- This topic has 50 replies, 7 voices, and was last updated 15 years, 8 months ago by
sdrealtor.
-
AuthorPosts
-
March 19, 2010 at 10:32 AM #528851March 19, 2010 at 10:40 AM #527925
an
Participant[quote=sdrealtor]Its a short sale so there is no way of knowing if thats a real price or if the lender would accept that. The asking price means very little in this case. Wait until it closes and then we can get excited.[/quote]
Good info. We’ll see where it closes at. Even if it close at the original listing price, that’s still below 1999 price. I would have assumed there are more multi-millionaire today than in 1996.March 19, 2010 at 10:40 AM #528058an
Participant[quote=sdrealtor]Its a short sale so there is no way of knowing if thats a real price or if the lender would accept that. The asking price means very little in this case. Wait until it closes and then we can get excited.[/quote]
Good info. We’ll see where it closes at. Even if it close at the original listing price, that’s still below 1999 price. I would have assumed there are more multi-millionaire today than in 1996.March 19, 2010 at 10:40 AM #528507an
Participant[quote=sdrealtor]Its a short sale so there is no way of knowing if thats a real price or if the lender would accept that. The asking price means very little in this case. Wait until it closes and then we can get excited.[/quote]
Good info. We’ll see where it closes at. Even if it close at the original listing price, that’s still below 1999 price. I would have assumed there are more multi-millionaire today than in 1996.March 19, 2010 at 10:40 AM #528603an
Participant[quote=sdrealtor]Its a short sale so there is no way of knowing if thats a real price or if the lender would accept that. The asking price means very little in this case. Wait until it closes and then we can get excited.[/quote]
Good info. We’ll see where it closes at. Even if it close at the original listing price, that’s still below 1999 price. I would have assumed there are more multi-millionaire today than in 1996.March 19, 2010 at 10:40 AM #528862an
Participant[quote=sdrealtor]Its a short sale so there is no way of knowing if thats a real price or if the lender would accept that. The asking price means very little in this case. Wait until it closes and then we can get excited.[/quote]
Good info. We’ll see where it closes at. Even if it close at the original listing price, that’s still below 1999 price. I would have assumed there are more multi-millionaire today than in 1996.March 19, 2010 at 10:43 AM #527931sdrealtor
ParticipantJust checked and its a bit odd. Sold in 1999 for 2.7M. In 1997 there were sales on the same street for smaller homes at $850 and $1.1M. Not sure whats going on but $2.45M seems way too high for a 1996 price in that area. My guess is 2.45M is a real price today but not a real price for 1996. Either way its looks like a bit of an outlier relative to other homes in the area.
March 19, 2010 at 10:43 AM #528063sdrealtor
ParticipantJust checked and its a bit odd. Sold in 1999 for 2.7M. In 1997 there were sales on the same street for smaller homes at $850 and $1.1M. Not sure whats going on but $2.45M seems way too high for a 1996 price in that area. My guess is 2.45M is a real price today but not a real price for 1996. Either way its looks like a bit of an outlier relative to other homes in the area.
March 19, 2010 at 10:43 AM #528512sdrealtor
ParticipantJust checked and its a bit odd. Sold in 1999 for 2.7M. In 1997 there were sales on the same street for smaller homes at $850 and $1.1M. Not sure whats going on but $2.45M seems way too high for a 1996 price in that area. My guess is 2.45M is a real price today but not a real price for 1996. Either way its looks like a bit of an outlier relative to other homes in the area.
March 19, 2010 at 10:43 AM #528608sdrealtor
ParticipantJust checked and its a bit odd. Sold in 1999 for 2.7M. In 1997 there were sales on the same street for smaller homes at $850 and $1.1M. Not sure whats going on but $2.45M seems way too high for a 1996 price in that area. My guess is 2.45M is a real price today but not a real price for 1996. Either way its looks like a bit of an outlier relative to other homes in the area.
March 19, 2010 at 10:43 AM #528867sdrealtor
ParticipantJust checked and its a bit odd. Sold in 1999 for 2.7M. In 1997 there were sales on the same street for smaller homes at $850 and $1.1M. Not sure whats going on but $2.45M seems way too high for a 1996 price in that area. My guess is 2.45M is a real price today but not a real price for 1996. Either way its looks like a bit of an outlier relative to other homes in the area.
March 19, 2010 at 10:44 AM #527936SD Realtor
ParticipantActually I have a client who wanted to see this home 2 weeks ago. We were going to visit it and that day were told no more showings. On paper it does appear to be a good deal. The listing agent told us they have a cash offer into the lender at that time with another solid backup. He could be bsing us. Not sure.
March 19, 2010 at 10:44 AM #528068SD Realtor
ParticipantActually I have a client who wanted to see this home 2 weeks ago. We were going to visit it and that day were told no more showings. On paper it does appear to be a good deal. The listing agent told us they have a cash offer into the lender at that time with another solid backup. He could be bsing us. Not sure.
March 19, 2010 at 10:44 AM #528517SD Realtor
ParticipantActually I have a client who wanted to see this home 2 weeks ago. We were going to visit it and that day were told no more showings. On paper it does appear to be a good deal. The listing agent told us they have a cash offer into the lender at that time with another solid backup. He could be bsing us. Not sure.
March 19, 2010 at 10:44 AM #528613SD Realtor
ParticipantActually I have a client who wanted to see this home 2 weeks ago. We were going to visit it and that day were told no more showings. On paper it does appear to be a good deal. The listing agent told us they have a cash offer into the lender at that time with another solid backup. He could be bsing us. Not sure.
-
AuthorPosts
- You must be logged in to reply to this topic.
