APOLOGY NOT ACCEPTED - Thread has de-railed!!

[COI]

Basically Dan entered into two contracts and defaulted on one of them.

 

The real question becomes was the "I'll take it" rule abrogated, and effectively merged into the contract without effect, or was the contract voidable and subject to divestiture by subsequent "I'll take it" in the thread. Some are saying that the contract was voidable by its terms. They like black and white answers, because they can't see both sides if an issue. That generally fails no matter how many times one might repeat it.

 

I think that any tribunal would rule that Tranny was entitled to the book, and SD breached the contract. The reasoning would be that they wouldn't let a vendor profit from setting up a voidable contractual scheme. People would get screwed left and right if this were acceptable. This is a change that really needs to be set into place in the market place here.

I guess I get to ask the question again, what state (or states) do you practice law in?

 

Did I claim to practice law somewhere?

Your understanding of contract law is asininely wrong yet you spout off your knowledge as fact "I think that any tribunal..." So yes its upsetting to me (who spent years concentrating on studying contract/corporate/sales law) to listen to someone whose legal knowledge is based off watching some episodes of law and order (or maybe Perry Mason not sure how old you are) who thinks they know how the law works. Sadly for some reason everyone thinks they are a lawyer. Do me (and the other boardies who are attorneys) a favor and don't say things like "Basically Dan entered into two contracts and defaulted on one of them" until you're actually admited to practice law in at least one state.

 

Mmehdy is a lawyer. Lets ask him.

[Spider-Dan]

Jaydogrules:

At least under New York law the deal would be Joey's. The seller (Spider-Dan) posted his conditions ("I wish to sell 1 widget for $X, in order to claim it the buyer must place a in this thread") Transplant wished to change one of the terms of the contract (the price) and contacted seller and said something along the lines of "Hey would you take $Y?" Seller responded with something like "No, but I would take $Z." Transplant said great in PM. All Transplant was doing was dickering over a single term, the price. Had he PM'd and said, "Hey I want to know, would you take $Y and can I claim it here in PM?" and Spider-Dan said, "You can claim it in PM but I can't sell for $Y, I can sell for $Z" then people would have a point that the contract was changed. The only term that was changed though was the price, Joey was still the first to claim it to the terms of the offer and thus he would be the only one with a valid contract. Now as to peoples opinions as to whether this is shady or not a good practice etc that's their call not the laws of course. However the general rule here is that Seller creates the terms of their offer so it should be respected.

 

Wrong. Your premise is flawed. The rules did not say that an needed to be placed into a thread to complete a deal. It said that in the thread TRUMPS everything else. SD made a deal with Transplant. Offer, acceptance, consideration. He then used his TRUMP card to void out his deal with Transplant. So this is not an "additional or different terms" argument, it is "I have placed terms that allow me to void this type of agreement out anytime I want." If Joey never posted and Transplant paid, would the book have been his. Of course. It was only Joey's, because SD voided out his agreement with Transplant. I have a hard time believing a court would uphold this type of insane voidable agreement.

 

Maybe they would, but the absolutes being thrown around in here are laughable.

 

 

I also think was Fingh is trying to say is that Dan's rules set it up so that while he negotiated a deal that was accepted by Mike, he is creating a loophole allowing himself to wait around until someone offers a better deal.

 

This is the accusationthat bothers me the most. Ive sold hundreds of books on these Boards without any issue. I put that rule into effect (which im allowed to do) because early on I was a victim of "Sorry it sold in a PM" I was a Noob and didnt know who was shady and who wasnt.

 

I Always tell a buyer once they agree in a PM.. "Do you want to mark it sold iN the thread, or do you want me to?" Its nobodys buisness what my family issue was that pulled me away, but it happened.

 

Until someone can post one of my sales threads where this has happened before, the insinuating that I wait around for full price is asinine

 

I extended the olive branch to Mike publically to show that I am sorry for not getting bacl to the thread in time. In 60+ pages he has decided not to accept. Oh well

 

Also why try and make Joey feel bad for not giving the book to Mike. That also is ridiculous. HE Won the book fair and square.

 

 

 

 

[Twistty1]

First visit to general in awhile... great thread to read when you're at home on a Friday night doing daddy duty and no drama of your own to deal with. Carry on

[COI]

I dislike having been associated with the thread in any way, and there was nothing I could do to avoid it (didn't know about the PMs going on). I feel badly for Mike, for Dan, and for me.

 

You could have deferred to the person who took the book first. You can't really say "There was nothing I could do"…

 

I blame the CGC, who graded the book in question, and created this message board on which transactions go awry, and these brain-damaging conversations take place.

[ChrisInBaltimore]

Also why try and make Joey feel bad for not giving the book to Mike. That also is ridiculous. HE Won the book fair and square.

 

Hasn't the back and forth in this thread shown you that it wasn't "fair and square"?

 

Look it is your book and you have the right to do with it as you please. I just don't think you can say this is so cut and dry.

 

On that note, I'm off…

[mikenyc]

Jaydogrules:

At least under New York law the deal would be Joey's. The seller (Spider-Dan) posted his conditions ("I wish to sell 1 widget for $X, in order to claim it the buyer must place a in this thread") Transplant wished to change one of the terms of the contract (the price) and contacted seller and said something along the lines of "Hey would you take $Y?" Seller responded with something like "No, but I would take $Z." Transplant said great in PM. All Transplant was doing was dickering over a single term, the price. Had he PM'd and said, "Hey I want to know, would you take $Y and can I claim it here in PM?" and Spider-Dan said, "You can claim it in PM but I can't sell for $Y, I can sell for $Z" then people would have a point that the contract was changed. The only term that was changed though was the price, Joey was still the first to claim it to the terms of the offer and thus he would be the only one with a valid contract. Now as to peoples opinions as to whether this is shady or not a good practice etc that's their call not the laws of course. However the general rule here is that Seller creates the terms of their offer so it should be respected.

 

Wrong. Your premise is flawed. The rules did not say that an needed to be placed into a thread to complete a deal. It said that in the thread TRUMPS everything else. SD made a deal with Transplant. Offer, acceptance, consideration. He then used his TRUMP card to void out his deal with Transplant. So this is not an "additional or different terms" argument, it is "I have placed terms that allow me to void this type of agreement out anytime I want." If Joey never posted and Transplant paid, would the book have been his. Of course. It was only Joey's, because SD voided out his agreement with Transplant. I have a hard time believing a court would uphold this type of insane voidable agreement.

 

Maybe they would, but the absolutes being thrown around in here are laughable.

 

 

I also think was Fingh is trying to say is that Dan's rules set it up so that while he negotiated a deal that was accepted by Mike, he is creating a loophole allowing himself to wait around until someone offers a better deal.

 

This is the accusationthat bothers me the most. Ive sold hundreds of books on these Boards without any issue. I put that rule into effect (which im allowed to do) because early on I was a victim of "Sorry it sold in a PM" I was a Noob and didnt know who was shady and who wasnt.

 

I Always tell a buyer once they agree in a PM.. "Do you want to mark it sold iN the thread, or do you want me to?" Its nobodys buisness what my family issue was that pulled me away, but it happened.

 

Until someone can post one of my sales threads where this has happened before, the insinuating that I wait around for full price is asinine

 

I extended the olive branch to Mike publically to show that I am sorry for not getting bacl to the thread in time. In 60+ pages he has decided not to accept. Oh well

 

Also why try and make Joey feel bad for not giving the book to Mike. That also is ridiculous. HE Won the book fair and square.

 

 

 

 

If you knew that Mike had agreed to your terms why would you defer to a rule that was simply put there as boiler plate in your sales threads?

 

You know that the deal was negotiated and agreed upon in PMs why treat the rule, that you created, like its gospel. The spirit of the rule is to protect you but in this instance clearly Mike won the book so why invoke it?

[Jiminy_Cricket-migration]

Nerds.

[COI]

Jaydogrules:

At least under New York law the deal would be Joey's. The seller (Spider-Dan) posted his conditions ("I wish to sell 1 widget for $X, in order to claim it the buyer must place a in this thread") Transplant wished to change one of the terms of the contract (the price) and contacted seller and said something along the lines of "Hey would you take $Y?" Seller responded with something like "No, but I would take $Z." Transplant said great in PM. All Transplant was doing was dickering over a single term, the price. Had he PM'd and said, "Hey I want to know, would you take $Y and can I claim it here in PM?" and Spider-Dan said, "You can claim it in PM but I can't sell for $Y, I can sell for $Z" then people would have a point that the contract was changed. The only term that was changed though was the price, Joey was still the first to claim it to the terms of the offer and thus he would be the only one with a valid contract. Now as to peoples opinions as to whether this is shady or not a good practice etc that's their call not the laws of course. However the general rule here is that Seller creates the terms of their offer so it should be respected.

 

Wrong. Your premise is flawed. The rules did not say that an needed to be placed into a thread to complete a deal. It said that in the thread TRUMPS everything else. SD made a deal with Transplant. Offer, acceptance, consideration. He then used his TRUMP card to void out his deal with Transplant. So this is not an "additional or different terms" argument, it is "I have placed terms that allow me to void this type of agreement out anytime I want." If Joey never posted and Transplant paid, would the book have been his. Of course. It was only Joey's, because SD voided out his agreement with Transplant. I have a hard time believing a court would uphold this type of insane voidable agreement.

 

Maybe they would, but the absolutes being thrown around in here are laughable.

 

 

I also think was Fingh is trying to say is that Dan's rules set it up so that while he negotiated a deal that was accepted by Mike, he is creating a loophole allowing himself to wait around until someone offers a better deal.

 

This is the accusationthat bothers me the most. Ive sold hundreds of books on these Boards without any issue. I put that rule into effect (which im allowed to do) because early on I was a victim of "Sorry it sold in a PM" I was a Noob and didnt know who was shady and who wasnt.

 

I Always tell a buyer once they agree in a PM.. "Do you want to mark it sold iN the thread, or do you want me to?" Its nobodys buisness what my family issue was that pulled me away, but it happened.

 

Until someone can post one of my sales threads where this has happened before, the insinuating that I wait around for full price is asinine

 

I extended the olive branch to Mike publically to show that I am sorry for not getting bacl to the thread in time. In 60+ pages he has decided not to accept. Oh well

 

Also why try and make Joey feel bad for not giving the book to Mike. That also is ridiculous. HE Won the book fair and square.

 

 

 

 

If you knew that Mike had agreed to your terms why would you defer to a rule that was simply put there as boiler plate in your sales threads?

 

You know that the deal was negotiated and agreed upon in PMs why treat the rule, that you created, like its gospel. The spirit of the rule is to protect you but in this instance clearly Mike won the book so why invoke it?

 

I'm sorry, but you only scored 163 on the LSAT.

[Transplant]

Fellow forumites:

 

First - wow! I can't believe the amount of drama and argument that ensued. I didn't realize this was going on, but believe I should atleast say something.

 

It's a tough situation, and I'm not a lawyer, but my gut told me that we had a grey-area situation.

 

What's sad to me is that Dan didn't mean for this to happen, I'm sure atleast most agree with that. He put his rules in the thread, but there are a couple of unintended consequences in the structure. I think a lesson learned (for me in sales threads) is to be clear that the timestamp of the post governs (if I'm okay with people winning without declaring in the thread) OR stipulating that supersedes anything and must be posted in the thread to be viable.

 

As for my situation, I didn't know what to do, and I don't know Mike, but I sent him a PM. I asked him if he was okay. His response was a little snippy with me, but he's upset and I understand, I would have been upset too. But I don't deserve the response.

 

I'm going to go out on a limb here and say I think most agree (now, even if they didn't before),

that more clarity is sales threads is a good thing. I'm not speaking to contract law, just the associated optics. And it makes the environment more pleasant.

 

I dislike having been associated with the thread in any way, and there was nothing I could do to avoid it (didn't know about the PMs going on). I feel badly for Mike, for Dan, and for me.

 

I think we should let this thread fizzle and start a new one focused on sales thread rules that everyone wants, including all that posted in this thread (I think).

 

Enjoy your weekend. I'm headed to TMNT and hope my three young kids don't think it's too scary and make me leave early. They've already complained about their "necks" being gross

 

Cheers

Joey

 

Here's my "snippy" response.

 

Am I okay? Like, do I need a hug? I'll make it. I thought when I opened this, it might be you offering the book to me. Oh well.

 

Enjoy the book. LMK when it comes back on the market.

[thirdgreenham]

Fellow forumites:

 

First - wow! I can't believe the amount of drama and argument that ensued. I didn't realize this was going on, but believe I should atleast say something.

 

It's a tough situation, and I'm not a lawyer, but my gut told me that we had a grey-area situation.

 

What's sad to me is that Dan didn't mean for this to happen, I'm sure atleast most agree with that. He put his rules in the thread, but there are a couple of unintended consequences in the structure. I think a lesson learned (for me in sales threads) is to be clear that the timestamp of the post governs (if I'm okay with people winning without declaring in the thread) OR stipulating that supersedes anything and must be posted in the thread to be viable.

 

As for my situation, I didn't know what to do, and I don't know Mike, but I sent him a PM. I asked him if he was okay. His response was a little snippy with me, but he's upset and I understand, I would have been upset too. But I don't deserve the response.

 

I'm going to go out on a limb here and say I think most agree (now, even if they didn't before),

that more clarity is sales threads is a good thing. I'm not speaking to contract law, just the associated optics. And it makes the environment more pleasant.

 

I dislike having been associated with the thread in any way, and there was nothing I could do to avoid it (didn't know about the PMs going on). I feel badly for Mike, for Dan, and for me.

 

I think we should let this thread fizzle and start a new one focused on sales thread rules that everyone wants, including all that posted in this thread (I think).

 

Enjoy your weekend. I'm headed to TMNT and hope my three young kids don't think it's too scary and make me leave early. They've already complained about their "necks" being gross

 

Cheers

Joey

 

Here's my "snippy" response.

 

Am I okay? Like, do I need a hug? I'll make it. I thought when I opened this, it might be you offering the book to me. Oh well.

 

Enjoy the book. LMK when it comes back on the market.

 

There'll be a hug for you when you come to Toronto. Poor kid.

[budsbundy]

. HE Won the book fair and square.

 

 

No he didn't

Basically you sold the book to Trans, and then turned around, yanked it out of his hands(figuratively speaking) and sold it to Roulette

 

 

 

 

 

[Transplant]

There'll be a hug for you when you come to Toronto. Poor kid.

Seems like a long way to go for little payoff.

[MCMiles]

There'll be a hug for you when you come to Toronto. Poor kid.

Seems like a long way to go for little payoff.

 

Watson's driven further for less.

[COI]

There'll be a hug for you when you come to Toronto. Poor kid.

Seems like a long way to go for little payoff.

 

I can recommend several massage places in Toronto that'll finish you off.

[Transplant]

For the record, I want in thee peen internet lawyer contest.

 

Licensed in 4 states. Top 2% LSAT. Negotiate contracts with 7-8 figures involved. What do I win? Not a DD 1 I imagine.

 

Let it go folks.

[Prince Namor]

Fellow forumites:

 

First - wow! I can't believe the amount of drama and argument that ensued. I didn't realize this was going on, but believe I should atleast say something.

 

It's a tough situation, and I'm not a lawyer, but my gut told me that we had a grey-area situation.

 

What's sad to me is that Dan didn't mean for this to happen, I'm sure atleast most agree with that. He put his rules in the thread, but there are a couple of unintended consequences in the structure. I think a lesson learned (for me in sales threads) is to be clear that the timestamp of the post governs (if I'm okay with people winning without declaring in the thread) OR stipulating that supersedes anything and must be posted in the thread to be viable.

 

As for my situation, I didn't know what to do, and I don't know Mike, but I sent him a PM. I asked him if he was okay. His response was a little snippy with me, but he's upset and I understand, I would have been upset too. But I don't deserve the response.

 

I'm going to go out on a limb here and say I think most agree (now, even if they didn't before),

that more clarity is sales threads is a good thing. I'm not speaking to contract law, just the associated optics. And it makes the environment more pleasant.

 

I dislike having been associated with the thread in any way, and there was nothing I could do to avoid it (didn't know about the PMs going on). I feel badly for Mike, for Dan, and for me.

 

I think we should let this thread fizzle and start a new one focused on sales thread rules that everyone wants, including all that posted in this thread (I think).

 

Enjoy your weekend. I'm headed to TMNT and hope my three young kids don't think it's too scary and make me leave early. They've already complained about their "necks" being gross

 

Cheers

Joey

 

Here's my "snippy" response.

 

Am I okay? Like, do I need a hug? I'll make it. I thought when I opened this, it might be you offering the book to me. Oh well.

 

Enjoy the book. LMK when it comes back on the market.

 

That's a pretty good response.

[thirdgreenham]

There'll be a hug for you when you come to Toronto. Poor kid.

Seems like a long way to go for little payoff.

 

Watson's driven further for less.

 

[HighStakesComics]

Man, Daredevil #1 has sure come a long way. 1 year ago that book was colder than Winnipeg in February.

[thirdgreenham]

There'll be a hug for you when you come to Toronto. Poor kid.

Seems like a long way to go for little payoff.

 

I can recommend several massage places in Toronto that'll finish you off.

 

PM sent.

 

[Prince Namor]

Seems like the majority of people in SpiderDan's corner have been here less than 3 years and the majority of people who think he was wrong have been here more than 3 years.