High Signal Podcasts Evidence ledger
Method
Browse
← Back to evidence

Evidence receipt / recommendation

Published · transcript-backed

Jacob Warwick: recommendation

15 Mar 2026 Lenny's Podcast The tactical playbook for getting 20-40% more comp (without sounding greedy) | Jacob Warwick (Executive Negotiator)

“If you are very senior, I typically don't want to re- anchor with a number because you should never be so sure of what you're worth that you wouldn't accept more.”

— Jacob Warwick

Source trail

Everything needed to verify it.

Speaker
Jacob Warwick
Attribution
Verified speaker
Claim type
recommendation
Recorded
15 Mar 2026
Publisher
Lenny's Podcast

Transcript context

…I love that phrase you just shared of, "What's the chance there's a bit more here. I was expecting number X." Is that the phrase you recommend, that approach of just the soft pushback just to see? Sometimes. Again, it really depends on the leveling. If you are very senior, I typically don't want to re- anchor with a number because you should never be so sure of what you're worth that you wouldn't accept more. When you anchor, that's the ceiling, and what often happens is naturally they want to split the difference. There's a quick Hollywood story here. We had a writer who had a $700,000 contract, so 700, and the agent that I was working with was saying, "This writer has the most aggressive attorneys in LA. They're super aggressive," and I said, "Well, how do you know, first of all, if that's what they're perceived as?" The production studio offers this writers 700. The attorneys come back and say, "We want 1.3, 1.3 million," and the studio said, "Fine, we'll do a million," and they settled at a million. And I find that really interesting because the studio came up 300,000, and the attorneys lost 300,000, so they split the difference right in the middle. So if the attorneys- So you split the difference right in the middle. So if the attorneys said 1.5, would the deal have come in at 1.1? If the attorney said 1.7, would it have come in at 1.2? How do we know? The way I see it is those attorneys weren't aggressive enough. We didn't find the ceiling there, did we? That was lazy negotiating. So it still made the client 300,000. They were excited. The attorneys were excited, they made more on their commission. The agency was excited, they got 10% of that. But we didn't find the ceiling, did we? That was lazy negotiating. So those are things that you've got to slow down to really understand where is the value being made here? And that movie, that movie could make $50 million. You think one million for writing was worth it for someone who controlled the creative there? I don't know. A 50 to one value exchange, why not push for more? Why not put some milestones in that if this movie makes more than 50, my milestone is increased? This is how Tom Brady had his contract at Tampa Bay. Win eight games, get a half a million dollars. Win 12 games, get a million five. Go to the playoffs, get an extra this. Win the division, get this. Get to the Super Bowl, X. Win Super Bowl MVP, two and a half million more. So performance-based triggers. I love just how much you love this. It's just clear this is so interesting to you.…

Stored transcript either side of the excerpt. The highlighted words are the published quote; the surrounding text is unedited source, never generated.

Search evidence