patrick.net

elliemae says

Tenouncetrout says

I’m not a sanctimonious prick.

You might want to re-read some of your many posts - you'd change your mind.

Eschew Obfuscation

No I'm just a Pompous ass. Sanctimony is not my strong suit.
I'm just a lowly pissed off citizen.

I think they need to make everyone on welfare work the fields, instead of convicts.

EMan says

Yup, that seems to be what Amazon is saying to all of its former CA affiliates.

You need to register your business outside of CA through a law firm. Than you can go back to being an affiliate for Amazon. That's what others are doing now.

Sure, just set up a shell corporation in Wyoming for patrick.net. It's convenient, cheap, and easy. You can share the same headquarters as thousands of other shell corporations. It's truly a cottage industry. It's what all the cool tax dodgers are doing this year.

The guy is an admitted realtor already.

LOL.

Bubble Bobble says

This is what I have to work with, 40 acres, 1.5 hours from home, no power, no water, dirt road access. This one isn't mine but I have one like it.

*Deleted* Just realized this is a commercial thread and not about surviving on junk land.

BB- Thank you for Bid4Assets - great site!!!

Some hilarious stories behind some of these properties... google "River Ranch Acres". Basically, a redneck haven where owners are chased off their own land, as it interferes with the anarcho-redneck commune of trailer livin' and tobacco chewin', 6 trailers hooked into one generator with some extension cords to power the bug zapper and the 13" B/W under the awning. Central Florida, boy howdy, 90F / 90% humidity, true Savannah/Swampland livin'.

Like the properties in DC and Dayton and Jackson, MS. Either total rubbish, inhabited by a gang of well armed heroin salespersons, or with god knows how much in back taxes that will probably be many times what you pay for it, which is probably why the seller wants out.

1oz Silver Coins by a private mint with little collectible value ("Generic Silver Round") being sold for $130+S/H, a 400% markup.

But there may be a gem in here somewhere. Nothing like buying a $300 piece of land for shits and giggles. :)

I think most Americans are ok with 10,000 troops there if the Iraqi government "requests" it.

And yes, these troops are protecting the peace we brought to Iraq.

All the "Serious" commentators, left and right, agree, and only marginalized extremist whackos want otherwise.

pretty much, actually.

"America's headed the wrong way fast - six million foreclosures, 14 trillion in debt, 500 billion in higher taxes and the worst long-term unemployment in generations,"

"Don't let Obama drive us to disaster, change direction."

Tenouncetrout says

"America's headed the wrong way fast - six million foreclosures, 14 trillion in debt, 500 billion in higher taxes and the worst long-term unemployment in generations,"

that's not Obamas fault, thats pretty much everyones fault. Banks and Wall street for their cronyism, deadbeats that bought into this for their greed.

Rent Seeking behavior blows. It encourages laziness and speculation; and punishes actual productivity and innovation.

It's not just about land anymore, now they are trying to make ideas into property - not just the limited rights to protect and reward innovators, but permanent, multi-generational revenue streams.

Obligatory:

Troy says

I think most Americans are ok with 10,000 troops there if the Iraqi government "requests" it.
And yes, these troops are protecting the peace we brought to Iraq.
All the "Serious" commentators, left and right, agree, and only marginalized extremist whackos want otherwise.
pretty much, actually.

“Nessuna soluzione . . . nessun problema!„

I'm not ok with 10k troops in Iraq. Having troops anywhere in the mideast is destabilizing. It's a magnet for terrorist activity and a great boon for extremist terrorist organizations recruiting. Osama bin Laden was banished from Saudi Arabia in 1990 for speaking out against having Us troops based there. He then built Al-Qaeda and did his recruiting by denouncing American troops stationed in Saudi Arabia. Saudi Arabia has always been largest source of money for terrorism. If the US really wanted to fight terrorism then we would stop treating the Saudis with kid gloves.

Iraq was at peace in 2001 when we went in, how did we bring peace?

Just curious. You said "HOA" won't let you run a business.

I'm unaware of any "HOA" properties that are 20 acres in size.

You said you could run this out of your house, yet you need 20 acres if you run it somewhere else?

bob2356 says

Iraq was at peace in 2001 when we went in, how did we bring peace?

Chalabi & the INC replacement government. There was going to be no settlement with Saddam's government. The optics were too bad on this.

It's a magnet for terrorist activity

We can't let terrorists dictate what we do and don't do.

If the 10,000-strong force has a training mission, I see no problem with it.

Abandoning Vietnam completely in 1973 did in fact throw away the investment we had made in Thieu's regime, and was a mistake (but a mistake dictated by the national disgust with the war by 1970).

bob2356 says

Iraq was at peace in 2001 when we went in, how did we bring peace?

It makes sense in Newspeak coming from the Ministry of Truth.

War is peace.

That's how we brought peace. See, in order to bring peace you must bring war. War is peace. Freedom is slavery. Ignorance is Strength.

We're there already:
War is peace: Look at Libya, Afghanistan, Iraq, etc...
Freedom is slavery: Destroy unions so that we all become corporate wage slaves with no benefits.
Ignorance is strength: Dismantle public education. Vilify intellectuals while elevating the ignorant. (e.g. The best president is a "regular guy who you can have a beer with." [sic])

It's amazing that this country decided to take George Orwell's warning about a possible future and turn it into a blueprint for "progress."

That's doubleplusspecial.

I hope that the Ministry of Plenty increases the ration of chocolate again.

EMan says

You need to register your business outside of CA through a law firm.

Incorporation is easier than you think. You don't necessarily need a law firm for a relatively uncomplicated business.

just_passing_through says

Flying into LA there was a multi-row discussion around me (I just listened) about how all were from LA but only visiting. They'd moved to San Antonio for the better business climate.

I noticed you didn't list either a) where in LA they moved to San Antonio from (they could have been from Bakersfield for all you know), b) what business they were in, and c) any other details that would matter. It's easy to relate such an anecdote, but harder to think critically about it.

simchaland says

Sure, just set up a shell corporation in Wyoming for patrick.net. It's convenient, cheap, and easy. You can share the same headquarters as thousands of other shell corporations. It's truly a cottage industry.

Anyone sophisticated that is doing business with a random Wyoming corporation would first wonder why they were registered in Wyoming and want additional assurances.

Well why was Bush horrible

#1 was putting crooks in charge of overseeing the nation's banking system, some of the same idiots who blew it up the last time with the S&L crisis under Reagan.

http://dorkmonger.blogspot.com/2008/11/cutting-red-tape.html

http://www.vdare.com/sailer/080928_rove.htm

But while disastrous, this wasn't the core failure of the Bush years. That would be screwing up the occupation of Afghanistan and Iraq, getting ~4000 soldiers killed and pissing away 2-3 trillion dollars.

2-3 trillion dollars. It's unbelievable, really. The mideast fuckup may still in fact cripple this country as a going concern.

http://www.reuters.com/article/2011/06/29/us-usa-war-idUSTRE75S25320110629

Putting Alito and Roberts on the supreme court is just a partisan thing; if you're Republican it's a good thing and if you're sane it's not. At any rate the difference between these two clowns and Sotomayor and the other lesbian is obvious.

Cutting taxes in 2001-2003 instead of getting our fiscal house in order.

Medicare Part D being a ~$60B/yr give-away to pharmaceutical companies.

NCLB putting test-taking in place of education in this country.

E-man says

We hear all the stories about how first-time-buyers lose out to investors, probably 'all cash' (no one can verify).

This is not true believe it or not. It's emotion that was doing the talking when FTHB lost out on an offer.

The homes I have lost out on were absolutely lost to all cash offers, this has been verified, all of them closed in only a couple weeks. And to the original post, yes, they have all been under 400k. I would say those most at risk are homes either in decent condition that would rent for good money, or homes in decent areas on very large lots. The cash prices were for asking or significantly above asking price.

"It's a magnet for terrorist activity

We can't let terrorists dictate what we do and don't do.
"

Where have you been for the last ten years buddy?

Terrorists have been doing exactly just that for awhile now.
They want the U.S in Iraq and Afghanistan, because it proves their point.

E-man says

However, the all cash offer was well above the asking price. Do you know of any investors that would love to overpay for properties?

The best offers during the boom are the ones foreclosing today.
Yep! real winners all right...

Troy says

Abandoning Vietnam completely in 1973 did in fact throw away the investment we had made in Thieu's regime, and was a mistake (but a mistake dictated by the national disgust with the war by 1970).

Explain how support for an extremely corrupt, totally repressive authoritarian, completely inept christian government that took power in a fixed election in a 95% buddhist country represents an "investment"? Your 401k must be interesting.

permanent_marker says

I would venture out and say, 'bottom' properties (below 400k) attracts lot of investors, while 600k and up may be not so much

So many sellers in the 600K range drop their price to $500K or less on thin demand, which competes with $400K range which drops to attrack buyers. And so it goes with the correction.

bob2356 says

in a 95% buddhist country represents an "investment"

most people in SVN weren't big fans of the communists by 1974. I don't think Thieu had a chance since the peace agreement we gave him in 1973 was just an armistice to let us get our POWs out, but in the mid-1970s if we had been serious about defending the Saigon regime (as serious as we had been in 1965-68) our investment in Saigon would have paid off as well as our interventions to save the Seoul and Taipei regimes from communism.

We made tons of mistakes, but overall we were trying to do what was right.

corntrollio says

just_passing_through says

Flying into LA there was a multi-row discussion around me (I just listened) about how all were from LA but only visiting. They'd moved to San Antonio for the better business climate.

I noticed you didn't list either a) where in LA they moved to San Antonio from (they could have been from Bakersfield for all you know), b) what business they were in, and c) any other details that would matter. It's easy to relate such an anecdote, but harder to think critically about it.

I relate anecdotal experiences on here all the time and yes that is completely different than real data.

I still find my experiences in the real world as they relate to what I read in print interesting.

For instance:

Housing bubble bursting and personal friends of mine choosing to short sale, sell and or walk away. There was a real lag between what I'd been reading about and actually experiencing some sort of confirmation.

I've been hearing about a lot of businesses leaving CA-specifically and heading to other countries, states etc.. Odd to hear them (one row up, both left and right aisles and didn't get all the details. Wouldn't have noticed them at all if a guy at one end didn't stretch to speak to the others opposite. He was pretty dramatic about missing LA but sure, he could have missed Bakersfield that much I guess.

This is a bad thing for the U.S trucking industry.

If this goes through expect a decline a of the U.S trucking industry as more trucking routes within North America are based out of Mexico and wages and one of the last few decent paying jobs for high school grads start to go to Mexican truckers who probably are paid around 15K a year.

It's the Republican's fault!

We're loosing 2 Billion to Mexico my Ass their gross GDP isn't 2 Billion. American Truckers will lose more than that.
I wonder what pissed of Bushes Democrat controlled Congress that they revoked this, but under King Sugar Britches it's all good to reinstate. Did somebody get Paid?

"Yeah yall we got Paid, show me the paper, gimme my rubber stamp!" Love Obama's Democrat Congress

most buyers right now are complete suckers cash or no cash. it's really a great market to sell in, buying is bad.

Whats holding back the economy is the government. Before under Bush and today under Obama. Easy money policy, hoping for inflation. Constant subsidies and spending more than we take on. It all adds up. Eventually someone has to pay the piper, it will be all of us.

I live on the San Francisco Peaks and was recently offered $1.5 million cash for my property. As I was contemplating the offer, I heard a knock on my door. It was from a new prospective buyer, who wanted to purchase the property for $1.7 million cash. I took their contact information and stated I was debating other offers.

I then went to Patrick.net to review housing prices in the Bay area; maybe these are foreign investors who are confused with this area. My hypothesis proved correct as I saw seemingly worthless houses selling for insane prices near San Fran. I figured it’s time to cash in.

I was ready to make a call to accept the offer when I heard a louder knock on my door. I then woke up. I had been in a third level dream.

It was nice to get back to reality.

Edzakory says

It was nice to get back to reality.

Good that you woke up from the dream. Some people on this forum dream while they are awake. :)

There is no way to prove that a slight increase in CO2 warms or cools the earth, because the energy output of the sun varies, it isn't a constant. Nothing therefore can be proven. The assumptions that are swirling around CO2 are pretty big, and can be argued.
1. Global warming is happening. Evidently, not very much and not lately.
2. Global warming is bad. Maybe not. We do know that global cooling is bad for lots of reasons. They could grow grains in vast areas of Russia and Canada if the earth warmed up.
3. Adding a plant nutrient to a living system won't be taken up. Evidently plants will grow when a nutrient is added, this was observed in the oceans.
4. It's unclear whether CO2 follows warming, and is an effect, or comes before, and might be a cause.
5. The proponents of the global warming theory generally have an economic interest in people believing it, e.g. Al Gore.
6. The proponents of global warming often have other motives, e.g. redistribute world wealth, economic activity, etc. This is a religious pursuit, not science.
7. The proponents of global warming were also liars and corrupt, which were outed by Wikileaks. This lack of honesty destroys their credibility.

E-man says

Tude,
The term investor is being used so loosely. You lost to an all cash offer. However, the all cash offer was well above the asking price. Do you know of any investors that would love to overpay for properties? If you do, please refer them to me. I would love to sell them all of my properties, and I would even give you 3% commission on each deal.

Success isn't by chance, but by choice.

The asking prices were purposely priced very low per sq ft to generate interest I assume. They were all REOs or short sales. These properties would still rent for more than the carrying costs if mortgaged, and others had large enough lots to possibly subdivide.

Tude says

These properties would still rent for more than the carrying costs if mortgaged, and others had large enough lots to possibly subdivide.

a) just because it may be an ideal investment property doesn't mean it's an investor
b) renting should always cost more than buying, and it's strange when it doesn't
c) if rent is significantly higher than carrying costs, you're not bidding enough

The whole point is that there has been a significant shift in how real estate is viewed. These are prices significantly higher than they were in the late 1990s being bought with cash in areas where hardly anyone was buying before. Rents are no higher now in these areas than they were 10+ years ago.

In the late 1990s homes in the 100-200k languished on the market. Now people are bidding 300k+ in cash for these same homes. In 1998 you could buy a house in Orinda for less than that. I wonder if the real estate bubble has juts permanently perverted people's ideas about it, everyone wants to get in on the next bubble early this time, they are all so sure it will skyrocket again soon.

Bubble Bobble says

I can run it in my garage, but it limits my top production to 1 machine and isn't very safe. I intend to scale up as money permits, so working from home would only be a first step towards getting something else...

From a garage to 20 acres is one hell of a big scale up. Seems like it could be done in steps smaller than 400 sq ft to 20 acres. I really can't believe this is the only option so you can't move forward. It would take years to increase to that scale. Growing the management alone would be a major undertaking, much less sales, production, accounting, warehousing, shipping, etc..

I am a natural science professional and I can tell you this.

1. CO2 is a greenhouse gas. You can't put all that CO2 into the atmoshpere without a direct effect.
2. The earth's atmosphere is very large and it takes a large amount of time for enough CO2 to effect change. Hence, the increases are minor.
3. The sun's solar cycle plays a big role in heating and cooling the earth. We are just beginning to understand this.
4. The ocean temperature changes described as La Nina and El Nino have only recently been discovered and play major roles in variations of continental climate influence for any given year.
5. Glacial melt is occuring and cannot be denied.
6. Increasing the Earth's temperature is good for some and bad for others. Canada Vs Africa.
7. All global warming could be wiped out with just one major volcanic eruption. The Mt St. Helens eruption lowered the global temperature that year by .1 degrees.

This is why the global warming arguement will persist for long periods of time. There are too many variables to pinpoint a direct cause to gradual temperature increases. However, we are on a trend of gradual temperature increases proven by massive glacial melts across the globe.

I believe that you cannot pump that much CO2 into the atmosphere without creating change. We will know for sure 75 years from now if it was good or bad.

To add to point 7, I wouldn't be suprised if some major volcanic eruption did occur multiple times over the next few years. The tectonic plates have been very active over these past two years.

Tude says

Now people are bidding 300k+ in cash for these same homes. In 1998 you could buy a house in Orinda for less than that. I wonder if the real estate bubble has juts permanently perverted people's ideas about it, everyone wants to get in on the next bubble early this time, they are all so sure it will skyrocket again soon.

The median housing price in Orinda was apparently $630,500 in 2000. Did it really rise 100+% from 1998 to 2000? I doubt it. As of 2009 the median is $738,647. I don't think median is necessarily the best indicator of how the housing market is doing, but this is below inflation -- CPI would give a 2009 price of $786K.

What's also interesting is that Orinda has better affordability now. Median income in 2000 was $117,637 and in 2009 it was $155,289, which means that houses have gone from 5.4 times income to 4.8 times income. The opposite has happened in a lot of Silicon Valley/Peninsula areas.

http://www.city-data.com/city/Orinda-California.html

Tude says

These are prices significantly higher than they were in the late 1990s being bought with cash in areas where hardly anyone was buying before. Rents are no higher now in these areas than they were 10+ years ago.

Are you saying that these places cash-flowed even better 10 years ago? I think you're going to have to provide more data to make this claim. If you're seeing a Bay Area market where buying is that much cheaper than renting such that investors are snapping up cashflow-positive prices, of course people are going to be buying and bidding up prices. It's about cashflow now, not appreciation like the speculators during the boom.

Do you guys have an actual point? Other than being a PIA.

E-man says

Hmm, imagine what the offer would have been if they were able to get financing with 3.5% down.

During the bubble, people were doing 0% down or less! Some "buyers" go cash back after putting down $0 on an adjustable rate, interest only (or negative amortizing) loan. That's why prices got so high.

Image putting no skin in the game and getting paid to do so. Best case scenario: you flip in a few months and pocket $100k. Worst case, you walk away and get $30k for ruining your credit rating. That was a big part of the bubble.