If I buy a Pacaso home, will I eventually come to regret it within 2 years of purchase?

Plus

Ṁ360

resolved Aug 15

Resolved

N/A

ALL

I am considering buying 1/8 of a house through the unicorn startup Pacaso. Roughly, I buy 1/8 of an LLC and the LLC owns the home. After the sale, Pacaso does not own any part of the home, but Pacaso fully manages the home. If I don't buy through Pacaso, the claim resolves to 50% (I wish I could create a conditional claim, but since I can't, I will settle the claim at 50% if I don't buy.) If I do buy through Pacaso AND I come to regret the decision within two years of my purchase, the claim resolves to Yes. Some ways that I might come to regret the decision include: Pacaso goes bankrupt; one or more co-owners makes my life miserable; Pacaso does not maintain the property well; I repeatedly cannot reserve many of the dates that I want; I am not able to sell my share for more the 0.9 of my investment; through some LLC shenanigans, I lose my ownership stake; some major change in the house that I think is essential does not happen because I get outvoted; my annual fees go up by 1.5 or more; the house is severely damaged; the jurisdiction where I am buying bans Pacaso-like sales; and any number of other unknowns and unknown unknowns. If I do buy through Pacaso AND I do not come to regret the decision before two years after my purchase, then the claim resolves to No. Jun 4, 9:40am: I learned from @Jack in the comments that I can resolve the claim as N/A. So I intend to resolve the claim as N/A if I DO NOT buy a Pacaso home, instead of resolving the claim at 50% as I stated above. In this way, the claim is conditional. If I don't buy a Pacaso home, everyone gets back exactly the money that they put in. If I DO buy a Pacaso home, then the claim will resolve as Yes if I come to regret it within 2 years, and No if I don't regret it.

This question is managed and resolved by Manifold.

#Ancient Markets

#Personal Decision in Hindsight

Get

1,000

and

3.00

10 Comments

9 Holders

192 Trades

Sort by:

I would like to resolve this market to N/A. I did not buy a Pacaso home. There is still a chance that I might, but the chance is low, and I think it's better to resolve the market than let it stay open indefinitely. But I am open to discussion. I only see options to resolve it to "YES", "NO", or "PARTIAL %". How do I resolve this to "N/A"? @mods Thank you!

I don't think the tag worked so I'll try again @mods

Hm interesting, so Pacaso is "Timeshares but done right, eg with more free-market resale mechanisms"? As a person with high preference for novelty, I have a hard time imagining wanting to own a timeshare-like second home haha. It seems more fun to me to just book different AirBnBs/VRBOs even if I have to pay extra for the optionality and reduced maintenance. Though I guess: if the choices were to buy a single home, or buy 8 1/8th shares of houses and fly between them, I'd be pretty tempted by the second option...

@Austin Yes, I think timeshare done right is a good summary. It's time share literally -- you share time with 7 others. But the ownership is more clear -- the 8 people own the LLC 100% and Pacaso owns none, unlike most "timeshares". Yes, novelty versus tradition is a factor. My family has been renting in this location nearly every summer since I was a kid, so to me it's something that makes sense. And I agree about multiple 1/8 shares being fun to think about.

Don't know how much edge I have after looking at Pacaso's website for a couple minutes...but it does look like a nice site.

> (I wish I could create a conditional claim, but since I can't, I will settle the claim at 50% if I don't buy.) You can! The standard way to do it is say you'll resolve as N/A if you don't buy a Pacaso home. That makes the question equivalent to "If I buy a Pacaso home, will I come to regret it within 2 years of purchase".

@jack +1

@SG Aha!! Thanks!! That's exactly what I want. I may revise the claim in that way -- is that ok to do especially since I just opened the market yesterday?

predicted NO

@DavidPennock It's a bit of a judgement call, the main downside is that people who already bet on the previous criteria might be unhappy - but looking at the betting, only a few bets of ~m$10 each have gone in, and not that far from 50%, so it seems like no big deal.

@jack @SG Thanks -- I did change it. Hopefully it didn't harm anyone too much

Related questions

Related questions