"NOYB" wrote in message
link.net...

"Calif Bill" wrote in message
link.net...

"NOYB" wrote in message
link.net...

"Harry Krause" wrote in message
. ..
NOYB wrote:
"Eisboch" wrote in message
...
"NOYB" wrote in message
.net...

Could be. Of course, for 40 years down here in Naples, there hasn't
been a problem. Two bad years, and the insurance industry panics
and starts raping folks. Perhaps they should have been saving the
money they collected on those high premiums for a rainy day.

Florida is a big state. I remember reading that the area in which we
had property (Jupiter) had not had a direct hurricane hit in over 100
years at the time we bought.
Three years following our purchase, we got direct or near direct hits
three times.

Statistically, we have as high or higher probability of getting a
hurricane up here in MA this year as Jupiter does.


Right. But I bet that you don't have the same problem getting boat
insurance up there.




So...move...sell your boat...pay the premium.

Nope, nope, and already doing that.

As I said in my first post, this doesn't affect people like me who are
already insured. It affects new buyers...which will kill the boating
market. Reread the title. This isn't a personal bitch session. It
affects tens of thousands of people, and could end up affecting an
entire industry and the folks whose jobs rely upon that industry.




It may affect presently insured boaters also. Wait till renewal time.

The $3000 *is* my renewal cost. I was paying $2100...but that was before
the new motors added $30k to the insured value.



Look
at the increases in home and apartment insurance rates after Katrina.
Reading this morning that some $500k homes in New Orleans will go to $10k
a year in insurance. 400-500% increase in apartment building insurance
rates. Why should the people / government pay for peoples choice to build
in flood plains, etc. Lots of the river flood plains are now
non-insurable for federal flood insurance. Build on a beach and then cry
when the ocean takes your house, and figure that the rest of us will pay
to rebuild it. Bzzzt. wrong.

You and I already bail those folks out via the taxes we pay to the
"insurer-of-last-resort (a.k.a. the US Government). How many billion did
the Federal Gov't spend on Katrina?

Wouldn't it be simpler (yet, cost the individual taxpayer no more) if we
all paid into a national disaster relief insurance fund that reinsured the
insurance companies? It could be used to cover you guys in California
when the next brush fire or earthquake hits, the folks in the midwest when
the next flood or tornado comes along, people in Florida and the Gulf and
Atlantic states when a hurricane comes along, and the folks in the major
cities when the next terrorist attack occurs.



Lots of places that the government will not help the victims of natural
disasters. All those river flood zones along the Mississippi River that
used to flood yearly or so and still do. The Fed's told them last payment.
Lots of the Louisiana rebuilding by the Fed's is total vote pandering. Why
should we gift money for a new house and life to someone. Guarantee a loan
maybe, but not give them a house. Help the state with infrastructure
rebuilding, but not total payment. We are still paying into funds to
rebuild the San Francisco-Oakland Bay Bridge. How come the Fed's did not
pay for all that? If you want the Fed's to bail out people who build on
flood plains, and next to the beach where global warming and wind storms
will damage the property, maybe the Fed's should have a veto in zoning?
Where are State and local rights then?

On Thu, 24 Aug 2006 23:13:49 GMT, "NOYB" wrote:

Insurance companies won't insure for more than $100k on boats 30' or more in
length.

Depends on the insurance company, there are obviously many insured
boats over 30 ft and $100K residing in SWFL, mine among them. Not to
say that insurance isn't an issue, it is. Our premiums just went up
$1K per year for no reason other than residing here, and we did have
some difficulty getting insurance even before Charlie and the others.

My advice would be to check with some of the yacht insurance brokers
in Ft Lauderdale. You may not like their rates or restrictions but
they can almost always find a policy for you.

On Thu, 24 Aug 2006 18:37:21 GMT, "NOYB" wrote:

Wouldn't it be simpler (yet, cost the individual taxpayer no more) if we all
paid into a national disaster relief insurance fund that reinsured the
insurance companies?

What makes you think the government could run an efficient reinsurance
business? Their success with social security, the IRS and the FBI?
Everything the federal government touches becomes loaded down with
regulatory and political bloat.

"Wayne.B" wrote in message
...
On Thu, 24 Aug 2006 18:37:21 GMT, "NOYB" wrote:

Wouldn't it be simpler (yet, cost the individual taxpayer no more) if we
all
paid into a national disaster relief insurance fund that reinsured the
insurance companies?

What makes you think the government could run an efficient reinsurance
business? Their success with social security, the IRS and the FBI?
Everything the federal government touches becomes loaded down with
regulatory and political bloat.


They could force the insurance companies to establish their own reinsurance
business.

"Wayne.B" wrote in message
...
On Thu, 24 Aug 2006 23:13:49 GMT, "NOYB" wrote:

Insurance companies won't insure for more than $100k on boats 30' or more
in
length.

Depends on the insurance company, there are obviously many insured
boats over 30 ft and $100K residing in SWFL, mine among them.

Just for kicks, call around to other insurance companies and see if they'll
insure your boat. If you're not already with them, they won't insure it.



Not to
say that insurance isn't an issue, it is. Our premiums just went up
$1K per year for no reason other than residing here, and we did have
some difficulty getting insurance even before Charlie and the others.

My advice would be to check with some of the yacht insurance brokers
in Ft Lauderdale. You may not like their rates or restrictions but
they can almost always find a policy for you.


As I said, I'm with Boat US already, but switching to a new company is
impossible if I wanted to.

NOYB wrote:
" JimH" not telling you @ pffftt.com wrote in message
. ..
"NOYB" wrote in message
link.net...
" JimH" not telling you @ pffftt.com wrote in message
. ..
"NOYB" wrote in message
hlink.net...
" JimH" not telling you @ pffftt.com wrote in message
. ..
"NOYB" wrote in message
k.net...
" JimH" not telling you @ pffftt.com wrote in message
. ..
"NOYB" wrote in message
.net...
"Chuck Gould" wrote in message
ups.com...
NOYB wrote:
It's insurance! Or lack thereof. In Florida, it is now
impossible to
insure a boat over 30' long valued at more than $100,000 if the
boat:

a) doesn't have a trailer

and/or

b) is more than 5 model years old (2001 and older are uninsurable
if they're
over 30 feet and valued at more than $100,000)


I just applied for quotes from NBOA, Boater's Choice,
Progressive, and 2 or
three others. All said the same thing: no dice.

Progressive was willing to write my boat for $100,000 coverage
(it's valued
at $113k though) to the tune of $4500/year.

I'm with Boat/US, and insured for $113,000 for just under
$3000/year. I was
looking to save some money, and it's apparent that that isn't
going to
happen.


Read this thread on thehulltruth.com to understand how bad it is
in Florida
now:

http://www.thehulltruth.com/forums/t...114956&start=1


Guys cannot get financing on boats because they can't insure
them.

Sorry to hear about your insurance difficulties. Nothing similar
is
happening in this area of the country- so I'm willing to bet it
has a
lot to do with the $$$$$$$$$ in losses the boat insurance
companies
suffer whenever your several hurricanes per year blow through.
Sort of like trying to buy fire insurance on a house 50-feet from
a
blast furnace.

Those rates sound astronomical to insure a $100k boat, but it
makes
some sense to evaluate local risk rather than just "average" it
out
against everybody in the country- whether they live in a hurricane
zone
or not.
Yup. Sounds fair. Just like the rest of the country's tax
dollars shouldn't have to pay for security against terrorist
attacks in cities like NY, Seattle, LA, Chicago, etc.

There is no comparison between people choosing to live in hurricane
alley and folks living in large cities that terrorists chose to
target.

Sure there is. I have a much lower chance of being the victim of a
terrorist attack than someone living in NY...and NY'ers have a lower
chance of getting hit by a Cat 3 or higher hurricane. And guess
what? The risks are directly related to where we each chose to live.



And folks living in Hawaii have a lower chance of seeing snow in
January than those living in Alaska. And guess what, the risks are
directly related to where we choose to live.

So what does snow have to do with insurance? Nothing, just like
insurance has nothing to do with taxes.

BTW: How many terrorist attacks were there in New York last year?
How many hurricanes were there in Florida last year? How about 2004?
2003? 2002?
How many Cat 3 or greater Hurricanes hit Naples since 1960? One. How
many terrorist attacks occurred in NY in the same 46 year period?



I did not know that we have limited our discussion to Cat 3+ hurricanes
only.

Here is a very interesting link for you Doc:

http://www.collierem.org/never.htm
===================================
In 1960, when hurricane 'Donna' struck, there were approximately 15,500
people living full time in Collier County. Today there is nearly 300,000
residents, most of whom have never been through a severe land-falling
hurricane, even though they lived through the 2004 hurricane season. We
have come to southwest Florida from all over the country and around the
world, and we would all like to believe that we are safe from the
ravages of hurricanes.
After all, how often is Collier County struck by tropical weather?
Records kept by the National Weather Service date back to 1851, or 153
years as this is written. In that time 73 tropical storms and hurricanes
have passed within 75 nautical miles of Naples, or one nearly every 2.1
years! Of those, 40 have been tropical storms with winds of less than 74
miles per hour. That also means at 33 have been hurricanes, or one about
every 4.7 years!

Ah, but they're all small hurricanes aren't they? Let's take a look:

a.. Sixteen major hurricanes in 153 years averages out to 1 every 7.7
years!
b.. 14 have been category three, one has been category four and one was
a category five.
Now THAT Was a Close Call!
(Center Less Than 20 Miles From Naples)

Tropical Storms: 1861, 1878, 1891, 1899, 1907, 1932, 1936, 1945, 1953,
1969 (Jenny),
1985 (Bob), 1994 (Gordon), 1998 (Mitch), 1999 (Harvey)

Hurricanes: 1870,1894, 1910, 1926, 1929, 1941, 1947, 1960 (Donna)
('Andrew' passed 35 miles south of Naples in 1992)



--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Hang on To Your Hat!
Winds Greater Than 96 mph (Category 2+) within 75 nautical miles of
Naples

1865 (100 mph), 1873 (115 mph), 1876 (104 mph), 1888 (113 mph), 1894
(104 mph), 1910 (126 mph), 1924 (104mph), 1926 (130 mph.), 1929 (115
mph), 1935 (146 mph.), 1941 (121mph), 1944 (127 mph), 1945 (127 mph),
1946 (113 mph), 1947 (147 mph), 1948 (115 mph), 1950 (115 mph), 1950
(107 mph) 1960 (Donna, 129 mph), 1964 (Isbell, 115 mph), 1965 (Betsy,
124 mph), 1966 (Alma, 120 mph), 1992 (144 mph, Andrew's winds were less
than 95 mph at Naples, but higher on Marco Island and in Everglades
City), 2004 (Charley, 145mph), & 2004 (Jeanne, 120 mph)

================



And you were saying? ;-)
My boat made it through all of them unscathed...which is why I stated
"Cat 3 or higher". It would take a storm stronger than Charley to damage
my boat...and that hasn't happened in 46 years.



And my house has never caught on fire either.

Why were all the boats damaged in previous tropical storms and cat 1 and 2
hurricanes? Are you some sort of magician that you can make a statement
that it would take a storm stronger than Charley to damage your boat?

All it takes is a tree or large chunk of building falling on the boat, or
someone else's boat (if it is in the water) blowing into it.

Did you read the article I posted a link to?

I haven't had time yet.

I wasn't looking for sympathy with this thread. In fact, I was playing
Devil's advocate. I live in an area that deserves to have higher insurance
rates on boats. But the fact that all of the boat insurance companies
completely pulled out of the state needs to be addressed.

As long as each state sets their own insurance regulations, companies will
continue to cherry-pick the states that it's cheapest and easiest to do
business in. But considering all of the special treatment that insurance
companies get via Congress (ie--McCarron-Ferguson Act, special tax
consideration, etc), they ought to be regulated to some degree at the
Federal level. And they should be forced to offer coverage no matter which
state someone lives in (albeit at a higher rate if warranted).



NYOB,

I agree, rates should be risk adjusted, but they should not be allowed
to just pull out of a market and cherry pick the low risk states.
The idea is of insurance is the risk is spread among the insured, but
you and those in high risk areas should pay substantially higher rates
following risk assessment and risk management based upon actual claims.

Harry Krause wrote:
NOYB wrote:
"Harry Krause" wrote in message
. ..
NOYB wrote:
"Harry Krause" wrote in message
. ..
DSK wrote:
Don't complain about your high insurance costs or your being
uninsurable. And don't expect taxpayers to pay the bill so you can
build a new house after your is destroyed by a hurricane. *You*
chose to purchase a house in hurricane alley. You knew the risks and
you are now paying the price.
NOYB wrote:
I don't mind paying the price. It's not the cost that I'm complaining
about. It's the fact that there is no insurance company willing to
write a new policy for a boat over 30' long valued at more than
$100,000...unless that boat is a 2002 or newer.

Isn't that complaining about cost? All you have to do is go buy a new
boat. If you pre-2002 boat is truly perfect, then all you have to do is
get a custom builder to crank out an exact replica. Money doesn't solve
everything, but it can easily solve problems like that.



The problem with insurance companies is that there is no federal
oversight (thanks to the McCarron-Ferguson Act), and they're not
subject to anti-trust legislation. It's the only industry that has
that has the benefit of such an unlevel playing field. Congress has
the Constitutional authority to regulate interstate commerce.
And not so very long ago, the Republican battle cry was "Deregulation!"
So these things come & go in cycles.



The entire problem spills over directly to health insurance too.
Corporations, labor unions, and the US government can buy their
insurance in a state that has affordable premiums and cheap coverage,
and provide that coverage for members no matter where they live.
Small businesses have no such luxury, because Senate Democrats have
managed to stall a vote on the Small Business Health Fairness Act.

That's right, I knew you'd find a way to blame the Democrats. But hey,
as long as *you* do it, it's not partisan hackery!


I'm pleased to report that we are involved in slowing down passage of S.
545, aka the Small Business Health Fairness Act.
Of course you (unions) are. Unions already have the priviledge to buy
insurance across state lines.



There's nothing wrong with the basis concept, but there are plenty of
problems with the Bill's proposed implementation.

1. The Act exempts association health plans from state laws and
regulations, and therefore eliminates consumer protection and coverage
requirements.
Bull****. I'd bet that your insurance doesn't conform to Maryland's
insurance regulations, because your union purchases it in a state with
less regulation.
You'd lose your bet.


2. The insurers would have no incentive to cover preventive care or many
expensive procedures if the law did not require them to do so.
Then regulate them at the Federal level so that they can't cherry-pick
which states to do business in.


3. AHPs open the door for cherry picking.
Bull**** again. The insurance companies already cherry pick which states
have the least regulation, and sell most of their products there.
AHP's would eliminate cherry-picking, not increase it.

I suspect my knowledge of the health insurance industry from the insurer's
POV is a bit more sophisticated than yours.

Oh goody! You're speaking from the insurer's and the union's point of view.
No wonder you're opposed to AHP's. They'd help small businesses (and the
60% of the workers in this country employed by small businesses), but
they're no good for insurance companies, labor unions, or corporations
because it might affect their bottom line if there was actual competition in
the health insurance market.

All one has to do is look at the list of the folks who oppose AHP's, and it
becomes evident just why they oppose them. And it's not for any of the
smoke and mirror reasons that you stated above.





Right...expertise from the dentist with the highly leveraged, overpriced
house on which he can't park a boat trailer and the boat he can't insure.

Bingo!

Reginald P. Smithers III wrote:
NOYB wrote:
" JimH" not telling you @ pffftt.com wrote in message
. ..
"NOYB" wrote in message
link.net...
" JimH" not telling you @ pffftt.com wrote in message
. ..
"NOYB" wrote in message
hlink.net...
" JimH" not telling you @ pffftt.com wrote in message
. ..
"NOYB" wrote in message
k.net...
" JimH" not telling you @ pffftt.com wrote in message
. ..
"NOYB" wrote in message
.net...
"Chuck Gould" wrote in message
ups.com...
NOYB wrote:
It's insurance! Or lack thereof. In Florida, it is now
impossible to
insure a boat over 30' long valued at more than $100,000 if the
boat:

a) doesn't have a trailer

and/or

b) is more than 5 model years old (2001 and older are uninsurable
if they're
over 30 feet and valued at more than $100,000)


I just applied for quotes from NBOA, Boater's Choice,
Progressive, and 2 or
three others. All said the same thing: no dice.

Progressive was willing to write my boat for $100,000 coverage
(it's valued
at $113k though) to the tune of $4500/year.

I'm with Boat/US, and insured for $113,000 for just under
$3000/year. I was
looking to save some money, and it's apparent that that isn't
going to
happen.


Read this thread on thehulltruth.com to understand how bad it is
in Florida
now:

http://www.thehulltruth.com/forums/t...114956&start=1


Guys cannot get financing on boats because they can't insure
them.

Sorry to hear about your insurance difficulties. Nothing similar
is
happening in this area of the country- so I'm willing to bet it
has a
lot to do with the $$$$$$$$$ in losses the boat insurance
companies
suffer whenever your several hurricanes per year blow through.
Sort of like trying to buy fire insurance on a house 50-feet from
a
blast furnace.

Those rates sound astronomical to insure a $100k boat, but it
makes
some sense to evaluate local risk rather than just "average" it
out
against everybody in the country- whether they live in a hurricane
zone
or not.
Yup. Sounds fair. Just like the rest of the country's tax
dollars shouldn't have to pay for security against terrorist
attacks in cities like NY, Seattle, LA, Chicago, etc.

There is no comparison between people choosing to live in hurricane
alley and folks living in large cities that terrorists chose to
target.

Sure there is. I have a much lower chance of being the victim of a
terrorist attack than someone living in NY...and NY'ers have a lower
chance of getting hit by a Cat 3 or higher hurricane. And guess
what? The risks are directly related to where we each chose to live.



And folks living in Hawaii have a lower chance of seeing snow in
January than those living in Alaska. And guess what, the risks are
directly related to where we choose to live.

So what does snow have to do with insurance? Nothing, just like
insurance has nothing to do with taxes.

BTW: How many terrorist attacks were there in New York last year?
How many hurricanes were there in Florida last year? How about 2004?
2003? 2002?
How many Cat 3 or greater Hurricanes hit Naples since 1960? One. How
many terrorist attacks occurred in NY in the same 46 year period?



I did not know that we have limited our discussion to Cat 3+ hurricanes
only.

Here is a very interesting link for you Doc:

http://www.collierem.org/never.htm
===================================
In 1960, when hurricane 'Donna' struck, there were approximately 15,500
people living full time in Collier County. Today there is nearly 300,000
residents, most of whom have never been through a severe land-falling
hurricane, even though they lived through the 2004 hurricane season. We
have come to southwest Florida from all over the country and around the
world, and we would all like to believe that we are safe from the
ravages of hurricanes.
After all, how often is Collier County struck by tropical weather?
Records kept by the National Weather Service date back to 1851, or 153
years as this is written. In that time 73 tropical storms and hurricanes
have passed within 75 nautical miles of Naples, or one nearly every 2.1
years! Of those, 40 have been tropical storms with winds of less than 74
miles per hour. That also means at 33 have been hurricanes, or one about
every 4.7 years!

Ah, but they're all small hurricanes aren't they? Let's take a look:

a.. Sixteen major hurricanes in 153 years averages out to 1 every 7.7
years!
b.. 14 have been category three, one has been category four and one was
a category five.
Now THAT Was a Close Call!
(Center Less Than 20 Miles From Naples)

Tropical Storms: 1861, 1878, 1891, 1899, 1907, 1932, 1936, 1945, 1953,
1969 (Jenny),
1985 (Bob), 1994 (Gordon), 1998 (Mitch), 1999 (Harvey)

Hurricanes: 1870,1894, 1910, 1926, 1929, 1941, 1947, 1960 (Donna)
('Andrew' passed 35 miles south of Naples in 1992)



--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Hang on To Your Hat!
Winds Greater Than 96 mph (Category 2+) within 75 nautical miles of
Naples

1865 (100 mph), 1873 (115 mph), 1876 (104 mph), 1888 (113 mph), 1894
(104 mph), 1910 (126 mph), 1924 (104mph), 1926 (130 mph.), 1929 (115
mph), 1935 (146 mph.), 1941 (121mph), 1944 (127 mph), 1945 (127 mph),
1946 (113 mph), 1947 (147 mph), 1948 (115 mph), 1950 (115 mph), 1950
(107 mph) 1960 (Donna, 129 mph), 1964 (Isbell, 115 mph), 1965 (Betsy,
124 mph), 1966 (Alma, 120 mph), 1992 (144 mph, Andrew's winds were less
than 95 mph at Naples, but higher on Marco Island and in Everglades
City), 2004 (Charley, 145mph), & 2004 (Jeanne, 120 mph)

================



And you were saying? ;-)
My boat made it through all of them unscathed...which is why I stated
"Cat 3 or higher". It would take a storm stronger than Charley to damage
my boat...and that hasn't happened in 46 years.



And my house has never caught on fire either.

Why were all the boats damaged in previous tropical storms and cat 1 and 2
hurricanes? Are you some sort of magician that you can make a statement
that it would take a storm stronger than Charley to damage your boat?

All it takes is a tree or large chunk of building falling on the boat, or
someone else's boat (if it is in the water) blowing into it.

Did you read the article I posted a link to?

I haven't had time yet.

I wasn't looking for sympathy with this thread. In fact, I was playing
Devil's advocate. I live in an area that deserves to have higher insurance
rates on boats. But the fact that all of the boat insurance companies
completely pulled out of the state needs to be addressed.

As long as each state sets their own insurance regulations, companies will
continue to cherry-pick the states that it's cheapest and easiest to do
business in. But considering all of the special treatment that insurance
companies get via Congress (ie--McCarron-Ferguson Act, special tax
consideration, etc), they ought to be regulated to some degree at the
Federal level. And they should be forced to offer coverage no matter which
state someone lives in (albeit at a higher rate if warranted).



NYOB,

I agree, rates should be risk adjusted, but they should not be allowed
to just pull out of a market.....snip

Why not? It happens all the time.

JohnH wrote:
On 24 Aug 2006 07:41:02 -0700, "basskisser" wrote:


JohnH wrote:
On 24 Aug 2006 07:13:21 -0700, "basskisser" wrote:


Gene wrote:
On Thu, 24 Aug 2006 06:40:35 GMT, "Calif Bill"
wrote:

Gas may also do it. Took the boat out today, and filled up at $2.92 gallon
at Costco and put $99 in the boat. $3.19 for diesel and $75 for that this
evening.


You may want to look a bit further for the real problem:

as of yesterday, 87 octane at Sam's and Costco was $2.61
--


Anybody notice that as of today, the amount of oil coming out of Prudoe
Bay has been cut in half AGAIN? Sure seems a tad odd that when the
price per barrel starts coming down, a new problem arises to push it
back up!

http://edition.cnn.com/2006/BUSINESS...p.pipeline.ap/

Well, I wasn't going boating this week anyway. By next week it'll be fixed
and the price will be back to normal.
--
So, how come you're not out there fishing??

Spending too much time trying to learn how to hit a golf ball. I'll be
moving the boat down to the Rappahannock River in a couple weeks so the
kids can use it also.
--
******************************************
***** Hope your day is great! *****
******************************************

John

I'm hauling to Lake Hartwell this weekend for some striper fishing.

NOYB wrote:
"basskisser" wrote in message
oups.com...

Harry Krause wrote:
NOYB wrote:
"Shortwave Sportfishing" wrote in message
...
On Wed, 23 Aug 2006 20:26:02 GMT, "NOYB" wrote:

It's insurance! Or lack thereof. In Florida, it is now impossible
to
insure a boat over 30' long valued at more than $100,000 if the boat:

a) doesn't have a trailer

and/or

b) is more than 5 model years old (2001 and older are uninsurable if
they're
over 30 feet and valued at more than $100,000)
Hmmmm. So here's a scenario for you.

I have a custom made trailer for my Contender which is used to haul
the boat twice a season for a wash and wax. It also doubles as a
winter storage trailer - just put it on, park it and shrink wrap.

The only problem is if I wanted to take it from the yard, I would need
a special permit because it's over-width for the highway. So I
couldn't just pick it up and move it away from the coast if a storm
approached or whatever.

If that boat was a, say 2000, would it be covered?

No. A 2000 wouldn't be covered unless it was valued under $100,000. A
2002
would be covered, but the premium for a $100,000 boat is nearly
$5000/year.


I have no place to store a trailer unless I'm willing to pay $150/month
storage fee. Even if I pulled the boat, where would I put it? And I'd
need
something that could tow upwards of 12,000 lbs that is 10'6" wide.





No room on the lot of that million dollar house to stash a boat trailer?

Incredible.

Bwaaahaa!! He got hosed in the housing bubble. Along with an interest
only loan!

My house appraised in July, 2005 for 50% more than I paid for it in March,
2004. The house next to mine is the same size, but sits on the end of a
canal (less desirable) and is listed for $1.59 million. They won't get
that, but if they lowered it to $1.2 million it would sell tomorrow.

But, what does it appraise for NOW as opposed to what you've paid for
it, and how much of that has been soaked up by the interest rate you're
paying??