6 ms·
Sounds like the US and UK housing markets, as well as startup M&A, suffer from similar problems. In a free market, you should be able to market what you’re sel
by cj 3y ago
Sounds like the US and UK housing markets, as well as startup M&A, suffer from similar problems.
In a free market, you should be able to market what you’re selling until the moment it’s officially sold.
- jahewson 3y agoThat’s not fair though because it takes a few weeks for a broker to close on a mortgage whereas a cash buyer can pay immediately.
- sokoloff 3y agoWhat part of that is not fair? If someone else has more ready access to funds, and a seller wishes to prioritize highly for that, they should be able to. It would seem to me to be unfair to a seller to say "you must wait an extra N weeks on all sales because some buyers will need that long to get funds together".
- MrPatan 3y agoThe world is easier to understand when you replace "fair" with "good for me and mine in the shortest of terms"
- ska 3y ago> In a free market, you should be able to market what you’re selling until the moment it’s officially sold. That's not what free market means. In a free market (which this is an okayish example of) buyers and sellers are free to set their own terms, rather than having them externally imposed. So you are free to try and negotiate a lack of exclusivity, it's just that likely nobody will take you up on it. SEC oversite and similar mechanisms, by comparison, is an external imposition on the market. Ironically, what you seem be suggesting (exclusivity terms "not allowed") could only be enforced by regulation, therefore making the market less free.
- cj 3y agoI agree. Free market was a poor choice of words