- This topic has 70 replies, 10 voices, and was last updated 16 years, 9 months ago by SD Realtor.
-
AuthorPosts
-
February 21, 2008 at 12:05 PM #157394February 21, 2008 at 12:42 PM #157332CavalierLionParticipant
That’s one advantage to checking the current ownership on every listing. It’s time consuming, but it does have results.
How does one go about looking up the current ownership on a listing?
February 21, 2008 at 12:42 PM #157045CavalierLionParticipantThat’s one advantage to checking the current ownership on every listing. It’s time consuming, but it does have results.
How does one go about looking up the current ownership on a listing?
February 21, 2008 at 12:42 PM #157348CavalierLionParticipantThat’s one advantage to checking the current ownership on every listing. It’s time consuming, but it does have results.
How does one go about looking up the current ownership on a listing?
February 21, 2008 at 12:42 PM #157424CavalierLionParticipantThat’s one advantage to checking the current ownership on every listing. It’s time consuming, but it does have results.
How does one go about looking up the current ownership on a listing?
February 21, 2008 at 12:42 PM #157356CavalierLionParticipantThat’s one advantage to checking the current ownership on every listing. It’s time consuming, but it does have results.
How does one go about looking up the current ownership on a listing?
February 21, 2008 at 1:04 PM #157444SD RealtorParticipantHi Rich –
I think ultimately what I am trying to get to is the true number of bank owned properties that are being sold. Using the MLS as my database I realize that is a very poor vehicle to gain insight but it is all I have for the limited time I have to look into things. Just to note I did my numbers based on all San Diego county so that should smooth out regional disparities in the county.
I know that yes agents are sloppy or lazy but REO or bank owned properties are usually indicated. I would argue only a small sample are not.
I do better understand your analysis is from a NOD/NOT perspective. Also what bolsters your thoughts/numbers further are distressed sales from those who are not even NODDED or NOTTED yet. Also per esmiths input I would agree that REO sales should lookback much farther then the 3-4 months time. His numbers are dead on there.
I guess what I am really trying to find is the correlation of the number of foreclosures reported by foreclosureforum.com to the number of closed reo sales I see on the MLS. So if I look at the NOD numbers in 2007 and then the % that went to foreclosure, I should be seeing about 500 closings per month that would be REOs. This is a generously low number given the lagtime of the pipeline. That is I looked at the early spring numbers of NODs and the % number and then would expect to see roughly that many closed REO sales down the line.
I need to look at the data more tonite but can you see what I am trying to rough out? Yes there may be sloppiness in an agent not putting in the string I am looking for and such and I need to reread the other entries more closely.
It just is gnawing at me and I want to figure out the difference.
I hate it when I cannot explain the data….
February 21, 2008 at 1:04 PM #157376SD RealtorParticipantHi Rich –
I think ultimately what I am trying to get to is the true number of bank owned properties that are being sold. Using the MLS as my database I realize that is a very poor vehicle to gain insight but it is all I have for the limited time I have to look into things. Just to note I did my numbers based on all San Diego county so that should smooth out regional disparities in the county.
I know that yes agents are sloppy or lazy but REO or bank owned properties are usually indicated. I would argue only a small sample are not.
I do better understand your analysis is from a NOD/NOT perspective. Also what bolsters your thoughts/numbers further are distressed sales from those who are not even NODDED or NOTTED yet. Also per esmiths input I would agree that REO sales should lookback much farther then the 3-4 months time. His numbers are dead on there.
I guess what I am really trying to find is the correlation of the number of foreclosures reported by foreclosureforum.com to the number of closed reo sales I see on the MLS. So if I look at the NOD numbers in 2007 and then the % that went to foreclosure, I should be seeing about 500 closings per month that would be REOs. This is a generously low number given the lagtime of the pipeline. That is I looked at the early spring numbers of NODs and the % number and then would expect to see roughly that many closed REO sales down the line.
I need to look at the data more tonite but can you see what I am trying to rough out? Yes there may be sloppiness in an agent not putting in the string I am looking for and such and I need to reread the other entries more closely.
It just is gnawing at me and I want to figure out the difference.
I hate it when I cannot explain the data….
February 21, 2008 at 1:04 PM #157368SD RealtorParticipantHi Rich –
I think ultimately what I am trying to get to is the true number of bank owned properties that are being sold. Using the MLS as my database I realize that is a very poor vehicle to gain insight but it is all I have for the limited time I have to look into things. Just to note I did my numbers based on all San Diego county so that should smooth out regional disparities in the county.
I know that yes agents are sloppy or lazy but REO or bank owned properties are usually indicated. I would argue only a small sample are not.
I do better understand your analysis is from a NOD/NOT perspective. Also what bolsters your thoughts/numbers further are distressed sales from those who are not even NODDED or NOTTED yet. Also per esmiths input I would agree that REO sales should lookback much farther then the 3-4 months time. His numbers are dead on there.
I guess what I am really trying to find is the correlation of the number of foreclosures reported by foreclosureforum.com to the number of closed reo sales I see on the MLS. So if I look at the NOD numbers in 2007 and then the % that went to foreclosure, I should be seeing about 500 closings per month that would be REOs. This is a generously low number given the lagtime of the pipeline. That is I looked at the early spring numbers of NODs and the % number and then would expect to see roughly that many closed REO sales down the line.
I need to look at the data more tonite but can you see what I am trying to rough out? Yes there may be sloppiness in an agent not putting in the string I am looking for and such and I need to reread the other entries more closely.
It just is gnawing at me and I want to figure out the difference.
I hate it when I cannot explain the data….
February 21, 2008 at 1:04 PM #157352SD RealtorParticipantHi Rich –
I think ultimately what I am trying to get to is the true number of bank owned properties that are being sold. Using the MLS as my database I realize that is a very poor vehicle to gain insight but it is all I have for the limited time I have to look into things. Just to note I did my numbers based on all San Diego county so that should smooth out regional disparities in the county.
I know that yes agents are sloppy or lazy but REO or bank owned properties are usually indicated. I would argue only a small sample are not.
I do better understand your analysis is from a NOD/NOT perspective. Also what bolsters your thoughts/numbers further are distressed sales from those who are not even NODDED or NOTTED yet. Also per esmiths input I would agree that REO sales should lookback much farther then the 3-4 months time. His numbers are dead on there.
I guess what I am really trying to find is the correlation of the number of foreclosures reported by foreclosureforum.com to the number of closed reo sales I see on the MLS. So if I look at the NOD numbers in 2007 and then the % that went to foreclosure, I should be seeing about 500 closings per month that would be REOs. This is a generously low number given the lagtime of the pipeline. That is I looked at the early spring numbers of NODs and the % number and then would expect to see roughly that many closed REO sales down the line.
I need to look at the data more tonite but can you see what I am trying to rough out? Yes there may be sloppiness in an agent not putting in the string I am looking for and such and I need to reread the other entries more closely.
It just is gnawing at me and I want to figure out the difference.
I hate it when I cannot explain the data….
February 21, 2008 at 1:04 PM #157065SD RealtorParticipantHi Rich –
I think ultimately what I am trying to get to is the true number of bank owned properties that are being sold. Using the MLS as my database I realize that is a very poor vehicle to gain insight but it is all I have for the limited time I have to look into things. Just to note I did my numbers based on all San Diego county so that should smooth out regional disparities in the county.
I know that yes agents are sloppy or lazy but REO or bank owned properties are usually indicated. I would argue only a small sample are not.
I do better understand your analysis is from a NOD/NOT perspective. Also what bolsters your thoughts/numbers further are distressed sales from those who are not even NODDED or NOTTED yet. Also per esmiths input I would agree that REO sales should lookback much farther then the 3-4 months time. His numbers are dead on there.
I guess what I am really trying to find is the correlation of the number of foreclosures reported by foreclosureforum.com to the number of closed reo sales I see on the MLS. So if I look at the NOD numbers in 2007 and then the % that went to foreclosure, I should be seeing about 500 closings per month that would be REOs. This is a generously low number given the lagtime of the pipeline. That is I looked at the early spring numbers of NODs and the % number and then would expect to see roughly that many closed REO sales down the line.
I need to look at the data more tonite but can you see what I am trying to rough out? Yes there may be sloppiness in an agent not putting in the string I am looking for and such and I need to reread the other entries more closely.
It just is gnawing at me and I want to figure out the difference.
I hate it when I cannot explain the data….
-
AuthorPosts
- You must be logged in to reply to this topic.