dalparadise

I may be thinking the same thing U R, except this was in West University. If I and U R talking about the same firm, I wasn't aware they operated in West U.

Wow -- hard to believe a builder would let a Realtor go so loosely like that on a TREC form. I just assumed the builder was in on the whole deal and was using his own forms to skirt the details. The sleaze really should not act like he did on a TREC form. He could easily lose his license over this.

While I agree with your take, it's a tad bit on the dramatic side, don't you think?

The short answer is -- yes, you should go to TREC (Texas Real Estate Commission). The problem is, you're on a builder's contract, not a TREC form. So, actually, your buyer's agent should go to TREC. He or she had an agreement to represent you that is independent of the real estate contract. Most likely, that agreement was for 30 or 60 days. That is, in essence the buyer's agent's claim to his commission. Provided he did his work and got you signed on that agreement of representation, he has a legitimate claim to this deal. TREC can open an investigation and solve this for you, even if the contract itself is outside their regulation. Of course, that assumes the sleaze in question is actually a REALTOR (capital R), meaning he is a member of the NAR and is governed by TREC. I believe that, in any case, the rules of arbitration apply when a single broker represents both seller and buyer. You would have had to sign your understanding of this condition for the contract to go through. Not to be overly harsh here, but it sounds like your buyer's agent didn't earn his money. Otherwise, you would have included him in the contract. Plus, he'd be much more interested in figuring out what he needed to do to challenge this. With that in mind, what interest do you really have in getting this guy paid? It doesn't end up costing or saving you any money, either way. The sleaze guy will still get his half of the deal, as the seller's agent. But no -- this is not common practice in Texas real estate. Yes -- the sleaze will get his eventually. The title company's role in this is to ensure a good transfer of the title and deed and all that entails. They are really not too concerned with the real estate commission, beyond being a holding place for the funds while the transaction is taking place. The fact that this was a builder's contract, not a TREC one probably blurred their role even more, as the Builder was representing both sides of the deal, as far as they were concerned. So, a contract change after the execution was not a big deal in their eyes, as they had "both parties'" agreement to the change.

All the cities listed have approximately the same number of millionaires, relative to their size, except TAMPA?!? Holy shite. Tampa is about 1/4 the size of Houston and has the same number of millionaires? That's a lot of wealthy old coots and a wildly wealthy urban area.

By the way -- Times Square may have been slow "for Times Square," but I'm sure there were still thousands of people around that 40 or so block area. If you were coming out of a theater, you were most likely closer to 8th Ave., in the mid-40s. There are mostly restaurants and a few bars around there to handle the before theater crowd, but they do close after the shows start. Plus, 8th is sort of at the edge of one of the remaining "bad neighborhoods" of Midtown. Most New Yorkers don't really like going west of there after dark. So, yeah, it's a little quiet at 12:30. Down on 42nd, the sidewalks were most likely full, as was the giant subway station there. Broadway and 7th (the main streets through Times Square probably had throngs of people from about 40th St. all the way up to 50th. At 12:30, though, it would have been time to go hit the bar, rather than try to gawk at lights in Times Square like a tourist. A quick ride on the subway down to The Village is what you should have done. The Strip in Las Vegas is lively, but it's about 1/5 the size and not at all pedestrian oriented. Never does it see the kinds of crowds that Times Square does.

First of all, Buckhead is not new. This development in Buckhead is new. Second, Buckhead is not ghetto. It's been Atlanta's version of Uptown Houston for as long as I can remember. Check out the crappy apartments around Uptown some time if you want to see how quickly chic can turn to crap. Third, trying to "rival Rodeo Dr." is indeed stupid. Not because it can't be done, but because it's a ridiculous notion that a shopping district would rival another that's 2500 miles away. Exactly what customers would consider these two rivals? It's telling of Atlanta's lack of a sense of place that they have to look to a city equally vacuous in that regard to set their bar. Now, as for rivalling Michigan Ave., I'm not even sure how Michigan Ave. "rivals" Rodeo. All this highbrow one-upsmanship can get pretty confusing.

Not very good. This just shows how important the writing is to these spots. I believe the agency is or was DMB&B (or perhaps BBDO) St. Louis who came up with this concept. They can't be happy about these two hacks running around trying to extend their 15 minutes of fame.

The Texans are among the top 5 valued franchises in the NFL. Moreover, they have sold out every regular season game in their history. Already, the first preseason game this season is sold out. There may be only a few hundred seats left for the Cowboys preseason game. Two or three regular season games are already sell-outs for the coming season. And, at last count available season tickets (they allocated several thousand new season tickets this year in the upper seating bowl) were under 1000, with still a month left to sell them. The Texans are doing just fine and will stay here for a long time.

Roscoe's is an LA institution. People in the production industry swear by it. It's also a place where production companies take their out-of-town visitors to show the "other side" of LA hip. I'd think people here would be all over this. Breakfast Klub was compared favorably to Roscoe's when it opened. The popularity of Roscoe's outside the Deep South was used to explain Breakfast Klub's unique offerings.

I understand the appeal of the things you list, but are they really special enough to attract tourists? It's not really our bag. We attract shoppers from Mexico, families with sick relatives in Med Center hospitals, big-league sports fans and business people and their families here for long stays. We do this all pretty well. Most cities have restaurants worth checking out and many even have decent access to performing arts at least close to home. Our art in our museums is a source of pride for the city, but really isn't worth much more than an hour's drive in a car as a destination in and of itself. If tourists are here for something else, then sure -- check out the Menil. I doubt many buy plane tickets to see it, though. There are also hundreds of "cute little coastal communities" that do it much better than the ones you listed. I love Galveston and it is getting better, but it's a bit of a tough sell as more than a regional tourist destination on most days of the year. Now, for cruises, yeah -- it's a great draw and people from all over sometimes stick around a day or so and see what's up. It's not in the leagues of the purely tourist destinations you list, though. Dallas has done a pretty good job of making a tourism industry out of nothing. They also pull a lot of the Oklahoma, Arkansas and Louisiana tourists who might otherwise come here more often. If we want to play in that arena, maybe we should follow their lead more. That all said, I think we do pretty well without pandering to tourists. The amenities of our city serve locals in very high urban style. I always enjoy city living in Houston more than I do in Dallas. Dallas plays on the scenographic far more successfully than we do. We seem to capture the true urban personality of a city this size more successfully than they do. We do this at the expense of a "pure" tourism industry. If we put out the effort, we might have one on top of the huge non-traditional visitor draw we have now. I'm just not completely convinced we'd like our city as much if we did.

I just hope it's more "architecturally significant" than Hines' last building here.

So, what would you suggest we promote?

They are nice sketches, but that really looks like a building suited for Ft. Worth, not Houston.

I think one of the points trying to be made is that some cars have high residual values at the end of their lease terms. These end up being a better deal for leasing. Essentially, if you choose a high-demand, high-value car on the used market, like, for instance, a 3-series BMW, you will have comparably low lease payments and more favorable terms than, say, a Lincoln with the same sticker price. There just isn't as big a market for the 3-year-old Lincoln, so the lease terms won't be as good. So, the key is to choose your vehicle accordingly. That said, leasing is usually not the greatest deal -- all things being equal. It's really only worth it if you feel like you need to drive a more expensive car than you can afford.

Yeah, he was known for that kind of reporting -- often erring on the side of the "victim" without getting his facts straight. I know a car dealership that was investigated by Zindler after they actually went above and beyond for an unreasonable customer. He laid out a rant of "F-bombs" and threats to smear the dealership when they simply tried to explain their side of the story. Later, when he discovered the dealership had actually done no wrong, he offered no apologies. He just simply went away and didn't air the report. But, I guess at times like this, we should concentrate on the good things. I suppose he did more good than bad.

I'd bet we're already there in a year's time.

They've been refurbishing DeLoreans at this plant for several years with limited success. I think they bought all the existing parts and the DeLorean name and shipped everything to Humble. Basically, you can buy a "new" car -- one built from new and refurbished parts -- or get your existing car fixed up to new standards. Interesting, to say the least, but considering how long they've been trying to gain some traction and how little attention they've gotten, I wouldn't bet on this lasting very much longer.

I understand this article isn't worth much note. I was questioning more Sarnoff's take on it.

The "whites"? The "blacks"? Is this some archived page from 1957?

I've had my suspicions, based on his posts, that "Plastic" was George W. Bush.

So, Houston ranks #20 of 30 cities surveyed and Sarnoff writes the headline, "Bayou City not so cheap"? I'd say we came in well below the median. But hey, we're more expensive (I guess the implication is that our business climate is healthier and more desirable) than Dallas -- which is as far as Sarnoff or most Houstonians care to look to judge the health of our economy. When will we get over our insecurities and promote our city the way it should be promoted? I bet the CVB in Dallas will spin the story to read, "Dallas among the top ten least expensive cities for business" and tell it much louder than in the second story in some lame local column.

It looks like they're responsible for a couple of things even uglier than this. Ugh -- that abomination at 59 and 610 is on their site. If I had any part of that, I'd never let it be known.

Nope -- those cables are the barrier, I believe.