Quote:
Originally Posted by Buehler445
The problem with the lease, and I think they did a shit job of explaining it or at least reinforcing it was property taxes. The lease didn't provide a ton of revenue, some but not material enough to matter after development takes place the property taxes for the Ranch (presuming there is an entity, if not it's just John getting ****ed here) after they goddamn explode when development happens. They touched on it early on, but if development moves in, even if it's on neighbors farm that will drive the property tax rates up to an unprofitable level, and they lose the ranch to insolvency.
What Jamie did, alleviated the immediate pressure, but absolutely devastated the ranch by allowing development to move forward.
I'd have to go back and re-watch, but that's the way I understood the economics of the thing on the Ranch's end.
RE: Bob. I don't remember exactly, but he hung her out to dry once market equities overpowered him. I dunno. She was pissed. Whatever.
|
If Jamie REALLY wanted to **** John, he technically could've just sold the place. And really, he should've.
I saw the lease as a tactical retreat. Had they dug their heels in and attempted to block the development outright, they'd have gotten steamrolled. By leasing it, they don't actually cut off any options to fight later and in the meantime they get a bit of a cash infusion that could bankroll that battle.
It seemed to me that the writing was on the wall w/r/t the near term issues with the lease. And he still maintains ownership of the land, even with a long-term lease on it. Had Jamie refused to lease it, it was likely that the Governor was going to use eminent domain to simply transfer ownership outright and again, cut off some options.
The lease was a way to slow the burn, save some powder and regroup for a fight on firmer ground, IMO.