The Daily Arsenal

That's why the developers who buy off you have such tight margins. We would never buy off someone like you. We don't have to, as we source the sites ourselves.

 

HIAG got schooled about severance packages when it came to Adebayor's contract being terminated at Spurs and the subsequent continuation of his wages from Spurs until he signed for Palace. This was despite HIAG claiming that he would 'own me every time' as he was involved in constructing contracts all of the time. Turned out he didn't know anything about them at all.

 

Sorry, but I'm calling bullshit on that.

A £600k net return off a £700k total cost is beyond what is even remotely believable in today's market - particularly darn sarf where you're supposedly trading

As is a developer handing you 50% of said profit in return for your professional services.

 

How else would you calculate the net profit? GDV - total costs. That's it.

You comically threw a hissy when I pointed that out and said that I was wrong! You dumb bastard!

 

You're not following the plot, Tobes.

We're dealing directly with the bank, who want to clear their mortgage. The pub owner got planning on the site but then ran out of money, and he needs to clear the mortgage to stop them calling on his PG. We're getting the site at around half its market value, before it falls into the hands of the Receivers. This isn't a deal that is on the open market. That's the whole point, mate.

You call bull-**** as much as you like. It makes not one jot of difference to me.

 

By the way, conveyancing fees and general legals on a £300k purchase will be no more than £6k. Your partner must be as thick as you are to allow you to waive those fees in exchange for half of the imaginary £400k profit.

 

So you're buying land at 50% of its market value? From a financial institution?

**** off HIAG

 

Hardly a hissy fit.

So, I'm going to end up with more "profit" than I thought. It's still going to be around £200k-£250k for my share (on our conservative sales figures). Oh, dear! I'm wounded!

I see that my "estate agent" jibe has really stung you. Sorry, mate. I'll try to go a bit easier on you next time.

 

You said earlier you were buying the site from the LPA Receivers. Now you're buying it from a bank before it goes to the receivers. Contradictory.

 

I don't mind estate agents.They're reasonably easy to control.

 

We're actually buying from the owner (a company) at the price at which will clear the company's mortgage, so that the director/shareholder doesn't run the risk of having a call on his PG. There is nothing illegal about it. If the property falls into the hands of a Receiver, then it will have to be properly marketed, and it will undoubtedly cost us more to acquire.

 

If you're dealing directly with the bank then he's already in default and they've taken control of the property for disposal. His DG would surely only become a part of that equation once the asset has been liquidated and any shortfall to the mortgage value has been calculated?

I've bought a number of repossessed properties and a bank doing a deal off the open market is a new one on me.

 

Wow, HIAG has really tied himself up in knots with his bullshit on this one

 

You're a lawyer who is also a property developer who didn't know how to calculate return on cost and proved you were right by presenting an incorrect calculation. You dumb bastard!

 

You said in post #785 you were dealing directly with the bank

Sort your story out

 

The bank has threatened to appoint a Receiver. We've been negotiating directly with the bank to make sure that doesn't happen. I'm trying to get the bank to discount some of its mortgage, which I think it will go for. We could end up getting the property for less than the £299k that's owing on the mortgage. The key thing for the seller is that the director doesn't get caught on his PG.

By the way, I'm not going to disclose to you every last nuance of my business. So what if I haven't spelt out every exact detail, exactly as it stands? What the **** does it matter to you?

 

See my last post.

 

So when you said you were buying the site from a Receiver what you meant was you were buying it from a bank but actually what you meant was you were buying it from the owner. Well that's clear and plausible.

 

He said in post #758 that he was dealing with the receiver, By the time we get to post #857 he'll be dealing with the Baron who owned the land at the time of the Magna Carta.

 

I've brought the deal to the table. It's a no-brainer. Without me, he wouldn't have got his hands on it. Either he cut me in, or I would have found someone else to do it with me. That's business, Stan. I thought you would have understood that.