3 ms·
Right, a "spite" transaction. But on the other hand, the coalition of rich neighbors could organize a counter-offer to buy out neighbors who want to leave. A b
by saltcured 4y ago
Right, a "spite" transaction.
But on the other hand, the coalition of rich neighbors could organize a counter-offer to buy out neighbors who want to leave. A bit like lands are bought up by conservation groups to prevent development. Put a price on how much you want to preserve your neighborhood.
They could even buy out the developer who purchased a spite sale, unless there are deed restrictions in that sale. Most developers are also doing it as a business, not for idealism, so it there ought to be a price point where they see it is more lucrative to fold than to go forward with the building project.
I'm not sure I understand the economic effect of something like this. At first blush it almost seems like the same feedback loop as land value taxes. But, it also creates a game-theoretic scenario where the coalition is pumping up the price of their own neighborhood and increasing the potential gains for the next defector, at which point the values could rapidly unwind if the coalition loses its way.
- whimsicalism 4y agoSeems like there would be massive, easy arbitrage in buying the home and saying you are moving in then changing your mind and building multi-family, then taking the buyout from the coalition of rich neighbors. Free money for defection and could easily exhaust the resources of this coalition.