How to Buy w/out a Realtor?

[njtosd]

[quote=sdrealtor] . . . Even though you cant predict something perfectly you can make an assessment on the outcome post mortum.[/quote]

But that’s why they came up with the phrases Monday morning quarterback, 2-/20 hindsight, etc. You can make an assessment, but you have to keep in mind the concept of statistical significance. Everyone is entitled to their own (subjective) opinion. But to say that someone else got it wrong (objectively) you need to know how accurately the best estimator can predict.

[drboom]

[quote=sdrealtor]Dr B
Again you are stretching a RE agents role beyond what they are charged to do.[/quote]

Perhaps. But you know when someone walks in the door whether they have any business buying or not; you’re one of the good guys and at least try to do the right thing by your own account.

I’m not talking about you, however, I’m talking about systemic problems. Market incentives just don’t align agents’ and consumers’ interests.

[quote]Additionally houses dont always have easy to identify well-understood values in relation to things like incomes and prevailing rents. For example, prices in SF and NYC have never in recent history been anywhere close to being in line with either.[/quote]

Even in those two extreme and artificially distorted cases (rent control in both cities, etc.), the laws of economics still hold true: beyond a certain percentage of household income lies mortgage madness–sooner or later.

Lots of people in both cities have been beneficiaries of bubble economics, so they aren’t the best examples. I was working in Silly Valley and The City in 1999-2000–it was quite a party, but it wasn’t real life. That party faltered but never really stopped for certain parts of that crowd (I know because I still talk to and work with some of them).

[quote]Here’s another more local example. In 2001, the house next door sold for $550K and it was way out of whack with rents and incomes in the area. Obviously that house was worth considerably more a couple years ago but it has never been worth less and is still worth about $250K more than that. By any long term quantitative measure one could have looked at back in 2001 it was not a good deal. History of course tells a very different story and it will never approach that $550K price again.[/quote]

Accounting for inflation and selling costs, it would have to be worth $730k+ for the owner to even get his money back out. I’m not sure what you’re trying to say here, but it doesn’t take going back a decade in nominal dollars to incur a loss.

I do agree that in an absolute sense something is “worth” exactly what someone will pay for it, but is that what we’re talking about?

[quote]PS you didnt hear any of us on this board saying it was a great time to buy in 2008 or 2009.[/quote]

No, everyone was afraid of being called a permabull or worse. 😉

[drboom]

[quote=sdrealtor]Dr B
Again you are stretching a RE agents role beyond what they are charged to do.[/quote]

Perhaps. But you know when someone walks in the door whether they have any business buying or not; you’re one of the good guys and at least try to do the right thing by your own account.

I’m not talking about you, however, I’m talking about systemic problems. Market incentives just don’t align agents’ and consumers’ interests.

[quote]Additionally houses dont always have easy to identify well-understood values in relation to things like incomes and prevailing rents. For example, prices in SF and NYC have never in recent history been anywhere close to being in line with either.[/quote]

Even in those two extreme and artificially distorted cases (rent control in both cities, etc.), the laws of economics still hold true: beyond a certain percentage of household income lies mortgage madness–sooner or later.

Lots of people in both cities have been beneficiaries of bubble economics, so they aren’t the best examples. I was working in Silly Valley and The City in 1999-2000–it was quite a party, but it wasn’t real life. That party faltered but never really stopped for certain parts of that crowd (I know because I still talk to and work with some of them).

[quote]Here’s another more local example. In 2001, the house next door sold for $550K and it was way out of whack with rents and incomes in the area. Obviously that house was worth considerably more a couple years ago but it has never been worth less and is still worth about $250K more than that. By any long term quantitative measure one could have looked at back in 2001 it was not a good deal. History of course tells a very different story and it will never approach that $550K price again.[/quote]

Accounting for inflation and selling costs, it would have to be worth $730k+ for the owner to even get his money back out. I’m not sure what you’re trying to say here, but it doesn’t take going back a decade in nominal dollars to incur a loss.

I do agree that in an absolute sense something is “worth” exactly what someone will pay for it, but is that what we’re talking about?

[quote]PS you didnt hear any of us on this board saying it was a great time to buy in 2008 or 2009.[/quote]

No, everyone was afraid of being called a permabull or worse. 😉

[drboom]

[quote=sdrealtor]Dr B
Again you are stretching a RE agents role beyond what they are charged to do.[/quote]

Perhaps. But you know when someone walks in the door whether they have any business buying or not; you’re one of the good guys and at least try to do the right thing by your own account.

I’m not talking about you, however, I’m talking about systemic problems. Market incentives just don’t align agents’ and consumers’ interests.

[quote]Additionally houses dont always have easy to identify well-understood values in relation to things like incomes and prevailing rents. For example, prices in SF and NYC have never in recent history been anywhere close to being in line with either.[/quote]

Even in those two extreme and artificially distorted cases (rent control in both cities, etc.), the laws of economics still hold true: beyond a certain percentage of household income lies mortgage madness–sooner or later.

Lots of people in both cities have been beneficiaries of bubble economics, so they aren’t the best examples. I was working in Silly Valley and The City in 1999-2000–it was quite a party, but it wasn’t real life. That party faltered but never really stopped for certain parts of that crowd (I know because I still talk to and work with some of them).

[quote]Here’s another more local example. In 2001, the house next door sold for $550K and it was way out of whack with rents and incomes in the area. Obviously that house was worth considerably more a couple years ago but it has never been worth less and is still worth about $250K more than that. By any long term quantitative measure one could have looked at back in 2001 it was not a good deal. History of course tells a very different story and it will never approach that $550K price again.[/quote]

Accounting for inflation and selling costs, it would have to be worth $730k+ for the owner to even get his money back out. I’m not sure what you’re trying to say here, but it doesn’t take going back a decade in nominal dollars to incur a loss.

I do agree that in an absolute sense something is “worth” exactly what someone will pay for it, but is that what we’re talking about?

[quote]PS you didnt hear any of us on this board saying it was a great time to buy in 2008 or 2009.[/quote]

No, everyone was afraid of being called a permabull or worse. 😉

[drboom]

[quote=sdrealtor]Dr B
Again you are stretching a RE agents role beyond what they are charged to do.[/quote]

Perhaps. But you know when someone walks in the door whether they have any business buying or not; you’re one of the good guys and at least try to do the right thing by your own account.

I’m not talking about you, however, I’m talking about systemic problems. Market incentives just don’t align agents’ and consumers’ interests.

[quote]Additionally houses dont always have easy to identify well-understood values in relation to things like incomes and prevailing rents. For example, prices in SF and NYC have never in recent history been anywhere close to being in line with either.[/quote]

Even in those two extreme and artificially distorted cases (rent control in both cities, etc.), the laws of economics still hold true: beyond a certain percentage of household income lies mortgage madness–sooner or later.

Lots of people in both cities have been beneficiaries of bubble economics, so they aren’t the best examples. I was working in Silly Valley and The City in 1999-2000–it was quite a party, but it wasn’t real life. That party faltered but never really stopped for certain parts of that crowd (I know because I still talk to and work with some of them).

[quote]Here’s another more local example. In 2001, the house next door sold for $550K and it was way out of whack with rents and incomes in the area. Obviously that house was worth considerably more a couple years ago but it has never been worth less and is still worth about $250K more than that. By any long term quantitative measure one could have looked at back in 2001 it was not a good deal. History of course tells a very different story and it will never approach that $550K price again.[/quote]

Accounting for inflation and selling costs, it would have to be worth $730k+ for the owner to even get his money back out. I’m not sure what you’re trying to say here, but it doesn’t take going back a decade in nominal dollars to incur a loss.

I do agree that in an absolute sense something is “worth” exactly what someone will pay for it, but is that what we’re talking about?

[quote]PS you didnt hear any of us on this board saying it was a great time to buy in 2008 or 2009.[/quote]

No, everyone was afraid of being called a permabull or worse. 😉

[drboom]

[quote=sdrealtor]Dr B
Again you are stretching a RE agents role beyond what they are charged to do.[/quote]

Perhaps. But you know when someone walks in the door whether they have any business buying or not; you’re one of the good guys and at least try to do the right thing by your own account.

I’m not talking about you, however, I’m talking about systemic problems. Market incentives just don’t align agents’ and consumers’ interests.

[quote]Additionally houses dont always have easy to identify well-understood values in relation to things like incomes and prevailing rents. For example, prices in SF and NYC have never in recent history been anywhere close to being in line with either.[/quote]

Even in those two extreme and artificially distorted cases (rent control in both cities, etc.), the laws of economics still hold true: beyond a certain percentage of household income lies mortgage madness–sooner or later.

Lots of people in both cities have been beneficiaries of bubble economics, so they aren’t the best examples. I was working in Silly Valley and The City in 1999-2000–it was quite a party, but it wasn’t real life. That party faltered but never really stopped for certain parts of that crowd (I know because I still talk to and work with some of them).

[quote]Here’s another more local example. In 2001, the house next door sold for $550K and it was way out of whack with rents and incomes in the area. Obviously that house was worth considerably more a couple years ago but it has never been worth less and is still worth about $250K more than that. By any long term quantitative measure one could have looked at back in 2001 it was not a good deal. History of course tells a very different story and it will never approach that $550K price again.[/quote]

Accounting for inflation and selling costs, it would have to be worth $730k+ for the owner to even get his money back out. I’m not sure what you’re trying to say here, but it doesn’t take going back a decade in nominal dollars to incur a loss.

I do agree that in an absolute sense something is “worth” exactly what someone will pay for it, but is that what we’re talking about?

[quote]PS you didnt hear any of us on this board saying it was a great time to buy in 2008 or 2009.[/quote]

No, everyone was afraid of being called a permabull or worse. 😉

[sdrealtor]

Actually as an agent very often you have no idea of your clients wherewithal. You have to relie on what they tell you and what the lender tells then and you. Its more common that we dont have an idea as to what our client’s full financial status is.

With that said the system is ripe for abuse and incomptence. However, even for the most competent it is dififcult to know what and where we are going. As smart as you portend to be, I’d bet you expected us to be in far worse shape pricewise around here and that just hasnt happened to the extent it could have. Of course, you can say it has to eventually but does it really? We just dont know for sure what is going to happen from here.

It actually was resold in 2003 for more than 730K and today is still worth quite a bit more than that. No that it matters, current owner is a long time local and not going anywhere…ever.

Actually i think we all have been pretty straight forward, honest and on target over the years.

[sdrealtor]

Actually as an agent very often you have no idea of your clients wherewithal. You have to relie on what they tell you and what the lender tells then and you. Its more common that we dont have an idea as to what our client’s full financial status is.

With that said the system is ripe for abuse and incomptence. However, even for the most competent it is dififcult to know what and where we are going. As smart as you portend to be, I’d bet you expected us to be in far worse shape pricewise around here and that just hasnt happened to the extent it could have. Of course, you can say it has to eventually but does it really? We just dont know for sure what is going to happen from here.

It actually was resold in 2003 for more than 730K and today is still worth quite a bit more than that. No that it matters, current owner is a long time local and not going anywhere…ever.

Actually i think we all have been pretty straight forward, honest and on target over the years.

[sdrealtor]

Actually as an agent very often you have no idea of your clients wherewithal. You have to relie on what they tell you and what the lender tells then and you. Its more common that we dont have an idea as to what our client’s full financial status is.

With that said the system is ripe for abuse and incomptence. However, even for the most competent it is dififcult to know what and where we are going. As smart as you portend to be, I’d bet you expected us to be in far worse shape pricewise around here and that just hasnt happened to the extent it could have. Of course, you can say it has to eventually but does it really? We just dont know for sure what is going to happen from here.

It actually was resold in 2003 for more than 730K and today is still worth quite a bit more than that. No that it matters, current owner is a long time local and not going anywhere…ever.

Actually i think we all have been pretty straight forward, honest and on target over the years.

[sdrealtor]

Actually as an agent very often you have no idea of your clients wherewithal. You have to relie on what they tell you and what the lender tells then and you. Its more common that we dont have an idea as to what our client’s full financial status is.

With that said the system is ripe for abuse and incomptence. However, even for the most competent it is dififcult to know what and where we are going. As smart as you portend to be, I’d bet you expected us to be in far worse shape pricewise around here and that just hasnt happened to the extent it could have. Of course, you can say it has to eventually but does it really? We just dont know for sure what is going to happen from here.

It actually was resold in 2003 for more than 730K and today is still worth quite a bit more than that. No that it matters, current owner is a long time local and not going anywhere…ever.

Actually i think we all have been pretty straight forward, honest and on target over the years.

[sdrealtor]

Actually as an agent very often you have no idea of your clients wherewithal. You have to relie on what they tell you and what the lender tells then and you. Its more common that we dont have an idea as to what our client’s full financial status is.

With that said the system is ripe for abuse and incomptence. However, even for the most competent it is dififcult to know what and where we are going. As smart as you portend to be, I’d bet you expected us to be in far worse shape pricewise around here and that just hasnt happened to the extent it could have. Of course, you can say it has to eventually but does it really? We just dont know for sure what is going to happen from here.

It actually was resold in 2003 for more than 730K and today is still worth quite a bit more than that. No that it matters, current owner is a long time local and not going anywhere…ever.

Actually i think we all have been pretty straight forward, honest and on target over the years.

[Author]

Posts