Opinions Requested

[ezez420]

Hey there, I wanted to get some opinions on this with a fellow board member and what YOU would do.

So, I come to an agreement on some cards with a board member. However, they requested that they "lock" in the price (sort of like a mortgage rate) until the end of next week so I don't sell to anyone. Being a nice person I was perfectly fine with that. However, I receive a phone call from a friend of mine about 10 minutes later stating that someone is trying to sell them MY cards and practically double the price. I laughed and said, those are my cards.

What really gets me is that they guy tries to use some story on payment and backfires. Should he have paid for them and received I wouldn't have cared.

So now I told him the deal is off and will not be doing any transactions with him. I would reverse my decision should I get overwhelming responses.

[t206trader]

I can see both sides on this one. Still, if you agreed to his terms, why should you care what he eventually does with said cards? I understand the whole selling cards before you have them argument. Still, if the deal was "done", I see no harm in him communicating with others about a future sale of the cards. Obviously transparency is the issue here. Is it wrong for him to agree to a deal with you and flip the cards for double what you're asking? No. Is it wrong for him to agree to a deal with you and then possibly back out when his flip doesn't pan out? Yes. Still, agreeing to his terms enters you into a verbal contract. Whatever happens after that is irrelevant. If I were you I would carry through with the deal. If he backs out or reneges later then hold him accountable and refuse his business.

Brandon

[Forever Young]

Originally Posted by t206trader

I can see both sides on this one. Still, if you agreed to his terms, why should you care what he eventually does with said cards? I understand the whole selling cards before you have them argument. Still, if the deal was "done", I see no harm in him communicating with others about a future sale of the cards. Obviously transparency is the issue here. Is it wrong for him to agree to a deal with you and flip the cards for double what you're asking? No. Is it wrong for him to agree to a deal with you and then possibly back out when his flip doesn't pan out? Yes. Still, agreeing to his terms enters you into a verbal contract. Whatever happens after that is irrelevant. If I were you I would carry through with the deal. If he backs out or reneges later then hold him accountable and refuse his business.

Brandon

I disagree. Why didn't the guy but them already? Why did you have to wait for payment ? Me me me.. I know. He doesn't have the money unless he resells them first. He holds you hostage and there is a large chance you would not have been paid(especially when he is trying to sell your cards(unknowingly ) for twice as much. I would have done exactly whAt you did; no more deal. They are not his cards to sell and you did not agree to him brokering. He was being disingenuous at best and that gives you ever right to kill any agreement (especially if it was one different than you originally to hought).

[Runscott]

(Hey Leon - does this sound familiar )

Now I get to hear opinions without having a Net54 boulder tied around me and getting tossed in a lake.

[thecatspajamas]

nevermind

[t206trader]

Originally Posted by Forever Young

I disagree. Why didn't the guy but them already? Why did you have to wait for payment ? Me me me.. I know. He doesn't have the money unless he resells them first. He holds you hostage and there is a large chance you would not have been paid(especially when he is trying to sell your cards(unknowingly ) for twice as much. I would have done exactly whAt you did; no more deal. They are not his cards to sell and you did not agree to him brokering. He was being disingenuous at best and that gives you ever right to kill any agreement (especially if it was one different than you originally to hought).

Regardless, OP agreed to the deal. If the terms were not to the OP's liking he could have easily said no originally. Seems like this is a slippery slope. We can't know whether he would have been paid or not since the OP didn't follow through on his end of the bargain. I agree that it's probable he wouldn't have been paid but that's the risk you take when you agree to a "wait to pay" deal.

[ezez420]

My view is I don't care what would be done with the cards after they were paid for.

But the fact that you state you don't have the money yet try to sell to obtain the money shows dishonesty. And if you can't sell you would likely back out or request more time to pay.

[t206trader]

Originally Posted by ezez420

My view is I don't care what would be done with the cards after they were paid for.

But the fact that you state you don't have the money yet try to sell to obtain the money shows dishonesty. And if you can't sell you would likely back out or request more time to pay.

I understand your apprehension but I just believe that if you agree to a deal for X amount of time you should allow X amount of time to pass before canceling the deal. Withdrawing from a deal for "could haves" or "might nots" just doesn't strike me as the right thing to do. Unless the Buyer did something to void the contract (which doesn't sound like the case here) I would feel obligated. Suppose this was eBay and the buyer requested more time to pay? Would you have leniency then? If you did and noticed they created a listing for the card at double what you were asking would you refuse to sell them it? Assuming the buyer paid, you would be eventually obligated to complete the deal. Talking about the buyers actions as right or wrong doesn't have anything to do with your deal.

Suppose I agree to sell a stained but valuable card to a board member and later I hear through another board member that the buyer plans on taking my card to have its stains removed and sell it for double what I'm asking. The fact that I don't agree with the buyers actions or view them as immoral doesn't change the fact that we have an agreement. I would still be obligated to sell them the card based upon our original agreement. If I didn't like the buyers actions I would blackball them immediately following the sale and agree to never sell to them again which is what I would do in your current scenario.

[Forever Young]

Ed,

Like I said.. if it were me.. it is a no brainer. This "a deal is a deal" is bs IMO based on the circumstances you have provided. You will have people arguing both ways. Some only looking from a buyer's point of view, some from a sellers point of view, some who might be friends with the unknown buyer, ect ect.

I would cancel the deal and support you for doing it if that is what you want to do.

You should not be labelled as breaking your word(ending deal) by a guy who was not upfront from the beginning. That is just lunacy/one sided horses*t.


Ben

[daves_resale_shop]

Ed,
I'd honor the deal and expect the agreed upon payment from the buyer on the date discussed... I will also say that If I were in your shoes, I would have a very difficult time transacting with this person in the future...

Good luck
Dave

[Kawika]

Technically speaking, a deal is a deal, but the guy's hidden agenda is kinda slimy. I wish Joe Palaez was around for this thread. He'd rip the buyer a new one. ****Sonny Boy, are you a Collector or are you a FLIPPER?****

[Forever Young]

Originally Posted by daves_resale_shop

Ed,
I'd honor the deal and expect the agreed upon payment from the buyer on the date discussed... I will also say that If I were in your shoes, I would have a very difficult time transacting with this person in the future...

Good luck
Dave

Nevermind

[ezez420]

If enough people say a deal is a deal, I would probably honor with the caveat of I would disclose who he is for the community in the title of the thread which would ruin future business and excuses. That would be up to him.

[drcy]

Originally Posted by daves_resale_shop

Ed,
I'd honor the deal and expect the agreed upon payment from the buyer on the date discussed

Agree with what Dave said. If he pays at agreed time, the deal is fulfilled from both ends as promised. If he backs out because he couldn't pre-sell cards, that would obviously be slimy and worth complaining about. I think you should stick to the deal.

For the record, I don't think putting up for sale cards you don't physically have is good practice, even when you have/will pay your bill. And this includes for the seller. It's a recipe for trouble. Though putting out feelers and asking friends if they want to go in on parts of auction lots seems to be not uncommon practice for members of this board.

P.s. I already bought those cards from the guy you made the deal with, so you can't back out now. If you want to make a deal with me to buy them back (at a slight profit for me, of course), I'm sure you can make a deal before the 10 days is up.

[glchen]

I would cancel the deal as it looks as if the buyer will renege if he doesn't find someone to flip the cards to at a higher price. (this reminds me of the wheretheyaint strategy.) If the buyer states the still wants the cards, I might be flexible and then request payment in 1-2 hrs and not a week.

[drcy]

This type of dealing sort of reminds me of the guy who emailed me about a card I had for sale, then emailed back trying to bargain me down against a guy he had just emailed with the same card for sale at the same. I pointed out that he wasn't dealing with two sellers, but had emailed the same seller (me) twice.

Then there was the guy who emailed me a picture of a rare regional Babe Ruth card he had for sale and I replied "Not only do you not have the card, but the picture you sent me is from my web site."

Good times. Still make me laugh.

But, seriously, I've on occasion made agreed-beforehand deals with people where they said they needed some time first to get the money and it all worked out as spelled out. I never asked for the reasons for the delays, but assumed they needed to wait for payday, to transfer funds or something like that.

I once had a collector who wanted to buy a large collection, but could only pay for half now and half in six months. I agreed to terms as I'd dealt with him before and knew he specialized in that area. Six months later after he payed the second amount, he got the second half. But that was a unique deal, and part of the deal making involved me deciding if I was okay with half the collecting sitting inactive on my shelf for half a year. From past dealings, I knew he'd pay.

I also remember he once picked out a bunch of single photos he was going to buy, then asked if I would give him a group lot discount. I added up the individual prices and said "No. That's a good price for the lot" and he said "Okay. Just asking" and paid.

He was such a specialist and straight shooter in what he collected that I once included in a package a free original studio portrait of Eddie Collins that came from Collins' personal family photo album, and he returned it because it didn't fit in with what he collected.

[murphusa]

So after your introduction you said, I made a deal with a board member ...

what should I do?

I would think that if it was a board member they would now know your state of mind and the opinions you are asking for.

Ah, this was done on the card side, so they don't come over here

[ezez420]

Oh I let the board member know. The reason for not paying for the item was they had to pay for auction items first. I don't buy it. There was no deposit either to lock in the price. In fact it was a mere 10 minutes before trying to flip.

[drcy]

I think you babies should move to back Russia. Sorry that you choke on the fresh air of capitalist freedom.

[yanks12025]

I wouldn't sell them to him. He was trying to sell something he hadn't owned yet. The deal isn't complete until you receive PAYMENT! And personally I think you should out the buyer/forum member, so people can stay away from them.

[drcy]

My final opinion is you (and the buyer) should stick to the terms of the deal (A week wait isn't that long. I've taken longer naps.). The only reasonable possible reason I see for considering backing out is if the buyer lied about the reason for the delay in payment. But, still, if he pays after a week he pays and the reasons behind the delay (even if he fibbed) would be nether here nor there. And, yes, I said the buyer has to stick to the deal too.

I don't see how on day 2 you can out someone for not paying the bill on day 7.

[Runscott]

A buyer shouldn't behave like a buttonhole (<==spellcheck changed it ) when he doesn't even have the item in hand yet. It's stupid since at that point the seller still has the power to tell them where to stick it. After the buyer has the item in hand, he STILL should not behave poorly, but it's not quite as stupid to do so. Bottom line - if a buyer OR a seller behaves like a jerk, it kills their ability to do future business with that person, and it reflects very badly on them here in this forum. Given all of that, even if the seller adheres to "a deal is a deal" as some are suggesting, things aren't going to work so good in the long run for the offender. Is it really worth it to make a few extra bucks?

But I think David's idea about moving to Russia wasn't a bad one.

[Leon]

My opinion is once you make a deal then that is the deal. If I say I will sell to someone for $100 and I agree to be paid in two weeks, then that is the deal. If I get paid in two weeks, which I agreed to, then I have nothing to complain about. What that buyer does really isn't any of my business as long as he does what he contracted with me to do.

Yes Scott, it sounds familiar and I haven't changed my opinion. And I completely disagree with Brock. The Deal IS DONE when you agree to it. It's not finalized but I will be darned if it isn't a contract as long as there is a meeting of the minds and an agreement made.

All that being said transparency and honesty should always be adhered to.

[Runscott]

Leon, I ultimately agreed with you, but part of it was just wanting to avoid another board fight. No one likes to be treated disrespectfully by fellow hobbyists, even if the technical rules of business are being adhered to.

[1880nonsports]

for me is a contract - whether it turns out that it was in my best interest or the other person's......
I will say from experience that selling something one doesn't actually have in hand no matter the reason - isn't the best idea.