Rob:

Sorry that this has happened, and I sincerely hope that the messages here did not contribute to the "busted deal".

So we have two theories: (1) the seller studies after the listing and sale, and busts the deal, or (2) a third party sees that the watch has been sold at a bargain price, and "interferes" with the deal between buyer and seller.

Based on my own experience, scenario (2) seems much more likely. In fact, this has happened to me a couple of times and I have witnessed it in other situations. In one very memorable instance, I got a late night eBay BuyItNow bargain (1133B for $1,500, at a time when they were selling for $7,500), then the seller busted the deal and sold the watch to someone else (for $3,000). I was able to figure out who the interfering third party was (yes, he was one of the occasional participants here), went to Wikipedia, copied the elements of "tortious interference", and told this third party that I would be suing for the $6,000 damages. Guess what? He sent me the Monaco, and suffered the loss from his $3,000 purchase price. I should mention that the quick sale and bargain were never mentioned on this forum.

Ironically, there are two types of message posted on this forum that can contribute to the trouble: (1) Stewart say, "wow that sold quick", which alerts our readers to the listing . . . possibly setting the stage for the "interference", and (2) I wrote, "wow, seller left money on the table", which may set the stage for the "seller studies" scenario. It's worth considering whether this forum actually contributes to busted deals, of either variety.

Personally, I doubt that this forum contributes to many (or even any) of these situations . . . I just don't think that many sellers get on the web and do their research after the sale, and I don't think that many of our readers would interfere with a completed transaction. But we should think more about this subject and I look forward to seeing others' views.

Jeff