Yes I think this is a good point – he is not using language to properly convey his intention. Knucklehead’s lack of knowledge of the horse world, as well as horses, is showing up again.
It’s common to commit to buy a horse contingent on a PPE – that is, Buyer wants the horse and will definitely buy it nothing too concerning is on the PPE – but Knucklehead is using a description that is the buyer’s language, not the seller’s.
So if we re-interpret and re-arrange the words – Guessing the probable intention is: If Buyer wants a PPE, first agree on price and fully commit to buying at that price “contingent on results of PPE”. Then do the PPE.
I wonder if he thinks that he, the Seller, will decide if the PPE is “clean” (a term I don’t usually hear re PPE’s). As we all know, a PPE is information, not a pass/fail exam.
It’s tricky to give the Seller a say as to if a PPE has enough concerning info to back out of the purchase. The language he’s using (or his sales team is using) is hard to interpret as to which party makes the decision.
I have an idea that he probably thinks that he will keep the Buyer’s money and will come up with reasons why the Buyer gets the horses in as-is condition, PPE or not.