a paragraph it appears that there are three different and distinct phrases used to describe what is add to that lee submitted and tendered as a purchase off  net the first line says that's an acceptable point five off of the second one says it's a third party offer and then at the very end it's  plain generic offer of lower case do you not think there's any ambiguity in those terms at all i do not i think is that i think they will stay with ok acceptable or it is clear document itself ok so then i assume then you just it's an it's a it's assumed that a third party offer were first to be acceptable off i offer correct paragraph correct ok so then when we go down to this kind of goes to the gist of the argument receive an executed copy of the offer what is the offer the authors the third  offer that there can be in this case ok what does that what's the universe of the third party offer that needs to be tendered to the holder of the first holder of the right of first refusal to offer to purchase without having to get into any further details to read the terms himself mean ok let's let's say we don't go to the expense of evidence yet we look at the language of the right itself executed copy of the upper right this is what the dispute is all attachments inclusions conditions proceed in that are listed are identified and the offer that must be made and satisfied contemporaneous with the offer are those included as required you know tendered to the to the to the holder if the answer that question is it depends on exactly read it is you're talking about the intermediary or maybe not all the language at the south it's first thirty eight entitled to know that it's and ways that the that the author or didn't have to put down on this money deposit so firstly it says well i'm not going to be there i'm going to match this i get the same deal that bill gates gets so in that case isn't first thirty eight entitled to see everything that the parties have agreed on it is a form offer a form of course can be amended can be changed we can put it on them something in  of any potential purchase of any three paragraph or hell if that's so couldn't you have written that into the into the language of the contract with some clarity because that's the whole ball of contention that's why you're here in this court they're saying that presume form the purchase officer that if the language indicates that attached there is an earnest money deposit at that means in order for it have to have been acceptable to any object and in order the language of right of first refusal and the terms for fighter purchase officer the natural sequence would have been first thirty eight head one day two except to two either you know  similar fit offer on the penthouse unit and then only then would i'm sorry then as a matter of just the requirements of the purchase offer the tracys would have had additional the circumstances on the fifth that make it a bonafide offer in other words is the offer not ready it doesn't constitute except a want by offer until the fifth after receiving proof of the offers ability to close at that point is when it's tendered and when the right of first refusal is actually triggered i wouldn't think so because the jury to the extent that the me reach for it evidence which come back to the courts question a little bit more directly you know if that were true it doesn't make a difference because first thirty eight didn't have the ability to independently determine the