventually public That's what I have an agent for.
Speaker 1 (23:51):
So so you we have you know, you have publishers,
they publish your book. Everyone has different deals. You get royalties,
you know, or you don't get royalties. However however it is.
But eventually, you know, we die and the rights go
(24:13):
to our state, right and then they they can kind
of negotiate.
Speaker 2 (24:19):
So just going in to chat see good luck with that.
Speaker 1 (24:23):
The rights revert to CHAT GPT or whichever m ends
up winning that race. So no, So it's to think
that creators can't have rights to their work, that you
just kind of sell it and then that's it. It's
just a completely just insane way of looking at it.
(24:46):
And twenty five years. It's not like he's saying, I
get you know, in five years, you guys stop right,
stop owning these rights. Twenty five years, there's a lot
of time to make your money back. By the way,
he also invested in the movie. His production company invested
in the movie, so he is also one of the
people who paid for it. So it's not like he
puts zero dollars and zero sounds in there.
Speaker 3 (25:08):
Okay, so neither of us have seen this movie yet.
I give sixty percent outs. I will eventually, but we
have done negotiations in the past, probably more than the
average person has done being kind of independent freelancers, etcetera
for a long time. So let's use some negotiating tips. Maria,
I'm gonna put you on the spot. What's your number
one tip?
Speaker 1 (25:28):
All right? So my number one tip is do not
be the first to act. Don't be the first mover,
because information is power, and you do not want to
be the one who is revealing information first.
Speaker 2 (25:44):
Yeah, I mean doesn't that like.
Speaker 3 (25:47):
Contradict the idea of framing the conversation now that we
talked about in the Pope segment. I'm not just seeing
with you, I'm being a little provocative.
Speaker 1 (25:55):
Yeah, So I think that this is a really interesting dynamic, right,
there are different considerations at play. The reason I said
what I said is you don't want to end up
anchoring people too low, and you also don't want to
tip your hand as to what your expectation might be, right,
(26:18):
So you want them to make the first move so
that you can be the one to have more information
rather than less information. So this is like from an
anchoring standpoint and from a negotiating informational standpoint.
Speaker 3 (26:35):
I mean, look, there's always negotiation before the negotiation, right.
Speaker 2 (26:40):
I mean, like.
Speaker 3 (26:43):
Things from if you go out to dinner or lunch, right,
who is picking up the lunch and how nice is
the place? I mean that's a signal. It might not
tell you very much. And people can be charmed by
things that are charming and not actually, you know, that
may not be a positive signal actually, right, And.
Speaker 2 (27:03):
You know I have suffered in.
Speaker 3 (27:07):
Negotiations sometime from actually being too polite right where it's like, Okay,
this isn't really going to work out. I want to,
like I have some social relationship with the person to maintain,
or maybe they're like a backup option later on. Right,
so you're like too solicitous stuff that you kind of
know it's going to be an offer that's insufficient or uninteresting.
And then and then yeah, I mean, look, I was
(27:28):
going to say, you know my approach. I guess this
is my number one tip. Be aware that giving out
information is costly.
Speaker 2 (27:38):
Right.
Speaker 3 (27:38):
The flip side of that, or the companion of that
being that, like, I don't think misdirection. It's just not
worth my time. Usually I think there are too many
ways it ends badly.
Speaker 1 (27:51):
You know, No, I actually I totally agree with that,
and I think, yeah, ours kind of go hand in
hand information valuable, giving off information costly. And yet there's
a cost to both of our tips because the framing
can be valuable. Right, So if you are the one
who kind of frames things, that can also be helpful.
But I think you and I both are airing on
(28:14):
the side of information power, and so that's why we're
giving our number one tips the way that we are.
But do keep in mind, as a caveat to both
of these that framing the conversation is alwoso important.
Speaker 3 (28:27):
With the important exception that, like, you know, look, a
negotiation is supposed to in most contexts result in the
positive sum agreement. Right now, if you're trying to like
rent an apartment or something, then that's more straightforward. I'm
trying to get five hundred bucks per month off the lease,
and the counter party is trying to figure out, Okay,
if this guy doesn't sign the lease, what's the expected
(28:50):
value of maybe taking another month to rent the apartment?
That kind of thing, right, Yeah, But like if I'm
trying to, like, let's say I'm trying to get investment
for a business venture silver bulletin or receive business or
whatever else, right, you know, I mean there is mutual
gain from information. It's like, hey, this is acually a
good idea, like because Pardoner got figuring, like how do
(29:10):
we how do we create value in all these different
ways that we might create value in the world. Right, Okay, Marie,
what's your what's your second hint?
Speaker 1 (29:21):
My second tip is be willing to walk away.
Speaker 2 (29:25):
Okay, it was my Yeah, we're.
Speaker 1 (29:28):
Going to we're going to merge. Yeah, so great, so
we both we both agree that's crucial, Nate. If you
enter a negotiation and you're not willing to walk away,
you've already lost, right, because there will be a point
at which they realize that you're not going to walk away,
(29:48):
and then they can get what they want to get.
You need to be willing to walk away from the table,
truly willing, not just say oh yeah, I'm willing to
walk away, Otherwise you're going to you're going to be
the weaker party.
Speaker 2 (30:01):
Yeah.
Speaker 3 (30:02):
No, I think I benefited it in my life from
from walking away and being very patient to find a
deal that I thought was really good. Not good in
the sense of being unfair, right, but in the sense
of like, look, I hold my work product in high esteem, right,
and like, and you.
Speaker 2 (30:21):
Know, look, if you're.
Speaker 3 (30:24):
If you're resourceful, then you have a lot of optionalities
you get older and better connected and things like that.
I think in general, people are too quick to settle.
I think I think it's a general tip. It's probably
right in most contexts in life, right, and I think
I think in the context of negotiations too. I mean,
(30:44):
it's very powerful as a negotiating tactic. But also like
you know, look, I've had deals that fell through that
I would have been worse off if I had signed them.
Speaker 1 (30:53):
Right, absolutely, Yeah, And that actually goes to my tip
number three, which is before you enter the negotiation, right
down and know what your non negotiables are, right, Like,
what are the few things that like you absolutely must
have and you don't have to like state them all,
but just know these are the things that like without
(31:14):
this or it can be either way. Either without this,
I walk away or if this happens, then I walk away.
And then do not negotiate on those, no matter how
compelling other things might look. Know what your core principles are, right,
and don't compromise them in the heat of the moment,
under emotion, whatever it is. Because it's really easy to
(31:38):
try to convince yourself in the moment. If someone's like, Okay,
well i'll give you this much more money. If you
can just accept this one thing you really don't want
to accept, it can be easy to convince yourself that
it will be okay, and in the long run it
probably won't if this was one of your core principles.
That's why it's important to know those ahead of time.
I'm not talking a long list. I just mean like,
(31:58):
sometimes there are just a few crucial things that you
know that you must have or that you absolutely can't have.
Speaker 3 (32:05):
My third tip is kind of like focus on someone's negotiables,
and I would say, in hooker terms like exploit that right,
arranging from small to large. When I negotiate my deal
with Disney back in twenty thirteen, I guess it was,
you know, one thing I asked for was like business
(32:26):
class travel and accommodations because it's relatively small cost. Right,
it might be worth one percent of the salary or something,
but they're not going to blow up the whole deal
over that kind of thing, and so it's free basically, right.
A more serious thing is like they, I think did
not appreciate the value of the intellectual property of the models, right,
and so like you have to go to totally to
(32:47):
town there. I mean, that's almost a more important provision
than it turned out than like my license fee and
salary and things like that, but like paying attention to
the non central terms that are important to you, especially
the other side seems blind to them and and is desperate, right, Like,
it's sometimes easier to negotiate on things that aren't salary
(33:08):
when they're when they're material.
Speaker 1 (33:12):
Yeah, absolutely absolutely, And so I think that this, like
to me, that would all of our tips kind of
make a tip number four, which is like a meta thing,
which is, don't negotiate when you're emotional, like under under pressure,
(33:33):
under emotion. Think through all of these things ahead of time,
try to do a lot of work ahead of time,
and try to give yourself time to you know, execute one, two,
and three, and we'll be back right after this. All right, Nate,
(34:04):
Let's play a game called would you rather? Okay, all right, Nate,
would you rather be President of the United States or
the next pope?
Speaker 3 (34:12):
I'd rather be president. I mean, first of all, I'm
not pappable, right, I'm not Catholic. Various other problems doubly.
Speaker 1 (34:19):
I'm doubly not pappable. I'm not.
Speaker 3 (34:22):
If there are only two people left, I'm gonna become
the Pope.
Speaker 2 (34:25):
I'm sorry, Maria, right you are.
Speaker 3 (34:27):
I don't think I want to be president, but I mean,
I yeah, I mean way better than being fucking not
fucking I respect the Catholic. What am I even talking about.
I'd rather be president of the United States?
Speaker 2 (34:41):
Okay, Maria.
Speaker 3 (34:42):
Would you rather be underestimated in every negotiation or feared
in every negotiation?
Speaker 1 (34:49):
Well, I know how the first one feels, because that's
that's the way I've gone through life, and I think
it's actually a pretty good thing. So I'm just gonna
choose choose the devil. I know, I'd rather be underestimated
in every negotiation because if people underestimate you, then it
can be easier to to surprise them, right, and to
(35:10):
pull off stuff that they wouldn't expect coming from you.
That said, like, sometimes I think it would be pretty
cool to be feared, and no one ever fears me.
They look at the.
Speaker 3 (35:22):
Weird things too, where like you can like win a
negotiation for an outcome that winds up not being great
for you, right, because someone is cowed and it's omission
and they are unhappy, right, and you kind of and
you receive worse information from them. We talked before about
sometimes it's not a purely zero sum game.
Speaker 2 (35:40):
So yeah, I think that's I would agree with that.
Speaker 1 (35:43):
All right, Nay? Would you rather be an average American
or Chinese citizen a year from now American USA? Fuck?
Speaker 2 (35:52):
Yeah?
Speaker 1 (35:53):
No?
Speaker 2 (35:53):
I actually what reason? It's been a busy week.
Speaker 3 (35:56):
I went and gave a talk at West Point on Monday,
actually spent the whole day there. So not too many
civilians get that opportunity. And like you know, these cadets
who forsake traditional college experience to commit to five years
serving the country, we're very smart, and like you know,
it's a very selective program, right, You can't just do
it unless you're very very good. But that made me
(36:19):
a little bit more optimistic for the future of the country. Nice, okay, MARIREGT.
Would you rather let current AI decide? So chat GPT,
you get to use version four point five year I'm
going to tell you when to launch nuclear weapons or
the June twenty twenty four version of Biden the day
that Biden did that debate, for example, So.
Speaker 1 (36:42):
I am not trying to be tech alarmist, but I
would actually still say June twenty twenty four, Biden, because
he wouldn't be the one making the decision, okay, right,
He has his smart advisors making the decision. And all
he does is, you know, he lacks capacity for his
own independent meddling, and he just says he just like
(37:04):
he says fine on whatever it is, because he's exhausted.
You know, he's done. Here was my so exactly exactly,
and he like the one thing other than stepping down
at which he did eventually do, he did listen to
his advisors, and so I think that that would be
my choice. And with that, Nate, I am off to well, actually, no,
(37:27):
I'm going to make a good decision. I was going
to say, I am off to play my first tournament
at EPT Monte Carlo. But I'm not going to play
because I am off of a red eye, I did
not sleep, I'm exhausted, and it's going to be a
minus CVO. Love.
Speaker 2 (37:41):
I love that.
Speaker 1 (37:42):
I love that turn.
Speaker 3 (37:44):
I love the barreling into town right late regis late
regime from mccaren Airport. I love the I love blowing
my first bullet on, like, you know, a fifteen hundred
dollars Omaha eight tournament. I'm going to fucking like Yeah,
I like getting the babbling out of the way really soon.
Speaker 1 (38:02):
Well, but but the three hour jet lag is not
a nine hour or six hour jet lag. So after
a red eye, be tough. That said, I have played
this first day at Monte Carlo in the past, but
right now I think I'm just a little bit too tired,
and I'm going to be responsible, Nate. I'm going to
be financially responsible and not not blow eleven hundred responsibilities.
Speaker 3 (38:25):
You can do something irresponsible later. That's how I That's
how I love.
Speaker 1 (38:28):
Yes, Yes, so I will. I will be able to
reward myself with a little treat later on because I'm
being so good right now. What are you going to do, Nate?
You are in Chicago. Are you going to go eat
some pizza?
Speaker 2 (38:41):
I probably won't.
Speaker 3 (38:41):
It's hard to find non heavy food, and it's probably
some Mexican Actually, I love the Mexican go.
Speaker 1 (38:48):
To peaquads, peaquads. I like, I'm here by my pizza.
Speaker 3 (38:51):
I mean seeing some friends there tomorrow at their place. Yeah,
I'm not going to have a whole fucking pizza by myself.
Speaker 1 (38:56):
I don't think you can eat some pea quads and
bring the rest for your friends.
Speaker 2 (39:01):
Okay, let me let me, let me, let me. Let
me evaluate some options. Maria, peakwads is quite good.
Speaker 1 (39:07):
Peaquads is quite good. Now I've put it in your brain,
and with that, we'll see you all next week. Risky
Business is hosted by me Maria Kanikova.
Speaker 3 (39:21):
And by me Nate Silver. The show is a co
production of Pushkin Industries and iHeartMedia. This episode was produced
by Isabelle Carter. Our associate producer is Sonya Gerwit. Sally
Helm is our editor, and our executive producer is Jacob Goldstein.
Speaker 2 (39:35):
Mixing by Sarah Bruger.
Speaker 1 (39:36):
If you like this show, please rate and review us
so other people can find us too. Thanks so much
for tuning in.
Pushkin. Welcome back to Risky Business, a show about making
better decisions. I'm Maria Kanikova.
Speaker 2 (00:31):
And I'm made Silver.
Speaker 1 (00:32):
Today on the show, Nate, we are going to be
talking about the Conclave, not the movie, but the actual
process for choosing the next hope and more broadly, how
does group decision making work and what is the best
way of doing it.
Speaker 3 (00:49):
We'll also be talking about negotiation, using the prompt of
the movie Sinners. We're going to be talking about how
to negotiate a good deal for yourself.
Speaker 1 (00:59):
And at the end, we will leave you with a
little game that Nate and I are going to play
called would you rather? By the way, listeners, I apologize
my voice is a little bit shot. I am in
the middle of allergy season and just off of a
red eye, so I will be extra raspy today. I
(01:22):
still love you, and yes, that's what I'm going to
sound like for the pod, and.
Speaker 2 (01:26):
We talked about our red eyes. Drata, what flight did
you take? What time was your flight?
Speaker 1 (01:30):
My flight was at six pm. It was the only
direct flight to NIS from New York.
Speaker 3 (01:35):
I didn't know I had a fucking direct flight to Congratulations.
Speaker 1 (01:38):
Yeah, direct flights be Yeah. So I took a direct
flight to Nis and then took a car from Nice
to Monte Carlo. The other way to do it is
to take a helicopter, but we've talked on the show
about the dangers of helicopters and I did not do that.
And now I'm here for EPT Monte Carlo, which happened
to be my first ever international poker tournament. Back when
(02:02):
I started playing poker, my first ever international hendon mob
flagnate was from Monte Carlo. So I'm back to the
scene of the crime and I have never cashed the
main event here? Is this going to be the year will?
Speaker 2 (02:14):
Are you superscitious about that?
Speaker 3 (02:16):
Are you like, oh, there are certain venues where I
run well or certain events.
Speaker 1 (02:19):
Absolutely not. I think that that's a very self handicapping
way of thinking.
Speaker 2 (02:24):
The six pm flight, I think is the worst option.
Speaker 1 (02:26):
By the way, it's an awful it's hard to sleep, yeah,
it's really hard. But for me, taking a direct flight
is the least bad option. I would rather take a
direct flight to Nise than a later flight at a
more optimal time to Paris and then have to fly
to Nise. So sometimes you make the least bad decision possible,
(02:48):
which brings us to electing the pope, which directly ties
to the least bad decision possible. So Nate, the Pope
died as we know. Oh wait, yeah, oh my god,
I'm so sorry, breaking news story. JD. Vans killed the Pope.
Now I'm sorry. I shouldn't say that, but the Pope
(03:08):
did die day after meeting with JD. Vance. I take
it all back. We're not conspiracy theorists on risky Business,
or are we. Okay, So the Pope is dead and
now they must choose a new pope, and they do
this by a process called a conclave, and it's been
announced that is going to take place on May seventh.
We are taping this on April thirtieth, so a week
(03:31):
from now is when the conclave starts. And this is
how the process works. So there are around two hundred cardinals,
but only one hundred and thirty five of those are
actually eligible to vote in the conclave because by the rules,
they have to be under the age of eighty. A
(03:52):
lot of old cardinals out there, is what I'm hearing here.
Speaker 2 (03:57):
So you're saying is that they're too young to be
the US president.
Speaker 1 (04:01):
That is exactly what I'm saying, And technically speaking, any
Catholic male can be elected pope. Practically speaking, it's going
to be one of those one hundred and thirty five cardinals.
The way that it works is they vote up to
four times a day, but in the morning and in
the afternoon, and they can vote once or twice in
(04:22):
those sessions. And they basically have multiple days of meetings
that have already started leading up to conclave. Then they
seal the doors and the only people there are the
cardinals who can vote. And then they're also you know,
there's guards, there's a doctor. Everyone's sworn to secrecy. They're
completely cut off from the outside world. No phones, no news.
(04:44):
The place is swept for listening devices. You know, it's
like very like hush hush. And then the vote is
done by secret ballot, So everyone on a piece of
paper writes their choice for the pope, folds it up,
it's collected, the ballots are shaken, and then three people
will read the ballots. So one person will take a
(05:04):
ballot out at a time and will silently write down
what the name is. The the second person will also
write down what the name is, and the third person
will read it out loud. So this is to make
sure that the votes are tallied accurately. If there's a miscount,
so say one hundred and thirty five people vote and
there's only one hundred and thirty four ballots or one
hundred and thirty six somehow, then they destroy it and
(05:24):
do it all over. You need a two thirds majority
to become pope. After each vote, the ballots are burned
and smoke comes out of the chimney. The smoke is
either black if they have not chosen a pope, or
white if they have chosen a pope. This can take
quite a bit of time. The last two times it
took two days. One time it took two years. There
(05:46):
was a lot of infighting. They weren't actually in secret
conclave for that entire period, but that it took a
while to elect that pope. So, first of all, you
had told me before we started recording that you weren't
really familiar with this process.
Speaker 3 (06:05):
So now what happens pre recording says pre recording Maria, I.
Speaker 1 (06:09):
Thought, no, no, but this is but this is actually
I think it's actually a really it's good to just
have a fresh reaction, because you know, a lot about
decision making, So just fresh your your first reaction to
how this is structured. What do you think is this
a good way to make, you know, such a monumental decision.
(06:32):
What are we thinking here?
Speaker 3 (06:33):
Well, my first thought is that this is an easy
decision because there is a candidate named Pierre Batista Pizza Bala.
He's a fucking red hat looks kind of like a
pizza Pope slash hat, Like, how can you not name
that guy pope? He has a divine right, I think
I'm using that term incorrectly.
Speaker 1 (06:51):
No, Look, he's not the favorite, he's not the betting
market favorite. Night we can talk about it.
Speaker 2 (06:56):
I got all the money and Pizza Bala I tell
you that much.
Speaker 1 (06:59):
I mean, that's that's a pretty amazing name. I will
hand it to him.
Speaker 3 (07:03):
No, the process I am indirectly familiar with because it's
the same process essentially that like political parties used choose
a candidate in the event of a broker or contested convention.
Right there, you need a majority and not two thirty
said it was Maria. But still they go one ballot
at a time, and it can take a lot of ballots.
(07:26):
You know, in some of the conventions in the early
twentieth century, you could take more than one hundred, I think, right,
and like, there's a couple of dynamics that are important, right.
You know, One is that people are trying to through
the kind of veil of anonymity. Of course, I can
also have conversations on the side, right side channel conversations.
You know, they're trying to order their preferences.
Speaker 1 (07:48):
Right.
Speaker 3 (07:48):
Maybe I do think that Pete Sabala is my first choice,
but I'd rather have I'm just looking at some of
these other candidates. I'd rather have Peter Trix and them
Matteo Zupie, Right, and so you know, I am looking
for signals about how other people vote. You can also
have I don't know if this takes place in the conclave,
but it does in like political American context. You can
(08:08):
kind of play your votes to a different candidate, right,
I mean there are kind of you know, and a
minimum two dimensions that are important here.
Speaker 2 (08:19):
Right.
Speaker 3 (08:20):
One is you can have a more reformist pope like
Francis versus ones that are more traditional.
Speaker 2 (08:25):
That's one dimension.
Speaker 3 (08:27):
Then you have Italian versus Europe versus the rest of
the world. Right, you could have the first Filipino pope.
You could have the first black pope, for example, And
so yeah, I don't quite know how you begin to
kind of model the game theory of this. My guess
is that, like, there are some essentially random dynamics right
(08:50):
where someone's like, fuck it, I'm bored of keep voting
over and over again. I'm gonna shift my vote That
catalyzes a chain reaction of sorts. And my guess is
that if you kind of like somehow simulated this, it
wouldn't be deterministic.
Speaker 2 (09:03):
It would be somewhat stochastic.
Speaker 1 (09:06):
Yeah, well, first name, I have a question, and then
and then I'll reach when we're in the US political system,
when you need a majority. They're not sequestered though, right
like they're still they They are allowed to listen to
the news and everything. It's a little bit more open, right.
Speaker 3 (09:23):
No, Look, today they'd all be on their phones and
and there'd be a lot of implicit pressure. In the
old days, it was a proverbial smoke filled rooms. It's
one of the context in which that phrase kind of
comes from, Right, So you might have some degree of.
Speaker 2 (09:37):
Isolation.
Speaker 3 (09:38):
Yeah, Now it's it's tricky because everything you say is
on Twitter, and and you know the back channels can
be compromised and leaked to the press.
Speaker 2 (09:48):
Yeah, I don't know.
Speaker 3 (09:48):
I know, if there's like a pope, if there's a
Maggie Haberman of the Vatican or something, right who's leaking stuff,
there has to be some way to leak stuff.
Speaker 1 (09:58):
No, there's there's really no way to leak stuff these days.
So the you know, the idea behind the total sequestering
is to keep it secretive on their side, but also
to minimize the politicking that's going on. That said, I mean,
the meetings have already started, so you were saying that,
(10:19):
you know, you can pledge votes to a pope. That
absolutely does happen, and popees start, potential popes start building coalitions.
And even now we're still a week out and already
a number of that one hundred and thirty five eligible
cardinals have dropped out. Some have done it for health reasons,
(10:40):
but people are like already who can and can't vote
is a thing, because since it's two thirds, the actual
number really matters, right Like, it matters if all one
thirty five vote or if only one hundred and ten vote,
right Like, that's a big difference. In terms of what
you need for support, because even though the percentage is
(11:00):
the same, because we're talking about very personal relationships, absolute
numbers here matter, right, Do I need to get one
more vote? Do I need to get three more votes?
Like here? That actually does make a difference. So Paula
taking starts very very early, and I think that yes, sure,
(11:22):
sequestering them the day of the conclave accomplishes something. But
I wonder, like the moment that someone you know dies,
like the moment Francis died, can we just like see
what immediately gather them all there like it, start sequestering
because they.
Speaker 3 (11:43):
If they can't vote, I mean they get a break
at night, right, No they they stay there.
Speaker 1 (11:48):
No, they can't leave, so they they h it's completely
They have a dormitory on premises, so they sleep there
as well. So everyone everyone is there twenty four to
seven until the pope is elected. That's why they have doctors.
So so the only one of some of the only
people who are allowed in who are not the voting
(12:09):
cardinals are medical professionals in case something happens, because Nate,
we've already established that these are not young men who
are doing this, and so.
Speaker 3 (12:20):
There's always ways for information to leak.
Speaker 1 (12:22):
There is always ways for information to leak. And I
would go one step further. There are secret ballots, and
there are secret ballots. Right, so we are here, you know, saying, Okay,
this is your secret ballot. But first of all, they're
writing it by hand. And these are men who probably,
(12:46):
like I'm sorry, handwriting is recognizable, Like I hate saying
it's true.
Speaker 3 (12:51):
Friends just supposedly had very discentive like small handwriting, yeah everywhere.
Speaker 1 (12:56):
I mean, these are men who've been handwriting their whole life.
This isn't like a twenty year old who like grew
up on social media and never handwrites anything. Handwriting is distinctive.
You are, you know, they're sitting in an open room.
They're not going to voting booths. The thing is like
it's secret, but it's not secret, and you can still
exert pressure on people and people can still think they
(13:16):
still know how I'm voting, and like that sort of
psychological play is definitely a factor here. And I think
is you know, even though we're talking holy men, like
they are not above this, Like I'm guessing that that
voting and that pressure can get pretty damn vicious and
(13:38):
there are better and worse ways to make group decisions,
and yes, this is one of the better ways to
try to do it. But I think that we can
go a step further and try to really anonymize it
and take that pressure off so that you can't point
fingers and be like, see, I recognize your handwriting, Nate.
I know that you voted for mister Pizza because you
(13:59):
still like it and you don't be the bull. Good
vote for me.
Speaker 3 (14:03):
Yeah, look, there are there's a lot of theory about
how this supplies to the US Congress as well, and
the public nature of the voting process. Yeah, if you
had a private ballot, you might have had I mean,
Trump was impeached but not convicted. It might have been
convicted if you privately asked GOP centers what they thought.
Speaker 1 (14:23):
Right.
Speaker 3 (14:25):
So you know, as poker player, on the one hand,
there's like a party, It's like, hey, information, I'm a journalist,
so therefore therefore information is always good. We always want
to give people more information and they make rational decisions.
Whereas poker players, we understand that information has value and information,
the existence of information and the flow of information can
(14:46):
like can reshape the world.
Speaker 1 (14:50):
Yeah, absolutely, absolutely, And controlling the flow of information also
has a lot of value. Who controls the information and
what information gets shared and the order in which it
gets shared is also incredibly important. So let's just back
up a little bit, because you know, this group dec
is being made in secret, but the run up to
(15:12):
it is not in secret, and so we know, you know,
we can see the betting odds, we can see kind
of the stories, we see the headlines, we see of
the arguments for you know, all of your front runners.
Why you would want Pietro Perolin, who's currently the front
runner on most betting sites, versus Luis Antonio Tagle, who
(15:33):
is known as the Asian Francis. You know, they're that's
his nickname. You know, why you'd want one or the other?
The odds actually have changed. So when I looked on
the twenty second Tagle was actually the odds on favorite,
and now he's in second place to perilin so already, right,
people have been shifting. And what we know about decision
(15:57):
making is those early things matter, right, Like that is framing,
and that is kind of dynamics that actually can affect results,
Like if you can make yourself appear to be a
front runner early in a decision process that can actually
influence how the group makes a decision later on. You know,
(16:18):
that first mover advantage is absolutely crucial and can really
affect how people think and how they think other people
are thinking. Which is also a major thing here, right,
because also no one wants a two year long conclive.
So you're also trying to think strategically about this as
you would in any group decision. You know, how do
we get to this outcome faster?
Speaker 3 (16:40):
Yes, this is a big media pr thing too, right, Well, sometimes,
I mean increasingly you'll have people who are the subject
of a critical media story, right, and they will go
on their social media accounts and be like, yeah, I
just want to I mean, they'll be more delicate than
this way. I just want to preempt this. It's a
hit job. Or let's say, I just want to preempt
this by admitting I fucked this thing up, and you
(17:03):
know the subtext and softening a little bit. Why it's
not quite as bad as you think. I mean, yeah,
this and you know, perpecause people are kind of lazy
and it's costly to contradict people. I mean, we've probably
all been in a decision making process. Right, a meeting
where like maybe five people want I mean, take whatever
simple example you want. Five people want to get pizza,
(17:25):
one person wants to get Thai food, right, and then
like and for whatever reason, the Thai food fucking person
speaks up first and they're like, super fucking annoying. Right,
you can tell I want pizza. I'm in Chicago, something,
I got pizza, pizza on the brain.
Speaker 1 (17:37):
Here, you've got pizza on the brand.
Speaker 3 (17:39):
Yeah, even though it's none am Yeah, But anyway, absolutely,
I mean again that goes to the notion of this
it can be a bit random and stochastic, and like
having having a secret ballot with minimal I am skeptical
of zero information leakage is a way to diminish that.
But you know, maybe a conversation you have in the
(18:01):
hallway or things like that can have cascading effects.
Speaker 1 (18:05):
Absolutely, and let's actually also do the converse of that. So,
as I said, Cardinal Pietro Perolyn is currently the favorite
to be the next pope. He is, you know, Italian,
kind of a little bit more centrist, but still someone
who was close to Francis. You know, people think that
(18:28):
he's a nice choice now imagine I'm going to do it. Total.
We don't know what's going to happen in the conclave,
and we will never know because, as as we've already said,
totally secret. Imagine the first vote he is like number
four or something, right, Imagine he's actually very performs below expectation.
(18:49):
That also can have an outsized effect. Right when you
are a perceived front runner and that first ballot doesn't
go your way, that can also throw throw things into
disarray and really change the dynamic of the group decision. Right, Yeah, that.
Speaker 3 (19:05):
First I would imagine that that he would withdraw or
support would collapse after that. Right, it's like, okay, this
is a guy that probably ought to start out with
the head start, right, and if he doesn't, then there's
a big scramble where it's like a unexpected dark horse candidate.
If they got five votes out of nowhere, that probably
(19:27):
means that might be quite bullish, right.
Speaker 2 (19:31):
People.
Speaker 3 (19:31):
Now, people can also do say hey, I just want
to wait and see and prolong the process. Like in
the contextilitical conventions, they might nominate like a favorite son. Right,
you're a delegate from West Virginia, The governor of West Virginia,
is not a viable nominee, but you want to wait
and see what everyone else does and maybe like preserve
time for a viable candidate who is not the front
(19:52):
runner to gather support. Right, So you want to make
sure there's no first ballot pick, so you just vote
for your governor or something. Right, So people are pretty
smart about this for the most part.
Speaker 1 (20:03):
Yeah, that's actually an interesting broader question. In any sort
of group decision situation like this, does it make sense
to vote for the person who you think is kind
of likely to win and you'll eventually end up supporting
at first or does it make sense to just vote
for your preferred candidate and split the ballot, you know,
(20:27):
one hundred ways or or or whatever it is. What
is the strategically smarter decision? And yeah, Nate, if you
were to I mean, if you were to pick, would
you go with Perilin just because he is the betting
market's favorite.
Speaker 3 (20:43):
No, I like, I like the you know, obviously Pizzabella
pizza bala, excuse me, and then the how do you say,
I guess I go with him?
Speaker 1 (20:56):
Yeah, that's he was actually, Yeah, Asian Francis was my pick.
Speaker 2 (21:00):
Is there a vice pope?
Speaker 1 (21:02):
You know.
Speaker 2 (21:06):
Him will be right back after this break.
Speaker 1 (21:18):
Well, Nate, now we've talked to group decision making, let's
talk a little bit about negotiation. I have not seen
Sinners as the movie that's taken Hollywood by storm. You
have not seen it either, No, so for listeners who
haven't seen it, don't worry. There will be zero spoilers
because we have no idea what happens. The reason we're
(21:40):
talking about it is because Ryan Coogler created a clause
in his deal with Warner Brothers that said that in
twenty five years, the rights to the film will revert
to him, and so he will retain his rights. He
is not the first person to have done this. There
(22:02):
are some filmmakers like Quentin Tarantino who have been able
to negotiate deals like this, but it is incredibly rare.
It is something that is not seen often in Hollywood,
and people are up in arms saying, oh, these kinds
of deals are going to be the death of studios.
Speaker 3 (22:19):
You know about Totals Studio, but the fucking Disney Company,
and I feel about sympathetically for them as I do
for Harvard. If you've seen previous segments, and I don't
think the Trump administration is targeting the White or the
Walt Disney company, yet in the way he did for Harvard.
So so yeah, go go fuck yourself studios. Now I'll
never get a contract for anything.
Speaker 1 (22:45):
He didn't mean it, guys, he didn't mean it. Actually
know he probably he did mean it. He did mean it,
and I kind of agree. So so no, this is
a completely I think this is a completely ludicrous take
because what it's saying is that, oh, you know, after
twenty five years, the creator cannot have the copyright over
his creation. And people are you know, people are saying, oh,
(23:09):
this is this is totally crazy. You know, the studio
is the one that financed it, They're the one who
made the movie. And yet right there would be no
movie without the person who created it, without the person
who actually made the movie who wrote about it. Now,
I was thinking about this in terms of what you
(23:29):
and I do, Nate, which is write books. One of
the things you and I do. So who owns the
copyright to what you write?
Speaker 2 (23:40):
I guess the publish.
Speaker 1 (23:42):
Well, yeah, you retained the copyright.
Speaker 2 (23:45):
Eventually eventually public That's what I have an agent for.
Speaker 1 (23:51):
So so you we have you know, you have publishers,
they publish your book. Everyone has different deals. You get royalties,
you know, or you don't get royalties. However however it is.
But eventually, you know, we die and the rights go
(24:13):
to our state, right and then they they can kind
of negotiate.
Speaker 2 (24:19):
So just going in to chat see good luck with that.
Speaker 1 (24:23):
The rights revert to CHAT GPT or whichever m ends
up winning that race. So no, So it's to think
that creators can't have rights to their work, that you
just kind of sell it and then that's it. It's
just a completely just insane way of looking at it.
(24:46):
And twenty five years. It's not like he's saying, I
get you know, in five years, you guys stop right,
stop owning these rights. Twenty five years, there's a lot
of time to make your money back. By the way,
he also invested in the movie. His production company invested
in the movie, so he is also one of the
people who paid for it. So it's not like he
puts zero dollars and zero sounds in there.
Speaker 3 (25:08):
Okay, so neither of us have seen this movie yet.
I give sixty percent outs. I will eventually, but we
have done negotiations in the past, probably more than the
average person has done being kind of independent freelancers, etcetera
for a long time. So let's use some negotiating tips. Maria,
I'm gonna put you on the spot. What's your number
one tip?
Speaker 1 (25:28):
All right? So my number one tip is do not
be the first to act. Don't be the first mover,
because information is power, and you do not want to
be the one who is revealing information first.
Speaker 2 (25:44):
Yeah, I mean doesn't that like.
Speaker 3 (25:47):
Contradict the idea of framing the conversation now that we
talked about in the Pope segment. I'm not just seeing
with you, I'm being a little provocative.
Speaker 1 (25:55):
Yeah, So I think that this is a really interesting dynamic, right,
there are different considerations at play. The reason I said
what I said is you don't want to end up
anchoring people too low, and you also don't want to
tip your hand as to what your expectation might be, right,
(26:18):
So you want them to make the first move so
that you can be the one to have more information
rather than less information. So this is like from an
anchoring standpoint and from a negotiating informational standpoint.
Speaker 3 (26:35):
I mean, look, there's always negotiation before the negotiation, right.
Speaker 2 (26:40):
I mean, like.
Speaker 3 (26:43):
Things from if you go out to dinner or lunch, right,
who is picking up the lunch and how nice is
the place? I mean that's a signal. It might not
tell you very much. And people can be charmed by
things that are charming and not actually, you know, that
may not be a positive signal actually, right, And.
Speaker 2 (27:03):
You know I have suffered in.
Speaker 3 (27:07):
Negotiations sometime from actually being too polite right where it's like, Okay,
this isn't really going to work out. I want to,
like I have some social relationship with the person to maintain,
or maybe they're like a backup option later on. Right,
so you're like too solicitous stuff that you kind of
know it's going to be an offer that's insufficient or uninteresting.
And then and then yeah, I mean, look, I was
(27:28):
going to say, you know my approach. I guess this
is my number one tip. Be aware that giving out
information is costly.
Speaker 2 (27:38):
Right.
Speaker 3 (27:38):
The flip side of that, or the companion of that
being that, like, I don't think misdirection. It's just not
worth my time. Usually I think there are too many
ways it ends badly.
Speaker 1 (27:51):
You know, No, I actually I totally agree with that,
and I think, yeah, ours kind of go hand in
hand information valuable, giving off information costly. And yet there's
a cost to both of our tips because the framing
can be valuable. Right, So if you are the one
who kind of frames things, that can also be helpful.
But I think you and I both are airing on
(28:14):
the side of information power, and so that's why we're
giving our number one tips the way that we are.
But do keep in mind, as a caveat to both
of these that framing the conversation is alwoso important.
Speaker 3 (28:27):
With the important exception that, like, you know, look, a
negotiation is supposed to in most contexts result in the
positive sum agreement. Right now, if you're trying to like
rent an apartment or something, then that's more straightforward. I'm
trying to get five hundred bucks per month off the lease,
and the counter party is trying to figure out, Okay,
if this guy doesn't sign the lease, what's the expected
(28:50):
value of maybe taking another month to rent the apartment?
That kind of thing, right, Yeah, But like if I'm
trying to, like, let's say I'm trying to get investment
for a business venture silver bulletin or receive business or
whatever else, right, you know, I mean there is mutual
gain from information. It's like, hey, this is acually a
good idea, like because Pardoner got figuring, like how do
(29:10):
we how do we create value in all these different
ways that we might create value in the world. Right, Okay, Marie,
what's your what's your second hint?
Speaker 1 (29:21):
My second tip is be willing to walk away.
Speaker 2 (29:25):
Okay, it was my Yeah, we're.
Speaker 1 (29:28):
Going to we're going to merge. Yeah, so great, so
we both we both agree that's crucial, Nate. If you
enter a negotiation and you're not willing to walk away,
you've already lost, right, because there will be a point
at which they realize that you're not going to walk away,
(29:48):
and then they can get what they want to get.
You need to be willing to walk away from the table,
truly willing, not just say oh yeah, I'm willing to
walk away, Otherwise you're going to you're going to be
the weaker party.
Speaker 2 (30:01):
Yeah.
Speaker 3 (30:02):
No, I think I benefited it in my life from
from walking away and being very patient to find a
deal that I thought was really good. Not good in
the sense of being unfair, right, but in the sense
of like, look, I hold my work product in high esteem, right,
and like, and you.
Speaker 2 (30:21):
Know, look, if you're.
Speaker 3 (30:24):
If you're resourceful, then you have a lot of optionalities
you get older and better connected and things like that.
I think in general, people are too quick to settle.
I think I think it's a general tip. It's probably
right in most contexts in life, right, and I think
I think in the context of negotiations too. I mean,
(30:44):
it's very powerful as a negotiating tactic. But also like
you know, look, I've had deals that fell through that
I would have been worse off if I had signed them.
Speaker 1 (30:53):
Right, absolutely, Yeah, And that actually goes to my tip
number three, which is before you enter the negotiation, right
down and know what your non negotiables are, right, Like,
what are the few things that like you absolutely must
have and you don't have to like state them all,
but just know these are the things that like without
(31:14):
this or it can be either way. Either without this,
I walk away or if this happens, then I walk away.
And then do not negotiate on those, no matter how
compelling other things might look. Know what your core principles are, right,
and don't compromise them in the heat of the moment,
under emotion, whatever it is. Because it's really easy to
(31:38):
try to convince yourself in the moment. If someone's like, Okay,
well i'll give you this much more money. If you
can just accept this one thing you really don't want
to accept, it can be easy to convince yourself that
it will be okay, and in the long run it
probably won't if this was one of your core principles.
That's why it's important to know those ahead of time.
I'm not talking a long list. I just mean like,
(31:58):
sometimes there are just a few crucial things that you
know that you must have or that you absolutely can't have.
Speaker 3 (32:05):
My third tip is kind of like focus on someone's negotiables,
and I would say, in hooker terms like exploit that right,
arranging from small to large. When I negotiate my deal
with Disney back in twenty thirteen, I guess it was,
you know, one thing I asked for was like business
(32:26):
class travel and accommodations because it's relatively small cost. Right,
it might be worth one percent of the salary or something,
but they're not going to blow up the whole deal
over that kind of thing, and so it's free basically, right.
A more serious thing is like they, I think did
not appreciate the value of the intellectual property of the models, right,
and so like you have to go to totally to
(32:47):
town there. I mean, that's almost a more important provision
than it turned out than like my license fee and
salary and things like that, but like paying attention to
the non central terms that are important to you, especially
the other side seems blind to them and and is desperate, right, Like,
it's sometimes easier to negotiate on things that aren't salary
(33:08):
when they're when they're material.
Speaker 1 (33:12):
Yeah, absolutely absolutely, And so I think that this, like
to me, that would all of our tips kind of
make a tip number four, which is like a meta thing,
which is, don't negotiate when you're emotional, like under under pressure,
(33:33):
under emotion. Think through all of these things ahead of time,
try to do a lot of work ahead of time,
and try to give yourself time to you know, execute one, two,
and three, and we'll be back right after this. All right, Nate,
(34:04):
Let's play a game called would you rather? Okay, all right, Nate,
would you rather be President of the United States or
the next pope?
Speaker 3 (34:12):
I'd rather be president. I mean, first of all, I'm
not pappable, right, I'm not Catholic. Various other problems doubly.
Speaker 1 (34:19):
I'm doubly not pappable. I'm not.
Speaker 3 (34:22):
If there are only two people left, I'm gonna become
the Pope.
Speaker 2 (34:25):
I'm sorry, Maria, right you are.
Speaker 3 (34:27):
I don't think I want to be president, but I mean,
I yeah, I mean way better than being fucking not
fucking I respect the Catholic. What am I even talking about.
I'd rather be president of the United States?
Speaker 2 (34:41):
Okay, Maria.
Speaker 3 (34:42):
Would you rather be underestimated in every negotiation or feared
in every negotiation?
Speaker 1 (34:49):
Well, I know how the first one feels, because that's
that's the way I've gone through life, and I think
it's actually a pretty good thing. So I'm just gonna
choose choose the devil. I know, I'd rather be underestimated
in every negotiation because if people underestimate you, then it
can be easier to to surprise them, right, and to
(35:10):
pull off stuff that they wouldn't expect coming from you.
That said, like, sometimes I think it would be pretty
cool to be feared, and no one ever fears me.
They look at the.
Speaker 3 (35:22):
Weird things too, where like you can like win a
negotiation for an outcome that winds up not being great
for you, right, because someone is cowed and it's omission
and they are unhappy, right, and you kind of and
you receive worse information from them. We talked before about
sometimes it's not a purely zero sum game.
Speaker 2 (35:40):
So yeah, I think that's I would agree with that.
Speaker 1 (35:43):
All right, Nay? Would you rather be an average American
or Chinese citizen a year from now American USA? Fuck?
Speaker 2 (35:52):
Yeah?
Speaker 1 (35:53):
No?
Speaker 2 (35:53):
I actually what reason? It's been a busy week.
Speaker 3 (35:56):
I went and gave a talk at West Point on Monday,
actually spent the whole day there. So not too many
civilians get that opportunity. And like you know, these cadets
who forsake traditional college experience to commit to five years
serving the country, we're very smart, and like you know,
it's a very selective program, right, You can't just do
it unless you're very very good. But that made me
(36:19):
a little bit more optimistic for the future of the country. Nice, okay, MARIREGT.
Would you rather let current AI decide? So chat GPT,
you get to use version four point five year I'm
going to tell you when to launch nuclear weapons or
the June twenty twenty four version of Biden the day
that Biden did that debate, for example, So.
Speaker 1 (36:42):
I am not trying to be tech alarmist, but I
would actually still say June twenty twenty four, Biden, because
he wouldn't be the one making the decision, okay, right,
He has his smart advisors making the decision. And all
he does is, you know, he lacks capacity for his
own independent meddling, and he just says he just like
(37:04):
he says fine on whatever it is, because he's exhausted.
You know, he's done. Here was my so exactly exactly,
and he like the one thing other than stepping down
at which he did eventually do, he did listen to
his advisors, and so I think that that would be
my choice. And with that, Nate, I am off to well, actually, no,
(37:27):
I'm going to make a good decision. I was going
to say, I am off to play my first tournament
at EPT Monte Carlo. But I'm not going to play
because I am off of a red eye, I did
not sleep, I'm exhausted, and it's going to be a
minus CVO. Love.
Speaker 2 (37:41):
I love that.
Speaker 1 (37:42):
I love that turn.
Speaker 3 (37:44):
I love the barreling into town right late regis late
regime from mccaren Airport. I love the I love blowing
my first bullet on, like, you know, a fifteen hundred
dollars Omaha eight tournament. I'm going to fucking like Yeah,
I like getting the babbling out of the way really soon.
Speaker 1 (38:02):
Well, but but the three hour jet lag is not
a nine hour or six hour jet lag. So after
a red eye, be tough. That said, I have played
this first day at Monte Carlo in the past, but
right now I think I'm just a little bit too tired,
and I'm going to be responsible, Nate. I'm going to
be financially responsible and not not blow eleven hundred responsibilities.
Speaker 3 (38:25):
You can do something irresponsible later. That's how I That's
how I love.
Speaker 1 (38:28):
Yes, Yes, so I will. I will be able to
reward myself with a little treat later on because I'm
being so good right now. What are you going to do, Nate?
You are in Chicago. Are you going to go eat
some pizza?
Speaker 2 (38:41):
I probably won't.
Speaker 3 (38:41):
It's hard to find non heavy food, and it's probably
some Mexican Actually, I love the Mexican go.
Speaker 1 (38:48):
To peaquads, peaquads. I like, I'm here by my pizza.
Speaker 3 (38:51):
I mean seeing some friends there tomorrow at their place. Yeah,
I'm not going to have a whole fucking pizza by myself.
Speaker 1 (38:56):
I don't think you can eat some pea quads and
bring the rest for your friends.
Speaker 2 (39:01):
Okay, let me let me, let me, let me. Let
me evaluate some options. Maria, peakwads is quite good.
Speaker 1 (39:07):
Peaquads is quite good. Now I've put it in your brain,
and with that, we'll see you all next week. Risky
Business is hosted by me Maria Kanikova.
Speaker 3 (39:21):
And by me Nate Silver. The show is a co
production of Pushkin Industries and iHeartMedia. This episode was produced
by Isabelle Carter. Our associate producer is Sonya Gerwit. Sally
Helm is our editor, and our executive producer is Jacob Goldstein.
Speaker 2 (39:35):
Mixing by Sarah Bruger.
Speaker 1 (39:36):
If you like this show, please rate and review us
so other people can find us too. Thanks so much
for tuning in.
Hosts And Creators
Maria Konnikova
Nate Silver
Popular Podcasts
Dateline NBC
Current and classic episodes, featuring compelling true-crime mysteries, powerful documentaries and in-depth investigations. Follow now to get the latest episodes of Dateline NBC completely free, or subscribe to Dateline Premium for ad-free listening and exclusive bonus content: DatelinePremium.com
24/7 News: The Latest
The latest news in 4 minutes updated every hour, every day.
Therapy Gecko
An unlicensed lizard psychologist travels the universe talking to strangers about absolutely nothing. TO CALL THE GECKO: follow me on https://www.twitch.tv/lyleforever to get a notification for when I am taking calls. I am usually live Mondays, Wednesdays, and Fridays but lately a lot of other times too. I am a gecko.