You can't be serious, a bidding war?? I sold my house 3 years ago, 30k over listing price. If they had offered me 6 million do you think I would take it? Of course not!
It would be painfully obvious some kind of fraud was afoot.
Ok, well, guess you just proved me wrong about how someone choosing to pay more than the seller is asking is fraud.
You should start calling around to all the DAs around the country telling them about the millions and millions of potential fraud cases they need to prosecute.
You're going to be famous for cracking this conspiracy. Congratulations!
🙄
Also, do you know what a Strawman argument is? If not, you should look it up. It might help you in the future when you're trying to prove someone wrong about something.
Ok, so now your just flat lying? I never said that paying more than asking price is fraud, and you know that. However, I believe you know how bidding wars work. But, since you may not, I will give you a break down.
Someone goes and looks at a house for lets say 465k. They really like the house and would want to live there. The house is listed fairly, but it is a sellers market. Your RA tells you they will get several bids on the house, so you decide to go as high in your range as you can. To win the bid, you go over by 7 or 8 %. What you don't do, if it is on the up and up, is offer 5 or 6 million for the property. If you had that kind of money to spend, you would be house hunting in a totally different neighborhood.
Bottom line, your analogy that someone overpaid by that much is simply a bidding war, is simply dumb. Most of us no longer buy these stupid cover stories.
I wasn't saying that what was going on with Jon Stewart's situation was a bidding war. I brought up bidding wars on properties because it's something that happens regularly, many people are familiar with them, and is an example of when someone pays more than asking price for a property. It was an example to show that just paying above asking price is not fraudulent.
Remember when I said you should look up what a Strawman Argument is? This is why.
The original argument was that Jon Stewart received more for his house than he was asking for, and that was fraud.
When it's pointed out that no, it's not fraud to receive more than asking price for a property, you (along with others) are now stating or implying (with zero evidence) that Jon Stewart committed fraud by cooking up some scheme to get someone to pay too much so then they both benefit financially.
That's a Strawman argument. And it's simply just wrong.
People pay stupid prices for things all the time. Doesn't mean it's illegal. Super wealthy people tend to have different outlooks on things than the rest of us, so judging what they do by our own values just doesn't work.
I'd also look into how accurate the information is in this post about how much Stewart actually listed the apartment for, and how much was paid. The information provided here hasn't been all that confidence inspiring, and I wouldn't take it for granted that any of those numbers are right.
If you think that going from 1.8 million to 17.5 million is something the rich do all the time, and it's normal operating procedure, move along, nothing to see here, then I have a bridge to sell you.
You can't be serious, a bidding war?? I sold my house 3 years ago, 30k over listing price. If they had offered me 6 million do you think I would take it? Of course not! It would be painfully obvious some kind of fraud was afoot.
Ok, well, guess you just proved me wrong about how someone choosing to pay more than the seller is asking is fraud.
You should start calling around to all the DAs around the country telling them about the millions and millions of potential fraud cases they need to prosecute.
You're going to be famous for cracking this conspiracy. Congratulations!
🙄
Also, do you know what a Strawman argument is? If not, you should look it up. It might help you in the future when you're trying to prove someone wrong about something.
Ok, so now your just flat lying? I never said that paying more than asking price is fraud, and you know that. However, I believe you know how bidding wars work. But, since you may not, I will give you a break down.
Someone goes and looks at a house for lets say 465k. They really like the house and would want to live there. The house is listed fairly, but it is a sellers market. Your RA tells you they will get several bids on the house, so you decide to go as high in your range as you can. To win the bid, you go over by 7 or 8 %. What you don't do, if it is on the up and up, is offer 5 or 6 million for the property. If you had that kind of money to spend, you would be house hunting in a totally different neighborhood.
Bottom line, your analogy that someone overpaid by that much is simply a bidding war, is simply dumb. Most of us no longer buy these stupid cover stories.
I wasn't saying that what was going on with Jon Stewart's situation was a bidding war. I brought up bidding wars on properties because it's something that happens regularly, many people are familiar with them, and is an example of when someone pays more than asking price for a property. It was an example to show that just paying above asking price is not fraudulent.
Remember when I said you should look up what a Strawman Argument is? This is why.
The original argument was that Jon Stewart received more for his house than he was asking for, and that was fraud.
When it's pointed out that no, it's not fraud to receive more than asking price for a property, you (along with others) are now stating or implying (with zero evidence) that Jon Stewart committed fraud by cooking up some scheme to get someone to pay too much so then they both benefit financially.
That's a Strawman argument. And it's simply just wrong.
People pay stupid prices for things all the time. Doesn't mean it's illegal. Super wealthy people tend to have different outlooks on things than the rest of us, so judging what they do by our own values just doesn't work.
I'd also look into how accurate the information is in this post about how much Stewart actually listed the apartment for, and how much was paid. The information provided here hasn't been all that confidence inspiring, and I wouldn't take it for granted that any of those numbers are right.
If you think that going from 1.8 million to 17.5 million is something the rich do all the time, and it's normal operating procedure, move along, nothing to see here, then I have a bridge to sell you.