The Internet Edition- Vol. 1 Issue 24

The essay he sent out is obviously a tasty bait rigged up to put the hook in those "financially sophisticated" and willing to "make investments with a high degree of risk" investors aching for 100% annual gains. It’s a no-limit open season on "high net worth" individuals.

Mr. deForrest admits "this is still a risky investment" but that failure to complete a project is "rare but not unheard-of." Right. He advises sticking with proven track record developers and you'll do fine. That is actually good advice: Stick with people who have earned your trust.

Selling condos before they are built has been a win-win situation for the speculator and the builder. The builder beefs up an escrow account with down payment money and that makes financing the entire project easier. The speculator can, hopefully, look forward to loan shark gains. There's really nothing wrong with that. You take a risk and you are entitled to rewards.

He uses IRS depreciation schedules as a litmus test of a building's viability. Over forty . . . bring out the wrecking ball. We can't have obsolete

buildings keeping new, more lavish; and higher, projects from destroying even more green space. One of the difficulties facing redevelopment in Miami is that so many buildings went condo. These are no longer businesses to be written off; but, darn it all, someone's homes. Can't have that. Homeowners seldom tear down the house they are living in.

Mr. deForrest's e-mail goes into the details of the spreading virus of "historic districts and preservation mandates." He questions the "geometric growth of 'styles' for which legal protection is sought." Particularly offensive to Mr. deForrest is the "Miami Modern" style that predominates the prime waterfront so desirable for redevelopment. Apparently no building lesser than the Louvre or Grand Central Station is worth saving - if it sits on waterfront property. (Actually he may have a point - although I remember the pool was great, the Fountainebleau had problems from its opening.)

I have never held the opinion that just because a building exists it should be saved no matter what. But Mr. deForrest's disdain for this architecture is possibly rooted in his desire to rebuild the waterfront and zoning now permits much higher buildings - dooming almost any structure in a heated market.

Buy the Beach Realty has "Site Specialists" ready to provide speculators with "insider" access to "pre-opening" prices providing the chance to "get in early." All that's needed is a "Letter of Intent" or "similar document" designed to keep out the "tire kickers" and "faint of heart." I’d sure hate to be called that. "Similar document," has a kind of scary tone to it, or am I cynical.

The e-mail gives a rosy picture of leveraging real estate you don't ever want to close on. It

sounds great. Maybe a little too great. My question is: "Does someone with insider access to fabulous profits need to broadcast e-mails to attract clients?"

Other Problems

The U.S. Army Corps of Engineers is supposed to safeguard the Everglades. That's a joke, folks. President Bush, the elder, promised "no net loss" and introduced a program to "exchange" building permits in wetlands for the "promise" of equal land elsewhere. And that's all Florida has gotten: Promises. There is no effective oversight in place that makes anybody keep those promises.

The problem starts with counties, not the state, being responsible for permitting in an ecologically unique environment that covers southern Florida. The federal marshal on the scene is supposed to be the Corps of Engineers. Woe is me.