Its a humorous thought really. Pending US sales lowest since recorded
(2001)
By region, the Northeast decreased 8.3% in August from July; it fell
18.3% from August 2006. The Midwest fell 2.9% in August from July; it
fell 18.0% since August 2006. The South decreased 9.5% in August from
July; it dropped 21.3% since August 2006. The West declined 2.7% in
August from July; it tumbled 27.1% since August 2006.
I have to admit to a sort of delight when things like this happen, a
guilty pleasure when the greedy lose their shit...
I giggle when I see the "sold" signs at the Wesley..what most dont'
get is that nothing can be sold without a CO and investors will walk
away from deposits
the scary thing is that builders will start using inferior materials
when they can't meet their costs....
will we end up with more gone goons and skeleton buildings? I'll love
it here anyway but it will be a bummer for those who are obsessed with
Asbury's image.
-- In AsburyPark@yahoogroups.com, Gary Wien <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> My take:
>
> Asbury Partners will only hurt their own properties (Convention
> Hall / Paramount Theatre) with condos built across the street. That
> will be a total disaster imo. I can see people complaining about the
> noise after 9pm on nights with a show; people complaining about
> someone leaving a beer can on their lawn or doing something even
> worse; and people complaining about the parking situation. It's a
> disaster waiting to happen.
>
> I think MM recognizes that for Convention Hall/Paramount to work they
> NEED to have a mini restaurant row near the facilities. The Wonder
> Bar plays a role along with Salt River Grill and Cabanas. The three
> are very different restaurants and all would attract people before
> and after the show. I'm betting that MM would rather see something
> like the Wonder Bar remain and either build a second restaurant next
> to it or have that be a parking area.
>
> Why else would they spend money rennovating the Paramount? So a
> bunch of condo owners could complain and limit the type/amount of
> shows they could do?
>
> Personally, I don't understand why Asbury Park can not simply say no
> more condo development until the existing condo projects are finished
> and sold. Why have even more of a glut in a down market?
>
>
> On Oct 2, 2007, at 7:11 AM, justifiedright wrote:
>
> > Occam's Razor - the simplest explanation is usually the right one.
> >
> > I see 3 entities whose current PRIMARY interests simply don't coincide
> > at this moment in time. Nothing untoward or ill-meaning is going on.
> >
> > Pat, Lance and Debbie: Primary interest - Want to continue to invest
> > in WB to make it better, so they need a long term lease to protect the
> > investment; certainly can't agree to be out on 60 day's notice.
> > Conclusion: Must have 5 year lease.
> >
> > Madison Marquette: Primary Interest - to buy the whole block to
> > build condos; but not right now because real estate isn't selling and
> > financing is strict. Have to wait. Not going to buy the block now and
> > cover carrying costs/potential liabilities just to save WB. If they
> > gave WB a 5 year lease, they wouldn't be able to develop it 1 year
> > from now, 2 years, etc.
> > Conclusion: 5 year lease contrary to their primary interests.
> >
> > Asbury Partners: Primary Interests - (Mirror opposite of MM) They
> > want to sell the whole block to condo developer. Now suffering
> > carrying costs and potential liabilities. Won't give WB a 5 year
> > lease, because the length of the lease will hold up a sale to a sub-
> > developer for exactly that long.
> > Conclusion: 5 year lease contrary to their primary interests.
> >
> > I know it feels better to ascribe all sorts of Machiavellian reasons
> > including class warfare, social planning, etc. all to create a
> > villain, but things don't run philosophically in real estate.
> > Developers aren't part of a secret society to create a new world
> > order. It's one parcel at a time and how much can they make on that
> > parcel. Simple.
> >
> > To make a deal, quite simply, all sides need the their financial
> > incentives to coincide. They don't right now.
> >
> > LAST HOPE: The secondary incentives: Asbury Partners will suffer
> > increased carrying costs when the WB closes. To them and MM the block
> > will look terrible, affecting the rest of the beachfront.
> >
> > Perhaps a last minute deal is struck as a bow to secondary incentives,
> > but make no mistake - they won't greatly compromise the primary
> > incentive to keep WB open. Larry can find someone to open a bar there
> > when WB leaves to cover carry costs if he has to, so the secondary
> > incentives are not that strong.
> >
> > It's business.
> >
> > Unfortunately, we don't get what we want. It's not the first time
> > for any of us.
> >
> > There are parts of the redevelopment we would all do differently. I
> > guess that's part of being a diverse community it never looks like
> > one person's perfect place.
> >
> > If many of you were in charge things would look differently. If I
> > were in charge the Casino complex would have been knocked down and
> > replaced with a much larger, world class facility.
> >
> > Maybe WB gets a temp space elsewhere and moves back to the beach in a
> > few years, when all involved have similar current interests.
> >
> >
> >
>
Yahoo! Groups Links
<*> To visit your group on the web, go to:
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/AsburyPark/
<*> Your email settings:
Individual Email | Traditional
<*> To change settings online go to:
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/AsburyPark/join
(Yahoo! ID required)
<*> To change settings via email:
mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
<*> To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
<*> Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to:
http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
