News for hackers. Stuff that matters.

A comment on SF residents get a shock: Someone bought their street. Parent comment

Re:SF residents get a shock: Someone bought their street by softawre on Monday August 07, 2017 @03:07PM (#14950283)
They could drag it out, but they may all agree to give up 10k each (==400k) for a nice profit.

Why pay lawyers here? Spite?

[ Parent | on HN ]
Re:SF residents get a shock: Someone bought their street by spaceflunky on Monday August 07, 2017 @03:34PM (#14950519)
Pretty much. I doubt the couple has even $100k to spend fighting this. So why pay the couple $400k when you can pay $400k to a lawyer and have the satisfaction of "winning."
[ Parent | on HN ]
Re:SF residents get a shock: Someone bought their street by ryandrake on Monday August 07, 2017 @03:48PM (#14950657)
They had $90K to buy it but not $100K to defend in court?
[ Parent | on HN ]
Re:SF residents get a shock: Someone bought their street by spaceflunky on Monday August 07, 2017 @04:05PM (#14950812)
IMO this kind of investment seems like the thing that someone with more than $190k would not be messing around with. But maybe they do, but would you spend $100k defending a $90k investment? Or to put it another way, if the HOA rallies up all 40 property owners to spend $20,000 each fighting this, is it worth it to outspend a $800,000 legal war chest to protect a $90,000 investment?
[ Parent | on HN ]
Re:SF residents get a shock: Someone bought their street by ryandrake on Monday August 07, 2017 @06:01PM (#14951629)
> But maybe they do, but would you spend $100k defending a $90k investment?

If I thought I could successfully "flip" it for, say $500K, which is pocket change for the affected people in that neighborhood, then sure, $190K would be a bargain. And if the 40 property owners could kick in $20K each to sue the investor, surely they'd rather kick in $10K each to buy the street back instead.

[ Parent | on HN ]