Thought-provoking question!

I suggest you refer to discussion of land and property rights by Jurgen Oestereich in Habitat International, Vol 24 (2), 2000.Article Land and property rights: Some remarks on basic concepts and...

Also the work of 'Georgists' (Henry George) who view land as common property. Individuals or corporations cannot own land as such, but hold 'bundle of rights and duties over it'.

Such a concept and field of research seems especially relevant to land on the Moon, and not just the Moon, as it appears better able to deal with social and environmental externalities. Users rent land, and have 'use rights' with obligations attached. Such rights are transferable. Similar concept has been used in managing precious natural resources e.g. water rights for river water.

Whilst I don't claim to be real estate expert, I referred to above concept in my thesis 'Accounting for effects of oversupply of commercial property' (2002, 98-99)- you can find on my ResearchGate. Hope this helps.

It could be a reality after an unknown time.

This question can let us rethink the definition of land, real estate, and ownership.

First, we need to know the story of the Lunar Real Estate Agency and Dennis Hope.

https://www.lunarland.com/

https://lunarembassy.com/

https://lunarregistry.com/

https://lunarembassy.com/who-owns-the-moon-dennis-hope/

Second, we need to make clear that the land of the moon is a physical thing, but it is not a legal thing. Therefore, the laws of various countries, and even the United Nations Treaty on Outer Space 1967 in which Hope has exploited loopholes, cannot restrict the land on the moon. Because it is not the subject of property rights. Therefore, it makes no sense to talk about the ownership, sale, and transfer of the lunar real estate.

Finally, the transaction of moon real estate is just a game, without any legal protection. But this question makes us think about the essential properties of houses. When human ancestors transitioned from caves to building thatched houses on their own, the bottom line of the house will always provide people with a safe place from the wind and rain. However, its upper limit never exists.

I guess the first question that I have is who is selling? Since nobody owns the moon, before anyone can buy land there it should be determined who owns it or has claim on it. Will it be the the settling of North America sans native in habitants where the first country to lay claim to ownership wins or will it be an international coalition approach?

Anybody can become a Lunar Land Owner by purchasing acres of land on the Moon. ... Lunar Land is one of THE FIRST companies in the world to file for a legal TRADEMARK and COPYRIGHT for the sale of extraterrestrial property within the confines of our solar system

Earth real estate comes with a bundle of ecosystem services. In "The moon is a harsh mistress" Heinlein details just how vulnerable anybody would be to a cutoff of the full bundle of ecosystem services that would likely be supplied by somebody else. The value of land and any improvements would always be tied to the security of the ecosystem services that allowed them to function. I think instead of land absorbing the value of nearby amenities/development, the ecosystem service provider would absorb that value to the extent there is a monopoly on ecosystem service provision. If somehow it wasn't a utility-monopoly model than -I'll have to think more on that one.

NASA Names Companies to Develop Human Landers for Artemis Moon Missions

https://www.nasa.gov/press-release/nasa-names-companies-to-develop-human-landers-for-artemis-moon-missions