[ View Thread ] [ Post Response ] [ Return to Index ] [ Read Prev Msg ] [ Read Next Msg ]

BGonline.org Forums

Hedging Controversy

Posted By: Phil Simborg
Date: Sunday, 16 October 2011, at 3:40 a.m.

In Response To: Hedging Controversy (Stick)

The solution is that no money is owed. Especially since it was Player A who was mistaken when he brought up the subject and now feels he should be able to collect. How do we know, if Play A had lost, that he wouldn't have said, "Oh, sorry, I made a mistake, there is no money paid, so I am not going to pay you."

Even if it was the other player that made the suggestion, I would say no money is owed. The hedge was made on a premise that was totally false.

What if I bet you that Green Bay would not win tomorrow? And the next day we find out that Green Bay didn't play. Should you pay me? There was a false premise as my bet with you suggested that Green Bay was going to play, and it is not proper for me to "trick" you out of your money, either intentionally or unintentionally. The bet was made with the "assumption" that Green Bay would be playing. This bet was made with the "assumption" that the winner would receive $1500.00. When the basic assumption was incorrect, the bet is not valid.

I have spent years as an arbitrator and often when I render a decision I stated, on a scale of 1-10 how sure I am of the decision (as often if it is less than 10 some kind of compromise is reached instead). In this case, I give it a 10. If I had some doubts I might suggest a settlement of say, $100.00, but that is not the case here in my opinion.

I will go one step further. I believe player A is not entitled to anything for another reason as well. I believe only a very one-sided, unfair person would make a demand of full payment under these circumstances. I can understand maybe initiating a conversation whereby the player tells the other play he is sorry there was a misunderstanding, and in view of the circumstances, he believes he is entitled to something less than the full amount of the hedge, and he would be willing to discuss it. But to simply demand full payment under these circumstances is clearly not being a fair-minded person, in my opinion. Had the person been apologetic, reasonable, and willing to compromise, I might see a case for settling for $50.00. Tops.

Messages In This Thread

 

Post Response
Your Name:
Your E-Mail Address:
Subject:
Message:

If necessary, enter your password below:

Password:
 

 

[ View Thread ] [ Post Response ] [ Return to Index ] [ Read Prev Msg ] [ Read Next Msg ]

BGonline.org Forums is maintained by Stick with WebBBS 5.12.