According to the chapter four, Sun Tzu distinguishes two statements. The first one - if the opponent can't beat me, another one - if I can't beat the opponent. These two assertions are accepted by Sun Tzu to define essence of a victory and defeat, and then - approaches and defenses. These two statements are connected to each other. Sun Tzu said: «The good fighters of old first put themselves beyond the possibility of defeat, and then waited for an opportunity of defeating the enemy». In the modern world of negotiations it could be interpreted as necessity of very intensive preparation. You have to give a careful consideration to the subject of your future negotiations, you have to discuss in advance with your colleagues all possible risks and difficulties. In addition you should to exclude any possibility that another party will take advantage on you, in order to achieve all your goals and benefits. But on the other hand today it might also mean that you shouldn’t accept «no» for an answer, you should try to find a compromise. For example you offer another party to buy something for one thousand euro, but they don’t have this amount of money and they are ready to pay eight hundred. You shouldn’t say «no» right away; at least you will have eight hundred instead of nothing. As Sun Tzu said «In respect of military method, we have, firstly, Measurement; secondly, Estimation of quantity; thirdly, Calculation; fourthly, Balancing of chances; fifthly, Victory». For negotiations everything can be equated to knowledge. For the military it is equated to territorial advantage. It is not enough just to know how much you will make if you are the bank and how much you will spend if you are the company. A calculation also takes into account the possible losses. You must calculate how much the other side is willing to lose as well as how much you are willing to gamble in the negotiation. If you do not know where you stand, again in a negotiation you get in over your head and the other side’s winds. From chapter number nine we can get following ideas: in business, as in war, to have the high ground is to have the strategic advantage. In order to position yourself correctly in negotiations, you need to know where the high ground is. If you know where the where the high ground is before you start the negotiation, you are better prepared to come out better when they start. The high ground can also be an obstacle or a danger. If you enter into a negotiation and set your sights far too high, you are in fact setting yourself up for a fall. For example Wal-Mart wants to build a new store in a small town. They have to negotiate for a new land deal so that they can build on it. They know that they always get less land than they ask for so to take the higher ground they always ask for more than they need. If they ask for far too much, that is taking too much high ground and they will lose the negotiation and get nothing. They went too high and lost the negotiation battle. A stream or river is a problem for both armies in war. In the same way, sometimes there is a problem for both sides of the negotiation. You can understand this as letting the other guy «take the fall». It is bad business practice, but it will help you win if you are ruthless. For example Wal-Mart wants to build its store and the land owners agree. However there is a town meeting that has to take place and there are many costs that have to be paid. This is a river that they both must cross before the land can be sold. Wal-Mart can take the land owner to the town meeting and then at the last minute, they can make it look like everything is the fault of the owner. They can make everything look like the owner is greedy and that Wal-Mart is an angel.