possible rejection by Board????

How much less? 10-15% below a 2007-2008 price is to be expected in most market segments, and no Board should balk. 40% lower would be harder for them to swallow, but such an offer is unlikely to be accepted by the seller anyway.

It would be illegal for the Board to reject for that reason. Sue the bastards.

the board would NEVER disclose a reason for rejection, outside of 'criminal record' or 'not meeting financial requirements'. Usually the rejection is always delivered without an explanation as to limit the boards liability for discrimination. Just a heads up

Sounds like sarcasm steve, but I'll bite: going with the theme, would it also be illegal for Google to reject an offer of $5 a share?

spinnaker..perfect analogy. Debate is now concluded. Thanks for attending.

Despite the blessing youve received from stevie pompoms, spinner, there's nothing in steve's post that seems other than literal.

It is in fact illegal for a board to reject a buyer based on contracted tranaction price. Were a board to express that, to "reject as being too low" as described in the OP, lawsuit would be a reasonable course of action.

WTF a transaction of Google shares, miles from regulated market prices, has to do with this discussion, only you will know.

Wbottom...my lost in the wilderness bear...
Do u buy shares in a coop and become a shareholder?
Does Google have a board of Directors?
Can only one shareholder decide to allow Google tobe purchased by another buyer or does the board of directors approve it?

Coop owners are shareholders in a corporation....duh.

'bottoms, I get that you are enamored by yourself but I ask a question, not as a captain of industry, but as someone from the other end of the spectrum - the one where people respect one another.

Both are examples of shareholders agreeing to a transaction price, yet Steve suggests the blocking actions of a coop would be illegal. I don't understand why that would be the case.

Spinster, sorry, it's case law in New York: co-op Boards of Directors don't have the power to stop sales based on price.

UD - the power of Boards has been being whittled away for years now. They almost always lose lawsuits. Sue them, and the have to disclose their reasons. It's called "discovery."

I haven't made the offer yet. I was thinking 20 -21% of the seller's purchase price. It's less of a discount off her current asking price. I know Boards do not give reasons for rejections but I've heard stories in my open house travels that just made me wonder . BTW I am enjoying the diversion to Google stock and look forward to see how you all work it out.

steviepompoms/spinner--the sum intelligence you produce is that of a shoe

two situations you describe as analogous:

1) the board of google rejects a buyout of google at ??5 bux?? a share (trades 570 bux today).

2) the board of a coop apt indicates it is rejecting a buyer. the buyer has negotiated with the seller, in an arms length transaction, a price for a well-advertised apt. the board indicates the buyer has been rejected based on the price negotiated for the apt "being too low".

"It would be illegal for the Board to reject for that reason. Sue the bastards."

Don't worry.

We'll find plenty of other reasons to reject.

rlmg
sale prices well below peak prices of late 07 are common for coop boards these days. it is illegal for coop boards to reject a buyer based on a price that results from an arms length negotiation/transaction, where an apt was reasonably marketed, etc
boards do on occasion reject based on price, but if a board is stupid enough to indicate that, youd likely not want to own in that bldg, as run by them. and of course that board could be sued.
bid as you think appropriate, period. if you get an "off the record" warning that said board will reject (illegally, mind you) a bid such as you might go to contract with, i'd avoid the bldg. if you like the building and are in no hurry, and you are able to go to contract at a price you like, and are not worried about potentially wasting 3 months waiting to hear from the board; run with it.

i just read that stevipompoms/spinner have offered to buy google for 5$/share--the board is in emergency session---shhhhh---this is not yet public

Jeezus, I don't know why I bother. Are you really that thick?

Get out the crayons captain:

It's a story of 2 shareholders - I owns 500 shares in 666 Broadway corp, the other owns 500 shares in Google corp. They each find a buyer at a price far below market value. One corp can, according the stevies case law, legally block the transaction, while the other cannot. It just seems reasonable for someone to ask why without your confused dick getting in the middle of it.

Wbottom, another wandering bear, forever lost in their quest to obtain that elusive manhattan apartment that they so desperately love. Frustrated to the point of thrashing everything and anything that gets in their way of owning what they feel is rightfully theirs. Wbottom's slogan to live by: If you can't beat 'em then trash 'em.

And by the way fool, SteveF may take issue with your liberal use of the steveipompoms handle. What a turd.

I have a new handle for 'bottoms: upsidedown tomato

Wbottom just b/c apt prices are now around 5% below the highest they ever listed for doesn't mean u r allowed to get fresh and have a tantrum.

and matt, like i said, if you were dumb enough not to find other reasons, i wouldn't want to own in your bldg!!

spinner/steviepompoms, you guys should start a real estate/google fund

spin, the bears ALWAYS start, always. I complimented your creative post and for some reason the insults start flying.....
I often raise the question of "why do I try" as well. It's all doom and gloom for them.

wait to sell all studios til spinner/pompoms fund is up and running---and buy now if you aint long--this thing's gonna run away!!!

I assume you mean 20-21% OFF (and not of?) the seller's purchase price. If that's the case, I think you're fine. But if you want to make sure, look at recently sold comps within the building if the building is big enough. I suspect the board will be paying more attention to those than to what this seller paid.

In a medium or small building where everyone knows each other's business, it's a bit trickier. If the shareholder has lost her job or needs to move for a new one, I think the board will generally be inclined to help her move on with her life rather than risk potential default from someone with so little equity. But if she has come into money, gotten married, or otherwise moved up the ladder, there may be some jealousy/hard feelings that she is depressing their property values just to move on with her life. Still, despite whatever hard feelings, you're close enough to ask and to the previous sale that the board will probably swallow it.

And just some food for thought/encouragement, we bought our unit in Q1 '10 for almost 40% less than the one mirror unit in the building, in inferior condition, had appraised for in early '09 during a refinance. I think the valuation on this particular appraisal was flawed and extremely inflated, but that was the board's most recent anchor price. (Of course, we had no idea of this at the time.)

Despite this, we were board approved within two weeks of contract with no questions about the price. It wasn't until after we moved in that we got accused, mostly tongue-in-cheek, of decreasing property values and presenting refinance problems for everyone. (Our place appraised for exactly what we paid for it, so don't blame us!)

well said lad--and sounds like you made a nice purchase too

Wbottom

Thank you. I may have been putting to much importance on broker chatter at open houses I have visited, the ones trying to explain a lost deal and an apartment now back on the market. I have not heard anything like that in connection with the apartment I am considering an offer on and if I did I probably would walk away. I figured it didn't hurt to ask. This process is stressful enough; if I can prevent my mind from wandering to all the things that could possibly go wrong it would be a good thing.

now, on to those $5 Google shares...

"We'll find plenty of other reasons to reject."

I guess you've never been through legal discovery, have you?

"I guess you've never been through legal discovery, have you?"

No need to.

Wowie! Matthew is correct again: nobody would ever sue to get into a walkup condo in Fort George. Exit, maybe.

today, 4/12, is matt's day.

matt would you pls predict today's closing price for the s and p futures?

stop kissing his @ss, he's not interested in your bottom.

lad
yes, I meant 'off' and not 'of' Thanks for the encouragement. I hope we'll do as well with whatever we decide to do.

it's all a moot point.
you make your low offer, the seller accepts, you make your package and, you let the chips fall where they may.
If they reject you because of price would you offer to pay more?
end of story...

falcogold1- I wondered about that too and how much I wanted the apartment. (It would be so much easier than legal action.) But you're right, the chips gotta fall where the chips gotta fall.