August 10, 2016 10:22AM
First of all, I'm not familiar with the situation being described, but frankly, it sounds rather incredible.

My reaction is not "how dare he?", but "how could they?"

Why in the world would anyone invest in a home on land they don't own, or have a long-term lease on?

I see nothing to indicate that what Kroenke is doing is illegal, or even unethical. That's not an argument that it's moral or nice, but I'm not trying to say that it's moral or nice. I'm not defending Kroenke as much as I'm criticizing the foresight and assumptions of the tenants.

I'm saying that people have a responsibility to themselves to make sure they're not building on quicksand (metaphorically). And no one else has a responsibility to take care of that for them. Change happens.

If I'm understanding it right, these leases were relatively short-term, but were getting renewed over and over again for so many decades that people just figured that would continue world without end. Understandable, perhaps, but not wise. I don't get the outrage.

So now the owner of the land is never supposed to sell it, even if he decides that's in his best interest. And a new owner is not supposed to have different plans for the land, even if that's in his best interest, because non-owners want things to stay the way they've always been, to their benefit.

I hope most of them have a type of home that can be moved, and not lose too much investment. I don't want to see them lose it all.
But it's a risk they took, and if they thought it could never happen, they thought wrong. To me this is like deciding not to buy insurance and then compaining about how unfair it is when I get sick, and it costs money to be treated.

But let's say I own a rental, and renters (maybe not always the same ones) have rented there for decades.

One day I decide to sell the rental, and use the money to help in my retirement. The new owner wants to live in the house, or maybe he wants to tear it down and build a newer one on the property. We aren't supposed to do that because the renters figured nothing would ever change?

Just a different point of view to contrast with all the tut-tutting.



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 08/10/2016 10:24AM by Saguaro.
SubjectAuthorViewsPosted

  Oh man, are locals PO'd at Kroenke..

sstrams1053August 06, 2016 08:01AM

  That's flat ridiculous

Drew2839619August 07, 2016 06:05AM

  Agreed..

sstrams627August 07, 2016 07:51AM

  Re: Agreed..

Bud Frosty567August 07, 2016 08:29AM

  He's a real prince

LesBaker672August 07, 2016 03:16PM

  Oh, they'll care!

Drew2839562August 07, 2016 03:29PM

  His wallet weighs more than Nibblers poo NM

LesBaker544August 07, 2016 04:03PM

  No wonder he's rich: dark matter technology. nm

Drew2839550August 08, 2016 07:01AM

  Yeah... was reading on facebook today..

sstrams632August 08, 2016 03:35AM

  Re: Oh man, are locals PO'd at Kroenke..

Bud Frosty602August 07, 2016 06:36AM

  I was embarrassed..

sstrams592August 07, 2016 07:53AM

  Same as in Mexico

waterfield550August 07, 2016 08:44AM

  The way I understood it..

sstrams585August 07, 2016 02:15PM

  Re: The way I understood it..

waterfield631August 07, 2016 03:15PM

  I'm going to be the bad guy here.

Saguaro562August 10, 2016 10:22AM

  I totally get ya...

sstrams572August 10, 2016 11:12AM

  I'm not sure how that works....

JamesJM531August 10, 2016 11:18AM

  Just guessing...

Saguaro536August 10, 2016 11:43AM

  Yes, for retired folks who have nothing else this is tough. no doubt. nm

Saguaro523August 10, 2016 11:44AM

  Totally true

Drew2839519August 12, 2016 06:14AM

  The stories keep rolling in..

sstrams563August 12, 2016 09:15AM

  I would be VERY surprised...

JamesJM520August 12, 2016 09:25AM

  I have no idea...

sstrams544August 12, 2016 12:58PM