To: James Clarke who wrote (9578 ) 1/9/2000 12:01:00 PM From: LauA Read Replies (1) | Respond to of 78752
$82 an acre seems really really really cheap no matter where the land is. I disagree with that rule of thumb. Take a look at PICO. They are the current owner of Nevada Land & Resource, which owns ~1.4 million acres of northern Nevada along the I-80 from Reno to Salt Lake. This land came from one of those railroad land grants to Central Pacific RR (one of the 'golden spike') players and looks like a checkerboard along the Humboldt River valley. It was the site of an 1870's land rush when sodbusters from Omaha and St. Louis didn't realize that the river was running only because it was the one decade in the Millenium that it would rain in Northern Nevada. This checkerboard got passed among railroads until Santa Fe sold it to a public water company in 1994/5 as a predicate to its merger with Burlington Northern. The sale price was $32/acre. It included water rights, microwave and fiber optic cable stations, lots of freeway interchanges, and far-as-the-eye-can-see chaparral. The river runs east to west, and ends in a wet-year lake that really is a sink hole. It crosses the Carlin Trend, abuts major gold mining districts, and includes large geothermal fields. To date, I would credit Santa Fe as the winner in this transaction despite the fact that PICO, the current owner, is flogging it as an undervalued asset, carried on the books at $36/acre. Remember, land has carrying costs - taxes, insurance, etc. Renting range land to ranchers who require X # acres per steer, just isn't a very profitable business. One Burns Brothers Truck Stop, at one interchange, gives a higher total return, than the entire property. I'd rather own a piece of Burns Brothers, but the Burns Brothers don't want me. Lau