Land investment

[Ricechex]

The whole idea of seminars and such is nothing but a red flag to me. A con game if you will.

I was looking into land at one time too. The following is a link to an excellent book. However, after reading it, I was so overwhelmed by all the tasks involved, and all the things that could go wrong, etc….that I gave up the land buying idea.

[NicMM]

Ricechex,

Thanks for your information. I will read this book.

NicMM

[NicMM]

Ricechex,

Thanks for your information. I will read this book.

NicMM

[NicMM]

Ricechex,

Thanks for your information. I will read this book.

NicMM

[NicMM]

Ricechex,

Thanks for your information. I will read this book.

NicMM

[NicMM]

Ricechex,

Thanks for your information. I will read this book.

NicMM

[CA renter]

[quote=NicMM]In that seminar, many success stories were provided. One of them is a big land in Temecula bought in 70s for $400k and lastly offered about $20 million. This land is hold by the speaker.

By the way, Palmdale will be a transportation center as there is an airport nearby, several high speed railroad in construction will go through there. There is a special tax zone called FoxField industrial zone in Lancaster. Google backed eSolar put their solar farm there. and BYD (Buffet invested Chinese green car company) also set manufacture facilities there.

-NicMM

[quote=jpinpb]My take on the land. Depends how long you plan to keep it. How old are you? Can you just sit on it for the next 20-30 years? Plan on leaving it to kids?

I can think back to 30 years ago when there was a big nothing in Temecula. I even remember a lawsuit involving some land in Temecula. Big dispute. I kept thinking who the hell would live in the middle of nowhere between Riverside and San Diego.

I remember when we first moved to California my dad was telling me about some guy who bought quite a bit of land way back in the day in the middle of nowhere. He ended up making quite a bit of money. He was talking about Palm Springs.

Also, the expression, “They stopped making land.” Really applies to land, not houses.

I don’t think I’m being bullish, but I wouldn’t be shocked if in 30 years they end up building up there in Palmdale/Lancaster.

But I also agree, whoever is selling it, already subdivided and they’re making money off the subdivision of the parcels. Nevertheless, developers like to build and when they overbuild, they continue to push out to the exburbs and deserts.[/quote][/quote]

For every supposed “success story” about raw land, there are thousands who’ve lost their tails on land investments.

I know someone who invested in the desert area back in the 1950s, and pretty much couldn’t break even on a sale until the bubble of the 2000s. The Antelope Valley, Mojave Desert, and surrounding areas have a long history of emptying the wallets of wannabe land speculators. If anything, it’s less promising today than it was 20 years ago. Crime has shot up there since the late 80s, and it’s a cluster of low-income neighborhoods that can easily get worse in just a few short years.

IMHO, what the others say is true. If a company needs to hold seminars to sucker people into buying their lots, it’s a losing bet. If there were any money to be made, they’d develop the lots themselves. Try asking them why they’re not doing it.

[CA renter]

[quote=NicMM]In that seminar, many success stories were provided. One of them is a big land in Temecula bought in 70s for $400k and lastly offered about $20 million. This land is hold by the speaker.

By the way, Palmdale will be a transportation center as there is an airport nearby, several high speed railroad in construction will go through there. There is a special tax zone called FoxField industrial zone in Lancaster. Google backed eSolar put their solar farm there. and BYD (Buffet invested Chinese green car company) also set manufacture facilities there.

-NicMM

[quote=jpinpb]My take on the land. Depends how long you plan to keep it. How old are you? Can you just sit on it for the next 20-30 years? Plan on leaving it to kids?

I can think back to 30 years ago when there was a big nothing in Temecula. I even remember a lawsuit involving some land in Temecula. Big dispute. I kept thinking who the hell would live in the middle of nowhere between Riverside and San Diego.

I remember when we first moved to California my dad was telling me about some guy who bought quite a bit of land way back in the day in the middle of nowhere. He ended up making quite a bit of money. He was talking about Palm Springs.

Also, the expression, “They stopped making land.” Really applies to land, not houses.

I don’t think I’m being bullish, but I wouldn’t be shocked if in 30 years they end up building up there in Palmdale/Lancaster.

But I also agree, whoever is selling it, already subdivided and they’re making money off the subdivision of the parcels. Nevertheless, developers like to build and when they overbuild, they continue to push out to the exburbs and deserts.[/quote][/quote]

For every supposed “success story” about raw land, there are thousands who’ve lost their tails on land investments.

I know someone who invested in the desert area back in the 1950s, and pretty much couldn’t break even on a sale until the bubble of the 2000s. The Antelope Valley, Mojave Desert, and surrounding areas have a long history of emptying the wallets of wannabe land speculators. If anything, it’s less promising today than it was 20 years ago. Crime has shot up there since the late 80s, and it’s a cluster of low-income neighborhoods that can easily get worse in just a few short years.

IMHO, what the others say is true. If a company needs to hold seminars to sucker people into buying their lots, it’s a losing bet. If there were any money to be made, they’d develop the lots themselves. Try asking them why they’re not doing it.

[CA renter]

[quote=NicMM]In that seminar, many success stories were provided. One of them is a big land in Temecula bought in 70s for $400k and lastly offered about $20 million. This land is hold by the speaker.

By the way, Palmdale will be a transportation center as there is an airport nearby, several high speed railroad in construction will go through there. There is a special tax zone called FoxField industrial zone in Lancaster. Google backed eSolar put their solar farm there. and BYD (Buffet invested Chinese green car company) also set manufacture facilities there.

-NicMM

[quote=jpinpb]My take on the land. Depends how long you plan to keep it. How old are you? Can you just sit on it for the next 20-30 years? Plan on leaving it to kids?

I can think back to 30 years ago when there was a big nothing in Temecula. I even remember a lawsuit involving some land in Temecula. Big dispute. I kept thinking who the hell would live in the middle of nowhere between Riverside and San Diego.

I remember when we first moved to California my dad was telling me about some guy who bought quite a bit of land way back in the day in the middle of nowhere. He ended up making quite a bit of money. He was talking about Palm Springs.

Also, the expression, “They stopped making land.” Really applies to land, not houses.

I don’t think I’m being bullish, but I wouldn’t be shocked if in 30 years they end up building up there in Palmdale/Lancaster.

But I also agree, whoever is selling it, already subdivided and they’re making money off the subdivision of the parcels. Nevertheless, developers like to build and when they overbuild, they continue to push out to the exburbs and deserts.[/quote][/quote]

For every supposed “success story” about raw land, there are thousands who’ve lost their tails on land investments.

I know someone who invested in the desert area back in the 1950s, and pretty much couldn’t break even on a sale until the bubble of the 2000s. The Antelope Valley, Mojave Desert, and surrounding areas have a long history of emptying the wallets of wannabe land speculators. If anything, it’s less promising today than it was 20 years ago. Crime has shot up there since the late 80s, and it’s a cluster of low-income neighborhoods that can easily get worse in just a few short years.

IMHO, what the others say is true. If a company needs to hold seminars to sucker people into buying their lots, it’s a losing bet. If there were any money to be made, they’d develop the lots themselves. Try asking them why they’re not doing it.

[CA renter]

[quote=NicMM]In that seminar, many success stories were provided. One of them is a big land in Temecula bought in 70s for $400k and lastly offered about $20 million. This land is hold by the speaker.

By the way, Palmdale will be a transportation center as there is an airport nearby, several high speed railroad in construction will go through there. There is a special tax zone called FoxField industrial zone in Lancaster. Google backed eSolar put their solar farm there. and BYD (Buffet invested Chinese green car company) also set manufacture facilities there.

-NicMM

[quote=jpinpb]My take on the land. Depends how long you plan to keep it. How old are you? Can you just sit on it for the next 20-30 years? Plan on leaving it to kids?

I can think back to 30 years ago when there was a big nothing in Temecula. I even remember a lawsuit involving some land in Temecula. Big dispute. I kept thinking who the hell would live in the middle of nowhere between Riverside and San Diego.

I remember when we first moved to California my dad was telling me about some guy who bought quite a bit of land way back in the day in the middle of nowhere. He ended up making quite a bit of money. He was talking about Palm Springs.

Also, the expression, “They stopped making land.” Really applies to land, not houses.

I don’t think I’m being bullish, but I wouldn’t be shocked if in 30 years they end up building up there in Palmdale/Lancaster.

But I also agree, whoever is selling it, already subdivided and they’re making money off the subdivision of the parcels. Nevertheless, developers like to build and when they overbuild, they continue to push out to the exburbs and deserts.[/quote][/quote]

For every supposed “success story” about raw land, there are thousands who’ve lost their tails on land investments.

I know someone who invested in the desert area back in the 1950s, and pretty much couldn’t break even on a sale until the bubble of the 2000s. The Antelope Valley, Mojave Desert, and surrounding areas have a long history of emptying the wallets of wannabe land speculators. If anything, it’s less promising today than it was 20 years ago. Crime has shot up there since the late 80s, and it’s a cluster of low-income neighborhoods that can easily get worse in just a few short years.

IMHO, what the others say is true. If a company needs to hold seminars to sucker people into buying their lots, it’s a losing bet. If there were any money to be made, they’d develop the lots themselves. Try asking them why they’re not doing it.

[CA renter]

[quote=NicMM]In that seminar, many success stories were provided. One of them is a big land in Temecula bought in 70s for $400k and lastly offered about $20 million. This land is hold by the speaker.

By the way, Palmdale will be a transportation center as there is an airport nearby, several high speed railroad in construction will go through there. There is a special tax zone called FoxField industrial zone in Lancaster. Google backed eSolar put their solar farm there. and BYD (Buffet invested Chinese green car company) also set manufacture facilities there.

-NicMM

[quote=jpinpb]My take on the land. Depends how long you plan to keep it. How old are you? Can you just sit on it for the next 20-30 years? Plan on leaving it to kids?

I can think back to 30 years ago when there was a big nothing in Temecula. I even remember a lawsuit involving some land in Temecula. Big dispute. I kept thinking who the hell would live in the middle of nowhere between Riverside and San Diego.

I remember when we first moved to California my dad was telling me about some guy who bought quite a bit of land way back in the day in the middle of nowhere. He ended up making quite a bit of money. He was talking about Palm Springs.

Also, the expression, “They stopped making land.” Really applies to land, not houses.

I don’t think I’m being bullish, but I wouldn’t be shocked if in 30 years they end up building up there in Palmdale/Lancaster.

But I also agree, whoever is selling it, already subdivided and they’re making money off the subdivision of the parcels. Nevertheless, developers like to build and when they overbuild, they continue to push out to the exburbs and deserts.[/quote][/quote]

For every supposed “success story” about raw land, there are thousands who’ve lost their tails on land investments.

I know someone who invested in the desert area back in the 1950s, and pretty much couldn’t break even on a sale until the bubble of the 2000s. The Antelope Valley, Mojave Desert, and surrounding areas have a long history of emptying the wallets of wannabe land speculators. If anything, it’s less promising today than it was 20 years ago. Crime has shot up there since the late 80s, and it’s a cluster of low-income neighborhoods that can easily get worse in just a few short years.

IMHO, what the others say is true. If a company needs to hold seminars to sucker people into buying their lots, it’s a losing bet. If there were any money to be made, they’d develop the lots themselves. Try asking them why they’re not doing it.

[NicMM]

By searching the author Curtis Seltzer I found the website of his column: http://www.landthink.com/

NicMM

[NicMM]

By searching the author Curtis Seltzer I found the website of his column: http://www.landthink.com/

NicMM

[NicMM]

By searching the author Curtis Seltzer I found the website of his column: http://www.landthink.com/

NicMM

[NicMM]

By searching the author Curtis Seltzer I found the website of his column: http://www.landthink.com/

NicMM

[Author]

Posts