Make offer on 2 boats simultaneously?

Hey, get 3 or 4 boats lined up. Tell the brokers, after the survey, the low price wins. Let us know the brokers reactions. SMILE

We had the choice of 2 Mainship Pilots that were in the same area and either would be fine. We put an offer on one and when the owner balked we did not bother to negotiate as it was obvious it was going to be a long slog. so we pulled it and put a similar offer on the other boat and had the deal done within a few days (pending a survey).

Most legit brokers and brokerages won't allow this. I tried when bought my power-cat. It could be a broker's personal MO, the brokerage house rules, or even state laws in states that license boat brokers. It's the same in real estate but I can't find any law in the state that I had an RE license in. I think it's just the rules of the National Association of Realtors which I didn't belong too.

I you are dealing buyer to seller direct without any brokers your are free to do whatever you want or if you don't tell multiple brokers what you are doing. However if they find out they will probably drop you.

This is ridiculous, you should be able to do whatever you want and your broker should comply. They will moan about their liability but that is a ruse, they have no more, or no less, either way which is usually -0- if they are honest. And this hide-bound, set in their ways position actually costs them business.

I guess I’m too old but I was brought up by an ethical father and learned that my word was my bond. I treat people the way I want to be treated. Recently there were two GB 54 feet that I liked. I offered on the first that was slightly less expensive and spent over $2K on the survey, I rejected that boat. I then put an offer in on the other GB, took it on survey, negotiated the price based on the survey and purchased the boat. I did not play with either seller and everyone was happy and I didn’t need to defend myself against a law suit on contract law.

Legally, if both accept, you have two contracts and are legally obligated to honor both. These are the basics of a contract: offer, acceptance, consideration (there are a few more, but unimportant in the context of your question). You'd have all three for both contracts! Not a good idea!

You could always bank on a survey getting you out of one or the other or both, but that's rolling the dice and you'd be paying for two surveys as well as having the two deposit checks floating around out there.

ERTF said:

Well that's the second half of my question. If they both accept. Can I just cancel one, or am I already required to get a survey if they accept?

Click to expand...

denverd0n said:

Well, I still wouldn't be "fuming" about that.

Click to expand...

I'm not. I wasn't involved in the deal. I'm just attempting to shed some light on the backstory.

BobMc said:

Legally, if both accept, you have two contracts and are legally obligated to honor both.

Click to expand...

If I were to attempt this, I would certainly be making sure that the verbiage of the offer included a means to get out. Frequently, an offer includes a deposit, that is what is potentially at stake. I would make sure the offer included either no deposit or a refundable deposit.

If you have ever read a boat purchase contract, you can back out at any time up until the expiration for nearly any reason. As the selling broker told me: if you or your wife decide that the heads are the wrong color, you can cancel the deal. Don’t like the wallpaper in the galley? You can cancel the deal. You could ask for these items to be changed, but you can also just cite that as a reason to cancel. Remember, no money has changed hands yet, the deposit is paid when an deal has been made and offers and counter offers have been made and accepted. The balance is paid post survey and sea trial.

Choices

Here's a case when the right thing to do (ethically) is also the right things to do from a negotiating perspective. Make both offers, submit them together and advise the Sellers that you have submitted two (or more) offers and state that you will accept the first responding offer that meets your requirements. Total transparency and it stirs the pot.

Sailorseven said:

Here's a case when the right thing to do (ethically) is also the right things to do from a negotiating perspective. Make both offers, submit them together and advise the Sellers that you have submitted two (or more) offers and state that you will accept the first responding offer that meets your requirements. Total transparency and it stirs the pot.

Click to expand...

You beat me to it. Not only would the OP be upfront,but the sellers may be better motivated to respond.
I suggest each offers state that in the event of the other offer being accepted or otherwise reaching agreement this offer will lapse forthwith without notice.
It`s not unlike an advertiser posting that his advert is on other sites and the item may be sold elsewhere.
Of course, if the survey of the accepted offer is unsatisfactory you might be eating some humble pie returning to the other seller.

There's a time-honored concept known as "negotiating in good faith". Two simultaneous offers without disclosing to both sellers that you are making simultaneous offers is not what I would consider a good faith negotiation. On the other hand, disclosing simultaneous offers to both sellers may very well put pressure on the both sellers to come back with their bottom price rather than screwing around with a back and forth to see how much they can get. Saves time for everyone. Just put it in both offers that you are making a simultaneous offer on another acceptable boat and whichever one comes back with the best price first will get the deal. I would also state that in the event both sellers come back with identical prices you reserve the right to void either offer prior to moving to survey. Keep it above board and you'll end up with a more amenable deal.

ERTF said:

WTF is your problem? I ask a simple procedural question and you act like I'm trying to scam somebody.

Click to expand...

Not you. We did experience a person who wanted to do just that. Sell it before he actually bought the boat.

I'm curious about something....


A number of people feel that making offers on two boats at the same time is unethical, even if the contract allows the buyer to cancel for any reason.



Yet a seller's best outcome is to have multiple offers at the same time so they can work them off each other.


Why is one OK and the other not OK?

twistedtree said:

I'm curious about something....


A number of people feel that making offers on two boats at the same time is unethical, even if the contract allows the buyer to cancel for any reason.
Yet a seller's best outcome is to have multiple offers at the same time so they can work them off each other.
Why is one OK and the other not OK?

Click to expand...

Difference is, to create competition the lucky seller you envisage has to disclose to the multiple buyers that he is dealing with multiple buyers.Otherwise it won`t work.
It may not work anyway, if buyers don`t believe there is another buyer. In a short post retirement stint in real estate,when we had multiple offers in a range the seller would take, we would communicate that to the buyers and invite any further offer by a fixed time. Sometimes buyers thought it was sales BS,and some discovered,too late, it was not. We thought it an ethical approach.
If I was making offers on 2 boats simultaneously I would be upfront about it. Again,it is creating competition, but this time between sellers. Relying on a presumption I could escape the contract on the less preferred boat on finding I had bought both, would keep me awake nights.
It`s all about disclosure, and an escape route. Easy if you are upfront,less so if gaming the system.

Examine each boat minutely before you make an offer.
Drive a hard bargain by all means but be straight about it and do a deal honourably.
Good manners and honour are a burden easy carried.

This past weekend I placing an offer on two really nice, low mileage, Lexus RX 350 SUV's [a 2010 and a 2013]. I told both owners that I am looking at other similar vehicles and that I have placed an offer on one other. I also told both if they accepted my offer that I would be taking their SUV to my mechanic for inspection and that results from inspection would determine my desire to follow through or not on the purchase.


I see nothing unethical about placing offers on more than one similar item at the same time. Matter of fact... I see nothing unethical of running a test ad [if you so desire] to see if the item you are bidding on might sell at a higher price after you purchase it... as long as you tell any person answering your "for sale" ad that the vehicle is not in your possession at this time but that you expect it to be so in near future.


It all comes down to conversation reveals and position transparency; as well as open, honest dialogue.


The above mentioned is in relation to private sellers' and private purchasers' interactions...

Thanks for the replies.


As I see it, the benefit of extending multiple offers comes from creating competition, so I would definitely let both sellers know I'm shopping multiple boats, even though there is no obligation to do so. And as others have noted, your typical contract allows the buyer to back out at any time and for any reason up until they have surveyed and accepted the boat. So no problem backing out of which ever contract you like less. That said, I would feel obligated to cancel the losing contract promptly so you aren't stringing someone along. That's the part I would have ethical problems with. So I wouldn't expect to have two contracts for any more than 24 hrs. But if you really wanted to play hardball, you could keep both contracts up through survey and use each as leverage to continue negotiating with the other. With motivated sellers, they might tolerate it.



Now from the sellers side, again assuming you know the buyer is working multiple offers, I would probably make acceptance of the offer contingent on them cancelling any other contracts, and not take any offense to it. But if I found out a buyer had another contract simultaneous with mine and hadn't told me, I'd probably be pretty annoyed. But any action would come down to how much I wanted to sell the boat vs keep looking for a buyer. I've encountered a lot of talk and no action when selling boats, and this would just be another example. Before accepting an offer, I'd want to qualify the buyer in the first place. With a typical contract, what you the seller are agreeing to do is hold the boat and not sell it to anyone else for a period of time while the buyer does diligence and decides to buy or not. So the down side to you as a seller is essentially passing on other offers that might come along in the ensuing time. Keeping that time horizon short is your best defense.


In short form, I have always felt my obligations are:


1) Live up to the letter and spirit of any contract, which means reading and understanding it.


2) Be up front about your intentions. People always appreciate it, and typically reciprocate.

Using the same broker?

Perhaps, but probably not

denverd0n said:

Well, I still wouldn't be "fuming" about that. There are lots of unethical people in this world. I don't have the emotional energy to "fume" about every one of them.


I suppose if I knew enough of the details I might report it to the police. Trying to sell something that you don't own is pretty much the definition of criminal fraud.

Click to expand...

Retailers often sell things which they have not yet acquired. Now, taking money for something you can't acquire or have no plans to acquire, well that might be illegal.

I would only ever treat a seller with the respect that they deserve, remember if you are a buyer you will one day be a seller. I have bought and sold many boats, and have always been as up front and helpful that I could be to the buyers. If I felt I was being treated like this - you would not buy my boat, and if you did, There would be nothing outside of the inventory listed, left on the boat when you took possession (hope you have dock lines and bumpers listed on the inventory, or fuel) (Spares we all have them), when we sold our last sailboat, we had a guy try to use a surveyor to negotiate the price down, with ridiculous findings, (boat needed new standing rigging because it was 17 years old), this came back to bite him as we said no way were we doing anything with the rigging, and after he agreed and proceeded, he could not get insurance, on the boat due to his ridiculous survey, (he had to pay for a 2nd realistic survey, after he closed the deal.) and after the close, when I had my money you could whistle Dixie when you had a question. Just my 2 cents. If you are using a Broker, (which there are lots of reputable ones up here in Canada), get him to negotiate with both sellers on your behalf, and enter into a contract once he has finished negotiating for you, that you intend to bring to fruition, (as long as all terms and conditions have been fulfilled) Cheers

You people are missing the point. What would be the point of making multiple offers without revealing this fact to all? The whole purpose of multiple offers would be to inform all offerees that you have made multiple offers (without revealing names, of course) This lets them all know that you are serious about your price. Its first come, first served, so if you really want to sell your boat get off you butt and respond by time-stamped certified mail ASAP. There is nothing sneaky, unethical or illegal about this. It's just like eBay or any other auction or bidding process. You guys have got your nickers in too tight of "knots". If more brokers would agree to this time saving, cut-to-the-chase approach to brokerage their production, and their commissions, would improve dramatically.

ERTF said:

I'm narrowed down to 2 similar trawlers with similar asking prices. It's basically gonna come down to which seller is willing to negotiate on price.

Can I put an offer in on each simultaneously, and then choose to go forward with the best accepted price? (Since I'm offering below asking, I'm very doubtful they both will accept my original offer without countering.)

Is that acceptable practice?

Click to expand...

OK now ERTF, what boats and details are you looking at so we can give you some real feedback. BTW, have you been on either vessel?

ProMaritime said:

You people are missing the point. What would be the point of making multiple offers without revealing this fact to all? The whole purpose of multiple offers would be to inform all offerees that you have made multiple offers (without revealing names, of course) This lets them all know that you are serious about your price. Its first come, first served, so if you really want to sell your boat get off you butt and respond by time-stamped certified mail ASAP. There is nothing sneaky, unethical or illegal about this. It's just like eBay or any other auction or bidding process. You guys have got your nickers in too tight of "knots". If more brokers would agree to this time saving, cut-to-the-chase approach to brokerage their production, and their commissions, would improve dramatically.

Click to expand...

As stated earlier, I had two active offers on two boats without informing either seller. I wanted to see their best price , but did not want to pit them against each other. I honestly do not think that would have made any difference in the prices, but would have alienated both sellers. Both boats had been actively on the market for over two years, if that wasn’t enough incentive for the sellers to negotiate seriously I do not know what else would be. Both sellers knew that I was interested in the two boats, both knew that I had flown over 1750mi and that I had spent several hours on both boats with the respective brokers. They did not, however, know that I had two offers out there at once.

In the end, I became friends with the seller who had the best price, something that has paid me repeated dividends in terms of advice, assistance and many spare parts and other accessories that were later given to me months after the deal closed. Not all things of value are purely monetary and saving a thousand or two while turning the seller into an adversary would have cost me a lot more in the long run.