Trump Soho Redux

I suspect Trump literature or marketing was counting "in contracts" as "sold" to lead "or mislead" others into the health of sales.

Obviously this happening in 2004 would not have benn an issue beucause whatever number they had or made up would have came true eventually.

In this climate, I suspect the suers will earn the right to rescind.
And good, this market sorely needs some regulation.

Already posted.

steve: the lawsuit by the buyers was posted earlier today. this is the newly minted response by Trump Soho. I couldn't find the earlier thread so just started a new one.

http://www.nytimes.com/reuters/2010/08/03/news/news-us-trumpsoho-lawsuit.html?_r=1&hp

seems base of buyers suit is that misleading representations of 30, 40 ,50,60% sold caused them to miss an opportunity to rescind which they might have done had they known the sales were so dismal and therefore financial health of building in questions.

A good point and even if Trump Soho had "seen" 100 condos "enter" contract that in no way is 30 -60% sold.

The Donald dismissed it as a case of buyers remorse. I guess so and it doesn't help his cause to point it out.

borkers= hookers
trump hotel time-share condo buyers = horny johns

That is a lawsuit made in RE HEAVEN.

So if this lawsuit overshadows sales just as Rushmore lawsuit overshadowed sales -- until the hefty price cuts-- I guess we will see more shadow inventory or more hefty price cuts. Btw, not one apt closed at the Rushmore in the month of July. And the 43 apts in contract (ironically the same number as the number of buyers who are suing) has not grown at all since June.

The difference is that Soho Trump is not shadow inventory. It's not even inventory, unless you count the opportunity to pay a million dollars to stay in a hotel for a month a year inventory. Maybe there's a special bullshit and crapola inventory?

the only winners here are the lawyers, Ka-chow!