Originally posted by Chrisfishenstein
reply to post by SeesFar
You think $100,000 an acre is too high for a historic site?
How is 40 acres appraised at $7,000? Maybe in 1710......
What is the issue here? The seller wants 4 mill.....If they don't want to pay it, someone will.....
Sorry I see no problems with this at all.....
Yes, I think so when his targeted "market" has been issued an ultimatum AND that ultimatum *happens* to coincide with the Oglala about to receive
$20mil from the Cobell lawsuit AND the land holds such sentimental value to no one but the Sioux. Also, please note that Advantage indicated the land
is neither prime building nor farming land. Further, had you read any of the links provided, you'd know that the land is located about 120 miles
away from the nearest town and over 300 miles away from the nearest large city. As employment opportunities decline, so do land values.
Here are a few comparisons for you.
is a 4 bdrm, 3,000+ square feet home on 60
acres for only $220,000.00 in the general area. The listing says the price per square foot for the home is $72. Do the math and it doesn't leave
the acreage worth much at all, does it?
listing comes out to not quite $3,100 an acre; of
course, it's almost 100 miles away from Pine Ridge and within an easy drive of a job, so it *would* be worth more. But, if Mr. Czywczynski wanted to
sell his 40 acres at the over-inflated price of $3,100 per, he'd be asking $124,000 for it; NOT $4 million.
we have a listing for what is touted as a "productive
farm" of 160 in a neighboring County. 160 PRODUCTIVE acres is going for $1,500 per acre. At $1,500 per acre, Mr. Czywczynski would be asking
$60,000 for his land; NOT $4 million.
in Butte County is 119 acres for $49,623.00 or $417 per acre. Using
that price, Mr. Czywczynski's 40 acres would have a value of $16,000; NOT $4 million.
Yes, it is absolutely conceivable that the land (all 40 acres of it) IS listed on the tax rolls with an appraised value of $7,000.00. Remember, we
are talking about remote, virtually unusable land. You'll notice here
that Shannon County, SD (where the
subject property is located) doesn't even have it's own Tax Assessor-Collector. Those services are provided by nearby Fall River County and,
unfortunately, they don't have an online look up or I would have found the specific property for you.
But notice that Shannon County in the link above "is entirely within the Pine Ridge Indian Reservation and contains part of Badlands National Park."
Have you seen the Badlands? Just Google "photos South Dakota Badlands" and tell us if you think that friendly, useable land is worth more than a
couple hundred dollars an acre - you can't even graze cattle on most of it - you'd have to do a LOT of supplemental feeding.
So, given that information, why do you suppose he's offering it to the Oglala for $4 mil rather than listing it? Still think someone else will pay
Do you believe he will get much more than $200 per acre for it when it lets it go to bid? Really?
I respect your opinion; however, I am very disappointed that you quite obviously did not read any of the links provided or look at the photos. Had
you done so, the land valuations of the area would have been rather obvious.
Further, I am presuming that since you are alright with Mr. Czywczynski asking such an inflated price for his land you are equally alright with the
idea of the land where the Twin Towers once stood being sold to foreign investors.
And, btw, 1710? Not a good example, particularly in this instance. Remember, in 1710, it wasn't necessarily necessary to actually purchase land
with money. You just took it, built on it, and told the Natives that it was no longer theirs.