patrick.net

I know Sacramento has really seen a surge in listings. Heard it's now at the highest level since 1999.

“I’m tracking MLS stats for Marin, Napa, and Sonoma. It would be interesting if there’s a correlation.”

So what are you seeing up there?

I started tracking in early August, so you're way ahead of me. Looking around, I see that homes locally are sitting much longer, and others saying "price reduced". Sales are down, inventory is up (I have data on that), so I'm guessing people aren't willing to budge on the price, and the home sits...

I know Sacramento has really seen a surge in listings. Heard it’s now at the highest level since 1999.

Certain areas of Sac have seen a big increase in inventory. Rental listings in those areas are up too. Articles in the paper say that speculators in certain areas are getting spooked and are trying to sell.

I guess realtors cant convince buys that they have to jump on a property if its been on the mkt for 8 weeks

Nope, don't want to give them a competitive edge, eh?

Here's a direct example...I've mentioned this flipped property before (way overpriced, on a busy street, etc.). I think it's been out there for a month, and it's dropped from $800K to $774. (huh --real estate goes down after all) And since it's nearby, so it will be fun to see if it drops further.

http://tinyurl.com/b6hpf

...so I’m guessing people aren’t willing to budge on the price, and the home sits…

I guarantee you that something will give shortly. There are still those people who have bought the 2nd or 3rd house/condo/townhouse that has been sitting empty since they purchased them. The plans that many of them had in mind was to either rent them out for a short time (renting less than the monthly mortgage), then sell (at a profit), or let it sit empty (while they dug into their pockets) for a few months or a year and sell (again, supposedly, at a profit). I suspect that those folks may be getting a little nervous at the reduction of prices around them.

Now, regarding MP's Marina's whoop-de-doo dream house....there are just folks who have money to throw at anything and will find words to justify it. Granted, it is probably "prime" property (what IS a good, working definition of "prime"?) but...wow...that's a lot of money. $400K over asking? How many offers could there have been? Just wondering....

BayQT~

Here’s a direct example…I’ve mentioned this flipped property before (way overpriced, on a busy street, etc.). I think it’s been out there for a month, and it’s dropped from $800K to $774.

I've always thought of San Anselmo to be such a quaint little town. And that's such a cute house. But, DAYUMM, 3/4's of a million dollars?? I'll just snap a picture and put it on my refrigerator, thank you. LOL!

BayQT~

sfbayqt:
Now, regarding MP’s Marina’s whoop-de-doo dream house….there are just folks who have money to throw at anything and will find words to justify it. Granted, it is probably “prime” property (what IS a good, working definition of “prime”?) but…wow…that’s a lot of money. $400K over asking? How many offers could there have been? Just wondering….

Yeah, I agree--it's only a matter of time before these "investors" realize the magnitude of their mistake. Regarding the Marina--I'm sure that area has attracted MANY investors too (just wealthier but no more wise) Sorry MP--nothing personal. I think it's a great area, just a bit steep. Regarding "prime" areas, I also wonder if the dynamic is any different there. Yesterday, I was in Belvedere, which is one of the pricier (or "prime") bay area zip codes (if not in the whole country). There, I've noticed the same homes for sale since January. The home prices range between $2M-$4M, a 2BR townhouse for $1.1M . So, I'm starting to wonder...why aren't these waterfront homes snapped up right away, or do the wealthy consider them overpriced as well? Perhaps...the wealthy* care about value as much as average joe? For that reason, I wonder if prices will drop across the board if a "crash" ensues?

*unless a $20K/mo. mortgage+tax is chump change for you.

is it illegal to put MLS data online?

What--confidential, or public knowledge?

can I use MLS to tell me how many times a property has changed hands in a given time frame and what the sale prices were?

I wish I had that info! I just use realtor.com--or look at local listings. If there's a way to see the history of a property, that would sure be informative.

I just use realtor.com–or look at local listings. If there’s a way to see the history of a property, that would sure be informative.

I'm like you, Kurt. I just use realtor.com and local listings. That information would be priceless for negotiations. Then again, that is probably the point in having limited access to that info. :-( Heaven forbid we give the buyer too much leverage. But at least everyone would be on the same page, ya know.

BayQT~

MLS is a private database, maintained by the Nat'l Ass'n of Realtors. Realtor® is a trademark of the same people.

It's a classic disparity of information scam. The NAR hoards information that would otherwise be used to create an honest market.

Nonetheless, it's not secret information. A lot of it is a matter of public record. It's certainly not illegal to post it, but it is in violation of the contract between Realtor®s and the NAR.

See above re: Shmend Rick's comments about self-perpetuating cabals taken to a ridiculous extreme.

I’m like you, Kurt. I just use realtor.com and local listings. That information would be priceless for negotiations. Then again, that is probably the point in having limited access to that info.

Without full MLS access, my approach to building a history on properties in my local area is to drive around, collect flyers, and date them. This is how I noticed the San Anselmo place had dropped to $774K. I figure if someone really knows the area, they'll be in a better bargaining position.

The ditech instant home appraisal calculator that I heard about on this blog at least tells what the last sale price for the house was, and when it last sold. Not a complete history of changing hands, but it's helpful to know.

http://www.ditech.com/calculators/appraisal/form.do

I just looked up that San Anselmo house that KurtS posted, and it came up with the following valuation:

Last Sale Price: $537,000.00
Last Sale Date: 07/27/2004
High Value Estimate: $690,000.00
Low Value Estimate: $590,000.00

Interesting that even after a price reduction, they're still asking more than this particular calculator's high estimate of the property's value.

I just looked up that San Anselmo house that KurtS posted, and it came up with the following valuation:

Last Sale Price: $537,000.00
Last Sale Date: 07/27/2004
High Value Estimate: $690,000.00
Low Value Estimate: $590,000.00

Wow! You rock for looking that up!
I smell a flipper--good luck!

I was thinking the same thing--smells like a flipper. Kind of makes me want to do a random sampling of a a couple hundred remodeled houses listed in the BA on realtor.com and see how many of them have changed hands in the past year or so...anyone wanna help? We could each pick a town...

I was thinking the same thing–smells like a flipper. Kind of makes me want to do a random sampling of a a couple hundred remodeled houses listed in the BA on realtor.com and see how many of them have changed hands in the past year or so…anyone wanna help? We could each pick a town…

How do you do that? Do you just type in the address on ditech and they give you the info? If it's that easy count me in.

SHmend–the MLS keeps track of all that info, but you have to be a realator (or know one very well ) to access it. I actually had this type of access earlier in the year. the flipping activity was astronomical

Yuan

Do you have any numbers/stats on the amount of flipping going on? There are those (who shall remain unnamed :roll: ) who claim that speculation in the market is overstated and that it's just a bear's argument against normal price appreciation. It would be nice to have someone with first hand knowledge to back those of us who think speculation has been rampant.

SactoQt, for the Ditech appraisal calculator, yes, you type in the address. It requires the complete address (which realtor.com doesn't always give), I think, and it's a tiny bit cumbersome in that you have to select from a few menus--like a million different words for "Street."

I will try it (and time it) with a few more properties later just to see how time-consuming it would be to do.

what public records are available? what is only on MLS?

Real estate sales information is public record. Historical data is not always so easy to acquire (most towns don't have those records online), but it is also in MLS. Naturally info like square footage is public too.

MLS also keeps history like listing dates, days on market, relisting, listed and withdrawn, etc. That's private stuff. Also photos.

Note that this stuff is actually copyrighted data. They also claim a copyright on their collection of public information. Sketchy, but it has precedent.

The NAR doesn't exactly own MLS. I lied. The local Realtor® organizations own the MLS for their area. I think they generally organize by state, since RE laws are different enough. This is why you see different information on listings from different areas. There's a lot of stuff in there, only some of which is exposed.

SactoQt, for the Ditech appraisal calculator, yes, you type in the address. It requires the complete address (which realtor.com doesn’t always give), I think, and it’s a tiny bit cumbersome in that you have to select from a few menus–like a million different words for “Street.”

I'll have to play with it too. I know yahoo maps will give zip codes when you look for directions, so I think that could help with complete addresses. This could be such a great tool when you go looking for a house; not only would you know the history of the house you're looking at, but you could look at the activity in the whole neighborhood. Plus, sometimes it's just fun to be nosy. :grin:

The ditech instant home appraisal calculator that I heard about on this blog at least tells what the last sale price for the house was, and when it last sold.

Not always the case, however. I have been using that appraisal calculator for a while, looking up my current property and others I have owned....some of the results do not pan out with the correct info. If the property has been refinanced, that may show as the "last sale price". 2 cases: I refinanced in 2003 but it doesn't show...it shows my original purchase price (1999). But I know of a home that was purchased in 1989, and it was refinanced in 1999...it shows $0.00 sales price but has the date of the refinance as the "last sale date".

BayQT~

MLS also keeps data like "waterfront", "park-like view", "3-car parking", etc which is value-added stuff above public record information.

MLS also keeps data like “waterfront”, “park-like view”, “3-car parking”, etc which is value-added stuff above public record information.

Yes, misinformation can be truly value-adding for the seller.

Yuan

Yeah, it would be difficult to get hard #'s on flippers, but I think your gut feel is probably accurate enough. I've noticed that the markets that have been pegged by the media as weakening out here have seen a huge surge of properties both for sale and rent. Speculation in the Sacto region (especially in the area of Natomas which is by Arco Arena) has been rampant enough for the broadcast news to do a number of stories on it. The Bee also recently printed an article that stated speculators are getting nervous, specifically around the Natomas area, and that a lot of 'for sale' signs are popping up. I think it will have a cascade effect; once on area starts selling off, investors in neighboring areas will get nervous and do the same thing. I think what we're seeing out here now is the tip of the iceberg.

The family who sold the house are in Venture Capital, and they actually bought a larger house just down the street. I don’t really think anybody should blame them for being ‘investors.’ I mean, they invested in the house to live a nice life. They invested so their kids could have a nice safe environment to play in. And, they invested their proceeds to an even larger house. Is that so bad?

Don't blame at all for being investors, or for buying (not *investing*) in a nice house to live a nice life. But how much damn house does one need to raise kids? $2.5 million worth of house? I guess so. If I had the money, I'd look at the very nice houses, too. But I'm frugal and definitely a bit practical in my spending or investing.

Personally, I think the house and location is fantastic, despite it being in the middle of landfill.

HUH!!?? Did you say in the middle of a landfill??? 8-O Oh, I'm finished now. LOL! I have no more to say about this house.

BayQT~

I have had difficulty getting accurate information about foreclosures too. My Mom and Dad bought a house years ago, and were halfway through the process before they found out the 'seller' was actually the already foreclosed on previous owner. They had scammed some other people on other properties as well by 'selling' properties that had already been repo'd by the bank. Fortunately my Mom thought something was up and investigated the property before they put any money down. They ended up buying it from the bank and turned in the former owners for fraud.

My point in posting this is that I've noticed a lot of sites that advertise foreclosures for sale but list the owners as the sellers. If the property is already foreclosed on, obviously it is now owned by the bank. Now, I'm willing to give the benefit of the doubt to some owners who are trying to sell before the property is foreclosed on. But I think a lot of people are just trying to get interest in a property by claiming they are selling it before it's foreclosed on, because a lot of the asking prices on the so called foreclosures I saw were astronomical.

Needless to say, I don't trust a lot of sources I've seen on the net about foreclosures.

MP,

Yep...you are right. I completely forgot about what happened in the Marina District after the Loma Prieta Quake in '89. Lots of liquifaction.

tinyurl.com/84l45

BayQT~

I remember when I was in school in Japan, and my homestay father was telling me about the Kansai airport, which was built on landfill. It was the newest most high-tech, ultra modern airport. I saw it, and I must admit it was really nice. Now in Japan, landfill is very common due to the lack of land. I don't remember the price tag on building the airport, but it could have been in the billion dollar range.

Anyway, it was sinking.

I did see a story on the history channel about how they were going about fixing the problem. This involved lots more landfill and mega$$$. As far as I know the airport is still open, so maybe the problem is solved-- at least temporarily.

Once again, it always pays to buy in the best location possible, despite the high price.

I agree... locations beyond school districts though.

As far as I know the airport is still open, so maybe the problem is solved– at least temporarily.

I don't think the problem is solved. It is just sinking so slowly that it does not matter... yet.

Speaking of liqufaction. Not long after I left Japan the Kobe quake hit. I know that despite supposedly earthquake- safe building that had been done, there was massive damage, and that many railroads that had been built on landfill totally collapsed.

I don’t think the problem is solved. It is just sinking so slowly that it does not matter… yet.

Since they've already spent lots of $$ shoring it up, it might be sinking faster than we know.

I know that despite supposedly earthquake- safe building that had been done, there was massive damage, and that many railroads that had been built on landfill totally collapsed.

It is just difficult to build structure for earthquakes because there are some many different forms and types. I really think we should have hydralic dampening devices. An active dampening foundation should stand a better chance.

I don’t think the problem is solved. It is just sinking so slowly that it does not matter… yet.

Sort of like the Tower of Pisa, huh. They just continue to shore it up the best way that they can.

BayQT~

It is just difficult to build structure for earthquakes because there are some many different forms and types. I really think we should have hydralic dampening devices. An active dampening foundation should stand a better chance.

How likely is this to happen? I mean, is it cost effective enough or do you think builders will just figure it's cheaper to build another traditional style house when the old one falls down?

How likely is this to happen? I mean, is it cost effective enough or do you think builders will just figure it’s cheaper to build another traditional style house when the old one falls down?

Of course they rather have buildings that fall down every few years... :(

Sort of like the Tower of Pisa, huh. They just continue to shore it up the best way that they can.

But they will not fix the problem even if they can... otherwise, there will be no Tower of Pisa.

What was I thinking? Builders wanting to build something that lasts????
Silly me. :?

otherwise, there will be no Tower of Pisa.

There will still be a tower, but it won't be the leaning tourist attraction anymore. (that's what you meant isn't it Peter?)

There will still be a tower, but it won’t be the leaning tourist attraction anymore. (that’s what you meant isn’t it Peter?)

Yes, there will be "some tower around the town of Pisa" but no "Tower of Pisa".