patrick.net
An Antidote to Corporate Media
1,260,415 comments by 15,050 users - Blue, FarmersWon, ForcedTQ, Patrick online now
NAR: Speculation Accounts for 40% of 2005 Home Sales
invite response
2006 Apr 5, 8:24am 15,273 views 153 comments
« First « Previous Comments 153 - 153 of 153 Search these comments
Newsfreak
Back in 2003 it was a different market and yes it sounds like in your situation the buyers agent was working for the buyer. However, a lot more'bargain hunters' seem to have crawled out of the woodwork....and if you are looking to close a bargain deal in a declining market, you need the perfect combination of elements as both DinOr and George pointed out. You need a buyer that CAN actually sell for a lowball price, the house has been sitting on the market with no action, a desperate realtor that NEEDS the sale,significant cash in hand, and some good strategies to close the deal. Often houses that are FSBO are overpriced so negotiating with an owner would be rare. Foreclosure buying is a science with many pitfalls and that market can be full of hawkers and bargain hunters also. I truly believe the best scenario for closing that deal is to get the sellers realtor in your pocket. This does have to be disclosed to the seller, but that realtor can offer the seller a kick back of part of their commision. If you are going to try FSBO then having an atty draw up your contract is invaluable. Mine made a loophole so I could get out of the deal if I got cold feet..the seller didn't catch it when he signed.
In closing, what I'm trying to say is that in the long run, the atty ,in my experience, can be less expensive in the long run AND you KNOW he's on your side, unlike some random,lying, untrustworthy, realtor. :P
« First « Previous Comments 153 - 153 of 153 Search these comments
Second homes 40% of market
Updated 4/5/2006 3:10 AM
By Noelle Knox, USA TODAY
This is up from 2004's already record-breaking 36% figure. This is a NATIONAL statistic, mind you, so we can safely assume that it is even higher along the Bubble coasts --probably much higher. On top of that juicy little tidbit, we get the following information from Ben Jones as to how exactly those Sub-prime issuers of IO/neg-am mortgages still manage to book all those "record profits" we keep hearing about:
Majority Of S&L Profits Neg-AM, ‘Non-Cash’
Let me see if I get this straight: The big neg-am (aka "option-ARM") lenders are deriving close to TWO-THIRDS of their reported "profits" by booking "deferred interest" on negatively amortizing loans WITHOUT ACTUALLY RECEIVING A PENNY. They're just assuming they'll be receiving all that "deferred interest" (the extra interest that gets tacked on to the loan principal when homedebtors make the minimum payment), whenever Mr. & Mrs. Specuvestor decide to sell. And of course they'll definitely be able to sell for much more than they paid, so why wait til then? Why not just go ahead and book all that guaranteed "profit" right now?
Wow. And I thought the Feds were good at "creative accounting". 8O
(begin sarcasm) Pardon me, but where was all that evidence about housing prices & lender profits actually reflecting demand? I seem to have misplaced it. Maybe Juku/MP/JohnJacob/etc. has the data. Oh, sorry... I forgot --they don't actually USE data. (/end sarcasm)
Discuss, enjoy...
HARM
#housing