This applies to the seller and buyer, the lessor and lessee, and the husband and wife. The goods sold may be present or absent, and the price of goods that are present is lower than that of goods that are absent. Likewise, the buyer may be able to pay immediately because he has the money, or he may not have it but intend to borrow it or sell the goods. The price charged to the former is lower.

Similarly, the lessor may be able to deliver the use to which the lessee is entitled under the contract, allowing him to enjoy it without difficulty. Alternatively, the lessee may be unable to enjoy it without incurring trouble and expense. Such is the case with villages repeatedly visited by oppressors, whether powerful officials or thieves, or frequented by beasts of prey. Their value is not equal to that of land requiring no such effort.

Indeed, some properties can be fully utilized only by someone powerful enough to ward off harm, allocating some of their proceeds to his helpers and supporters. Someone else may derive only a slight benefit from such a property, whereas a person with power obtains its full benefit because he can protect it from harm.

Accordingly, the benefit derived from what is rented—and indeed from what is purchased, from a spouse, and from other things—varies. Someone with the necessary means may derive many times the benefit that another person obtains, because he can secure the conditions that increase its usefulness and remove the obstacles that prevent its use. Yet the greater benefit resulting from the conditions he has established and the obstacles he has removed does not necessarily warrant including that benefit in the valuation, unless a comparable case is assumed. Land may command only a small rent because of obstacles posed by aggressors or beasts of prey, or because obtaining its benefit requires strength and money.