BST etiquette am I wrong

SyrNy1960 · #1 03-01-2025, 03:26 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Peter_Spaeth

In my world, 5 hours is a perfectly timely response. If it were me, and you may just have a different orientation I acknowledge, I'm from a different generation (I am assuming)- if I had not heard back from Jonathan by say the next morning, I would have followed up and said please let me know today or I will sell elsewhere. There are lots of guys here I've dealt with who sometimes get back to you the next day, it's normal and fine as far as I am concerned.

What was the anxiety/rush?

+1 The best way to do it

Carter08 · #2 03-01-2025, 04:40 PM

First person to commit to sending cash should get it. Too many people flak out at the last minute or want the price but only if that�s with fee protections included. This is within reason of course. Don�t think there�s a right or wrong answer on this one. Buyer who missed out has a right to feel slighted but I don�t think the seller should be condemned either.

gregndodgers · #3 03-05-2025, 12:28 AM

My two cents from a contract law perspective. It appears to me that an important (I.e. “material”) payment term was not included in the seller’s initial BST post. Hence, his initial post was not an offer (which must include all material terms) that could be accepted (to form an actual agreement) with a simple “I will take it.” So seller is free to negotiate with anyone he wants, and sell to the first buyer able to satisfy all material terms. In other words, seller has no obligation to wait for any potential buyers to get back to him.

With all that said, there is a lot of confusion because contract law principles are not being followed on this board. I tried to warn some with my posts in that other thread. For example, some here believe the words “I will take it” seals the deal and binds the parties. That’s not always the case.

The key is the wording on the seller’s initial post. Does it leave out any material terms? If so, it’s not an offer. It’s an invitation to negotiate, and the buyer who is fastest to complete the deal gets the prize.

EDIT: for the layman, a term is “material” in a contract when it’s a condition that if not met, is a deal breaker for either party.

Republicaninmass · #4 03-05-2025, 05:43 AM

Any succesful lawsuits against ebay sellers and their "pricing mistakes"? If so, it could lead to a precedent, without it, I doubt anyone would feel obligated to keep their word, even if over a few lousy bucks.

4815162342 · #5 03-05-2025, 07:21 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by gregndodgers

My two cents from a contract law perspective. It appears to me that an important (I.e. �material�) payment term was not included in the seller�s initial BST post. Hence, his initial post was not an offer (which must include all material terms) that could be accepted (to form an actual agreement) with a simple �I will take it.� So seller is free to negotiate with anyone he wants, and sell to the first buyer able to satisfy all material terms. In other words, seller has no obligation to wait for any potential buyers to get back to him.

With all that said, there is a lot of confusion because contract law principles are not being followed on this board. I tried to warn some with my posts in that other thread. For example, some here believe the words �I will take it� seals the deal and binds the parties. That�s not always the case.

The key is the wording on the seller�s initial post. Does it leave out any material terms? If so, it�s not an offer. It�s an invitation to negotiate, and the buyer who is fastest to complete the deal gets the prize.

EDIT: for the layman, a term is �material� in a contract when it�s a condition that if not met, is a deal breaker for either party.

You should post these legal critiques directly in BST threads. �This transaction between hobby friends violates contract law principles!� Cue Debbie Downer and the muted trombone.

gregndodgers · #6 03-05-2025, 08:37 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by 4815162342

You should post these legal critiques directly in BST threads. �This transaction between hobby friends violates contract law principles!� Cue Debbie Downer and the muted trombone.

This particular transaction was fine ~ nothing was violated except the expectation of the buyer (due to the reasons I stated).

D. Bergin · #7 03-05-2025, 09:15 AM

Sadly for me, the stuff I post for sale isn�t in demand enough to spark legal arguments by prospective buyers, over who gets to buy it and who doesn�t.

steve B · #8 03-05-2025, 10:57 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by D. Bergin

Sadly for me, the stuff I post for sale isn�t in demand enough to spark legal arguments by prospective buyers, over who gets to buy it and who doesn�t.

Welcome to the club, I'm happy when I get one buyer.

Similar Threads
Thread	Thread Starter	Forum	Replies	Last Post
B/S/T Etiquette	bcbgcbrcb	Net54baseball Vintage (WWII & Older) Baseball Cards & New Member Introductions	303	03-03-2025 07:20 PM
BST etiquette	Flintboy	Net54baseball Vintage (WWII & Older) Baseball Cards & New Member Introductions	51	01-01-2023 07:47 PM
Bid Retraction Etiquette	nat	Net54baseball Vintage (WWII & Older) Baseball Cards & New Member Introductions	14	03-04-2020 11:14 PM
BST etiquette question	KLSDAD	Net54baseball Vintage (WWII & Older) Baseball Cards & New Member Introductions	14	01-24-2013 03:39 PM
Am I Wrong or Is Hunt Auctions Wrong?	sports-rings	Net54baseball Sports (Primarily) Vintage Memorabilia Forum incl. Game Used	19	01-24-2013 07:55 AM