There are too many pieces to the puzzle of the Empire State Building, which make answers to a complex, obfuscated proposal difficult to find.

What we need is a straight forward, honest approach before our puzzle of ESB ownership decisions can be completed.

The following scenario, simplified, seems to make some sense:

1. Under the 1961 contract, signers were given a solid deal for a solid investment which had a long lifespan.

2. Between now and then, these same investors or their heirs were consulted about various changes to ownership, building improvements, etc. and gave their consent to forego revenue to add to the value of their investment.

3. Income sacrifices have played a large roll in glorifying the Empire State Building. Appraised values reflect not only this iconic piece of property and its location, but the improvements paid for by the investors.

4. In considering the deal before us, payback to the investors for their loss of income over the years in addition to the market value of the building and payback of any expenses allocated from revenues used for the expenses incurred in putting together the REIT need to be itemized and presented to the owners. If this arithmetic is in the documents, it seems to be hiding somewhere.

5. Unlike other changes undertaken by management, 

this deal was never presented to the owners before it was launched.

6. This puzzle is a confusing one. It would be interesting to see if "there is a train about to come down the track" which is not yet clearly in focus, perhaps lost in our sea of paperwork. And / or "hidden agendas" hinted at and unfortunately often put to use in the business dealings of our times.

7. It is hard to say "yes" when the puzzle is incomplete.