The bylaw of not renting outside of one rental management company is an HOA bylaw enforced by the HOA. Owners knew from the beginning that they had to rent via the company that manages the rental's at the resort. Now if the rental company breached their contract, then they could either be voted out or the individual could cancel their contract with them. However if an owner cancelled their contract, they could still not rent their unit outside of the rental company. the solution is to either have enough owners to vote out the company and replace with another or cancel your contract with them (again can't rent the unit if you go this route). As I say this, I believe the resort Well now,there you go again quoting bible and verse. You're good at that. Put the Kool Aid down for a sec and reconsider. If the HOA is us and we are screwing ourselves we change it. You cannot go back to some bullshit clause over and over if it doesn't work. And enough of your " I'm in the know" crap. You don't know and your approach isn't working. There is NO LOGIC to your argument Drymeat. That's why you got people on your ass here.
Competition is good, we have it among the resorts (ex. sun, spa, sea, sky, bella sirena, tessoro, las palomas, etc.) We can't though have 400+ individual owners dictating the market and having hundreds of different price points as to what one thinks they should charge. Example: what would stop an owner from renting their unit for $10 per night? eventually they would book 100% and under cut other owners. at that rate the market would drop only because owners dictated the rates rather than what the market thought was appropriate. The competition should be among resorts, and as it stands- Las Palomas still has a higher occupancy percentage than the market (see examples above) and the price point is on par with the other resorts along sandy beach. The enforcement of only one rental management company at the resort has a variety of benefits. To owners that don't rent, they are not going to want tens of independent contractors on the property servicing units (ex. maid service, rental agencies, etc.). Also one rental management company is common among most of the resorts along sandy beach. Eventually when a new rental company comes along, they will benefit from having the enforcement of one rental agency.
It is like having a debate with Bam Bam without his economic degree. Who says you can't have hundreds of price points? I believe they were each sold at different price points, each unit is wildly different and the free market will correct your ridiculous $10 example.
Now I would not want to brag about how Las Palomas is faring against other resorts. It has a higher percentage of owners not getting paid to go along with that high occupancy and high price point. And because their options are limited, owners had no where to go when WWG stopped paying. Some owners may even have even been forced into default.
Also, given the HOA is owed millions and millions of dollars due to mismanagement from the profit side, I am not sure the owners that do not rent are so happy with one rental agency.
ernoesto....I've heard from a friend who is an owner (and lives at) Las Palomas that there is sufficient "outside" vote on the HOA (the developer???), that change is almost impossible....even for little things like what is provided in terms of a cable/satellite tv "package"........but I'm sure that dry heat will come on here and correct anything that I have wrong on the matter.....
I never said the resort did not have problems, that is why I have repeated over and over again that we will more than likely have a new operator for the for profit side and a new administrator for the HOA side (hopefully this year). The wristband fee's go toward the HOA, which help offset costs within the HOA (yes the operator has made a substantial payment on wristband fee's they collected over the last several months to the HOA, however they still owe the HOA a lot of money). In regards to changing HOA bylaws, the state of sonora will not recognize changes unless they are legally done, for example some bylaws require the approval of 75% of the total ownership within a phase. We can't just change something with a simple vote or because we want to. Thus the reason why it would be more beneficial to work and negotiate with the developer. I would love to just change something as quickly as possible, however we are limited by a lot of things. The resort will always have only one rental management company, we can't have owners each setting their own pricing. This is not reinventing the wheel, the other resorts along sandy beach do it too. the price point owners can offer is lower than most resorts along sandy beach and the price point the resort offers is on par with other resorts along sandy beach. The resort still has a higher percentage of occupany compared to the other resorts along sandy beach because guests still want to stay here (we just have to correct a lot of these issues to make the product even better) If an owner wanted to rent their unit and set their own pricing, they should have purchased a private home. In regards to the control of the satellite package or internet speed, the HOA controlls that. we are also looking to have a new HOA operator this year that should lower the overal costs of the HOA by having a full audit of all expenses. We can add channels to the satellite package and increase speed on the internet, however right now is not the right time since we are looking to truly take over and funds are limited as we speak.
Charge $10 for wristband. Wristband is good for $10 of booze or food. Problem solved. Riff raff won't pay and visiting guests would probably spend way more than $10 anyway. If I had rented directly from an Owner I would have no problem forking over $10 that I'd spend on booze anyway.
Charge $10 for wristband. Wristband is good for $10 of booze or food. Problem solved. Riff raff won't pay and visiting guests would probably spend way more than $10 anyway. If I had rented directly from an Owner I would have no problem forking over $10 that I'd spend on booze anyway.
Now that is a great idea for non resort guests that want access to the pool area. something to keep in mind. thanks.
You pretty much had everyone on board 'til you waffeled on blocking and unblocking LP from the condos.You took your eye off the ball and identified certain HOA paying owners as cheaters. The cheater has always been and continues to be LP.You had your foot on the throat of the devil and you let him up.They say " we'll play nice now".
Can you imagine the thoughts in WWGs heads?These stupid sheep gringos bought us a hotel room, pay for repairs and insurance and taxes and utilities and we keep ALL the money. Not just our %. What's more, they keep coming back for more.You are misguided and wrong my friend.They are challenging us on their field because they know the legal system is so slow.
You pretty much had everyone on board 'til you waffeled on blocking and unblocking LP from the condos.You took your eye off the ball and identified certain HOA paying owners as cheaters. The cheater has always been and continues to be LP.You had your foot on the throat of the devil and you let him up.They say " we'll play nice now".
Can you imagine the thoughts in WWGs heads?These stupid sheep gringos bought us a hotel room, pay for repairs and insurance and taxes and utilities and we keep ALL the money. Not just our %. What's more, they keep coming back for more.You are misguided and wrong my friend.They are challenging us on their field because they know the legal system is so slow.
Again, we expect to have a new rental management company and a new HOA administrator. Owners will eventually have much greater control. In regards to unblocking units, well that is a little more complicated. We can't play hard ass if we believe a solution is at hand. If they really wanted to play hard ass they could shut the water source from their plant (on their own private property), they could limit access on the private road leading up to the resort (that they own). Also, the voting out of the operator and HOA requires a near impossible majority. So, we have to work with these guys. I believe we go their attention and I believe they are ready to move on to other projects within the resort's property (medical facilities, phase III, homes around the course, etc.). they have too much invested on this project to completely screw owners out. The whole situation is a complicated mess, however I think we are finally heading in the right direction and it will turn around sooner than later. Cheaters have been both owners and the resort, owners who rented outside of the rental company for years before it was enforced. In any case we have to move forward with a solution rather than a problem. In regards to indefinately blocking out units, as much as that was helpful- your fellow owners only blocked 30% of the units- thus only affecting a few sold out weekends in the year. Yes, the legal system is slow and that was another factor in wanting an amicable solution to past debt and future control.
I seriously doubt if they can move on to anything. Who in their right mind would buy anything from them now? They are getting their asses sued off by the entities that funded phase III anyway. They are most likely going to lose those buildings.
Yo DRY MEAT, you dont need cliff notes, you have the reading comprehension of a PRO, right?! I wasnt comparing watches to rental rates, only comparing how MEXICANS do business. I dont believe the operator is bad at the rental game, they arent bad they are bad people. They purposefully dont tell you about the cheaper rate, why would they?! Its not that they are bad at what they do, its that they dont give a <WASH MY MOUTH OUT WITH SOAP><WASH MY MOUTH OUT WITH SOAP><WASH MY MOUTH OUT WITH SOAP><WASH MY MOUTH OUT WITH SOAP>! If it's this person's job to get business into the resort they are doing a horrible job and should have been fired. Like I said we went elsewhere because of a $50 difference. Also, if you are educated and I know you are because we've gone back and forth these past couple of days you would know that a CONDO isnt going to rent out for $10/night. $100/night yes but $10 come on, now you're making this a joke. Im well aware of the reason why LP implemented a wristband policy, because for a while like you said the LOCALS were using the pool like it was the SUNNYSLOPE CITY OF PHX POOL. I understand this but what I dont understand and this has nothing to do with race but simply THE TRUTH, IM WHITE AND A TOURIST AND I HAVE MONEY (well... at least thats what the RP cops think every time they stop me) THAT I WOULD LIKE TO SPEND. Kicking locals out because they are DEGENERATING isnt the same as telling me to leave when Im about to DROP $50 at the swim up bar! You took what I said out of context, I didnt mean they disrespect anyone that has money, as in you with your G WAGON. What I was saying is that they are disrespectful of possible guests or people that are going to spend money at their resort. I know this has nothing to do with LP but the last time we stayed at SONORAN SKY the security was hassling the hell out of us and my buddy and I were talking about it and I was saying could you imagine that happening at the KIERLAND RESORT OR DESERT RIDGE OR THE POINT TAPATIO CLIFFS OR ANY OTHER RESORT HOTEL IN AMERICA. When I was younger I was a bellman at EMBASSY SUITES PV, and the one thing I learned about the HOTEL RESORT INDUSTRY, the GUEST IS ALWAYS RIGHT. You would never get asked what room or what floor you were staying on IN AMERICA, the HOTEL OR RESORT DOESNT ALIENATE GUESTS OR POTENTIAL GUESTS LIKE THAT !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! Happens a lot in RP though, why? Because LOCALS WERE USING THE POOLS????????? IM WHITE AND I HAVE MONEY TO SPEND, tell the LOCALS TO GO HOME AND TURN TO ME AND SAY WHAT CAN I GET FOR YOU SIR?????????????????????!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
Not trying to take sides, however you are not entitled (which is the problem here) to be able to got swim and hang out at the pool of any resort in AMERICA as you put it. Try going to The Phoenician, Hyatt at Gainey Ranch, The Four Seasons, The Boulders, etc. Now, you certainly can go hang out at these hotels' restaurants and lobby bars, but not at the pools. Can you imagine paying $700/night and having any rif-raf with $50 hanging out of their pocket come invade the space and privacy that comes with staying at an exclusive resort? Not sure what the deal was at Embassy Suites/motel 6, but at nicer resorts you are not entitled as a local to hang out there. (that's what public pools are for). Security will and does throw you out. I would assume LP, when first marketed and sold, was more of a high-end or exclusive place, unlike Playa Bonita, and owners bought there for that reason. They also expected the place to be packed, as well as the entire town of RP for that matter. Then the economy went to heck and business is off. But, if I originally paid 400-500k for a place, I would not want any old 'Joe' to be able to walk off the beach, take my chair, my place at the swim up bar, etc just because they have a few bucks to spend. The place would be invaded by people who either can't afford staying there or would rather pay for cheaper place and then hang out all day in the luxury of the nicer resorts. Something doesn't add up with that socialist mindset.
By the way, go try plopping yourself in a recliner at The Phoenician (hotel in AMERICA) pool and order some food and drinks. They will ask, EVERY TIME, for your room #. And you can't pull the 'ol, "Put it on the Underhilll's tab" either.
I seriously doubt if they can move on to anything. Who in their right mind would buy anything from them now? They are getting their asses sued off by the entities that funded phase III anyway. They are most likely going to lose those buildings.
A lot of the information that is passed around is usually a rumor and not completely true. phase III was funded by a few different institutions, one of the buildings was taken over by the bank- however they are more than likely going to give it back to the developer to finish off once the other building starts delivery (the bank will more than likely control funds or use a 3rd party). the other building was funded by a bank that went bankrupt, as the building was going up the developer was funded on an open line of credit (common among commercial buildings). all of a sudden the bank went belly up and the new institution called the note immediately, the note was not paid so the lender placed a lien on the building and stopped all funding. last I heard the lender is working with the developer to use a 3rd party company to control the finances as the building is started up again.
Its not the end of times, things sometimes hit snags and you have to find a way to make it work. Not everything is gloom and doom. The economy collapse created a trickle down effect on everything. The developer though did a poor job of communicating what was going on and the status of the development. they have had a variety of interest in the development over the last 6 months from US medical facilities wanting to set up operation to developers (ex. trump organization).
You pretty much had everyone on board 'til you waffeled on blocking and unblocking LP from the condos.You took your eye off the ball and identified certain HOA paying owners as cheaters. The cheater has always been and continues to be LP.You had your foot on the throat of the devil and you let him up.They say " we'll play nice now".
Ernesto hits the nail on the head here. You had almost all the owners unified but the SC continues to enforce rules that appear to benefit WWG. See my earlier post on a non rental pool owner who has been fighting WWG after charging a friend $50 per night for her unit. You can not possiblly think she is hurting the resort nor is she advertising low prices online. With all the other problems, it makes you wonder if the big picture is being missed.
Ernesto hits the nail on the head here. You had almost all the owners unified but the SC continues to enforce rules that appear to benefit WWG. See my earlier post on a non rental pool owner who has been fighting WWG after charging a friend $50 per night for her unit. You can not possiblly think she is hurting the resort nor is she advertising low prices online. With all the other problems, it makes you wonder if the big picture is being missed.
The SC represents the HOA. The bylaws of only one rental agency is no differerent than other resorts along sandy beach and in other locations around the world (I have many condo/hotel units and all of them enforce only one rental agency on site). When we have another rental agency, that one will be exclusive and the same rules will apply. If you lease/rent/procure money for the use of your unit, the exchange must be approved by the exclusive rental operator (OLP is the current one). When the day comes we have a different operator, the rules will still apply.
And that's fine by me. I'll gladly pay their % if they DO THEIR JOB. LP never did .Try calling down there now.They can't even answer the damned phone. What the hell is that about?
All the stealing and stuff aside, they wouldn't have had so many renting outside the pool if they hadn't been IMPOSSIBLE to deal with. You see that business ethic (or lack of) all over the world too?
Whatever the problem with WWG, the answer is always complicated....and the SC's hands are tied. But god forbid you lend your condo to your grandmother, and she hides $50 in the fruitcake, the SC is all over your ass.....
If te rental pool problems were fixed, why wouldn't every owner want to rent through the operator?
Oftentimes hidden behind a thick layer of ineptitude and laziness. Those are exactly the kind of people that are fired frequently throughout their lives. Time for that here and now.
For the time being, at least the operator is paying current rental income. a lot of this is due to the negotiations done by the Surveillance Committee. The main goal is achieving a solution for debt owed to owners and to the HOA, moving forward we should hopefully see improvement and changes. If we could just fire at will, that would have been done, unfortunately it is not that simple. Rental pool problems will be fixed, in the meantime we at least have a band-aid for the current rental situation. I don't think the resort is looking to come down on grandma or uncle bob if they give you money for the use of the unit. they are more interested in the owner that is renting the unit and showing a pattern of having a variety of different last names checking in and all saying they are related to the owner or "friends" of the owner month after month. However, this is a minor issue in the eyes of the SC. the main concern is past debt and control of both entities (for profit side and HOA). The enforcement of bylaws is the responsability of the administrator and operator (if the issue involves them). The SC has bigger issues to deal with.
Seems to me that in a time when your investment is loosing money and you take the time to find renters. You should reap the profits. I have seen at the Sonoran Sea and Spa bribes being given to the rental agency to rent out their condo ahead of others. At some point you have to protect your investment.
For the time being, at least the operator is paying current rental income. a lot of this is due to the negotiations done by the Surveillance Committee. The main goal is achieving a solution for debt owed to owners and to the HOA, moving forward we should hopefully see improvement and changes. If we could just fire at will, that would have been done, unfortunately it is not that simple. Rental pool problems will be fixed, in the meantime we at least have a band-aid for the current rental situation. I don't think the resort is looking to come down on grandma or uncle bob if they give you money for the use of the unit. they are more interested in the owner that is renting the unit and showing a pattern of having a variety of different last names checking in and all saying they are related to the owner or "friends" of the owner month after month. However, this is a minor issue in the eyes of the SC. the main concern is past debt and control of both entities (for profit side and HOA). The enforcement of bylaws is the responsability of the administrator and operator (if the issue involves them). The SC has bigger issues to deal with.
This is a far more reasonable position, however it is just not entirely consistent with the message coming out of the TC group. Recently, someone even suggested that the SC will be limiting the number of guests days that all owners can have, including those that do not rent. Next thing you know, the SC might propose that owners cannot bring their coolers to the pool.
If the SC can remain focused on the big issues, most importantly recouping the HOA fees for the resort, maybe the owners can remain (mostly) unified....
Kinda like WWG paying the secret squirrels to force everyone back into the game at LP.
1. WWG does not have to pay anyone, they can do as they please without the support of a single owner. either remove them by majority vote or attempt to negotiate a settlement. If you are so hungry for action, I suggest you get your ass up and get a hold of 75% of your fellow owners and vote them out. I wish you the best of luck, I am sure you don't think a conspiracy exists that would involve WWG secretly paying 75% of your fellow neighbors.
2. Bylaws of the HOA will never allow more than 1 rental agency. for the time being the operator is paying owners their rental income (since feb. 1st). hopefully sometime this year we will have a new operator. hopefully we will also have a negotiated settlement that will pay owners past rental income owed and pay the HOA for past dues owed.
3. we also have heard about owners "bribing" the operator (unfortunately I have seen this in many places). the owners who did this where eventually found out about and the employee was warned.
4. an owner can reap the benefits of finding their own renter by having increased rental nights and even keeping 100% of the rental for any amount over the minimum rental rate (ex. many ground floor units charge more than the lowest rate and keep 100% of these funds). Yes, I know past income is still owed. At least the operator is paying current income moving forward. I am sure they also have lower expenses after removing over 70 employees from their staff.
Nothing is perfect. all we can do is attempt to fix the problem with the least damage to our investment. you have successful business men and women among the 15 or so SC members that probably have more in the game than most- thus they want the problem fixed just as much as any other owner.
The new operator should be a guy named Craig (he has a list) When someone rents the credit card payments could be broken down intoseperate payments to owners,to payroll,the resort etc. no fuss no muss.
This is a far more reasonable position, however it is just not entirely consistent with the message coming out of the TC group. Recently, someone even suggested that the SC will be limiting the number of guests days that all owners can have, including those that do not rent. Next thing you know, the SC might propose that owners cannot bring their coolers to the pool.
If the SC can remain focused on the big issues, most importantly recouping the HOA fees for the resort, maybe the owners can remain (mostly) unified....
The Secret Squirrels cannot LEGALLY limit the number of non paying guests anyone can have without the same vote necessary to change anything else.
Calm down Drywhatever,have a cocktail.
The Secret Squirrels cannot LEGALLY limit the number of non paying guests anyone can have without the same vote necessary to change anything else.
Calm down Drywhatever,have a cocktail.
The SC cannot limit the non paying guests an owner can have in their unit. However those that use their unit for rentals have a contract with the Operator that may give the operator permission to limit the "guest of owner" reservations. The only concern the HOA has or can control is if owners outside of the rental pool are renting their units, if so- a variety of restrictions or sanctions can be assessed. guest of owners will now have to check in and out with the lobby and must have a confirmation letter when they check in. owners must now present an owner id when they check in and out and must check in and out in person with the front desk. owners who don't have a rental contract with the operator and are found to be violating the rental bylaws of the HOA will be caught (a variety of ways are in place to find such owners).
thank you ernesto for your concern about me, I will certainly have a cocktail. I like your cute reference to secret squirrels- sounds very secretive and mysterious. DryHeat is just a reference to the dry heat in the Phoenix AZ area. however you can call me dry meat or dry whatever, both are fine with me- as long as it brings you happiness.
Not trying to take sides, however you are not entitled (which is the problem here) to be able to got swim and hang out at the pool of any resort in AMERICA as you put it. Try going to The Phoenician, Hyatt at Gainey Ranch, The Four Seasons, The Boulders, etc. Now, you certainly can go hang out at these hotels' restaurants and lobby bars, but not at the pools. Can you imagine paying $700/night and having any rif-raf with $50 hanging out of their pocket come invade the space and privacy that comes with staying at an exclusive resort? Not sure what the deal was at Embassy Suites/motel 6, but at nicer resorts you are not entitled as a local to hang out there. (that's what public pools are for). Security will and does throw you out. I would assume LP, when first marketed and sold, was more of a high-end or exclusive place, unlike Playa Bonita, and owners bought there for that reason. They also expected the place to be packed, as well as the entire town of RP for that matter. Then the economy went to heck and business is off. But, if I originally paid 400-500k for a place, I would not want any old 'Joe' to be able to walk off the beach, take my chair, my place at the swim up bar, etc just because they have a few bucks to spend. The place would be invaded by people who either can't afford staying there or would rather pay for cheaper place and then hang out all day in the luxury of the nicer resorts. Something doesn't add up with that socialist mindset.
By the way, go try plopping yourself in a recliner at The Phoenician (hotel in AMERICA) pool and order some food and drinks. They will ask, EVERY TIME, for your room #. And you can't pull the 'ol, "Put it on the Underhilll's tab" either.
Entitlement is a killer....
Listen DICK, once again an irrational response. The four Resorts you list are top $ resorts and no that wouldnt go down there so I agree with you. However thats exactly why I didnt use those in my example you penis. You're way out of touch with reality if you believe that EMBASSY SUITES IS COMPARABLE TO MOTEL 6. The Embassy Suites at PV charges well over $200/night during peak season, as IN RIGHT NOW! I hardly call that A MOTEL 6. Embassy Suites is owned by Hilton and has HUNDREDS of TOP NOTCH RESORTS around THE WORLD. When you rebuke me, next time dont compare APPLES and ORANGES, RP to HAWAII or whatever other reasoning you can come up with that is irrational. 1000% correct that those 4 resorts wouldnt let you do that, "PROLLY" because they have the likes of movie stars and Presidents as guests. So why even bring that up? First of all, I have a pool at my house. Second, I know personally for a fact that you can do this at the Resorts I mentioned because I have personally done it. Thirdly, you dont have to worry about "JOE" taking your seat because luckily for you there's nobody there and plenty of seats to go around. This brings me back to another related BAD BUSINESS CHOICE AT LAS PALOMAS. They originally had plans to make the LP LINKS COURSE PRIVATE, lets see how that worked out, OOOOO WAIT IT DIDNT. Ive been playing golf my whole life and worked in the golf industry solomente since I was 16. THERE IS NO CHANCE IN HOLY HELL THAT A COURSE IN RP COULD GO PRIVATE, you know why? Theres not enough BUSINESS. Same goes for LP in general, when you have to lay off 200 employees because you cant pay them maybe its time to start letting people use the facility. What if a guest wanted to use the facility and was willing to pay a guest fee for a ONE DAY WRISTBAND? Once again the only reason I bring this up is because sometimes you have to roll with the punches, times are bad, IMPROVISE, ADAPT, DARWIN E CHING mother FUCKER. How is trying to spend MONEY and talking about BUSINESS PRACTICE THIS WHOLE THREAD related to SOCIALISM?! Wouldn't that be CAPITALISM?! You must be a MICHELLE BACHMANN FAN RIGHT?! LOL, now thats 1000% guaranteed! Lastly, I dont think Im entitled to anything, nor do I feel a sense of entitlement of the LP POOL, Im just in awe of the businesses in RP that DONT LIKE MAKING MONEY!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
Seems to me that in a time when your investment is loosing money and you take the time to find renters. You should reap the profits. I have seen at the Sonoran Sea and Spa bribes being given to the rental agency to rent out their condo ahead of others. At some point you have to protect your investment.
Rick
Cholla Bay
I would love to see proof of this or is this just someone talking without any proof?
Las Palomas's story that they were ripped off by cheaters is yet another illogical argument. So you were ripped off. Your response is to steal the rental income from everyone who played nice with you?
And to top it off, the Secret Squirrels buy into the theory.
Who in their right mind would jump back in bed with these arrogant asses and say "they're paying on all reservations since the beginning of February". Are you f-ing insane?
If you can't see that this defies logic, you deserve to be suckered. But step the f down and quit purporting to represent the rest.
So you wanna know what is really hurting the resort. WWGs bad business practices, that's what.Sober up Secret Squirrels! Stop trying to manipulate everyone else to your benefit. Could never say this on the official Secret Squirrel website or you would be chastised and sent to bed without dinner. then banned. Grow the F up. Nice that we can have this little dustup with one of them ( Dryheat) without the retribution bullshit. And speaking of Dryheat, see if you can read and process this without your constant need to have the last word. I don't argue with everything you say. It's not about being right.
Do you see you have no allies here?
And the support for your friends is dwindling. Rightfully so. Their motives are painfully obvious. Look at how they dominate Craigslist.Don't they have a rule about constantly reposting to move your listing to the top? Cheaters.
Where are your friends? Making more Kool Aid?
Ernesto, when you foreclose on your unit I may be interested in buying it from the bank at a discount.
as I have said countless times, the situation is being resolved by having a new rental operator and a new HOA administration company (hopefully this year). In addition to having a settlement agreement on debt owed to owners and the HOA. I still don't understand your rant. what do you want? do you have a different solution? if your concern is owners being able to rent on their own without a rental company, that will never happen. If you have a different concern or solution, please share. what exactly do you want to see happen that has not already been shared? we know wwg had bad business practices and we have agreed that we need a new operator and administrator- no one is arguing with you on that, thus I am confused as to what you want. If you are unhappy about owners that "unblocked" their unit from being rented, well you might want to bring up your issues with your fellow neighbors since only 30% of them blocked the units after the sc recommended it. The point about cheaters affecting the system, that is true. for years the HOA did not enforce the rental rules. no one is defending the operator that kept income from owners, that is the reason why we are looking to replace them. thus I don't know what else you want?
if your concern is owners being able to rent on their own without a rental company, that will never happen.
So, you say that will never happen because you know how every owner would vote or because the SC would never allow it for a vote because they arrogantly know what is best for everyone else? WWG cannot vote right now.....so maybe the idea of allowing owners to rent on their own without a rental company should be added to the next HOA meeting. I suspect it may get quite a few votes.
Do you see where this is going Dryheat? If you don't have the support of the rest of us,you have nothing.Bring that back to Ben.Or do you still say you don't know who that is. Liar.
Ernesto, when you foreclose on your unit I may be interested in buying it from the bank at a discount.
as I have said countless times, the situation is being resolved by having a new rental operator and a new HOA administration company (hopefully this year). In addition to having a settlement agreement on debt owed to owners and the HOA. I still don't understand your rant. what do you want? do you have a different solution? if your concern is owners being able to rent on their own without a rental company, that will never happen. If you have a different concern or solution, please share. what exactly do you want to see happen that has not already been shared? we know wwg had bad business practices and we have agreed that we need a new operator and administrator- no one is arguing with you on that, thus I am confused as to what you want. If you are unhappy about owners that "unblocked" their unit from being rented, well you might want to bring up your issues with your fellow neighbors since only 30% of them blocked the units after the sc recommended it. The point about cheaters affecting the system, that is true. for years the HOA did not enforce the rental rules. no one is defending the operator that kept income from owners, that is the reason why we are looking to replace them. thus I don't know what else you want?
Come on Dry. read what I wrote, or read it again. You're an educated man.And who really cares what the "SC" recommends anymore. Read my last few posts and step down.You walk around all the issues and address only those that benefit you.Read it again . It's clear.
So, you say that will never happen because you know how every owner would vote or because the SC would never allow it for a vote because they arrogantly know what is best for everyone else? WWG cannot vote right now.....so maybe the idea of allowing owners to rent on their own without a rental company should be added to the next HOA meeting. I suspect it may get quite a few votes.
Some bylaws require 75% of the undivided ownership group in order to change. for example: replacing the existing administrator and no longer requiring only one rental agency on premise. This has nothing to do with voting rights, this has to do with % of ownership. The developer owns 20% in phase 1 and 23% in phase 2, this means that in order to change certain bylaws within the covenants it would require over 90% of the rest of the owners (not those present but 90% of the total owners to show up and all agree to pass the motion). Maybe you can see why we have to work with the developer for an amicable solution.
Do you see where this is going Dryheat? If you don't have the support of the rest of us,you have nothing.Bring that back to Ben.Or do you still say you don't know who that is. Liar.
My dear tontito, I never said I did not know Ben. I only made a remark as to why you speak about him so much, I think I made a reference to you dating him or him dumping you or something like that- maybe you can find it.
We are restricted by what we can and cannot do (see sonoran law, federal law, bylaws, voting rights, etc.) good thing your emotional unbalanced self is not leading things- you would certainly not get a thing done with saying what you want and how you want it- while neglecting or not paying attention to the process of actually achieving something (more like think with your head and not with your heart).
Come on Dry. read what I wrote, or read it again. You're an educated man.And who really cares what the "SC" recommends anymore. Read my last few posts and step down.You walk around all the issues and address only those that benefit you.Read it again . It's clear.
I am missing it, please tell me again what you want changed and how you plan on achieving it. I deal better with black and white issues and not emotionally unbalanced rants. If the reference is to allowing owners to rent outside of the designated rental agency it would require 90% of the owners to show up (each phase) and approve it. I think the most we ever had at a meeting was 41%, and that was the last meeting when we made a drastic effort to get people to show up. Oh by the way, if a resort did not require all rentals to be ran through the approved onsite rental company- well that would be a 1st since I don't know of a hotel/condo resort that allows owners to rent outside of the rental operator- but maybe you know better than how it has been done around the world.
Some bylaws require 75% of the undivided ownership group in order to change. for example: replacing the existing administrator and no longer requiring only one rental agency on premise. This has nothing to do with voting rights, this has to do with % of ownership. The developer owns 20% in phase 1 and 23% in phase 2, this means that in order to change certain bylaws within the covenants it would require over 90% of the rest of the owners (not those present but 90% of the total owners to show up and all agree to pass the motion). Maybe you can see why we have to work with the developer for an amicable solution.
Dryheat, I think you are being deliberately misleading. We understand that certain bylaws require 75% of the undivided ownership to change. I am not suggesting replacing the current administrator, which I understand is challenging.
On the other hand, including a bylaw to allow owners to rent on their own in competition with WWG would not face the same hurdle. I believe it would just require a 75% majority of those who vote and have voting rights. Since WWG can no longer vote, I suspect this would pass easily.
Having options would be a great benefit for owners. If the next operator has problems similar to WWG, owners can choose to opt out of the contract and rent on their own. Of course, if the new operator is doing a good job, why wouldn't most owners want to stay in the rental pool?
So how do we get this issue onto a ballot for vote?
Dryheat, I think you are being deliberately misleading. We understand that certain bylaws require 75% of the undivided ownership to change. I am not suggesting replacing the current administrator, which I understand is challenging.
On the other hand, including a bylaw to allow owners to rent on their own in competition with WWG would not face the same hurdle. I believe it would just require a 75% majority of those who vote and have voting rights. Since WWG can no longer vote, I suspect this would pass easily.
Having options would be a great benefit for owners. If the next operator has problems similar to WWG, owners can choose to opt out of the contract and rent on their own. Of course, if the new operator is doing a good job, why wouldn't most owners want to stay in the rental pool?
So how do we get this issue onto a ballot for vote?
It is not a matter of just adding an amendment to an existing bylaw. the bylaw would have to be re-writting to state that the resort does not have a designated rental operator and owners are allowed to lease their units without a subscription to any operator. The original covenants and restrictions filed with the state of sonora restrict the resort to having only 1 rental company on site (no different than all the other resorts along sandy beach and in most areas). Certain bylaws are restricted to the approval of the undivided ownership regime, such as changing the use of the commercial area (restricted to office space, small general store, restaurant, hotel operations), use of personal property, changing the administrator, removing the requirements for a rental company that adheres to the standards of the resort.
Also, why would this resort do something that no other resort does? Issues I can think of that would occur are problems with security dealing with multiple paying guests, dealing with multiple cleaning companies. I am not sure owners who dont rent would like to see wildcat renting going on in their resort (again, I don't know of a resort that allows your suggestion). Also, how would the HOA collect impact fee's from owners that rent (who would issue wristbands for security to identify they are a guest of the resort, is the HOA now responsible for issuing wristbands to everyone)?, what kind of rating would the resort get when they have hundreds of different owners renting according to their own standards, who would enforce occupancy limits, who would handle maintenance issues for every paying guest if something happens overnight and the owner is not available.
I would love to collect 100% of the rental income, however I know that it would create a mess at the resort. I could just see owners undercutting each other for rentals. For example I have my unit paid free and clear, thus my expenses are low so what would stop me from renting my unit for $75 per night and having it occupied every day of the month. Would owners who have a mortgage benefit from other owners undercutting their rates? I am sure the resort would be filled with love if everyone could do as they please. Unfortunately you bought into a condo regime that limits and restricts what you want to do. No different than an HOA in the states (ex. can't park overnight on the street, can't paint your home as you please, can't leave the garbage out, have to pull weeds, etc.). My suggestion is if an owner would want to do as they please with no restrictions is to purchase a home that is not governed by an hoa.
It is not a matter of just adding an amendment to an existing bylaw. the bylaw would have to be re-writting to state that the resort does not have a designated rental operator and owners are allowed to lease their units without a subscription to any operator. The original covenants and restrictions filed with the state of sonora restrict the resort to having only 1 rental company on site (no different than all the other resorts along sandy beach and in most areas). Certain bylaws are restricted to the approval of the undivided ownership regime, such as changing the use of the commercial area (restricted to office space, small general store, restaurant, hotel operations), use of personal property, changing the administrator, removing the requirements for a rental company that adheres to the standards of the resort.
Also, why would this resort do something that no other resort does? Issues I can think of that would occur are problems with security dealing with multiple paying guests, dealing with multiple cleaning companies. I am not sure owners who dont rent would like to see wildcat renting going on in their resort (again, I don't know of a resort that allows your suggestion). Also, how would the HOA collect impact fee's from owners that rent (who would issue wristbands for security to identify they are a guest of the resort, is the HOA now responsible for issuing wristbands to everyone)?, what kind of rating would the resort get when they have hundreds of different owners renting according to their own standards, who would enforce occupancy limits, who would handle maintenance issues for every paying guest if something happens overnight and the owner is not available.
I would love to collect 100% of the rental income, however I know that it would create a mess at the resort. I could just see owners undercutting each other for rentals. For example I have my unit paid free and clear, thus my expenses are low so what would stop me from renting my unit for $75 per night and having it occupied every day of the month. Would owners who have a mortgage benefit from other owners undercutting their rates? I am sure the resort would be filled with love if everyone could do as they please. Unfortunately you bought into a condo regime that limits and restricts what you want to do. No different than an HOA in the states (ex. can't park overnight on the street, can't paint your home as you please, can't leave the garbage out, have to pull weeds, etc.). My suggestion is if an owner would want to do as they please with no restrictions is to purchase a home that is not governed by an hoa.
Once again, you answered a different question. The bylaws could be rewritten to explicitly allow individual owners to rent their own units alongside the chosen operator. You do not need to replace the current operator. In fact, there is actually a legitimate question whether or not this is even against the current bylaws in the first place. The current bylaws only restrict the resort to one operator. It is a bit of a stretch to extend that clause to individuals managing and maintaining their own units.
You say it would be a mess to allow owners to rent their own units. Without debating the merits of your logic, you ignore that you are now forcing owners and the resort into a worse mess. Alongside the obvious issue of owners not getting paid, a partial list of other reasons to not join the rental pool include:
- resort guests have been put into units under the table, without compensation to the owner
- the rotation queue is not enforced
- the walk-in process is corrupt
- items are missing from your condo, not replaced, or fixed
- the resort rarely finding any guests.
I have been around the resort from the beginning. While not perfect, it ran better the first few years when individual renting was encouraged. Once again, if the operator is performing well, most people would join because they do not want the hassle of marketing and managing their units. If the big concern is really lowballing, perhaps marketing restrictions would be a better solution.
That is why we will have a new operator, all the issues you mentioned are being addressed. No Opereator would take on the business if they were not protected as the the exclusive rental company (no other resort allows it, why would Las Palomas be the only one that does). Yes, the bylaws of the hoa state that any unit leased or rented must use the designated rental operator, it is not as simple as rewritting the bylaws to state that owners can rent along aside the one chosen operator, because every single owner that rents on their own would be their own operator (some would use 3rd party companies, some would create a corporation, some would rent as a private person). The bylaws also state that the rental of units must conform to various standards that the HOA has set. Look, it will never happen. no other resort does it, why would Las Palomas. In the meantime, owners are getting rental income. Hopefully sometime this year we will have a new operator to replace the current one. All the issues you brought up will be addressed by a new operator. NO operator is perfect and we will always have issues with any rental operator. The only way one can rent on their own is if they owned their own home and were not part of an HOA that restricts what you can and cannot do. Your request that owners be allowed to rent outside of one rental operator will never happen and has not happened anywhere else. You can say all you want, kick and scream, call HOA members names, hate the resort, pull out advertisements, hire an attorney- it will never happen. and if you purchaed at any other resort, they too would not allow it either.
Can someone besides dry heat explain who dry heat is ? Is he some sort of management or just another condo owner ? As I watch dry heat take a simple question and twist it till it appears the best option of action is always his !!!!! Dry heat sounds like he would make a good attorney.. If he didn't get his out come right away he can always just talk the people to death till they throw up there hands and give up. Dry heat preaches how it all works according to how he see's it. I love the way dry heat says it will NEVER happen. Were does a person get a super ego so large that everyone else is a emotional fool if they disagree with dry heat... Wow we have a black president now BUT so many said that will NEVER happen ! Dry heat claiming some things will "never" happen will come back to bite you.... So dry heat what motivates you ????? power, greed, or to simple pretend your Superior to everyone else around you ?????? I like your profile picture :-) that explains a lot about you !
dry heat said:
That is why we will have a new operator, all the issues you mentioned are being addressed. No Operator would take on the business if they were not protected as the the exclusive rental company (no other resort allows it, why would Las Palomas be the only one that does). Yes, the bylaws of the hoa state that any unit leased or rented must use the designated rental operator, it is not as simple as rewritting the bylaws to state that owners can rent along aside the one chosen operator, because every single owner that rents on their own would be their own operator (some would use 3rd party companies, some would create a corporation, some would rent as a private person). The bylaws also state that the rental of units must conform to various standards that the HOA has set. Look, it will never happen. no other resort does it, why would Las Palomas. In the meantime, owners are getting rental income. Hopefully sometime this year we will have a new operator to replace the current one. All the issues you brought up will be addressed by a new operator. NO operator is perfect and we will always have issues with any rental operator. The only way one can rent on their own is if they owned their own home and were not part of an HOA that restricts what you can and cannot do. Your request that owners be allowed to rent outside of one rental operator will never happen and has not happened anywhere else. You can say all you want, kick and scream, call HOA members names, hate the resort, pull out advertisements, hire an attorney- it will never happen. and if you purchaed at any other resort, they too would not allow it either.
Can someone besides dry heat explain who dry heat is ? Is he some sort of management or just another condo owner ? As I watch dry heat take a simple question and twist it till it appears the best option of action is always his !!!!! Dry heat sounds like he would make a good attorney.. If he didn't get his out come right away he can always just talk the people to death till they throw up there hands and give up. Dry heat preaches how it all works according to how he see's it. I love the way dry heat says it will NEVER happen. Were does a person get a super ego so large that everyone else is a emotional fool if they disagree with dry heat... Wow we have a black president now BUT so many said that will NEVER happen ! Dry heat claiming some things will "never" happen will come back to bite you.... So dry heat what motivates you ????? power, greed, or to simple pretend your Superior to everyone else around you ?????? I like your profile picture :-) that explains a lot about you !
I should re-phrase it.... The chances that a condo/hotel in penasco or in any other area would allow owners to rent their unit outside of the approved rental operator are slim to non. Maybe "never" was too strong of a word, "slim to non" is probably more appropriate. I own property around the world, most are in hotel/condo developments and I have never heard of a development that allows owners to rent outside of the designated operator. I also own residences in the states and in other countries that I rent, for those I have full control of how I rent the units because I am not restricted.
I should re-phrase it.... The chances that a condo/hotel in penasco or in any other area would allow owners to rent their unit outside of the approved rental operator are slim to non. Maybe "never" was too strong of a word, "slim to non" is probably more appropriate. I own property around the world, most are in hotel/condo developments and I have never heard of a development that allows owners to rent outside of the designated operator. I also own residences in the states and in other countries that I rent, for those I have full control of how I rent the units because I am not restricted.
best!
Unlike Dryheat, I am not familar with how every other resort in Penasco runs their rental business. Just a question to any owners from other resorts, can you rent your own unit outside the management company? If you have a friend or guest that you wish to have stay in your condo, do they need to rent from the management company?
Unlike Dryheat, I am not familar with how every other resort in Penasco runs their rental business. Just a question to any owners from other resorts, can you rent your own unit outside the management company? If you have a friend or guest that you wish to have stay in your condo, do they need to rent from the management company?
Now that is a great question!
You might be interested to know that Seaside Reservations (a rental operator that manages a lot of the developments along sandy ) has one of the strictest enforcements in the area for owners that bypass the rental operator when it comes to leasing or renting the unit.
You have never heard of condo's being rented outside of a designated operator ? Then in the next sentence you state you rent your other condo's yourself because you are not restricted ? WTF ? Are these restrictions only applied in Penasco then ???
dry heat said:
I should re-phrase it.... The chances that a condo/hotel in penasco or in any other area would allow owners to rent their unit outside of the approved rental operator are slim to non. Maybe "never" was too strong of a word, "slim to non" is probably more appropriate. I own property around the world, most are in hotel/condo developments and I have never heard of a development that allows owners to rent outside of the designated operator. I also own residences in the states and in other countries that I rent, for those I have full control of how I rent the units because I am not restricted.
Now that is a great question!
You might be interested to know that Seaside Reservations (a rental operator that manages a lot of the developments along sandy ) has one of the strictest enforcements in the area for owners that bypass the rental operator when it comes to leasing or renting the unit.
Dryheat, let me rephrase the question. I do know that Seaside has strict enforcement for those owners that have contracts with them. My question is, what is the process for owners who do not join the rental company at other resorts. Can they rent their units to guests?
Not Speaking for Dryheat but at the Sonoran Sea and Sonoran Spa I had to sign a contract agreeing that if I was to put my condo in the rental pool I would only be allowed to use RPR. not sure about any other resorts so I can not comment on them. Slight correction would be to say I can rent out my condo personally but I must give RPR the normal amount that they would have gotten if they rented the condo out. I didn't buy either condo with the intention of making any money renting them out. 1 we rent the other is just our home away from home.
Not Speaking for Dryheat but at the Sonoran Sea and Sonoran Spa I had to sign a contract agreeing that if I was to put my condo in the rental pool I would only be allowed to use RPR. not sure about any other resorts so I can not comment on them. Slight correction would be to say I can rent out my condo personally but I must give RPR the normal amount that they would have gotten if they rented the condo out. I didn't buy either condo with the intention of making any money renting them out. 1 we rent the other is just our home away from home.
AZRob, how would it work if you did not put your condo in the rental pool? Could you rent out your unit on your own to friends and guests?
You have never heard of condo's being rented outside of a designated operator ? Then in the next sentence you state you rent your other condo's yourself because you are not restricted ? WTF ? Are these restrictions only applied in Penasco then ???
I'm sorry I am not proof reading as I type. I meant to say that my private residences (ex. houses) don't have restrictions when it comes to renting. those properties I keep 100% of the rental income. restrictions on renting are applied in all of the hotel/condo resorts that I know of (including those that I own in).
Dryheat, let me rephrase the question. I do know that Seaside has strict enforcement for those owners that have contracts with them. My question is, what is the process for owners who do not join the rental company at other resorts. Can they rent their units to guests?
At one location, if I don't have a contract with the rental operator and I rent my unit. the operator will invoice me the rack rate for the stay of my guest.
At another location, if I don't have a contract with the rental operator and I rent my unit, the HOA charges my account $150 per day for each night of the stay. If I don't disclose the rental, the HOA charges me $225 per night.
Both locations require the guest to check in and out at the lobby, thus it is a bit of a challenge to sneek them around- unless they where trained really well to lie upon check in and check out.
So Rob what is the normal cut for RPR ? Lets say you had a guest use your other condo for free ? or you charged $50 a night ? Those two deals are OK as long as you pay RPR how much a night ? Sorry am a bit confused as some friends and I were looking for a condo to rent there for a week and of course were looking for the best deal.
AZ ROB said:
Not Speaking for Dryheat but at the Sonoran Sea and Sonoran Spa I had to sign a contract agreeing that if I was to put my condo in the rental pool I would only be allowed to use RPR. not sure about any other resorts so I can not comment on them. Slight correction would be to say I can rent out my condo personally but I must give RPR the normal amount that they would have gotten if they rented the condo out. I didn't buy either condo with the intention of making any money renting them out. 1 we rent the other is just our home away from home.
This Dry guy is obviously really full of himself.As are the other Squirrels.
Yes, totally full of ourselves. You are too smart to fool. I don't know what the squirrels are going to do with your insightful knowledge, you are too dangerous with your perceptive powers. Damn you got me- you sir are good......................................you still can't rent your unit outside of the rental company.
You mean unless u say so right? Arrogant ass. Every bully eventually gets punched in the nose.
No tontinto, because the regulations you agreed to when you purchased say so. I am sure you did your due diligence when it came to purchasing a unit in a regime governed by an HOA. Take a couple of extra pills tonight to help you rest. I know it sucks when you can't get your way, I'm sorry buddy. A foreclosure or short sale does not stay on your record forever. maybe next time you will purchase a private residence and then you can rent all you want in complete bliss and keep all the money.
Yes, totally full of ourselves. You are too smart to fool. I don't know what the squirrels are going to do with your insightful knowledge, you are too dangerous with your perceptive powers. Damn you got me- you sir are good......................................you still can't rent your unit outside of the rental company.
I disagree, craigslist.com, vacation rentals, key word Rocky Point. Looks like a bunch of people are CHEATING... drug dealing is illegal but people deal drugs. Honestly, theres no way these people can get caught. There's a woman who rents me her CONDO at Sonoran Sky for an unbelievable rate and we get everything here in Phoenix before we leave, wristbands and keys. We dont even have to bother with going into the lobby or anything. The only thing she asks, in no way contact the front desk for anything. Pretty failsafe and shes meeting the MARKET EQUILIBRIUM in this SHITTY ECONOMIC TIME PERIOD, great deal for ME and great deal for HER. SUPPLY MEETS DEMAND NATURALLY! NO RULES!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! and to DRYMEAT, no she doesnt rent her 3bed 3bath 2,000 square feet for $10/night like you suggested would happen with no oversight.... #Winning
No tontinto,DRY Heat, Spell check its actually TONTITO I have a bunch of tontito's out where I live too, but about the time I get tired of them somebody else does too, thats the best part of ejido life.
I disagree, craigslist.com, vacation rentals, key word Rocky Point. Looks like a bunch of people are CHEATING... drug dealing is illegal but people deal drugs. Honestly, theres no way these people can get caught. There's a woman who rents me her CONDO at Sonoran Sky for an unbelievable rate and we get everything here in Phoenix before we leave, wristbands and keys. We dont even have to bother with going into the lobby or anything. The only thing she asks, in no way contact the front desk for anything. Pretty failsafe and shes meeting the MARKET EQUILIBRIUM in this SHITTY ECONOMIC TIME PERIOD, great deal for ME and great deal for HER. SUPPLY MEETS DEMAND NATURALLY! NO RULES!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! and to DRYMEAT, no she doesnt rent her 3bed 3bath 2,000 square feet for $10/night like you suggested would happen with no oversight.... #Winning
You are absolutely right, nothing in life is 100%. People will cheat the government, cheat on a test, cheat casinos, cheat their employer, etc. all one can do is attempt to decrease the problem (I have a lot of employees and have owned a variety of business and I see it go on everywhere). I do like your example of how some owners cheat, it certainly helps with identifying how owners do it (althought your way is common). Fortunately at LP, "guest of owner" reservations will require the guest to check in and out with the reception desk. Of course some will try to circumvent the system and of course the system will try to use various methods and ways to find such ones. So, I guess we will see how it goes.
Oh, I think your reference to WINNING is very creative and imaginative. I have yet to hear such a phrase being used in the media lately. It would be a shame to have other copy cat your catchy phrase and show that they are just followers.
No tontinto,DRY Heat, Spell check its actually TONTITO I have a bunch of tontito's out where I live too, but about the time I get tired of them somebody else does too, thats the best part of ejido life.
I have always like that word, and of course my spelling has always been a nightmare (my staff can never read a thing I write). I have often found that those that complain and whine eventually are forgotten about because they lack the will power to do something about their issue, complaint or problem. I have seen it in business and always see it in communities that are governed by an association or administrator (they either sell, foreclose or continue to cry with no action). For people like Mexican Jose I understand their desire to take advantage of a situation- that is smart business. I do it when I purchase business for pennies on the dollar or purchase properties that are foreclosed or on the verge of foreclosure (I too am taking advantage of the situation). Mexican Jose is not doing anything ilegal or violating any contract, he is just taking advantage of the owner's who are violating their contracts. That is why he has so much extra money to spend, he is WINNING and has Tiger blood in him. He is a warlock.
So much for the Charlie Sheen quotes... Now for someone that's as busy as you it's nice to know that you monitor this forum so closely, and are so quick to jump on board when you read something that you think that might be detrimental to your massive holding in PP. LOL You would think you might just want to sit back and watch the post's that make the coups look bad so you could make more purchases for "pennies on the dollar", but your actions on here tell a different story. It tells the story of someone who is very much worried about whatever holding he has in PP, and your bullshit bravado is just that, pucky.
So much for the Charlie Sheen quotes... Now for someone that's as busy as you it's nice to know that you monitor this forum so closely, and are so quick to jump on board when you read something that you think that might be detrimental to your massive holding in PP. LOL You would think you might just want to sit back and watch the post's that make the coups look bad so you could make more purchases for "pennies on the dollar", but your actions on here tell a different story. It tells the story of someone who is very much worried about whatever holding he has in PP, and your bullshit bravado is just that, pucky.
Last 3 weeks I have been hooked on my new ipad and spent way to much time on it (carrying the damn thing everywhere and accessing this site too much). Nope, don't really have a massive holding in Penasco. Place is more like my childhood spot a sentimental place- reason why I purchase a couple of properties here. nothing massive. Do I really carry myself with bravado? hmmm. Forums are fun and entertaining, unfortunately some like yourself take them very seriously and get so bothered that you start using politics in your discussions (I always love your comments about republicans and democrats). Well I truly enjoy reading your posts and understand that you take them seriously. Damn, you have almost 2000 posts. My lazy ass has only racked up 100 or so over the last 3 weeks. I understand that this is a serious hobby for you.
Last 3 weeks I have been hooked on my new ipad and spent way to much time on it (carrying the damn thing everywhere and accessing this site too much). Nope, don't really have a massive holding in Penasco. Place is more like my childhood spot a sentimental place- reason why I purchase a couple of properties here. nothing massive. Do I really carry myself with bravado? hmmm. Forums are fun and entertaining, unfortunately some like yourself take them very seriously and get so bothered that you start using politics in your discussions (I always love your comments about republicans and democrats). Well I truly enjoy reading your posts and understand that you take them seriously. Damn, you have almost 2000 posts. My lazy ass has only racked up 100 or so over the last 3 weeks. I understand that this is a serious hobby for you.
I'm thrilled that that you "truly enjoy reading" my post's, but don't be confused about my bravado statement or twist it, as it was clarified with the word false. You did notice that my massive holding's statement was ended with lot's of laughs didn't you, or no? I think your bragging is just so much pucky, and hogwash. You've been posting on here and the other forum anonymously for years, and it's never about "fun" heat, never; but they always have a hint of a little man in more way's than one.... So keep up the good work Heat.The "my staff" statement was a true gem, and of course made you look oh so good, and oh so important.
not a big fan of the units in phase 1. I did notice they had a teaser rate in the posting to get attention. however if you scroll down you will read the following in the advertisement:
2011 Daily Rates: Sun-Thurs: $115.00 Fri-Sat: $145(includes LP approved 20% discount) Holidays: APRIL 8-10, MAY 1- 2, May 22-25, JULY 2- 4, & OCTOBER 9-12. 2009 Holiday Rates: $230 *CANCELLATION POLICY* Las Palomas accepts credit card payments. At the time of booking a reservation, they charge 50% of the total reservation cost. - Within thirty (30) days of your arrival, they will charge the remaining balance of the reservation.
Is this what you are referring to? see if you can find me another one, it was a good start.
You are absolutely right, nothing in life is 100%. People will cheat the government, cheat on a test, cheat casinos, cheat their employer, etc. all one can do is attempt to decrease the problem (I have a lot of employees and have owned a variety of business and I see it go on everywhere). I do like your example of how some owners cheat, it certainly helps with identifying how owners do it (althought your way is common). Fortunately at LP, "guest of owner" reservations will require the guest to check in and out with the reception desk. Of course some will try to circumvent the system and of course the system will try to use various methods and ways to find such ones. So, I guess we will see how it goes.
Oh, I think your reference to WINNING is very creative and imaginative. I have yet to hear such a phrase being used in the media lately. It would be a shame to have other copy cat your catchy phrase and show that they are just followers.
Probably? Lol, its ok to acknowledge all the owners that are sick and tired of being told what to do with their property and sick and tired of poor Mexican business ideals. Its ok not to say probably because thats exactly whats going on. In the last 4 years, I have raped craigslist for the best deals in RP known to man. Still havent gotten that $10/night deal that you said would happen without the WWG' oversight. In addition, I was thinking about this ongoing conversation and how not only are the CONDOS competing with owners renting privately but with other AMERICAN TOURIST DESTINATIONS. The reason I dont get to SAN DIEGO as much as I used to is because RP is closer, and the money goes further. However, that wouldnt be the case if I booked directly with the RESORT. There are PLENTY of decent places in San Diego to stay for at or under $200/night. Shit, I can stay at THE CATAMARAN on MISSION BAY for $200 a night. Thats exactly the reason why RP blew up in the first place. People realized they could drive less, stay for less, eat for less, shop for less and have sex on the beach for less. Well.... not anymore. When you have your prices set near prices in San Diego at places like THE CATAMARAN, the OPPORTUNITY COST VANISHES. RP created an OPPORTUNITY COST and people took advantage of it. If it costs the same to go to one of the greatest cities on the West Coast, why would you spend the same amount of money to stay at LP??????????????? ESPECIALLY IN THESE TIMES, the lack of DEMAND would be enough to lower prices. Just one more thing these Mexican businesses dont understand. They arent only in competition with the other resorts and private renter on craigslist but other tourist destinations in general; Tucson, Flagstaff, LA, San Diego, Vegas.... The draw used to be lets go to RP because my money goes further. MEAT before you reply and tell me that in a perfect world, yes I should be able to get a CONDO FOR $10/night. Please dont be irrational, Im saying $100/night instead of $200/night, not $10! Please dont rebuke me with, "well whos to say that an owner wouldnt start renting out their condo for $10 a night". UUUUGGGGHHHHHH SUPPLY AND DEMAND SAYS THAT. I thought you would understand Supply Side economics, you're a REAGAN GUY right? Reaganomics isnt going to work here if the prices are $200/night...
I'm thrilled that that you "truly enjoy reading" my post's, but don't be confused about my bravado statement or twist it, as it was clarified with the word false. You did notice that my massive holding's statement was ended with lot's of laughs didn't you, or no? I think your bragging is just so much pucky, and hogwash. You've been posting on here and the other forum anonymously for years, and it's never about "fun" heat, never; but they always have a hint of a little man in more way's than one.... So keep up the good work Heat.The "my staff" statement was a true gem, and of course made you look oh so good, and oh so important.
I don't know why you would think a reference to having a staff is anything to brag about. landscapers have staff, street vendors have a staff. Maybe you watched too much tv as a youth and had goals of having a staff. I'll change my wording for you so that it sounds humble in your eyes: "due to my poor spelling, I pay others to correct my errors and humbly surround myself with such ones that have great qualities". I look to your 2000 posts as a sign of someone that has a lot of fun on the internet, you are clearly having way to much fun. As a little poor man with a big fish syndrome, I leave you a fun thought I had in my hogwash mind...
wonder why construction was so slow and seemed to affect certain businesses in the Malecon area, wonder why the gov't funded infrastructure and road improvements in a bad economy (in penasco of all places), wonder why a high end mall with a movie theater, boardwalk that will easily hold hundreds, retail, hotel, office and condo development set up shop in the back of the marina (by the way an amazing group- hopefully non involved are hogwash), wonder how the cruise port will come to fruition, wonder why the construction of said development is quickly being funded and supported by various government agencies (local, state and federal). Hmmmm I wonder too, just some random questions I had. Anyways, since you are a fisherman. I hope you will always have an affordable and convenient marina to dock and lauch (for all of your friends too). Since you are the forum addict (I mean sonoran god) would you save my little rant and repost 3 years from now. I would not mind being ridiculed for this hogwash comment and weird rant.
Probably? Lol, its ok to acknowledge all the owners that are sick and tired of being told what to do with their property and sick and tired of poor Mexican business ideals. Its ok not to say probably because thats exactly whats going on. In the last 4 years, I have raped craigslist for the best deals in RP known to man. Still havent gotten that $10/night deal that you said would happen without the WWG' oversight. In addition, I was thinking about this ongoing conversation and how not only are the CONDOS competing with owners renting privately but with other AMERICAN TOURIST DESTINATIONS. The reason I dont get to SAN DIEGO as much as I used to is because RP is closer, and the money goes further. However, that wouldnt be the case if I booked directly with the RESORT. There are PLENTY of decent places in San Diego to stay for at or under $200/night. Shit, I can stay at THE CATAMARAN on MISSION BAY for $200 a night. Thats exactly the reason why RP blew up in the first place. People realized they could drive less, stay for less, eat for less, shop for less and have sex on the beach for less. Well.... not anymore. When you have your prices set near prices in San Diego at places like THE CATAMARAN, the OPPORTUNITY COST VANISHES. RP created an OPPORTUNITY COST and people took advantage of it. If it costs the same to go to one of the greatest cities on the West Coast, why would you spend the same amount of money to stay at LP??????????????? ESPECIALLY IN THESE TIMES, the lack of DEMAND would be enough to lower prices. Just one more thing these Mexican businesses dont understand. They arent only in competition with the other resorts and private renter on craigslist but other tourist destinations in general; Tucson, Flagstaff, LA, San Diego, Vegas.... The draw used to be lets go to RP because my money goes further. MEAT before you reply and tell me that in a perfect world, yes I should be able to get a CONDO FOR $10/night. Please dont be irrational, Im saying $100/night instead of $200/night, not $10! Please dont rebuke me with, "well whos to say that an owner wouldnt start renting out their condo for $10 a night". UUUUGGGGHHHHHH SUPPLY AND DEMAND SAYS THAT. I thought you would understand Supply Side economics, you're a REAGAN GUY right? Reaganomics isnt going to work here if the prices are $200/night...
Yes you got me, $10 per night was a inflalated example (I thought I had already said that earlier). Actually the resort caugh an owner renting their 1 bedroom unit in February for $500- so I guess that average was closer to $18 per night- then again this is a unique example. In any case, if anyone could rent as they please, you would probably find a 2 bedroom for $75 per night and a 1 bedroom for $50 per night (had many of these listings for LP units at one time before the rental rules where enforced. Thank you for the economics lesson, duly appreciated.
AZRob, how would it work if you did not put your condo in the rental pool? Could you rent out your unit on your own to friends and guests?
I am sure you could "loan" the condo to friends and family but you wouldn't have the maid service that comes with renting it out. on our rental we let our friends and family stay there we just put a non-paying guest of owner block on the condo. This way it is only 30 or 50 bucks and the maid cleans up when they leave changes the towels and washes all the sheets and dishes..
No I think dry meat has a few condos and thought it was a done deal that one or both rented for say $250 a night. Less the cut for the rental agency and lets guess $200 a night X 2 is $400 a night times 7 = $2800 a week X 52 weeks = $145.000 and some change. Now drymeat finds out the agency is not doing there job to rent his condos and being the great world wide business man that he is..... He is trying to correct this problem and stop owners from renting out there own condos too. Hows that backing up the rental agency working out for you drymeat ?????? :moon: :rofl:
Thank god drymeat is rich and the condos units he bought were for childhood memories and sentimental reasons so no big deal for drymeat. Maybe drymeats staff should advise drymeat that he has the personality of a donkey ! I have always had pity for a person that has to put everyone one down around them to somehow make himself seem important... But your right Kenny I bet its not to long before drymeat has his condos on craigslist too. Rich world wide business man hahahahaha with a staff LOL Thanks for the laughs drymeat.. I find your posts very entertaining drymeat so keep them coming OK :woo:
Kenny said:
That looks like a great deal Tomcat, do you think it the Heats? :veg:
would you save my little rant and repost 3 years from now.
Have your staff save it for you, because as it is I've already been reading your drivel a lot longer that and you'll be around three years from now, if not posting, then lurking around looking for a opportunity to shake your pom poms. Lets not forget that it was you that was always saying that we were just chicken littles saying the sky was falling when we warned folks of the fall and the shady deals. Then after it all came to pass you made yourself scarce only coming out of your hole for special occasions to get up on your soap box spouting for the most part the same old crap.
Just read Toms post above, and yes I to feel his worry about his little investment. I've always though that what drives him, worry and fear.
Thanks for the information Rob, Its refreshing to get some real feedback from a condo owner....
AZ ROB said:
I am sure you could "loan" the condo to friends and family but you wouldn't have the maid service that comes with renting it out. on our rental we let our friends and family stay there we just put a non-paying guest of owner block on the condo. This way it is only 30 or 50 bucks and the maid cleans up when they leave changes the towels and washes all the sheets and dishes..
I don't know why you would think a reference to having a staff is anything to brag about. landscapers have staff, street vendors have a staff. .
I agree. I also never brag about my staff. At my age, I am just glad it works. Now the riff-raff, you know those that illegally rent, the landscapers, street staff etc, they seem so focused on their staffs. Probably why they have so many kids and cannot afford to pay full rack rate!
Hi Tommy, It is 79.00 per night but then there are wrist band fees paid to Las Palomas directly when you arrive. A onetime $25.00 the first day and $5.00 per day starting on the 2nd day per person over 10 years old. If you want to reserve these nights call my husband Gary at 480-766-2115 for the details on reserving those nights.
Leagan Realty Lisa Eagan; Designated Broker 9414 East San Salvador Drive Suite 112 Scottsdale, Arizona 85258 Office: 480-656-7714 Ext 101 Cell: 480-403-1075 E-Fax: 888-422-9951 Email: [B][COLOR=navy][email protected][/COLOR][/B] Website: www.LeaganRealty.com
Hummm ! Hey drymeat it looks like someone made a deal behind your back and that someone is the Las palomas resort with some condo owner !!!! Yes its more then $79 a night if you want to use the pool etc. BUT even so its pretty good deal :-)
dry heat said:
not a big fan of the units in phase 1. I did notice they had a teaser rate in the posting to get attention. however if you scroll down you will read the following in the advertisement:
2011 Daily Rates: Sun-Thurs: $115.00 Fri-Sat: $145(includes LP approved 20% discount) Holidays: APRIL 8-10, MAY 1- 2, May 22-25, JULY 2- 4, & OCTOBER 9-12. 2009 Holiday Rates: $230 *CANCELLATION POLICY* Las Palomas accepts credit card payments. At the time of booking a reservation, they charge 50% of the total reservation cost. - Within thirty (30) days of your arrival, they will charge the remaining balance of the reservation.
Is this what you are referring to? see if you can find me another one, it was a good start.
No I think dry meat has a few condos and thought it was a done deal that one or both rented for say $250 a night. Less the cut for the rental agency and lets guess $200 a night X 2 is $400 a night times 7 = $2800 a week X 52 weeks = $145.000 and some change. Now drymeat finds out the agency is not doing there job to rent his condos and being the great world wide business man that he is..... He is trying to correct this problem and stop owners from renting out there own condos too. Hows that backing up the rental agency working out for you drymeat ?????? :moon: :rofl:
Thank god drymeat is rich and the condos units he bought were for childhood memories and sentimental reasons so no big deal for drymeat. Maybe drymeats staff should advise drymeat that he has the personality of a donkey ! I have always had pity for a person that has to put everyone one down around them to somehow make himself seem important... But your right Kenny I bet its not to long before drymeat has his condos on craigslist too. Rich world wide business man hahahahaha with a staff LOL Thanks for the laughs drymeat.. I find your posts very entertaining drymeat so keep them coming OK :woo:
My Dear Tomcat, the problem with so many condo owners is they purchased their units on debt and needed rental income in order to pay their loan and survive month by month. I am truly amazed how many people will purchase secondary homes and investment properties by taking a loan out. Always, always pay cash and if you can't then don't buy. Thus if something horrible happens and you can't rent, then you are not throwing a fit about not being able to rent your unit on your own (cough cough). I feel bad that so many purchased on debt and will probably have their property foreclosed on. Everyone that purchased at any of the resorts along Sandy Beach should have known that a rental company was the only way they would be able to lease their unit. Sadly for some, their personal financial circumstances changed and as they say "desperate times, desperate measures". Don't buy on credit and don't buy something you can't pay cash for. I would hate to see what would happen to so many of these owners that must rent on their own in order to survive if a tourist was killed in penasco- who do we blame then for no rentals. I found an old post about the importance of paying cash for something (January 2010)...
dry heat said:
ok ok, here is the deal. I admit that I did not expect such a drastic fall in prices. I did plan on holding my condo for at least 5 years and fortunately paid cash for it. I will probably hold it for more like 8 years now. This attorney that is trying to capture money from the developer won't find any money anywhere. I have yet to hear of a succesful case in which someone was paid from a Puerto Penasco project. When buying in Puerto Penasco I went with the largest and biggest and only purchased because they had already built something and had something to show for it. I feel bad for the owners who financed their purchses or are stuck in limbo waiting for a building to be completed. HOwever from what I hear the developer is offering to move these owners to units that are completed in phase 2. Have yet to jump off since I spend less that what I have. Don't buy something unless you can pay cash for it- regardless of what it is.
Sincerely, drymeat- will do my best to continue to entertain those that are losing the economic battle, need to keep them upbeat amid their despair of not being able to rent their units on their own and thus keep the lights on.
Have your staff save it for you, because as it is I've already been reading your drivel a lot longer that and you'll be around three years from now, if not posting, then lurking around looking for a opportunity to shake your pom poms. Lets not forget that it was you that was always saying that we were just chicken littles saying the sky was falling when we warned folks of the fall and the shady deals. Then after it all came to pass you made yourself scarce only coming out of your hole for special occasions to get up on your soap box spouting for the most part the same old crap.
Just read Toms post above, and yes I to feel his worry about his little investment. I've always though that what drives him, worry and fear.
I do worry and have fear that the desperation of some to pay the banks and keep the lights on will drive them to desperation (ie. renting for whatever they can get just to have something coming in). I feel bad for such ones, however I am not going to have the situation they put themselves in (ie. borrowing for something they could not afford and thus needing every penny to pay for it) dictate what happens to my little investment.
To my boating friends (kenny) I hope we can share the love if the marina changes much in say 3 years. I know how much development can adversely affect some that hate change. anyways just another one of my stupid drivels to file for later.
I agree. I also never brag about my staff. At my age, I am just glad it works. Now the riff-raff, you know those that illegally rent, the landscapers, street staff etc, they seem so focused on their staffs. Probably why they have so many kids and cannot afford to pay full rack rate!
tell me about it, nothing is worse that having to pay out for "staff". Those families with lots of children can at least use the free labor. I would love to find a way to spend less and keep more (hmmm, need to reserach business practices in 3rd world countries).
Absolutely a great deal. thank you for sharing the name, very much appreciated. This is the kind of thing I love about you guys, always doing for others. Again, thank you for the example and name. Love- drymeat
Tomcat said:
Hi Tommy, It is 79.00 per night but then there are wrist band fees paid to Las Palomas directly when you arrive. A onetime $25.00 the first day and $5.00 per day starting on the 2nd day per person over 10 years old. If you want to reserve these nights call my husband Gary at 480-766-2115 for the details on reserving those nights.
Leagan Realty Lisa Eagan; Designated Broker 9414 East San Salvador Drive Suite 112 Scottsdale, Arizona 85258 Office: 480-656-7714 Ext 101 Cell: 480-403-1075 E-Fax: 888-422-9951 Email: [B][COLOR=navy][email protected][/COLOR][/B] Website: www.LeaganRealty.com
Hummm ! Hey drymeat it looks like someone made a deal behind your back and that someone is the Las palomas resort with some condo owner !!!! Yes its more then $79 a night if you want to use the pool etc. BUT even so its pretty good deal :-)
No problem I have found some much better deals that I am NOT sharing ! I will say howdy neighbor soon when my friends and I come visit your nice condo resort. There are some really good deals online drymeat :-) have your staff search for them so you can seek and destroy the enemy (your neighbors) for trying to keep there lights on..... your such a sweet human being !!!!! so compassionate to your fellow man ! perhaps you will die in a dark corner alone clutching a bag of money !
dry heat said:
Absolutely a great deal. thank you for sharing the name, very much appreciated. This is the kind of thing I love about you guys, always doing for others. Again, thank you for the example and name. Love- drymeat
No problem I have found some much better deals that I am NOT sharing ! I will say howdy neighbor soon when my friends and I come visit your nice condo resort. There are some really good deals online drymeat :-) have your staff search for them so you can seek and destroy the enemy (your neighbors) for trying to keep there lights on..... your such a sweet human being !!!!! so compassionate to your fellow man ! perhaps you will die in a dark corner alone clutching a bag of money !
Now now tom, not nice. You are right, deals are out there. It's really up to the resort to "seek and destroy", so I guess we will see what happens. Why Tom, I do have compassion- I feel bad for those that allowed greed to motivate them to purchase a second home when they did not have the money to pay for it. I feel bad that such ones are resorting to desperate measures to maintain a lifestyle they could not afford. I compassionately hope that you pay for something in full rather than want instant gratification- it's a tough lesson for many. What can you do, hopefully it is a lesson learned.
Thanks for the reminder.... prior to dying I will research which religion offers the best after death program (any suggestions- mormon, catholic, christian, islam, scientology). I need a good one, one that will let a spirit or my multiple heavenly wives hold my money bag.
Now that I know how sick you are and what you are :twisted: ! you have become much less entertaining.... See you soon by the pool :-) don't forget to wave dear neighbor. I will be the one with the proud to be "Trailer Trash" T-shirt on ! bye bye :har:
dry heat said:
Now now tom, not nice. You are right, deals are out there. It's really up to the resort to "seek and destroy", so I guess we will see what happens. Why Tom, I do have compassion- I feel bad for those that allowed greed to motivate them to purchase a second home when they did not have the money to pay for it. I feel bad that such ones are resorting to desperate measures to maintain a lifestyle they could not afford. I compassionately hope that you pay for something in full rather than want instant gratification- it's a tough lesson for many. What can you do, hopefully it is a lesson learned.
Thanks for the reminder.... prior to dying I will research which religion offers the best after death program (any suggestions- mormon, catholic, christian, islam, scientology). I need a good one, one that will let a spirit or my multiple heavenly wives hold my money bag.
Now that I know how sick you are and what you are :twisted: ! you have become much less entertaining.... See you soon by the pool :-) don't forget to wave dear neighbor. I will be the one with the proud to be "Trailer Trash" T-shirt on ! bye bye :har:
Not the devil, oh boy. I might need a cross or my magic undergarment to protect me. In any case, here's to a prosperous year my dear friend. May we all live within our means and stave off foreclosure- Shalom, drymeat.
Again, just more drivel coming from the heat... Truth is the only thing that's real about you to us is your glowing personality. The rest is unsubstantiated and like a Walt Disney fairytale; just a wish upon a star as far as we know.
Again, just more drivel coming from the heat... Truth is the only thing that's real about you to us, is your glowing personality. The rest is unsubstantiated and like a Walt Disney fairytale; just a wish upon a star as far as we know.
Ah yes the poetry of our seniors. I hope my fairytales don't disturb your fascination over discussing political parties and how the government is screwing you and the various conspiracies in your head. Remember to live within your means and not blow your fixed retirement my old friend- not sure if spreading the wealth will save your boat.
twinkle twinkle
Keep it up Heat, I like it! Nothing like a faceless keyboard to spice up the joint with unsubstantiated and therefore probably untrue crap about how good they have it. One thing you've never told us about heat, and that is what a good time you have in PP with your friends. That right there would be an ever bigger fantasy, that I'd just love to hear.
Keep it up Heat, I like it! Nothing like a faceless keyboard to spice up the joint with unsubstantiated and therefore probably untrue crap about how good they have it. One thing you've never told us about heat, and that is what a good time you have in PP with your friends. That right there would be an ever bigger fantasy, that I'd just love to hear.
Nobody has it good dear kenny. You are right I have no friends, unfortunately I don't have a network of seniors to play shuffle board with like you do. As one of our mature in age seniors, I don't want to cause you any stress or frustrations, so whatever you say is right. I know how dear this forum is to you and how seriously you you take it, my lying fantasies are just causing you stress- so I am sorry. I wish you nothing but the best and hope you are able to stretch that fixed income so that you can enjoy life. I will just continue to make things up and continue in my dreams.
I rarely ever reply to the comments that are posted on this blog, I appreciate the information that is posted and also enjoy many laughs, but can't control myself when it comes to the comment dryheat made in reference to those investors who purchased condos on Sandy Beach and chose not to pay cash, instead put the minimum amount down and made monthly payments and YES was looking forward to rental income from the unit. (also known as ROI)
Now you tell me which scenario is better, purchase a condo say for 200,000 cash and now it is worth 75,000, thus giving you a 125,000 loss, OR, purchasing the same condo for 200,000 with a down payment of 60,000 and giving the condo back to the developer thus losing your 60,000, OR hanging onto the condo that you rarely are able to rent, thus no return on your 200,000 and if you decide to sell and cut your loss, lose 125,000.
Me, I'm choosing the $60,000 loss. Just sayin
Dryheave makes the pompous ASSumtion that he was the only able to pay cash.Your point is well taken. And his Secret Squirrel friends,not so smart that they bought multiple units in the same development. No wonder theyre crapping their pants trying to control everyone else so they can keep some cash flowing.
I rarely ever reply to the comments that are posted on this blog, I appreciate the information that is posted and also enjoy many laughs, but can't control myself when it comes to the comment dryheat made in reference to those investors who purchased condos on Sandy Beach and chose not to pay cash, instead put the minimum amount down and made monthly payments and YES was looking forward to rental income from the unit. (also known as ROI)
Now you tell me which scenario is better, purchase a condo say for 200,000 cash and now it is worth 75,000, thus giving you a 125,000 loss, OR, purchasing the same condo for 200,000 with a down payment of 60,000 and giving the condo back to the developer thus losing your 60,000, OR hanging onto the condo that you rarely are able to rent, thus no return on your 200,000 and if you decide to sell and cut your loss, lose 125,000.
Me, I'm choosing the $60,000 loss. Just sayin
The point I was trying to make is that many purchased beach property on borrowed debt, when their property back home was inflated in value and afforded them the opportunity to buy on debt. Most really could not afford it, same ones that pulled a second mortgage to pay for a Hummer. If one cannot handle the risk of no renters or limited renters in a down economy, then they should have not purchased in the 1st place.
I do like your example of walking away from a loan as the better option than paying for a property in full- you are right it is less skin in the game. As we see in the states, many like you feel the same way and many of these individuals are also the same ones that purchased more than they could afford. In reality whatever down payment the person had probably came from a home equity line or borrowed money-thus the money was really not there to begin with. If you pay cash for something, you only have a loss when you sell if it is less than what you paid (no monthly loan payment makes it a lot easier to not have to sell, you can afford to wait out the storm). Your example is one that most 30k millionaires follow and the reason why many of them have to foreclose or short-sell (they lived a lifestyle they could not afford without more income coming in).
Dryheave makes the pompous ASSumtion that he was the only able to pay cash.Your point is well taken. And his Secret Squirrel friends,not so smart that they bought multiple units in the same development. No wonder theyre crapping their pants trying to control everyone else so they can keep some cash flowing.
Sounds to me like you will probably have to foreclose due to not being able to pay for something you could not afford in the 1st place. We all make mistakes. Desperation to rent at any price and desperation to keep all the money tells me that you are in a dire financial situation. I say, let the unit go back to the bank and move on. the recovery will start once you have unloaded unecessary debt (read a dave ramsey book for inspiration). You will find greater happiness when you have less debt and live within your means. Best- dry heave aka dry meat aka dry hump
The point I was trying to make is that many purchased beach property on borrowed debt, when their property back home was inflated in value and afforded them the opportunity to buy on debt. Most really could not afford it, same ones that pulled a second mortgage to pay for a Hummer. If one cannot handle the risk of no renters or limited renters in a down economy, then they should have not purchased in the 1st place.
I do like your example of walking away from a loan as the better option than paying for a property in full- you are right it is less skin in the game. As we see in the states, many like you feel the same way and many of these individuals are also the same ones that purchased more than they could afford. In reality whatever down payment the person had probably came from a home equity line or borrowed money-thus the money was really not there to begin with. If you pay cash for something, you only have a loss when you sell if it is less than what you paid (no monthly loan payment makes it a lot easier to not have to sell, you can afford to wait out the storm). Your example is one that most 30k millionaires follow and the reason why many of them have to foreclose or short-sell (they lived a lifestyle they could not afford without more income coming in).
I know alot of those, why they would jeopordize their families security and their own happiness to pump up their egos is beyond me.
