As much as me and MATTG share hate eachother. I jus couldn't see him being a known reputable backer/ub sponsored pro and simply not coming through on his end of a financial agreement to buy a piece of one of the most well known players in the world, in the most prestigious tournament held all year. I would just always assume that if Bakes didnt cash in the tournament MattG would pay the money without a hassle, to me that seems obvious given his position in the poker world and years of never hearing anything shady involving him financially. From what I've seen any reputable backer, who asks you to purchase a piece of yourself in a tournament, and that share is agreed upon between HSMTT REG and OFFICAL BACKER, both parties would seem to be held liable to pay the money .In correlation with the above statement, if all the information has correctly been presented to us, I just don't see how Bakes couldn't owe MattG his piece of the pie. In addition, I think it's hard for people to give an accurate opinion on the issue without understanding the personal relationship between you and Bakes. What im trying to say is if you guys have never dealt with eachother financially then Bakes might have a valid arguement to not paying you, but if you guys have been involved with eachother over the years I just dont understand how he doesn't owe it.

Didn't read any of the posts but it's pretty clear you are in the wrong and Bakes is completely clear of feeling the need to pay you.

It would be completely diff. if you contacted him even a couple days after to let him know you forgot to pay and you still want 10%. It would even be legit if you made contact with him the day of or maybe even the first day. But waiting until he's already cashed before even CONTACTING him about the deal that you attempted to make but YOU failed to follow through with is not his fault at all. Kinda feel like you owe him an apology anyway.

I seriously doubt anyone was trying to angle here, i believe Mattg's intent was to buy the 10% and I believe that Bakes did not think he had sold 10% to Mattg by the fact he sold all of the action that his backer didn't take. Mattg didn't act on his intention, but Bakes did by selling the 10% to someone else. I understand that pieces are not always paid up front, but Bakes could reasonably assume that Mattg no longer wanted the action because Mattg said I will send the money by tomorrow at the latest, and when tomorrow passed and Bakes didn't have the money, he went on to the next person.

 

Originally Posted by mattg1983

Pieces are booked without sending money before the tournament starts al the time.

So i guess all the people saying i am owed nothing would think that if bakes thought the action was booked, since we did after all agree on it, and then asked me for the 5K i owe him after not cashing that it would be perfectly reasonable for me to stiff him?

The thing is, you put yourself in such a terrible situation by not at least getting some sort of closure beforehand - you left yourself in a gray area whether you thought so at the time or not. I understand that things are booked without money exchanging hands often, but in this situation how can you assume there will be no issues? The fact that you didn't send money and you didn't get in touch with him beforehand pretty much puts you in a lose-lose situation. He can expect the 5k if he doesn't cash (in this instance he can say he assumed you were booked) and he can plead ignorance if he does cash (obviously like the case is now).

The problem is you can never know his true intent prior to the tourney. I'd have to imagine if he was approaching the tourney thinking your 10% was booked he himself would have tried to contact you to confirm. Similarly he probably assumed you would have contacted him to confirm you were booked. My guess would be he started playing assuming your 10% wasn't booked which is why I'd probably side with him. (I didn't read the whole thread maybe there is a chat log out that would change my mind which is definitely possible)

 

Originally Posted by rock3656

As much as me and MATTG share hate eachother. I jus couldn't see him being a known reputable backer/ub sponsored pro and simply not coming through on his end of a financial agreement to buy a piece of one of the most well known players in the world, in the most prestigious tournament held all year. I would just always assume that if Bakes didnt cash in the tournament MattG would pay the money without a hassle, to me that seems obvious given his position in the poker world and years of never hearing anything shady involving him financially. From what I've seen any reputable backer, who asks you to purchase a piece of yourself in a tournament, and that share is agreed upon between HSMTT REG and OFFICAL BACKER, both parties would seem to be held liable to pay the money .In correlation with the above statement, if all the information has correctly been presented to us, I just don't see how Bakes couldn't owe MattG his piece of the pie. In addition, I think it's hard for people to give an accurate opinion on the issue without understanding the personal relationship between you and Bakes. What im trying to say is if you guys have never dealt with eachother financially then Bakes might have a valid arguement to not paying you, but if you guys have been involved with eachother over the years I just dont understand how he doesn't owe it.

I like this one

I just don't understand how communication can collapse to this point. You figure there would be clarification on the agreement from one party to the other before the tournament began...

Where are the logs? It would clarify this specific situation, if anything.

 

Originally Posted by GambleAB

It really isn't though.
I'd agree with you that it certainly makes the situation more murky then it has to be, but ultimately if one reg agrees to buy a piece of another reg, then that's the deal.

Put it this way: if Matt had gotten the money to Bakes two days later, instead of the next day, would the deal be off? Of course not.

ok..but he didnt. he didnt get back to him until after he ft'd and i think the language is extremely important here. if someone wants to buy a piece of me and says "ill get you money by tomorrow at the latest" then doesnt transfer the money or talk to me for weeks id be looking for a new buyer.

yet you are the one who broke the payment terms that you yourself set, and then didnt bother to get in touch with your horse to assure it was still on. He has no fault in this at all having done everything he said HE was gonna do, and like the other poster said, your action was probably sold to someone who actually thought this was a good enough investment to make sure and send the fuckin money. Not cool to renig on the deal on YOUR behalf and then come in the forums and try to bash this dude and make him out to be a scheister. Real classy

 

Originally Posted by N 82 50 24

Obviously this is not how things work for most people in the world but for a few hundred high stakes MTT regs, this is how it works.

A few hundred? Come on. I'd believe a few dozen operate like this. But a few hundred?

I'm on the fence here.

I sold action this summer on 2+2 Marketplace. There was a poster (a reg) that asked to reserve action. I didn't know him, so it's a little different, but when I hadn't heard from him in a few days I posted in the thread and sent a pm that he had until a certain date/time to pay or his share would no longer be reserved. I'd like to think that I would have done the same if I had know him personally.

Bakes interpreted that the deal was void if he hadn't received the monies by the time mattg had said via chat. Mattg interpreted that he had the action until he was informed otherwise. There's clearly no malicious intention by either side here. Both are right, but I think that this has to be a wash. I'd say the same thing if Bakes hadn't cashed and it was Bakes wanting the monies from mattg.

There was clearly a lack of communication here. Both parties should have been in better touch w/ the other. If, however, Bakes and Matt have conducted business in the past in which a verbal contract was conducted in similar fashion, I'd rule that Matt was owed the monies.


P.S. Mat,t who is the masseuse that my roommate Reed and you were talking about? I haven't been able to spot her yet?

I know that I just posted, but I changed my mind. I don't think that Matt is owed the money. It's close, but the problem that I have is that he didn't talk w/ Bakes before the tournament started since he hadn't yet paid Bakes. I know that you weren't trying to freeroll him, but Bakes shouldn't expect to have 10% of his action sold to you if he hasn't yet been paid or even contacted by you.

Alot of this is pointless without the logs really. I think it's understandable how Bakes thinks you decided not to take a piece of him if you said you said you basically didn't wanna give him cash and that you'd just xfer either that day or the next and then a month goes by and you don't say a word. I know backing deals are done without money being exchanged at all before the event, but you gotta see where he's coming from if you worded it the way you said in your first post and then the 0 contact for a month.

On the other hand though it's weird how he won't show his chat logs which kinda makes one think maybe the wording in the msg was different and made it more clear that a deal was in place regardless of whether money was sent online or not. I get why he's annoying/pissed about everything but you'd think if he really thought he was in the right he'd just show the IM and unless there's something clad there he's pretty much in the right. Thats not to say he's hiding the email cause he know's he is wrong or anything though, because he really could be so pissed he just doesn't give a shit anymore and is just being stubborn.

It's a shitty situation though for sure. It's understandable where he might be coming from but without chat logs to look at wording it's really hard to say if he owe's or not. You should see if you can convince him to send the IM to a 3rd party you both trust to make a ruling if he'd be down with that. Obv he doesn't have to go for that, but at this point what do you have to lose?

 

Originally Posted by augie_

A few hundred? Come on. I'd believe a few dozen operate like this. But a few hundred?

Who cares what the number is. If they're both in that few 'dozen or hundred', then it doesn't matter (assuming the chat logs say it was a deal)

A poker forum with a lot of low/ mid stakes players (myself included) who dont understand "high stake backing deals" prob wasnt the best place to post this, specially as you stated you have already discussed it with some of the high stakes community whom you*said have mainly take your side.

Looks like you just used this forum to try to call bakes out and damage his rep cause you are pissed how things went down.

Seems like it would have been easier just to have dropped by his condo, discussed the situation and tried to reach a mutual agreement.

FWIW, the situation sucks but you kinda put yourself in it by not being clear or fulfilling your end of the bargain. Bakes may have come to you and asked for the 5k had he not cashed, noone but him will ever know. Expensive lesson, but hope you learn to make business deals 100% clear and documented*in future dealings.

if i woke up the very next days and there is no money in my account i got a clue that maybe matt was not interested no more,but when the tourney stars fewww days later and still no online/cash money,that make no doubt in my mind that mattg does not own 10% of me ....