> Having a job offer is a signal that someone else did due diligence on you and is willing to commit capital at a year rate for your talents.
Sure, but applicants can and do lie about the existence of such offers, so ignoring such statements is not a terrible strategy. And that another company did "due diligence" is not as valuable as you might think. The investigation prior to an offer letter is often cursory, and different companies have different concerns they're looking for as well as differing levels of scrutiny.
Some companies also view an applicant leveraging other offers as a negotiation tactic as a bit of a red flag, depending on the sort of applicant they want to hire.
I'm not saying any of this is universal, nor that any of it is smart or appropriate. I'm just saying that I know there are a nontrivial number of companies that think like this.
> Sure other companies don't have to compete on the price is if what you are trying to state that, but you didn't state that clearly.
Yes.
> Having a job offer is a signal that someone else did due diligence on you and is willing to commit capital at a year rate for your talents.
Sure, but applicants can and do lie about the existence of such offers, so ignoring such statements is not a terrible strategy. And that another company did "due diligence" is not as valuable as you might think. The investigation prior to an offer letter is often cursory, and different companies have different concerns they're looking for as well as differing levels of scrutiny.
Some companies also view an applicant leveraging other offers as a negotiation tactic as a bit of a red flag, depending on the sort of applicant they want to hire.
I'm not saying any of this is universal, nor that any of it is smart or appropriate. I'm just saying that I know there are a nontrivial number of companies that think like this.
> Sure other companies don't have to compete on the price is if what you are trying to state that, but you didn't state that clearly.
No, that wasn't what I was saying.