Forgot about "Oil Wells"! I think the Ricardos were wrong initially. They didn't buy any oil stock when they could have and later they practically accused the Mertzes of "jumping" their claim.
I know we always end up on opposites sides of "The Sublet". We don't know if Ricky actually ASKED the real estate lady if he could get more money. He only tells Fred that he was told that he "could get as high as $300." So why not take it?
And Fred couldn't even give a reason why it was wrong. He just said, "it's lousy."
From everything I've read about subletting, especially when it's an apartment in a prime location (like the Ricardo apt. in Manhattan) and it's summertime, most people get top dollar. They're usually renting to someone who really needs temporary digs and doesn't want to stay in a hotel.
You can say that Lucy and Ricky were profiting. But they were living up to their lease by paying their rent. Fred wasn't LOSING money. Also, Mr. Beecher (the renter) would be using the Ricardo's furniture, sheets, towels, dishes, appliances, etc. I'm assuming they'd probably still have to pay the utility bills like water, electricity, phone, etc. even though they wouldn't be using them all summer and Mr. Beecher would be.
I think it came down to the real estate agent Mrs. Hammond. When she brokers a peace between the two couples, she says that she was 'trying to protect my commission."
She said she'd been renting apartments in the Mertz building for years and no doubt other buildings. I don't know what a realtor's commission is. Maybe it's the standard 10% like show biz agents. If you are working on commission, it makes sense to try and get the most money possible. If she'd rented the Ricardo apartment for what they paid ($125) she would've gotten $12.50. By getting $300, she more than doubled her commission.
I doubt if Ricky was up to date on the rental market, but it was Mrs. Hammond's business to know. And summertime probably made for a "seller's market". So she'd try to get top dollar during her most lucrative season.
Of course if Ricky had just offered Fred a cut, then there wouldn't have been an argument!
With the washer, the Mertzes handled it wrong at the start when they accused the Ricardos of selling them a broken machine. It wasn't broken when they bought it. And Fred did say he was "handy with tools" if something broke. I think Fred and Ethel
could've been more tactful. Just ask Ricky to help pay for repairs instead of accusing their best friends of being cheats and foisting a broken machine on them especially since the Mertzes DID ask to buy the machine. It wasn't as if Ricky and Lucy schemed to unload a broken down washer on their friends.
You know how human nature is! If you are accused of something terrible, you immediately get defensive.
Later both couples were wrong when they found out that they could make money by selling the washer. Both couples just couldn't wait to claim ownership!
reply
share
Garyandfilm (513)
2 years ago
Both couples act childishly when the machine breaks down, but the fact remains that any legitimate company selling used appliances would've automatically given Fred and Ethel a 30 day warranty. Shouldn't best FRIENDS act accordingly??? If this were me with my friends, I not only wouldn't accept a dime for payment, I would've offered to at least pay half of the expenses to have it repaired. It's a matter of ethics.
My brother has owned several apartment buildings, and he told me that it's illegal for his tenants to sublease without his consent, and also to charge more rent to "profit" on his personal property.
I'm with Fred and Ethel. I, too, would've turned down every tenant to make sure the Ricardos didn't profit on a building they didn't own.
reply
share
[email protected] (5497)
2 years ago
Oh yes, a legit company would've given a 30 day warranty. They are in the business to keep customers satisfied. Ricky wasn't. He just wanted to use the machine for its trade-in value. Once he sold it, he wouldn't be responsible for how it did or did not function.
I think that's why he was correct in not wanting to sell the washer directly to the Mertzes. He was aware of the bad blood that would ensue if something went wrong but Fred insisted because he wanted to save money. He knew a dealer would charge him more, but in the end Fred didn't get the bargain he sought because the the Ricardos didn't give him a 30 day warranty!
If I was in the Ricardos position, I would've acted similarly to you. I would've taken the washer back and tried to have it repaired myself. Mrs. Trumbull's nephew Joe said he could repair it for a few dollars. I'm sure in a big city like New York there are plenty of fix it shops. I'd then sell the machine to a secondhand store and if Fred wanted to buy it back he could do business with THEM. Of course a store would charge him more than Ricky which was what he tried to avoid in the first place. But you get what you pay for. And he paid for a washer with NO warranty!
I admit I know very little about the real estate business. Do the laws vary from state to state? In "The Sublease" Ricky was allowed to sublet according to the terms of his lease. It didn't say anything about how MUCH he could get for the sublet, only that it had to be approved by the owners. A clause like that seems to be a standard way for the owner to protect himself against an undesirable tenant. But Ricky wouldn't rent to some irresponsible lowlifes who'd trash the place.
I still think it was Mrs. Hammond who tried to get more money because it raised her commission. If she had been renting apartments in the Mertz building for years (as she said), I think it was her standard way of doing business. Maybe she never mentioned it to Fred?? If Fred's other tenants made a profit, how would he have known? None of the other tenants were his best friends.
As for friendship, I don't think the Mertzes were showing much. The Ricardos initially offered them a free vacation. They wanted them to come to Maine and be their guests at the resort. I'm sure a nice trip would've been worth the profit that Fred wasn't going to make if Ricky sublet the place. In the end, they would've rather hurt their friends by not approving of ANY tenant. It always struck me as a bit spiteful.
reply
share
Garyandfilm (513)
2 years ago
The real estate laws might indeed vary state to state (my brother does not own property in New York).
I usually side with Fred and Ethel in those childish (but fun to watch) fights. That being said, it appears Fred and Ethel paid for virtually nothing while in Hollywood. I doubt Fred paid for their hotel. Lucy and Ricky were often very generous with their friends.
reply
share
[email protected] (5497)
2 years ago
Those fights are fun to watch. But as for being best friends, there sure was a lot of anger and mistrust! But they always made up quickly.
Back to 'The Diner', it's hard to believe that Lucy and Ricky thought that the only thing involved in running the place was greeting guests! ha! Ricky did have "a name" but I'm being to think it was "Clueless". As I wrote, he was the manager of the Tropicana and he surely must have known the work involved in running a food establishment.
reply
share