Detroit plot sells for $1 per sq in

**davewindsor** · January-15-10, 03:58 PM

Originally Posted by n7hn

is it possible he is selling it off with the multiple deeds like a co-op and not a condo? I mean co-op's have multiple owners and its not illegal........

Yes, but then he would need city approval to rezone it for co-op, condo, or whatever would allow multiple owners.

**cub** · January-15-10, 05:19 PM

The [[deeds) arent real. Who in there right mind would think that they are owning a square inch of a vacant lot. Can you say "Making a Statement" or "Art Project".
It really has people talking so its doing its job.

**gnome** · January-15-10, 05:57 PM

Cub, it seems you have some connection either with this guy or his project, fine. That gives him some credibility in my eyes. But can you tell me what he is going to do with his virtual partners or the property?

Maybe I'm jealous, maybe daft, maybe my reading comprehension has dropped off the table, but besides giving the guy a dollar I just can't figure out what his plan is.

leave it empty? put a web cam on it? mow it? plant it? build on it? host virtual parties on it?

I have spoken to the guy, I have read his web site, I have seen his post here; but for the life of me I so not understand what it is all about. A virtual art project sounds to me like a project that is almost an art project.

oh, one last thing, where is this place that almost exists? does it have a real address? Can I drive by and shovel off the snow on my share of the property?

**MJCMEX** · January-15-10, 06:21 PM

This so called "Loveland" project really bothers me.

I think that these flightly kinds of "art projects" "conceptual pieces" and "lovefests" cause people to expect nothing but flakiness and filler from artsists, musicians etc.

If I write a real piece of music there is a real score written and a real recording of that score made in order to demostrate the work. That is art.

I am waiting to know what this is. Perhaps Jerry will tell us and perhaps not.

I would also suggest the following to those who would argue that this kind of concept art is "mind expanding":

There is a clear link between John Cage and Yoke Ono. He may have been a unique genius of concept music but his concepts led directly to her self assured tone deaf caterwauling.

To quote a much more profound artist

Sometimes artists need to produce "more matter and less art."

**n7hn** · January-15-10, 06:24 PM

well, I dont see the people selling the right to name a star being sued. Im sure whatever process they have in place does not offically name the star after you, and who is to say stars arent named twice, or if your star really even exists......

I guess Im struggling with trying to understand why this guy has offended so many doing this,,,, he isnt really promising anything. i did see the address or at least the corner in the article. So get your soup spoon and go shovel your plot....... Its the one with the weed growing on it, please try and keep the neighborhood up and looking presentable.....

**MJCMEX** · January-15-10, 06:52 PM

Originally Posted by n7hn

well, I dont see the people selling the right to name a star being sued. Im sure whatever process they have in place does not offically name the star after you, and who is to say stars arent named twice, or if your star really even exists......

I guess Im struggling with trying to understand why this guy has offended so many doing this,,,, he isnt really promising anything. i did see the address or at least the corner in the article. So get your soup spoon and go shovel your plot....... Its the one with the weed growing on it, please try and keep the neighborhood up and looking presentable.....

Perhaps people are upset because they want real answers for a very real problem.
And ...there are real answers.

I was visting the website of the Magic Johnson Foundation.
Magic has really worked to bring more business opportunities to L.A.
Magic is if I am not mistaken from Michigan originally.

Why doesn't someone [[Mayor Bing perhaps, he is a former NBA star) write a grant to Magic's foundation in orer to buy up the nasty, neglected lots in the bad parts of town?

That would be a practical step.

This "Loveland" thing I think seems way too conceptual and impractical for real people who are living with Detroit's problems.

**davewindsor** · January-15-10, 06:53 PM

Originally Posted by cub

The [[deeds) arent real. Who in there right mind would think that they are owning a square inch of a vacant lot. Can you say "Making a Statement" or "Art Project".

The fraudster says it right here: http://www.kickstarter.com/projects/...eland-round-10 "For each dollar you inchvest in this project you'll get an honest to gosh real square inch of land in Detroit, MI as part of Plymouth, the first LOVELAND colony of 10,000 square inches: http://makeloveland.com/inchvestors. Claim at least 12 inches and receive a letter with a one square inch golden deed and magnifying glass in the mail. So far we're at around 7,500 inches from more than 400 inchvestors."

He posts it on his website. Sounds real to me. This is not art. This is fraud!

Route29 · January-15-10, 07:02 PM

Originally Posted by MJCMEX

Wait a minute. What the hell is this?

I bought a REAL HOUSE in an ok neighborghood for 8K. I am moving here, and therefore bringing money to Detroit. Some of the people on this forum have ridiculed me for that, and yet this guy's fake "sale" of Detroit property is actually being treated by some as legitimate?

There are real plots of land, whole properties, in Detroit that can be purchased for $1 because the banks want to liquidate the properties. These are those same burned down houses that they show on youtube etc.

A real "love purchase" [[easy stomach don't turn over here) would be to get a bunch of people together, form a 501c3, get a grant for the tax burdens and buy a bunch of these properties for a buck each.

Then knock the burned down debris to the ground, haul it away and make parks, or parking lots, or build new houses on the land...there are any number of things that could be done.

This just insults the intelligence of anyone who cares about the city.

You summed up my feelings exactly.

I think art projects, installations, gardens, things like that, have a lot to add to this City. However, this guy doesn't appear to be accomplishing anything, except enriching himself.

Even if his motives are altruistic, he isn't actually doing anything. If I sat around and didn't get anything accomplished all day, I would lose my job.

I think the Adopt-a-Star analogy is a good one. Except I think there is a darker side to this, call me cynical. I have an unpleasant feeling it is simply a conversation piece for jerks around the world "I have a piece of property in the hood!" "I own some blighted land in Detroit" "I'm an investor in Detroit real estate!"*snicker* The jokes are old and tired.

All fun and games unless you actually have your life invested here and care about this place, and not just a dollar.

"Get's people talking". Well, talk is cheap. People have been talking [[both shit and some really important stuff - try Origins of the Urban Crisis by Sugrue for important stuff) about Detroit for years. Pull up your sleeves, assholes, or make a big fat check out to one of Detroit's great institutions or charities.

If one cares about "art" so much, the DIA or Michigan Opera Theatre or the Detroit Symphony Orchestra are in a world of hurt - and deserve the money way more than this asshole. The least he could do is give his PROFITS to someplace like them. The way I think about it [[artistically, at that) these places have the power to transform the city into a more creative, beautiful place, and challenge its people to look at their worlds differently. Wouldn't it be better to be listed in the Annual Report of one of these venerable institutions instead or having some counterfiet deed from Yuppie Half-beard?

Retroit · January-15-10, 07:03 PM

Maybe because $1 seems like such a trivial amount, people may think that this is all good, clean fun. But suppose Mr. P. sold property at a more reasonable price, let's say $100 or $1000, would it then be considered fraud? Of course it would [[assuming they are not given some form of legitimate ownership). Well, the fact that he is selling it for only $1 is immaterial. A sale is a sale. He can be just as easily sued by 1,000,000 people who each bought $1 shares as by 1000 people who each bought $1000 shares.

...or be convicted of fraud by the government.

Bearinabox · January-15-10, 07:26 PM

Originally Posted by Route29

You summed up my feelings exactly.

I think art projects, installations, gardens, things like that, have a lot to add to this City. However, this guy doesn't appear to be accomplishing anything, except enriching himself.

Does it have to accomplish something? Does every action performed within the city of Detroit have some obligation to make the city better? If he's just pursuing something he thinks is interesting, and getting other people who find it interesting to buy into it, and it really doesn't have all that much to do with Detroit except that this is where he happens to be doing it, is there anything really wrong with that? I guess I don't get why everyone is assuming this is about helping Detroit. Admittedly, his motivations aren't entirely clear to me, but he spent most of that interview he linked to above talking about online virtual communities and the like.

Even if his motives are altruistic, he isn't actually doing anything. If I sat around and didn't get anything accomplished all day, I would lose my job.

It sounds like this is his job. Maybe it's not the most productive job in the world, but people seem to be willing to pay him to do it.

I think the Adopt-a-Star analogy is a good one. Except I think there is a darker side to this, call me cynical. I have an unpleasant feeling it is simply a conversation piece for jerks around the world "I have a piece of property in the hood!" "I own some blighted land in Detroit" "I'm an investor in Detroit real estate!"*snicker* The jokes are old and tired.

It doesn't sound like that is his intent with this project, but I agree that the potential is there for it to turn into that. Still, if your skin is thick enough to live here, it should be thick enough to put up with some stupid jokes.

All fun and games unless you actually have your life invested here and care about this place, and not just a dollar.

It's good that you care about this place. I care about it, too. But I don't see how Mr. Paffendorf or his "investors" have any effect on my relationship to the city at all. If this guy didn't exist, the lot would just sit empty. If he puts something on it, there will be something there. Either way, the fate of one random lot in the middle of the lower-east-side urban prairie is not something with which I'm particularly concerned.

"Get's people talking". Well, talk is cheap. People have been talking [[both shit and some really important stuff - try Origins of the Urban Crisis by Sugrue for important stuff) about Detroit for years. Pull up your sleeves, assholes, or make a big fat check out to one of Detroit's great institutions or charities.

Why is this particular group of people any more obligated to do such a thing than anyone else? Plenty of people around the world haven't ever given a "big fat check" to a Detroit charity. Are they all assholes?

If one cares about "art" so much, the DIA or Michigan Opera Theatre or the Detroit Symphony Orchestra are in a world of hurt - and deserve the money way more than this asshole. The least he could do is give his PROFITS to someplace like them. The way I think about it [[artistically, at that) these places have the power to transform the city into a more creative, beautiful place, and challenge its people to look at their worlds differently. Wouldn't it be better to be listed in the Annual Report of one of these venerable institutions instead or having some counterfiet deed from Yuppie Half-beard?

Maybe so, but now you're telling people how they should spend their money. If it's their money, and they would rather support this project than the DIA or the MOT, isn't it their prerogative to make that choice?

**MJCMEX** · January-15-10, 10:13 PM

Route 29 you just touched upon something esle that could be done with those lots:

They could be purchased by patrons of the Detroit Symphony and Michigan Opera.

Then they could be given to these 501c3 organizations. The organizations could in turn fix up the properties, perhaps have the really bad stuff re-zoned [[the whole parking lot or park concept) and sell them off to private parties, land developers, etc. at a profit.

[[Yes, not for profit companies can make a profit. They just need to roll the surplus into next year's budget so that every penny has a final purpose)

I have no idea what Bearinabox is trying to say or trying to prove. Surely he must understand that people who care about Detorit want to see some practical solutions, not some nauseating touchy feely "Loveland" nonsense.

If I had been a Detroit resident all of this time instead of a new member of the community I would be ten times more annoyed than I am.

I repeat: This insults the intelligence of people who really care about seeing Detroit recover.

smudge pot · January-15-10, 11:37 PM

Originally Posted by MJCMEX

If I had been a Detroit resident all of this time instead of a new member of the community I would be ten times more annoyed than I am.

If you grew up here you'd think it was funny. Anyhow, don't let me crap on your "zeal of the convert" phase. Welcome.

**cub** · January-15-10, 11:44 PM

Gnome, I have no direct connection to Jerry except for talking to people from around the country who let me know he gives them info on the GSCC, DetroitLives, The Garden Resource Program and so on and so forth. My ? to him was "what the hell is this suppose to do for Detroit?"
He explained to me the concept or virtual idea. It will be setup where a donor, cause technically thats all it is [[ if I am misunderstanding he will let me know) is a donation, you will be able to virtually do something with the inch[[es) you buy. Similar to an application on Facebook. On Farmville for instance you can PURCHASE credits to buy plants, animals, tractors, its virtual.
A deed has to be registered by the county to be legal and it also has to be written a certain way and signed in front of a notary. So how in the world could it be fraud. Maybe I will suggest he puts a big disclaimer so people wont take things the wrong way.

**cman710** · January-15-10, 11:56 PM

Cub, as usual, you show lots of common sense. While I am not a member of the Michigan bar, I am very confident that this is not fraud, so long as he is clear that what he is selling is a virtual piece of land.

In order for there to be a fraud, there must be a mistatement or misrepresentation about a material fact. Also, the person who the fraud is committed against can't know that the misrepresentation is false. Here, so long as Jerry is telling people that this is virtual, there is no way that it could be construed as a fraud. And even if he did not tell people explicitly, it would most likely not be fraud if it was clear that he was not purporting to sell an actual, legal deed. To be on the safe side, it would not hurt for him to have a disclaimer.

**MJCMEX** · January-16-10, 12:22 AM

Originally Posted by smudge pot

If you grew up here you'd think it was funny. Anyhow, don't let me crap on your "zeal of the convert" phase. Welcome.

That's OK. I am sure I will be complaining bitterly about something regarding Detroit by this summer. Most likely it will be basketball related

I'll be in town next week and I will try to be less zealous.

....actually in my case it is nothing more than the zeal of a property owner.

MichMatters · January-16-10, 01:59 AM

Could you not bold everything you post?

**MJCMEX** · January-16-10, 02:52 AM

Originally Posted by MichMatters

Could you not bold everything you post?

Sorry,

I do it because it's easier for me to read.

Bearinabox · January-16-10, 06:28 AM

Originally Posted by MJCMEX

I have no idea what Bearinabox is trying to say or trying to prove. Surely he must understand that people who care about Detorit want to see some practical solutions, not some nauseating touchy feely "Loveland" nonsense.

Of course I want to see some practical solutions, but I don't expect Jerry Paffendorf to provide them. He's not, as far as I can tell, presenting himself as trying to solve the city's problems, so I think it's unfair to expect that of him. Not everybody is suited to the task of making Detroit better, and the simple fact of living and working here doesn't obligate anyone to be actively involved in the process. If you condemn Jerry Paffendorf for not improving Detroit, you also have to condemn every shop-rat or bus driver who redid his kitchen instead of donating to the DIA.

**davewindsor** · January-16-10, 08:37 AM

Originally Posted by cub

A deed has to be registered by the county to be legal and it also has to be written a certain way and signed in front of a notary. So how in the world could it be fraud. Maybe I will suggest he puts a big disclaimer so people wont take things the wrong way.

Yes, that's the procedure. But, a layperson is not a lawyer. A layperson cannot reasonably be expected to know what a deed is supposed to look like or what procedure it's supposed to go through. Not everyone has owned property in their lifetime. How would a layperson know it needs to be signed by a notary if he's not a lawyer?

Also, when I bought property, I never went to a courthouse to file and register anything. I never saw a notary sign anything. I just showed up to the lawyer's office, cut a cheque, signed a couple things and he gave me a bunch of papers and that was it. In a few minutes, I was in and out of there. The lawyer didn't tell me what the procedure was to make it legal. I just assumed he did it right because the papers said so and that was it. If it's an agent handling the transaction instead of a lawyer like a paralegal or title company, etc., I can reasonably assume they did it right too if I see it written in the documents.

Yet, he's misrepresenting something in way that a layperson can think it's a deed [[which he's doing on his website) so the person who buys it can now claim he owns an inch of real land in Detroit. Let the buyer beware? Bullsh*t. He's selling phony deeds for money. It's fraud.

**michigansheik** · January-16-10, 09:30 AM

recently met mr. loveland, he claimed the money [[or at least part of) would be used to keep the lot clean and trimmed and i believe he was planning a donation of the land, while paying the taxes in the mean time. I told him to patent his idea. I hear both sides, is this is art or a business deal or both, but the bottom line is an empty lot gets maintained [[if the owner lives up to his word) which is a positive and Detroit gets tax $ [[again if the owner lives up to his word) and hopefully he won't donate to a church so the lot stays on the tax rolls, a positive. Repeat this thousands of times and enjoy.

I have been toying with the idea of establishing a charitable trust [[take that Jim Cramer) that will purchase burned out/dilapidated home sites, pay for the demolition, then turn them back into green land and finally donate [[or sell for $500) to the neighbors. I think there are lots of Detroiters who would make a donation for a cause like that. Thoughts?

**MJCMEX** · January-16-10, 11:42 AM

Originally Posted by Bearinabox

Of course I want to see some practical solutions, but I don't expect Jerry Paffendorf to provide them. He's not, as far as I can tell, presenting himself as trying to solve the city's problems, so I think it's unfair to expect that of him. Not everybody is suited to the task of making Detroit better, and the simple fact of living and working here doesn't obligate anyone to be actively involved in the process. If you condemn Jerry Paffendorf for not improving Detroit, you also have to condemn every shop-rat or bus driver who redid his kitchen instead of donating to the DIA.

The bus driver and shop rat are not purchasing property and then claiming to raise funds for it to produce a "work of art" that will also help the community.

I don't require that everyone who lives in Detroit take active role in rescuing the city. Mr Paffendorf however has put himself in the position of being scrutinized for the good his efforts will bring.

The post directly above by Mighigansheik is evidence of that because Mr. Sheik thinks that the idea has merit, assuming that Mr. Paffendorf will keep his promise.

Bearinabox · January-16-10, 01:40 PM

Originally Posted by MJCMEX

The bus driver and shop rat are not purchasing property and then claiming to raise funds for it to produce a "work of art" that will also help the community.

Granted, his interview is rather ambiguous on this point, but I can't remember him specifically saying that his primary goal is to help the community. He's not Friends of Belle Isle or the Greening of Detroit. He's more like Tyree Guyton, or that lady on Hubbell and 7 Mile who built those junk sculptures along her fence. I doubt Mr. Paffendorf's project will make the surrounding area any less of a shithole, but it might just help break the monotony of empty lots and broken streets along that stretch of Vernor by creating something weird and interesting that people can talk about. It won't improve the city, per se, but neither is it out of line with any of the other weirdness erected around town by ordinary citizens. Things like this are a natural part of the culture of a place where land is next to worthless, and I guess I just don't see the point of getting so angry about it. There are plenty of worthier targets for your anger around here.

I don't require that everyone who lives in Detroit take active role in rescuing the city. Mr Paffendorf however has put himself in the position of being scrutinized for the good his efforts will bring.

I don't see how. He's not accepting grants or tax money for improving the city, and his "investors" are mostly out-of-towners intrigued by the project itself, not people specifically committed to the goal of helping Detroit. If you don't like his idea, don't give him any money. Simple as that.

The post directly above by Mighigansheik is evidence of that because Mr. Sheik thinks that the idea has merit, assuming that Mr. Paffendorf will keep his promise.

Just because Michigansheik thinks something like this has the potential to improve the city doesn't mean it should be judged alongside projects with that specific goal.

**cub** · January-16-10, 02:00 PM

Davewindsor,
Ok then....no one is cutting a check to a lawyer, no one is signing anything. So where is the fraud. You are being too technical.

Retroit · January-16-10, 02:23 PM

Originally Posted by cman710

...I am very confident that this is not fraud, so long as he is clear that what he is selling is a virtual piece of land.

In order for there to be a fraud, there must be a mistatement or misrepresentation about a material fact. Also, the person who the fraud is committed against can't know that the misrepresentation is false. Here, so long as Jerry is telling people that this is virtual, there is no way that it could be construed as a fraud. And even if he did not tell people explicitly, it would most likely not be fraud if it was clear that he was not purporting to sell an actual, legal deed. To be on the safe side, it would not hurt for him to have a disclaimer.

Jerry Paffendorf: "Inchvestors will get an actual inch for every dollar they inchvest once the grid exists for reals, and forever be recognized as Founding Forefathers and Foremothers of this tiny new city or country or whatever it becomes. When you get your inches you'll be able to create on them physically [[in person -- or by asking someone local) or virtually [[over the internet), like a real life Sim City."

emphasis added
http://www.kickstarter.com/projects/...-inches-in-det

In other words, you will actually receive the property and you can virtually create on them.

**MJCMEX** · January-16-10, 03:17 PM

Bearinabox I am offended on two levels:

1. As an artist. I am offended by so called concept art based not upon craft, artistic integrity, and profound thought, but upon the trendy, fashionable, facile and cheap.

That is my right as an artist. I don't expect you to understand that element of why I am annoyed by the Loveland project.

2. As a real investor in Detroit's recovery.

As I said in my first post at this thread I was attacked and ridiculed by some at this forum simply for choosing to buy a house in Detroit for the specific purpose of renovating it and living in it.
Meanwhile people such as you are making excuses for a guy who is exploiting the city for his own mediocre artistic statement.

What in the hell do you suppose the title "Loveland" implies? The very title of his project submits that his project is an act of "love". Who then would be the supposed target of this love? Ann Arbor? The Detroit Lions? His trendy artsy friends?

No, the clear implication is that he is trying to bring "love" to a small portion of the Detroit Ghetto.

He therefore has an obligation to demonstrate that he has indeed brought "love" to the area, or his entire concept is a fraud, not on the legal level as some suggest but on an artistic and practical level.

If you disagree, fine, you disagree. I argue however that your point-by-point analysis of my last post is very weak. You have done nothing to disprove that Mr Paffendorf needs to be held accountable both on an artistic level, and from a level of what kinds of practical and sociological impact his project will make.

If he really has little to say artistically, and little to offer in terms of assistance to Detroit he is bringing criticism upon himself by promoting his project without being able to demonstrate what that project really has to offer.

I am a person who loves modernist art. I have Salavor Dali prints, recordings of music by Berg, Boulez, Messian etc...I am not one to just reject new art because it is strange or different...

But as I said above I can tell the difference between John Cage and Yoko Ono.