BST etiquette am I wrong

[G1911]

Originally Posted by bigfanNY

Your a lawyer you understand that a threat of legal action with no intent to follow up is just wrong. I gave you my word I will follow up in court. That's not a threat.

Also thank you for clarification on the fact that although
I was not the first to inquire about the card. I was the first to say I will take it.
That is the crux of our disagreement. I believe that saying " I will take it " means I am committed to buying the card. And you disagree. And claim another layer of conformation is nesacery.

Quoting the wrong person? You claimed in 86 "I 100% agree with you saying I will see you in court sounds like a threat. But not what I said."

It is, in fact, literally what you said. "I will see you in court". The message was already shown.

Want to address your blatant lie? I don't care about who is or is not a lawyer or this other crap. I never claimed anything about layers of confirmation whatsoever in any direction.

[Peter_Spaeth]

Originally Posted by G1911

Quoting the wrong person? You claimed in 86 "I 100% agree with you saying I will see you in court sounds like a threat. But not what I said."

It is, in fact, literally what you said. "I will see you in court". The message was already shown.

Want to address your blatant lie? I don't care about who is or is not a lawyer or this other crap. I never claimed anything about layers of confirmation whatsoever in any direction.

You should be flattered someone thinks you're a lawyer.

[bigfanNY]

But again it is not what I said. I Said I will see you in court. I give you my word on that. Get it? A promise not a threat. You can have last word I am done..

[Rich Klein]

When a market is hot, and the sports card market is very hot right now does make for interesting conversations.

While not as hot as during covid, I can tell you (with the caveat that this is mostly for newer cards) that the world is more like 1988-91 than than 2008-11.

And when markets are that hot and a popular item is posted at a fair price there will be competition for said item.

From reading this thread I believe the seller should have posted after the "I'll Take it" post that as noted he is working with people who contacted him first and he will get back to JS if they pass on said item

And I don't know about you but calling someone a low life and saying you'll see them in court implies future behavior. It will not come to pass for me, but I would not want to do business with someone acting that way.

Sounds like Peter is about to pick up some new clients as well.

Regards
Rich

[Peter_Spaeth]

Originally Posted by Rich Klein

Sounds like Peter is about to pick up some new clients as well.

Regards
Rich

Haha. The only things I have ever done in this space are to help some collectors out with their issues for no charge.

[SyrNy1960]

I think once something is posted for sale on the B/S/T, then all communications should only be on the B/S/T. Posting on B/S/T, then using other sources to communicate with others, while not updating the B/S/T post, can definitely confuse things, as shown in this situation.

[bnorth]

Originally Posted by SyrNy1960

I think once something is posted for sale on the B/S/T, then all communications should only be on the B/S/T. Posting on B/S/T, then using other sources to communicate with others, while not updating the B/S/T post, can definitely confuse things, as shown in this situation.

That wouldn't work as many people have stuff listed on several different sites. Plus as Peter pointed out not everyone is always on the internet so someone posting it was sold shouldn't need to be updated for several hours or the next day.

[jayshum]

Originally Posted by SyrNy1960

I think once something is posted for sale on the B/S/T, then all communications should only be on the B/S/T. Posting on B/S/T, then using other sources to communicate with others, while not updating the B/S/T post, can definitely confuse things, as shown in this situation.

I'll repost what I said before.

There have been probably 10s of thousands of transactions on the B/S/T without any issues with the way things are now set up. A few recent complaints don't seem to be reason to try to force everyone to follow some set of rules that can never be enforced.

[brunswickreeves]

This is how BST typically works well (I’m not a lawyer, nor play one on TV, so this is not legal advice, and all are welcome to correct any errors or omissions):

1. Seller posts card, description, price, and statement: ‘I’ll take it’ supersedes all ongoing discussions (there’s good reason some post this disclaimer).
2. Potential Buyer posts reply to listing or PMs Seller: ‘I’ll take it.’
3. Seller PMs the potential Buyer either that a sale is already pending and thus their ‘I’ll take it’ is unfortunately declined, or the payment method details if they’re 1st in queue, asks Buyer to make payment in a specified time period to lock in the deal, as well as asks for Buyer’s email, shipping carrier preference, and address. Good faith assumption is made by Seller that payment will be made by the potential Buyer from their ‘I’ll take it’ post, regardless of whether or not they hear back from potential Buyer before #5 below. Potential Buyer makes good faith assumption they will be sold the card if Seller responds to them and doesn’t explicitly decline their ‘I’ll take it’ reply.
4. Potential Buyer PMs the Seller asap with requested info from #3 and notes when payment will be made and cleared.
5. Seller replies ‘Sale Pending’ to their listing. Anyone else in BST replying they’ll take it, or on any other platform tries to claim it takes their respective place in the potential Buyer queue.
6. Potential Buyer makes payment and once cleared becomes the rightful owner by transfer of their property (money) for Seller’s property (advertised card).
7. Seller confirms Buyer’s payment clears their bank, completing part 1 in the transfer of property. Then replies ‘Sold’ to their listing.
8. Buyer PMs the Seller their email, shipping carrier preference, and address to Seller.
9. Seller emails pics of the card to the Buyer in current state and time stamped, pics in its secured packaging, then ships the card to Buyer. Seller then PMs and/or emails the shipping tracking info to the Buyer. Both monitor shipping status and keep lines of communication open as needed.
10. Card arrives to Buyer and part 2 in the transfer of property is complete.

[G1911]

Originally Posted by bigfanNY

But again it is not what I said. I Said I will see you in court. I give you my word on that. Get it? A promise not a threat. You can have last word I am done..

I won't have the last word, you will in court. Because your case is totally legitimate and real and you will be taking this excellent court to case where you will surely win and be vindicated.

Again, you claimed in 86 "I 100% agree with you saying I will see you in court sounds like a threat. But not what I said."

You admit right there it sounds like a threat, but it is not because it is "not what I said".

However, It is, in fact, literally what you said. Verbatim. Word for word. "I will see you in court". The message was already shown where you did this.

In retrospect, OP was obviously correct to wrap up with the earlier responders rather than making a deal with the guy who responded to the situation by lying, throwing a fit, issuing threats, and allegedly-and-totally-actually suing in court over a tiny and petty dispute over who should get first dibs. Can't wait to see the judge's ruling in court, which will definitely happen.

[Carter08]

No one should be so hurt over this. Seller was trying to sell. A bunch of people wanted to give him their money. He went with someone that gave it quickly. Semi-uncool of someone said I’ll take it and he didn’t go that route. Perhaps. Lesson learned though - if it’s a hot item say I’ll take it and get the seller paid.

[PhillyFan1883]

I would love to be in attendance if there ever was a trial. There will be scenes as captivating as the movie "A Few Good Men" ----that I am sure of.

Joe Jackson always entangled in controversy.