<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?>
<rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:wfw="http://wellformedweb.org/CommentAPI/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
	xmlns:slash="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/slash/"
	>

<channel>
	<title>Business Law Strategy &#187; Negotiation and Drafting Principles</title>
	<atom:link href="http://businesslawstrategy.com/category/negotiation-and-drafting-principles/feed" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://businesslawstrategy.com</link>
	<description>by Jeffrey A. Fromm, Esq.</description>
	<lastBuildDate>Sat, 04 Sep 2010 06:59:17 +0000</lastBuildDate>
	<language>en</language>
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=3.0.1</generator>
		<item>
		<title>Know the No&#8217;s</title>
		<link>http://businesslawstrategy.com/negotiation-and-drafting-principles/know-the-nos</link>
		<comments>http://businesslawstrategy.com/negotiation-and-drafting-principles/know-the-nos#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Thu, 04 Feb 2010 08:07:38 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>Jeff Fromm</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Negotiation and Drafting Principles]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://businesslawinsight.com/?p=34</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[&#8216;No&#8217; is a powerful word in business negotiations. If used wisely, it can help you (or the other party) achieve the target objectives. If misused or misinterpreted, it can crater (or at least hamper) a deal for the wrong reasons. &#8216;No&#8217; is such a problem in business negotiations that the seminal book on the topic [...]]]></description>
		<wfw:commentRss>http://businesslawstrategy.com/negotiation-and-drafting-principles/know-the-nos/feed</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>1</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>Business Negotiations:  When the Whole is Less than the Sum of the Parts</title>
		<link>http://businesslawstrategy.com/mergers-acquisitions/business-negotiations-when-the-whole-is-less-than-the-sum-of-the-parts</link>
		<comments>http://businesslawstrategy.com/mergers-acquisitions/business-negotiations-when-the-whole-is-less-than-the-sum-of-the-parts#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Thu, 25 Jan 2007 23:03:01 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>Jeff Fromm</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Mergers & Acquisitions]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Negotiation and Drafting Principles]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://businesslawinsight.com/2007/01/25/business-negotiations-when-the-whole-is-less-than-the-sum-of-the-parts/</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[It&#8217;s an axiom of business that &#8220;the whole is greater than the sum of the parts.&#8221; Through the magic of synergy, a company can often create value by combining two or more things (e.g., businesses, products, marketing ideas) that interact positively and result in more than a purely additive outcome. The same result can often [...]]]></description>
		<wfw:commentRss>http://businesslawstrategy.com/mergers-acquisitions/business-negotiations-when-the-whole-is-less-than-the-sum-of-the-parts/feed</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>Control Freak</title>
		<link>http://businesslawstrategy.com/negotiation-and-drafting-principles/control-freak</link>
		<comments>http://businesslawstrategy.com/negotiation-and-drafting-principles/control-freak#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Sat, 09 Dec 2006 06:35:45 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>Jeff Fromm</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Negotiation and Drafting Principles]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://businesslawinsight.wordpress.com/2006/12/09/control-freak/</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[It’s usually easier to review a contract than to write one. It’s usually less expensive to review someone else’s draft. And it’s usually bad legal strategy to voluntarily agree to do so. Once the basic terms of a legal agreement are decided, they are often given to the lawyers to “document” the deal. This is [...]]]></description>
		<wfw:commentRss>http://businesslawstrategy.com/negotiation-and-drafting-principles/control-freak/feed</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>When Clarity is a Curse and Vagueness a Virtue</title>
		<link>http://businesslawstrategy.com/negotiation-and-drafting-principles/when-clarity-is-a-curse-and-vagueness-a-virtue</link>
		<comments>http://businesslawstrategy.com/negotiation-and-drafting-principles/when-clarity-is-a-curse-and-vagueness-a-virtue#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Sun, 11 Jun 2006 01:53:00 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>Jeff Fromm</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Negotiation and Drafting Principles]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://businesslawinsight.wordpress.com/2006/06/11/when-clarity-is-a-curse-and-vagueness-a-virtue/</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[A conference speaker recently stated that a company&#8217;s legal documents should avoid vague provisions like &#8220;the parties will use their best efforts to&#8230;.&#8221; I agree that clarity is generally a virtue in legal contracts. Except when it isn&#8217;t. Practicing law, like many things, is part &#8220;science&#8221; and part &#8220;art&#8221;. One of the &#8220;arts&#8221; is knowing [...]]]></description>
		<wfw:commentRss>http://businesslawstrategy.com/negotiation-and-drafting-principles/when-clarity-is-a-curse-and-vagueness-a-virtue/feed</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>1</slash:comments>
		</item>
	</channel>
</rss>

<!-- Dynamic page generated in 0.333 seconds. -->
<!-- Cached page generated by WP-Super-Cache on 2010-09-06 14:01:59 -->
