The Offer

[maipenrai]

Wow! This interesting thread has turned into a joke. No, Walmart cannot sell the cars on its parking lot, because the legal owner has it registered in his name. No, the bank cannot give your money away, because you have an account number with your name on it! Does the person that buried this treasure have it registered in his name, and transfers it to you Why did he bury it on

 

Amazon Forum Fav 👍

Cry Of The Eagle: History And Legends Of The Cherokee Indians And Their Buried Treasure - Grab it through Amazon!

[Frankn]

Maipenrai, The feds were after him. It was his hideout stach, but it wasn't stolen, it was his.
Basicly what I have been looking for in THE OFFER is a justification for all the work involved in the research of a cache, but it appears that many think the work involved has no monitary value in THE OFFER. In fact when something is found, it appears that everyone that has put in no work towards finding it believes thet they should get the lions share. No wonder you hear nothing about the finds!

 

[maipenrai]

Why did he bury it on someone elses land? You seem to be turning this discussion into the level of 10 year olds. Do you really believe possession is 9/10 of the law? Where have you read this kind of law?

The fact is that your cut and the land owners cut, cannot be voted on in this forum, he has all the cards, and you are really getting to be hard headed about this. You asked for opinions, and you got them, but you try to argue that the land owner has done nothing and you have done everything, it maybe true, but it is still his! You said you have spent thousands on this, if so, then why not spend the $100 for gas and meet him face to face? That sounds like a very small expense to make millions on.

As some have already pointed out, he may already be following this discussion, and knows exactly what cards you have.

 

[ppratt]

I'm thinking you just like to argue. I think you know your wrong. Can we all just say your right that you deserve it all. Your like a dang snapping turtle you have to cut off it's head for him to let go. How many more wrongs does it take? Who is this landowner? I would like to pay him money for him to keep telling you no, You never said how much money you put in to deserve such a large cut.

 

[Frankn]

ppratt, What are you talking about? deserve it all, such a large cut?? I am only asking that I get the same as he gets.

maipenrai, I never said possesion is 9/10 of the law and I never said that I have spent thousands to locate it. Go back and look! I have spent over $100 in fuel looking for it and a finders fee of 10% if I find it, plus months of time.

 

[Silver Searcher]

ppratt, What are you talking about? deserve it all, such a large cut?? I am only asking that I get the same as he gets.

maipenrai, I never said possesion is 9/10 of the law and I never said that I have spent thousands to locate it. Go back and look! I have spent over $100 in fuel looking for it and a finders fee of 10% if I find it, plus months of time. View attachment 636519

Frankn...A $100 in fuel is nothing to what I spend on it, if you and your partner excepted the 50/50 cut, I think this would set your porfolio off in hunting out lost caches, this could pay dividends and earn you more in the long run...just a thought.

SS

 

[lastleg]

maipenrai doesn't seem to understand that if Frank obtained the mineral rights he could dig wherever he wishes and if he were to find
a hidden cache he could go to the landowner and say "Hey Bud, I found this stuff while looking for minerals and I want to share it with
you." Of course Frank should have thought of this first if he has really researched the records like he says. Armchair THers rarely do
due diligence. The expenses and the seismic testing could be billed to the landowner's share so Frank, and his partners of course, would
suffer no loss because of a stubborn tenant. Frank, and his partners of course, could also realize a substantial tax windfall for nonrenewable
energy exploration

 

[Frankn]

My partner is working on a different approach, but I can't talk about it yet.

 

[spartacus53]

Frankn, the saddest part is that we will reach over a 1000 posts, and dollars to donuts, still no where near finalizing an agreement.

It's my obligation to chime in every 2-3 pages to give a reality check on this situation

 

[maipenrai]

This thread is getting so long, that its impossible to go back and check what was said or not said. Frankn, at one point you compared the cost of his land, ($60,000), to the cost of your motor home, what does one have to do with the other? Should he have to pay for your motor home? You didnt buy that motor home to do this project with. Why dont you add the price of your detectors and your home, and get an even bigger number? Also you mentioned that the decendents of the person that hid the treasure might come an claim their share, and then the land owner would get nothing. You keep jumping at straws to get us on your side, (actually I was on your side) You even ask about mineral rights. As far as I know, you just dont go and get mineral rights, you need to prove that there are minerals in the ground, that you are looking for, so you cannot just get the rights, and start digging. If you dont have the $100 to drive and meet the owner, how are you going to buy the mineral rights, as Lastleg suggested?

You also mentioned all the work the owner would have to do to fill all the 100 holes and clear the trash. If you are not digging 100 holes, why would he have to dig 100 holes? Its HIS land, if he digs 100 holes, he can decide to fill or not to fill, leave the trash or not leave the trash. You use the same argument, one version, for the owner, one for yourself.

And contrary to what you believe, I think most of the people following this thread are aware of most of the problems with cache hunting, so please dont talk down to us. It was you that asked for opinions, and now you say we dont know what we are talking about, we dont understand.

Another thing, If I were you, I wouldnt have even started this thread, because while you are trying to convince us that you are right, you keep dropping clues every now and then, and pretty soon, there might be one or two of us that will get interested, then you will have a nice soup.

Your deal with the property expert doesnt sound so good either, 10% finders fee? Wow, you are going to pay him a million dollars? or was it just out of your share, or your partners share? In either case, you are very generous with the expert, but you still feel that the property owner should only get one third. That alone is making enough problems. How are you going to prove the amount of the cache, so you can pay the right %??

Instead of being a thread on how to go about negotiating a good deal for everyone, its turning into a thread about what Not to do. I already know what your reply will be, "go back and read all the post", maybe you should do that also.

 

[Kentucky Kache]

Frankin, did the guy who buried the cache on the property pay the landowner for the use of the land? Also, do you think it's legal to trespass? Now what about ethics.

 

[Frankn]

Spart, you seam to be injoying this post.

Maipenrai, I did buy the MH to use as a home base for TH, but you missed the point. Someone said that he had paid out all the money for the land so he deserved a big cut. What you quoted was my reply that showed what he paid for his land had about as much relivence as what I paid for my MH in figguring the split. I have spent over $100 on fuel money looking for this location so I can tell you the fuel money is no problem. It was someone else that mentioned the 100 holes to fill. I think the posts are getting crossed in your memory. I don't have to go back and read them. I can remember them. Jest because I don't agree with your opinion doesn't mean you are right and I am wrong any more than it means I am right and you are wrong. They are just opinions. I don't talk down to responders, but I have a good Idea from the reply weather they have cache hunted or not. Cache hunting is far more complicated than a walk in the park and it cost more to do time wise and money wise.

Kentucky, No,No,Yes

 

[ppratt]

Then 50/50 if you want the same cut as he gets. I'm thinking a ot more people are getting tired of this. You act like your doing the owner a favor my letting him in on the cut. Thats why said you deserve it all. You never said how much you have spent money wise to deserve such a large cut of the cache. give us a rough est. Like I said before I dont care about the time cuz you can be a bad researcher, cuz we all can see. Making offers and arguing arent your strong points.

 

[lastleg]

Frank you'll have to get a title search to see who owns mineral rights to the property. Could be it's some yahoo that sold the land and not
the minerals. maipernai doesn't understand US property laws evidently. Find who does own them and make a deal with him instead of
trying to deal with an obstinate land owner who doesn't understand the "rules" of cache hunting.

 

[maipenrai]

Lastleg, No, I probably dont understand all the laws about mineral rights. Then tell me if Im wrong. Do mineral rights include anything buried on the propery? Treasure is nothing to do with mineral rights, and no, you cant just bring an oil rig on to a property and do what you want, this is not the 1800's. Its been discussed on the gold prospecting sites.

And, what are the "rules" of cache hunting? Hey, maybe you didnt notice, but there are no "rules". It is something that has to be negotiated, and apparently in this case, no one is negotiating, just trying to put pressure on the "obstinate land owner" who doesnt understand that he should give someone half of HIS property. Im sure with this tactic, that treasure will be there forever.

 

[lastleg]

Sorry minniepearl but Jed Clampitt (Frankn) will be shooting at squirrels (loot) while sniffing around for natural gas and oil (minerals).

 

[Frankn]

ppratt, Getting tired of this? Looks like you are pushing your point hard! Your the one that doesn't under the situation! This involves two THs and one land owner. Try doing the math! That is 3. Now if you devide the cache equally that is 1/3 each. There are people with more knowledge of barganing than you that have posted here . You don' t represent the bulk of the knowledge here by a long shot.

 

[ppratt]

Al you have been doing is pushing your point (and its wrong) what if the landowner got a partner would a 25% cut be OK? You never did say how much you spent. You afraid? Man I hope you never get on the land. the way things look your not going to. I never claimed to know it all. I just know your wrong. have a nice day.

 

[Frankn]

ppratt, and you are not pushing your point? The land owner does have a partner, his wife, but neither has put any effort towards finding the cache and that is what this is all about. You are wrong! I have stated many times how much I have spent and what it will cost me if I find it.
Perhaps you missed something along the way.

 

[ppratt]

A wife your saying his partner is his wife. What a joke. Hey man it's your story tell it how you want. What ever blows your hair back. What ever makes you sleep at night. I am pushing my point that your are wrong. There are page after page of people saying the same thing. so your saying he goes 50/50 with his partner 25% and you get 33.%. Yup I knew it's greed.