Real Estate Model Is Broken – Property Virgins

[svelte]

We used to really like this show…Sandra would help them get a low price.

But now, it seems like it is a mouthpiece for realtors…first bids over list (???) and the show makes it look like people tour 3 properties then buy (that would minimize the work of realtors, wouldn’t it?).

Remember back when these shows would have a label on the screen showing the total number of houses toured? I haven’t seen that in a few seasons…now it looks like everyone tours three and buys (shoot, we look at triple digits before we buy!).

Even Sandra’s wardrobe isn’t as appealing as it used to be…she used to dress very provocatively.

Maybe she should do a show about people like us who’ve bought a lot of homes. They can call it Property Sluts.

[abell]

While they only show the buyers touring 3 properties, if the buyers take a long time and look at a lot of houses, they will mention it (although not say any more detail than that). You can also tell if seasons have past if it’s an area with snow.

[abell]

While they only show the buyers touring 3 properties, if the buyers take a long time and look at a lot of houses, they will mention it (although not say any more detail than that). You can also tell if seasons have past if it’s an area with snow.

[abell]

While they only show the buyers touring 3 properties, if the buyers take a long time and look at a lot of houses, they will mention it (although not say any more detail than that). You can also tell if seasons have past if it’s an area with snow.

[abell]

While they only show the buyers touring 3 properties, if the buyers take a long time and look at a lot of houses, they will mention it (although not say any more detail than that). You can also tell if seasons have past if it’s an area with snow.

[abell]

While they only show the buyers touring 3 properties, if the buyers take a long time and look at a lot of houses, they will mention it (although not say any more detail than that). You can also tell if seasons have past if it’s an area with snow.

[UCGal]

[quote=svelte]
Maybe she should do a show about people like us who’ve bought a lot of homes. They can call it Property Sluts.[/quote]
I love it.

(And like you – I looked at a LOT of houses before buying my various houses. Not triple digits – but high double digits.)

[UCGal]

[quote=svelte]
Maybe she should do a show about people like us who’ve bought a lot of homes. They can call it Property Sluts.[/quote]
I love it.

(And like you – I looked at a LOT of houses before buying my various houses. Not triple digits – but high double digits.)

[UCGal]

[quote=svelte]
Maybe she should do a show about people like us who’ve bought a lot of homes. They can call it Property Sluts.[/quote]
I love it.

(And like you – I looked at a LOT of houses before buying my various houses. Not triple digits – but high double digits.)

[UCGal]

[quote=svelte]
Maybe she should do a show about people like us who’ve bought a lot of homes. They can call it Property Sluts.[/quote]
I love it.

(And like you – I looked at a LOT of houses before buying my various houses. Not triple digits – but high double digits.)

[UCGal]

[quote=svelte]
Maybe she should do a show about people like us who’ve bought a lot of homes. They can call it Property Sluts.[/quote]
I love it.

(And like you – I looked at a LOT of houses before buying my various houses. Not triple digits – but high double digits.)

[urbanrealtor]

The problem with analyzing real estate at the micro level is that the macro economic models do not work so well.

Macro generally assumes lots of vendors with large inventories of interchangeable, single-purpose goods competing for buyers in a transparent market where information sets (unknowns) are minimized.

Walmart is a brilliant example of this.

However, in real estate, there are a relatively small number of unique goods that are crazy expensive. There are piles of unknowns (from neighborhood violence to termites to closing costs)and the concept of value is much more ethereal.

Making a foolish move could make you into an FB and its easy to draw a line from A(bad decision) to B (bankruptcy).

Given this tension, I don’t see the role of real estate agent going away any time soon.

I do agree with some of the things Rt66 said.

Some agent do jack shit and get way overpaid for it.
If it is not obvious that your agent is actually helping, or if it in doubt that they are actually working hard, then yeah, it might be time to revisit the arrangement.

However, given the OP’s description, I would be willing to bet that the fair market value of the property is around 650-675.

To borrow from Warren Buffet, if you can find someone willing to sell you dollars for 80 cents each, then buy them.

Of course real property is not as simple as that but if something is a really good deal at asking (and there are other buyers) then negotiation really do look more like a bidding war.

[urbanrealtor]

The problem with analyzing real estate at the micro level is that the macro economic models do not work so well.

Macro generally assumes lots of vendors with large inventories of interchangeable, single-purpose goods competing for buyers in a transparent market where information sets (unknowns) are minimized.

Walmart is a brilliant example of this.

However, in real estate, there are a relatively small number of unique goods that are crazy expensive. There are piles of unknowns (from neighborhood violence to termites to closing costs)and the concept of value is much more ethereal.

Making a foolish move could make you into an FB and its easy to draw a line from A(bad decision) to B (bankruptcy).

Given this tension, I don’t see the role of real estate agent going away any time soon.

I do agree with some of the things Rt66 said.

Some agent do jack shit and get way overpaid for it.
If it is not obvious that your agent is actually helping, or if it in doubt that they are actually working hard, then yeah, it might be time to revisit the arrangement.

However, given the OP’s description, I would be willing to bet that the fair market value of the property is around 650-675.

To borrow from Warren Buffet, if you can find someone willing to sell you dollars for 80 cents each, then buy them.

Of course real property is not as simple as that but if something is a really good deal at asking (and there are other buyers) then negotiation really do look more like a bidding war.

[urbanrealtor]

The problem with analyzing real estate at the micro level is that the macro economic models do not work so well.

Macro generally assumes lots of vendors with large inventories of interchangeable, single-purpose goods competing for buyers in a transparent market where information sets (unknowns) are minimized.

Walmart is a brilliant example of this.

However, in real estate, there are a relatively small number of unique goods that are crazy expensive. There are piles of unknowns (from neighborhood violence to termites to closing costs)and the concept of value is much more ethereal.

Making a foolish move could make you into an FB and its easy to draw a line from A(bad decision) to B (bankruptcy).

Given this tension, I don’t see the role of real estate agent going away any time soon.

I do agree with some of the things Rt66 said.

Some agent do jack shit and get way overpaid for it.
If it is not obvious that your agent is actually helping, or if it in doubt that they are actually working hard, then yeah, it might be time to revisit the arrangement.

However, given the OP’s description, I would be willing to bet that the fair market value of the property is around 650-675.

To borrow from Warren Buffet, if you can find someone willing to sell you dollars for 80 cents each, then buy them.

Of course real property is not as simple as that but if something is a really good deal at asking (and there are other buyers) then negotiation really do look more like a bidding war.

[urbanrealtor]

The problem with analyzing real estate at the micro level is that the macro economic models do not work so well.

Macro generally assumes lots of vendors with large inventories of interchangeable, single-purpose goods competing for buyers in a transparent market where information sets (unknowns) are minimized.

Walmart is a brilliant example of this.

However, in real estate, there are a relatively small number of unique goods that are crazy expensive. There are piles of unknowns (from neighborhood violence to termites to closing costs)and the concept of value is much more ethereal.

Making a foolish move could make you into an FB and its easy to draw a line from A(bad decision) to B (bankruptcy).

Given this tension, I don’t see the role of real estate agent going away any time soon.

I do agree with some of the things Rt66 said.

Some agent do jack shit and get way overpaid for it.
If it is not obvious that your agent is actually helping, or if it in doubt that they are actually working hard, then yeah, it might be time to revisit the arrangement.

However, given the OP’s description, I would be willing to bet that the fair market value of the property is around 650-675.

To borrow from Warren Buffet, if you can find someone willing to sell you dollars for 80 cents each, then buy them.

Of course real property is not as simple as that but if something is a really good deal at asking (and there are other buyers) then negotiation really do look more like a bidding war.

[Author]

Posts