250k for Loundon shoe box apt

[Brian37]

I really am getting sick of the gouging by the uber rich. Some people would claim "If they are willing to pay what business is it of yours". That would be fine execpt for the long term climate it promotes. If that jackass gets away with selling a fucking shoe box for an outragious price, then other businesses look at that "whatever you can get away with"model and they too, do the same.

No fucking apartment that tiny should b
Iye anywhere close to that price, I don't give a shit if it were in the Vatican or on top of Mt Everest, or on top of Trump towers.

I know the uber rich can wipe their asses with 1,000 dollar bills. But when you charge that much all you are doing is passing money from one rich person to another, and on top of that you are not building a damned thing but ripping society off by making everyone chace after max profits.

It would be one thing if it were really based on a reasonable free market. But ripping people off like that only widens the gap for everyone.

It isn't that inequity in an open market should not exist. It does have to exist for an open market to be healthy. But the long term gap that has widend for much of the west is precisely because the goal isn't about reasonable profits, but max profits.

This shoe box apt is another example of the errosion of the fair market and the widening gap of the top and bottom. 250k for what amounts to a walk in closet? YOU HAVE GOT TO BE FUCKING KIDDING ME!

[Anomalocaris]

It ought to be worth a lot more since you can be buried in it for an eternity.

[Tiberius]

Don't see the problem here. Prices are an agreement between the consumer and producer. Nobody is being forced to pay that much for an apartment; they are going to pay it willingly. If someone thinks it is worth that much, so be it. If nobody thinks it is worth that much, the price drops and the owner loses out. That is how it works.

[festive1]

Was the condo actually sold at $250,000 or is that the asking price? I think property is more expensive than that in Tokyo, isn't it? It's stomach churning, and what does that mean for people who can't afford 250k for a place to live, but basically I agree with Tiberius.

[Tiberius]

I don't see whether the buying price or asking price matters really. I'm against some forms of what governments consider "scams", where people think they are buying something and are actually buying something else, but in cases where it is quite clear what is going on, I don't think you should interfere.

For example, Facebook sold a load of shares at a massively overpriced (compared to the value of their company) value, but at the end of the day, Facebook's profits and revenue are public, and it was up to them to set the share price, and likewise up to the potential shareholders to make a decision on whether to buy the shares or not. Evidently, a lot of (stupid as it turns out) people bought the shares, and had their investment effectively slashed in half as the price dropped. That isn't a scam; it's stupid people buying from stupid people (Facebook were stupid for setting the price that high, since they lost a lot of consumer trust in the process).

[festive1]

If it's just the asking price, then no one was stupid enough to buy it at that ridiculous price, the seller will have to lower his/her price and try again. Amounting to someone not doing their market research before trying to sell. Whereas if it actually sold at that price it can be surmised that it is a fair market value for the size, amenities, and location, or at least in the ballpark. I don't think there should be any governmental interference, but I am rather shocked by the implications of cost per square foot this would have on someone without those kinds of means.