Conforming limit to $700,000?

[patientlywaiting]

SD Realtor, your market observation is correct. What ucodegen said also makes perfect sense.

Markets are based on the greater fool theory. Like Roubini said, people start dancing when the music begins to play. People have short memories (or no experience at all) and emotions will cause then to buy no matter what.

Investors who have long memories or who can learn from their own past mistakes and mistakes of others will thrive over the long term. The rest will experience boom and bust cycles.

[NotCranky]

Just in case anyone participating in this thread doesn’t a background on where these limits stood a month ago I am posting a paragraph from an article(and not crediting it properly).The paragraph also hs some info on how the limits are typically derived when not part of a supper bubble damage control plan(sham).

“Conforming Loan Limit Unchanged In 2008

The conforming loan limit, currently $417,000, will remain unchanged in 2008, announced OFHEO director James B. Lockhart. OFHEO is the entity that regulates Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac, the government-chartered guarantors of home mortgages. Any loans above the $417,000 limit are considered “jumbo” and cannot be guaranteed by Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac, so lenders usually charge higher interest on them. This limit only applies to one-unit properties; multiple-unit properties have higher limits. Alaska, Hawaii, Guam and the U.S. Virgin Islands have higher upper limits than other states. The maximum conforming loan limit is determined by analyzing October-to-October change in the average house price, which has declined more than 3% this year. The maximum limit hasn’t changed for the last 2 years, and it probably won’t get revised upwards anytime soon. The latest NAR report says the inventory of single-family homes on the market is at the highest level in 22 years (10.8 months’ supply), which can only drive home
prices down.”

Has anyone seen how the changes will affect multiple 2-4 unit properties? Other than some advantage coming from that I can see little use for more than the old limits for the investment properties some people are talking about or that Iwoudl be concerned with unless it has to do with a big old cash out?
I am happy about the interests rate trends as a whole. But if I take any of this cheap money it won’t be to prop up the market. I’ll protect it until this manipulation has run its course and prices crash further. If they don’t I’ll consider giving it back.

[NotCranky]

Just in case anyone participating in this thread doesn’t a background on where these limits stood a month ago I am posting a paragraph from an article(and not crediting it properly).The paragraph also hs some info on how the limits are typically derived when not part of a supper bubble damage control plan(sham).

“Conforming Loan Limit Unchanged In 2008

The conforming loan limit, currently $417,000, will remain unchanged in 2008, announced OFHEO director James B. Lockhart. OFHEO is the entity that regulates Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac, the government-chartered guarantors of home mortgages. Any loans above the $417,000 limit are considered “jumbo” and cannot be guaranteed by Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac, so lenders usually charge higher interest on them. This limit only applies to one-unit properties; multiple-unit properties have higher limits. Alaska, Hawaii, Guam and the U.S. Virgin Islands have higher upper limits than other states. The maximum conforming loan limit is determined by analyzing October-to-October change in the average house price, which has declined more than 3% this year. The maximum limit hasn’t changed for the last 2 years, and it probably won’t get revised upwards anytime soon. The latest NAR report says the inventory of single-family homes on the market is at the highest level in 22 years (10.8 months’ supply), which can only drive home
prices down.”

Has anyone seen how the changes will affect multiple 2-4 unit properties? Other than some advantage coming from that I can see little use for more than the old limits for the investment properties some people are talking about or that Iwoudl be concerned with unless it has to do with a big old cash out?
I am happy about the interests rate trends as a whole. But if I take any of this cheap money it won’t be to prop up the market. I’ll protect it until this manipulation has run its course and prices crash further. If they don’t I’ll consider giving it back.

[NotCranky]

Just in case anyone participating in this thread doesn’t a background on where these limits stood a month ago I am posting a paragraph from an article(and not crediting it properly).The paragraph also hs some info on how the limits are typically derived when not part of a supper bubble damage control plan(sham).

“Conforming Loan Limit Unchanged In 2008

The conforming loan limit, currently $417,000, will remain unchanged in 2008, announced OFHEO director James B. Lockhart. OFHEO is the entity that regulates Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac, the government-chartered guarantors of home mortgages. Any loans above the $417,000 limit are considered “jumbo” and cannot be guaranteed by Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac, so lenders usually charge higher interest on them. This limit only applies to one-unit properties; multiple-unit properties have higher limits. Alaska, Hawaii, Guam and the U.S. Virgin Islands have higher upper limits than other states. The maximum conforming loan limit is determined by analyzing October-to-October change in the average house price, which has declined more than 3% this year. The maximum limit hasn’t changed for the last 2 years, and it probably won’t get revised upwards anytime soon. The latest NAR report says the inventory of single-family homes on the market is at the highest level in 22 years (10.8 months’ supply), which can only drive home
prices down.”

Has anyone seen how the changes will affect multiple 2-4 unit properties? Other than some advantage coming from that I can see little use for more than the old limits for the investment properties some people are talking about or that Iwoudl be concerned with unless it has to do with a big old cash out?
I am happy about the interests rate trends as a whole. But if I take any of this cheap money it won’t be to prop up the market. I’ll protect it until this manipulation has run its course and prices crash further. If they don’t I’ll consider giving it back.

[NotCranky]

Just in case anyone participating in this thread doesn’t a background on where these limits stood a month ago I am posting a paragraph from an article(and not crediting it properly).The paragraph also hs some info on how the limits are typically derived when not part of a supper bubble damage control plan(sham).

“Conforming Loan Limit Unchanged In 2008

The conforming loan limit, currently $417,000, will remain unchanged in 2008, announced OFHEO director James B. Lockhart. OFHEO is the entity that regulates Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac, the government-chartered guarantors of home mortgages. Any loans above the $417,000 limit are considered “jumbo” and cannot be guaranteed by Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac, so lenders usually charge higher interest on them. This limit only applies to one-unit properties; multiple-unit properties have higher limits. Alaska, Hawaii, Guam and the U.S. Virgin Islands have higher upper limits than other states. The maximum conforming loan limit is determined by analyzing October-to-October change in the average house price, which has declined more than 3% this year. The maximum limit hasn’t changed for the last 2 years, and it probably won’t get revised upwards anytime soon. The latest NAR report says the inventory of single-family homes on the market is at the highest level in 22 years (10.8 months’ supply), which can only drive home
prices down.”

Has anyone seen how the changes will affect multiple 2-4 unit properties? Other than some advantage coming from that I can see little use for more than the old limits for the investment properties some people are talking about or that Iwoudl be concerned with unless it has to do with a big old cash out?
I am happy about the interests rate trends as a whole. But if I take any of this cheap money it won’t be to prop up the market. I’ll protect it until this manipulation has run its course and prices crash further. If they don’t I’ll consider giving it back.

[NotCranky]

Just in case anyone participating in this thread doesn’t a background on where these limits stood a month ago I am posting a paragraph from an article(and not crediting it properly).The paragraph also hs some info on how the limits are typically derived when not part of a supper bubble damage control plan(sham).

“Conforming Loan Limit Unchanged In 2008

The conforming loan limit, currently $417,000, will remain unchanged in 2008, announced OFHEO director James B. Lockhart. OFHEO is the entity that regulates Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac, the government-chartered guarantors of home mortgages. Any loans above the $417,000 limit are considered “jumbo” and cannot be guaranteed by Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac, so lenders usually charge higher interest on them. This limit only applies to one-unit properties; multiple-unit properties have higher limits. Alaska, Hawaii, Guam and the U.S. Virgin Islands have higher upper limits than other states. The maximum conforming loan limit is determined by analyzing October-to-October change in the average house price, which has declined more than 3% this year. The maximum limit hasn’t changed for the last 2 years, and it probably won’t get revised upwards anytime soon. The latest NAR report says the inventory of single-family homes on the market is at the highest level in 22 years (10.8 months’ supply), which can only drive home
prices down.”

Has anyone seen how the changes will affect multiple 2-4 unit properties? Other than some advantage coming from that I can see little use for more than the old limits for the investment properties some people are talking about or that Iwoudl be concerned with unless it has to do with a big old cash out?
I am happy about the interests rate trends as a whole. But if I take any of this cheap money it won’t be to prop up the market. I’ll protect it until this manipulation has run its course and prices crash further. If they don’t I’ll consider giving it back.

[ucodegen]

@SD Realtor

Would you consider ANYBODY buying in the market today a “savy” buyer? The facts just show that most buyers are indeed not savy.

I never said I considered them savy. That is why I am disagreeing with your statement earlier:

“This measure will simply help those who have money get more property”.

I was using the second quoted statement:

“While the savy buyer measures value of a home with regards to market conditions, pricing, etc… many a buyer, dare I say a majority simply look at the mortgage payment.”

to counter the first quoted statement. I don’t agree with the first quoted statement but agree with the second. I felt you were making slightly contradictory statements. I was also bringing in the fact that many of the non-savy buyers have already shot their wad… of cash to coin a phrase. They don’t have money to buy in now. The ones that have money to buy in are the savy buyers (who probably haven’t contacted a Realtor yet because they know this thing has legs in the downward direction) and wannabe savy who are fence sitters sitting on the edge of their seat. The change in conforming will probably pull the wannabe savies off the fence. Instead of “wannabe savy”, I was calling them green investors or green potential buyers. The green/inexperienced label is a bit nicer than wannabe. My two last sentences in the paragraph referring to green investor/buyers could have been clearer. I consider having money and the wisdom to use it properly going hand in hand because those with money currently but lacking wisdom are soon separated from their money.

Your argument is like a college professor giving a lecture. You use facts, you point out cause and expected affects. It all makes perfect sense.

However the world is not working like that. At least not yet.

I use facts because I know they are the only real counter argument to things that the NAR have been saying as well as other individuals/groups. I know the market is not working rationally and won’t until this thing has spent itself out. That is why I was doing a rational explanation of the liquidity, where the problems are, what is expected to happen and why the fed move and who is it really helping. Somehow people were getting the feeling that the fed dropping the rates was to help them with houses.. and I was trying to pull off the rose colored glasses.. if only for a second. I am not saying that you, SD Realtor, have rose colored glasses on. I do think there are viewers on this board who do.

Anyways again, no argument with your post, except that I am a heck of alot busier then I should be given the market conditions.

I know you are quite busy.. and that is what really scares the crap out of me. I bet the houses are not going for that much of a discount from ’05 prices. There have been several statements on the media that the turn around will occur in ’08 or ’09. I think the flattening that we will see in ’09 will be another suckers play. Neg Ams start resetting afterwards (and therefore the “All hell breaks loose.” statement).

I generally use my facts and analysis on this board because I feel the “quality of clientèle” is better. If I try the logic approach to a member of the general public, it is often too much for them to handle and their eyes glaze over. They then grasp a one of the statements the RE hypers have used to counter. Sorry if I sound like Tanta or Calculated Risk…

[ucodegen]

@SD Realtor

Would you consider ANYBODY buying in the market today a “savy” buyer? The facts just show that most buyers are indeed not savy.

I never said I considered them savy. That is why I am disagreeing with your statement earlier:

“This measure will simply help those who have money get more property”.

I was using the second quoted statement:

“While the savy buyer measures value of a home with regards to market conditions, pricing, etc… many a buyer, dare I say a majority simply look at the mortgage payment.”

to counter the first quoted statement. I don’t agree with the first quoted statement but agree with the second. I felt you were making slightly contradictory statements. I was also bringing in the fact that many of the non-savy buyers have already shot their wad… of cash to coin a phrase. They don’t have money to buy in now. The ones that have money to buy in are the savy buyers (who probably haven’t contacted a Realtor yet because they know this thing has legs in the downward direction) and wannabe savy who are fence sitters sitting on the edge of their seat. The change in conforming will probably pull the wannabe savies off the fence. Instead of “wannabe savy”, I was calling them green investors or green potential buyers. The green/inexperienced label is a bit nicer than wannabe. My two last sentences in the paragraph referring to green investor/buyers could have been clearer. I consider having money and the wisdom to use it properly going hand in hand because those with money currently but lacking wisdom are soon separated from their money.

Your argument is like a college professor giving a lecture. You use facts, you point out cause and expected affects. It all makes perfect sense.

However the world is not working like that. At least not yet.

I use facts because I know they are the only real counter argument to things that the NAR have been saying as well as other individuals/groups. I know the market is not working rationally and won’t until this thing has spent itself out. That is why I was doing a rational explanation of the liquidity, where the problems are, what is expected to happen and why the fed move and who is it really helping. Somehow people were getting the feeling that the fed dropping the rates was to help them with houses.. and I was trying to pull off the rose colored glasses.. if only for a second. I am not saying that you, SD Realtor, have rose colored glasses on. I do think there are viewers on this board who do.

Anyways again, no argument with your post, except that I am a heck of alot busier then I should be given the market conditions.

I know you are quite busy.. and that is what really scares the crap out of me. I bet the houses are not going for that much of a discount from ’05 prices. There have been several statements on the media that the turn around will occur in ’08 or ’09. I think the flattening that we will see in ’09 will be another suckers play. Neg Ams start resetting afterwards (and therefore the “All hell breaks loose.” statement).

I generally use my facts and analysis on this board because I feel the “quality of clientèle” is better. If I try the logic approach to a member of the general public, it is often too much for them to handle and their eyes glaze over. They then grasp a one of the statements the RE hypers have used to counter. Sorry if I sound like Tanta or Calculated Risk…

[ucodegen]

@SD Realtor

Would you consider ANYBODY buying in the market today a “savy” buyer? The facts just show that most buyers are indeed not savy.

I never said I considered them savy. That is why I am disagreeing with your statement earlier:

“This measure will simply help those who have money get more property”.

I was using the second quoted statement:

“While the savy buyer measures value of a home with regards to market conditions, pricing, etc… many a buyer, dare I say a majority simply look at the mortgage payment.”

to counter the first quoted statement. I don’t agree with the first quoted statement but agree with the second. I felt you were making slightly contradictory statements. I was also bringing in the fact that many of the non-savy buyers have already shot their wad… of cash to coin a phrase. They don’t have money to buy in now. The ones that have money to buy in are the savy buyers (who probably haven’t contacted a Realtor yet because they know this thing has legs in the downward direction) and wannabe savy who are fence sitters sitting on the edge of their seat. The change in conforming will probably pull the wannabe savies off the fence. Instead of “wannabe savy”, I was calling them green investors or green potential buyers. The green/inexperienced label is a bit nicer than wannabe. My two last sentences in the paragraph referring to green investor/buyers could have been clearer. I consider having money and the wisdom to use it properly going hand in hand because those with money currently but lacking wisdom are soon separated from their money.

Your argument is like a college professor giving a lecture. You use facts, you point out cause and expected affects. It all makes perfect sense.

However the world is not working like that. At least not yet.

I use facts because I know they are the only real counter argument to things that the NAR have been saying as well as other individuals/groups. I know the market is not working rationally and won’t until this thing has spent itself out. That is why I was doing a rational explanation of the liquidity, where the problems are, what is expected to happen and why the fed move and who is it really helping. Somehow people were getting the feeling that the fed dropping the rates was to help them with houses.. and I was trying to pull off the rose colored glasses.. if only for a second. I am not saying that you, SD Realtor, have rose colored glasses on. I do think there are viewers on this board who do.

Anyways again, no argument with your post, except that I am a heck of alot busier then I should be given the market conditions.

I know you are quite busy.. and that is what really scares the crap out of me. I bet the houses are not going for that much of a discount from ’05 prices. There have been several statements on the media that the turn around will occur in ’08 or ’09. I think the flattening that we will see in ’09 will be another suckers play. Neg Ams start resetting afterwards (and therefore the “All hell breaks loose.” statement).

I generally use my facts and analysis on this board because I feel the “quality of clientèle” is better. If I try the logic approach to a member of the general public, it is often too much for them to handle and their eyes glaze over. They then grasp a one of the statements the RE hypers have used to counter. Sorry if I sound like Tanta or Calculated Risk…

[ucodegen]

@SD Realtor

Would you consider ANYBODY buying in the market today a “savy” buyer? The facts just show that most buyers are indeed not savy.

I never said I considered them savy. That is why I am disagreeing with your statement earlier:

“This measure will simply help those who have money get more property”.

I was using the second quoted statement:

“While the savy buyer measures value of a home with regards to market conditions, pricing, etc… many a buyer, dare I say a majority simply look at the mortgage payment.”

to counter the first quoted statement. I don’t agree with the first quoted statement but agree with the second. I felt you were making slightly contradictory statements. I was also bringing in the fact that many of the non-savy buyers have already shot their wad… of cash to coin a phrase. They don’t have money to buy in now. The ones that have money to buy in are the savy buyers (who probably haven’t contacted a Realtor yet because they know this thing has legs in the downward direction) and wannabe savy who are fence sitters sitting on the edge of their seat. The change in conforming will probably pull the wannabe savies off the fence. Instead of “wannabe savy”, I was calling them green investors or green potential buyers. The green/inexperienced label is a bit nicer than wannabe. My two last sentences in the paragraph referring to green investor/buyers could have been clearer. I consider having money and the wisdom to use it properly going hand in hand because those with money currently but lacking wisdom are soon separated from their money.

Your argument is like a college professor giving a lecture. You use facts, you point out cause and expected affects. It all makes perfect sense.

However the world is not working like that. At least not yet.

I use facts because I know they are the only real counter argument to things that the NAR have been saying as well as other individuals/groups. I know the market is not working rationally and won’t until this thing has spent itself out. That is why I was doing a rational explanation of the liquidity, where the problems are, what is expected to happen and why the fed move and who is it really helping. Somehow people were getting the feeling that the fed dropping the rates was to help them with houses.. and I was trying to pull off the rose colored glasses.. if only for a second. I am not saying that you, SD Realtor, have rose colored glasses on. I do think there are viewers on this board who do.

Anyways again, no argument with your post, except that I am a heck of alot busier then I should be given the market conditions.

I know you are quite busy.. and that is what really scares the crap out of me. I bet the houses are not going for that much of a discount from ’05 prices. There have been several statements on the media that the turn around will occur in ’08 or ’09. I think the flattening that we will see in ’09 will be another suckers play. Neg Ams start resetting afterwards (and therefore the “All hell breaks loose.” statement).

I generally use my facts and analysis on this board because I feel the “quality of clientèle” is better. If I try the logic approach to a member of the general public, it is often too much for them to handle and their eyes glaze over. They then grasp a one of the statements the RE hypers have used to counter. Sorry if I sound like Tanta or Calculated Risk…

[ucodegen]

@SD Realtor

Would you consider ANYBODY buying in the market today a “savy” buyer? The facts just show that most buyers are indeed not savy.

I never said I considered them savy. That is why I am disagreeing with your statement earlier:

“This measure will simply help those who have money get more property”.

I was using the second quoted statement:

“While the savy buyer measures value of a home with regards to market conditions, pricing, etc… many a buyer, dare I say a majority simply look at the mortgage payment.”

to counter the first quoted statement. I don’t agree with the first quoted statement but agree with the second. I felt you were making slightly contradictory statements. I was also bringing in the fact that many of the non-savy buyers have already shot their wad… of cash to coin a phrase. They don’t have money to buy in now. The ones that have money to buy in are the savy buyers (who probably haven’t contacted a Realtor yet because they know this thing has legs in the downward direction) and wannabe savy who are fence sitters sitting on the edge of their seat. The change in conforming will probably pull the wannabe savies off the fence. Instead of “wannabe savy”, I was calling them green investors or green potential buyers. The green/inexperienced label is a bit nicer than wannabe. My two last sentences in the paragraph referring to green investor/buyers could have been clearer. I consider having money and the wisdom to use it properly going hand in hand because those with money currently but lacking wisdom are soon separated from their money.

Your argument is like a college professor giving a lecture. You use facts, you point out cause and expected affects. It all makes perfect sense.

However the world is not working like that. At least not yet.

I use facts because I know they are the only real counter argument to things that the NAR have been saying as well as other individuals/groups. I know the market is not working rationally and won’t until this thing has spent itself out. That is why I was doing a rational explanation of the liquidity, where the problems are, what is expected to happen and why the fed move and who is it really helping. Somehow people were getting the feeling that the fed dropping the rates was to help them with houses.. and I was trying to pull off the rose colored glasses.. if only for a second. I am not saying that you, SD Realtor, have rose colored glasses on. I do think there are viewers on this board who do.

Anyways again, no argument with your post, except that I am a heck of alot busier then I should be given the market conditions.

I know you are quite busy.. and that is what really scares the crap out of me. I bet the houses are not going for that much of a discount from ’05 prices. There have been several statements on the media that the turn around will occur in ’08 or ’09. I think the flattening that we will see in ’09 will be another suckers play. Neg Ams start resetting afterwards (and therefore the “All hell breaks loose.” statement).

I generally use my facts and analysis on this board because I feel the “quality of clientèle” is better. If I try the logic approach to a member of the general public, it is often too much for them to handle and their eyes glaze over. They then grasp a one of the statements the RE hypers have used to counter. Sorry if I sound like Tanta or Calculated Risk…

[SD Realtor]

uco –

“I generally use my facts and analysis on this board because I feel the “quality of clientèle” is better. If I try the logic approach to a member of the general public, it is often too much for them to handle and their eyes glaze over. They then grasp a one of the statements the RE hypers have used to counter. Sorry if I sound like Tanta or Calculated Risk…”

Which is a good thing. I am not in stark disagreement with your argument as I said before. In theory it makes perfect sense.

“I was also bringing in the fact that many of the non-savy buyers have already shot their wad… of cash to coin a phrase. They don’t have money to buy in now. The ones that have money to buy in are the savy buyers (who probably haven’t contacted a Realtor yet because they know this thing has legs in the downward direction) and wannabe savy who are fence sitters sitting on the edge of their seat.”

Which makes great sense to me… Uco I wish I could tell you where they come from (the buyers) but I don’t think we will ever see a disruption in the demand until we have a an event… what are they called? Black swan moments? Until we see engineers, biotech people, and the likes of the 150k salaries getting seriously disrupted, the supply lines for the 750k homes will stay pretty much intact. In fact I would say that to be regardless of this non conforming nonsense unless somehow the rates skyrocketed up. In my opinion we need a more substantial event then we have had to push 4S down to 470k or other wishful pricings like people have posted about. I think that in lieu of something like that we will have a very measured ride down over several years. Now contrary moves to subsidize the market, (I lump this move and other political bs in the same basket) are like you said, not even close to being intended to help anyone. They are intended to mask or delay the inevitable.

The fluff that NAR puts out, is to me, no different then the smell I deal with when I change the kids. I hold my nose, wipe em up, and throw the waste in the trash. Your explanation makes perfect sense and in no way do I disagree with the facts. Eventually one thinks, (at least I think) that it all catches up… it has to catch up doesn’t it? Yet I know to many people where this cut will make a difference. Will it push them into the market? Perhaps. Yet when has NAR ever said RE sucks? In a hot market they say buy now before you get priced out and in a p.o.s market they say buy now cuz it is a good deal.

Anyways no need for saying sorry if you sound link Tanta or Calculated Risk at all because I agree. Besides I lurk over there all the time and it all makes sense to me. Believe me what you and they say makes perfect sense to me. I used to not understand buyers psyche but I do now, I am just not good at explaining it.

SD Realtor

[SD Realtor]

uco –

“I generally use my facts and analysis on this board because I feel the “quality of clientèle” is better. If I try the logic approach to a member of the general public, it is often too much for them to handle and their eyes glaze over. They then grasp a one of the statements the RE hypers have used to counter. Sorry if I sound like Tanta or Calculated Risk…”

Which is a good thing. I am not in stark disagreement with your argument as I said before. In theory it makes perfect sense.

“I was also bringing in the fact that many of the non-savy buyers have already shot their wad… of cash to coin a phrase. They don’t have money to buy in now. The ones that have money to buy in are the savy buyers (who probably haven’t contacted a Realtor yet because they know this thing has legs in the downward direction) and wannabe savy who are fence sitters sitting on the edge of their seat.”

Which makes great sense to me… Uco I wish I could tell you where they come from (the buyers) but I don’t think we will ever see a disruption in the demand until we have a an event… what are they called? Black swan moments? Until we see engineers, biotech people, and the likes of the 150k salaries getting seriously disrupted, the supply lines for the 750k homes will stay pretty much intact. In fact I would say that to be regardless of this non conforming nonsense unless somehow the rates skyrocketed up. In my opinion we need a more substantial event then we have had to push 4S down to 470k or other wishful pricings like people have posted about. I think that in lieu of something like that we will have a very measured ride down over several years. Now contrary moves to subsidize the market, (I lump this move and other political bs in the same basket) are like you said, not even close to being intended to help anyone. They are intended to mask or delay the inevitable.

The fluff that NAR puts out, is to me, no different then the smell I deal with when I change the kids. I hold my nose, wipe em up, and throw the waste in the trash. Your explanation makes perfect sense and in no way do I disagree with the facts. Eventually one thinks, (at least I think) that it all catches up… it has to catch up doesn’t it? Yet I know to many people where this cut will make a difference. Will it push them into the market? Perhaps. Yet when has NAR ever said RE sucks? In a hot market they say buy now before you get priced out and in a p.o.s market they say buy now cuz it is a good deal.

Anyways no need for saying sorry if you sound link Tanta or Calculated Risk at all because I agree. Besides I lurk over there all the time and it all makes sense to me. Believe me what you and they say makes perfect sense to me. I used to not understand buyers psyche but I do now, I am just not good at explaining it.

SD Realtor

[SD Realtor]

uco –

“I generally use my facts and analysis on this board because I feel the “quality of clientèle” is better. If I try the logic approach to a member of the general public, it is often too much for them to handle and their eyes glaze over. They then grasp a one of the statements the RE hypers have used to counter. Sorry if I sound like Tanta or Calculated Risk…”

Which is a good thing. I am not in stark disagreement with your argument as I said before. In theory it makes perfect sense.

“I was also bringing in the fact that many of the non-savy buyers have already shot their wad… of cash to coin a phrase. They don’t have money to buy in now. The ones that have money to buy in are the savy buyers (who probably haven’t contacted a Realtor yet because they know this thing has legs in the downward direction) and wannabe savy who are fence sitters sitting on the edge of their seat.”

Which makes great sense to me… Uco I wish I could tell you where they come from (the buyers) but I don’t think we will ever see a disruption in the demand until we have a an event… what are they called? Black swan moments? Until we see engineers, biotech people, and the likes of the 150k salaries getting seriously disrupted, the supply lines for the 750k homes will stay pretty much intact. In fact I would say that to be regardless of this non conforming nonsense unless somehow the rates skyrocketed up. In my opinion we need a more substantial event then we have had to push 4S down to 470k or other wishful pricings like people have posted about. I think that in lieu of something like that we will have a very measured ride down over several years. Now contrary moves to subsidize the market, (I lump this move and other political bs in the same basket) are like you said, not even close to being intended to help anyone. They are intended to mask or delay the inevitable.

The fluff that NAR puts out, is to me, no different then the smell I deal with when I change the kids. I hold my nose, wipe em up, and throw the waste in the trash. Your explanation makes perfect sense and in no way do I disagree with the facts. Eventually one thinks, (at least I think) that it all catches up… it has to catch up doesn’t it? Yet I know to many people where this cut will make a difference. Will it push them into the market? Perhaps. Yet when has NAR ever said RE sucks? In a hot market they say buy now before you get priced out and in a p.o.s market they say buy now cuz it is a good deal.

Anyways no need for saying sorry if you sound link Tanta or Calculated Risk at all because I agree. Besides I lurk over there all the time and it all makes sense to me. Believe me what you and they say makes perfect sense to me. I used to not understand buyers psyche but I do now, I am just not good at explaining it.

SD Realtor

[SD Realtor]

uco –

“I generally use my facts and analysis on this board because I feel the “quality of clientèle” is better. If I try the logic approach to a member of the general public, it is often too much for them to handle and their eyes glaze over. They then grasp a one of the statements the RE hypers have used to counter. Sorry if I sound like Tanta or Calculated Risk…”

Which is a good thing. I am not in stark disagreement with your argument as I said before. In theory it makes perfect sense.

“I was also bringing in the fact that many of the non-savy buyers have already shot their wad… of cash to coin a phrase. They don’t have money to buy in now. The ones that have money to buy in are the savy buyers (who probably haven’t contacted a Realtor yet because they know this thing has legs in the downward direction) and wannabe savy who are fence sitters sitting on the edge of their seat.”

Which makes great sense to me… Uco I wish I could tell you where they come from (the buyers) but I don’t think we will ever see a disruption in the demand until we have a an event… what are they called? Black swan moments? Until we see engineers, biotech people, and the likes of the 150k salaries getting seriously disrupted, the supply lines for the 750k homes will stay pretty much intact. In fact I would say that to be regardless of this non conforming nonsense unless somehow the rates skyrocketed up. In my opinion we need a more substantial event then we have had to push 4S down to 470k or other wishful pricings like people have posted about. I think that in lieu of something like that we will have a very measured ride down over several years. Now contrary moves to subsidize the market, (I lump this move and other political bs in the same basket) are like you said, not even close to being intended to help anyone. They are intended to mask or delay the inevitable.

The fluff that NAR puts out, is to me, no different then the smell I deal with when I change the kids. I hold my nose, wipe em up, and throw the waste in the trash. Your explanation makes perfect sense and in no way do I disagree with the facts. Eventually one thinks, (at least I think) that it all catches up… it has to catch up doesn’t it? Yet I know to many people where this cut will make a difference. Will it push them into the market? Perhaps. Yet when has NAR ever said RE sucks? In a hot market they say buy now before you get priced out and in a p.o.s market they say buy now cuz it is a good deal.

Anyways no need for saying sorry if you sound link Tanta or Calculated Risk at all because I agree. Besides I lurk over there all the time and it all makes sense to me. Believe me what you and they say makes perfect sense to me. I used to not understand buyers psyche but I do now, I am just not good at explaining it.

SD Realtor

[Author]

Posts