Theeye has been busy and hasn't had time to devote to the thread, and while I can understand that, evidently his reputation doesn't mean much to him imo. He's not making any meaningful attempts to resolve this issue via arbitration or whatever, so I've removed his marketplace approval and he is not welcome to post in the MP anymore.

Personally, my thoughts are that Jkidd is not entitled to the swap as this kind of defaults to the horse unless noted otherwise. However, the MU issue should probably be arbitrated if they really can't compromise on their own and he again, he's not making an effort to resolve the issue.

I posted Theeye's personal info in the OP and will repost it here and he hasn't given me jkidd's personal information. To be honest, neither party is probably totally in the right, so I'm going to post the personal info so that people can find this thread and can decide what they want to believe.

Info on Theeye:

Name: Jack Lacovou
PS Name: taoj
FTP Name: monkcall
Location: Cyprus/Greece
Email: taostakes@gmail.com

Info on Jkidd:

Name: Michael Degilio
PS Name: jkidd1084
FTP Name: bustable
Location: Florida, USA
Email: jkidd1084@yahoo.com

i think you guys should just both jus go out to an open field with two revolvers in ur pockets count to 3 and duel. whoever shoots the other first wins.. end of story

This. I don't get why the horse doesn't realize that part of the equity in paying off expenses came from his percentage of himself that he had. If he trades that equity for a piece of someone else, he doesn't get to wipe clean that equity from the expense agreement. Any amount he swaps and then cashes for should be considered part of his "total profit" for the purpose of paying back expenses.

Outside of that, the backer shouldn't get anything. I don't know why this is so hard.

I haven't read 75% of this thread but I've dealt with Jkidd and I actually came 2nd in the event the swap took place (brag!).

My unbias opinion: If a horse swaps a percentage without prior agreement (The horse should NOT do this) then the 4% goes towards the deal. This seems pretty clear cut to me. If the the horse cashes then the 4% has to be paid to the swapie from the deal as well.

Doing this swap and waiting until the money to tell your backer you've swapped out of YOUR OWN cut looks like a huge angle to me..

Wow why is everyone saying the backer only has 15%??? 70% sold @ 1.2 markup and backer pays the rest. Why is this an issue?

Ok say for example the backer puts up the "full" 30%, then the investor pays his 85%(70%*1.2mu), the extra 15% is going to makeup anyway right? I dont get the issue, backer pays the same amount(15%) in the end either way.

Not sure if/how that effects the swap though.

Regardless backer is owed 15k from makeup eigher way.

Disclaimer: Only read through first 1/3 of thread.