Debate Topic: How Much is "Too Much" Profit? - Posted by J.P. Vaughan

import · January 16, 2000, 7:25pm

…(oops – that was “inclination,” not reluctance) - Posted by PeteH(NYC)

Posted by PeteH(NYC) on January 16, 2000 at 20:25:30:

… the people who, in Dirk’s negotiation, mentioned $380/month came up with that figure of their own volition, after having seen the home in question, familiar with their own financial situation (including the inclination of credit-granting folks to offer a cold shoulder), and after calculating what they thought reasonable for them in the circumstances. That’s precisely what Lonnie says let the other guy name the figure: the other guy is factoring into his choice of a figure elements you have no way of knowing. Now, whether or not the other guy is automatically the “loser” for having named a figure higher than we dealmakers might have asked for should be of very little concern to onlookers. All we’re doing is providing folks enough rope.

import · January 16, 2000, 7:24pm

Let’s Not Forget the Ladies OFFERED That Much - Posted by PeteH(NYC)

Posted by PeteH(NYC) on January 16, 2000 at 20:24:25:

… the people who, in Dirk’s negotiation, mentioned $380/month came up with that figure of their own volition, after having seen the home in question, familiar with their own financial situation (including the reluctance of credit-granting folks to offer a cold shoulder), and after calculating what they thought reasonable for them in the circumstances. That’s precisely what Lonnie says let the other guy name the figure: the other guy is factoring into his choice of a figure elements you have no way of knowing. Now, whether or not the other guy is automatically the “loser” for having named a figure higher than we dealmakers might have asked for should be of very little concern to onlookers. All we’re doing is providing folks enough rope.

import · January 16, 2000, 5:48pm

Re: Debate Topic: How Much is “Too Much” Profit? - Posted by The Baze

Posted by The Baze on January 16, 2000 at 18:48:03:

What was the original intention for this MH before somone said they could aford $380/mo? I would have a hard time believing that the intention from the get-go was to sell the home at that price.

Now, I’m a conservative, Reagan-loving, capitalist who agrees that there is no such thing as too much profit, but I do believe it is possible to take advantage of people, and I’m not a big fan of that.

I have not read the post that JP refers to, so all I know are the details that were included in this post, but from that information, it appears that someone was taken advantage of. The issue here isn’t the amount of profit. If the home was truly worth that amount, then by all means, get it. But to sell this home at that price and terms to 2 people that don’t appear to have much choice in the matter . . . well, if you can sleep nights, fine. I couldn’t.

Tom Bazley

import · January 16, 2000, 5:37pm

Re: Debate Topic: How Much is “Too Much” Profit? - Posted by chris

Posted by chris on January 16, 2000 at 18:37:35:

Well, Dirk is providing something more than a space to rent out. The apartment owners will charge over twice the amount for something the ladies never get an ownership interest in.

I say that Dirk is charging an amount equivalent to the risk he is undertaking for providing a living space for credit risks. They seem to be happy if they are going to fix up the space. This is something they might not even have an option to do as an apartment renter.

So, NO there is no such thing as too much profit.

-Just my two cents worth, Chris

import · January 16, 2000, 5:04pm

The Myth of the Fair Profit - there is no such thing - has been proven again and again. - Posted by GL

Posted by GL on January 16, 2000 at 18:04:49:

People who know nothing of business and money often think there is something called a “fair profit”. This is because they have never thought it through, or tried to define a “fair profit”, or tried to come up with a definition of “fair profit” that makes sense. It can’t be done.

This is because THERE IS NO CAUSAL RELATIONSHIP BETWEEN BUYING PRICE AND SELLING PRICE.

This is so obvious once someone points it out. Of course! Does the cost of making and selling a ladies’ dress dictate the selling price? NO! Its value to the consumer may be more than the cost of production. On the other hand, if it is an ugly color or an unfashionable cut it may be worth nothing. It could be no one would wear it even if they gave it away for free.So should consumers be forced at gunpoint, to buy and wear undesirable goods at full price?

The same goes for everything else. There are rules of thumb that act as guides, in retailing and business in general, that the selling price usually bears some relationdhip to cost price. But these are merely guidelines not laws of nature.

Many times governments have fallen for this myth. In the 1930’s in the US the government passed “Fair Trade” laws dictating the retail price of goods. It didn’t work and was soon abandoned.

In the 1970’s the government passed Wage and Price Control laws and they didn’t work either. They were abandoned within months before they wrecked an already weak economy.

Even Socialists don’t believe in a “Fair Profit”. They are perfectly prepared to manipulate costs and selling prices of all goods to achieve social goals.

import · January 16, 2000, 4:32pm

Re: Debate Topic: How Much is “Too Much” Profit? - Posted by JohnG

Posted by JohnG on January 16, 2000 at 17:32:08:

This is really a no-win situation.
You are either a low-life who preys on the unfortunate and the weak and by taking advantage of the needy, you make a large and immoral payday.
OR you are a lazy, good for nothing who by luck more than design, you are in the right place at the right time and you make a quick buck.

So, as a real estate investor, I can be a shark or a charlatan.
I decided a long time ago that I don’t want to play in that ball park.

Rather, I want to be in a place where I am rewarded for the service that I provide to the marketplace and that doesn’t mean I am worth so much an hour, so much a month etc.

I have made what to most people may seem like outrageous sums of money. For example, I bought and sold a property and made $25,000 - all in one day. It worked out to $6,250 an hour for 4 hours work. Now was that wrong ? Immoral ? Taking advantage ?

Lets review the deal.
Vendor had to sell, I had the ability to close the deal today. So, I got my price. Vendor got his cash.
My buyer needed help in financing. I was able to help. So, that is worth money and I was paid for that.

You see, just by definition - every person who plays this game called real estate investing is an entrepreneur. We risk our cash and our credit on a daily basis doing things that others won’t do. So, in return for that we are compensated on another level. Not by the hour, or by the month as in paycheck.
Rather on the deal and by the amount of value and service we provide to the marketplace.
When we fully understand that truism, then, and only then, are we capable of making a lot of money and the notion of “too much” profit has absolutely no meaning.

Now, lets look at the other side of the coin. If we can make “too much profit” can we lose too much as well. Let me say, that after losing my first million way back in the early 80’s there is no limit on how much we can lose. If we are prepared to risk it all, then we have an opportunity for huge gains as well as huge losses. I only learned to accept the former when I experienced the latter.

So,for me, there is no such thing as too much profit, nor is there such a thing as too much to lose. I am a gambler and a risk taker at heart and that is why I do deals day in and day out and will continue as long as I can write my name on a peice of paper. The profit; large , small or outrageous; is just a by-product of doing what I love to do and that is do deals.

import · January 16, 2000, 4:18pm

Re: Debate Topic: How Much is “Too Much” Profit? - Posted by Bill Gatten

Posted by Bill Gatten on January 16, 2000 at 17:18:14:

JP,

Here is a note I wrote just this morning in answer to a question re. this very subject.

A fair profit turns into an unfair advantage when either side violates the “Hubbard Rule for Success in Transactions”:

Show up
Pay attention
Be honest
Stay unassociated with the outcome (end result)

If the above seems too simplistic or too maudlin, I suggest taking some time to analyze exactly what it actually implies and infers within itself (it’s considerably more complex and complete than one might think at first glance). By adhering to these four simple principals (without fail) you can not take advantage of anyone, or be taken advantage of: period!

When I present this concept in my workshops someone always says that it leaves out “non-disclosure of pertinent facts.” The fact is that disclosure of facts comes under the heading of Honesty: but most importantly, disclosure of facts that are your own proprietary (hard earned) professional data is not a requisite to fair dealings, any more than revealing inside-trader information to the stock-buying public would be, to make or break a sale (doing so, as a matter of fact, is so sacrosanct that you can go to jail for it).

EXAMPLE: In acquiring the house I live in, I knew the value was between $400K and $435K. I offered $345 (the loan amount and no more) plus a 50% share in future appreciation, which means that if there was $100 in equity over the loan amount, half of it would be the seller’s (to be paid to him when I sell or refinance in my own name in a few years).

The seller refused my offer. I walked away (unconcerned about the outcome…whether he would accept it or not…but respecting his reasons for not doing so, and capable of making another offer if I wished…I didn’t (…too many houses out there).

Later on the seller came back with a counter of $375K. I said “No.” He then came back and accepted my original offer (a PACTrust, of course). After moving in (for a bit over $3,500) and living the house for 6-7 months, the house next door (identical, but with a pool) sold for $485K. Now, did I make a good deal for my self? Did the seller cut a good deal for himself (he had it on the market for several months without an offer when I came along)? Was anyone taken advantage of?

Well…upon noticing the transfer next door, the seller came bellowing back with fire in his eyes, suggesting that we re-structure our deal, as he felt he had been taken advantage of (because I was a “professional,” and should have known the values in the area). I said that I had indeed been aware of the values, and that apparently he was too: as according to him, his original asking price had been based on comps given to him by three Realtors (his basis in arguing for a higher price in the first place).

If this seller had not had easy access to the same information I did, my job would have been, at most, to point him toward resources that would allow to fairly evaluate his property (though not necessarily MY resources): not to offer more than I was willing to pay, just because the property could be worth more. Any properlty is worth exactly what a buyer and seller are willing to agree upon irrespective of what a similar neighboring structure might sell for.

If you buy a famous painting at a garage sale for $100 and go on the Antique Roadhshow and find that it’s worth $100,000, should you give it back to the person you bought it from (who could have gone to the Antique Roadshow as easily as you did). Or…what if you knew it was worth $100,000 before you bought it, and you saw it for sale at the garage for $100: should you tell the seller that he should raise his price, and give him your source for your pricing data?

Re. the painting analogy, a “dishonest” transaction would be one in which you would offer too litle for the paiknting, prior to the seller having the opportunity to price it, prior to its being placed on the market for sale (e.g., in hopes that a distressed seller wouldn’t know, or have time to determine, its value before being cajol4ed into selling it). After the price tag goes on, your obligation to disclose any properietary (or inside) data you may possess stops.

Bill Gatten

import · January 16, 2000, 4:12pm

Re: Debate Topic: How Much is “Too Much” Profit? - Posted by Pavon Bailey

Posted by Pavon Bailey on January 16, 2000 at 17:12:03:

Mrs. Vaughan:

To me, there is no such thing as “too much profit.” Numbers or amounts that are mesurable in nature can’t be determined by an immesurable phrase such as “too much profit.” For example, if a friend told you that his house costs a lot of money, that statement is immeasurable because it does not contain an accurate figure. What may be a lot of money to him may be miniscule to you. If your friend, however, says that his house costs $120K, then that statement is measurable because a) $120K is a measurable figure and b) you, the receiver of the statement, can determine if $120K is expensive or is inexpensive. So, there is no such thing as “too much profit” or “too little profit” to me. Simply put, if you buy a home, car, anything for $X and resell it to a third party for $X+, the + obviously is your profit from the transaction. Now consider this: you have 3 people-A, B, and C. A says the + is too much, B says it’s just right, and C says the + is not enough. Should it matter to you what guy A, B, and C says? It’s an opinion in the “eye of the beholder.”

Now, I do believe that when structuring deals, you should be reasonable. As Mr. Scott Britton says in one of his articles, “don’t be greedy,” you shouldn’t take advantage of someone who may be in a financial bind. You should make a profit, no doubt, but you shouldn’t do it at the expense of an unfortunate third person. THAT is unethical and immoral.

Finally, anyone with common sense knows his or her financial budget. If an individual’s budget is $600K to buy a house, and he likes the house that you’re selling so much that he’ll pay you $260K for the home, and the appraisal value is only $225K, are you going to tell him, “No, I want only $225K”? Grant in mind, the extra profit will be nice, but does the opinions of a third party (that’s too much, you ripped him off; you should’ve charged more since he likes the house so much, etc.) really matter?

Like I said before, “too much profit” is only an opinion to someone, not a fact. However, if you make that “profit” by taking advantage of someone, that is unethical and immoral. It’s the ACTION you did to make the profit that makes it unethical or immoral, not the amount of profit that you made.

This is my stand on the issue.

Thank you.

Pavon

import · January 16, 2000, 3:54pm

Re: What??? - Posted by anonomous

Posted by anonomous on January 16, 2000 at 16:54:39:

I believe that ‘working the streets’ and getting the best possible on a piece of property should pay the highest. You see, Dirk made his money BUYING, selling is where he collected it.

I have bought property at great discounts (under $1000) and sold them at retail value (over $20000). “I was at the right place at the right time.” The sellers were ‘don’t wanters’. Why shouldn’t I get the fruits of my labor???

import · January 17, 2000, 9:29pm

Re: Just how much DID he make? - Posted by JPiper

Posted by JPiper on January 17, 2000 at 22:29:59:

Now adjust that value by inflation for the last 30 years. What did you get?

JPiper

import · January 17, 2000, 8:48pm

Re: What if: Widow / 100% Equity / I buy for ?% FMV - Posted by David Alexander

Posted by David Alexander on January 17, 2000 at 21:48:45:

Someone said it earlier. You cant make other peoples descisions for them. As long as your arent being manipulative and are putting everything on the table it there right whether buying or selling to do business with you. Your Profit has nothing to with them. I think people get caught up in projecting there expectations, thoughts and what they believe is right for the other person into the equation. What we believe is right has nothing to do with what is right for another person.

Case example: A long time I was in a grocery store parking lot, a man was literally beating up a woman. Me being the "Man I am stepped in between to put a stop to it while a friend ran in to have the police called. As I stepped in and stopped the man from brutalizing her, the lady(for lack of another term) started hitting me and told me to leave her Man alone.

After upon reflection , I wondered if this lady was crazy or what. But you know what, it was me that was wrong. I stepped in to manipulate a situation that was none of my business.

It’s the same with profits, You dont step in and help the other person cheat yourself out of profits. You dont let the other make your ultimate descision and you dont make the other peoples ultimate descision. Fact is profit is what we decide to make and the market allows us to, no right or wrong. You could price yourself higher than the rest and try to create new markets, ala the difference between a Honda and an Acura, pretty mcuh the same car just different markets.
But you cant tell me they dont make more profit on one.

David Alexander

import · January 17, 2000, 11:54am

correction MH is good alt, not NH! (nt) - Posted by Ann

Posted by Ann on January 17, 2000 at 12:54:59:

nt

import · January 17, 2000, 9:57am

Re: Debate Topic: How Much is “Too Much” Profit? - Posted by JPiper

Posted by JPiper on January 17, 2000 at 10:57:06:

Rob:

I certainly don?t have a problem with how you determine how much profit you make. If you determine that by conscience, or by the Golden Rule, that?s OK with me.

One thing I would suggest however is that you RESIST all inclinations to feel that people have a birthright to things like car loans (to use that as an example). The car title business exists to loan money to high risk people?just like pawn shops. No one forces people to get these loans. And certainly TV is only going to portray a business of this type by showing some poor souls who have lost their cars.

Reality though is that if government ?clamps? down on these title loan places, they?ll cease to exist, and therefore all these poor souls that you?re concerned for will no longer get a loan anywhere?like it or not.

When government enters the picture, you can always expect poor results. Someone in this thread mentioned ?Wage and Price Controls? that the federal government placed on product in the Nixon administration back in the 70?s. The goal of this programs was to ?protect? people. Sure did a great job didn?t it? It held those prices down alright?and in the process, people stopped producing the product. Shortages cropped up all over the country.

Remove the incentive, remove the compensation for risk (in the case of car title loans), and you eliminate the business and therefore the product that some people want.

I would imagine that people who can?t get loans any place else would love to have car title loans at 8%. Reality however is that these same people have a history of not paying. Collecting 8% will break a lender with a portfolio of loans to these types of people.

Today we see mortgage loans being made to risky people?in some cases to people that even I wouldn?t loan to. Some of these companies are going to go under in the next recession?.because the risk level of their loan portfolio is too high.

Don?t you believe it for a second when some politician starts to tell you about a poor soul, or about a business that?s earning too much profit. Trying to control the market only accomplishes one thing?it eliminates the market. None of us can make decisions for other people or control the foolish moves that people make?.not us, and certainly not the government. And remember, if you charge too little in a misguided effort to be ?fair? (whatever that is) the risk level in your business will overwhelm you in the end.

JPiper

import · January 17, 2000, 7:51am

Re: Debate Topic: How Much is “Too Much” Profit? - Posted by Rob FL

Posted by Rob FL on January 17, 2000 at 08:51:43:

Of course, banks do the same thing. If you make 12 years worth of mortgage payments on a $100,000 home at 8% on a 30 year loan, the bank has already made more than $105,000 from you. Does this mean the bank is being unfair by expecting you make 18 more years worth of payments? And this at only 8% interest.

import · January 18, 2000, 7:12am

I’m with David on this one - Posted by steph in tex

Posted by steph in tex on January 18, 2000 at 08:12:22:

ditto!
no such thing as too much profit.

i am still a beginner, but i was perfectly content with the 10K deal… until i made 20K…!
what a difference! there are times when i do feel guilty about getting such a sweet deal- but bottom line–
i am responsible for my income, my existence, and providing for my families future. This is first and foremost in MY mind when i do a deal. maybe this will change once i’ve made my first million…maybe not.

i have only been full time for a year, and i am still adjusting to not having a “paycheck” every 2 weeks, not having to live paycheck to paycheck, and having more money than i ever had before. i know—hey–poor me right> LOL> but never the less- it is an adjustment, and i still have the hunger for the biggest deals i can get…
from a newbie stand point— the more profit the better!
steph in tex

import · January 17, 2000, 7:33am

Re: Debate Topic: How Much is “Too Much” Profit? - Posted by Rob FL

Posted by Rob FL on January 17, 2000 at 08:33:08:

I have heard that argument about the $24 as well.

One flaw is that they didn’t get cash, they got a bunch of beads and jewelry. Which of course back then couldn’t be sold for much of anything. Another flaw is that by 1990 the original buyers of these beads were long dead.

So in reality, if they had $24 in cash and could invest it in some business or the stock market, maybe it would have been a good deal (probably not), but we are talking 300+ years ago.

import · January 17, 2000, 9:07am

Not surprisingly… - Posted by Jacob

Posted by Jacob on January 17, 2000 at 10:07:32:

I had a hunch that my post would bring out some pretty intersting responses. I can say I truly enjoyed reading each of them, no matter how “wacked” a few might have been.
I’m not going to bother responding to each post individually, so I’ll try to post a few collective thoughts.

Am I jealous? Of what? The fact that I could have a nationally known multi-millionaire re investor as a father in law instead of a drunk that doesn’t remember my name? To have a father in law that can open doors and introduce me to other respected nationally known authors and show me the ropes in this business? No, not really. You see, I didn’t have those advantages, like 99% of the rest of us. I started with nothing, nobody to walk me through my first deals. No support besides my wife. I suspect that is the case for most of us. But, I can assure you I am not jealous of anyone. Believe what you want.

As far as not being a professional, I find that an interesting comment. I’ve yet to meet a local investor in my market that has taken the time to “beat the bushes” and learn the ins and outs of this business. I’ve yet to meet a local mh investor that has taken the time to build relationships with park managers. I’ve yet to meet a local investor that has invested the time and effort I have. If that’s not being a pro, I would ask one of you to define the term for me.

For whatever reson, it’s clear that many of you do not like me. I guess because I do not put anyone on a pedestal, which seems to be the prime requirement to be loved on this site. Pay homage to the great ones and everyone will be happy. Sorry, that’s not my style. I call things as I see them, I guess some people don’t like things pointed out to them.

Sorry, Mr. Piper. This was not a post regarding the NADA book. Believe it or not, I am a bit familliar with the market in So. Cal having been stationed at Camp Pendleton in my past. I know how crazy things get there. I don’t care what any book might value this particular deal at, it’s the book of common sense I care about. Common sense tells me that it’s not worth $14,000.

Actually, what bothered me and others about the original “ugly duckling…” post was the fact that Dirk seemed to be openly bragging about a wonderful deal. He was patting himself on the back for making it happen this way. I find that pretty offensive, and so did others. I guess I was the only one brave enough to speak up.
Best wishes to all, and thanks to Don for showing how a pro can respond.
Jacob

import · January 17, 2000, 1:26am

Re: Being that I made the first comment… - Posted by Ed Garcia

Posted by Ed Garcia on January 17, 2000 at 02:26:05:

Jacob,

I find it interesting that you question someone’s profit structure, and then pat yourself on the back for being courage’s.

Jacob say’s,
I was the first one to have enough courage to question the ethics of this particular deal, I find this topic interesting.

Ed Garcia’s reply,
Jacob, I think ethics, would be the correct word, if someone lied, misrepresented, or cheated some other
party. Not for attempting to get full profit on a buyer, that is considered high risk.

Jacob say’s,
Now, having said that let me state that I think this deal stinks. As I stated earlier, these women are happy right now, as they have somewhere to live. What happens when the honeymoon wears off and they realize they overpaid by 1000% or so? Do they refi and lower payments? Of course not, since the unit is too old and worth 10% what it is financed for.

Ed Garcia’s reply,
Jacob, this is all an assumption on your part. And we both know what happens when someone
a-s-s-u-m-e-s. But Think before you speak. Just what would make you think that the honeymoon would wear off, when the truth is, this lady has nowhere to go. She is paying the lowest payment in town.

Jacob say’s,
If one wants to call themselves a professional investor, a term I hear thrown around a lot on this site; that term has requirements. As a professional, one has a much greater knowledge of the marketplace and the workings of real estate than the general public. That is one reason why holders of a re license must disclose that fact.

Ed Garcia’s reply,
Jacob, I’m not quite sure what the point is in this statement.
But let me tell you a story. I am not a mechanic. If my car brakes down and I try to fix it to save money,
I risk braking something, or screwing something up. If I go to a mechanic that I don’t know, I risk the fact,
that he could take advantage of me because he don’t know me, and will over charge me. If I go to my own mechanic that I trust, I have a better chance of getting a fair deal. What ever my choices are, there mine.
And I will have to accept the responsibility for those choices.

My point, is that people have to accept the responsibility for their actions or decisions. Rather than consider
themselves victimized every time they make a bad decision. I don’t see how you can hold the seller responsible for the buyers lack of experience, when the truth is, we do not know how much experience the
buyer has. We don’t know anything about the buyer.

Jacob say’s,
As a pro, one also has the responsibility to use that knowledge for the benefit of others, as well as our self. We are not to use that knowledge, contacts, experience to take advantage of others.

Ed Garcia’s reply,
Jacob, it’s obvious that you’re not a pro. You seem to still be living in the world of make believe.
It is not the sellers responsibility to look out for the buyer, any more than it’s the buyers responsibility to
look out for the seller. Jacob, when you go to purchase an item lets say at Walmart. When was the last
time you bought something and offered them less than their asking price. There’s no negotiating. You
pay their price and that’s it. Real-estate, and Automobiles are the only two things today that are still
negotiable.

Jacob say’s,
Since I dind’t marry into a family of successful re investors, and I do not know any nationally known authors as friends, I require my good name and reputation ALONE to do business. It is all I have, and closes more deals than anything else. I get more deals handed to me than I can do anything with at the moment, because I have a rep for helping people and treating them fairly.

Ed Garcia’s reply,
Jacob, I’m glad that you have a good reputation. However, let me explain something to you. A good reputation is not based on price. It’s based on PERFORMANCE.
I have a policy that you should treat people like you want to be treated. To tell you the truth Jacob, I think in this last statement, you took a cheap shot at Dirk, that contradicts you being the wonderful guy that you tell us you are.

Jacob say’s.
Again, there is nothing wrong legally with charging whatever you feel you can get in a deal. But, I subscribe to a higher court that says I am required to treat others in a completely open and ethical manner. I am amazed that if someone sold a used car at 10 times it’s value to a friend or relative of those supporting this deal, that same person would be condemning the actions of that salesperson. We would be talking about what a scam artist the car salesman was. I do not see the difference.

Ed Garcia’s reply,
You see Jacob, the problem is, that we know what Dirk made in this deal. If Dirk would have paid $7000
for this coach, you wouldn’t have said a word. The truth of the matter is, that you can’t buy coaches in
California the way Dirk buys. So you see, you have falsely accused him. Now you’re going to have to accuse him of stealing from the person he bought it from. Either way, anybody that can do something
that you can’t, you are going to consider them to be unethical.

I realize that were all entitled to our opinion, and that this evening you have given yours.

But we’re not talking about a professional opinion. We’re talking about you attacking a mans character
unnecessarily, and then telling us how courage’s you are, and how fair you consider yourself.

I think you owe the man an apology. Jacob, you went beyond an opinion of the profit in a deal.

Ed Garcia

import · January 16, 2000, 11:31pm

The Difference… - Posted by JPiper

Posted by JPiper on January 17, 2000 at 24:31:17:

The fact that you do not see the difference merely illustrates your lack of knowledge and experience.

Each of us is free to choose our own way…and you have chosen yours. But make no mistake, there is a value to terms. Your sense of value is based on a NADA book (not the market) and so-called cash value. This value is MUCH different than the value driven by terms. Dirk’s deal illustrates that clearly.

Unless you are willing to sell this MH to these women for a few thousand (keep in mind that they don’t have the cash, or the credit), then the CASH VALUE of a MH has absolutely no meaning to them…because they can’t buy it on that basis.

Think about it…you’ll see the difference.

JPiper

import · January 16, 2000, 10:17pm

Overpaid 1000% ??? - Posted by don, sdca

Posted by don, sdca on January 16, 2000 at 23:17:11:

Jacob,

I can tell that this is an important issue for you, and your position on the issue is a noble one!

However, Dirk and all of us are acting as Principals and thus we owe NO ONE any fiduciary responsibility about “being a professional”. We have NO obligation (fraud, etc. excepted) to the buyer, seller or the public at large. Further, NADA or other sources of “market data” do not dictate market prices - the “market” does. So the reference to “overpaid 1000%” is misplaced and inaccurate.

The local grocery store does not “owe” us any responsibility for making 2%, 100% or 1000% profit on the goods they sell (which they make everyday). In addition, we have the freedom to “shop around” for the best price and terms. In the specific example of a MH transaction, both the sellers and buyers had that right and/or obligation … but ultimately they accepted or made an offer that they and Dirk could live with, ie. a successful transaction!

Bill Gatten and JPiper (and others) have said it best… Show Up, Listen, Be Honest and be Unattached to the results! No further obligation is owed to ANYONE!

Thanks for your honest and thoughtful opinions!

Don, sdca