GamersForum.Com Unresolved Sale Cover-up

[Spex]

That's where things get complicated and jumbled together. The sequence of events happened as follows:

1) He stated BIN was $5000
2) I offered $4200
3) He accepted that offer
4) Trying to get the lowest price possible, I offered ~$3600 I believe.
5) He rejected it and would not budge from $4200.
6) I accepted $4200 and made a $200 deposit as it was the day before Thanksgiving and could not deposit money at that time nor would be able to on Thanksgiving as it is a Federal holiday.
7) Thanksgiving day, everything was set in place for the $4000 to be deposited in my bank account
8) The day after Thanksgiving ~0900, I deposited cash into my bank account to make the full payment
9) ~1000 I received a PM saying it was sold for $5000.

I DID NOT try to renegotiate the price AFTER the $200 deposit was made to hold the domain for up to 3 days for a BIN of $4200.

The point is, I got screwed, accepted it and moved on. My suggestion is to reopen the thread and CLOSE it. Not DELETE it as no threads on DNF are deleted unless there is some sort of cover-up occuring here.

Feedback or input from a moderator or administrator?

Why did you try to bring him down after he accepted your original offer? Would you do that when purchasing a car? A house?

[Mike Cruz]

Why did you try to bring him down after he accepted your original offer? Would you do that when purchasing a car? A house?

This Is irrelevant, after all, the $4,200 was accepted by both parties and a deposit was made on the domain. You can't breach a contract within 24 hours just because you received a higher offer, especially when you gave the buyer "a few days" to clear the rest of the balance. This is not only unethical, but in my opinion, enough for Amplify to take up this situation in court.

The other thread definitely should not have been deleted, there was very revealing information there.

[Melly]

I think it is all BS. King accepted the offer which was to be paid by Amplify. Amplify tried to renegotiate the price which put doubt in Kings head. However, if he had doubts he should not have accepted the deposit to begin with. It should have been message me when you have the money together and we can go from there but if another buyer comes along before that then I will sell it. If King agreed to a specific time frame he should have waited. Amplify should have never purchased anything for the domain (Hosting, etc) before having the name in hand. Deals fall through all the time and then the shit hits the fan. I would say both had their hand in messing up this deal and it seems as though alot of things were not really "detailed". Okay I have a deposit this holds the domain for "so many days" (should have listed how many days exactly), if there were any stipulations on the deposit as in if someone else comes along and pays before you then the deposit will be refunded or if you haven't paid by a specific time our deal is void. Just my two cents. Whether you are making a verbal agreement or written one make sure all of the fine details are in place. King should have stuck to the agreement that was made ultimately.

[Dale Hubbard]

Some stupid people here I think. Contract established at (4). Jesus...enough already.

[Melly]

Are you calling me stupid since you posted after my post Dale? lol : ) - I do agree that the other thread should have stayed up.

[Dale Hubbard]

Melly, I actually KNOW you're not stupid. Where is my argument flawed? I'm all ears.

[Spex]

This Is irrelevant, after all, the $4,200 was accepted by both parties and a deposit was made on the domain. You can't breach a contract within 24 hours just because you received a higher offer, especially when you gave the buyer "a few days" to clear the rest of the balance. This is not only unethical, but in my opinion, enough for Amplify to take up this situation in court.

The other thread definitely should not have been deleted, there was very revealing information there.

I agree with you on that. No question about it, both sides screwed up here.

But given your example, wasn't Amplify trying to breach the contract as well by trying to lowball after King accepted his original offer?

Example:

You're selling your house for 500,000
I offer 450,000
You accept
The "contract" has been created at this point

A couple hours later, I come back and offer you 425,000
Am I attempting to breach the contract with my 425,000 offer?

[Melly]

I was just messing with you. I simply stated what I saw. There were issues on both sides that I do not agree with as far as a business transaction goes. However, ultimately I would have to agree that King was in the wrong to sell the domain out from under someone for a higher number. The thread should have stayed.

[Dale Hubbard]

It's actually quite simple. I'd get rid of both of them. They taint the business and in my book, there ain't room for any of that. See my reasons above for @amplify and @KING. I'd ban them sharpish AND give a reason for it. KING's a player and amplify is a lost case. Just IMHO.

[TravelFastpitch]

Dale - I also wish you the best of luck and happy holidays. I do think you are way off base. Amplify is a victim at the end of the day.

[Mike Cruz]

If I am stupid for stating the obvious, then so be it.


But:


"6) I accepted $4200 and made a $200 deposit as it was the day before Thanksgiving and could not deposit money at that time nor would be able to on Thanksgiving as it is a Federal holiday."


Price agreed, deposit made, Then contract breached, whether it was revised or NOT before the deposit was made, less than 24 hours later. King agreed to the amount, accepted the deposit and to the terms of payment.


No matter how you want to angle it. King was in the wrong.




The previous thread needs to be revived. I am actually pretty disturbed that it is gone and a mod/admin has yet to comment about it.

---------- Post added at 03:56 PM ---------- Previous post was at 03:47 PM ----------

I agree with you on that. No question about it, both sides screwed up here.

But given your example, wasn't Amplify trying to breach the contract as well by trying to lowball after King accepted his original offer?

Example:

You're selling your house for 500,000
I offer 450,000
You accept
The "contract" has been created at this point

A couple hours later, I come back and offer you 425,000
Am I attempting to breach the contract with my 425,000 offer?

The only thing Amplify is guilty of is being a bit of a cheapskate. But at the end f the day He went through with his end of the deal, made his deposit and went to pay him the following day although King was giving him a few days to do it, but then King already sold the domain to another party for $800 MORE, breaching there verbal/written contract.

This couldn't be anymore black and white and King even admits to it in the other thread which needs to be revived ASAP, not only so others can see, but so if amplify decides to take him to court, it's something that will be very useful.

Btw, I have never dealt with the two of these people before and have nothing against neither of them, just giving my opinion.

[Dale Hubbard]

I agree with you on that. No question about it, both sides screwed up here.

But given your example, wasn't Amplify trying to breach the contract as well by trying to lowball after King accepted his original offer?

Example:

You're selling your house for 500,000
I offer 450,000
You accept
The "contract" has been created at this point

A couple hours later, I come back and offer you 425,000
Am I attempting to breach the contract with my 425,000 offer?

Exactly - that's what I (am trying to) say.

[amplify]

I agree with you on that. No question about it, both sides screwed up here.

But given your example, wasn't Amplify trying to breach the contract as well by trying to lowball after King accepted his original offer?

Example:

You're selling your house for 500,000
I offer 450,000
You accept
The "contract" has been created at this point

A couple hours later, I come back and offer you 425,000
Am I attempting to breach the contract with my 425,000 offer?

Obviously you have never bought a car or a house before. If you offer X amount (they say OK and no papers are signed on it or deposit given) and then come back and say, you know what? I want it for Y amount, because Z is wrong with the house/car and I need to fix it out of my own pocket, can you do that? No, we have to sell for X. Ok, then I will buy it for X, here is my down payment/deposit.

I made an offer for $4200, later tried $3600 because I wanted to stay under a $10,000 budget on the whole thing. He rejected it, I accepted the terms of $4200 and made my deposit, which I may add would be non-refundable. I just want the previous thread to be re-opened because he stated something along the lines of 'they're my domains, I can do what I want with them'.

Amazing that there is still no input from staff as to why the thread was deleted 24 hours after this thread was started and with so many in agreement that it should be reopened.

[Dale Hubbard]

There's a lesson to be learned here. Your word is your bond in this game.

[amplify]

There's a lesson to be learned here. Your word is your bond in this game.

That should apply to KING as I made a $200 deposit after we finally agreed on $4200. Rule #8 which he admits he will violate in the previous thread which got deleted.

[copper]

Amplify,

With/Without DNF staff, you are already accomplishing what you want from this thread.
This thread and deleted thread are already seen by thousands of DNF members.

This is what you want, right?
Let people know what happened?

[Adam Dicker]

Just found this thread, I am not sure how it could be deleted as I did not delete it.

I will however look for the thread.

Adam

[amplify]

Amplify,With/Without DNF staff, you are already accomplishing what you want from this thread.This thread and deleted thread are already seen by thousands of DNF members.This is what you want, right?Let people know what happened?

Yes, but coming from KING's mouth is much better than just my side of the story here. In that thread he has what he has to say and I have evidence to back up what I had to say in this trade.

Just found this thread, I am not sure how it could be deleted as I did not delete it.I will however look for the thread.Adam

Thank you for looking it over and determining whether it breaks the rules or not. I believe all evidence has been posted and that thread should remain (but locked) to protect other members of this forum from dealing with him in the future. This thread however, should be deleted if the other one is re-opened as it is a one-sided story only (KING has not posted to defend himself in this one).