Houston19514

Can you explain your math? Even with a 6% sales commission (and 3% seems more likely unless the builder has a selling agent), a $330 sales price would get you $310,200, netting 50,000-70,000. Am I missing something?

Interesting. When were those projects completed?

And like I explicitly said earlier, there is no reason the Editor cannot be held to the same standards of civility and respect. And by the way, I can read your posts here, I can do without the duplicate PMs.

LOL This is getting positively surreal. I feel like I'm in "The Wizard of Oz." I'm sure you all know the scene. The one near the end, where Dorothy questions the great and powerful Oz, infuriating Oz and sending everyone else into fits of panic... "No, Dorothy, take it back. She didn't mean it, Oz... You are the great and powerful Oz" ;-) FWIW, I too appreciate the editor's undertaking the business enterprise of providing this discussion board, just as I appreciate, for example, Walgreen's undertaking the business enterprise of providing me prescriptions on the corner near my house. That does not put either Walgreens or the editor of this board above criticism or questioning.

Well said. I totally agree.

Likewise a little respect is due from him to the members who make this board what it is. Please read the post to which I was responding before telling me how to behave. Where's the anger? I just correct misstatements of fact and misrepresentations. AND sometimes I respond in a manner similar to that to which I am subjected. (See Editor's first response to me) (and he also gets the advertising revenue.) Hey guys, just because the editor is the grand poohbah, is that supposed to make his statements immune from criticism? I surely hope not. Not bounce me for flaming? Where is the flaming? If I am guilty of flaming, my friend, so are you. The words in my post that are possibly "flaming" were all from your post. Perhaps I should have just called you on it and moved on, not allowing myself to get drug down to that level of discourse. For that I apologize to the board and to myself. (And no, it will not drive me nuts that you didn't respond to my posts. I'm not in here for childish games. I'm here to get and share accurate information; therefore when I see misstatements and mischaracterizations, I correct them. That's all.)

Don't be an idiot. We are all familar with residential skyscrapers. You must be referring to Lakeshore East. A lovely development to be sure, but calling that an "apartment complex" is, shall we say, a bit misleading...?? That's like calling Dallas' Victory Park an "apartment complex." And I'm the one who has "no idea what [i'm] talking about?" When an organization's claims comport with my own experience and knowledge, and when I have never seen any evidence to the contrary, yes, I'm willing to accept their claims, subject always to being disproven. (And not speaking Chinese or living in China is not a bar to knowing anything about China; that's just silliness on stilts. Since we neither speak Chinese nor live there, must we also assume that China may have an airport busier than O'Hare and therefore not believe O'Hare's claim to be the world's 2nd busiest airport?) No. I am not confusing you with other people. (I have a very good memory.) RE: your final sentence above; Let me just say, "hmmmmm, go figure." Again, you demonstrate you have trouble comprehending. This was not a Chamber of Commerce PR piece. It was a list of facts about Houston published on the website for Houston Pavilions, presumably to develop interest among prospective retail tenants. (And yes, indeed we have had plenty of discussions about Houston's downtown development; so stop bringing it up already. But FWIW, Houston's downtown development and near-downtown development is not appreciably different from similarly situtated cities. And yes, we all know that Chicago is of a similar age, but it had its massive growth very early in its existence and so has an altogether different development pattern than Houston). You may not like some of the information presented. You may not be impressed with some of the information presented, but just because you are predisposed to disbelieve anything good about Houston does not make the information untrue.

Yes, we can all make up our own definitions of what constitutes downtown and then string together a bunch of zip codes to come up with a number we like. Every source I can find online gives numbers for downtown Chicago FAR lower than you are feeding us. Again, you seem to have demonstrated that you "have no idea what you are talking about." Enough already with the "tourist bureau manipulation" and "fact distortion".

Perhaps it is you who should read again. Since you have demonsrated that you have no ability to comprehend simple English, I'll explain if for you: Those are clearly and obviously two separate thoughts, separated by a hyphen. Each stands alone. It is quite obvious that the second clause is not there to "prove" the first clause, because it does not in any way prove the statement made in the first clause. If the second clause were there to support the first clause, the first clause would have to read "Houston is the third most ethnically diverse city in the United States. (Not only did you demonstrate your inability to comprehend, you also demontrated that you "have no idea what you are talking about" with your earlier question about embassies.)

Another example of the crack real estate reporting from the Chronicle and, for that matter, the Business Journal. Wouldn't you think that construction on such a high-profile site would merit at least a mention in the business pages?

Houston has no embassies, OF COURSE. Embassies are only located in capital cities. How many embassies does Chicago have? I don't think anyone said or suggested that the number of consulates was the way to measure ethnic diversity. (In fact, since Houston is not the number THREE city for consulates, it is obvious that is NOT the way ethnic diversity has been measured. I don't remember where, but I have seen this study before that named Houston the most ethnicially diverse. And it wasn't just based on the number os nationalities represented in the public schools either.) RE: population. How is it that you know what Census Bureua dataset they used? And how did you come up with 250,000 for Chicago? Talk about "tourist bureau manipulation" and "fact distortion"... Everything I find online puts downtown Chicago's population closer to 50,000. (and you're bragging about an apartment complex housing 15,000 people? Sheesh. Where are you, Calcutta? That sounds hideous) RE: the medical center claim. Just because other cities may have made the same claim does not automatically mean Houston's claim is untrue. Is there really a medical center in NYC, Tokyo, or Moscow that even comes close in size to the Texas Medical Center? I doubt it, but don't know for sure. I know I've never seen any evidence that Houston's claim is untrue. As we have seen in some past threads, you seem to be quite eager to assume that Houston's claims are not true. For such a fan of Houston, we sure seem to be able to count on you to put a negative spin on any news out of Houston, in any way you can, whether logical or not. Folks, this list was from the Houston Pavilions website. It's just a list of things about Houston they have up there to help market the development to potential retail tenants. That's the purpose for listing downtown (including Midtown) population. All of these people have easy pedestrian, auto, and train access to Houston Pavilions. (if I were them I would have included all of the other near-downtown neighborhods, as well.) And they were no deceitful or disingenuous about it; they clearly said 'including midtown'.

1. No 2. No date certain. I think before the end of 2008 is the best we know at this time.

That is patently ridiculous. We "risk sacrificing a human beings health" for "money or our job creation" every single day, as we must. To pretend otherwise is just silly. It is simple economics... the allocation of limited resources to meet unlimited "needs". We could require that all vehicles be as heavy and indestructible as a tank in order to avoid risking any human beings health. But we (as a society) have chosen to take that risk. We could all live in bubbles to avoid damage (from both naturally occurring elements and "man-made" elements) to our human lungs, but we (at least most of us) choose to assume the risk. As The Niche said, we could require the elmination of stairs, because a lot of people fall on them, making them a risk to human beings' health; but we choose not to because of money/job creation. Human society does not currently have sufficient resources to make the world perfectly safe for human beings' health. Therefore, allocations have to be made, lines have to be drawn, and we indeed have to "risk sacrificing human beings' health for money or job creation.

Perhaps the inside of the Houston cathedral will yet redeem it in your eyes as well... I absolutely agree that a structure can both represent a time peeriod and seem timeless. But they can just easily fail at both. I just think a number of posters in this thread (and elsewhere on this board, for that matter) are unduly harsh. Now, the new fire station... THAT is an example of settling for the mundane, and is truly disappointing.

Yeah, the relocation of the oak trees has been discussed elsewhere on this boarda and was reported in the newspaper. (He donated some for use in Discovery Green and I think relocated others elsewhere in town, IIRC.

Glad to see someone on the case. That article was so slopppy it's a little hard to believe he wasn't being intentionally dishonest. For starters, there was nothing in the article supporting the thesis stated in the headline. And it went downhill from there.

Having heard about the "exciting and wonderous" design of the new LA cathedral, I, too, was a little disappointed the Houston archdiocese didn't go for something a little more excting. But now having seen these pictures of the LA Cathedral, I'm thankful they went with the updated traditional look. The Houston design looks far more enduring and beautiful. 20-50 years from now, Houston will be happy to have a beautiful cathedral with a time-honored and enduring design. LA will still have an ugly (in my opinion) cathedral that will be instantly identifiable as having been built in the first decade of the 21st century. (Think about all of the lovely and innovative 1970s architecture littering the landscape) ;-)

Don't be too hard on yourself. The information you posted was just out-of-date. When originally printed it was accurat. But at later dates, some of those stores opened branches in Dallas. (Ferragamo is just now opening, I believe. Some of the others are still not there.)

Ahh, yes. That explains a lot. You invent your own facts and your own language. ;-)

I sure can't think of any that are worse.

What in the world are you talking about? Where has there been any hate exhibited in my posts? Your aversion to facts is really quite extraordinary.

I could not have said it better myself. I'm an equal opportunity fact checker. ;-) And thank you for demonstrating so clearly and concisely for everyone just the sort of out-of-control defensiveness that we see so often from the Dallas boys and girls... exactly what I had in mind when I asked you to not go all "Dallas" on me just because I challenged you to back up your statements (which, as it turns out, you were clearly unable to do). I'm sorry that it offends you so to be asked to back up your assertions. If you were actually able to do so, you might gain some respect.

Do you have anything to back up that statement? Anything at all?? Because I'm pretty sure you're wrong. Several places I have seen that LFT is being brought to you by the same people who brought you Octane. Octane's "contact us" address on their website is none other than Dallas, Texas. And I'm pretty sure I read somewhere a couple days ago that LFT is being created by some Dallas retail "masterminds." Here's a quote from the Denver Business Journal you might find of interest: "Dallas entrepreneur Ort Varona will open his LFT boutique at that time. The store is actually three boutiques, each with its own entrance." So it would appear that, not only is LFT a Dallas invention, the Dallas store is not even going to be the first one. :-( DallasBoi, I hate to say it, but it's looking more and more as though you are simply clueless and had no knowledge upon which to base your statement (and revised statement) about th exclusivity of the stores at Victory Park...

Thanks for that pointless piece of misinformation. ;-) I guess Carolina Herrera, Salvatore Ferragamo, Fendi, Movado, Giorgio Armani and many others over the years haven't received the memo. Only if you don't count Miami as part of the South, and of course the Dallas Mandarin Oriental is still 3 years in the future, at best. And FWIW, let me remind you of the revised criteria set forth by DallasBoi. In addition to being the first in Texas and/or the South, he told us that "the stores that were chosen only have maybe two or three other Locations in the united States". So the Mandarin Oriental fails his criteria on two counts. It will no doubt be a lovely hotel (assuming it is actually built) but hardly the level of exclusivity claimed by DallasBoi.