Anonymous wrote:This is all troll BS. If it's ancient it can't only be worth $20k
Anonymous wrote:The word for that is “theft.”
All of us own other property and we use this common property for visits, vacations... I am thinking about taking the artifact and moving it to my own place (abroad). However, if I ask my siblings t I will draw attention to it so they will take it first. How bad would be the fallout if I just took it?
Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:NP. I think this is what's going on--OP correct me if I'm wrong.
OP is younger than her siblings and unlike them, grew up around the object, so it's sentimental to her and not to them.
Therefore, a copy is not the same to OP. She wants the original.
She is worried that her siblings will get grabby with her and want the object just because she wants it.
She feels more entitled to the object, because she has the sentimental feelings toward it, but believes they'd get grabby either because they are grabby, or because it becomes a power situation.
She's thinking, in tort language..."Take and Pay." That it's easier to ask forgiveness than permission.
All good, OP, until you don't want to pay your siblings.
The object is worth MORE than market value to you because you have sentimental value attached to it.
So if you want this thing AND want to keep your relationships intact, I vote Take and Pay. Take, then offer MORE than 1/3. "There was a water leak so fixed it, but in doing so I had to move Object to my house. Object is worth 20K--see valuation attached to this email-- so I'm mailing each of you a check for 8K, which is over 1/3."
How is that, OP?
but the object is worth less than “market value” to me. this is because if I had it I couldn’t be able to sell it to whoever is willing to pay full price. there is no investment value whatsoever in it.
when I reflect upon it the object is worth at most $5000 to me. yes it has a sentimental value to me But I wouldn’t pay 10 grand for, say, an old photo of my parents either.
If it's worth less than market value to you- as in, you only like it enough to be willing to pay about a quarter of what it's worth- then what's the big idea? When I see a dress and I think "hmmmm, I'd buy that but only if it were marked 75% off" despite the price being within my budget, that doesn't scream "I LOVE THIS DRESS SO MUCH I WANT TO STEAL IT FROM THE STORE BEFORE SOMEONE ELSE BUYS IT!", does it?
my concern with my oldest siblings is not that they would buy me off but rather that they would take it for free (move to their place) or (best case scenario) keep in the apartment that I have little reason to visit. I don’t think the thing is worth $20k to them either. You keep treating it as any other item of its type but it is significantly different. A house that has a tenant with a 10 year lease is worth much less than a similar empty home. 1000 lbs if gold is worth nothing if you can’t trade it. Now this does look nice etc but that’s not worth “market price” to anyone involved.
Anonymous wrote:Get a copy made. Take the original and leave the copy in the joint apartment. Your siblings will never know the difference. Just be sure to hide yours if they ever come to visit you!
Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:NP. I think this is what's going on--OP correct me if I'm wrong.
OP is younger than her siblings and unlike them, grew up around the object, so it's sentimental to her and not to them.
Therefore, a copy is not the same to OP. She wants the original.
She is worried that her siblings will get grabby with her and want the object just because she wants it.
She feels more entitled to the object, because she has the sentimental feelings toward it, but believes they'd get grabby either because they are grabby, or because it becomes a power situation.
She's thinking, in tort language..."Take and Pay." That it's easier to ask forgiveness than permission.
All good, OP, until you don't want to pay your siblings.
The object is worth MORE than market value to you because you have sentimental value attached to it.
So if you want this thing AND want to keep your relationships intact, I vote Take and Pay. Take, then offer MORE than 1/3. "There was a water leak so fixed it, but in doing so I had to move Object to my house. Object is worth 20K--see valuation attached to this email-- so I'm mailing each of you a check for 8K, which is over 1/3."
How is that, OP?
but the object is worth less than “market value” to me. this is because if I had it I couldn’t be able to sell it to whoever is willing to pay full price. there is no investment value whatsoever in it.
when I reflect upon it the object is worth at most $5000 to me. yes it has a sentimental value to me But I wouldn’t pay 10 grand for, say, an old photo of my parents either.
If it's worth less than market value to you- as in, you only like it enough to be willing to pay about a quarter of what it's worth- then what's the big idea? When I see a dress and I think "hmmmm, I'd buy that but only if it were marked 75% off" despite the price being within my budget, that doesn't scream "I LOVE THIS DRESS SO MUCH I WANT TO STEAL IT FROM THE STORE BEFORE SOMEONE ELSE BUYS IT!", does it?
Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:NP. I think this is what's going on--OP correct me if I'm wrong.
OP is younger than her siblings and unlike them, grew up around the object, so it's sentimental to her and not to them.
Therefore, a copy is not the same to OP. She wants the original.
She is worried that her siblings will get grabby with her and want the object just because she wants it.
She feels more entitled to the object, because she has the sentimental feelings toward it, but believes they'd get grabby either because they are grabby, or because it becomes a power situation.
She's thinking, in tort language..."Take and Pay." That it's easier to ask forgiveness than permission.
All good, OP, until you don't want to pay your siblings.
The object is worth MORE than market value to you because you have sentimental value attached to it.
So if you want this thing AND want to keep your relationships intact, I vote Take and Pay. Take, then offer MORE than 1/3. "There was a water leak so fixed it, but in doing so I had to move Object to my house. Object is worth 20K--see valuation attached to this email-- so I'm mailing each of you a check for 8K, which is over 1/3."
How is that, OP?
but the object is worth less than “market value” to me. this is because if I had it I couldn’t be able to sell it to whoever is willing to pay full price. there is no investment value whatsoever in it.
when I reflect upon it the object is worth at most $5000 to me. yes it has a sentimental value to me But I wouldn’t pay 10 grand for, say, an old photo of my parents either.
Anonymous wrote:NP. I think this is what's going on--OP correct me if I'm wrong.
OP is younger than her siblings and unlike them, grew up around the object, so it's sentimental to her and not to them.
Therefore, a copy is not the same to OP. She wants the original.
She is worried that her siblings will get grabby with her and want the object just because she wants it.
She feels more entitled to the object, because she has the sentimental feelings toward it, but believes they'd get grabby either because they are grabby, or because it becomes a power situation.
She's thinking, in tort language..."Take and Pay." That it's easier to ask forgiveness than permission.
All good, OP, until you don't want to pay your siblings.
The object is worth MORE than market value to you because you have sentimental value attached to it.
So if you want this thing AND want to keep your relationships intact, I vote Take and Pay. Take, then offer MORE than 1/3. "There was a water leak so fixed it, but in doing so I had to move Object to my house. Object is worth 20K--see valuation attached to this email-- so I'm mailing each of you a check for 8K, which is over 1/3."
How is that, OP?