On Sun, 12 Nov 1995, John Teeter wrote:
> Bill,
>
> you read WAY too much into my message. only intended to say I (FSR) couldn't
> build there (for me, I'd put $'s into FSR, not into realestate - which ain't
> my business...). didn't say ANYthing bout the other folks that are currently
> in the incubator. maybe you'd be best to ask them eh?
>
> ================================================================
> >>>>> "Bill" == Bill London <london@wsunix.wsu.edu> writes:
>
> > For some reason, I am still interested in the bizpark. And very
> > much interested in your point that nobody in the incubator
> > (supposedly the actual ones clamoring to have the bizpark become
> > reality) would be able to build a building there.
> It is a fact that I've got to move FSR somewhere within 18months....hm...
> wonder where it will be....
>
> > That seems to
> > be in direct contradiction to the EDC Party line (eaten hook and
> > sinker by the council). Hodge seemed to say that speculators
> > wanting to make a quick buck buying a site at the park would be
> > required to build in a year or two. But are you saying that the
> > present incubator tenants would not be able to afford to get a
> > site at the park and build a building there--
>
> Again, I only spoke for myself. I don't want to sink capital into a
> building when I can sink it into expanding the market of a business. My
> business is NOT real estate. I'd GUESS those that are going to build
> a building, who-ever they might be, either are way successfull in their
> incubation, or in the realestate business.... Should be VERY easy for you
> to find out if there is an owner-occupancy requirement in the b-park and
> if there are restrictive covenents (sp??) which would control/restrict
> ownership of the both the lands and/or buildings in any way....
>
> > and thus would have
> > to await a speculator's purchase of property (at a value held
> > artificially low by its tax-supported status) there and then the
> > construction of a building not for occupancy but for resale?
> > Not one of the companies now expanding at the incubator will be
> > able to afford to build at the bizpark?
>
> (you should be a BIT ashamed of your leap to "Not one of the companies..."
> if its based JUST on my little ol' comment eh? Only said FSR ...)
>
> > I would really love
> > some clarification on these questions, John.
>
> Beats me. As the timing/cost isn't right for FSR, I've not really
> kept up with it....
>
> > Because, frankly,
> > I still don't quite get it. Are we underwriting a business park
> > so a handful of speculators would get even bigger profits than
> > if they just went out and built some buidlings for incubator
> > tenants? BL
>
> This LAST question is interesting....
>
> have fun,
>
> johnt
>
>
>
>