Silicon Investor (SI) -- The First Internet Community

STOCKTALK

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor. We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community. If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.

Technology Stocks : Amazon.com, Inc. (AMZN) -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: Bill Harmond who wrote (100544)	4/14/2000 2:16:00 AM
From: GST	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 164684

William <At its height in 1988-89 the Imperial Palace grounds in downtown Tokyo, based on adjoining property valuas, was worth more than all the real estate in the entire state of California*> That comes close. Did you know that a simple clay teapot in Japanese culture could be "worth" more than a castle? That comes closer. I am always surprised by your sincerity -- there were so many times when you did not even want to acknowledge the risk was there at all.

To: Bill Harmond who wrote (100544)	4/14/2000 3:02:00 AM
From: KeepItSimple	Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 164684

This is a very misleading statistic. The Imperial grounds are analagous to the several thousand acre central park in manhattan. If you tried to "value" that huge chunk of grass based on real estate prices in times square (where real estate is measured in square feet, not acres), you'd come up with an astronomical figure that probably is more than all of california, too. Both the imperial grounds and central park are huge exceptions to local real estate rules, being free from all development relative to the surrounding region by long standing political edicts. -------------------------- At its height in 1988-89 the Imperial Palace grounds in downtown Tokyo, based on adjoining property valuas, was worth more than all the real estate in the entire state of California*.(Morgan Stanley Research, 1989)