In the decade since the buck passing analysis of goocl (BPA) was (re)introduced by TM. Scanlon in his book, What We Owe to Each Other,1 there has been a great deal of optimism about the view. This optimism is not well founded, and so I shall argue that it is time to abandon the BPA.2 This paper will be concerned with the BPA as an analysis of goocl in the sense of final value rather than in any attributive use.3 My suggestion is not that the BPA cannot be made to work for one narrow technical reason or another. This may or may not be so. Rather, I shall argue that the BPA is unable to deliver on its supposed advantages and that in the end it lacks plausibility as an analysis of final value. To make this case, it will be necessary to consider what the BPA is and what benefits are supposed to accrue from adopting it. The BPA and its cousin, the jittirig attititcle artahrsis, are not presented in uniform ways throughout the literature. Scanlon’s original presentation of the BPA is most likely about properties,"* whereas other accounts are about language and concepts.