Teams negotiate to get back homerun balls

[travrosty]

He thinks he was gonna be jeters friend after that, like you can call him up in the offseason and ask to go hold hands and walk in central park.

they want to believe in the possibility that jeter will remember him and his kind action and even be buddies, but its never the case. jeter probably forgot the guys name already. he should have figured out the high retail price for the ball, then offer jeter right of first refusal, if he doesnt want to spend part of his 20 million dollar a year salary on the ball, he doesnt have to, but he had his chance.

[Splinte1941]

Originally Posted by travrosty

He thinks he was gonna be jeters friend after that, like you can call him up in the offseason and ask to go hold hands and walk in central park.

Fantastic as usual Travis.

[howard38]

.

[Trl3789]

Originally Posted by howard38

It's sad to see this guy getting ridiculed here for giving the ball to Jeter. I would have sold it to the highest bidder but some people are not driven by money. Maybe he just felt good doing it.

I don't know if it is money driven. I look at it as being more fiscally responsible.

[David Atkatz]

Originally Posted by howard38

It's sad to see this guy getting ridiculed here for giving the ball to Jeter. I would have sold it to the highest bidder but some people are not driven by money. Maybe he just felt good doing it.

Nobody prevented Jeter from taking the high road, and expressing his gratitude in a way that might really help the poor bastard.

[howard38]

/

[Exhibitman]

"Maybe Jeter didn't do the right thing. That is no reason to hold up "the poor bastard" to ridicule."

Yeah, there is: Stupidity. I never applaud stupidity, regardless of what pieties it is cloaked in. This was not an act of charity. Giving a valuable artifact to an orphanage to auction off to pay for food and clothing for the kiddies is charity. Giving an artifact of baseball history to the HOF to display and share is commendable. Giving the artifact to a rich entertainer to put in his trophy case for a tiny fraction of its worth because you are starstruck is stupid.

Let's be very clear: there is no "right" or "wrong" thing to do with a baseball you catch at a ballgame. It is not a moral question. The team grants you the right to keep the ball or dispose of it as you wish as part of the ticket [license] to enter its property. What you do with it is a business decision. Jeter did not do the right thing or the wrong thing; he and the Yankees did the shrewd thing. Lopez, however, did the stupid thing. In this world, in this economy, you have to protect your own interests first and foremost. The kid had bills to pay and debts to cover and a future family to provide for, and he threw away a winning lottery ticket. That is not commendable, it is dumb.

And yes, I am a callous, unsentimental bastard; comes with the J.D.

[Gary Dunaier]

I don't know if I'm hijacking the thread by asking this, but with Santana's no-hitter having taken place Friday night, this seems like a good place to ask.

One of the things we hear in the coverage of milestone home run balls is that the fan who finally comes up with the ball is immediately liable for taxes on the presumed market value, regardless of what the fan does with it.

The ball Santana threw for the final strike never left the field and is presumably in the custody of Santana or the Mets. I think it's safe to say that if this ball were put up for auction, it would sell for six figures due to its historical significance. I'm wondering if Santana or the Mets is just as liable for taxes on the value of the ball, whether or not they actually sell it - or does that just apply to fans?

[Scott Garner]

Originally Posted by Exhibitman

"Maybe Jeter didn't do the right thing. That is no reason to hold up "the poor bastard" to ridicule."

Yeah, there is: Stupidity. I never applaud stupidity, regardless of what pieties it is cloaked in. This was not an act of charity. Giving a valuable artifact to an orphanage to auction off to pay for food and clothing for the kiddies is charity. Giving an artifact of baseball history to the HOF to display and share is commendable. Giving the artifact to a rich entertainer to put in his trophy case for a tiny fraction of its worth because you are starstruck is stupid.

Let's be very clear: there is no "right" or "wrong" thing to do with a baseball you catch at a ballgame. It is not a moral question. The team grants you the right to keep the ball or dispose of it as you wish as part of the ticket [license] to enter its property. What you do with it is a business decision. Jeter did not do the right thing or the wrong thing; he and the Yankees did the shrewd thing. Lopez, however, did the stupid thing. In this world, in this economy, you have to protect your own interests first and foremost. The kid had bills to pay and debts to cover and a future family to provide for, and he threw away a winning lottery ticket. That is not commendable, it is dumb.

And yes, I am a callous, unsentimental bastard; comes with the J.D.

Like