Using "forum noob" as an excuse doesn't really fly. He's been around here and P5s long enough to use the quote feature; and if he truly meant that response to one particular poster I'm pretty sure he would know to use the quote to quote that particular user. From an outsider's POV with no involvement it definitely looks like an open invitation to whomever ships, has action.

Im not going to take that response seriously. Im sure after the tournament is over we can reach a better understanding.

I should have added I think TMay's latest response is a disgrace.

The first part of your post is just plain wrong. Almost everyone in here who has commented are marketplace regulars who did give their opinion and talk about solutions.

As for the rest of your post.....all of the people who are close with Tmay irl need to step back and look at everything presented as if you didn't know him personally.

Tmay told these two investors to go **** off. There are no ifs, and's or but's about it. I don't think any reasonable person can defend the response Tmay gave. Seeing as that is the case, why are you "sure Tim will finish the tournament and meet with investors to reach an agreement?"

If i was one of the two investors here, I certainly wouldn't be "sure" Tmay will come to an agreement, the proofs in the pudding. People who don't know him can only go by what he's SAID.

Why are all of the people close with him seemingly disregarding that heinous post?

If max thinks this isn't a big deal then he shouldn't think it's a big deal to give part of his 50% or whatever chunk he has to the investors. Obviously kidding but if that was a viable option I'm sure this would change from just being a mistake to a big deal.

thread is full of stupid on many levels, Tmay just how over it are you? Like a 6/10 over it or more like an 8 or 9 / 10 over it?

I think hella means at least 9/10.

I actually thought the tournament was finishing yesterday.

Obv I think Tim should come in here now before the final table and make a more sensible post, but it's up to him (and I ain't gonna text him).

how could veerob's 1% ever be booked and onetimenow333's 3% isn't booked? from the looks of it onetimenow reserved before veerob, and sent his money before veerob... or is veerob gonna get screwed too and he doesn't know it? sick either way.

redgrape also makes a good point that while we are almost all in agreement that tim didnt initially have any bad intentions, there's no way for us to know that he would have noticed the extra $1600 in his accounts, and then shipped it back to investors if he had turbo busted the 10k or something... it just seems like a sick freeroll for tim any way you cut it.


also wanted to ask, was this originally a thread titled differently and he was selling a lot more action? looks like maxkatz swooped a big chunk up and then Tmay changed the title and revenant tried to delete his post(rupert noticed and called him out), for obvious reasons this is in poor taste if it happened.

It isn't a big deal at that moment. He plays a tournament and have a final table to win tomorrow, you can't expect him to seat here and discuss this thing.

He will play tomorrow, finish the tournament, relax for a day or two, then contact the two persons and decide what to do. I almost sure they will solve it peacefully and all the sides will be happy.
If they don't, I'm sure they won't start to tell each other "get out of here, I don't want to see you". I'm sure they will find one or three persons that they both respect, and ask them to be an arbitrator in this situation.

If one of the sides has a financial clime, and the second side controls the money and don't ready to do steps to solve it — then yes, it is a big deal.

At this moment this is a small technical misunderstanding, that almost sure will be solved between the three persons without any dramatic stuff.

You guys here skipping the possibility for Tim and the investors to solve it peacefully because it is a fan for you here, to discuss all this stuff. I work here at this marketplace, spinning ~300K every month, I don't like the idea that stuff like this is threaten this way. This thread already put Tim against the investors, the atmosphere in this thread is much closer to thread about cheating than to thread about technical problem.

This approach aggravate the problem. I don't agree that this situation, if will be solved by the sides or with an arbitrator, has anything negative in it. Stuff like this happen.

So I offer everybody to calm down here, wish Tim good luck today, and go sleep . Tomorrow or few days from now they will talk and decide what to do. I will be the first to defend the investors in case somebody will say them "f**k off" in a situation like this, but this is not the case now, please stop threat it this way.

Yeah say he quickly busts, and notices the money. His first instinct would be to send back the money, but he would probably consider the "what if" for the other scenario just as he has done here. He too wouldn't want to get freerolled on. So Tmay asks a few buddies what he should do and what would have happened had he cashed. Most of them would probably say he'd be obligated to fulfill their share. So even under the circumstances where Tmay had no intentions of selling that 13% or doing anything scummy, he may end up keeping the transfered money.

This is simply my take on why the "intentions are paramount" isn't quite accurate. I'm not sure what the marketplace standard is on when action being booked it, but I think that alone is the most important factor - pretty much for the reasons stated by several others.

I don't know what the Marketplace baseline standard is, but those trying to use this post against Tim are incorrect. It was posted on 3/18, and contains a demand that the money be shipped online "asap". No one whose stake is in dispute shipped money within an amount of time that this post was made that could possibly qualify as "asap". You can't read the second half of the post in isolation.

The separate issue of whether action is always booked when shipped in the Marketplace is something I don't know anything about. But it's the real issue here.

IMO.

If you ship the money and the seller doesn't contact you before the start of the event then the action has always been considered booked. OP only has himself to blame for not checking this thread and not setting a specific date he needed the money by. Takes one second to quote a person on here using an iphone even if you don't have internet access on your laptop.

I always thought floes was going to be the first this happens to and he came pretty close during WSOPE last yr.

Hope OP does the right thing.

Never disagreed so strongly with a Todd Terry post.

As he was not answering to directly quoted staker and as there was no post following it to revoke this request, it can obviously be read as anyone who wants to buy a share should ship him the money and they are booked.

IMO.

So "asap" doesn't mean anything then?


Edit: Nor is failure to use the quote feature conclusive proof that you aren't responding to a preceding post.

Dude, Tim replied after 50 posts and said he's giving .5% freerolls and if you don't like it take him to court because he is hella over it... are you just trying to protect your asset in this tournament because that's what it looks like.

also pretty lol that you think it'd be ok for him to take a couple days off after the tournament to "relax" before re-addressing this.

there's a million different readings of what "asap" means in this context. if i were reading the thread at that time i probably would've taken it to mean "ship as soon as you decide to buy action" because it can be annoying reminding people (via PM) who have 'reserved' action to send their reserves. if tmay said "asap" because he needed/wanted the funds before a specific date he should have stipulated the date.

potential investors should not have to be bothered with reading through every post in a thread and determining the context of phrases: "Oh, he said 'asap', that clearly means <2 days in this case, so despite no other indications/posts from OP i'm just gonna assume action is now closed".

OP should make explicitly clear when their action is closed and, above all, sort out who has what % before the event starts.

I don't think this makes any sense at all, but maybe others will disagree.

Arguing about what he should have done isn't going to get us anywhere here. Obviously he handled the situation poorly. The only thing that matters is what consequences flow from what he did do.

I don't spend much time here in Marketplace, but from what I've seen terms get changed by share sellers during the course of a thread quite frequently. Also this was a very short thread prior to the posts at issue. And the shares at issue were purchased, or attempted to be purchased, 7 days after that post.

Personally if I had opened this thread a week after Tim's post (and 2 days before the tournament began) as a potential investor, I would have been unsure as to whether action was still available, especially since it was a live event and thus he didn't have the ability to buy in using online money.

Undoubtedly. But what consequences should flow from his failure to do so? It may be that the Marketplace standard is that failure to do so means any money sent prior to that occurring or the tournament starting is booked, I don't know.

Going to take this a different direction for a moment. Let's assume for some reason that intentions are actually central to any way this resolves. Not sold on that being the case, but since this concept gets brought up as being in Tmay's favor quite a bit let's take a second look.

Now consider the 3 percent dude who clearly has a reserve when the thread first opens, is never told he doesn't have those shares available, and sends before the tournament.

His intentions to have action seem at least equally clear as any that could be argued on the other side. As far as just the actual marketplace issues exposed in this thread go, his actions are the most clear over the duration of the thread. He bought part of this package the same way these threads are done over and over and over and there's no reason to interpret it at all like a last minute sneak purchase or whatever nonsense was directed at it.

Intentions aren't one sided.



Todd- sure, terms get changed quite often. But there's no change listed in the thread at all, and that really is the only concern wrt how the marketplace should work. There's no way it should operate on a "yeah I changed my mind/price/timing but didn't let anyone know" type basis.

I'm sure that nobody can react in a proper way to thing like this in the middle of the event, night before the final table. To much material to read, to complicated situation to understand and accept in the 30 minutes that you have after you came to the hotel and before you go to bed.

I'm sure the reaction will change and they will solve it.

Hard to argue with any of this. I was just responding to vetiver's argument that buyers shouldn't have to read seller's posts carefully, not drawing a specific analogy to this thread.

TMay had an open staking thread. He said he was without internet for 4 days, what if one the stakers sent their stake after 30 minutes of him being without internet?

He left a post which said Ship me the money asap and you are booked. Yes, I can see your point, but it is clearly dubious as to the meaning of the post. I certainly took it as a general offer to all stakers.

It was his responsibilty to close the thread when he had sold all the action he wanted to.

To come on after playing Day 1 and deny stakers who had bought action in good faith is plain wrong. If it had been an unknown doing this, there would be no debate imo. He is getting a ton of leeway because of his reputation.

And TMay's last response was just disgraceful.

To be clear — I don't think that this is ok to say the investors "sorry, I canceled your shares" after the tournament started. It obviously can't work like this.
I just saying that we all need to give the guys a chance to solve it, and not in the middle of huge event. If Tim will continue to say that the shares aren't working and won't be ready to discuss anything —I of corse won't accept it as normal situation.

Just to clarify, I'm looking at this purely from a legal point of view. And I haven't expressed any opinion on the ultimate issue because I don't understand the Marketplace well enough to do so.

If Tim has an obligation to give the %s to the buyers at issue, it flows from either: (1) his post that we're discussing; or (2) a standard in the Marketplace that funds shipped prior to a thread being closed or the tournament beginning are always booked. I was expressing the opinion that (1) did not create such an obligation, in opposition to many in the thread who said that it did. It's quite possible that the action is booked under (2) -- as I said, I don't spend enough time here to have an opinion on that.

"ASAP" means "as soon as possible" which is in reference to the buyer's ability to send, correct? I don't see how that has any impact on this sale since the two purchasers of his action very legitimately could have sent it as soon as was possible for them.