0
0

Evil Buyers Display Extreme Cruelty to Distressed Sellers


 invite response                
2007 Apr 17, 5:43am   33,611 views  547 comments

by HARM   ➕follow (0)   💰tip   ignore  

buyer eyeing seller

Sadistic, Greedy Buyers Toying with Sellers Like Cats with Prey*
Copyright © 2007 UnReality Times®. All Rights Reserved.
by David Lereah, Leslie Appleton-Young and John Karevoll

As the alleged real estate bear market enters its second year of hitting bottom, some buyers out there are clearly enjoying this one-time market aberration --perhaps a little too much. Is deriving sadistic glee from other peoples' suffering a nice thing to do? The Germans have a word for this: schadenfreude (and we all know what cruelty the Germans are capable of!).

According to Donald Parisi, president of the Realtor Association of the Fox Valley (IL), buyer cruelty is reaching grotesque proportions:

"Parisi said he believes ‘doom and gloom’ media coverage has hurt the market. 'We’ve seen some very ridiculous offers,' Parisi said. 'People shouldn’t be desperate … The problem is some buyers are out there just to take advantage of the marketplace.'"

This view is further clarified by Jim Fox, manager of Realty One in Canton, Ohio:

“As unrealistic, said Fox, are some would-be buyers; they expect sellers to practically give their homes away. ‘Some people, … they want us to help them steal a home,’ Fox said.”

Even more to the point than Mr. Parisi, Florida Realtorâ„¢ Becky Troutt gets right to the heart of the matter:

"I think some of the buyers are out for blood! ...There is a difference from 'getting a deal' and 'trying to get something for nothing'! Just because the market is slow right now and homes take longer to sell.....doesn't mean that sellers are going to give their homes away and it doesn't give you the right to go for the jugular vein! How insulted would you be if you were that seller and someone asked you to come down off your price $90,000? Do you think you would say...ok sure no problem. I'm not spinning my heels in mud with an unrealistic buyer who only wants to try and rip a seller off!"

A note to home buyers: If you only want to pay $200,000 for a home......don't look at homes that are $90,000 more than you want to spend or can afford just because it's a slow market, and you think you can get a seller down that much.....because....IT AIN'T GONNA HAPPEN!!!"

Now, that's telling 'em like it is, Becky!

While the unbridled greed and glee exhibited by these sadistic buyers (and the American Dreamâ„¢-hating press) are stomach-turning awful, they are not the primary causes of this upside-down market. The real culprit for this most unnatural and unhealthy market condition, is well understood in the industry:

"What appears to be driving the increase in foreclosures is that home values are not rising, DataQuick analyst Andrew LePage said. 'Take away home-price appreciation, or ratchet it down or even make prices negative, and all of those forms of (economic) distress start to result in increased foreclosure activity,' LePage said."

Clearly what's needed here is massive government intervention to protect homeowners and rekindle the normal 20%/year appreciation. This might take the form of a distressed homeowner mortgage buy-down, or federal underwriting for all the kindhearted subprime lenders who generously enabled low-income Americans participate in the American Dreamâ„¢ (often mischaracterized by Gloom'n'Doomers as a "bailout").

To proactively tackle this looming crisis, the NAR and CAR have teamed up with the MBAA (Mortgage Bankers Association of America) to sponsor the Save the American Dreamâ„¢ Act of 2007. Says NAR Chief Economist, David Lereah, "We are urging people to sign our online petition, and write, call, email and beg their Senators and Congresspersons to support this badly needed piece of mercy legislation. Home ownership is as American as apple pie --only you (and Uncle Sam) have the power to save it! Please do your patriotic duty and support the SADA. God bless."

[*Note: while the offset quotes and links are real, this 'article' is a parody]

#housing

« First        Comments 240 - 279 of 547       Last »     Search these comments

240   DaBoss   2007 Apr 18, 3:40am  

Malcolm and crue-
I asked a former Ebay employee why Ebay didnt get into Real Estate as deep as they could. The answer was, many states require a certified represenative in the state to conduct business. I suspect this was put into place when interstate banking regulation was being rewritten and powers to be in each state wanted to maintain control over markets.
If we had Fed Deregulation this would assist in breaking down barriers.

Since Ebay isnt a Realtor firm they are excluded from conducting such business on mass scale in California. Actually I think they are a Delware company.

241   Malcolm   2007 Apr 18, 3:41am  

Randy you are questioning basic economic theory of excess profits. Economic theory states they are temporary so now we are discussing freshman college stuff. Anyway I won't be baited with YOUR criteria since I don't see realtors as monopolies why would I strain to fabricate a concept of transactional monopolies to make a point I don't even want to make?

242   Randy H   2007 Apr 18, 3:44am  

In fact, the Supreme Court *just* ruled in a case which may serve to deny states wide regulatory powers over mortgage financing and more basic real estate transaction services. The Supremes seem to believe this power falls within the Federal Govt's domain.

Now whether that's good or bad in this context is yet to be seen. Depends how much control one believes the NAR has over Congress.

243   Malcolm   2007 Apr 18, 3:44am  

BTW Realtors are regulated so why does the criteria have to be unregulated transactional monopolies. Ebay btw is classic since it attempts to block transactions outside of itself but our system understands that IP is necessary for a business to fairly protect its revenue. Ebay is an auction site, not a networking site.

244   DinOR   2007 Apr 18, 3:44am  

SFBB,

If you're like me I kind of cringed when the realtwhores basically "stormed" Craigslist. For a very brief period sellers seeking alternatives found a little haven. They were able to peddle their wares (for cheap) on C/L without having to compete with an advertising juggernaut like NAR.

Well NAR wasn't having ANY of it. They quickly flooded it with SO MANY listings finding the actual FSBO's was like finding a needle in a haystack! I s_u_p_p_o_s_e some would argue that this is just another example of "free markets" in action but to me it's the equivelant of Safeway plunking down in the middle of the "farmer's market"? Uh...? Is this what Craig intended?

245   Randy H   2007 Apr 18, 3:45am  

Malcolm

No. I am not talking about excess profits. I am talking about dead loss. I don't know where you went to school but it must have rocked if you covered dead loss as freshman 101 econ.

Dead loss can be a permanent fixture in a non-competitive market. Thus, the terms "dead loss".

246   Malcolm   2007 Apr 18, 3:46am  

Just see SFbubble's post, I can't say it any better.

247   DaBoss   2007 Apr 18, 3:46am  

"What the NAR does is more like price fixing than anything else"

SF, they do it everyday with fake bids creating artificially high prices.
If we had an open auction where all bidders MUST be present and
a true open bidding process is conducted, then we could eliminate
any and all price fixing. This would also eliminate any sticky prices
and todays sellers would face immediate market moves. Gone would
be.. "my castle is worth a million pounds of gold." Sorry Charlie! Aint gonna happen.

248   Malcolm   2007 Apr 18, 3:46am  

No, and I wouldn't and don't take offense to the question.

249   DaBoss   2007 Apr 18, 3:49am  

SP - that could be taxable? Im not sure, my knowledge on Personal Taxes is limited. But is sure smells like ordinary income (boot).

250   Malcolm   2007 Apr 18, 3:50am  

Space, it used to be rare for bidding wars to occur. Normal markets are a buyer and seller negotiating, we don't need more laws or systems to make sure that everyone. ..............

251   DaBoss   2007 Apr 18, 3:51am  

Malcolm-
Agreed, more deregulation may be the answer.

252   Malcolm   2007 Apr 18, 3:51am  

Why can't people in this country just say no? If the price makes it so the deal is not attractive don't do it. Don't go running around looking for someone to legislate or a court to force the deal to your terms.

253   DinOR   2007 Apr 18, 3:54am  

We just did a whole thread devoted to pocket listings and feigned bidding wars so whatever "regulation" realtors fall under, it needs a serious going over.

(It does make for some lively debate though)

254   DinOR   2007 Apr 18, 3:56am  

We are just saying NO!

Bubble blogs are a buyer's strike water cooler. Uh! Excuse me, some of us here are actually thirsty (elbows way to front)

255   Malcolm   2007 Apr 18, 3:58am  

OMG, nothing but love btw, but DINO you just sat there, and made all of these points about MLS being monopolistic because no one can comptete with it, and it does all of this and that, and then you bring up the subject of pocket listings, where the agent on his own chooses not to use the tool because of an economic benefit.

256   Malcolm   2007 Apr 18, 3:59am  

This blog is great, this is actually the first message board that I've actively posted to.

257   Peter P   2007 Apr 18, 4:00am  

How do you tax a mini-valise containing $250K in currency notes that the buyer hands to the seller as partial, un-recorded consideration?

Don't currency notes have embedded GPS chips?

258   HeadSet   2007 Apr 18, 4:04am  

"Can you show me any other examples of *transactional* monopolies which have been (a) not regulated and (b) found legal? "

Again. The National Football League

259   DinOR   2007 Apr 18, 4:05am  

Malcom,

As usual, you're missing the point. It's this ENTIRE CULTURE of entitlement where NAR sees the buyer as nothing more than a necessary evil. The culmination of which is the "ultimate realtwhore circle jerk-fest" where properties are flipped back and forth amongst various straw buyers (complete with appraise-whore/lender collusion) where it takes the D.A a year and a half to figure out who was s@cking who off.

260   Malcolm   2007 Apr 18, 4:06am  

Sea World

261   Malcolm   2007 Apr 18, 4:07am  

Missing the point? I don't even see a point in that last post.

262   Peter P   2007 Apr 18, 4:08am  

This blog is great, this is actually the first message board that I’ve actively posted to.

Same here. Ben's blog is too informative. No one will talk about sushi.

263   Malcolm   2007 Apr 18, 4:08am  

Now the speculative bubble was some giant conspiracty of the realtors?

264   Malcolm   2007 Apr 18, 4:09am  

:) or cake.

265   Malcolm   2007 Apr 18, 4:10am  

You do realize entire culture of entitlement is a paradox.

266   Malcolm   2007 Apr 18, 4:11am  

Like saying they are all monopolies.

267   Malcolm   2007 Apr 18, 4:14am  

But it has to be from a JBR point of view, truly successful people can keep their silly opinions to themselves.

268   Peter P   2007 Apr 18, 4:14am  

We like to inform, persuade, AND entertain.

Yep. We have sophistry and post-modernism. :) We also have excellent data and analysis from Randy.

269   DinOR   2007 Apr 18, 4:18am  

Malcom,

Help Me, Help YOU! O.K?

NAR/MLS/REIC very quickly indoctrinates "rookies" into the "finer points" of being a realtwhore. USE the MLS when it suits your/our needs, circumvent (and SCREW the client) when double dipping is in order!

This infraction (if caught) carries some pretty stiff penalties, as much as five HUNDRED dollars! Pffft (I just got both ends for a total of 60k?) I think I can swing a $500 fine. Now you're trying to tell us these assclowns should be allowed to "self-regulate". That they should be trusted to run MLS in an ethical fashion? You're kidding, right?

270   sfbubblebuyer   2007 Apr 18, 4:20am  

Out of curiosity, which blog is the "ben's blog" y'all are referrin' to?

271   Malcolm   2007 Apr 18, 4:20am  

Yes, they will go out of business much qucker if you let them hang themselves. If you don't trust your realtor don't use him/her.

272   Peter P   2007 Apr 18, 4:22am  

Out of curiosity, which blog is the “ben’s blog” y’all are referrin’ to?

That would be the mother of all bubble blogs, thehousingbubbleblog.com.

But patrick.net is a community, if not a family.

273   Malcolm   2007 Apr 18, 4:22am  

If you get full asking price why would you care if you agent got both sides? Their job is to sell your house, if he has a pocket buyer I'd rather have that 'exclusivity'.

274   Peter P   2007 Apr 18, 4:26am  

If you get full asking price why would you care if you agent got both sides?

I agree. But I will only deal with good agents.

275   Malcolm   2007 Apr 18, 4:28am  

Your problem DINO is that you try to paint all realtors the same. They can be viewed as a commodity (contrary to many monopolies) but even that is not right because they are different in abilities, experiences, and networks. Some are good, some are disgusting, some are just new inompetent Johnny Come Lately types.

I suspect your model of how things should work basically ends up being a government HUD official lists your house in the national registry, then a buyer is approved by the national bank, and the deal is transacted at the government determined fair market price. Then no one can get hurt, and it will be much more efficient.

276   Peter P   2007 Apr 18, 4:30am  

I have met some good agents. I even have friends who are agents. You just need to trust your instincts on whether they can help you.

277   DinOR   2007 Apr 18, 4:31am  

Malcom,

Randy has tried to help you, I've tried to help you and you just keep flailing for some kind of loose thread to tug on. NAR is crooked, we all know it and their culture of corruption, collusion and entitlement is both legendary and well documented. There is no paradox. Not here.

And what's with the JBR/"successful" cheap shot? I've made (and lost) a lot money. I've never made anything secret about that. Anybody can act "classy" when they're winning.

278   DinOR   2007 Apr 18, 4:33am  

He's a realtor.

279   Malcolm   2007 Apr 18, 4:36am  

Peter P, your point is ridiculous. You actually expect people to shop around for a good agent? Absolutely absurd. Wait a minute, let me get this straight, you are advocating choosing an agent based on his or her actual ability. You don't find it UNFAIR to consider someone's track record in your decision? You don't seem to realize that you are VICTIMIZING newer agents who haven't proved themselves as yet. Don't you realize that this type of EXCLUSION makes you a greedy MONOPOLIST? If not a monopolist you are a DE FACTO COLLUSIVE MONOPOLY, and enough people like you can only lead to buyer CARTELS.

« First        Comments 240 - 279 of 547       Last »     Search these comments

Please register to comment:

api   best comments   contact   latest images   memes   one year ago   random   suggestions   gaiste