Kuppy on Inflation

[Spekulatius]

Oil is the world’s central banker.

[gfp]

https://go.pracap.com/hubfs/Quarterly Letters/2024/2024 Q4 Investor Letter - Approved v2.pdf

 

Praetorian year end investor letter.  Page 10 mentions St. Joe for those interested in that part.  I would have liked to see a money weighted return figure but alas we only get "from inception" which was probably a million bucks from his dad or something along those lines.  

 

edit, re: JOE - I don't see how he gets $2 Billion of equity value, net of debt, today, for the commercial income producing endeavors.  It also rubs me the wrong way when people spit out a per-acre value on 168,000 acres when they know full well that isn't the number of acres St. Joe will be developing.  Use 100k - it's a plenty big number to build some credibility into your analysis.

 

"

you’re buying

approximately 168,000 acres of land in Florida, much of it waterfront, for approximately $3,600 an acre,"  

 

- c'mon man, give me a break.

Edited January 12 by gfp

[Gregmal]

2 hours ago, gfp said:

https://go.pracap.com/hubfs/Quarterly Letters/2024/2024 Q4 Investor Letter - Approved v2.pdf

 

Praetorian year end investor letter.  Page 10 mentions St. Joe for those interested in that part.  I would have liked to see a money weighted return figure but alas we only get "from inception" which was probably a million bucks from his dad or something along those lines.  

 

edit, re: JOE - I don't see how he gets $2 Billion of equity value, net of debt, today, for the commercial income producing endeavors.  It also rubs me the wrong way when people spit out a per-acre value on 168,000 acres when they know full well that isn't the number of acres St. Joe will be developing.  Use 100k - it's a plenty big number to build some credibility into your analysis.

 

"

you’re buying

approximately 168,000 acres of land in Florida, much of it waterfront, for approximately $3,600 an acre,"  

 

- c'mon man, give me a break.

Agreed, there’s a lot of liberties taken. But I think the waterfront claim is valid. You’ve got the 104 acres in Walton, a few acres in Bay, Basically the entire stretch of Gulf County including submerged land, and then like 20 miles worth of ICW if you count both North and South. 
 

I cannot get to $2B net of debt on the assets he listed, but you can easily get to $1.5b. Which then comes back to the whole premise of what exactly is the significance of $500m here? If $500m is make or break to someone investing here they should just move on to easier things and stop wasting their time because 1) $500m is a rounding error on the asset base, and 2) it demonstrates that most likely the person has been lazy, or isn’t capable of valuing the land. 

[whatstheofficerproblem]

3 hours ago, gfp said:

approximately 168,000 acres of land in Florida, much of it waterfront, for approximately $3,600 an acre,"  

 

 

I find it funny how Kuppy is bullish on FL land. I don't know if anyone on here has covered it, but Kuppy himself bought a waterfront condominium in FL in 2014 for ~$500K & today the units in that building sell for >$2M. ~$1,600-$2,000/sqft which is in Miami Beach & the price is a function of this location being hot.

 

Looking at listings in Bay County, where JOE has part of their, I could find land retailing for as high as ~$930K/acre & as low as ~$40K/acre depending on how much of that is trees, flat land, closeness to the ocean etc. I think with that in mind, his price range of $57,500 to $92,200 an acre makes sense to me considering some of this is waterfront & some deadbeat land.

Edited January 13 by whatstheofficerproblem

[Gregmal]

The land is a good bit easier in certain terms than people ever know because laziness takes over before any work really begins, more often than not. But you can clearly value a good chunk of it, as I suggested in the thread, based on already contracted and defined community pricing. Just the current pipeline is about $2.2-2.5b which covers about 12% of the Sector plan, and is only talking residential. So if you wanna be scrupulous we have $63 a share in easily defined value along with 88% of the BW Sector Plan and then another 60,000 non Plan acres thrown in for free.
 

I get why people hate on him, after the years he’s had especially, but no one’s forced to pay attention to him either. 

[thepupil]

9 hours ago, Gregmal said:

 Just the current pipeline is about $2.2-2.5b which covers about 12% of the Sector plan, and is only talking residential. So if you wanna be scrupulous we have $63 a share in easily defined value along with 88% of the BW Sector Plan and then another 60,000 non Plan acres thrown in for free.

 

I assume this is a gross number. I haven't updated this for 2024 and its pretty rough, but as a sanity check, I try to see "in hindsight what should one have paid for all the acres sold 2015 - present in 2014. Your multiple of gross is like 20-40% because of costs, taxes, discounting, etc.

 

So if JOE has $2.2-$2.5B of gross sales from the pipeline, I'd argue that pipeline is worth $400-$800 million of PV to shareholders, unless for some reason that pipeline is particularly high margin or will be monetized more quickly than others or some other factor. 

 

 

 

 

[Gregmal]

4 hours ago, thepupil said:

 

I assume this is a gross number. I haven't updated this for 2024 and its pretty rough, but as a sanity check, I try to see "in hindsight what should one have paid for all the acres sold 2015 - present in 2014. Your multiple of gross is like 20-40% because of costs, taxes, discounting, etc.

 

So if JOE has $2.2-$2.5B of gross sales from the pipeline, I'd argue that pipeline is worth $400-$800 million of PV to shareholders, unless for some reason that pipeline is particularly high margin or will be monetized more quickly than others or some other factor. 

 

 

 

 

You have to treat each column differently because there’s various stages of development and cost, as well as escalators the deeper into specific phases you get. IE best recent example see College Station. Column one is clearer and nearer then two obviously and two nearer than three. 
 

There’s also variables such as assumption to whether you assign LMWS West Bay or just keep that separate. Or how soon and how many custom lots you get around Lake Powell. (An new Club amenity that will replicate Camp Creek which is currently part of the free bucket).
 

Larger point again being, you don’t have to do very much to cover the current value you’re seeing quoted. 
 

The other cool thing is that you’re in Florida, there is a state entity willing to pay you to eat conservation land. So while you’re probably only looking at 90,000-110,000 actual development acres, you can still value the rest as something. 

[thepupil]

44 minutes ago, Gregmal said:

You have to treat each column differently because there’s various stages of development and cost, as well as escalators the deeper into specific phases you get. IE best recent example see College Station. Column one is clearer and nearer then two obviously and two nearer than three. 
 

There’s also variables such as assumption to whether you assign LMWS West Bay or just keep that separate. Or how soon and how many custom lots you get around Lake Powell. (An new Club amenity that will replicate Camp Creek which is currently part of the free bucket).
 

Larger point again being, you don’t have to do very much to cover the current value you’re seeing quoted. 
 

The other cool thing is that you’re in Florida, there is a state entity willing to pay you to eat conservation land. So while you’re probably only looking at 90,000-110,000 actual development acres, you can still value the rest as something. 

 

I don't really know or care what any of that means, but from a simplistic reported financials spreadsheet standpoint, JOE real estate gross profit margins are around 50%-60%. JOE is a taxable C Corp. So $100 of land value = $50-$60 of GP, you actually have 4.5% state income tax, 21% federal, so multiply $50 -$60 by 0.75 = $37.5 - $45 and if something is in one or two years multiply by 0.9 or 0.8 = $30 - $40. 

 

The math to me is pretty simple.  If you think JOE's going to sell $100 of gross value of finishded lots in a 3 years, it's worth $30-$40 today. If they're going to sell $100 of a 40 acre section in the sticks that they haven't touched / put any cost into, then it's probably worth $60 (75% for taxes then a couple years of discounting). 

 

What you can't do, in my opinion, is take the gross value of a pipeline and divide by shares and say they have X / share in pipeline value. empirically there are costs.

[Gregmal]

26 minutes ago, thepupil said:

What you can't do, in my opinion, is take the gross value of a pipeline and divide by shares and say they have X / share in pipeline value. empirically there are costs.

This isn’t what’s being done though. What you CANT do, is 

 

26 minutes ago, thepupil said:

from a simplistic reported financials spreadsheet standpoint

 We ve been over this like a million times and every single time the 

 

26 minutes ago, thepupil said:

simplistic reported financials spreadsheet standpoint

Has offered zero or negative value to projecting the forward based stuff. Whether it lot prices, club or hotel revenue, margins, leasing, LMWS(remember not long ago the “LMWS doesn’t make any money” stuff), etc, this has just never been a way of going about it that’s produced any forward guidance of accuracy. You actually need to know where and what’s being sold, and how it breaks down. There is NO other way of doing that than knowing the MPC level pricing, margins, and most importantly, volume. 
 

So again I would just say, if $500m or getting to $40/50/60 a share without valuing 85-90% of that assets makes it unattractive, to each their own. Even just focusing on CRE, it’s gonna grow 15% annually for the foreseeable future. So trying to exact a penny out of a 

 

26 minutes ago, thepupil said:

simplistic reported financials spreadsheet

Is pretty irrelevant. Why? That simplistic spreadsheet tells you not what any specific lot or land sold for, but a blended average from years ago, that isn’t indicative of today or tomorrow. 

Edited January 13 by Gregmal

[thepupil]

I guess I misinterpreted what you were saying, paraphrasing, I believe you said "you have $2.2 -$2.5 billion in value from pipeline". I assume that's a gross number. the value is lower than the gross revenue. we can debate whether value to shareholders is $30 or $40 or $80, but it can't be $100. you used the phrase "$63 a share" which is $3.6B. I asusme this is pipeline gross revenue + income producing estate. I think that's flawed and the reason is costs, taxes, and time. If the $63 a share is via some other method, I'm all ears. 

 

I think the past IS representative of the future. the margin fairy will not bestow 100% gross margins on JOE or a 0% tax rate.

 

the past may not appropriately predict the price at which an acre or a home trades (as you can see from the above spreadsheet, basing values on 2015-2019 transactions would completely fail to capture the massive positive inflection in fundamentals, but RE gross margins in 2015-2020 averaged 60% and averaged 57% 2021-2023. they were not wildly different. in the year where they sold huge plots of raw land to mormons (2014) they were 87%. 

 

So we can say margins on RE sales, based on ~10 years of data are likely to come in at 50-85% depending on the land type, corporate and state taxes will likely continue to exist, the time value of money will likely continue to exist. 

 

perhaps its overly semantic or even just stating the obvious, but $100 of revenue is less thanb $100 of value to shareholders...and I think the number is closer to $30 than $70. 

 

I own JOE and have been buying but I think EV / Acre is bullshit. I can only hope that it comes to be the valuation metric on which JOE is valued and I will happily sell my shares to more bullish people than I. 

Edited January 13 by thepupil

[Gregmal]

27 minutes ago, thepupil said:

think the past IS representative of the future.

Using 3/5 year intervals here shows this is completely false. Then you realize that those specific 3/5 year numbers represent backdated contractual figures, and it’s even more clear.
 

We went over this with lot pricing; how date x likely represents contracts negotiated x-2/3 years ago pricing, hotels…capex today equals margin tomorrow, clubs; revenue go forward is higher than last and margin accelerates with scale, with LMWS; startup costs +22/3 Covid inflation leaves the equation and MPC ramps, leasing; relationship between capex and margin.
 

If 3-5 years ago Bay County lot pricing averages(or just say whatever the “simple financial statement said”) were $55k per, and largely influenced by Breakfast Point sales(ie way smaller active selling community count), contracted based on 2018-2021 homes prices($280-400k a home), I don’t know how we can extrapolate ANYTHING useful about 2025-2028/9 lot sales in Bay County from that. Even using 2022-24 is giving us a lag not indicative of current prices. We can though, very easily determine what communities are now selling, their price points, the builder takedown schedules, and easiest of all, the cost to develop a lot and the tax rate.

 

We ve done this with pretty much every facet of JOEs business over the years and the backwards stuff has literally never been in the ballpark but at the end of the day, it’s even easier to summarize. If you’re buying a growth company, the future numbers will not resemble the past ones. 

[thepupil]

30 minutes ago, Gregmal said:

Using 3/5 year intervals here shows this is completely false. Then you realize that those specific 3/5 year numbers represent backdated contractual figures, and it’s even more clear.
 

We went over this with lot pricing; how date x likely represents contracts negotiated x-2/3 years ago pricing, hotels…capex today equals margin tomorrow, clubs; revenue go forward is higher than last and margin accelerates with scale, with LMWS; startup costs +22/3 Covid inflation leaves the equation and MPC ramps, leasing; relationship between capex and margin.
 

If 3-5 years ago Bay County lot pricing averages(or just say whatever the “simple financial statement said”) were $55k per, and largely influenced by Breakfast Point sales(ie way smaller active selling community count), contracted based on 2018-2021 homes prices($280-400k a home), I don’t know how we can extrapolate ANYTHING useful about 2025-2028/9 lot sales in Bay County from that. Even using 2022-24 is giving us a lag not indicative of current prices. We can though, very easily determine what communities are now selling, their price points, the builder takedown schedules, and easiest of all, the cost to develop a lot and the tax rate.

 

We ve done this with pretty much every facet of JOEs business over the years and the backwards stuff has literally never been in the ballpark but at the end of the day, it’s even easier to summarize. If you’re buying a growth company, the future numbers will not resemble the past ones. 

 

I think we're just talking past each other. I am making no other point than costs, taxes, and time value exist and will continue to exist. 

 

I cede any argument regarding actual detail and on the ground work to you. I have no desire to put in the degree of work to valuing JOE and I believe that an appraisal for any one piece of land (as discussed above) can vary a shit ton so there's obviously huge margin of error both ways in doing that 1000 times and the future is uncertain. 

 

I have little reason to believe JOE's margins, tax rate, or discount rates will be significantly/wildly different than the past, so would conclude that the multiple of gross RE revenue (whatever that revenue may be) justified by those things will not be radically different than in the past. if their gross margin goes from 50-70% because of whatever reason you know to be true, then it'd be $100 rev, $70 GP, $52 after tax and whatever PV for time; it's still 40% of gross revenue or whatever depending on how many years into the future that revenue may be.

 

I'm not making any kind of statement about what lot sales or price per lot will be. I'm making an observation about the nature of a lot developer with low basis land wrapped in a C corp structure where developments take multiple years. to me those things will always be true and are informed by the financials across market environments, across different types of developments (in terms of price point) etc. 

 

to me, I'm making a statement that is so obviously true that it lacks any kind of analytical value add. It's like saying the grass is green and the sky is blue. $100 of revenue does not equal $100 of net income or cash extractable from the business. But I'm happy to hear an argument as to why the grass is red and the sky is purple and why what i said is not true. 

 

 

 

 

 

Edited January 13 by thepupil

[Gregmal]

49 minutes ago, thepupil said:

I think we're just talking past each other. I am making no other point than costs, taxes, and time value exist and will continue to exist. 

 

But it s totally relevant in the opposite direction. Example

 

College Station in 2019 did not exist

2020- started selling lots to builders at $50k per. Phase 1 costs plus standard lot development came to about $25k per lot. Throw in a tax rate. Very possible in 2020 and 2021 they were reporting an $18k-$20k per lot profit to shareholders. 
 

The last year they had inventory sold was 2022. Lot pricing about $63k per. Based largely on 2019-2021 prices. Developing in 2021-22 also involved massive covid based inflation spend. At $63k your startup costs are past you, but you’re probably still around $30k per lot. 25% tax rate. Profit to shareholders somewhere around $24k-25k. 
 

Yet to be reported but showing up soon the newly reset lot prices at CS are $95k per, based on 2023 home prices, with no covid inflation costs and standard lot development for latter phases in that type of area…$20-25k we can call it. 
 

2019 “simple financial statement” showing- nil, the community didn’t exist

2020- $18-20k profit per lot, 38% margin

2022- $24-25k profit per lot, 40% margin

2025-$51-55k profit per lot, 55% margin

 

Now, these numbers are lower than average and fit into you’re assumptions, but where it’s wrong is that this is exactly the type of lower end, low profit, margin consuming MPC that has been bringing down JOEs margins. Camp Creek you’re selling $1m lots that cost $80k to develop. Stuff further inland costs $25-35k a lot. Some of the smaller communities they sell the land raw. 
 

With home prices where they are now the floor on per lot profit and margins is in and only inflecting higher. On the $2.2-2.5b pipeline estimate, as was described in the thread, column one is basically inventory; cash pricing is for much of it locked, just need to slap a tax rate on it. Column two is profit per lot, pricing marked to market, and column 3 is eventually the same as 2. Excluded in this was LMWS which is also another fairly easy valuation exercise.
 

 

Which leaves little left other than the standard discount rate argument but go ask Sahm his discount rate for Camp Creek or how $30m made sense for all of Origins….when we get an answer or a person who’s demonstrated the ability to appropriately apply a discount rate that’s fine, but the margin of safety there is simply as existing continues to build out the growth easily exceeds the discount rates assumed. So if you’re at an $80k per lot profit on column 2, we don’t need to apply capex and taxes to it because it’s net, and we also need to factor in that in 2026 it’s like $90k, and in 2027 in $100k. Which is still low considering the average home in Bay County is older, shittier, and low-mid $400s on average, meaning we should already be considering using higher figures than we are.

Edited January 13 by Gregmal

[thepupil]

whether their GM is 70% or 50% or 40%, the point stands.

 

they closed on 17 of those super high  margin Camp Creek lots 9m 2023 (i believe, right?) and their blended margin was still 50% on RE sales.

 

this is where the "super in the weeds, know everything about the company, forward looking projecting approach" doesn't exactly square  with the rolled up company level reported financials. like we know a lot of those lots went off at glorious prices...but JOE's aggregate margins for resi RE 2024 are lower in part because of a lot of low margin stuff. we can choose to be incredibly detail oriented about it, or we can slap "50-60%" and cover most of the outcomes. 

 

we know what a year where they have huge sclae 500K acre sale looks like: 2014 = 87% GM

we know what a gangbusters RE market looks like: 2021 = 63%. 

we know the lowest number was 44% in 2017. 

 

we know they have higher margin and lower margin projects. and we know they've averaged 58% over 8 years since the timber sale in total.

 

you can counter with any individual deal or community on how it will be higher in the future. i again believe you and trust you have done your work. 

 

but won't there always be a mix? somethings ramping, something harvesting, such that the aggregate company reported levels of the past (the dummy financial statements preferred by lazy simpletons like me) are actually more reflective of reality than any individual project level economics/margins. like if you just look at the financials, can you see Camp Creek? do you notice it? I don't. now they got 57 more to go so maybe it will be more noticeable wen they sell more or maybe it won't because it will just blend in with a bunch of $100K lots in tally nasty. 

 

by the way, can you direct me to this "column" stuff you are referring to. you've referenced it a few times, but honestly can't find it. is it a spreadsheet you posted somewhere?

 

 

[gfp]

6 minutes ago, thepupil said:

by the way, can you direct me to this "column" stuff you are referring to. you've referenced it a few times, but honestly can't find it. is it a spreadsheet you posted somewhere?

 

 

It's page 49 of the most recent Q but they include them in all reports -

[thepupil]

oh that table. that's what I used to calculate how many of camp creek lots they sold (using the changes from year end to 9/30). 

 

i don't really follow what @Gregmalis saying regarding those columns if that's what he's referring to.

 

to me that stuff is all of incredibly varying duration, value, time to monetize, etc. 

[Gregmal]

Yea see above.
 

And otherwise, yea I guess talking past. Theres just so much not even in the ballpark and nitpicking it seems destined for fruitlessness. “A blowout re market” margin is reflected in 2021s financials where you had contracted lots from 2017-2019 delivered and a period from 2020 where nothing got done? For real?  Not to mention margin is important but so is volume and there’s times when both work and there’s times when one does but the other isn’t.
 

It’s always the same. Forecast based on past numbers, ignore substantial majority of assets, then be overly punitive x2 on existing, then say “it’s too hard” lol. 

Edited January 13 by Gregmal

[Gregmal]

2 minutes ago, thepupil said:

don't really follow what @Gregmalis saying regarding those columns if that's what he's referring to.

 

I’m saying you have great clarity into the future cash flows by looking at each specific community and then valuing it. If you get to $500m or $2b  or $4b you then have to bridge the rest of the assets and commercial development plus non sector land with that number minus $1.5b/2b/whatever you or I or Kuppy wants to use for the defined CRE. The point is you don’t need to be exact cuz it’s like a half foot hurdle.

[thepupil]

12 minutes ago, Gregmal said:

Yea see above.
 

And otherwise, yea I guess talking past. Theres just so much not even in the ballpark and nitpicking it seems destined for fruitlessness. “A blowout re market” margin is reflected in 2021s financials where you had contracted lots from 2017-2019 delivered and a period from 2020 where nothing got done? For real? 
 

It’s always the same. Forecast based on past numbers, ignore substantial majority of assets, then be overly punitive x2 on existing, then say “it’s too hard” lol. 

 

I mean 2021 saw revenue double from 2020 which was almost double that of 2019 on increasing margin / price per lot etc. if that's not an awesome environment, I'm not sure what is. 2021 was objectively a smoking resi market everywhere. not sure how that's controversial. if the margins are reflected in later years and 2021 wasn't truly an awesome market...then whered they get pushed to? 2022? (which was lower) 2023 (lower), 2024 (same as 2022/3). 

 

	2015	2016	2017	2018	2019	2020	2021	2022	2023	Average
Resi GM	48.6%	67.2%	42.1%	50.3%	51.3%	59.9%	60.7%	52.5%	50.0%	53.6%

 

I have made no forecast. I don't think saying resi RE dev margins will probably be b/w 40-70% is even a forecast. it's too wide to be meaningful. like saying the stock market will return b/ -40% to +40. probably true, but doesn't really tell you anything. 

 

I'm simply pushing back on what i regard to be an outlandish statement "that you can get the value of the company in a few years pipeline" or whatever. that just seems wrong and out of line with any kind of reality and does not acknowledge costs, taxes, and time. 

 

i agree that valuing multiple decades of land sales is indeed too hard for someone of my analytical capabilities and free time.

 

I think i could study JOE full time and not come up with an accurate measure of IV. i think it's unpredictable but positively skewed at this price.

 

but we'll have to put it to rest as this is well beyond the point of productivity. 

 

 

Edited January 13 by thepupil

[Gregmal]

Like this is legitimately part of the “it’ll never get a real mark” thesis that to date has really been the only thing I can’t totally dispel. Bruce will stop eventually but, at the end of the day, even when it’s super easy and laid it there’s a complete refusal to do anything but use kinda half assed slapstick framework. 
 

1 minute ago, thepupil said:

mean 2021 saw revenue double from 2020 which was almost double that of 2019 on increasing margin / price per lot etc. if that's not an awesome environment, I'm not sure what is. 2021 was objectively a smoking resi market everywhere. not sure how that's controversial. i

Because the nature of selling lots is that they’re contracted well in advance. They take time to deliver. Pricing lags. Getting a full steam ahead market tomorrow has almost zero bearing on what you deliver NTM.  
 

Camp Creek lots where probably the only reflection of that, and those pricing were at 1/2 to 1/3 of what they are 2-3 years later. 
 

None of this has to do with a peak margin. 

[thepupil]

15 minutes ago, Gregmal said:

I’m saying you have great clarity into the future cash flows by looking at each specific community and then valuing it. 

 

maybe to try to tackle this another way, when you value an individual community, as you have, what is the value of that community relative to the total sellout of that community? 

 

[Gregmal]

14 minutes ago, thepupil said:

 

maybe to try to tackle this another way, when you value an individual community, as you have, what is the value of that community relative to the total sellout of that community? 

 

A typical MPC would simply be its total entitled roofs at a blended through the phases profit per roof plus any commercial minus development cost spread across the time it takes to complete the project. 
 

With JOE, again it varies. CC you know is done. Take the remaining lots, ASP, tax rate. That’s your cash.
 

At Windmark? You have to look at what’s listed on the table which is easy. And then make assumptions about what if anything they can do beyond that. I’ve just assigned value to the nearer term stuff listed on the table. I don’t need to know the totality of it or of Origins because I’m not paying for it here.  

Edited January 13 by Gregmal

[thepupil]

9 minutes ago, Gregmal said:

A typical MPC would simply be its total entitled roofs at a blended through the phases profit per roof plus any commercial minus development cost spread across the time it takes to complete the project. 
 

With JOE, again it varies. CC you know is done. Take the remaining lots, ASP, tax rate. That’s your cash.
 

At Windmark? You have to look at what’s listed on the table which is easy. And then make assumptions about what if anything they can do beyond that. I’ve just assigned value to the nearer term stuff listed on the table. I don’t need to know the totality of it or of Origins because I’m not paying for it here.  

 

okay so for Camp Creek, you are doing 57 * ($1 million? $1.3 million?) and saying camp creek is worth 57*1.3*0.75 = $55 million to shareholders? 

 

I'm using lot sales in last 6 months on zillow and the pricing sheet here

https://www.joe.com/community/watersound-camp-creek/available-homesites

 

and for number I'm using the 57 in the table in most recent 10Q and same website says 200/263 already done which foots w/ the table in the Q

The Watersound Camp Creek community will be home to 263 lots at full buildout. More than half of the community is sold out with 200 lots sold to date.

Edited January 13 by thepupil

[Gregmal]

4 minutes ago, thepupil said:

 

okay so for Camp Creek, you are doing 57 * ($1 million? $1.3 million?) and saying camp creek is worth 57*1.3*0.75 = $55 million to shareholders? 

Generally, yea. 
 

They’re done and paid for, it’s cash in the bank. 

[thepupil]

14 minutes ago, Gregmal said:

Generally, yea. 
 

They’re done and paid for, it’s cash in the bank. 

so when you do this by community, what the most valuable community and what's it worth in your view to sh today?