Hacker News Reader

Comment by mindslight | Hacker News Reader

As far as I am aware, listing a price of something (say in a mail order catalog, or on a store shelf), does not constitute an offer. Rather, it is a solicitation of offers to buy. I would think stating "the price is $XXX" would be along those same lines, as there has been no positive statement of willingness to sell it to a specific counterparty for that price.

Another example would be real estate listings, to which this is quite close. They have a definite list price, realtors most certainly say things like "the price is $XXX", and yet it's still on any potential buyer to submit a formal offer to buy with a specific price which the seller may or may not accept. If this weren't the case and such communication was considered positive offers, then we would rarely see things like houses being sold over their asking price.

View on HN

Advertising seems like a bit of a red herring here, given that the domain wasn't advertised. My understanding from reading is that the DomainAgents people sent an unsolicited offer on behalf of Jump for $2,500. I could be wrong on that. Even if I am though, using your house analogy, it's like offering a price on a house that's advertised, and a homeowner says "no I will sell it to you for 20x the amount" and then the buyer accepts in writing.

But what if you knock on the door of a property, ask the owner whats the price he's willing to sell the property at, owner says a price, and then you accept that price?

Is that binding without the property owner also accepting? Doesn't seem so to me.

Ignoring statute of frauds concerns - why not? The roles of offeror and offeree can reverse many times during a contract negotiation and it doesn't matter at all whether "buyer" and "seller" are in any particular role once the offeree accepts.

Can you explain the legal basis on which this "both sides need to accept" thingie of yours come from?

It is incredibly common in transactions more complicated than buying milk for both parties to communicate over time the many and varied factors that could effect forming a final agreement including both parties thoughts on price without intending to or forming a final agreement then and there or listing every possible contingency in every single informal communique.

The salesman and the buyer discuss the merits of the car one says they think they could pay 25000 and other 28000 but the buyer intends on test driving and having it checked out mechanically. Meanwhile the seller expects the buyer to have acceptable credit, sufficient down.

Whereas price could enter the discussion along with other factors both parties expect there to be a formal step in which paperwork is signed which actuates the sale. This could even in less formal situations be a handshake and a check but the difference between one and the other is clearly expressed intent to complete the sale.

That doesn't seem to have anything to do with what I asked.

Not sure how it works in the US but where I’m from a bid for a house, either buying or selling offer, is made as a very particular legal document with all sorts of assurances and has to be made by a lawyer or a real estate broker.

That document is legally binding and it’s enough for the receiving party to accept for a contract to be formed.

Casually doing this over email is absolutely not the same.

This type of requirement on offers/acceptance procedure is typically (most states and federal jurisdictions in the US) require for ‘real property’, that is things categorized as ‘immovable’ property in civil law jurisdictions. It is not required for other property types unless the jurisdiction explicitly requires it via legislation.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com