| |
BGonline.org Forums
Hedging Controversy
Posted By: Daniel Murphy In Response To: Hedging Controversy (Stick)
Date: Sunday, 16 October 2011, at 4:58 p.m.
All right. Well, based on what you've said, if I were Player A, I would have known what winning the match was worth -- a seat in the finals is all, no extra cash -- and would have assumed that Player B knew that too. Which means that any reference I would have made in my proposal to "$1500" would have been a reference to the value of the seat, and I would have expected B to understand that. And I'd be thinking it was clear that the agreement was for a cash payment to the loser, not a percentage of eventual winnings, if any.
What I read about the final tournament is that it pays the top four, and that the federation sponsoring the qualifying tournament is paying the entry fee to the final, which I read is 1000 + 50 Euro. And 1050 Euro is $1441, not $1500. But that's close enough, I think. Nothing you've written makes me think A was trying to mislead B or that B should have been misled by A's proposal.
So ... based on what you've said, it seems clear to me that A and B agreed that the winner would pay the other some amount of cash, and B's only defense for not paying up is that (for some reason I can't fathom) he thought he would receive $1500 cash (in addition to the seat value?!) just for winning the qualifier. I'll gladly concede that B holds his position in good faith, but I don't think it matches the facts.
Given that B is not wanting to stand by the original agreement as it seems to me A justifiably expects B to understand it, I suppose that as A I might offer B a substitute agreement: Perhaps this: a choice of either (1) paying half the original hedge now (as Neil suggested) or (2) paying half the anticipated semifinal prize (about $3600) if B becomes one of the top 4 in the finals.
| |
BGonline.org Forums is maintained by Stick with WebBBS 5.12.