Offers YYD.com (duplicate letters)

[1234567]

Intersted parties pls post offer here or by pm

 

[Stian]

$4,500

 

[1234567]

highest offer received so far $8250

 

[1234567]

$12K received thru email; BIN $16K

 

[bicoss]

Disputed transaction,
canceled.

 

[Hanson]

good price and good deal.
YYD.COM $16K

 

[1234567]

Disputed transaction,
canceled.

There has been no dispute and just negotiation raised by Seller on possiblities of modifying contract. As no new terms have been reached, old terms should still be valid.

In the course of negotiating contract modification, Buyer kept asking for "compensation", which were not accepted by Seller.

Buyer cancels the contract and the agreed escrow transaction unilaterlay without Seller's consent.

Look at where Buyer is from?? No wonder!

 

[bicoss]

There has been no dispute and just negotiation raised by Seller on possiblities of modifying contract. As no new terms have been reached, old terms should still be valid.

In the course of negotiating contract modification, Buyer kept asking for "compensation", which were not accepted by Seller.

Buyer cancels the contract and the agreed escrow transaction unilaterlay without Seller's consent.

Look at where Buyer is from?? No wonder!

---just negotiation raised by Seller on possiblities of modifying contract.---
The problem is here. You need to tell everyone the fact.Not possiblities.

When you started the deal to my escrow.com,i am ready to pay in next monday.
But at sunday,you tell me donot pay first.
Then you told me that someone give higher offer.
I think you want to wait the higher buyer to pay,if higher offer guy can't pay,then sell me.
I am not stupy,i am not the second guy.
I donot like to do business like that.
That is why i donot agree NOW.
Auctally,i only deal with trust seller " which is not suddenly stop the deal because others give higher offer when the deal is going. "
Bye!

 

[1234567]

---just negotiation raised by Seller on possiblities of modifying contract.---
The problem is here. You need to tell everyone the fact.Not possiblities.

When you started the deal to my escrow.com,i am ready to pay in next monday.
But at sunday,you tell me donot pay first.
Then you told me that someone give higher offer.
I think you want to wait the higher buyer to pay,if higher offer guy can't pay,then sell me.
I am not stupy,i am not the second guy.
I donot like to do business like that.
That is why i donot agree NOW.
Auctally,i only deal with trust seller " which is not suddenly stop the deal because others give higher offer when the deal is going. "
Bye!

What your are publishing agrees to what we are disclosing.

We asked you to hold payment first as there is another interested party, so we negotiated with you other possiblities and other names, but you asked for "compensation", which we did not accept. So to respect the deal with you we turned down another offer (higher) and have persuaded him to buy other names.

Since your repeated requests for compensation was not accepted by us, the contract modification talk has ended, that means our existing contract is still here, what's wrong?

Facts or possiblities all tell that you are trying to take advantage and ask for compensation when we told you there was another buyer and we wished to discuss with you other possibilities. This is a very normal situation happening every day, contract modification can succeed or fail, it is just a negotiation.

If you do not keep your contract and words, that's your problem and the more you explained and give excuses, the more ugly your excuses and reasons will be.

You wrote "That is why i donot agree NOW.", please be advised that whether you like it or not, agreement reached is a contract unless it is modified / cancelled by MUTUAL agreement. In short, you have breached contract and always intend to take benefit in the course of negotiation.

 

[bicoss]

well, a nice actor.
Stop here.
I donot want to waste my time to discuss with you about the boring deal.
bye bye.

What you mention is correct and agree to what we are disclosing.

We asked you to hold payment first as there is another interested party, so we negotiated with you other possiblities and other names, but you asked for "compensation", which we did not accept. So to respect the deal with you we turned down another offer (higher) and have persuaded him to buy other names.

Since your repeated requests for compensation was not accepted by us, the contract modification talk has ended, that means our existing contract is still here, what's wrong?

Facts or possiblities all tell that you are trying to take advantage and ask for compensation when we told you there was another buyer and we wished to discuss with you other possibilities.

If you do not keep your contract and words, that's your problem and the more you explained and give excuses, the more ugly

 

[1234567]

.

 

[1234567]

well, a nice actor.
Stop here.
I donot want to waste my time to discuss with you about the boring deal.
bye bye.

The case now is you do not honour the contract unilaterally because you "do not like it" anymore.

Please understand and learn what is the difference between "contract cancellation by mutual consent" and "contract modificiation negotiation". If you do not understand, do not yell here, this will not make you a honest and trustwrothy person.



What else you can say and justify you are not breaching contract, except throwing some bad words and temper here?! 老羞成怒 (turn shame into anger) ?

 

[bicoss]

This reply is my final reply.
who is the not honour first.
Then i just choose not to deal with you i think i have the right.
You should know the change is base on "you stop me to pay as some one offer higher than me at the past moment"
What is that means? You should know that.
Why do you must me to deal with you now? You should know that.(some give up the highest offer.)
Finally,i also want to give you a chinese word.
你就是一个煞笔，不知廉耻!

The case now is you do not honour the contract unilaterally because you "do not like it" anymore.

Please understand and learn what is the difference between "contract cancellation by mutual consent" and "contract modificiation negotiation". If you do not understand, do not yell here, this will not make you a honest and trustwrothy person.



What else you can say and justify you are not breaching contract, except throwing some bad words and temper here?! 老羞成怒 (turn shame into anger) ?

 

[1234567]

This reply is my final reply.
who is the not honour first.
Then i just choose not to deal with you i think i have the right.
You should know the change is base on "you stop me to pay as some one offer higher than me at the past moment"
What is that means? You should know that.
Why do you must me to deal with you now? You should know that.(some give up the highest offer.)
Finally,i also want to give you a chinese word.
你就是一个煞笔，不知廉耻!

Obviously it appears that you still do not understand the difference between "contract cancellation by mutual consent" and "contract modificiation negotiation". Consult your lawyers (but not mainland Chinese lawyers) who understand contract laws and have integrity, do not just yell like an uneducated and uncivilised person! This does not work here but may be a normal norm in your country.

As said, except for throwing us some dirty and insulting words (because of your "turning shame into anger" (老羞成怒)), what else and more you can do?


We are totally fine if you are not honouring the contract, do not pretend to be a honest guy with intergrity. Your hypocrisy and self ego really piss people off.

You are spoiling our thread!!

 

[BLazeD]

We asked you to hold payment first as there is another interested party, so we negotiated with you other possiblities and other names, but you asked for "compensation", which we did not accept. So to respect the deal with you we turned down another offer (higher) and have persuaded him to buy other names.

Since your repeated requests for compensation was not accepted by us, the contract modification talk has ended, that means our existing contract is still here, what's wrong?

This is messy. In fact you asked for him to hold off paying first, not him asking for "compensation". Hard to determine who is at fault here. Usually when a counter-offer is made (as looks like occurred here) the original offer and acceptance is no longer valid.

 

[1234567]

This is messy. In fact you asked for him to hold off paying first, not him asking for "compensation". Hard to determine who is at fault here. Usually when a counter-offer is made (as looks like occurred here) the original offer and acceptance is no longer valid.

Hi BlazeD, thanks for you input.

However, you have mixed up "contract" with "offers" & "acceptance".

Contract can be established only when all the 3 components below exist:
1. offer (there can be many offers, counter-offers, from either side of the contracting parties, before the final offer / counteroffer is agreed)
2. acceptance of offer
3. consideration

An established contract can only be cancelled, recinded, revised etc by a new "contract", or updated with a supplementary "contract" (e.g. addendum), but not simply by new "offers", "counter-offers" which have not been accepted mutually with consideration.

In our case, there was obviously an original contract. Subsequent discussion proposed by me, with new offers, counteroffers (compensation demanded by buyer), as long as there were no final acceptance, no new contract will be created to replace and supplement the original one.


If an "offer", "counter offer" can so easily void an existing "contract" like you said, there will be totally no protection of having contracts. As by then any one unhappy with the original contract can throw a new "offer" to invalidate an existing "contract", which obviously is not the case and does not make sense right?

So as long as the proposal or discussion of revising the contract was not accepted by BOTH sides, there was no new / revised contract established, and hence the existing contract is still valid.

However, we do not wish to repeatedly explain and educate the buyer who obviously cannot comprehend (because of his character or background?) but just throw to us dirty words and his temper (turning shame into anger) after failure to seek for compensation / benefit from us in our proposed revised contract.

So the fact is Buyer has breached the established contract, but that is fine to us. There is no point to insist on principles and laws with someone like such.

 

[88oldman]

do not know what happend

 

[airmax]

Sounds like you guys agreed on a price, and then went over to escrow.com, which point you received a higher offer, you asked the buyer if it would be ok for you to take a high offer, or if they could match, maybe you offered them some other domains... Buyer was probably like if you want to take the higher offer, I want a fee for my troubles, you probably refused, and this fall out occurred.

If you guys agree on a price on dnforum, and enter into an agreement at escrow, I think that should be good enough.

The buyer is angry for a reason?

 

[BLazeD]

Hi BlazeD, thanks for you input.

However, you have mixed up "contract" with "offers" & "acceptance".

Contract can be established only when all the 3 components below exist:
1. offer (there can be many offers, counter-offers, from either side of the contracting parties, before the final offer / counteroffer is agreed)
2. acceptance of offer
3. consideration

An established contract can only be cancelled, recinded, revised etc by a new "contract", or updated with a supplementary "contract" (e.g. addendum), but not simply by new "offers", "counter-offers" which have not been accepted mutually with consideration.

In our case, there was obviously an original contract. Subsequent discussion proposed by me, with new offers, counteroffers (compensation demanded by buyer), as long as there were no final acceptance, no new contract will be created to replace and supplement the original one.


If an "offer", "counter offer" can so easily void an existing "contract" like you said, there will be totally no protection of having contracts. As by then any one unhappy with the original contract can throw a new "offer" to invalidate an existing "contract", which obviously is not the case and does not make sense right?

So as long as the proposal or discussion of revising the contract was not accepted by BOTH sides, there was no new / revised contract established, and hence the existing contract is still valid.

However, we do not wish to repeatedly explain and educate the buyer who obviously cannot comprehend (because of his character or background?) but just throw to us dirty words and his temper (turning shame into anger) after failure to seek for compensation / benefit from us in our proposed revised contract.

So the fact is Buyer has breached the established contract, but that is fine to us. There is no point to insist on principles and laws with someone like such.

Check out contract repudiation (when the counter-offer was made after you agreed). You can't agree price, say hold up, I want more, then say OK you won't pay me more I want to enforce the original deal. It's called repudiating the contract.

 

[1234567]

Sounds like you guys agreed on a price, and then went over to escrow.com, which point you received a higher offer, you asked the buyer if it would be ok for you to take a high offer, or if they could match, maybe you offered them some other domains... Buyer was probably like if you want to take the higher offer, I want a fee for my troubles, you probably refused, and this fall out occurred.

If you guys agree on a price on dnforum, and enter into an agreement at escrow, I think that should be good enough.

The buyer is angry for a reason?

Yes the agreement and so contract of buy and sale was reached, and he posted "sold" on dnf (post 7 http://www.dnforum.com/f529/yyd-com-duplicate-letters-thread-520468.html#post2191510 ) which he later modified without my consent to "Disputed transaction, canceled." .

And yes he started the escrow transaction and was agreed by me, but he also cancelled it afterwards without informing me nor with my consent.

And your understanding of the reasons of quarrel is also correct.

Reasons of his anger? http://www.dnforum.com/f529/yyd-com-duplicate-letters-thread-520468.html#post2192226 . I don't know but very likely that because I was putting up a proposal after the agreement, but his request for compensation was refused, so I said as nothing new have been agreed, just stick to the existing agreement which is still in effect. He then turned angry, threated us to post in dnf, cancelled the escrow transaction without our consent, saying that he was treated by me as a second choice while his offer was accepted first.

Check out contract repudiation (when the counter-offer was made after you agreed). You can't agree price, say hold up, I want more, then say OK you won't pay me more I want to enforce the original deal. It's called repudiating the contract.

There is no "NEW" deal reached, so there is no "ORIGINAL" (which you are implying as already invalid) deal, there is only an "EXISTING" valid deal.

Your understanding is very strange. Simplying mixed up "contract" vs "offer / counter offer", and mixed up "right" vs "obligation".


Contract repudiation usually occurs when one party has not performed his "obligation" in the contract.

My (Seller)'s only "obligation" in the agreement with the Buyer is to deliver the domain name after receiving payment. So simply by asking Buyer to hold up payment (and at time, Sunday, when he could not make payment yet) would not constitute a repudiation of contract. In fact, as no new agreement / contract was reached, I already told Buyer that then just ignored the talk on modifying / revising the existing contract.

In our case, repudiation from Seller side could occur only if Seller did not perform his "obligation" of delivering name after getting payment, so there was no repudiation of contract. Repudiation comes from non performance of "obligation", asking Buyer to hold up payment and discuss other possiblities is not a non performance of Seller's "obligation".

And in a contract, a repudiation can be retracted so long as there has been no material change in the position of the performing party in the interim. A retraction of the repudiation restores the performer's obligation to perform on the contract.


And based on your understanding of "contract establishment", "contracts vs offers" and "contract repudiation", the following can happen:

- you put in auction a name and receive many bids, the last one is $100,000 and you are very happy with it already
- X then shoots a higher bid of $100,500, and there is no more higher bid
- you post "sold" on dnf and X started the escrow transaction where you have also accepted; so the auction closed and you have a contract of selling the name to X at $100,500
- X then "counter offers" you to just pay $80,000, and you "further counter offer" $100,300, and both could not agree on anything new
- according to your interpretation of "contract" and "contract repudiation", the "original" deal of $100,500 is no longer valid because there is "counter offer" after the $100,500 contract is reached, and you cannot enforce the "original" deal with X at $100,500 because it has been "repudiated"

You may feel there is no choice if you are seller (because you think the "original" contract has been "repudiated"), but if you are X, I do not believe the seller will consider the $100,500 deal is cancelled and let you walk away so easily.