[surveyor]

[quote=4plexowner]edit: just re-read your post – you are suggesting that the banks will foreclose on the construction loans and will let 11,000 condos sit vacant until the market recovers?[/quote]

Never underestimate the stupidity of banks!

I imagine what will happen is that they will hold on to the condos as long as they can, hoping the market will come back. Then they will probably declare bankruptcy or fail and close up shop. During the prevailing auction, someone will buy the condos for pennies and then will have to spend money re-habbing it for sale or for rent.

In this scenario, it sounds like the condos won’t hit the general population until a few years.

If the banks were smart, they would dump them on the market and just take the hit, but so far, all the banks with huge numbers of properties have not followed that particular line of thinking.

[surveyor]

[quote=4plexowner]edit: just re-read your post – you are suggesting that the banks will foreclose on the construction loans and will let 11,000 condos sit vacant until the market recovers?[/quote]

Never underestimate the stupidity of banks!

I imagine what will happen is that they will hold on to the condos as long as they can, hoping the market will come back. Then they will probably declare bankruptcy or fail and close up shop. During the prevailing auction, someone will buy the condos for pennies and then will have to spend money re-habbing it for sale or for rent.

In this scenario, it sounds like the condos won’t hit the general population until a few years.

If the banks were smart, they would dump them on the market and just take the hit, but so far, all the banks with huge numbers of properties have not followed that particular line of thinking.

[surveyor]

[quote=4plexowner]edit: just re-read your post – you are suggesting that the banks will foreclose on the construction loans and will let 11,000 condos sit vacant until the market recovers?[/quote]

Never underestimate the stupidity of banks!

I imagine what will happen is that they will hold on to the condos as long as they can, hoping the market will come back. Then they will probably declare bankruptcy or fail and close up shop. During the prevailing auction, someone will buy the condos for pennies and then will have to spend money re-habbing it for sale or for rent.

In this scenario, it sounds like the condos won’t hit the general population until a few years.

If the banks were smart, they would dump them on the market and just take the hit, but so far, all the banks with huge numbers of properties have not followed that particular line of thinking.

[surveyor]

[quote=4plexowner]edit: just re-read your post – you are suggesting that the banks will foreclose on the construction loans and will let 11,000 condos sit vacant until the market recovers?[/quote]

Never underestimate the stupidity of banks!

I imagine what will happen is that they will hold on to the condos as long as they can, hoping the market will come back. Then they will probably declare bankruptcy or fail and close up shop. During the prevailing auction, someone will buy the condos for pennies and then will have to spend money re-habbing it for sale or for rent.

In this scenario, it sounds like the condos won’t hit the general population until a few years.

If the banks were smart, they would dump them on the market and just take the hit, but so far, all the banks with huge numbers of properties have not followed that particular line of thinking.

[surveyor]

the answer

Two words:

COMIC-CON.

(hahahahahahhaaaa)

[surveyor]

the answer

Two words:

COMIC-CON.

(hahahahahahhaaaa)

[surveyor]

the answer

Two words:

COMIC-CON.

(hahahahahahhaaaa)

[surveyor]

the answer

Two words:

COMIC-CON.

(hahahahahahhaaaa)

[surveyor]

the answer

Two words:

COMIC-CON.

(hahahahahahhaaaa)

[surveyor]

allan:

I certainly would feel better about it being covered better in history if it weren’t for the fact that many Americans don’t tend to study history…

[surveyor]

allan:

I certainly would feel better about it being covered better in history if it weren’t for the fact that many Americans don’t tend to study history…

[surveyor]

allan:

I certainly would feel better about it being covered better in history if it weren’t for the fact that many Americans don’t tend to study history…

[surveyor]

allan:

I certainly would feel better about it being covered better in history if it weren’t for the fact that many Americans don’t tend to study history…

[surveyor]

allan:

I certainly would feel better about it being covered better in history if it weren’t for the fact that many Americans don’t tend to study history…

[surveyor]

some light reading….

A few of the things I’ve perused the last few days.

http://www.latimes.com/news/printedition/suncommentary/la-oe-kirchick16-2008jun16,0,7624149.story

The money quote:

Yet Rockefeller’s highly partisan report does not substantiate its most explosive claims. Rockefeller, for instance, charges that “top administration officials made repeated statements that falsely linked Iraq and Al Qaeda as a single threat and insinuated that Iraq played a role in 9/11.” Yet what did his report actually find? That Iraq-Al Qaeda links were “substantiated by intelligence information.” The same goes for claims about Hussein’s possession of biological and chemical weapons, as well as his alleged operation of a nuclear weapons program.

http://www.commentarymagazine.com/viewarticle.cfm/special-preview-br–why-iraq-was-inevitable-11456

Those who condemn Bush’s decision to go to war, bemoan its cost in material and human terms, and deplore the damage it has allegedly done to the American image around the world should consider what would have happened if there had been no war. It is not just that millions of Iraqis would still be in the iron grip of Saddam and his police state. The fact is that, by 2002, no inspection regime and no amount of international pressure, no matter how plumped up by yet another UN resolution, would have kept him contained any longer. The Oil-for-Food corruption would have continued to grow unrestrained, finding reliable co-conspirators in Europe and the Middle East. Rising oil prices over the next half-decade would have kept Saddam awash in cash, allowing him to rebuild his military and cement his connections with powers like Syria and Russia. He had called our bluff before; but this time it was no bluff.

Read a little history and maybe you’ll realize that Bush isn’t a warmonger. He actually had to act to rid the world of a threat to the United States.

[Author]

Posts