- This topic has 175 replies, 25 voices, and was last updated 15 years, 3 months ago by svelte.
-
AuthorPosts
-
July 22, 2009 at 11:44 AM #435898July 22, 2009 at 11:47 AM #435137CoronitaParticipant
[quote=Rich Toscano]If the piggs want something to talk about besides forged birth certificates and alien probes, how about the fact that boastful, factually incorrect real estate boosterism has apparentlymade a roaring comeback? Someone sent me this:
http://rismedia.com/2009-07-20/catch-22-artificially-suppressing-san-diego-county-rebound/
Feel free to start a list of the many inaccuracies in this article… I’ll start with this one (the bit about being sold twice in during a short time period is just an outright lie):
“Case Shiller studies only look at a small and misleading segment of the market, detached homes that have sold twice during a short period of time.”
Rich[/quote]
“The small amount of developable land within the county remains undeveloped for a reason; either it isn’t feasible due to remote location or steep terrain. There are also 18 Indian reservations, many of which now operate as casinos and do not intend to develop much of their land.”
LOL!
July 22, 2009 at 11:47 AM #435343CoronitaParticipant[quote=Rich Toscano]If the piggs want something to talk about besides forged birth certificates and alien probes, how about the fact that boastful, factually incorrect real estate boosterism has apparentlymade a roaring comeback? Someone sent me this:
http://rismedia.com/2009-07-20/catch-22-artificially-suppressing-san-diego-county-rebound/
Feel free to start a list of the many inaccuracies in this article… I’ll start with this one (the bit about being sold twice in during a short time period is just an outright lie):
“Case Shiller studies only look at a small and misleading segment of the market, detached homes that have sold twice during a short period of time.”
Rich[/quote]
“The small amount of developable land within the county remains undeveloped for a reason; either it isn’t feasible due to remote location or steep terrain. There are also 18 Indian reservations, many of which now operate as casinos and do not intend to develop much of their land.”
LOL!
July 22, 2009 at 11:47 AM #435660CoronitaParticipant[quote=Rich Toscano]If the piggs want something to talk about besides forged birth certificates and alien probes, how about the fact that boastful, factually incorrect real estate boosterism has apparentlymade a roaring comeback? Someone sent me this:
http://rismedia.com/2009-07-20/catch-22-artificially-suppressing-san-diego-county-rebound/
Feel free to start a list of the many inaccuracies in this article… I’ll start with this one (the bit about being sold twice in during a short time period is just an outright lie):
“Case Shiller studies only look at a small and misleading segment of the market, detached homes that have sold twice during a short period of time.”
Rich[/quote]
“The small amount of developable land within the county remains undeveloped for a reason; either it isn’t feasible due to remote location or steep terrain. There are also 18 Indian reservations, many of which now operate as casinos and do not intend to develop much of their land.”
LOL!
July 22, 2009 at 11:47 AM #435734CoronitaParticipant[quote=Rich Toscano]If the piggs want something to talk about besides forged birth certificates and alien probes, how about the fact that boastful, factually incorrect real estate boosterism has apparentlymade a roaring comeback? Someone sent me this:
http://rismedia.com/2009-07-20/catch-22-artificially-suppressing-san-diego-county-rebound/
Feel free to start a list of the many inaccuracies in this article… I’ll start with this one (the bit about being sold twice in during a short time period is just an outright lie):
“Case Shiller studies only look at a small and misleading segment of the market, detached homes that have sold twice during a short period of time.”
Rich[/quote]
“The small amount of developable land within the county remains undeveloped for a reason; either it isn’t feasible due to remote location or steep terrain. There are also 18 Indian reservations, many of which now operate as casinos and do not intend to develop much of their land.”
LOL!
July 22, 2009 at 11:47 AM #435903CoronitaParticipant[quote=Rich Toscano]If the piggs want something to talk about besides forged birth certificates and alien probes, how about the fact that boastful, factually incorrect real estate boosterism has apparentlymade a roaring comeback? Someone sent me this:
http://rismedia.com/2009-07-20/catch-22-artificially-suppressing-san-diego-county-rebound/
Feel free to start a list of the many inaccuracies in this article… I’ll start with this one (the bit about being sold twice in during a short time period is just an outright lie):
“Case Shiller studies only look at a small and misleading segment of the market, detached homes that have sold twice during a short period of time.”
Rich[/quote]
“The small amount of developable land within the county remains undeveloped for a reason; either it isn’t feasible due to remote location or steep terrain. There are also 18 Indian reservations, many of which now operate as casinos and do not intend to develop much of their land.”
LOL!
July 22, 2009 at 12:21 PM #435152jpinpbParticipantThat was entertaining reading.
“From January through June, the prices have been rising”
LOL. I guess we should not question if we are at bottom. We should ask if we are back at peak 😉
July 22, 2009 at 12:21 PM #435358jpinpbParticipantThat was entertaining reading.
“From January through June, the prices have been rising”
LOL. I guess we should not question if we are at bottom. We should ask if we are back at peak 😉
July 22, 2009 at 12:21 PM #435675jpinpbParticipantThat was entertaining reading.
“From January through June, the prices have been rising”
LOL. I guess we should not question if we are at bottom. We should ask if we are back at peak 😉
July 22, 2009 at 12:21 PM #435749jpinpbParticipantThat was entertaining reading.
“From January through June, the prices have been rising”
LOL. I guess we should not question if we are at bottom. We should ask if we are back at peak 😉
July 22, 2009 at 12:21 PM #435918jpinpbParticipantThat was entertaining reading.
“From January through June, the prices have been rising”
LOL. I guess we should not question if we are at bottom. We should ask if we are back at peak 😉
July 22, 2009 at 2:10 PM #435197CA renterParticipantFrom the article:
Typically, this sort of demand/supply imbalance would lead to bidding wars and increased selling prices. But, not now. The bidding wars are there but not the appraisals to support the higher prices. Buyers who are willing to pay more are being rejected by institutional sellers in favor of lower priced buyers out of apprehension that the property won’t appraise. So much for the free market setting prices.
San Diego is getting its first taste of government intervention in the real estate industry, and for buyers who are losing out and to other property owners whose home values are being artificially depressed by new appraisal laws, it’s just another reminder of how completely ineffective government has become.
——————So…where was this clown when prices were ramping up because of all the fraud? Was he complaining about the appraisers then, or was he “helping” them understand why a house should appriase for $100K+ more than it sold for only three months before?
He needs to understand that the appraiser’s job is to protect the lender, meaning the final bag-holder, and NOT the originating broker/lender.
If there’s one thing that the govt got right, it’s removing the originating/commision-based parties from the appraisal process.
July 22, 2009 at 2:10 PM #435403CA renterParticipantFrom the article:
Typically, this sort of demand/supply imbalance would lead to bidding wars and increased selling prices. But, not now. The bidding wars are there but not the appraisals to support the higher prices. Buyers who are willing to pay more are being rejected by institutional sellers in favor of lower priced buyers out of apprehension that the property won’t appraise. So much for the free market setting prices.
San Diego is getting its first taste of government intervention in the real estate industry, and for buyers who are losing out and to other property owners whose home values are being artificially depressed by new appraisal laws, it’s just another reminder of how completely ineffective government has become.
——————So…where was this clown when prices were ramping up because of all the fraud? Was he complaining about the appraisers then, or was he “helping” them understand why a house should appriase for $100K+ more than it sold for only three months before?
He needs to understand that the appraiser’s job is to protect the lender, meaning the final bag-holder, and NOT the originating broker/lender.
If there’s one thing that the govt got right, it’s removing the originating/commision-based parties from the appraisal process.
July 22, 2009 at 2:10 PM #435721CA renterParticipantFrom the article:
Typically, this sort of demand/supply imbalance would lead to bidding wars and increased selling prices. But, not now. The bidding wars are there but not the appraisals to support the higher prices. Buyers who are willing to pay more are being rejected by institutional sellers in favor of lower priced buyers out of apprehension that the property won’t appraise. So much for the free market setting prices.
San Diego is getting its first taste of government intervention in the real estate industry, and for buyers who are losing out and to other property owners whose home values are being artificially depressed by new appraisal laws, it’s just another reminder of how completely ineffective government has become.
——————So…where was this clown when prices were ramping up because of all the fraud? Was he complaining about the appraisers then, or was he “helping” them understand why a house should appriase for $100K+ more than it sold for only three months before?
He needs to understand that the appraiser’s job is to protect the lender, meaning the final bag-holder, and NOT the originating broker/lender.
If there’s one thing that the govt got right, it’s removing the originating/commision-based parties from the appraisal process.
July 22, 2009 at 2:10 PM #435794CA renterParticipantFrom the article:
Typically, this sort of demand/supply imbalance would lead to bidding wars and increased selling prices. But, not now. The bidding wars are there but not the appraisals to support the higher prices. Buyers who are willing to pay more are being rejected by institutional sellers in favor of lower priced buyers out of apprehension that the property won’t appraise. So much for the free market setting prices.
San Diego is getting its first taste of government intervention in the real estate industry, and for buyers who are losing out and to other property owners whose home values are being artificially depressed by new appraisal laws, it’s just another reminder of how completely ineffective government has become.
——————So…where was this clown when prices were ramping up because of all the fraud? Was he complaining about the appraisers then, or was he “helping” them understand why a house should appriase for $100K+ more than it sold for only three months before?
He needs to understand that the appraiser’s job is to protect the lender, meaning the final bag-holder, and NOT the originating broker/lender.
If there’s one thing that the govt got right, it’s removing the originating/commision-based parties from the appraisal process.
-
AuthorPosts
- You must be logged in to reply to this topic.