I'll apologize if (place condition here. ) Who asked for one anyway? LOL!
Mr Larkin,
I don't care for an apology.
Your claim that you have the ability to determine something to be what you call nonsensical, and declare it to be inconsistent with a methodology, is just plain comical. But, I'll help you with it. A Fee estate is inheritable, making it the Mercedes of the world of estates. Appropriate for the highest and most complete form of ownership, don't you think? A Life Estate is not inheritable, therefore appropriate to then describe it as something less than a Mercedes, I would think, as it is a lesser estate against Fee Simple Estates. Both reversion or remainder estates are lesser estates, while inheritable, during the duration of the Life Estate there are no rights of enjoyment at all typically. You may not like the cars selected for the analogy, but it was at least as consistent as you posting this:
<........snip......>Therefore, after many years of Life Estate Valuation trials in the courts, as well as trying to provide fair compensation in the many legitimate life estate purchases that take place every day - the case study that is provided in this thread is presented (and recognized) as the mainstream and accepted method of valuation for these Real Estate Interests.
<.....snip.....>
while stating this:
III. Factors affecting use and value
A. Life estates typically cannot be sold to others.
in your own case study PDF. I find this confusing, as I do a statement that ridiculing a methodology, or it's messenger, is not acceptable unless one has a solution or alternative. And in the later case, if one does have alternatives, that somehow that is better
Then we move on to your saying:
<......snip.....> I am ready, willing, and able to discuss the merits of the methodology with both of you. But I will do it with proper dialogue, not acrimony, which is all you've offered.<......snip.....>
right on the heels of:
<....snip....>Anyone who argues otherwise, without providing a more fair and credible method sounds like an obnoxious drunk at a wedding.
after it seems you intentionally ignored the parts of my post #20 that were ripe with the proper dialogue and offerings that opinion is made of.
Making your offer of:
<....snip....>Again, I will offer my apologies to you both, should you present a more credible solution. Until then, I stand by my observations regarding your lack of sobriety and decorum.<......snip.....>
rather less than sincere in my mind, as why would presenting a credible solution sooth your damaged feelings? In fact, it would seem to do just the opposite I would think.
By the way, nice quote!
"There is a principle which is a bar against all information, which is proof against all arguments and which can not fail to keep a man in everlasting ignorance - that principle is contempt prior to investigation."
---Herbert Spencer
Let me see, what did you post? Oh yes! Something about obnoxious drunks at weddings. I appreciate why you selected that particular quote! … Regardless, I'll be happy to likewise offer my apologies to you should you stop contradicting yourself and declaring others to be acrimonious while on the heels of your own acrimonious statements. Then perhaps we can discuss forecasting the future into what are short periods of time, using historical trending, in real estate. Until then, I'll have to stand by my own observations myself.
"Oho!' said the pot to the kettle;
"You are dirty and ugly and black!
Sure no one would think you were metal,
Except when you're given a crack."
"Not so! not so! kettle said to the pot;
"'Tis your own dirty image you see;
For I am so clean -without blemish or blot-
That your blackness is mirrored in me"
Maxwell's Elementary Grammar school book, copyright 1904
