Case Scenario: Big Time Toymaker Students Name LAW/421 Date Due Instructors Name Big Time Toymaker (BTT) is a company that develops, manufactures, and distributes board games and other toys to the U.S, Mexico, and Canada. Chou is the inventor of a new strategy game he named Strat. Big Time Toymaker and Chou entered into an agreement whereby Chou would receive $25,000 in exchange for exclusive negotiation rights for a 90-day period. The agreement stipulated that no distribution contract existed
Words: 635 - Pages: 3
Big Time Toymaker Jean Augustin Law/421 October 1, 2012 Thomas Wilson Abstract Big Time Toymaker (BTT) agreement with Cho for extension of exclusive distribution rights is being challenged due to a lack of written agreement. BTT reached an oral agreement which is not binding due to the stipulations in their original agreement, which states that all contracts must be in writing. Both parties have communicated the terms of the distribution agreements via email and fax, after a change in management
Words: 861 - Pages: 4
Running head: BIG TIME TOYMAKER Big Time Toymaker Name University Big Time Toymaker Paper A contract is an agreement between two parties that is enforceable in court. In order to have a valid contract, there are several criteria that must be met that will be explained throughout this analysis. A verbal or written agreement may result in a binding contract if the required contract criteria are met (Melvin, 2011). Contracts are put in place to protect both parties on either end of the agreement
Words: 1061 - Pages: 5
Big Time Toymakers Jessica Costin August 19, 2014 LAW/421 Ric Hedges Case Scenario Introduction Big Time Toymakers makes board games all over the world. Chou came to BTT with a deal that if Chou would let BTT distribute their game STRAT. BTT offered that they would give him 25,000 in exclusive negotiation rights for a three month period. The deal between BTT and Chou began when the time frame was set. The obligations between the two were made and the price that would be given was also established
Words: 901 - Pages: 4
1. At what point, if ever, did the parties have a contract? After reading “Theory to Practice,” I believe the two parties, although never had a signed written contract, did reach a verbal agreement. The deal between Big Time Toymaker (BTT) and Chou begin when BTT paid Chou $25,000 for exclusive negotiation rights for a 90-day period. Three days before the end, the two parties reach an agreement and Chou volunteered to draft the contract. When a manager from BTT sent an email that outlined all the
Words: 1047 - Pages: 5
Chou and BTT had a lot of verbal agreements and a lot of different terms that they were each abiding by during the time that they were talking about the business situation. BTT wanted to make sure that Chou would let them try out his game and he had no problem with that, and signed a 90 day trail period in which BTT would be able to test the game, and do whatever they could to see if the game was worth selling so that they could maybe go into a distribution contract with Chou and distribute the game
Words: 972 - Pages: 4
Big Time Toymaker At what point, if ever, did the parties have a contract? BTT paid Chou $25,000.00 to have exclusive rights for negotiations for a 90 day period. Big Time Toymaker and Chou did not have a binding enforceable contract made during this 90 day period. An oral distribution agreement was made three day before the 90 days deadline, but it was in the negotiations. But the negotiations said that there was not supposed to be an agreement unless it was in writing. Three days before the deadline
Words: 1069 - Pages: 5
Case Scenario: Big Time Toymaker LAW/421 Case Scenario: Big Time Toymaker Big Time Toymaker (BTT) develops, manufactures, and distributes board games and other toys in North America, Chou is the inventor of a new strategy game he calls Strat. BTT had an interest in distributing Strat and entered into an agreement with Chou, offering him $25,000 in exchange for exclusive negotiation rights for a 90-day period. This agreement stipulated that no distribution contract existed unless it was in
Words: 2098 - Pages: 9
BIG TIME TOYMAKER - CASE SCENARIO 2 Big Time Toymaker - Case Scenario Upon completion of required reading of “Theory to Practice” scenario, I confidently can report that the two parties never prepared a written contract. A written contract was supposed to be created for a deal between Big Time Toymaker (BTT) a company, which develops, manufactures, and distributes board games and other toys in North American and Chou who invented a new strategy game Strat. A contract was in process even the details
Words: 997 - Pages: 4
Case Scenario: Big Time Toymaker Ryan Sherrett LAW/421 June 10, 2013 Faculty: Mark Rorem Case Scenario: Big Time Toymaker 1. At what point, if ever, did the parties have a contract? The contract was established at the in-person meeting where the distribution agreement details were agreed upon. The fact that Chou was going to reiterate the details in writing is not required. The manager emailing the same agreed upon details confirms BTT's agreement of the terms. 2. What facts may
Words: 571 - Pages: 3
