Would you follow through and pay? Brady's last TD

[mrreality68]

Very interesting on many sides

But to me this was not unexpected. It has been in the news for months that he may comeback even if was next season after taking a season off.
As a result there was always that chance

The bidder know this when bidding so they took a chance and sadly it did not work out for them but to me they need to pay up.

When you buy a stock and the next day or so it crashes even if did not settle yet it still needs to be paid for at the higher value.

Same thing as mentioned above when the one of a kind card turns out to not be when another card or cards are discovered

But in reality big money and big potential loss for the buyer so it will be interesting to see what happens

[iwantitiwinit]

This could all be a moot point. The buyer may have already paid, I don't know how quickly Leland's sends out billings. I know I wire funds immediately so that I don't have open invoices out there. If so it would then turn into a case whereby the buyer is trying to reclaim funds.

[Tyruscobb]

I would argue that the sale price ($518k) reflected the risk Brady would return. That is - the risk was already baked into the cake, and is the reason the ball "only" went for $518k and not more.

Over a decade ago, Barry Bond's final homerun ball sold for $750k. Adjusted for inflation, in today's value, the $750k is worth over $832k. Thus, Brady's "final" TD ball sold for just 63% what the Bond's ball would fetch today.

In 1999, twenty-three years ago, a bidder paid $650k for Hank Aaron's final homerun ball (#755). Adjusted for inflation, in today's value, the $650k is worth over $1.1M. Thus, Brady's "final" TD ball only sold for less than half what Aaron's final ball would fetch today.

Like Aaron and Bonds, Brady is a legend and among the greatest to ever play. I know baseball's number are more sacred, but I would expect the true final Brady TD ball to sell close to par with Aaron and Bond's final balls.

The sports collectible market has only increased since the Bond's ball sale. Brady is the greatest QB, and perhaps the greatest football player. The fact his final ball only sold for fractions, when compared with Aaron and Bond's final balls, tells me that the bidding reflected the risk that Brady would come back. If bidder truly thought Brady would stay retired, the ball should've fetched near $1M.

If Brady stayed retired then $518k could have been an absolute bargain. The winning bidder took a gamble that didn't pay out. If Brady stayed retired, the bidder got a tremendous deal. If Brady came back, the bidder could back out and cancel? Where is the bidder's risk? Letting the bidder off the hook gives the bidder all the upside with absolutely no downside.

[Carter08]

Originally Posted by Tyruscobb

I would argue that the sale price ($518k) reflected the risk Brady would return. That is - the risk was already baked into the cake, and is the reason the ball "only" went for $518k and not more.

Over a decade ago, Barry Bond's final homerun ball sold for $750k. Adjusted for inflation, in today's value, the $750k is worth over $832k. Thus, Brady's "final" TD ball sold for just 63% what the Bond's ball would fetch today.

In 1999, twenty-three years ago, a bidder paid $650k for Hank Aaron's final homerun ball (#755). Adjusted for inflation, in today's value, the $650k is worth over $1.1M. Thus, Brady's "final" TD ball only sold for less than half what Aaron's final ball would fetch today.

Like Aaron and Bonds, Brady is a legend and among the greatest to ever play. I know baseball's number are more sacred, but I would expect the true final Brady TD ball to sell close to par with Aaron and Bond's final balls.

The sports collectible market has only increased since the Bond's ball sale. Brady is the greatest QB, and perhaps the greatest football player. The fact his final ball only sold for fractions, when compared with Aaron and Bond's final balls, tells me that the bidding reflected the risk that Brady would come back. If bidder truly thought Brady would stay retired, the ball should've fetched near $1M.

If Brady stayed retired then $518k could have been an absolute bargain. The winning bidder took a gamble that didn't pay out. If Brady stayed retired, the bidder got a tremendous deal. If Brady came back, the bidder could back out and cancel? Where is the bidder's risk? Letting the bidder off the hook gives the bidder all the upside with absolutely no downside.

Good point. I think the description of it was written poorly though. It was too definitive in proclaiming it at his last TD ball.

[Frank A]

Actually, this will become the famous I changed my mind ball. In the long run it will have an interesting spot in sports collecting. Not sure it will be as bad as many think.

[mrreality68]

Originally Posted by Frank A

Actually, this will become the famous I changed my mind ball. In the long run it will have an interesting spot in sports collecting. Not sure it will be as bad as many think.

Never thought of that could be right. Already seen several articles on this so he story/legend of that ball is growing.

Do not know if it grow to the heights of what the buyer paid

[Leon]

I am on the side of he took a risk and now has to pay the piper. But I am not a lawyer, obviously, so I don't know.
That said, now the buyer can buy the next Brady retirement ball and have bookends!
.

[scmavl]

Originally Posted by Tyruscobb

I would argue that the sale price ($518k) reflected the risk Brady would return. That is - the risk was already baked into the cake, and is the reason the ball "only" went for $518k and not more.

Over a decade ago, Barry Bond's final homerun ball sold for $750k. Adjusted for inflation, in today's value, the $750k is worth over $832k. Thus, Brady's "final" TD ball sold for just 63% what the Bond's ball would fetch today.

In 1999, twenty-three years ago, a bidder paid $650k for Hank Aaron's final homerun ball (#755). Adjusted for inflation, in today's value, the $650k is worth over $1.1M. Thus, Brady's "final" TD ball only sold for less than half what Aaron's final ball would fetch today.

Like Aaron and Bonds, Brady is a legend and among the greatest to ever play. I know baseball's number are more sacred, but I would expect the true final Brady TD ball to sell close to par with Aaron and Bond's final balls.

The sports collectible market has only increased since the Bond's ball sale. Brady is the greatest QB, and perhaps the greatest football player. The fact his final ball only sold for fractions, when compared with Aaron and Bond's final balls, tells me that the bidding reflected the risk that Brady would come back. If bidder truly thought Brady would stay retired, the ball should've fetched near $1M.

If Brady stayed retired then $518k could have been an absolute bargain. The winning bidder took a gamble that didn't pay out. If Brady stayed retired, the bidder got a tremendous deal. If Brady came back, the bidder could back out and cancel? Where is the bidder's risk? Letting the bidder off the hook gives the bidder all the upside with absolutely no downside.

That's an interesting take. The only difference being Bonds & Brady are both very polarizing figures, and hated by many fans of the sport. I don't think you'd find any baseball fan who actively hated Hank Aaron (racism notwithstanding).

[D. Bergin]

It was literally hours later....right?

The chances 1/2 a million bucks was wired to Lelands before they had a chance to even send out their invoices, is pretty low I imagine.

I think it's in the bidders court to do what they want, considering the circumstances.

People renege on auction winnings all the time. If auction houses hired a team of lawyers every time somebody backed out of a sale (of which they only get a commission on, while taking the financial risk of the entire transaction), they'd all be broke right now.

I assume it's written in all auction terms for consignors, that non-paying bidders and other complications may arise, which can negate the final result of an auction lot.

[keithsky]

This won't get settled for the next 6 months until the season starts and Brady throws his first TD. What if he gets hurt during pre season camp or a game and is out for the season then it's still the last TD. Don't see anything getting settled but you know lawyers will already be involved.

[conor912]

Maybe both the buyer and Leland’s should sue Tom Brady

[D. Bergin]

Maybe Mike Evans felt bad for throwing away that ball...and he's the winning bidder.

[nat]

Here's a fun (and surely not legally possible, but it's just for fun) way for it to play out:

Buyer pays, receives ball. Sues AH for non-performance of contract, as what he bought was Brady's last TD ball, and that's not what this is. AH says "okay, we'll refund your money and call the whole thing off", and buyer says "no" and demands specific performance. Then AH has to get Brady's final TD ball somehow. Maybe they buy all the seats by the endzone during his final game, hoping that some receiver will toss it to them.

[Yoda]

Maybe Tom will never throw another TD and the buyer will be doubly happy. Sure.

[Republicaninmass]

Maybe they will gave brady a come back at ages 50, 60, etc and keep throwing ONE TD...auctioned by lelands. It wont matter since people that have a lot of money dont care.

[tschock]

My non-contractually, cheeky-tongued, crystal ball is hazy but I see this playing out in 1 of 3 ways.

Buyer will renege on purchase, claim false advertising, and attempt to get money back. Auction House will claim that it was not false advertising at the time of sale. Lawyers will get involved costing both buyer and AH money. Deal will be struck, either with or without courts involved. Buyer will get the 'not final' TD ball for fraction of the cost. Brady will comeback, get injured in the first game and decide to REALLY retire. Even though lawyer fees involved, buyer makes a killing (at least relative to the original price).

OR

Buyer will renege on purchase, claim false advertising, and attempt to get money back. Auction House will claim that it was not false advertising at the time of sale. Lawyers will get involved costing both buyer and AH money. Deal will be struck, either with or without courts involved. AH will retain the ball and buyer will be refunded. Brady will comeback, get injured in the first game and decide to REALLY retire. Even though lawyer fees involved, AH makes a killing because ball now sells for $1 Million.

OR

Buyer will renege on purchase, claim false advertising, and attempt to get money back. Auction House will claim that it was not false advertising at the time of sale. Lawyers will get involved costing both buyer and AH money. Deal will be struck, either with or without courts involved. Brady will comeback and throw another touchdown pass, thus reducing the value of the original ball substantially.

It's a win-win-win situation!!!... For the lawyers. 🙂

[BobC]

Originally Posted by tschock

It's a win-win-win situation!!!... For the lawyers. 🙂

That is the first, and most, 100% accurate statement in this entire thread!

[chalupacollects]

Would it not matter if Brady had officially signed his NFL retirement papers at all? Or if they had even been processed?

If they were signed and processed would that not signal his retirement?

And this new season be considered a second career in the eyes of the court?

Couldn't either party state that as to Brady's true intentions as a fact not available at the time of sale?

Dunno myself if any of this really matters just random thoughts as I was reading the thread.

[Vintagedeputy]

If the buyer purchased “Brady’s final TD ball” and another ball becomes that final TD ball, hadn’t the buyer simply prepaid for the purchase of whatever ball becomes the final one, or is he tied to this specific ball? Which rules, the item or the description of the item?

Here’s another angle - if I buy a 3000th hit ball, and Elias credits the player with a previously unknown hit, do I now have 3001?

[Snowman]

This thread is hilarious, watching all the lawyers arguing back and forth, often in bad faith, as one would expect.

I've got good money that says the buyer doesn't pay for it, Leland's says something along the lines of "ya, we didn't expect you to", and no lawyers ever even get involved. Anyone care to place a wager?

[Aquarian Sports Cards]

Originally Posted by Snowman

This thread is hilarious, watching all the lawyers arguing back and forth, often in bad faith, as one would expect.

I've got good money that says the buyer doesn't pay for it, Leland's says something along the lines of "ya, we didn't expect you to", and no lawyers ever even get involved. Anyone care to place a wager?

I think it's more in the nature of an academic discussion. I can't see Leland's fighting this one out, so I basically agree with you.

[BobC]

Originally Posted by Aquarian Sports Cards

I think it's more in the nature of an academic discussion. I can't see Leland's fighting this one out, so I basically agree with you.

Scott,

You're in the auction business also, and thus know better than most the position Leland's is in. Everyone seems to keep talking about this being between Leland's and the auction winner, but what about the consigner? Your consigners enter into a consignment agreement with you, just as I'm assuming Leland's does with their consigners. You technically work for your consigners. So how does a typical AH consignment agreement in the case of a winner bidder that refuses to pay, for whatever reason, work? Does an AH have the ability to just unilaterally decide to cancel the auction with no input or say on the part of the consigner? And if so, is that because it is specifically written into the consignment agreement to protect an AH?

I can fully understand just canceling auctions in cases where someone backs out on paying just a few hundreds/thousands of dollars. The time, effort, and potential legal expense and other costs to go after such a winning bidder can make it totally senseless as you'll end up likely spending more than you'd get if the winner just paid you. But now we're talking $500K, and the further potential loss from a possible change to the football's significance. So if the AH refuses to go after the winning bidder on behalf of the consigner, can the consigner just step in then and go after the reneging auction winner themselves?

Or what about the consigner suing the AH for refusing to go after the auction winner on their behalf then?

According to some attorneys on here, the auction description may be a factor in letting the winning bidder off the hook from going through with the transaction. And assuming it was the AH that was responsible for writing the description, I could understand that maybe giving the consigner even more cause to go after the AH. In which case the consigner could possibly have cause to sue an AH for being harmed by the AH's mistakes as well. Heck, I could even see an attorney for an auction winner in a case like this one with Brady's football, prevailing over an AH because of the item's description, and then immediately turning around and contacting the consigner to offer to do the same for them against the AH. Probably wouldn't be the first time something like that may have happened either.

Will be interested to hear your responses from an AH viewpoint.

Oh, and as for agreeing with others that this thread is possibly just an academic discussion, I would definitely think not. If nothing else, it will help to educate members as to potential issues and problems that may occur were they to sell through an AH. And by examining and discussing the causes of these issues, and how they may end up being resolved, it may also let people better know what questions to ask and what things to look for in an AH's consignment and other agreements. That way a consigner can make a more educated choice in which AH they end up choosing, and hopefully never get stuck in the middle of a situation like the consigner of this Brady football apparently finds themselves in now.

[Snowman]

I'm curious about how people view a similar topic, but from a different perspective. There were a lot of Kobe Bryant cards that were instantly snatched up from ebay a mere seconds after the news broke about his death. Especially auto cards. Due to the limitations of eBay's selling platform, the sellers couldn't even hand logged in to change the price in time even if they wanted to. If these cards were sitting in display cases at a card shop, there's zero chance that the owner of the shop would have honored those sticker prices after the news broke. But what about on ebay? Should the seller who listed a Kobe auto card for $5k be obligated to proceed with the sale after it instantly quadrupled in value after his death? I say no.

Note, this is quite different than canceling a sale after a player wins the super bowl, MVP, or something similar where everyone knows the big game or vote is coming up.

And no, the odds of death are not "baked in" to the market at any given moment for a player of Kobe's age, unlike with Willie Mays where everyone knows he is in his 90s and is the oldest living HOFer.

[Aquarian Sports Cards]

Originally Posted by BobC

Oh, and as for agreeing with others that this thread is possibly just an academic discussion, I would definitely think not. If nothing else, it will help to educate members as to potential issues and problems that may occur were they to sell through an AH. And by examining and discussing the causes of these issues, and how they may end up being resolved, it may also let people better know what questions to ask and what things to look for in an AH's consignment and other agreements. That way a consigner can make a more educated choice in which AH they end up choosing, and hopefully never get stuck in the middle of a situation like the consigner of this Brady football apparently finds themselves in now.

Will answer your other questions, but this made me laugh out loud. You practically defined "academic discussion" while maintaining this isn't one.

[Aquarian Sports Cards]

Originally Posted by BobC

Scott,

You're in the auction business also, and thus know better than most the position Leland's is in. Everyone seems to keep talking about this being between Leland's and the auction winner, but what about the consigner? Your consigners enter into a consignment agreement with you, just as I'm assuming Leland's does with their consigners. You technically work for your consigners. So how does a typical AH consignment agreement in the case of a winner bidder that refuses to pay, for whatever reason, work? Does an AH have the ability to just unilaterally decide to cancel the auction with no input or say on the part of the consigner? And if so, is that because it is specifically written into the consignment agreement to protect an AH?

I can fully understand just canceling auctions in cases where someone backs out on paying just a few hundreds/thousands of dollars. The time, effort, and potential legal expense and other costs to go after such a winning bidder can make it totally senseless as you'll end up likely spending more than you'd get if the winner just paid you. But now we're talking $500K, and the further potential loss from a possible change to the football's significance. So if the AH refuses to go after the winning bidder on behalf of the consigner, can the consigner just step in then and go after the reneging auction winner themselves?

Or what about the consigner suing the AH for refusing to go after the auction winner on their behalf then?

According to some attorneys on here, the auction description may be a factor in letting the winning bidder off the hook from going through with the transaction. And assuming it was the AH that was responsible for writing the description, I could understand that maybe giving the consigner even more cause to go after the AH. In which case the consigner could possibly have cause to sue an AH for being harmed by the AH's mistakes as well. Heck, I could even see an attorney for an auction winner in a case like this one with Brady's football, prevailing over an AH because of the item's description, and then immediately turning around and contacting the consigner to offer to do the same for them against the AH. Probably wouldn't be the first time something like that may have happened either.

Will be interested to hear your responses from an AH viewpoint.

Oh, and as for agreeing with others that this thread is possibly just an academic discussion, I would definitely think not. If nothing else, it will help to educate members as to potential issues and problems that may occur were they to sell through an AH. And by examining and discussing the causes of these issues, and how they may end up being resolved, it may also let people better know what questions to ask and what things to look for in an AH's consignment and other agreements. That way a consigner can make a more educated choice in which AH they end up choosing, and hopefully never get stuck in the middle of a situation like the consigner of this Brady football apparently finds themselves in now.

I would definitely be on the horn to the consignor the minute Brady unretired. I am somewhat picky who I work with. I have driven an entire collection back to Ohio in a 12 foot box truck at my expense because the consignor was trouble. I have had consignors think that somehow the law was going to be on the side of them enriching themselves through fraud. So while there's no guarantee I would hope my consignor would be on the understanding side. This could be tough if it was life-changing money, which, in this case it might have been. Yes my fiduciary duty is to my consignor, NOT the buyer. However fiduciary duty only extends so far. I don't have to do something illegal, or even unethical in the name of fiduciary duty.

Real world scenario for my smaller company we have three ways of dealing with no pays and they are at our discretion as outlined in the consignor agreement.

1. Pay the consignor as if the item had been paid for. We take possession and auction again in a future sale to try and be made whole. This is the approach we take almost all of the time.

2. Do not pay the consignor but place in a future auction on their behalf.

3. Return the item to the consignor.

While we've done consignments that have totaled over $500,000 our big single item is only 1/10 that amount so it's obviously not a situation we find ourselves in, yet. I think a more interesting situation that isn't currently covered by my contract is buyer pays, but then, understandably, wants his money back. What do I tell my consignor then? The only way this is addressed in our contract is if an item is returned because of authenticity issues. That isn't the case here. It's tough when there is no "bad guy" actor. Everyone will be unhappy, but oddly, that's probably how it should be in a weird case like this.

[lowpopper]

Originally Posted by Tyruscobb

I would argue that the sale price ($518k) reflected the risk Brady would return. That is - the risk was already baked into the cake, and is the reason the ball "only" went for $518k and not more.

Over a decade ago, Barry Bond's final homerun ball sold for $750k. Adjusted for inflation, in today's value, the $750k is worth over $832k. Thus, Brady's "final" TD ball sold for just 63% what the Bond's ball would fetch today.

In 1999, twenty-three years ago, a bidder paid $650k for Hank Aaron's final homerun ball (#755). Adjusted for inflation, in today's value, the $650k is worth over $1.1M. Thus, Brady's "final" TD ball only sold for less than half what Aaron's final ball would fetch today.

Like Aaron and Bonds, Brady is a legend and among the greatest to ever play. I know baseball's number are more sacred, but I would expect the true final Brady TD ball to sell close to par with Aaron and Bond's final balls.

The sports collectible market has only increased since the Bond's ball sale. Brady is the greatest QB, and perhaps the greatest football player. The fact his final ball only sold for fractions, when compared with Aaron and Bond's final balls, tells me that the bidding reflected the risk that Brady would come back. If bidder truly thought Brady would stay retired, the ball should've fetched near $1M.

If Brady stayed retired then $518k could have been an absolute bargain. The winning bidder took a gamble that didn't pay out. If Brady stayed retired, the bidder got a tremendous deal. If Brady came back, the bidder could back out and cancel? Where is the bidder's risk? Letting the bidder off the hook gives the bidder all the upside with absolutely no downside.

All this is valid but the final HR ball from a
current HR King just seems to carry more weight