4 ms·
Honestly I get the sense that you're not even reading these links. They do not substantiate the argument that you're making. I have at least skimmed every one
by sorcerer-mar 1y ago
Honestly I get the sense that you're not even reading these links. They do not substantiate the argument that you're making.
I have at least skimmed every one of the links you've shared (except the Atlanta BizJournal since I don't have the nationwide subscription) and none of them say what you're suggesting they do.
I agree there's a problem here. I agree that these risks kill many projects before they are birthed. I do not agree they come anywhere close to the costs of land, material, and especially labor for any actual construction project. Nothing you have posted even attempts to argue that, AFAICT.
- pj_mukh 1y agoI think you're hung up on fractions, while the business logic is obviously hung up on the value. The cost of wood has gone up, but wood is a critical element in construction. What is the "value" of paying $100,000's in lawyer fees? It's like buying a home and having to pay 10% in agent fees and having a 6 month arbitrary holding period while you are still having to pay the mortgage. "Well the money you're losing is less than the cost of the land!" you would say. lol. That's basically what's happening to construction projects, it's an industry-wide show-stopper regardless of what fraction it is of the land price. All the links I've shared confirm that these costs are the prime-driver of project cancellations and projects dying on the drawing board, not that the costs are larger than all other costs in an absolute sense because obviously mortgage payments while you're waiting for lawsuits are less than the whole land value itself.
- sorcerer-mar 1y agoSo in other words, the original poster who I replied to is wrong, and I am correct. You are now saying the exact thing that I stated above.
- deleted 1y ago[deleted]