More on subsidies: The pot calls the kettle black

As a follow-up to my post Friday concerning the New York Times reporting about "subsidies" for the rich relating to Bandon Dunes, I thought I should also post to some stories (try here and here, among others) about the new headquarters for the Times. Seems that the whole project was one big subsidy for the paper, including the public condemnation of buildings for a private use, a la Kelo.
So, Pinch Sulzberger and company, as you move into your new glass house, watch where you throw those stones.

Comments

Post a Comment

Popular posts from this blog

Why real estate in San Diego is so expensive

This is one reason . Good old vernal pools, those puddles that emerge in the spring and bring life to rare species of plants, and yes, even shrimp. I think an average house in America's Finest City is over $700K these days. Granted, there are other reasons for expensive housing, but CEQA is one reason for sure.
Read more

I must be getting old...

...if I am reading about the history of shopping malls. Here's a link to a project on the subject, courtesy of David Bodamer and the Retail Traffic Court Blog . Actually, the oldest malls date to around 1920, so I guess I feel better. And I even did some work on something related to Country Club Plaza (widely regarded as one of if not the first mall) some years ago. Before going to law school, I was a Ph.D. student in history. I love reading history books and biographies, and if you don't believe me, you ought to see my library. This was a nice little synopsis of mall history that made me want to read more. I was disappointed that they did not mention the first vertical shopping mall, which I believe was Water Tower Place right here in Chicago. Now that I've said all that, it s time to bill a little and then hit the bookstore! See, I told you so.
Read more

Interesting trend - don't buy the dirt, buy the developer

Private Equity Real Estate has a good article (free sub. required) about a trend among private equity players: instead of buying up property or finished buildings or even developments, they are buying all or chunks of development or doing equity participation deals with them. I've seen the latter trend forever, of course. And it is a wise move on their part to do so. Take the undercapitalized developer, bring in a money source with cash to place, give the money partner a preferred return and the developer a nice promote and you have a total win-win situation. Buying the developer itself is an interesting twist. The upside is guaranteed stability. The downside? Are you expected to work exclusively on the owner's deals? What happens to the promotes -- are they there in the form of high bonuses or gone? The flexibility may not be there. But I still find the idea intriguing.
Read more