• When you click on links to various merchants on this site and make a purchase, this can result in this site earning a commission. Affiliate programs and affiliations include, but are not limited to, the eBay Partner Network.

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

Superman #4 and #6 Heritage sales

Started by Bonds25,

198 posts in this topic

Dark Knight

Dark Knight

Posted
Posted
According to Metropolis, the book had been paid in full for 10 days. The buyer was waiting for his book to arrive. Then, he recieved an e-mail from the seller saying he didn't want to sell the book.

 

That is just outright wrong! Once the book has been paid in full, the seller has to sell the book to the buyer. It doesn't matter if the seller sold it for too cheap. It's definitely a binding agreement. If that happened to me, all hell would break lose.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
G.A.tor

G.A.tor

Posted
Posted
According to Metropolis, the book had been paid in full for 10 days. The buyer was waiting for his book to arrive. Then, he recieved an e-mail from the seller saying he didn't want to sell the book.

 

That is just outright wrong! Once the book has been paid in full, the seller has to sell the book to the buyer. It doesn't matter if the seller sold it for too cheap. It's definitely a binding agreement. If that happened to me, all hell would break lose.

I would agree...if a seller accepts payment in full for a book, then they must sell the book... I would think the buyer would have a legitimate legal beef and recourse

Link to comment
Share on other sites
G.A.tor

G.A.tor

Posted
Posted
I disagree with both of you guys. A deal is a deal and it should be up to the buyer to withdraw the offer if the seller asks and the buyer agrees. It's not up to the seller to unilaterally withdraw the book any more than it is up to a buyer to reneg on a deal whether handshake, contract or any other form of agreement.

 

Whether money changes hands or not the principle and outcome is the same. No integrity.

 

R.

just playing devils advocate here roy...

and I will use you and I in my hypothetical/real situation..

 

we have agreed, both in principle and in initial money exchange to transact on a certain MMC...we are cool up to here...

 

you and I agree that book with be paid off in X time (3 months in our scenario).

 

What would you say, if in 3 months and 1 day you haven't finished paying the book off...maybe you come to me and say "Rick, I need a little more time"... me, being the nice guy, will probably say "OK", but you, as the buyer, understand that I the seller, don't "have to"...that at that time, "legally" (if I must say that) our deal is off...

 

but, I say sure, a little more time is fine (but we never define "little more time")...

let us now say, that between this expiration of the original deal and you finally paying me off, that another same issue of lessor grade or provenance, or whatever, sells for 2x what you and I had agreed upon... hm do you all of a sudden find a way to pay the book off... do I have the right at that point to say, sorry Roy, time's up... I will refund your money and sorry we couldn't finish the deal?

 

that is an interesting scenario

 

Rick, you're scenario is completely valid because I would have theoretically went outside of the originally agreed time frame. The contract (our handshake agreement) theoretically would have been broken by me and you would have every right to back out of the deal.

 

If that is what happened with the Supes #4 9.2 then that is a completely different scenario and one worth leaving between both parties involved as there is a grey area.

 

With my situation there was no grey area.

 

oh, I agree... I was just wondering, so when 3 months hit, I can "keep" the book and the deposit :baiting:

Link to comment
Share on other sites
VintageComics

VintageComics

Posted
Posted
I disagree with both of you guys. A deal is a deal and it should be up to the buyer to withdraw the offer if the seller asks and the buyer agrees. It's not up to the seller to unilaterally withdraw the book any more than it is up to a buyer to reneg on a deal whether handshake, contract or any other form of agreement.

 

Whether money changes hands or not the principle and outcome is the same. No integrity.

 

R.

just playing devils advocate here roy...

and I will use you and I in my hypothetical/real situation..

 

we have agreed, both in principle and in initial money exchange to transact on a certain MMC...we are cool up to here...

 

you and I agree that book with be paid off in X time (3 months in our scenario).

 

What would you say, if in 3 months and 1 day you haven't finished paying the book off...maybe you come to me and say "Rick, I need a little more time"... me, being the nice guy, will probably say "OK", but you, as the buyer, understand that I the seller, don't "have to"...that at that time, "legally" (if I must say that) our deal is off...

 

but, I say sure, a little more time is fine (but we never define "little more time")...

let us now say, that between this expiration of the original deal and you finally paying me off, that another same issue of lessor grade or provenance, or whatever, sells for 2x what you and I had agreed upon... hm do you all of a sudden find a way to pay the book off... do I have the right at that point to say, sorry Roy, time's up... I will refund your money and sorry we couldn't finish the deal?

 

that is an interesting scenario

 

Rick, you're scenario is completely valid because I would have theoretically went outside of the originally agreed time frame. The contract (our handshake agreement) theoretically would have been broken by me and you would have every right to back out of the deal.

 

If that is what happened with the Supes #4 9.2 then that is a completely different scenario and one worth leaving between both parties involved as there is a grey area.

 

With my situation there was no grey area.

 

oh, I agree... I was just wondering, so when 3 months hit, I can "keep" the book and the deposit :baiting:

 

lol

 

 

 

 

 

 

hm

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

:eek:

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

:cry:

Link to comment
Share on other sites
nearmint

nearmint

Posted
Posted
I disagree with both of you guys. A deal is a deal and it should be up to the buyer to withdraw the offer if the seller asks and the buyer agrees. It's not up to the seller to unilaterally withdraw the book any more than it is up to a buyer to reneg on a deal whether handshake, contract or any other form of agreement.

 

Whether money changes hands or not the principle and outcome is the same. No integrity.

 

R.

just playing devils advocate here roy...

and I will use you and I in my hypothetical/real situation..

 

we have agreed, both in principle and in initial money exchange to transact on a certain MMC...we are cool up to here...

 

you and I agree that book with be paid off in X time (3 months in our scenario).

 

What would you say, if in 3 months and 1 day you haven't finished paying the book off...maybe you come to me and say "Rick, I need a little more time"... me, being the nice guy, will probably say "OK", but you, as the buyer, understand that I the seller, don't "have to"...that at that time, "legally" (if I must say that) our deal is off...

 

but, I say sure, a little more time is fine (but we never define "little more time")...

let us now say, that between this expiration of the original deal and you finally paying me off, that another same issue of lessor grade or provenance, or whatever, sells for 2x what you and I had agreed upon... hm do you all of a sudden find a way to pay the book off... do I have the right at that point to say, sorry Roy, time's up... I will refund your money and sorry we couldn't finish the deal?

 

that is an interesting scenario

 

Rick, in my mind, the buyer and seller had an oral contract. If the buyer was late with the final payment, then that was the opportunity for the seller to cancel the contract and keep the book. But, by saying "a little more time is fine", he's essentially accepted a revision of the original contract, and has a responsibility to stand by it.

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites
stagedoorjohnny

stagedoorjohnny

Posted
Posted
True story:

 

A friend of mine was buying a very high grade pedigree CGC 9.2 Superman #4. Book had been priced near 30K & was being paid for with time payments.

 

The balance of the book had been paid for about 10 days ago. My friend had been waiting for the book to arrive in the mail.

 

This past weekend, my friend gets an email from the seller of the Superman #4. As a kind gesture to my friend who had scraped the money together in order to pay for the Superman #4, the seller announced that he did not want to sell the book after all and would be returning all the funds to my friend.

 

Gee? This must be a coincide. I am sure it has nothing to do with the Superman #4 in Heritage.

 

I think I can put two and two together on this one. If it is who I am thinking, all I can say is I am very surprised by the actions of this seller. Seems out of character unless there is more to the story.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
nearmint

nearmint

Posted
Posted
I disagree with both of you guys. A deal is a deal and it should be up to the buyer to withdraw the offer if the seller asks and the buyer agrees. It's not up to the seller to unilaterally withdraw the book any more than it is up to a buyer to reneg on a deal whether handshake, contract or any other form of agreement.

 

Whether money changes hands or not the principle and outcome is the same. No integrity.

 

R.

Roy, although your situation is unfortunate, it doesn't fall in the same catagory as The Sup. #4

 

I feel that everyone should know who the dealer is. :popcorn:

however, not 100% of the story has been told, so maybe the customer and the dealer should be left "unnamed", at least for now (thumbs u

 

I agree. People love to drag other people's names through the mud without a second thought.

 

I don't think that's what's happening here. The seller in question has an excellent reputation, and while his actions in this case were suspect, he didn't rob or cheat anyone. I wouldn't hesitate to buy from him in the future, although I think I'd pay in full rather than in installments.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
G.A.tor

G.A.tor

Posted
Posted
I disagree with both of you guys. A deal is a deal and it should be up to the buyer to withdraw the offer if the seller asks and the buyer agrees. It's not up to the seller to unilaterally withdraw the book any more than it is up to a buyer to reneg on a deal whether handshake, contract or any other form of agreement.

 

Whether money changes hands or not the principle and outcome is the same. No integrity.

 

R.

Roy, although your situation is unfortunate, it doesn't fall in the same catagory as The Sup. #4

 

I feel that everyone should know who the dealer is. :popcorn:

however, not 100% of the story has been told, so maybe the customer and the dealer should be left "unnamed", at least for now (thumbs u

 

I agree. People love to drag other people's names through the mud without a second thought.

 

I don't think that's what's happening here. The seller in question has an excellent reputation, and while his actions in this case were suspect, he didn't rob or cheat anyone. I wouldn't hesitate to buy from him in the future, although I think I'd pay in full rather than in installments.

I don't know jeff... the requests to "out" the seller have been lynchmobesque (at least how I read them)

 

and, given that the seller does have a generally stellar rep (as does the buyer, who has on several occasions told me he does NOT want to publicize his purchases), maybe there is more than meets the eye (shrug) so that is why I suggested keeping the transaction private, until either of those parties wish to make public (thumbs u

Link to comment
Share on other sites
G.A.tor

G.A.tor

Posted
Posted
I disagree with both of you guys. A deal is a deal and it should be up to the buyer to withdraw the offer if the seller asks and the buyer agrees. It's not up to the seller to unilaterally withdraw the book any more than it is up to a buyer to reneg on a deal whether handshake, contract or any other form of agreement.

 

Whether money changes hands or not the principle and outcome is the same. No integrity.

 

R.

just playing devils advocate here roy...

and I will use you and I in my hypothetical/real situation..

 

we have agreed, both in principle and in initial money exchange to transact on a certain MMC...we are cool up to here...

 

you and I agree that book with be paid off in X time (3 months in our scenario).

 

What would you say, if in 3 months and 1 day you haven't finished paying the book off...maybe you come to me and say "Rick, I need a little more time"... me, being the nice guy, will probably say "OK", but you, as the buyer, understand that I the seller, don't "have to"...that at that time, "legally" (if I must say that) our deal is off...

 

but, I say sure, a little more time is fine (but we never define "little more time")...

let us now say, that between this expiration of the original deal and you finally paying me off, that another same issue of lessor grade or provenance, or whatever, sells for 2x what you and I had agreed upon... hm do you all of a sudden find a way to pay the book off... do I have the right at that point to say, sorry Roy, time's up... I will refund your money and sorry we couldn't finish the deal?

 

that is an interesting scenario

 

Rick, in my mind, the buyer and seller had an oral contract. If the buyer was late with the final payment, then that was the opportunity for the seller to cancel the contract and keep the book. But, by saying "a little more time is fine", he's essentially accepted a revision of the original contract, and has a responsibility to stand by it.

 

true... and I agree that the extention prolongs that "contract", but at what point does the seller have the right to say "too late"... this has nothing to do with the supes deal, but I am trying to come up with a way to get one over on Roy, keep the book and his deposit, and still be the "good guy" lol

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

:jokealert:

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites
VintageComics

VintageComics

Posted
Posted
true... and I agree that the extention prolongs that "contract", but at what point does the seller have the right to say "too late"... this has nothing to do with the supes deal, but I am trying to come up with a way to get one over on Roy, keep the book and his deposit, and still be the "good guy" lol

 

:jokealert:

 

:whatev:

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Transplant

Transplant

Posted
Posted
I disagree with both of you guys. A deal is a deal and it should be up to the buyer to withdraw the offer if the seller asks and the buyer agrees. It's not up to the seller to unilaterally withdraw the book any more than it is up to a buyer to reneg on a deal whether handshake, contract or any other form of agreement.

 

Whether money changes hands or not the principle and outcome is the same. No integrity.

 

R.

I'm going to try to be brief. A web posting of a book for a certain price is not equal to offering everyone the book and waiting for someone to accept. Courts generally find that just like advertising in a Sunday flyer, posting an item for sale is an invitation for you to make an offer. The contract only happens when they actually accept that offer.

 

Do I think it's good business to do what they did? No.

 

As for the Supes #4, I think the contract was created at the moment that the terms of the deal were completed. The buyer had until the agreed upon time to make the full payment. Assuming they complied with all the terms, the seller breached and committed a pretty slimey act at the same time.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
nearmint

nearmint

Posted
Posted
I disagree with both of you guys. A deal is a deal and it should be up to the buyer to withdraw the offer if the seller asks and the buyer agrees. It's not up to the seller to unilaterally withdraw the book any more than it is up to a buyer to reneg on a deal whether handshake, contract or any other form of agreement.

 

Whether money changes hands or not the principle and outcome is the same. No integrity.

 

R.

Roy, although your situation is unfortunate, it doesn't fall in the same catagory as The Sup. #4

 

I feel that everyone should know who the dealer is. :popcorn:

however, not 100% of the story has been told, so maybe the customer and the dealer should be left "unnamed", at least for now (thumbs u

 

I agree. People love to drag other people's names through the mud without a second thought.

 

I don't think that's what's happening here. The seller in question has an excellent reputation, and while his actions in this case were suspect, he didn't rob or cheat anyone. I wouldn't hesitate to buy from him in the future, although I think I'd pay in full rather than in installments.

I don't know jeff... the requests to "out" the seller have been lynchmobesque (at least how I read them)

 

and, given that the seller does have a generally stellar rep (as does the buyer, who has on several occasions told me he does NOT want to publicize his purchases), maybe there is more than meets the eye (shrug) so that is why I suggested keeping the transaction private, until either of those parties wish to make public (thumbs u

 

I couldn't agree more. I've known the buyer for years, consider him a friend, and am very aware of his desire to keep his purchases private. I think we should all respect that. (thumbs u

Link to comment
Share on other sites
MrBedrock

MrBedrock

Posted
Posted
According to Metropolis, the book had been paid in full for 10 days.

This is incorrect. The buyer had in fact just made a payment to make the balance less then half the total.

At the time of that payment (which was before either had knowledge of the Heritage sale) the seller gave no indication of a problem with this (according to the buyer).

Link to comment
Share on other sites
G.A.tor

G.A.tor

Posted
Posted
According to Metropolis, the book had been paid in full for 10 days.

This is incorrect. The buyer had in fact just made a payment to make the balance less then half the total.

At the time of that payment (which was before either had knowledge of the Heritage sale) the seller gave no indication of a problem with this (according to the buyer).

hm
Link to comment
Share on other sites
G.A.tor

G.A.tor

Posted
Posted

it has made for some spirited discussion...

 

and, back on topic, has anyone been able to actually confirm or refute these 2 sales?

I hear lots of this and that, but trying to (for curiosity sake) get an official statement...anyone (shrug)

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Aman619

Aman619

Posted
Posted

what nobody is focussing on here is the greed factor. Both sides are being impelled by their desire to own a book that is suddenly worth a lot more for a cheaper price. Buyer wants seller to agree to terms made long ago that he himself failed to adhere to. Seller feels he bent over backwards and now has to let it go too cheap?

 

its a tough one, but not legally IMO. However IMO seller should negotiate a somewhat higher price as he has his good name to defend. Halfway between old and perceived new value perhaps? If a third party hasnt bough it already.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
nearmint

nearmint

Posted
Posted

I agree. We don't even know if the Heritage sales were genuine, and if they are, whether the sale of 2 books at crazy prices will have any legitimate impact on the value of early Supes.

 

29K for the Supes #4 CGC 9.2 seemed like a good, fair price to me, both before and after the Heritage auction.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Go to topic listing