My brother, Forbes is in business to suck rich people off. They are not a qualified source and are over double the valuation I can find ANYBODY ELSE giving it.

Like I said, even if you reach as hard as you can for even the furthest flung reasonable opinion (which should be Forbe's low estimate, which is already higher than literally everybody else's) then you get hundreds of millions in fraud.

Just take the L when he flat out admits to arbitrary evaluations in his own testimony.



We have him straight up tripling the size of his new york apartment. This is the degree of fraud you are defending. Blatant, obvious, and admitted by the man himself.

This post was edited by NetflixAdaptationWidow on Sep 28 2023 10:23pm

If you did nothing to estimate beyond naively multiplying the acreage of the lot against other adjacent lots, disregarding the double shorefront, club revenue, literal palace and historical importance, you'd still arrive at a figure in the ~500 million to 1 billion range. If you did nothing with the lot mar a lago is on other than bulldoze it and turn it into more development matching the properties next to it, all 0.5 acre lots with ~15 million average, you'd get 500 million+
I'm not sure how you're struggling with pretty basic math here. Do you think the shorefront along the tip of an important island, the palace, the $25-50+ million in revenue per year and history before and after Trump all somehow subtract from the raw value of the land for property development?

Forbes gave a lowball and they openly acknowledged it was a lowball, and you still seem to think they're overvaluing it.
Even if we went by your own estimates, the judge in this case would be "blatantly, obviously" misrepresenting the value of the property in a summary judgment in a case over the value of the property.
So how are you trying to spin this as anything other than Trump being railroaded by a mockery of a justice system?

I can just google comps right now. 101 Jungle Rd is right down the road and on the market for 60M with 10k sqft. Multiply the appropriate sq footage and you get 360M comp for MAL.

This has been on the market for almost a year. I.e. way overpriced.

The mansion right next to MAL was sold for 50M with 14,000 sqft. That gives you a comp of around 215 million.


If you do comps in the area, again, the best result is Trump overvalued his property by hundreds of millions.


And it's obvious why you're stuck on this and refusing to even acknowledge the others. Because this is incredibly obvious fraud but is STILL the most defensible case. Again, because he FLAT OUT ADMITTED TO IT.

Did you ever bother looking at a picture of Mar a Lago? Are you even aware its on a 17 acre lot?
You understand why square footage of the buildings is not how property values are assessed, especially shorefront island property, right?

at what value is it taxed?

The assessed value. The whole point of the law was a bunch of retirees in Florida voting to make sure grandfathered in old properties are taxed at a much lower rate than new developments, since its a cap on property value appreciation rather than new development values. I don't know how MAL was filed for the 3% vs 7% cap or the minutia of it, but its the general idea of how Florida winds up with the vastly different values

Hey man you're right! Let's go with the source you liked earlier. Forbes.

https://www.forbes.com/sites/chasewithorn/2018/04/23/donald-trump-has-gained-more-than-100-million-on-mar-a-lago/?sh=6b0f5695adc8

Oh wait, they only put it at 180M during the timeframe we're discussing.

Wait that doesn't match your argument, so I guess it has to be discarded.

The timeframe we're discussing is the 2011-2021 SFCs which are what the judge cited in the summary judgment.
Give you a hint, property values went up 'slightly' from 2017 to 2021

The article is from 2018.

Stay mad.


Honestly it doesn't matter, because even if we ignore MAL, he's got like a dozen other even more blatant examples. Which you are ignoring like the plague. (Literally the plague of Covid, which you ignored and went all conspiracy brained on)

This post was edited by NetflixAdaptationWidow on Sep 28 2023 11:31pm

The article is from April 2018, which means its using data from at latest financial year 2017. Why do you think this lawsuit in 2023 only covers up to the 2021 statements of financial condition?
shit, you just reminded me I haven't even paid my FY 2023 taxes yet, better get on it!
my man you just acted as if property values are based on square footage instead of location and acreage.



Please elaborate, tell me my own thoughts

This post was edited by Goomshill on Sep 28 2023 11:42pm