Home › Forums › Closed Forums › Properties or Areas › Pain in La Jolla
- This topic has 760 replies, 41 voices, and was last updated 15 years, 6 months ago by
DaCounselor.
-
AuthorPosts
-
January 9, 2009 at 2:16 PM #326959January 9, 2009 at 2:42 PM #326462
XBoxBoy
Participant[quote=waterboy]Word on the street is that the Chelsea property accepted offer above $1M all cash. [/quote]
If that’s true, (and I don’t doubt it one bit) it shows how asking a low price and triggering an auction can be a successful strategy for the seller.
For anyone interested in the psychology of auctions and why people overpay at them, read the chapter on the high cost of ownership in Dan Ariely’s book Predictably Irrational. He lays out the psychology of how when bidding on something in an auction we start to imagine ourselves as the winner/owner, and as we develop these thoughts in our head, we become more and more willing to pay for that ownership. And before you know it we’ve overbid.
XBoxBoy
January 9, 2009 at 2:42 PM #326803Participant[quote=waterboy]Word on the street is that the Chelsea property accepted offer above $1M all cash. [/quote]
If that’s true, (and I don’t doubt it one bit) it shows how asking a low price and triggering an auction can be a successful strategy for the seller.
For anyone interested in the psychology of auctions and why people overpay at them, read the chapter on the high cost of ownership in Dan Ariely’s book Predictably Irrational. He lays out the psychology of how when bidding on something in an auction we start to imagine ourselves as the winner/owner, and as we develop these thoughts in our head, we become more and more willing to pay for that ownership. And before you know it we’ve overbid.
XBoxBoy
January 9, 2009 at 2:42 PM #326872Participant[quote=waterboy]Word on the street is that the Chelsea property accepted offer above $1M all cash. [/quote]
If that’s true, (and I don’t doubt it one bit) it shows how asking a low price and triggering an auction can be a successful strategy for the seller.
For anyone interested in the psychology of auctions and why people overpay at them, read the chapter on the high cost of ownership in Dan Ariely’s book Predictably Irrational. He lays out the psychology of how when bidding on something in an auction we start to imagine ourselves as the winner/owner, and as we develop these thoughts in our head, we become more and more willing to pay for that ownership. And before you know it we’ve overbid.
XBoxBoy
January 9, 2009 at 2:42 PM #326890Participant[quote=waterboy]Word on the street is that the Chelsea property accepted offer above $1M all cash. [/quote]
If that’s true, (and I don’t doubt it one bit) it shows how asking a low price and triggering an auction can be a successful strategy for the seller.
For anyone interested in the psychology of auctions and why people overpay at them, read the chapter on the high cost of ownership in Dan Ariely’s book Predictably Irrational. He lays out the psychology of how when bidding on something in an auction we start to imagine ourselves as the winner/owner, and as we develop these thoughts in our head, we become more and more willing to pay for that ownership. And before you know it we’ve overbid.
XBoxBoy
January 9, 2009 at 2:42 PM #326974Participant[quote=waterboy]Word on the street is that the Chelsea property accepted offer above $1M all cash. [/quote]
If that’s true, (and I don’t doubt it one bit) it shows how asking a low price and triggering an auction can be a successful strategy for the seller.
For anyone interested in the psychology of auctions and why people overpay at them, read the chapter on the high cost of ownership in Dan Ariely’s book Predictably Irrational. He lays out the psychology of how when bidding on something in an auction we start to imagine ourselves as the winner/owner, and as we develop these thoughts in our head, we become more and more willing to pay for that ownership. And before you know it we’ve overbid.
XBoxBoy
January 14, 2009 at 3:34 PM #328731ParticipantHere’s a Blackhorse condo that sold in March 2006 for $2,040,000 and just resold for $1,300,000
That’s a $740,000 or 36% loss. (Still not counting carrying costs, maintenance, realtor commissions, etc)
Who says the coast is immune?
http://www.sdlookup.com/Property-1B4507B8-9703_Keeneland_Row_La_Jolla_CA_92037
January 14, 2009 at 3:34 PM #329067ParticipantHere’s a Blackhorse condo that sold in March 2006 for $2,040,000 and just resold for $1,300,000
That’s a $740,000 or 36% loss. (Still not counting carrying costs, maintenance, realtor commissions, etc)
Who says the coast is immune?
http://www.sdlookup.com/Property-1B4507B8-9703_Keeneland_Row_La_Jolla_CA_92037
January 14, 2009 at 3:34 PM #329140ParticipantHere’s a Blackhorse condo that sold in March 2006 for $2,040,000 and just resold for $1,300,000
That’s a $740,000 or 36% loss. (Still not counting carrying costs, maintenance, realtor commissions, etc)
Who says the coast is immune?
http://www.sdlookup.com/Property-1B4507B8-9703_Keeneland_Row_La_Jolla_CA_92037
January 14, 2009 at 3:34 PM #329166ParticipantHere’s a Blackhorse condo that sold in March 2006 for $2,040,000 and just resold for $1,300,000
That’s a $740,000 or 36% loss. (Still not counting carrying costs, maintenance, realtor commissions, etc)
Who says the coast is immune?
http://www.sdlookup.com/Property-1B4507B8-9703_Keeneland_Row_La_Jolla_CA_92037
January 14, 2009 at 3:34 PM #329249ParticipantHere’s a Blackhorse condo that sold in March 2006 for $2,040,000 and just resold for $1,300,000
That’s a $740,000 or 36% loss. (Still not counting carrying costs, maintenance, realtor commissions, etc)
Who says the coast is immune?
http://www.sdlookup.com/Property-1B4507B8-9703_Keeneland_Row_La_Jolla_CA_92037
January 14, 2009 at 6:49 PM #328876sunny88
Participant[quote=XBoxBoy]Here’s a Blackhorse condo that sold in March 2006 for $2,040,000 and just resold for $1,300,000
That’s a $740,000 or 36% loss. (Still not counting carrying costs, maintenance, realtor commissions, etc)
Who says the coast is immune?
http://www.sdlookup.com/Property-1B4507B8-9703_Keeneland_Row_La_Jolla_CA_92037%5B/quote%5D
I doubt that the $2040 k number is correct. This home was never worth that much!
January 14, 2009 at 6:49 PM #329213Participant[quote=XBoxBoy]Here’s a Blackhorse condo that sold in March 2006 for $2,040,000 and just resold for $1,300,000
That’s a $740,000 or 36% loss. (Still not counting carrying costs, maintenance, realtor commissions, etc)
Who says the coast is immune?
http://www.sdlookup.com/Property-1B4507B8-9703_Keeneland_Row_La_Jolla_CA_92037%5B/quote%5D
I doubt that the $2040 k number is correct. This home was never worth that much!
January 14, 2009 at 6:49 PM #329284Participant[quote=XBoxBoy]Here’s a Blackhorse condo that sold in March 2006 for $2,040,000 and just resold for $1,300,000
That’s a $740,000 or 36% loss. (Still not counting carrying costs, maintenance, realtor commissions, etc)
Who says the coast is immune?
http://www.sdlookup.com/Property-1B4507B8-9703_Keeneland_Row_La_Jolla_CA_92037%5B/quote%5D
I doubt that the $2040 k number is correct. This home was never worth that much!
January 14, 2009 at 6:49 PM #329312Participant[quote=XBoxBoy]Here’s a Blackhorse condo that sold in March 2006 for $2,040,000 and just resold for $1,300,000
That’s a $740,000 or 36% loss. (Still not counting carrying costs, maintenance, realtor commissions, etc)
Who says the coast is immune?
http://www.sdlookup.com/Property-1B4507B8-9703_Keeneland_Row_La_Jolla_CA_92037%5B/quote%5D
I doubt that the $2040 k number is correct. This home was never worth that much!
-
AuthorPosts
- The forum ‘Properties or Areas’ is closed to new topics and replies.