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

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

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!
.

leon lol

If you have a 1/2 a million dollars to spend I don't think it's gonna make any difference. It's a lot of money to most of us but people that have it to throw around I don't think they'll be super worried. They still have a game ball no matter which way they go

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).

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

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. :rolleyes:

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.

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. 🙂

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.

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

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

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.

This kind of topic and incident just make me sick to the stomach since we will never know the outcome definitively. It might just get "settled peacefully" but not in full hammered price etc. who knows?

Just like what happened to that $3M pokemon case that was fake? Anyone put in jail? All parties got their money back? No one wants to talk about it because lawsuit is on-going???

If the winner has 2nd thoughts (and not unlimited IDGAF type funds), likely they and Lelands come to some sort of an agreement to nullify the result of the auction.

I doubt the consignor has any recourse at all. They got the ball for free. Everybody knows this. Auctions go unpaid for all the time. High bids are deemed faulty all the time, for one reason or another. It's likely written into the terms.

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

Maybe somebody already asked this, but would it really be seen in the eyes of the court as entirely unforeseeable that Brady would come out of retirement? There were already plenty of sports pundits and other former NFL players who were saying last month that they expected he'd play next season. Wouldn't the auction have gone even higher if that hadn't been the case, or did the bidders just figure they could get out of paying if that happened?

On the other hand, by adding a sentence to the auction Leland's easily could have foreclosed any argument by the buyer.

I don't think any of the bidders (or Leland's), anticipated that Brady would come out of retirement, just hours after the auction for his alleged last TD ball ended.

If it had been a week later, and money had already been exchanged, it might be a much more complicated matter.

As it is...I'd guess, to use a football analogy, we have off-setting penalties. Time to re-set, regroup, and try it all over again. Probably best for everybody involved this ball didn't go for multi-million $'s.

If this ball WAS legit, and has rock solid, unimpeachable provenance....I have a hard time wrapping my head around the fact that several Tom Brady trading cards, have sold for multiple times what this ball hammered down for...even if the ball ends up just being a known thrown TD ball from a playoff game near the end of Brady's career.

I would think ANY Brady TD ball, would be worth more then ANY Brady trading card. :confused:

I agree. Even the way his retirement was leaked initially and everyone including him came out and said it was not true only to have him recant and then confirm he was retiring a few days later.

Not sure the value of a first TD ball is compared to that of a last TD ball but his first sold for 428K in 2021 by Leland's which I don't think suggests anyone held back in Saturday's auction.

A fool and his money are soon parted...

This was the risk that the bidder made and did lose 500k in 2 hours which was impressive. Anyone who thought that Brady would not pull a Favre in at least the next 2 years is nuts. Granted the speed of the return was a tiny surprise, but for me it would only had been a shock if he did not return after next season.

He should pay and learn about risk in investment.

This is a smaller scale but it's like going to a concert that was promoted as the artist farewell tour. You buy the ticket, concert is over, sell the ticket for a good sum of money then the artist decides to come out of retirement a couple years later to tour again.

That's funny. We went to the highly-touted 'farewell tour' of The Who at Giants Stadium. Who knew then that they'd still be touring a couple of decades later?

Ah, they DID, did they? So it WAS false advertising. :D

I remember a few other performers that un-retired, or is it re-retired, as well.

Could there be a reasonable person argument made? Since, the second Brady retired speculation about a comeback was rampant in the media, would a reasonable person have to assume the possibility of a comeback?

Funny how all the big stars always say there retiring to spend more time with their family. Then after a few months their back playing ball again. So much for quailty time with the family. Guess the family doesn't cheer them when they walk in the room

Famous comedian, and one time part-owner of the Cleveland Indians, Bob Hope, got married to his wife Dolores in 1934, and remained so till he died 69 years later. Many years after getting married, Hope was asked the secret for his long marriage to just one women, his wife Dolores. He quickly responded it was very simple, they went out to dinner twice a week..............he went on Tuesdays and she went on Thursdays! :D

So why doesn't that give rise to a duty on Leland's to disclose the speculation? Leland's knows and has made clear all the value in the ball depends on his being retired. All these arguments cut both ways it seems to me.

Maybe Tom Brady was in on it...

One huge difference in say Leland's just cancelling the sale is that if this item was sold for say $5K-$10K, or even a bit more, the legal fees potentially involved could easily end up being way more than what the item is even worth. So not at all then worth pursuing by either side really. But for an item selling for over $500K, that's a whole different story. And without specific wording in the consignment agreement specifically allowing an AH to unilaterally make such a decision on the consigner's behalf, I would think the AH has a duty to go after the auction winner to complete the sale and pay the full price they agreed to pay.

Technically Leland's made no false statements in their auction description, and even at this moment, that football is still the final one Brady has thrown for a TD pass in his career, retired or unretired.

Peter, Don't get mad, and not trying to be a contrarian, but the value does not depend on Brady being retired or not. It depends on whether or not he ever throws another TD in an NFL game. To me, that is a big difference.

By this logic, it would be fair to advertise a May 2021 Angels baseball ticket as the "final game of Mike Trout's career." Or, Super Bowl tickets from last month can be advertised as the "final game of Matt Stafford's career." Technically, they have not played in a game since those games happened. The fact that Leland specifically represented the football as "the last touchdown of Tom Brady's career" establishes that this was material to the transaction.

Same thing. If Brady had not retired, the ball right now would be worthless. It's a crucial assumption for both parties.

Does anyone have a ticket to Wander Franco's last game?

By the same logic, would someone need to disclose in the sale of a $400,000 Fernando Tatis, Jr. superfractor card “(PLEASE NOTE: Mr. Tatis has a proclivity to ride Motorcycles at night rates of speed and apparently has crashed now on more
than one occasion. The long term value of this card and all cards involving Mr. Tatis may be contingent upon future accidents beyond the control of the auction house.”

LOL. Hopefully the three month projection on his being out will prove right and he won't miss the season.

I don’t see how any of this varies significantly from paying big bucks for a 1/1 card, only to find out 6 Months later that 7 others have suddenly
appeared at the same grade (one of those common farmhouse attic finds)
and I paid a ridiculous amount for what is now a 1 of 8.

Leland’s owes the consignor their share of the sale if the top bidder follows through on their bid and pays for the item. No more, no less.

I don’t think it’s as complicated as you guys are making it out to be.

I mean, you can make it as complicated as you want, and hire Alan Dershowitz to take it all the way to The Supreme Court if you want to throw a lot of money (and time) away.

Make an example of a customer who obviously is a victim of dumb circumstance in order to make some ridiculous point or hold them to some legal technicality.

It’s silly.

It’s a free football that a dumb jock threw into the stands.

BTW, I’m not the high bidder on this item. Just want to make sure I’m being transparent in my argument. 😂

I’d have to explain to my wife why I just sold our house, everything in it, both our cars and a good part of our retirement fund, for a $40,000 football.

I’m not normally this sympathetic to people who have enough money to throw around on baubles like this. ;)

If Leland’s said this is the one and only Taris card ever produced and there ended up being more, would seems like a problem on their part. If they said highest grade and there are no others, but then more were found or graded, that would seem fine. This strikes me as more like the former - their description goes way too far to say it’s the last td of the guy’s career. Could have just said it’s the last td he threw before announcing his retirement. Would have avoided a lot of arguments against the sale.

I see the point, but as others have pointed out, there have been daily news stories about Brady waffling. Not like an auction house description is the only piece of information a reasonable buyer has access to.

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.

Absolutely right, and technically correct in both your examples. There is no 100% guarantee that either one ever plays again. People seem to be acting like auction winners in such cases are poor, innocent, naive bidders who have been completely fooled by the evil AH description and tricked into bidding their hard earned money to buy something that eventually turns out to not be worth what they ended up paying for it. What about the possibility the auction winners are smart, savvy, and maybe conniving collectors/dealers looking to grab a collectible that there may still be some questions or doubts about as to its historical significance and value. But they bid to take advantage of that doubt themselves to try and get a big score at a cheap price, or make a huge profit reselling it down the road.

So be completely honest with yourself. Which type of bidder do you really think is most likely bidding on items like these with maybe some lingering doubts as to their significance and value, especially in cases where they're willing to bid $500K? And then answer me why they should be able to back out of such a deal, with virtually none of the risk on them?

If this deal does end up going south for the consigner, I sincerely hope that Brady ends up changing his mind and re-retiring, or at least ends up never throwing another NFL TD again, for whatever reason. And then the consigner puts the same football back up for auction, but now gets 2X, 3X, 4X what he was originally supposed to get for it in this Leland's auction.

But of course this is all just speculation at this point. No one has heard what the auction winner intends to do yet, have they? Until then, this is all moot.

No, because if Brady comes back out of retirement (which he apparently has, but who knows if that won't change again next week), who's to say he doesn't get injured and can never play again, or gets killed in a car or plane accident, or whatever it is that keeps him from throwing another TD.

All NFL quarterbacks who throw a TD in an NFL game are not retired. But not all NFL quarterbacks who are not retired are absolutely guaranteed to throw a TD in an NFL game.

Anyway, no one knows what the auction winner is going to do yet, right? We're all just wasting time and energy debating till something happens. LOL

We are talking past each other. It's not worth continuing. But let's try it this way. If you had bought the ball, would you still want it at that price because it's still his last TD? Or would you not want it because he has unretired? QED.

When I first saw this thread I initially thought that the buyer bought it, it's his.

But I didn't post one of my cynical, heartless responses.

I thought more about it, and decided that Brady should probably honor the bid if the buyer didn't want to follow through with it. Now who here knows Tom or his agent well enough to suggest this to him.

But that's not now how I have decided what should happen. Think about it. Is Tom Brady the first professional athlete who retired and then returned? Absolutely not. Did the auction house guarantee that Brady would stay retired? NO! The buyer bought that ball, he should honor his bid. I understand the ball may well not be the last touchdown pass of the career ball; but it wasn't a conditional bid / purchase. The high bidder should pay, and everyone should learn from it.

(Being a Colts fan since about 1965, give or take a year, I kinda liked the deflated comment. And being a Colts fan, who the hell would want a Tom Brady anything???)

Judge Frank, are you just opining on what you think the right thing to do here is, or what the result would be if (hypothetically) the buyer didn't pay and Leland's sued? Because if the latter, as I posted,


Closely related to impossibility, frustration of purpose applies when a change in circumstances makes one
party’s contract performance worthless to the other party. See Restatement (Second) of Contracts § 265.

The defense commonly contains three elements:
1. the party’s principal purpose in making the contract is frustrated;
2. an event occurred whose non-occurrence was a basic assumption underlying the contract; and,
3. the party invoking the defense was not at fault.

All three elements are met, no?

If you think not, would be interested in your reasoning.

The Coronation Cases... we had that in a Contracts case. A coronation in England didn't happen as scheduled because one of the royals was gravely ill. The courts ruled against the landlords or lettors of the flats along the coronation route refund money to the renters. That's not what happened here. The frustration of purpose doesn't apply.

No one seems concerned about the seller / consignor. Is the auction house going to honor the bid, buy the ball themselves, and pay the consignor what he's due? The auction house shouldn't just unilaterally say ok, we aren't going through with this sale, seller, catch, here's your ball back.

The buyer bought the ball, he should pay for it.

With respect, it does apply I think. An event after formation happened (here, Brady unretiring, there, the postponement of the coronation) that completely frustrated the buyer's purpose, without his fault, in agreeing to the contract. Just as a post-formation event frustrated the purpose in the Coronation Cases. I don't see the distinction analytically.

Certainly in the coronation cases the buyer knew or should have known there was a possibility the event would be cancelled, but that did not stop the British court from excusing him from performing.