Donald Trump - Business and tax stories

[basilio]

Supplying false statements, overstating earnings and assett values.
Isn't that what borrowers here were doing? Which lead to a Royal Commission into banking and the banks were blamed for not checking the details were accurate and lending money to people who couldn't afford it.

Guess it depends on the narrative.

Very selective there SP. In fact not even in the ball park.
Companies cannot simply make up financial statements on a whim to suit themself.

Why are we having a royal commission into the banks? Catch up here

It's official, we will have a banking royal commission. So, how did we get to this point where the banks ask the Government for a royal commission into their own sector and the Prime Minister says yes.

www.abc.net.au

 

[sptrawler]

Very selective there SP. In fact not even in the ball park.
Companies cannot simply make up financial statements on a whim to suit themself.

Why are we having a royal commission into the banks? Catch up here

It's official, we will have a banking royal commission. So, how did we get to this point where the banks ask the Government for a royal commission into their own sector and the Prime Minister says yes.

www.abc.net.au

I doubt the banks audit very many people, they would only do so if the borrower was delinquent on their payments and obviously Trump wasn't

You say I'm very selective, don't you actually read what you post, well I guess you probably don't because there would be too much to read.

Here is your post #1319 above:

Banks auditing trump

Chase and Citi Bank two banks that lent Trump $290m and $990m respectively, admit they never audited him.

So did they audit him, or didn't they? You say they did, then you post that they didn't.

The longer this goes on the more it looks like a witch hunt and the more traction Trump gets, it is probably at a stage now where he would win by the biggest margin ever.
Mainly because of the frantic way the establishment is chasing him, gives him the Ned Kelly, Robin Hood appeal, everyone loves an underdog and all this hype is driving it beyond belief.
Everyone is talking about Putin getting rid of his opposition, well it looks as though Biden is trying everything to get rid of his opposition, from the outside looking in.
Just saying.

With regard Trumps latest foray, I just checked on Bloomberg what they had to say and this came up.

Trump Keeps NY Empire Intact as Judge Rescinds Asset-Sale Order

Donald Trump was banned from doing business in New York for three years and ordered to pay $354 million for lying about his wealth, but one thing missing from the judge’s order was an earlier edict to dissolve all the companies the billionaire owns in the state.

www.bloomberg.com

Donald Trump was banned from doing business in New York for three years and ordered to pay $354 million for lying about his wealth, but one thing missing from the judge’s order was an earlier edict to dissolve all the companies the billionaire owns in the state.

In a surprise move, Justice Arthur Engoron backed off Friday when he issued punishments in the civil fraud case, walking back his earlier ruling and leaving Trump’s control over his New York empire largely intact — for now. Instead, the judge said any decision about forced sales would depend on what two appointed monitors learn about individual Trump businesses.







Terms of Service Trademarks Privacy Policy ©2024 Bloomberg L.P. All Rights Reserved
Careers
Made in NYC
Advertise Ad Choices Help

 

[basilio]

I doubt the banks audit very many people, they would only do so if the borrower was delinquent on their payments and obviously Trump wasn't

You say I'm very selective, don't you actually read what you post, well I guess you probably don't because there would be too much to read.

Here is your post #1319 above:

Banks auditing trump

Chase and Citi Bank two banks that lent Trump $290m and $990m respectively, admit they never audited him.

So did they audit him, or didn't they? You say they did, then you post that they didn't.

The longer this goes on the more it looks like a witch hunt and the more traction Trump gets, it is probably at a stage now where he would win by the biggest margin ever.
Mainly because of the frantic way they establishment is chasing him, gives him the Ned Kelly, Robin Hood appeal, everyone loves an underdog and all this hype is driving it beyond belief.
Everyone is talking about Putin getting rid of his opposition, well it looks as though Biden is trying everything to get rid of his opposition, from the outside looking in.
Just saying.

You have missed the points badly SP.. A bit more back story to this

On post 1316 Moxjo suggested that banks do their own due diligence on developers regarding property valuations and so on.
I responded on post 1318 and said that in fact banks were were not necessarily diligent about checking out the reality of their developers property aspirations. As direct proof I cited the article in New York Spy magazine in 1991.

The article noted that Chase and Citbank who loaned Trump $1280m between them never audited the company. They simply didn't check the figures presented by Donald Trump.

I thought the article in Spy magazine was so useful I decided to post at least one page for people to read. My comment about "Banks auditing Trump" was meant to be ironical. (Clearly should have said NOT) . I thought the Big Box headline in the middle highlighting the Banks not checking the reliability of Donald Trumps figures was clear.
__________________________________________________________________________

The observation that "nobody lost any money there was no fraud " is simply misdirection. It would be like a person charged with drink driving screaming that "nobody was killed" saying they were being persecuted and expecting to not be prosecuted for drink driving. It's just nonsense.

Donald Trump was charged with multiple counts of issuing false financial statements. If you care to read the Judges statement it will explain the nature of the charges and the reasons why there are Civil Business Laws that make this an offence.

The Trump organization is not the first company to be charged with these offences. However the length and enormity of their deception makes them an extreme case. The really challenging part for the Court and the Judge is that the reality of completely bogus financial figures being presented as fact is still empathically denied by Donald Trump.

He refuses to accept he has been exposed as a fraud.

No surprises here are there ? But does that mean we have to accept his pathological refusal to acknowledge his deception ?

 

[sptrawler]

The thing is Bas property valuations can and do swing enormously, it will be interesting to see if he appeals the decision, it all sounds flaky to me, not that I have any idea on the laws in the U.S.
But overvaluing property is very vague, what is vallued at $100m today may be worth $50m next year if we go into a depression so it all just sounds like blocking tactics to stop try and stop people being able to cote for Trump if they wish to.
It is all becoming farcicle, and causing the U.S establishment to lose a lot of credibility, would any of this have happened if he chose not to run for the presidency? I doubt it and probably most people think the same way, which probably makes voters more angry.
As your post says it was an article from 1991, why so long to bring it to a head? Coincidence

 

[basilio]

The thing is Bas property valuations can and do swing enormously, it will be interesting to see if he appeals the decision, it all sounds flaky to me, not that I have any idea on the laws in the U.S.
But overvaluing property is very vague, what is vallued at $100m today may be worth $50m next year if we go into a depression so it all just sounds like blocking tactics to stop try and stop people being able to cote for Trump if they wish to.
It is all becoming farcicle, and causing the U.S establishment to lose a lot of credibility, would any of this have happened if he chose not to run for the presidency? I doubt it and probably most people think the same way, which probably makes voters more angry.
As your post says it was an article from 1991, why so long to bring it to a head? Coincidence

SP you have to read the judgement or at least some of the articles that explain what the company was doing that was so egregious.

The core of the issue was that banks had stipulations about how much net value there was in Trump holdings and how much cash at hand they hand when they were making loan decisions. There was also the case that the more net value and cash at hand the company could show the cheaper the interest rates would be.

To achieve the necessary guidelines the company massively and repeatedly overvalued its assets and offered dishonest accounts of the cash at hand. If they had given any reasonably accurate figures it would have been almost impossible to finance the deals they were doing. The figures were just too far out of the ballpark. We are talking 500% -1000 %-3000% differences

Again all of this is easily accessible in the judgement - if one wants to be accurately informed.

The article from 1991 ? Yes that's old news. It is mentioned in passing in some current articles. It's relevance is exposing in great detail how Trump lied his way through the 80's and lost billions of dollars for banks and investors. But it has relevance to 2024 because the same issues of fictional accounting run through the situation.

 

[sptrawler]

I just wish I cared enough to bother reading it, unfortunately I just can't get excited about it, maybe the American public are interested the election will tell as usual.

 

[basilio]

I just wish I cared enough to bother reading it, unfortunately I just can't get excited about it, maybe the American public are interested the election will tell as usual.

I wish you cared enough as well. Quite sincerely.

For me it was about understanding how the judge reached his decisions. What laws were being broken. Why were those in place anyway ?
Understanding how he viewed the various witnesses and why he accepted, had reservations or rejected in total the evidence offered by the witnesses for the defense.

I was interested in how he brought together the various conflicting testimonies and how he effectively summarised the main issues of contention.

It was not a difficult or a dry read. I thought he went to great pains to make it understandable and straightforward. I suspect that is not always the case with judicial judgements. I believe Judge Engeron went to unusual efforts to explain and justify his decision.

I suggest this is one of the critical turning points in US and world history. I think that people understanding the reality of how Donald Trump does business versus the simplistic theater he presents is very important in terms of their decisions as voters or as commentators. On ASF we are just commentators but our views are ripples in the pond.

 

[sptrawler]

I guess an appeal will decide if judge Engeron was fair and just in his judgement, with it being America, I would have no doubt precedents have been set.
I doubt whether Trump wins or loses will change history, as his last term proved, nothing much has changed except the World is in more chaos.

 

[moXJO]

I'll try and read it later. But I fail to see exactly how they brought charges. Trump was known to be a safe bet and that's why they loaned the money. The banks must have been comfortable with the risks.

 

[basilio]

A lot has been made about the Judge deciding not to force closure of the Trump organisaton. What Judge Engoren did do was reinforce the role of the Independent Monitor to oversee the operations of the company. The Judge explains why he has decided that such monitoring is essential to ensure the company does not continue to produce fraudulent financial statements.

He also gave the Independent Monitor powers to see financial statements before they were forwarded to outside bodies. She would stop the lies before they got the door.

Continuation of Judge Jones as Independent Monitor

The Court hereby concludes and orders that Judge Jones shall continue in her role as Independent Monitor for a period of no less than three years. However, Judge Jones’s role and duties shall be enhanced from those operative during the preliminary injunction, as her
observations over the past 14 months indicate that still more oversight is required.

In particular, the Trump Organization shall be required to obtain prior approval—not, as things are now, subsequent review—from Judge Jones before submitting any financial disclosure to a third party, so that such disclosure may be reviewed beforehand for material misrepresentations.

Within 30 days of this Decision and Order, Judge Jones shall submit a proposed order to the Court outlining the specific authority she believes that she needs to keep defendants honest, and the obligations of defendants, to effectuate a productive and enhanced monitorship going forward.

Appointment of an Independent Director of Compliance

In addition to the continued monitorship, the Court hereby orders that an Independent Director of Compliance be installed at the Trump Organization, who shall be responsible for ensuring good financial and accounting practices, shall establish internal written protocols for financial reporting, and shall also approve any financial disclosures to third parties in advance of submission.

The Independent Director of Compliance shall report directly to Judge Jones, and the Trump Organization shall pay such person reasonable compensation.

Within 30 days of this Decision and Order, Judge Jones shall submit to the Court a proposed order including, without limitation, a list of proposed persons who may fulfil this role, and the specifics of the role itself.

Prior Cancellation of Business Licenses

In its September 26, 2023, Decision and Order granting partial summary judgment to OAG, this Court ordered the cancellation of defendants’ business licenses. The Appellate Division, First Department has stayed this relief pending the final disposition on appeal.

However, as going forward there will be two-tiered oversight, an Independent Monitor and an Independent Director of Compliance, of the major activities that could lead to fraud, cancellation of the business licenses is no longer necessary.61 Accordingly, this Court hereby modifies its September 26, 2023, Decision and Order solely to the extent of removing the language ordering the LLCs cancellation en masse. The restructuring and potential dissolution of any LLCs shall be subject to individual review by the Court appointed Independent Director of Compliance in consultation with Judge Jones.

______________________________________________________________

 

[basilio]

Judge Engeron outlined why he believes the role of the Independent Monotor needs to be extended and expanded. The Trump organization can go forward as a organisation with strong financial integrity with accounts that can be trusted. Reading the final report makes clear why the Independent Monitor role has to be retained and strengthened.

The Oversight provision also ensures that any large financial transaction will be properly accounted for.

Necessity of Ongoing Oversight
In her final report, Judge Jones made the followings findings and observations:

(1) beginning in 2022, defendants elected no longer to submit SFCs, instead crafting their own list of “the Trust’s Material Assets and Material Liabilities, which does not include estimated current values of the properties contained therein and does not include a balance sheet of the guarantor or any representations regarding his financial condition, notwithstanding the loan covenants that still require it;57

(2) during the course of her monitorship, defendants transferred significant funds58 outside of the Trust without notifying the monitor, as they were obligated to do;

(3) during the course of her monitorship, defendants have submitted disclosures to third parties that fail to include significant liabilities;59

(4) the defendants are no longer representing that any disclosures are GAAP compliant, despite certain continuing obligations to do so;

(5) annual budgets of projected performance were submitted to third parties that were materially different from the actual budgets of the prior year and which excluded or significantly reduced actual management fees as liabilities;

(6) the internal accounting structure of the Trump Organization continues to be plagued by math and/or reporting errors; and

(7) there are no adequate internal controls over financial reporting in place at the Trump Organization to ensure that there will not continue to be misstatements and errors going forward. NYSCEF Doc. No. 1681.

Further, the Court notes that top leadership roles at the Trump Organization, particularly the CFO and Controller, remain vacant. Approximately five months after Weisselberg pleaded guilty to having committed 15 counts of tax fraud at the Trump Organization, Eric Trump negotiated, approved, and executed his separation agreement.60 The role of CFO has remained vacant ever since, a fact that Donald Trump, Jr. did not know at trial, mistakenly believing that Mark Hawthorn was the new CFO. Similarly, the role of Controller has remained vacant since McConney left the Trump Organization in February 2023.

Thus, the Trump Organization does not have the ability to operate with a functional financial reporting structure that would protect against fraud in the future. The fact that there are virtually no internal controls in place at the Trump Organization, “creates an atmosphere conducive to fraud.” People v Northern Leasing Sys., Inc., 193 AD3d 67, 75 (1st Dept 2021).

Moreover, the fact that the Trump Organization has refused to prepare SFCs, even though various loan covenants obligate them to do so, ever since the monitor was appointed, leads the Court to conclude that the Trump Organization cannot, or will not, prepare an accurate SFC that is GAAP compliant and that values assets at their estimated current values. That the Trump Organization has taken to manufacturing its own version of its assets, one that fails to include any valuations, is a telling admission that it simply cannot, or will not, prepare an SFC without committing fraud.
Notes to the judgement
56 The Court did not appoint Judge Jones randomly or arbitrarily or by happenstance. Rather, she was the only one of the three candidates that both sides proposed for the position of independent monitor. However, after she issued her scathing January 26, 2024 report, quite critical of defendants’ financial practices, defendants changed their tune. Overnight, a universally respected former judge with a stellar resume, nominated by defendants themselves, joined the ranks of all those people and institutions being unfair to defendants and out to get them.

57 As detailed by Judge Jones, over the past 14 months she has identified ten instances where the lender required defendants to submit certifications attesting to the accuracy and completeness of financial information, but which defendants failed to submit.

58 So as not to interfere with the day-to-day business operations, the monitor and defendants agreed upon a $5 million threshold; accordingly, defendants were obligated to inform the monitor of any transfer of assets of $5 million or more. Defendants transferred approximately $40 million without disclosing it to the monitor.

59 The January 26, 2024 report details that the Trump Organization is omitting certain liabilities on their disclosures, including, but not limited to, intra-company loans. At first blush, these loans may not seem to matter, because the money is all kept “in house.” However, the failure to report these transfers distorts the balance sheet for the transferor and the transferee.

60 Thus, even after Weisselberg pleaded guilty to committing fraud at the Trump Organization, Eric Trump and Donald Trump, Jr. left Weisselberg in his critical role as CFO for an additional five months.

 

[finicky]

Yep, cutting through the verbiage, it's just random chance that Donald Trump has lost two legal cases so far with hefty penalties in Democrat strongholds with smirking Democrat judges and prosecutors. In the year of the presidential election and TDS in full outcry. F'k all you rat cunning lefties.

 

[basilio]

Yep, cutting through the verbiage, it's just random chance that Donald Trump has lost two legal cases so far with hefty penalties in Democrat strongholds with smirking Democrat judges and prosecutors. In the year of the presidential election and TDS in full outcry. F'k all you rat cunning lefties.

Yeah. Totally get ya Finicky. There is NO WAY a proper MAGA community would ever consider the possibility of charging Donald Trump with any misdemeanor starting from a parking ticket up.

Clearly Trump cannot ever, ever be subject to the mere laws made for other subjects. Just unthinkable. In fact in a proper MAGA society anyone who dared take such action , Prosecutors, Judges, Juries , would be immediately charged and convicted on grounds of High Treason !!

Naturally this would be retrospective. After all Donald Trump has promised he will get his retribution for all theses slings and arrows when he becomes President again.

 

[basilio]

Judge Engeron delayed and rewrote his final judgement. In late January Judge Jones delivered her final report. As noted it expressed serious concerns about a number of activities done and not done by the Trump organisation.

Trump and his lawyers flatly rejected any criticism of their operations. Trump insisted the books were perfect. He was never, ever going to take a backward step in defending his right to make up whatever financial statements suited his purpose.

No acknowledgment. No contrition. Flat denial of any wrong doing in any way. Clearly no intention of changing his ways. What to do ?
_______________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________
As I read the judgement I was reminded of an incident that happened many years ago in my teaching career. We had this thug of kid who was bashing and terrifying classmates and anyone he didn't like.

He was called in and multiple incidents were detailed. Mr Thugee flatly denied everything. "I done nothing. " "They've got in for me" "They're liars every one of them" .

Parents were not that interested. Frankly we thought he was beyond them. What to do with this thug who was bashing kids at will, refused to acknowledge his actions and showed absolutely no sign he was going to mend his ways ?

We said " Dick, with the way you have behaved and your attitude we can't trust you around other students. From now on you will spend every recess and lunchtime in an office next to the co-ordinater. You will report to the office after last period for a further 30 minutes detention and we want your parents to take you home at 4pm so there is no opportunity for you to assault other students "

No more discussion. Dick was removed from all out of class activities . This was an indefinite directive.

Parents went ballistic. Dick went up the wall within 3 days. A week later a far more chastened Dick and parents acknowledged the error of his ways.
He was never a good kid but most of the overt bullying and denial evaporated.
________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________
Back To Judge Engeron. It was clear that there was no way the Trump organsiation was going to voluntarily clean up their act. The law could be used to close the company down. But that would have blowback.

So the clever option was to simply give the Independent Judge a stronger mandate, more teeth and an additional staff member to ensure the Trump Corporation could not get away with the fictional accounting and dodgy deals they were used to. Trump refuses to acknowledge his business operations were dishonest ? Fine he will have an going in house pair of Independent Monitors who will ensure everything is done by the book.

I think this is an outstanding decision. It wouldn't surprise me if it became used in other cases where Judges can't be confident a business will improve their processes.

 

[moXJO]

Here he is:


Seems like a nut.
Just starting to read the ruling.

 

[moXJO]

So I'm skimming through it. Seems they got around having no victims by using the claim of "repeated fraud" which was the overvalued estimates. I wonder if they will go after every developer from the 80s and 90s now?
Well of course not because this was a partisan witch-hunt

Kathy Hochul the mayor of NY "I think that this is really an extraordinary, unusual circumstance that the law-abiding and rule-following New Yorkers who are business people have nothing to worry about, because they’re very different than Donald Trump and his behavior,” Hochul responded.

So it was basically "get Trump". Every developer is guilty of doing what Trump did. God, I hope they apply this ruling to the banks on wallstreet. The size of the fine was ridiculous and done for one purpose. This is bordering on election fraud.

Sorry bas but while they got him on a technicality (he actually had documents that said the banks need to check valuations), they also won't apply this to anyone else. It's a tds witch-hunt.

 

[finicky]

It's like the Lilliputions tying down Gulliver.

The first female black DA in NY history, Letitia James, a Democrat who campaigned for office on the promise to prosecute Trump. She called him an illegitimate president. They can't get him before the POTUS election through the Federal system so went after him through the State courts. Fani Willis the same. Pigs. Half of America thinks this is ok. They're ok with all the other white-anting by cultural Marxists too. Rather than rely on stale class differences as their dialectic for subversion, the left now uses race, gender, weirdos, climate and migration as well.

 

[basilio]

So I'm skimming through it. Seems they got around having no victims by using the claim of "repeated fraud" which was the overvalued estimates. I wonder if they will go after every developer from the 80s and 90s now?
Well of course not because this was a partisan witch-hunt

Kathy Hochul the mayor of NY "I think that this is really an extraordinary, unusual circumstance that the law-abiding and rule-following New Yorkers who are business people have nothing to worry about, because they’re very different than Donald Trump and his behavior,” Hochul responded.

So it was basically "get Trump". Every developer is guilty of doing what Trump did. God, I hope they apply this ruling to the banks on wallstreet. The size of the fine was ridiculous and done for one purpose. This is bordering on election fraud.

Sorry bas but while they got him on a technicality (he actually had documents that said the banks need to check valuations), they also won't apply this to anyone else. It's a tds witch-hunt.

You have just read it plain wrong MoXjo. Or you didn't read it. Or you don't want to accept it. You completely missed the intention of the law that was established. As was stated repeatedly the criminal action by the Trump organisation was the repeated use of wildly false financial information to make money. They made money by pretending they had way more assets and cash at hand than in reality to -

1) Get approval for large loans and /or
2) Receive a substantially lower interest rate on these loans
3) Lower their tax liability
4) Gain extra value on insurance cover

The observation about saying "Don't believe these documents. Do your own checking " was not legal. The judge said the law made that clear.

The fines ? They weren't fines as such Moxjo . They were disgorgement. The law states that if a business makes a profit from the use of false financial statements the penalty will be loss of these profits. Essentially one can't do an illegal financial act, make a ton on money in the process and keep the profits.

The statement that every developer did what Trump has done is pure hyperbole and frankly BS. I would accept that valuations are stretched. So did the Judge . What was off the page financial fraud was the relentless way they made up asset vales that had no basis in reality. If you actually read the case you would have seen the details of the frauds committed across Trumps projects.

As I said, Judge Engoren went into substantial detail to make clear what laws had been broken, the magnitude of deception and finally how the company still refused to change it's practices despite being under investigation.

 

[IFocus]

So I'm skimming through it. Seems they got around having no victims by using the claim of "repeated fraud" which was the overvalued estimates. I wonder if they will go after every developer from the 80s and 90s now?
Well of course not because this was a partisan witch-hunt

Kathy Hochul the mayor of NY "I think that this is really an extraordinary, unusual circumstance that the law-abiding and rule-following New Yorkers who are business people have nothing to worry about, because they’re very different than Donald Trump and his behavior,” Hochul responded.

So it was basically "get Trump". Every developer is guilty of doing what Trump did. God, I hope they apply this ruling to the banks on wallstreet. The size of the fine was ridiculous and done for one purpose. This is bordering on election fraud.

Sorry bas but while they got him on a technicality (he actually had documents that said the banks need to check valuations), they also won't apply this to anyone else. It's a tds witch-hunt.

There is no doubt many dislike Trump intensely whether you agree with the law or not Trump clearly broke it as he is want to do any prosecutor Democrat or Republican will go after high profile people if only to further their careers... it's the "American Way".

If found guilty in the US you get absloutely rat f**ked again thats the US.

Trump's defense of the charges seem to be seriously brain dead,attacking the Judge and saying crap at the hearings that clearly had no bearing on the case.

A Republican appeal Judge / Judges may reduce the fine but Trump won't get off best he can do is delay, his previous record on this stuff in the courts is woeful.

I cannot see how he will avoid a guilty verdict in the Story Daniels case which is a criminal one

 

[moXJO]

You have just read it plain wrong MoXjo. Or you didn't read it. Or you don't want to accept it. You completely missed the intention of the law that was established. As was stated repeatedly the criminal action by the Trump organisation was the repeated use of wildly false financial information to make money. They made money by pretending they had way more assets and cash at hand than in reality to -

1) Get approval for large loans and /or
2) Receive a substantially lower interest rate on these loans
3) Lower their tax liability
4) Gain extra value on insurance cover

The observation about saying "Don't believe these documents. Do your own checking " was not legal. The judge said the law made that clear.

The fines ? They weren't fines as such Moxjo . They were disgorgement. The law states that if a business makes a profit from the use of false financial statements the penalty will be loss of these profits. Essentially one can't do an illegal financial act, make a ton on money in the process and keep the profits.

The statement that every developer did what Trump has done is pure hyperbole and frankly BS. I would accept that valuations are stretched. So did the Judge . What was off the page financial fraud was the relentless way they made up asset vales that had no basis in reality. If you actually read the case you would have seen the details of the frauds committed across Trumps projects.

As I said, Judge Engoren went into substantial detail to make clear what laws had been broken, the magnitude of deception and finally how the company still refused to change it's practices despite being under investigation.

The banks said they would happily lend him the money again. They didn't have any problems with the transaction.

It was a partisan attorney general that came up with fraud. No banks said there was fraud committed.

Yes, every single developer overstates their asset values. You must have been in the public service or something because there is no way you have run a business saying :

The statement that every developer did what Trump has done is pure hyperbole

Why do you think Kathy had to try and say it was a "one off". Developers and investment money is about to flee NY. The fact that you think NY developers or developers anywhere don't do it blows my mind.