Point Loma reducing a little

[CA renter]

[quote=jpinpb]I abhore when it’s an inside job and sells the day of list or before it’s even listed. If it’s on the market for a while and someone contacts the LA and makes an lowball offer that gets accepted, good for them.[/quote]

Exactly.

As long as all buyers have the same chance, then it’s a legitimate transaction. This is why all buyers should feel free to “lowball.” It’s the only way you’ll know whether or not something can sell for your price (which just might be “market price,” in the land of delusional sellers).

[an]

[quote=CA renter][quote=jpinpb]I abhore when it’s an inside job and sells the day of list or before it’s even listed. If it’s on the market for a while and someone contacts the LA and makes an lowball offer that gets accepted, good for them.[/quote]

Exactly.

As long as all buyers have the same chance, then it’s a legitimate transaction. This is why all buyers should feel free to “lowball.” It’s the only way you’ll know whether or not something can sell for your price (which just might be “market price,” in the land of delusional sellers).[/quote]
But there in lie the problem. Most buyers don’t know that they can do that. So those who are in the know were able to get the deal. I don’t see too much difference between property going pending immediately w/ a LA playing both side and a property going pending a few month later if the end result is the buyer score a 20-30% off list price, especially if it’s well below market value. All it means is that the agent was able to find a buyer that allow him/her to play both sides at different time. I would personally jump at a 20-30% discount in a heart beat, but I won’t kid myself that it’s shady. “market price” is when the LA lower the price frequently until he/she finds a buyer at very close to final list price. Something that list for $1.1-1.2M closing for $900k with the agent playing both side looks shady to me.

[an]

[quote=CA renter][quote=jpinpb]I abhore when it’s an inside job and sells the day of list or before it’s even listed. If it’s on the market for a while and someone contacts the LA and makes an lowball offer that gets accepted, good for them.[/quote]

Exactly.

As long as all buyers have the same chance, then it’s a legitimate transaction. This is why all buyers should feel free to “lowball.” It’s the only way you’ll know whether or not something can sell for your price (which just might be “market price,” in the land of delusional sellers).[/quote]
But there in lie the problem. Most buyers don’t know that they can do that. So those who are in the know were able to get the deal. I don’t see too much difference between property going pending immediately w/ a LA playing both side and a property going pending a few month later if the end result is the buyer score a 20-30% off list price, especially if it’s well below market value. All it means is that the agent was able to find a buyer that allow him/her to play both sides at different time. I would personally jump at a 20-30% discount in a heart beat, but I won’t kid myself that it’s shady. “market price” is when the LA lower the price frequently until he/she finds a buyer at very close to final list price. Something that list for $1.1-1.2M closing for $900k with the agent playing both side looks shady to me.

[an]

[quote=CA renter][quote=jpinpb]I abhore when it’s an inside job and sells the day of list or before it’s even listed. If it’s on the market for a while and someone contacts the LA and makes an lowball offer that gets accepted, good for them.[/quote]

Exactly.

As long as all buyers have the same chance, then it’s a legitimate transaction. This is why all buyers should feel free to “lowball.” It’s the only way you’ll know whether or not something can sell for your price (which just might be “market price,” in the land of delusional sellers).[/quote]
But there in lie the problem. Most buyers don’t know that they can do that. So those who are in the know were able to get the deal. I don’t see too much difference between property going pending immediately w/ a LA playing both side and a property going pending a few month later if the end result is the buyer score a 20-30% off list price, especially if it’s well below market value. All it means is that the agent was able to find a buyer that allow him/her to play both sides at different time. I would personally jump at a 20-30% discount in a heart beat, but I won’t kid myself that it’s shady. “market price” is when the LA lower the price frequently until he/she finds a buyer at very close to final list price. Something that list for $1.1-1.2M closing for $900k with the agent playing both side looks shady to me.

[an]

[quote=CA renter][quote=jpinpb]I abhore when it’s an inside job and sells the day of list or before it’s even listed. If it’s on the market for a while and someone contacts the LA and makes an lowball offer that gets accepted, good for them.[/quote]

Exactly.

As long as all buyers have the same chance, then it’s a legitimate transaction. This is why all buyers should feel free to “lowball.” It’s the only way you’ll know whether or not something can sell for your price (which just might be “market price,” in the land of delusional sellers).[/quote]
But there in lie the problem. Most buyers don’t know that they can do that. So those who are in the know were able to get the deal. I don’t see too much difference between property going pending immediately w/ a LA playing both side and a property going pending a few month later if the end result is the buyer score a 20-30% off list price, especially if it’s well below market value. All it means is that the agent was able to find a buyer that allow him/her to play both sides at different time. I would personally jump at a 20-30% discount in a heart beat, but I won’t kid myself that it’s shady. “market price” is when the LA lower the price frequently until he/she finds a buyer at very close to final list price. Something that list for $1.1-1.2M closing for $900k with the agent playing both side looks shady to me.

[an]

[quote=CA renter][quote=jpinpb]I abhore when it’s an inside job and sells the day of list or before it’s even listed. If it’s on the market for a while and someone contacts the LA and makes an lowball offer that gets accepted, good for them.[/quote]

Exactly.

As long as all buyers have the same chance, then it’s a legitimate transaction. This is why all buyers should feel free to “lowball.” It’s the only way you’ll know whether or not something can sell for your price (which just might be “market price,” in the land of delusional sellers).[/quote]
But there in lie the problem. Most buyers don’t know that they can do that. So those who are in the know were able to get the deal. I don’t see too much difference between property going pending immediately w/ a LA playing both side and a property going pending a few month later if the end result is the buyer score a 20-30% off list price, especially if it’s well below market value. All it means is that the agent was able to find a buyer that allow him/her to play both sides at different time. I would personally jump at a 20-30% discount in a heart beat, but I won’t kid myself that it’s shady. “market price” is when the LA lower the price frequently until he/she finds a buyer at very close to final list price. Something that list for $1.1-1.2M closing for $900k with the agent playing both side looks shady to me.

[CA renter]

If the house goes on the market already “pending,” then other legitimate buyers don’t have a chance to make offers (that will be accepted).

If a house sits on the market for months or years, we shouldn’t be looking at the list price as a benchmark, as 20-30% off of list might still be 10-20%+ higher than market price. Too many people are listing their homes for prices that have nothing to do with what’s going on in the current market. Smart buyers know where the values are, and they should certainly know that list prices are just that — what the sellers hope to get for their homes. It has nothing to do with market price — past, or present. I’ve seen list prices that are much higher than what the sales price was at the peak of the bubble!

Buyers should be looking at historical sales data, and they should be making offers at around levels seen in 2000-2002.

While everyone here knows how much I hate shady deals that seek to exclude other buyers, I’ve seen plenty of deals where someone had the intelligence and wherewithal to make offers well below list price…and they’ve managed to get the house. I don’t begrudge these people, I applaud them. There is nothing wrong with offering what the buyers feels is a fair price, as long as all buyers are able to make those same low offers, and they should get the house if they present the best offer.

[CA renter]

If the house goes on the market already “pending,” then other legitimate buyers don’t have a chance to make offers (that will be accepted).

If a house sits on the market for months or years, we shouldn’t be looking at the list price as a benchmark, as 20-30% off of list might still be 10-20%+ higher than market price. Too many people are listing their homes for prices that have nothing to do with what’s going on in the current market. Smart buyers know where the values are, and they should certainly know that list prices are just that — what the sellers hope to get for their homes. It has nothing to do with market price — past, or present. I’ve seen list prices that are much higher than what the sales price was at the peak of the bubble!

Buyers should be looking at historical sales data, and they should be making offers at around levels seen in 2000-2002.

While everyone here knows how much I hate shady deals that seek to exclude other buyers, I’ve seen plenty of deals where someone had the intelligence and wherewithal to make offers well below list price…and they’ve managed to get the house. I don’t begrudge these people, I applaud them. There is nothing wrong with offering what the buyers feels is a fair price, as long as all buyers are able to make those same low offers, and they should get the house if they present the best offer.

[CA renter]

If the house goes on the market already “pending,” then other legitimate buyers don’t have a chance to make offers (that will be accepted).

If a house sits on the market for months or years, we shouldn’t be looking at the list price as a benchmark, as 20-30% off of list might still be 10-20%+ higher than market price. Too many people are listing their homes for prices that have nothing to do with what’s going on in the current market. Smart buyers know where the values are, and they should certainly know that list prices are just that — what the sellers hope to get for their homes. It has nothing to do with market price — past, or present. I’ve seen list prices that are much higher than what the sales price was at the peak of the bubble!

Buyers should be looking at historical sales data, and they should be making offers at around levels seen in 2000-2002.

While everyone here knows how much I hate shady deals that seek to exclude other buyers, I’ve seen plenty of deals where someone had the intelligence and wherewithal to make offers well below list price…and they’ve managed to get the house. I don’t begrudge these people, I applaud them. There is nothing wrong with offering what the buyers feels is a fair price, as long as all buyers are able to make those same low offers, and they should get the house if they present the best offer.

[CA renter]

If the house goes on the market already “pending,” then other legitimate buyers don’t have a chance to make offers (that will be accepted).

If a house sits on the market for months or years, we shouldn’t be looking at the list price as a benchmark, as 20-30% off of list might still be 10-20%+ higher than market price. Too many people are listing their homes for prices that have nothing to do with what’s going on in the current market. Smart buyers know where the values are, and they should certainly know that list prices are just that — what the sellers hope to get for their homes. It has nothing to do with market price — past, or present. I’ve seen list prices that are much higher than what the sales price was at the peak of the bubble!

Buyers should be looking at historical sales data, and they should be making offers at around levels seen in 2000-2002.

While everyone here knows how much I hate shady deals that seek to exclude other buyers, I’ve seen plenty of deals where someone had the intelligence and wherewithal to make offers well below list price…and they’ve managed to get the house. I don’t begrudge these people, I applaud them. There is nothing wrong with offering what the buyers feels is a fair price, as long as all buyers are able to make those same low offers, and they should get the house if they present the best offer.

[CA renter]

If the house goes on the market already “pending,” then other legitimate buyers don’t have a chance to make offers (that will be accepted).

If a house sits on the market for months or years, we shouldn’t be looking at the list price as a benchmark, as 20-30% off of list might still be 10-20%+ higher than market price. Too many people are listing their homes for prices that have nothing to do with what’s going on in the current market. Smart buyers know where the values are, and they should certainly know that list prices are just that — what the sellers hope to get for their homes. It has nothing to do with market price — past, or present. I’ve seen list prices that are much higher than what the sales price was at the peak of the bubble!

Buyers should be looking at historical sales data, and they should be making offers at around levels seen in 2000-2002.

While everyone here knows how much I hate shady deals that seek to exclude other buyers, I’ve seen plenty of deals where someone had the intelligence and wherewithal to make offers well below list price…and they’ve managed to get the house. I don’t begrudge these people, I applaud them. There is nothing wrong with offering what the buyers feels is a fair price, as long as all buyers are able to make those same low offers, and they should get the house if they present the best offer.

[an]

[quote=CA renter]If a house sits on the market for months or years, we shouldn’t be looking at the list price as a benchmark[/quote]

But your average buyers are, so, the lucky buyer didn’t compete w/ the market. So, it can’t possibly be “market price”.

[quote=CA renter]Smart buyers know where the values are, and they should certainly know that list prices are just that — what the sellers hope to get for their homes. It has nothing to do with market price — past, or present.[/quote]

I would say even smarter buyers would get to know the listing agents and get in on great deals before they have to compete with the “market”. The extra smart buyer don’t compete with the market. The semi smart buyer compete w/ other semi smart buyers who don’t compete with the rest of the market by going straight to the LA and hoping the LA is shady enough to push through your low ball offer while he/she get to pocket both end of the fees. The rest of the buyers are actually buying at the market price.

[quote=CA renter]While everyone here knows how much I hate shady deals that seek to exclude other buyers, I’ve seen plenty of deals where someone had the intelligence and wherewithal to make offers well below list price…and they’ve managed to get the house. I don’t begrudge these people, I applaud them. There is nothing wrong with offering what the buyers feels is a fair price, as long as all buyers are able to make those same low offers, and they should get the house if they present the best offer.[/quote]
Again, you make the assumption that all buyers are aware they could make low ball offers. There’s so many things going on behind closed doors with deals where LA play both side that you can’t possibly think it’s all fair. To me, it’s like pot calling kettle black.

[an]

[quote=CA renter]If a house sits on the market for months or years, we shouldn’t be looking at the list price as a benchmark[/quote]

But your average buyers are, so, the lucky buyer didn’t compete w/ the market. So, it can’t possibly be “market price”.

[quote=CA renter]Smart buyers know where the values are, and they should certainly know that list prices are just that — what the sellers hope to get for their homes. It has nothing to do with market price — past, or present.[/quote]

I would say even smarter buyers would get to know the listing agents and get in on great deals before they have to compete with the “market”. The extra smart buyer don’t compete with the market. The semi smart buyer compete w/ other semi smart buyers who don’t compete with the rest of the market by going straight to the LA and hoping the LA is shady enough to push through your low ball offer while he/she get to pocket both end of the fees. The rest of the buyers are actually buying at the market price.

[quote=CA renter]While everyone here knows how much I hate shady deals that seek to exclude other buyers, I’ve seen plenty of deals where someone had the intelligence and wherewithal to make offers well below list price…and they’ve managed to get the house. I don’t begrudge these people, I applaud them. There is nothing wrong with offering what the buyers feels is a fair price, as long as all buyers are able to make those same low offers, and they should get the house if they present the best offer.[/quote]
Again, you make the assumption that all buyers are aware they could make low ball offers. There’s so many things going on behind closed doors with deals where LA play both side that you can’t possibly think it’s all fair. To me, it’s like pot calling kettle black.

[an]

[quote=CA renter]If a house sits on the market for months or years, we shouldn’t be looking at the list price as a benchmark[/quote]

But your average buyers are, so, the lucky buyer didn’t compete w/ the market. So, it can’t possibly be “market price”.

[quote=CA renter]Smart buyers know where the values are, and they should certainly know that list prices are just that — what the sellers hope to get for their homes. It has nothing to do with market price — past, or present.[/quote]

I would say even smarter buyers would get to know the listing agents and get in on great deals before they have to compete with the “market”. The extra smart buyer don’t compete with the market. The semi smart buyer compete w/ other semi smart buyers who don’t compete with the rest of the market by going straight to the LA and hoping the LA is shady enough to push through your low ball offer while he/she get to pocket both end of the fees. The rest of the buyers are actually buying at the market price.

[quote=CA renter]While everyone here knows how much I hate shady deals that seek to exclude other buyers, I’ve seen plenty of deals where someone had the intelligence and wherewithal to make offers well below list price…and they’ve managed to get the house. I don’t begrudge these people, I applaud them. There is nothing wrong with offering what the buyers feels is a fair price, as long as all buyers are able to make those same low offers, and they should get the house if they present the best offer.[/quote]
Again, you make the assumption that all buyers are aware they could make low ball offers. There’s so many things going on behind closed doors with deals where LA play both side that you can’t possibly think it’s all fair. To me, it’s like pot calling kettle black.

[an]

[quote=CA renter]If a house sits on the market for months or years, we shouldn’t be looking at the list price as a benchmark[/quote]

But your average buyers are, so, the lucky buyer didn’t compete w/ the market. So, it can’t possibly be “market price”.

[quote=CA renter]Smart buyers know where the values are, and they should certainly know that list prices are just that — what the sellers hope to get for their homes. It has nothing to do with market price — past, or present.[/quote]

I would say even smarter buyers would get to know the listing agents and get in on great deals before they have to compete with the “market”. The extra smart buyer don’t compete with the market. The semi smart buyer compete w/ other semi smart buyers who don’t compete with the rest of the market by going straight to the LA and hoping the LA is shady enough to push through your low ball offer while he/she get to pocket both end of the fees. The rest of the buyers are actually buying at the market price.

[quote=CA renter]While everyone here knows how much I hate shady deals that seek to exclude other buyers, I’ve seen plenty of deals where someone had the intelligence and wherewithal to make offers well below list price…and they’ve managed to get the house. I don’t begrudge these people, I applaud them. There is nothing wrong with offering what the buyers feels is a fair price, as long as all buyers are able to make those same low offers, and they should get the house if they present the best offer.[/quote]
Again, you make the assumption that all buyers are aware they could make low ball offers. There’s so many things going on behind closed doors with deals where LA play both side that you can’t possibly think it’s all fair. To me, it’s like pot calling kettle black.

[Author]

Posts