btw, that's how negotiations are in the business world

saying you want to accept an offer sent to you doesn't make it a deal

both sides have to say it is a deal. a handshake is just a symbol of that

making an offer is not: "this is binding on me if you want to do it" because multiple negotiations happen simultaneously with offers sent to several people

keep that in mind

I think the only penalty you could enforce would be making it public.

Since it is all he said/she said, maybe just having a "bitch" forum about people who back out, or trade assets they don't have.

It shouldn't be malicious or revenge oriented, but if GM X is an ******* and causes a problem, GM Y should be able to post it (in a reasonable, coherant way). Pretty soon, if GMs W,Y, and Z all post about GM X's poor trade anticts, then new GMs A, B, and C will at least be warned.

I think this is a good solution, it will punish those who deserve it, but not with picks or BRHL2 money where you could have problems providing evidence of the crime or determining a suitable punishment.

Islanders GM wrote:

---

btw, that's how negotiations are in the business world

saying you want to accept an offer sent to you doesn't make it a deal

both sides have to say it is a deal. a handshake is just a symbol of that

making an offer is not: "this is binding on me if you want to do it" because multiple negotiations happen simultaneously with offers sent to several people

keep that in mind

---

Your right in the real world for some people it's not a deal until there's a signed contract but for some people in the business world (myself being one of them) your word is everything.  The first thing I learned from my father when I got into real-estate is that it is VERY hard to earn respect and a good reputation in this world, but it is very easy to loose it and if you run around screwing people and breaking your word no one will do business with you, and I have been involved in multi-million dollar real estate deals so I would like to think I have an idea of what happens in the "business world".  

So to get to the point of my little rant just like in the real world there are honest people where their word is as good as sending in a deal (or signing a contract as it were) and there are people that only care about looking out for themselves and will screw anyone over in the process, and at the end of the day I can guarantee who is going to be more successful cause sooner or later people will just stop dealing with you.




-- Edited by Sens at 19:35, 2007-09-27

I NEVER send more than one offer involving any player on my roster.  If I send an offer involving my player Joe Blow to the Bears GM, I wait to hear a response from him before I offer Joe Blow to the Giants GM.  I will sometimes get into preliminary trade talks with the mention that Joe Blow is currently in an offer involving another team, and he may be available if that deal falls through.  But until that deal dies, thats it for me, I wait.
The exception is when I have waited a certain period of time with no response and I want to offer a guy up to other GMs.  But in this rare situation, I will send an email to the previous GM before I enter negotiations with other GMs and say the previous offer has expired.
I have never, nor will I ever, go back on a deal once it is done.  When I say done, its done.  If I think I can get a better deal from the next guy, I just don't take the deal!  How hard is that?
As well, I have never not confirmed a deal I have offered to another GM.  I find it to be in very poor taste to make an offer and not accept it as a done deal if you receive a timely response that says "sure, done".  Again, if I am unsure how much I like the offer I am sending, I leave it open ended (ie. How about: Joe Blow and Dave Brown FOR Bill Smith and one of your mid-range prospects?).

Finally:  I am a little shocked that this thread exists and that there are even differing opinions on these topics.  I have never seen these types of antics in other leagues I have been in, and in the few cases where they have existed, it was a new GM that came in and was immediately fired.  But I should also add that I have not found any of these problems in this league.  All the GMs I have talked trade with have been good about back and forth discussions and sending deals in when they say "done".

Islanders GM wrote:

---

 

Ianintheam wrote:

---

I think the only penalty you could enforce would be making it public.

Since it is all he said/she said, maybe just having a "bitch" forum about people who back out, or trade assets they don't have.

It shouldn't be malicious or revenge oriented, but if GM X is an ******* and causes a problem, GM Y should be able to post it (in a reasonable, coherant way). Pretty soon, if GMs W,Y, and Z all post about GM X's poor trade anticts, then new GMs A, B, and C will at least be warned.

I think this is a good solution, it will punish those who deserve it, but not with picks or BRHL2 money where you could have problems providing evidence of the crime or determining a suitable punishment.

---

public discussions in this league has not been responsible enough to expect that kind of system to remain reasonable and nonpersonal: attacks and digs would for sure happen

simply don't negotiate with a g.m. you have problems with

 

---

 Bruce Wayne Agrees 

 

I think it's somewhat of a fineline, however, it's hard to prove that a deal is 100% locked and final unless both teams have mailed it in. I think that IM Logs can be altered and other modes of conversation are OK. But a concrete answer  sent to the e-mail is best. 

I don't even think GMs should announce deals until they are put through the sim. Gives everyone statistical fact that it's been put through.

I Hate to see instances of backing out happen. Closest I've ever come to backing out of a deal is saying "I'm 99% sure, but I've got to think things out" which is where I think that we should aim to be. Just keep your word. Word travels fast here, if you haven't noticed. Might as well make it count for something.