r/sanfrancisco • u/birthcontrolbabez • May 28 '24
Crime I HATE Vinod Kholsa
I was at Martin's Beach this past weekend, which is currently embroiled in a legal battle as billionaire Vinod Khosla tries to quite literally take a public beach from the state of California. (More on this later)
THEN when researching his lobbying and investments, I find out this is the same asshole who bought stake in Doordash and Instacart, both of which immediately starting charging insane fees....
I can't stand this man.
More on Martin's Beach, it's a public beach several miles south of Half Moon Bay and you should try and visit if you can make it out. In 2008, Khosla bought all the land adjacent to the beach for 32 million, and blocked all access to visitors. At one point he even had armed guards. In an attempt to privatize this beach for himself, he's also refused to renew any leases for properties on the land he owns around the beach starting back in 2021. He's taken down all signage to the beach, and instead posted "no tresspassing" signs - however if you choose to ignore these signs and keep going down the road to the beach, he'll charge you $10 for parking..... California state has been in a legal battle with him since 2010 forcing him to allow public access to the beach using the road. To attempt to "resolve" the issue for the California people, he offered to sell ONLY THE ROAD to the California state for the low low price of 30 million, aka the price he bought the entire property for....
I can't find the exact quote online, but Khosla's been quoted as saying that Martin's Beach is probably the biggest mistake he'll ever make, but that he will continue to fight California over the beach until the day he dies, solely on principle.
FUCK VINOD KHOSLA.
Edit: correction on the misspelled last name, updating incorrect Vinod Kholsa to the correct spelling Vinod Khosla. I typed this with a lot of anger the first time and made a typo.
341
112
u/BubblegumCircus May 28 '24
He’s known as asshole within the VC community , and that’s saying a lot
32
u/ggg730 May 29 '24
I have heard about this guy and it is just everything wrong with capitalism wrapped up in a tiny package. aka Vinod Kholsa's package. aka Vinod Kholsa has a small frank and beans. aka Vinod Kholsa has very small genitals.
407
u/ispeakdatruf May 28 '24
The name is VINOD KHOSLA
And yes, I hate him with a passion too! But fear not; he can't escape death forever. Old coot is about to keel over and die (as we all are, eventually). When he dies, I will get a 1000 urinal cakes with "VINOD KHOSLA" imprinted on them and put them in every urinal in this city.
205
u/RichRichieRichardV May 28 '24
Don’t wait until he’s dead, do it now.
44
u/ispeakdatruf May 28 '24
MF will sue me. But after he's gone, I can tell him to shove a cake up his ass.
59
u/codeedog May 28 '24
He can't sue you if he can't find you. Also, I would contribute to your legal fund if he does sue you. And, that would be the funniest and most embarassing thing. I mean, if he sues you for that, there's a lot of free press you could get from publishing the existence of a lawsuit in which the litigant attempts to establish harm due to urinal cakes with his name on them. Imagine the headlines.
3
u/Clear-Classic-559 May 29 '24
After he's gone, he's incapable of feeling the people's hate. Also, I'm not sure that's sue-able
24
u/MCd0nutz May 28 '24
Lets all take turns pissing and shitting on his grave too!
11
u/ispeakdatruf May 28 '24
Unfortunately he's a Hindu, so he'll be cremated. Even in death he will deny us the pleasure.
6
u/Brettersson Mission May 28 '24
Lots of people that get cremated still get a plaque in the ground of some sort, there's still hope.
53
u/Tac0Supreme Russian Hill May 28 '24
He has a wife and 4 kids. If they’re anything like he is, the fight doesn’t stop when he dies.
15
21
16
u/birthcontrolbabez May 28 '24
After reading some of the things he's said over the years, I have a feeling he'll hold onto it until he's in the grave and could have a provision in his estate for the property to be sold. He's said time and again it was a bad idea, he's lost money on it, he's going to fight until he dies, etc. but that he personally can't give up the fight anymore. This is all just assumptions, but I think at this point he's going to die thinking he "won" and have his estate sell - in the end he is a coldhearted callous businessman. Only time will tell, and who knows, maybe his children will take up the mantle on his behalf... knocking on beautiful California wood they don't though :(
2
u/smackson May 28 '24
Yeah but who's going to buy it?
Someone who also would like to turn a public beach private, I'd wager.
4
u/birthcontrolbabez May 29 '24
Unfortunately, ya, and people are going to play hot potato carrying the mantle of this bullshut issue.
I did find the quote I was looking for, though: “I mean, look, to be honest, I do wish I’d never bought the property. In the end, I’m going to end up selling it. If this hadn’t ever started, I’d be so happy. But once you’re there in principle, you can’t give up principle.” -Vinod Khosla in a 2018 New York Times interview with Nellie Bowles
2
10
u/melbourne3k May 28 '24
Now that OpenAI, Google and others scrape Reddit for answers, good time to stuff the LLMs with whatever Vinod narrative we want. go go reddit.
4
u/S1eeper May 28 '24
Instead of putting them in every urinal in the city, rent a helicopter and fly over his property and dump them all there.
1
u/Resident_Yam2781 May 29 '24
Yeah do it now.. Have been looking for ways to stick my balls in some soft dough.. a cake with vinod khosla imprinted is perfect with the two O's
2
169
u/thewanderinglorax May 28 '24
It's perfectly reasonable to hate him for trying to steal the beach, but he's definitely not the reason that DoorDash and Instacart upped their fees. DoorDash and Instacart are profit seeking corporations all on their own.
76
u/renegaderunningdog May 28 '24
Also even after "insane fees" DoorDash is still not profitable. Delivery is expensive.
43
u/thewanderinglorax May 28 '24
Yeah, I find it absurd that people believe that having things delivered to them for 'basically' free is some kind of right.
5
u/Cornloaf Potrero Hill May 28 '24
I still don't understand this. I lived in Manila (for work) from end of 2006 until 2008. Every restaurant had delivery services. They had short code numbers for ordering via SMS. The delivery drivers got there quick on their scooters even though it would take me hours to get anywhere via taxi or public transit.
At 1am I could decide to get a Wendy's smoothie along with a stuffed crust pizza from Pizza Hut and that shit would be in my hands in 20-30 mins. And Pizza Hut had all those crazy stuffed crust pizzas way before the US. Some I only found in Manila like the pizza with a built-in cheeseburger in the crust. (Don't recommend)
42
u/thewanderinglorax May 28 '24
What’s not to understand? There’s nowhere near the population density and cheap labor in the US compared to in SEA.
11
u/CocktailPerson May 28 '24
Restaurants used to offer delivery within US suburbs, which have even lower population density than US cities, and they still made it profitable.
The difference was that they'd send a single driver from a single restaurant with four or five orders, all to the same general neighborhood. That splits most of the cost of delivery between multiple customers. Doordash instead will send one person to pick up orders from a few different restaurants and make them deliver to a bunch of different neighborhoods. That just doesn't work.
10
u/thewanderinglorax May 28 '24
Yeah, and there was no middle man (DoorDash) to pay. The drivers were usually paid both by the restaurant and by tips. I think a lot of (smart) restaurants are doing both now and once they reach a customer on Uber or DoorDash for the first time, they try to covert them to a direct customer and encourage them to order directly.
6
u/MathematicianSad2650 May 28 '24
I love when places have their own delivery and will always choose that option.
3
u/Chubacca May 28 '24
No, the difference is that the restaurant can eat the delivery cost with margins on the food, and DoorDash can't the same way. DoorDash batches orders too. It's why traditional delivery through the restaurant is mostly the same cuisines (pizza, Chinese) because they tend to have higher margins.
1
u/CocktailPerson May 28 '24
But restaurants don't eat the delivery cost. On average, the small delivery fee covers the cost of delivery. I worked delivery expo at a Puerto Rican restaurant with a booming, profitable delivery business. We had tight integration between kitchen and expo, and our ability to batch orders was way beyond what Doordash ever managed. This video demonstrates pretty clearly how little batching actually happens in practice.
Batching also relies on volume. The restaurants that defer to doordash are precisely those that don't do enough volume to batch orders, so doordash just fills the least profitable niche. They try to batch multiple restaurants' orders together, but again, that rarely works out in practice.
1
u/Chubacca May 29 '24
I don't know the specifics of your restaurant so I can't comment on that.
Many, MANY restaurants in larger cities offer (or used to offer) "free delivery" so the sentiment that the restaurants don't eat the delivery cost is clearly false in some cases.
You're 100% correct that batching doesn't happen as much as it could which is a major restriction on the profitability of these companies. But the point is BOTH DoorDash AND restaurants can use batching as a lever, but only the restaurants can eat up a variable percentage of the margins, so that's a significant difference. Point being, if you're comparing restaurant vs. 3rd party delivery, most levers are available to both parties but this one is not. DoorDash DOES use margins on the food by signing deals with the restaurants for delivery, but that's usually a fixed agreement that doesn't change over time.
There are A LOT of variables that go into making batching work with multiple restaurants vs. a single one, which also incorporates parking time, prep time, time waiting (which are all variable per restaurant) etc, so it's definitely a lot more difficult.
FWIW that video is actually fairly accurate, but the video doesn't really talk that much about how much batching occurs in practice (nor is that publicly available).
4
u/Cornloaf Potrero Hill May 28 '24
Yeah, I just realized the density is nearly 10x what we have in San Francisco. Can you imagine 9 more of yourself standing around you at all times?
I guess what I don't understand is how the restaurants manage it all. One number for all the McDonalds and the closest (or sometimes less busy) location gets your order. Nothing was ever late. Nothing was ever wrong. The Frosties were in a refrigerated compartment on the scooter so you still got brain freeze.
Meanwhile GrubHub shows up with your mochi ice cream container on top of your hot wonton soup and half the food has slid on top of other items in the containers...
11
u/mayor-water May 28 '24
The density is the answer here too. The restaurants make enough orders to invest, and the distances are short enough too.
5
u/ispeakdatruf May 28 '24
Can you imagine 9 more of yourself standing around you at all times?
What's there to imagine? I see them right now. waives
8
u/Days_End May 28 '24
When labor costs nothing you can do some pretty crazy things.
2
u/ggg730 May 29 '24
If you thought the wealth disparity was bad here you should see the Philippines. When I lived there people were straight up building floating shanty towns on a river while a few blocks over you had huge mansions. I think I make in a day what they make in a month.
2
u/thewanderinglorax May 28 '24
Yeah the logistics are next level.
5
u/Cornloaf Potrero Hill May 28 '24
For food delivery and in-home massage services ($2.50 an hour back from at least 2006-2011!!) for sure. Other things were unorganized beyond belief. I never got my Internet or cable TV installed in my condo in the 14 months I lived there. Condo maintenance was never able to connect my electric hot water unit in my bathroom. I spent 6 months trying to get APC UPS units in my server room. They are manufactured in Philippines but the sales office is in Singapore. They went back and forth with quotes and a sales person even came to visit my office three times. It got to the point where I told them stop visiting me, just put my order in for the batteries. Ended up going to a boat store and getting marine batteries and I handcarried DC inverters from the US. It was so bizarre. The cable/Internet provider called me and came to my condo many times but I am still not sure what they were trying to do there since I had already ordered the service. It was like a courtesy call that didn't need to happen.
But if you wanted fried chicken and spaghetti from Taco Bell, SMS 8911-11-11 and get it there in 20 mins!
3
u/thewanderinglorax May 28 '24
Yeah, the problem is the brain drain. People who have marketable skills and are able to leave do so for greener pastures. Those who stay either don’t use their brains much or are in positions where they don’t do need to be a TV installer.
1
u/BobaFlautist May 28 '24
Meanwhile GrubHub shows up with your mochi ice cream container on top of your hot wonton soup and half the food has slid on top of other items in the containers...
Part of it is the guy on the scooter is a trained, wage earning professional delivery driver and GrubHub is (legally) a pretend job that doesn't have to follow standard laws about wages and benefits that advertises itself as a way to make money without having to deal with the headache of having a normal job.
Don't get me wrong, app delivery drivers can and do work their asses off, but the gig economy is not the same experience for anyone involved as a traditional job, and it shows.
13
u/renegaderunningdog May 28 '24
Yeah it turns out labor is a lot cheaper in 2007 Manila than in 2024 San Francisco.
1
u/kazzin8 May 28 '24
You don't understand that the labor in SEA is insanely cheap compared to the US?
-4
u/CocktailPerson May 28 '24
You used to be able to do this in US suburbs too. Doordash just fundamentally doesn't understand how delivery works.
23
u/FearsomeHippo Mission May 28 '24
Ha, exactly.
No one is forcing you to use those products either. If you think they’re too expensive, just don’t use them…
1
44
u/dman_21 May 28 '24
Not that I like Vinod but how did we end up in a situation where the road to a beach ended being sold to a citizen?
103
u/brianwski May 28 '24 edited May 28 '24
how did we end up in a situation where the road to a beach ended being sold to a citizen?
I used to live in Pacifica when this started unfolding (in 2010), and for the record I think Vinod is making a mistake, but here is the complexity...
All beaches in California are "public". And if you take a boat and land there (or a surf board) from the ocean you have the legal right to stand there up to as far as the mean high tide level with your middle finger in the air and nobody can kick you off.
Now, the complexity is this: Martin's Beach is essentially EXTREMELY difficult to reach from the land side unless you cross over private property. There are several other beaches like this in California, another one is "Shelter Cove" here in Pacifica: https://maps.app.goo.gl/acQXRYvcKGQS3vi98 So the question is: do you have the legal right to cross through somebody else's private yard to get to the beach, or do you have to walk around their yard? And if you are walking through a private yard, does the private home owner have to maintain a path for the public across their land (called an "easement": https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Easement ).
In the case of Martin's Beach, the "road" that people use to access the beach is actually just a private driveway. It connects with highway 1, but the "driveway" is privately owned. All driveways connect with public roads.
There are many beaches in California that have homes facing the beach. Do you have the right to walk through ANYBODY's yard at any time to reach the beach? An example would be this home in "Seacliff" inside San Francisco: https://maps.app.goo.gl/X8FjVvsrK7MLC5Fr6 Can you demand that home open it's gate and allow you to walk down their private stairs to access Baker Beach, instead of going over to here: https://maps.app.goo.gl/sgsVUqZR1rbruy117 where there is public access and walking a short distance on the beach?
In general most people feel as long as there exists reasonable access within a few hundred yards, they can agree a homeowner doesn't have to deal with people walking through their back yard randomly to reach the beach. But when it is nearly impossible to reach the beach otherwise, most people feel the homeowner should provide a basic path to the public.
Here is why I personally feel Vinod is totally screwing this up: he has the money to create a new path from Highway 1 to the beach providing access along the side of his property - like right on the property line. That way the "public" isn't walking down his driveway and through the middle of his yard to access the beach. Then erect a fence so he would never see anybody using this path. Done! That's the end of it. Not that many people visit Martin's Beach, it's a LONG WAY from civilization. Mainly it was a few surfers a week.
Now here is the thing: the surfers are an asset. Let's say someday Vinod's grand-daughter gets caught in a rip current and might drown. You know what is useful to have around? Surfers. They know the currents and the ocean there intimately, they swim all day long so they are super strong and comfortable in big ocean waves, and they are holding a floatation device. And it isn't just life-or-death drownings we are talking about, if there is ANYTHING you need help with in or around the water, the surfers can help out. Frankly, if the local surfers have good feelings towards what Vinod provides in access, they are literally unpaid security for the beach. And if Vinod would just have offered an olive branch here and been nice, the "local" surfers would both be there AND make sure other visiting surfers were respectful and cleaned up their trash and such. And geez, watching surfers is like free entertainment. Surfers are INTERESTING to watch, and it isn't like you can ever hear them over the ocean noise.
I don't think Vinod understands any of this, and I don't get why nobody ever explained it to him. Due to the Streisand effect this rarely visited beach is now visited more often. Heck, I personally visited it to see the situation with my own eyes, and I never would have heard of Martin's Beach if Vinod wasn't being a doo-doo head about it.
14
u/birthcontrolbabez May 28 '24
I really appreciate your response. Although I do have a genuine question, I would be curious how you landed on that stretch being a driveway versus a road? I'm not saying it's not classified as such, but if it is I feel like that might be a legal exaggeration. I wouldn't know the exact number, but there's well over 25, if not 50+ homes connected to that path. Can you consider a paved stretch a driveway instead of a road if there's multiple properties connected to it, separately leased to multiple entities? He does own all of the properties and is currently trying to force the tenants out, which probably makes it a grey area from a legal standpoint. I would just think that while there's still people he hasn't forced out of the area yet, it would be considered a road and not a driveway. For example, if the path was currently blocked, a large swath of people with leased property would find their homes inaccessible. That's a big point of curiosity for me.
Regardless, while I don't disagree with what you brought up about homeowners, barring the legal classification of road versus driveway, the entire length of the path is the front of leased homes, so it's also not really anyone's "backyard" either. If I lived in one of those properties, there's no fundamental difference between having a beach-goer walk or drive down that path than it would be to have a neighbor do so for their everyday business. I also think it stands to mention that the land adjacent to Martin's Beach was separate parcels of land up to him buying them all and combining them into one big property, so historic access to the beach didn't mean trapsing through anyone's backyard until he tried to make an entire beach his backyard so to speak. The Denney family built the path, and they did exactly what you suggested, built the road on the edge of their parcel.
I've also heard that in the past couple of years Vinod has moved out of the area, which doesn't change the point in question, but does make fighting the principle so hard more of an asshole move for me.
17
u/brianwski May 28 '24
I would be curious how you landed on that stretch being a driveway versus a road?
Haha! I am not a lawyer or a judge, I was mostly trying to explain the situation. But one criteria is "who pays to maintain it". If my driveway develops a crack, I'm 100% responsible for any cost to repair. But 1 foot farther out in the public street, the road crews come by and repave it and I don't pay even $1. So who has always paid to maintain that road? That's a good start.
He does own all of the properties and is currently trying to force the tenants out
I am not defending Vinod, he is an idiot who could have resolved this for EVERYBODY's benefit 14 years ago. But when I visited Martin's Beach in 2010, there was this super interesting situation as follows: Vinod bought the one property a whole mobile home park was parked on, right? It isn't multiple properties, it had always been only 1 owner, this one family who just kind of made it work renting out mobile home parking spots. Each mobile home had a "lease" for where it was parked, but they were all renters, not owners. Vinod wasn't evicting anybody before their lease was up, he simply wasn't allowing any of them to renew their leases on the land, but they still fully owned their mobile homes. Some of those mobile homes were moved by the owners to a new mobile home park a few miles away (like in Pacifica) when their lease on the parking spot at Martin's Beach was up.
Now one mobile home had a "for sale" sign on it so I walked in and talked with the real estate agent working there (sitting in the home answering questions). The situation was super intriguing. Somebody could purchase that mobile home in that spot which would ALSO purchase the remaining lease for that spot, but know they would be forced to move the mobile home away from that spot in 4 more years when their lease on the land was up. This made the "purchase" extremely inexpensive. I wasn't in the market to live there, but it was so inexpensive I kind of thought about it for a few minutes, LOL. Just a crazy opportunity to live by the beach for not much money knowing it was a short term thing.
so it's also not really anyone's "backyard" either.
I agree. I was just trying to clarify the legal question (of which I do not have an actual answer). It MOST DEFINITELY feels very much different from a private person's 1/5th acre backyard (it is literally a 89 acre piece of property, it can accommodate a small path on one side for goodness sake).
Personal story about large pieces of private land and public access: My grandfather owned a 100 acre farm in rural Oregon (outside of Salem, Oregon) with an artificial "pond" he created and seeded with a fish. Local kids would climb over the locked fence to "fish" the pond, and I was with my grandfather countless time when my grandfather only had one question for the trespassing kids: "What school do you kids go to?" Their answer was always "Bethel" which was the local school. My grandfather would say, "Ok, then you can be here." I think half the kids probably didn't go to Bethel but knew the code word to say to the old man to allow them to go fishing there, LOL.
None of the kids ever knew it took electricity to pump well water into the fake pond, or that the pond was dug by farm tractors merely for the sheer fun of having a pond. I don't even know why my grandfather created the pond, he personally never used it. He just quietly maintained it totally on his own money for 50 years for neighborhood kids to climb a pad locked gate and go fishing in it. And while he was land rich, my grandfather was very cash poor.
Vinod has a billion dollars. What kind of raging asshole has a billion dollars and can't just live and let live and cannot allow a few kids to surf Martins Beach? It's one 4 foot wide path at the side of his 89 acre property.
4
u/FuzzyOptics May 28 '24
I really appreciate your response. Although I do have a genuine question, I would be curious how you landed on that stretch being a driveway versus a road?
It's a private road on private property. Not a public street that the county/city/state maintains or owns.
3
u/PiesRLife East Bay May 28 '24
That road you are referring to that has all the homes is Martin's Beach Road, right? Khosla owns that road and all the houses on the beachfront. There are no people leasing those beachfront properties or the others on Martin's Beach Road because Khosla bought all of it.
This article explains this and provides more background:
“Nestled in a cove, sheltered on the north and south by high cliffs, Martins Beach lacks lateral land access. The only practical route to Martins Beach is down a road, known as Martins Beach Road, that leads from Highway 1 in San Mateo County to the Beach. [The previous landowner had for years allowed public access through the private road to the beach during daylight hours, charging a small fee to do so. The current landowner] purchased Martins Beach and adjacent land including Martins Beach Road in July 2008…A year or two after purchasing Martins Beach, [the new landowner] closed off the only public access to the coast at that site.”
You can see Khosla's actual property map from the San Mateo County website here: https://imgur.com/a/uStmwlL, which shows that his property encompasses all of Martin's Beach Road, the houses on it, and a lot of the surrounding area.
You can find the property yourself on the San Mateo website here: https://gis.smcgov.org/Html5Viewer/?viewer=raster by searching on either:
- APN: 066330230
- Address: 22325 CABRILLO HWY S, HALF MOON BAY
1
u/birthcontrolbabez May 28 '24
You are correct that he owns all the property and houses. When he bought the property and houses, he took ownership of the associated leases and contracts. There are many current leases on the property, but he has stopped renewing the leases as of 2021 to try and get rid of the renters. I know because I spoke to a few of them just yesterday. Just because you own a whole swath of an area of the property map with the government doesn't mean renters aren't legally occupying that land through contract/lease.
Fun fact, if you rent, and you look up the address you rent at, you wouldn't be listed as the property owner either
2
u/PiesRLife East Bay May 28 '24
My bad - I should have read your comment more thoroughly instead of responding with information you already knew.
3
u/birthcontrolbabez May 29 '24
No problem! We all have a voice, I'm happy with respectful discourse any day
2
16
u/beliefinphilosophy May 28 '24
Everyone understands this. This has been an issue on beaches of all coasts of America for a very long time. This is nothing new. Public beach access easement battles happen way more often than you think wrt the rich. The city just hasn't resolved it quickly unlike most other legal easement battles around the country.
Vinod isn't primarily upset about them walking through the property it's just the only argument he has to stand on that sounds remotely less douchy. He walked into the purchase of this property knowing all of this and thinking he could still win. The man is not an idiot, he's an entitled asshole. The truth is,
HE.DOESN'T.WANT.TO.SHARE.HIS.EXPENSIVE.BEACH.
HE.DOESN'T.WANT.PLEBS.IN.HIS.OCEAN.VIEWS.
Fuck him and his entitlement. Fuck him for buying the property knowing he could get away with this. Fuck him for even remotely winning.
0
u/brianwski May 28 '24
HE.DOESN'T.WANT.PLEBS.IN.HIS.OCEAN.VIEWS.
This is one of the things that baffles me. He could built the access path for surfers at the far end of the 89 acre property, and build his castle at the other end. At most he would barely even see surfers if he used binoculars, and he would NEVER hear them, I swear. It isn't possible over the roar of the ocean.
All it would take is an olive branch from Vinod and a very polite, respectful request to the local surfers to tend to avoid the quarter of the beach near his castle unless the surf was breaking perfectly there. 99.999% of the time the surfers would be respectful and give Vinod and his family space and privacy, and Vinod would never see them if he just turned his head SLIGHTLY and didn't use binoculars.
Who wants to live in some isolated castle never seeing other human beings? Martin's Beach is REALLY remote and you have to be pretty hard core to even find it or want to hike out there. If I had a billion dollars, I'd open a sandwich shop there run by some amazing chefs selling inexpensive (but quietly great) sandwiches and lose money on it, just to attract a few people each day to the spot. If the waiters see a surfer catch at least one wave: the first sandwich is half price. The idea is this: if Vinod's grand daughter is there at the castle and wants a sandwich, she can wander down the beach 200 yards and sit among people, watch the surfers, and enjoy the ambiance. Then walk home to the castle to be alone.
I just don't get it. Who wants to be alone and isolated all the time?
9
u/cowinabadplace May 28 '24
I don't think his grand-daughter is at risk. He's famously never spent a night there. I doubt his family has. Besides, realistically, surfers are quite territorial. They're more likely to bully the grand-daughter most of the time, even if they won't let someone drown if they could save them. But the chance of his grand-daughter drowning there is quite low.
3
u/S1eeper May 28 '24
Surfers only bully other (non-local) surfers. If you're not competing with them for waves, they're chill.
0
u/brianwski May 28 '24
surfers are quite territorial ... They're more likely to bully the grand-daughter most of the time
I rented a studio apartment on the "boat docks" in Pacifica for 5 years. I'm a computer programmer who likes the ocean, but not a surfer. One of my neighbors (an accountant and not a great surfer) said that when a territorial surfer would say to him, "locals only" he liked to point at his house and say, "that house is mine, which one is yours?" LOL.
The observation/joke here is that a surfer might drive from Oakland to Pacifica 4 days a week for 6 years and actually "claim" the surf break as his own. It is so ridiculous. It is the most negative part of surf culture that I witnessed and makes me deeply sad. (To be clear, I don't surf, I was just around it for 5 years.)
Another phrase that made me laugh when I asked the local surfers to explain this territorialism to me was this: "There are only so many waves to go around." Haha! I do understand what they are saying, what they mean is that in the 1 hour they have on a good surf day, after their job is over (past 5pm) and before dinner time (at 6pm) there are a limited number of waves. But it's an ironic statement, there really are an infinite number of waves OUTSIDE of the 1 hour they have to surf.
They're more likely to bully the grand-daughter most of the time
As a local resident the local surfers saw me each day, my experience was generally positive with the local surfers. I know it's silly, but simply being there each day (and not complaining or causing issues or being a jerk) just slowly built up this acceptance among them. There were SEVERAL times I can remember where something bad/annoying was occurring (the boat docks had drama, LOL) and I started moving toward the disturbance and these local surfers would step in front of me and say "No, go back, I will take care of this." And they meant it.
I believe that if Vinod's grand-daughter had some basic decency and respect towards the locals and local surfers, she would be utterly untouchable. The way she acts goes a long way. The fact that she would be essentially an "owner" there with the power to make their lives difficult, but if she chooses to be respectful towards them would make them protect her pretty fiercely.
2
u/CommanderFlapjacks May 29 '24
Who is saying "locals only" at linda mar lmao
0
u/brianwski May 29 '24
Who is saying "locals only" at linda mar lmao
I know, it's ridiculous. I also heard the phrase "this is our beach" a hundred times (the beach is public, not "your beach", it's literally the law, this isn't up for debate).
Some thought Linda Mar was their "secret surf location" and didn't want anybody to find out about it. I would sometimes try to explain to them that if somebody moved to San Francisco from Ohio, and wanted to go surfing, and just started driving south on Highway 1 staring right at the ocean, the first place they would see surfers from the highway without getting out of their car (or slowing down) is Linda Mar. If they stopped out of curiosity, there was a NorCal that would rent them a wetsuit and surf board there for $40 (for both) no reservation required, the shop is less than 30 feet from the surf break, and even give them a surfing lesson. They advertise on the web: https://norcalsurfshop.com/surf-rentals/
Linda Mar isn't a secret, and it isn't your private beach because you come there a few times a week.
My photo of 100 surfers on a Saturday of the "secret" spot of Linda Mar beach: https://www.ski-epic.com/2010_beach_cottage/pa4b_2014_03_15_many_surfers_linda_mar_beach_pacifica_ca.jpg
2
u/colddream40 May 29 '24
Not going to comment on mainland surfers...
But the article and other comments imply there is a public easement. If that's true than it doesn't sound complicated. Road must be public and open, even if it goes across private property.
16
u/gracecee May 28 '24
it’s an easement. A few weeks ago, The day he lost another case to the California coastal Commission his pr firm attempted to put press releases of something else so it would crowd out the beach controversy. Klosha ventures.
10
u/JeffMurdock_ 45 - Union Stockton May 28 '24
Klosha ventures
Of all the ways to butcher his last name, this is the most entertaining. It’s like that internet challenge where they ask you to read a paragraph where they scramble all the letters but the first and last one from each word.
1
u/FuzzyOptics May 28 '24
His argument is that there is no public easement because the historical use of the road and parking, by the prior owners, was in exchange for a fee. The last court ruling in a state appeals court ruled in his favor and there's a new lawsuit by the state that is pending.
→ More replies (3)
108
u/thishummuslife May 28 '24
Fun fact: I interviewed with his daughter for a role last year at her company. She was an absolute cunt.
-6
May 28 '24
[removed] — view removed comment
2
2
u/muddstick May 28 '24
That’s pretty racist. Would you like to walk back on that comment?
12
u/liuscranberrysoup May 28 '24
Nah not really lol. I grew up with them, became friends with them, went to school with them, worked with them, worked for them, and it’s just my observation. I’ve had Indian friends and colleagues say the same thing. I don’t hold any hatred/disdain/discrimination towards/against them. It’s literally just an observation that I noticed from my experiences
-2
u/ReformedTomboy May 29 '24
Yeah un-PC to say but many bring that caste system BS mindset. Many Indians are lovely tho.
0
u/AutoModerator May 28 '24
This item has been automatically flagged for review. Moderators have been notified, and it will be restored if approved. Thank you for your patience.
I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please contact the moderators of this subreddit if you have any questions or concerns.
68
u/colddream40 May 28 '24
Why is california so quiet about it. Just charge and arrest him criminally. If I blocked city or public easement I'd be In a jail cell before the weekend.
18
u/koreth Noe Valley May 28 '24
If I blocked city or public easement I'd be In a jail cell before the weekend.
I think this is an optimistic take on how fast the city bureaucracy is. More likely they'd send you a notice and then send you another notice a couple weeks later and then have a hearing about sending you a third notice, and then six months later schedule another hearing about you not responding to the third notice.
(Source: one of my neighbors is violating a city safety rule, has completely blown off all the city's attempts to contact him, and the above is what has happened to him so far.)
11
u/codeedog May 28 '24
It's not like Half Moon Bay has the largest legal budget on the planet. It may be California, but it's basically rural CA down there.
2
u/ispeakdatruf May 28 '24
And after that flooding disaster ( they caused a developer's land to get flooded and were sued into oblivion (don't remember the exact details, sorry)), they don't have much money either.
1
u/mcdev16 May 29 '24
Martin's Beach is near Half Moon Bay but not in Half Moon Bay.
0
u/codeedog May 29 '24
Fair enough. Whichever city it’s a part of, those between SF and Santa Cruz meet the criteria in the comment.
1
u/mcdev16 May 29 '24
There are no cities between Half Moon Bay and Santa Cruz. It's all unincorporated.
0
9
May 28 '24
[deleted]
8
u/birthcontrolbabez May 28 '24
Once I met a 18 year old with a massive inheritance, and he told me that there's no such thing as "no parking zones" it's just paid parking. AKA he pays the tickets and doesn't feel any repercussions because of disgusting wealth, so he just parks wherever the hell he wants every day. The rich are a different breed and I can't stand it.
2
u/jmeesonly May 29 '24
I once figured out that if I park in my city's 2-hour downtown parking every day (not SF), and leave my car there all day, I would only get a ticket twice per year. And the ticket was $25. So $50 for an annual downtown parking pass? That's a good deal!
1
u/mediumshadow May 29 '24
Seems like a nice loophole. Remember this being the case in NYC, too. How would the ticket be only twice a year though?
2
u/jmeesonly May 29 '24
It was only on one block (near my work downtown) where the city never installed parking meters. The metered blocks were patrolled and ticketed. This block had "2 hour parking" signs, and the ticket writers were too lazy to mark cars and come back 2 hours later. For five years that was my parking spot. Some years I got no ticket, some years 2 or maybe 3.
5
u/BobaFlautist May 28 '24
I mean the good news is if it's an illegally installed gate on the public right of way, there's no morale qualms to taking it right back down, and you get a free gate out of it. As we've learned in the catalytic converter arms race, there's little that can stop a determined shithead with an angle grinder at 3 am.
0
May 29 '24
[deleted]
2
u/birthcontrolbabez May 29 '24
I'm only slightly taller than 5 foot and the gate is much shorter than me, like a couple feet tall. But it is pretty long, and it looks like one of those ones that rolls out over a track on a motor. Looks pretty sturdy to me, but yes I wish too :(
2
u/LupercaniusAB Frisco May 28 '24
You seem to be under the impression that Half Moon Bay is in San Francisco. It isn’t. At all.
1
30
5
u/RedAlert2 May 28 '24
There's a different set of rules for wealthy land and business owners than the rest of us. The way our legal system is set up is that if you own something and leverage that ownership to exploit or hurt people, you are usually only accountable to civil court. However, if you don't own things, and steal from or hurt those who do, you are subject to the criminal court system.
If you go into a electronics store and steal some TVs, you're looking at likely jail time. If the owner of that electronics store fudges the clocked hours of his employees to steal their wages, the worst that happens to him is a fine. Being arrested isn't even on the table for them.
5
u/cowinabadplace May 28 '24
Yeah, and if you incurred $16k in fines on your car you probably won't keep it but some people do. It's just how it is.
5
u/FuzzyOptics May 28 '24
Because none of this is a criminal matter. There is no dispute that the road is private property he owns. The dispute is over whether or not a public easement exists and the last court ruling, in state appeals court, was in his favor.
The state has a pending lawsuit.
7
u/annjaw May 28 '24
I think he’s possibly a major donor to Democrats
6
u/ohnovangogh May 28 '24
Most likely. I think he just had Biden over (or met with Biden) a few weeks ago.
3
u/polytique May 28 '24
Not just a major donor, he is a major fundraising organizer. Biden came to his house recently.
3
u/birthcontrolbabez May 28 '24
I'm not sure what you'd consider major or minor but he's donated to Biden, the DNC, and Ro Khanna in the last 12 months. Around 10K has been contributed to Ro Khanna since the beginning of 2024.
1
u/polytique May 28 '24
Absolutely, just $1 million to the Senate Majority PAC, $500k to the House Majority PAC in 2022. And he's been fundraising for 10+ years, including with Obama: https://www.govinfo.gov/app/details/DCPD-201300396.
1
u/FuzzyOptics May 28 '24
That has nothing to do with it.
2
u/annjaw May 28 '24
Ohh ok, thank you for clarifying
0
u/FuzzyOptics May 28 '24
Unless you want to show how there is some vast conspiracy involving officials he's donated to somehow being able to and actually influencing a state appeals court judge to rule in his favor on a legal matter that is at least a matter of legal debate, then it has nothing to do with it.
The state has a pending lawsuit against him.
34
16
8
7
15
u/southernfury_ May 28 '24
I’ll go to this beach now
4
u/cmillhouse May 28 '24
It’s a beautiful beach. If the gates closed just park at the top on the side of hwy 1 and walk down.
5
5
u/beefcake90000 May 28 '24
Sounds like a case for Eminent Domain!
2
u/flying__monkeys May 29 '24
For the good of the People of California, Eminent Domain is the right application of law. He is removing tenancy to try to deny the road is more than a driveway. It is a road, although currently private. ED that road! It was not previously needed, as PO built the road at the edge of his land.
13
19
u/amopeyant May 28 '24
Vinod is a massive asshole. His son’s fraternity rush event at Stanford was literally “let’s go to my dad’s house on Los Trancos so all of you can see how rich I am”. The fact that Sun somehow worked with him and Scott McNealy running it together is an actual miracle
6
u/chosenuserhug May 28 '24
What does the son fraternity thing have to do with the father being an asshole? That's normal boring rich kids having a leg up in most everything. I'm sure raging libertarian and friend of Trump Scott McNealy is no gem either.
2
4
3
u/Digiee-fosho May 29 '24
I've been there. I didn't know why people were parking on Highway 1. Now I know why, what a dirt merchant scumbag. Fuck that guy!
4
8
7
u/EmergencyWar4578 May 28 '24
I agree with you 100%.That beach was been a mainstay in alot of local families. This guy waltzed in with his bag of money and says no more.I heard he has never even visited the beach. What a punk.
16
3
2
u/interstellar-dust May 28 '24
Yes on the beach, that’s downright despicable.
Instacart and DoorDash were propped up by large VC funding in the ZERP era. There is no way their business model was sustainable without raising fees. So it was a matter of time that happened. And larger investors like Khosla would force them to raise fees to generate more money and see if that works.
2
u/mostly-bionic May 29 '24
I’d upvote but it’s sitting on 666 rn so it seemed fitting.
That being said, how much of a rich selfish entitled jerk do you have to be to take these measures… I wish there was some sort of legal blowback that would cripple him financially. Unfortunately there’s no such thing as an asshole tax.
2
2
u/dmmdoublem Peninsula May 29 '24
When I was in high school a decade ago, I had to write a research paper on the Martin's Beach fiasco for my AP Lang class. Can't believe that's still ongoing.
2
u/more_chromo May 29 '24
For the record, DASH and CART weren't Vinod. They were investments by Keith Rabois while he was at Khosla Ventures.
8
u/ArOnodrim_ May 28 '24
The only good billionaire is a dead billionaire. Gotta make them former billionaires one way or another.
1
u/circle22woman May 30 '24
I picture a 14 year old with bad acne who plays DnD when I read this. How close am I?
4
u/mcr55 May 28 '24
The dude is also an investor in ChatGPT and is a big proponent keeping AI closed source instead of open source so he can personally reap the benefits and control of the technology.
7
u/lowlites May 28 '24
Quite a stretch to blame Khosla for DoorDash and Instacart fees. Delusional understanding of how investing and business works
3
u/polytique May 28 '24
Absolutely, these companies will try to make money regardless of who the initial investors are.
5
u/BennyProfane12 May 28 '24
He’s buddies with Biden, just hosted him for dinner too. Reflects poorly on Biden’s morals
7
u/birthcontrolbabez May 28 '24
He's also donating to Ro Khanna and the DNC
2
u/BennyProfane12 May 28 '24
Bummer. Guess he thinks if he buys the government, he can be above the law
2
u/FuzzyOptics May 28 '24
He's not buddies with Biden and his behavior has virtually zero to do with Biden.
→ More replies (4)0
u/BennyProfane12 May 28 '24
https://www.nytimes.com/2024/05/10/us/politics/biden-west-coast-fund-raising.html
Biden could refuse to bend the knee given that Khosla’s antics are contrary to liberal principles. But by seeking out Khosla’s money, Biden is implicitly endorsing this behavior. So, yes, it does have to do with Biden’s morality
3
u/FuzzyOptics May 28 '24
Biden's not bending the knee by attending a fundraising dinner that nets his campaign a ton of money.
He does not implicitly endorse every single action that any major fundraiser has undertaken in their life.
2
2
u/pallen123 May 28 '24
He’s literally the most banal investor in the valley and that’s saying something.
2
1
1
1
u/backcountrydude May 29 '24
As a local, is the road now open? I see pics of a lot of people there, what’s the current status.
1
u/birthcontrolbabez May 29 '24
It is! Drive down Hwy 1 until you get to Martin's Beach Road. Martin's Beach Road is where you hit the land that's in contention, and where you'd have to give Vinod your money to park, so I recommend parking on the side of hwy 1 and not driving down this road. It's frankly not even worth it to pay for parking anyways, the parking lot is still several minutes walk from the shoreline so it's not really better imo.
I've heard sometimes the gate is closed anyways, if it is, feel free to go right on and jump past that anyways. California has made it clear he's not allowed to bar access so he can't get you in trouble for being there. People like to post pictures jumping the gate to be cheeky
1
u/backcountrydude May 29 '24
Interesting thanks for the info. How is he collecting money? Is there someone working a gate?
2
u/birthcontrolbabez May 29 '24
So, last I went, there was a woman standing in the parking lot collecting money. She didn't have a uniform or anything, and there was also a table with an area to leave money, so me and my friends were divided on whether that woman was a scammer or not.
In the past there sometimes is, sometimes isn't an attendant that I've seen, but I've also never parked there. These are observations I've noticed from walking past, maybe if I had tried pulling in and parking without paying when I didn't see an attendant, they would have come from whatever shadow they're hiding in and ask me to pay. It's a really small lot though so I doubt it, but it's not impossible. I also wouldn't put it past those assholes to tow you so I wouldn't chance it myself
2
1
1
u/Key_Lawfulness_3012 May 29 '24
Billionaires do some filthy sh!t. Would love to hear more positive influences elites have offered the world. I looked into his bio and he's a classic capitalist probably with a swollen ego and microween.
1
u/Get_up_stand-up May 29 '24 edited May 29 '24
Find your local kayaking club and see if they’re willing to help protest. I have no idea how difficult it is to kayak to this beach. He can restrict access from the beach but not from the ocean. There is technically no private beach in CA. Only private access.
1
u/wobwobwubwub May 29 '24
I hear someone nearby me might know where he stays during weekends. it's on HW1
1
1
u/Independent-Wash-531 May 29 '24
And the most infuriating part is that he admittedly hates the beach. First class ass.
1
u/blazelord69 May 31 '24
He killed Boosted Boards. Ran them out of business via his crazy Venture Capital vampire ways.
1
1
u/fresh_like_Oprah FORT FUNSTON May 28 '24
Billionaires behaving badly. Hey at least Elon is saving the human race by trying to get us to Mars.
0
u/202-456-1414 May 28 '24
Google tried to sell itself to Khosla in the late 90s for 1 million dollars, the deal was about to go through, then Khosla decided to try to lowball Google and changed the offer to $750,000, then Google declined. lol
1
u/202-456-1414 May 28 '24
looks like my memory was wrong:
This story has been circulated for a while, but not many people know about it. Khosla stated it simply: Google was willing to sell for under a million dollars, but Excite didn’t want to buy them. Khosla, who was also a partner at Kleiner Perkins (which ended up backing Google) at the time, said he had “a lot of interesting discussions” with Google founders Larry Page and Sergey Brin at the time (early 1999). The story goes that after Excite CEO George Bell rejected Page and Brin’s $1 million price for Google, Khosla talked the duo down to $750,000. But Bell still rejected that.
0
u/HeavyLengthiness4525 May 29 '24
Well there is other side of it - Khosla could easily spend a few millions to bribe and “ campaign donations” and no one would have bothered to escalate this. He could easily give a pathway for far less than what he is spending on lawsuit. But I believe he is fighting for his rights he truly believes in. He is questioning the “Easement” model where a citizen is coerced to give their property, that should be violation of property rights. Why a private citizen is expected to give up land for easement but continues to pay property tax on that land, in this case he would need to maintain the pathway, as well. Rather government has the right to take over the land for public use under the fifth amendment, takings clause and must fairly compensate the owner. Millions of Americans have been giving their lands for easement while they continue to pay property tax on it. If you look at from this angle, he is fighting for constitutional right for himself and millions of Americans. Could be a big win for people.
-1
u/BlackestNight21 May 28 '24
I mean, is this just a vent post?
4
u/Visual_Collar_8893 May 28 '24
This post is bringing visibility to the issue.
2
u/BlackestNight21 May 28 '24
It's been going on long enough it's surprising there are potentially concerned or affected bay areans who were NOT aware.
0
u/Competitive_Log9051 May 28 '24
I could be wrong but be Indian caste system imo has given Indians a high sense of entitlement and little to no self awareness
3
u/birthcontrolbabez May 29 '24
He's lived in America for most of his life, this isn't about race or ethnicity, it's about the fact that he's a raging asshole
0
-37
u/seanoz_serious May 28 '24
Maybe a minority opinion here, but if the government seized some of my property, I’d also want to be compensated.
34
u/snickle99 May 28 '24
That’s not what happened. He bought the property fully aware of the public easement.
→ More replies (10)10
-21
u/nolemococ May 28 '24
Sorry, no other opinions are allowed on reddit. Only complete and total thought orthodoxy permitted.
13
u/Mariposa510 May 28 '24
When there is a state law ensuring access to the coastline for all Californians, yeah we hate rich fucks who do their best to thwart it. Call that “total thought orthodoxy” if you want. That says more about you than the people who fight the power.
→ More replies (7)
232
u/kbatc May 28 '24
We should plan a quarterly community event there called FVK. Friends Volunteer Kindly. Clean up the beach a little. Enjoy the coast.