|
Post by Decatur on Nov 9, 2006 15:17:24 GMT -5
Basecamp doesnt make any money if they dont lease the ground...so if they are leasing the land and making the money the rates must not be too high. you guys live in the land of give "ME" What can "I" get given to "ME" But maybe they could lease them all if they lowered their prices. They are just using 1 lease to cover the cost of 3. I would be all for it if it was reasonably priced. I am just against the idea of the landowner only getting a token amount and BCL getting rich.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Nov 10, 2006 5:47:45 GMT -5
Insirance runs anywhere from 14 cents an acre to as much as 25 cents an acre, depending ont he number of acres. Most companies have a $250 minimum before they will issue a policy. That adds to the cost, but the landowners like it. If the landowner allowed FREE access, they wouldnt need the insurance....right? Don't we have state laws that protect landowners from liability if they allow FREE access to hunters? Not trying to say do away with leasing, just making a point that landowners that allow free access are protected by state law and don't need insurance Everybody needs insurance, especially when you have millions of dollars at stake. Someone gets hurt or killed on your property, you will get sued by someone. Do you want to take that chance for 15 to 20 cents an acre???
|
|
|
Post by indianahick on Nov 11, 2006 17:19:34 GMT -5
Why isn't leasing hunting ground like leasing a house or apartment. If you get hurt there you can not sue the owner because since you lease it its your problem? If I lease a plot of land from a farmer then the farmer is not liable I should be. Is this the type of insurance that you are alludeing to. If so them everyone that pays on the lease is the only ones liable. If you are selling insurance for the farmer and charging hime for it in your lease rate then you are essentially robbing the farmer. As the person doing the leasing it should be up to me to carry any insurance that I feel is necessary. And I sure as hell would not be buying it from a land lease agent and his designated insurance carrier.
|
|
|
Post by shinglemonkey on Nov 11, 2006 18:35:17 GMT -5
When I lease houses to people I still have insurance on them to protect me from the renters and my investment in the house.
|
|
|
Post by hunter480 on Nov 11, 2006 19:37:47 GMT -5
Bottom line on this thread is-
by a majority, the guys here think leasing BY the landowner is ok, (since it`s gonna happen anyway), but not fond at all of outfits such as BCL getting in the middle and driving the cost of leasing up, AND taking profit that SHOULD be the landowners away from them.
Only one`s who dissent are the guys on here who are part of "one of those" outfits.
I`ve already contacted the IDNR with my concerns about these middleman outfits and my thoughts that the DNR could facilitate the getting together the landowner and hunter, but who knows. Kyle didn`t want to hear my ideas before, maybe he won`t this time.
Maybe I`ll start a not-for-profit outfit myself to hook up landowners and hunters.
|
|
|
Post by cambygsp on Nov 12, 2006 2:24:24 GMT -5
If you don't like outfits like BaseCamp, don't do business with them.
You could take out an ad in the local paper and then go inspect the property when the landowner responds to your ad.
You could also check with the County Clerk and see who is late on their property taxes, then contact the late landowner and attempt to work a deal.
Any landowner that does lease their land, and don't require you to have renters isurance is plumb crazy!
BaseCamp provides a service, they set their pric, f you don't want to pay their price, don't use their service!!!!!
|
|
|
Post by paul3 on Nov 13, 2006 12:42:10 GMT -5
Bottom line on this thread is- by a majority, the guys here think leasing BY the landowner is ok, (since it`s gonna happen anyway), but not fond at all of outfits such as BCL getting in the middle and driving the cost of leasing up, AND taking profit that SHOULD be the landowners away from them. Only one`s who dissent are the guys on here who are part of "one of those" outfits. I`ve already contacted the IDNR with my concerns about these middleman outfits and my thoughts that the DNR could facilitate the getting together the landowner and hunter, but who knows. Kyle didn`t want to hear my ideas before, maybe he won`t this time. Maybe I`ll start a not-for-profit outfit myself to hook up landowners and hunters. I,ll sign on free. I,m disabled and have all day to help out.
|
|
|
Post by LawrenceCoBowhunter on Nov 13, 2006 13:45:36 GMT -5
|
|
|
Post by Hawkeye on Nov 13, 2006 13:53:10 GMT -5
Bottom line on this thread i Only one`s who dissent are the guys on here who are part of "one of those" outfits. Maybe I`ll start a not-for-profit outfit myself to hook up landowners and hunters. That would be great, sign me up.
|
|
|
Post by steiny on Nov 13, 2006 19:02:29 GMT -5
QUOTE - "Bottom line on this thread is- by a majority, the guys here think leasing BY the landowner is ok, (since it`s gonna happen anyway), but not fond at all of outfits such as BCL getting in the middle and driving the cost of leasing up, AND taking profit that SHOULD be the landowners away from them." "Only one`s who dissent are the guys on here who are part of "one of those" outfits."
........ I have nothing to do with any of these outfits and don't lease presently. I do however strongly disagree with your stance against the leasing companies and the whole leasing thing in general. It's perfect;y legal, above board, free market business. Like Camby said .... If you don't like them, don't do business with them. I would further disagree with the statement saying the majority feel as you do. Based on this thread, there are plenty who disagree with your notions.
|
|
|
Post by indianahick on Nov 13, 2006 21:55:11 GMT -5
steiny- Do not really mean to sound disrespectful to you and your ideas. Now we all know that camby is a small business owner/operator, shinglemonkey may be also; run his own roofing business. And other than the pen/outfitters no one here is really against small business people. As for basecamp I have looked at some of their properteis. There is nothing I would love more than to have 20-25 wooded acres of my own where I could set up my camper and spend time hunting with my hunting buddy and son, but I can not come close to being able to afford those type of properties, and I am not going to pay 1-2 k to hunt a fence row. I just feel that they are unreasonably priced. So why are you always acting like someone is trying to shut you down or take something away from you. To me you are kind of like the guy in the bible that was given the least amount of money and then hid it because he was afraid that if he did anything with it he would loose it. Hey the democrats won the election they are going to be top dog, all is safe now.
|
|
|
Post by steiny on Nov 14, 2006 18:37:06 GMT -5
So you can't afford something .... big deal.
I can't afford a new lakefront vacation home either. So should somebody step in beat up the realtors, landowners, etc. because some think lake front recreation homes are "unreasonably priced"?
The anti Basecamp argument follows the exact same reasoning.
This is basic, barnyard economics. If something is being offered at a fair price then the seller will be able to sell it. When the price becomes too high or unreasonable, then he no longer will have any buyers.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Nov 14, 2006 19:20:15 GMT -5
If Basecamp is too high on a property, they don't lease it. I've been watching one Illinois tract for two years now waiting for it to come down some, but it's held firm...still available to. Isn't that how business works??
|
|
|
Post by LawrenceCoBowhunter on Nov 14, 2006 19:34:36 GMT -5
There is this other property out by some other ground I hunt,It has a Basecamp Leasing Sign up,but I have never seen anyone hunt on it..
|
|
|
Post by Hawkeye on Nov 14, 2006 20:01:55 GMT -5
So you can't afford something .... big deal. This is basic, barnyard economics. If something is being offered at a fair price then the seller will be able to sell it. When the price becomes too high or unreasonable, then he no longer will have any buyers. Well maybe not, if gasoline were $15.00 a gallon, we would still buy it. If Cigarettes were $5.00 per pack ,many would gripe ,but buy. If you own all the land,or lease it, you can set your price, if no other land is available. people will then be forced to pay your price.
|
|
|
Post by shinglemonkey on Nov 14, 2006 21:45:39 GMT -5
So you can't afford something .... big deal. This is basic, barnyard economics. If something is being offered at a fair price then the seller will be able to sell it. When the price becomes too high or unreasonable, then he no longer will have any buyers. Well maybe not, if gasoline were $15.00 a gallon, we would still buy it. If Cigarettes were $5.00 per pack ,many would gripe ,but buy. If you own all the land,or lease it, you can set your price, if no other land is available. people will then be forced to pay your price. Your logic only works if you need to hunt to live.
|
|
|
Post by paul3 on Nov 15, 2006 8:38:56 GMT -5
Hunters do need to hunt to live!
|
|
|
Post by indianahick on Nov 15, 2006 16:22:29 GMT -5
Paul- Hunters hunt because they want to there is no longer a true need to hunt to feed your family, it is a desire. If pelosi and the rest of the gun grabbing demos get thier way the only thing you will have to hunt with is archery equipment anyway. If you do not think this can or could happen take a quick look at Mass. (teddy the drunk kennedy's) home state. They are talking about outlawing air rifles and bb guns.
|
|
|
Post by dbd870 on Nov 16, 2006 5:11:13 GMT -5
I assumed he was being humorous.
|
|
|
Post by cambygsp on Nov 16, 2006 5:11:46 GMT -5
If Basecamp is too high on a property, they don't lease it. I've been watching one Illinois tract for two years now waiting for it to come down some, but it's held firm...still available to. Isn't that how business works?? I've been watching a listing here in Indiana, you sometimes wonder if Basecamp has misled the landowner into beleiving that the land is worth the amount they have it listed for. Do you know if you can make an offer that is less than the listed price?
|
|