Track & Field News

by **EPelle** » Fri Nov 11, 2005 1:34 am

Inspired from a webpage I visited...

Which is worse, a very bad house in a very good location or a very good house in a very bad location?

Vote above.

by **slowcoach** » Fri Nov 11, 2005 1:40 am

Location, Location, Location...

by **SQUACKEE** » Fri Nov 11, 2005 3:27 am

a good house in a bad location wont be worth very much and you might get yourself killed.

by **tafnut** » Fri Nov 11, 2005 5:42 am

You can fix a house, but not a location.

by **bad hammy** » Fri Nov 11, 2005 7:11 am

SQUACKEE wrote:a good house in a bad location wont be worth very much and you might get yourself killed.

From the mean streets of Oakland, word is having a good house in a bad location makes you a target. You can always fix up a bad house.

FYI - I screwed up and voted for the wrong choice. Hanging chads got in the way . . .

by **tlb747** » Fri Nov 11, 2005 6:45 pm

bad hammy wrote:
SQUACKEE wrote:FYI - I screwed up and voted for the wrong choice.

I did the same thing.

by **maggot** » Sat Nov 12, 2005 7:50 am

bad hammy wrote:FYI - I screwed up and voted for the wrong choice. Hanging chads got in the way . . .

That's better than buying the wrong house!

Track & Field News

Which is Worse...

Which is worse

Which is Worse...

Who is online