Ski Posted August 21, 2006 Report Share Posted August 21, 2006 Despite the biased headline written by the very biased Times-Tribune editors, Montage's value during the recent appraisal was decided on the value of the property as a ski resort, rather than as property to be subdivided and sold off. And why? Because the new owners are obligated to run it as a ski resort. The appraisal takes into consideration what the actual use of the property will be. The little bitch Washo started jumping up and down, sweat leaping from his make-up caked face. He thought he had them right where he wanted. Washo has allowed a local developer to join in his lawsuit...hmmmm...no wonder why he wanted an appraisal for the land as property to be developed! The little bitch has his own "backroom" deal in the works! ************ Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Papasteeze Posted August 21, 2006 Report Share Posted August 21, 2006 aaarg........ that sucks, I hope it doesn't drag out, in 10 yrs will that 400 acres be worth 100k per acre if subdivided? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ski Posted August 21, 2006 Author Report Share Posted August 21, 2006 After they tear down the $20 million water park, new lodges and lifts? Is that the plan, Rob? Once---in the entire history of real estate---has a company passed on buying nearby property for under one million for the privledge of spending over $20 million as part of a conspiracy? From the T-T yesterday: "He (Washo) pointed out that a 2002 sale of land contiguous to Montage netted $22,000 per acre for a 58-acre, undeveloped parcel." If you are selling a parcel of land, Rob, does it appraise for the parcel or the amount you'd get after subdividing? What's your guess, Rob? I'll give you a hint: THE ENTIRE PARCEL. If Lackawanna County wants to ditch skiing and develop the entire property as housing, then the appraisal should take that into consideration. But the property is being sold with the buyer being obligated to run it as a ski resort for an entire decade. And it's a ski resort with a history of losing a million dollars a year. Washo wants it appraised as if it's being sold for real estate development, yet the contract makes it impossible to do that for 10 years. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Papasteeze Posted August 21, 2006 Report Share Posted August 21, 2006 you need not be so harsh. What I am saying is that after 10 years, that acreage appears to still have a value surpassing the the purchase price and improvements if were to be sub divided and developed. THAT IS NOT A REASON TO TIE THE HANDS OF THE INVESTOR BY DEMANDING A HIGHER PRICE UNLESS THAT IS WHAT IS LIKELY TO HAPPEN. Apparently, Washo has other motivation driving him to stir things up, he can't possibly be so stupid to drive a higher price and kill the sale to put the county back to square one. Question: Why wouldn't the county write into the agreement a first rights of refusal in the event an owner wants to start the subdivsion process after 10 years? Wouldn't that assure that the value remains as a ski resort not a developable piece of real estate? BTW - I am tearing down a home that is 15 years old right now - The house is a split level and will hurt the value of other homes around it. It baffles people. They say it is a waste. I doubt the new home owner on that homesite will feel that way when they move in. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Papasteeze Posted August 21, 2006 Report Share Posted August 21, 2006 Don't ever not think that these guys who are buying this are not businessmen. Montage can't be bought as a developable property now, but maybe in 10 years.. I wonder if they would agree that if they are to sell that they would only sell as an appraised ski resort? hmmmmmmmm... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ski Posted August 21, 2006 Author Report Share Posted August 21, 2006 Don't ever not think that these guys who are buying this are not businessmen. Montage can't be bought as a developable property now, but maybe in 10 years.. I wonder if they would agree that if they are to sell that they would only sell as an appraised ski resort? hmmmmmmmm... Who said they weren't businessmen? And no shit that they can do what they want in 10 years. Maybe they'll decide to rip apart a $20 to $40 million 4-season resort and sell it for $12 million in land. Yeah, that makes sense. It makes about as much sense as the second sentence of your post. And just for your info, Rob, SNLLC can sell it at any time, but they'll still have to have it appraised as a ski area because the 10 yr commitment transfers. BTW - I am tearing down a home that is 15 years old right now - The house is a split level and will hurt the value of other homes around it. It baffles people. They say it is a waste. I doubt the new home owner on that homesite will feel that way when they move in. Who cares? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Timeless Posted August 21, 2006 Report Share Posted August 21, 2006 Wow some not too deeply buried hostility here me thinks.......... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
parkbuilder Posted August 21, 2006 Report Share Posted August 21, 2006 Wow some not too deeply buried hostility here me thinks.......... hehehe... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
parkbuilder Posted August 21, 2006 Report Share Posted August 21, 2006 You don't want to be on SKIs bad side... as Sublime says...Paybacks a motherfuckin bitch.. not to much worry here lol i leave for vermont wednesday... just havin a little fun. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ski Posted August 21, 2006 Author Report Share Posted August 21, 2006 Ha, Senor is just goofing PB...and Timeless was just making an accurate observation. Fair enough. But if I ever start threatening to join in lawsuits to create problems for CB, then I'll certainly expect to be on his bad side. Of course, I'm not a little scumbag ratball, so I'd never do something like that. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Timeless Posted August 21, 2006 Report Share Posted August 21, 2006 Ha, Senor is just goofing PB...and Timeless was just making an accurate observation. Fair enough. But if I ever start threatening to join in lawsuits to create problems for CB, then I'll certainly expect to be on his bad side. Of course, I'm not a little scumbag ratball, so I'd never do something like that. LMAO Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Papasteeze Posted August 21, 2006 Report Share Posted August 21, 2006 I asked before, I will ask again, what the hell is driving washo? Does he have a history of this? Was he elected? If not, who appointed him? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Glenn Posted August 22, 2006 Report Share Posted August 22, 2006 I asked before, I will ask again, what the hell is driving washo? Does he have a history of this? Was he elected? If not, who appointed him? He was appointed by the Dem party I believe. From what I've gathered there is nothing publically known that is driving him, aside from the fact that he's a huge doucher. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ski Posted August 22, 2006 Author Report Share Posted August 22, 2006 He was appointed by the Dem party I believe. From what I've gathered there is nothing publically known that is driving him, aside from the fact that he's a huge doucher. Correct on all counts. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.