Sam owns outright (no mortgage payments) two plots of land of equal size in Southern California. One plot is in Victorville (the High Desert) and the other is in the coastal community of Newport Beach. Sam was thinking about going into the self-storage business by building a self-storage facility on one of his two pieces of property. Sam did some calculations and he noticed that the monetary cost (direct payments of money) to build and operate a self-storage facility in either location would be identical over the next ten years with a dollar amount of $2 million. Sam did more calculations and he concluded that either location would bring in the identical revenue over the same ten-year period with a dollar amount of $5 million.

Thus, Sam concluded that it did not matter which location he built his self-storage facility because the bottom line (profit) of $3 million over ten years is identical for each location. After ten years, Sam plans to sell both plots of land and then retire to France. In the meantime Sam will be living in downtown LA conducting his business from there (thus Sam will not need to travel to either location hence where Sam lives now or later has nothing to do with this question).

Given that Sams calculations were correct on the costs of building and operating the self-storage facilities and on the revenue, please explain why Sams conclusion is incorrect.

Remember, Sams calculations are 100% correct. It is only his conclusion that is incorrect. Do not question his numbers in your answer. His numbers are, again, 100% ironclad correct. Your answer needs to be directed only at his conclusion. (If you do question his numbers, you will be marked down and most likely receive zero points.)