>While it can happen, generally the first number is a stronger anchor than the second.
Not so, because the second anchor sets another number the moment it is uttered: the middle ground.
Employers may lowball you if you are forcing them to give a number, so what. If the number is insulting, you suggest that perhaps the interview is a waste of time and leave. Nothing lost. If the number is low but not crazy, you suggest that it is low - and won't be the final number - and carry on, taking this into account when you counter with your "high" number.
If you are asking for $150 and "making it clear that $125 is the minimum" you've effectively lost out on the fact that the employer may have given you >$125, but only as a last resort to losing you completely.
Nope, if you set it at $125K, you walk away from anything lower. That is how I do mine...I leave at most $5K room for negotiation but other than that, I tell them this is the fair salary in my view and they can match it or I walk. And indeed, I'll walk if they can't come pretty darn close to it.
The $150K is if you want to play a more elaborate game. Then you don't say between $125K and $150K. But if they come back with a $130K counter, you take it.
Not so, because the second anchor sets another number the moment it is uttered: the middle ground.
Employers may lowball you if you are forcing them to give a number, so what. If the number is insulting, you suggest that perhaps the interview is a waste of time and leave. Nothing lost. If the number is low but not crazy, you suggest that it is low - and won't be the final number - and carry on, taking this into account when you counter with your "high" number.
If you are asking for $150 and "making it clear that $125 is the minimum" you've effectively lost out on the fact that the employer may have given you >$125, but only as a last resort to losing you completely.
Setting the first anchor is generally a bad idea.