The Internet may not have had the impact we all thought it would on housing

[Nor-LA-SD-guy]

[quote=briansd1]

I believe that anything that has emotional or luxury marketing costs more money.

Women have been delaying marriage (or can’t find mates suitable to their standards) and single women now make up an increasingly large portion of buyers creating more housing demand.

That’s a demographic to consider.

I believe that women are more likely to use full service Realtors because they like to talk and discuss their options.

Women want to call someone and talk over every little concern.

An Internet model where everything is impersonal and done via computer is not really suitable to most female shoppers, in my opinion.[/quote]

Well today’s service economy is more suited to Women I believe so the stats are showing, (women more and more being the bread winners), so I can see where there is not much advantage for women to marry as there used to be.

This should provide for interesting (entraining) situation comedy in the future I would think.

[(former)FormerSanDiegan]

“There is a fairly widely held hypothesis that because we can find so much more information online about real estate that the market is more efficient and hence prices should be relatively lower now.”

Regardless of whether the market is efficient or not, I think there is a fundamental flaw in here, and that is the assumption that more efficient means lower prices. A more efficient market would simply respond more immediately to supply and demand. Prices may increase or decrease when this happens.

That said, I think the RE market is signficiantly more efficient than 15 years ago, but still has a long way to go IMO to be as efficient as other capital markets. There are plenty of other factors (including emotional ones) that come into play and probably always will be.

[(former)FormerSanDiegan]

“There is a fairly widely held hypothesis that because we can find so much more information online about real estate that the market is more efficient and hence prices should be relatively lower now.”

Regardless of whether the market is efficient or not, I think there is a fundamental flaw in here, and that is the assumption that more efficient means lower prices. A more efficient market would simply respond more immediately to supply and demand. Prices may increase or decrease when this happens.

That said, I think the RE market is signficiantly more efficient than 15 years ago, but still has a long way to go IMO to be as efficient as other capital markets. There are plenty of other factors (including emotional ones) that come into play and probably always will be.

[(former)FormerSanDiegan]

“There is a fairly widely held hypothesis that because we can find so much more information online about real estate that the market is more efficient and hence prices should be relatively lower now.”

Regardless of whether the market is efficient or not, I think there is a fundamental flaw in here, and that is the assumption that more efficient means lower prices. A more efficient market would simply respond more immediately to supply and demand. Prices may increase or decrease when this happens.

That said, I think the RE market is signficiantly more efficient than 15 years ago, but still has a long way to go IMO to be as efficient as other capital markets. There are plenty of other factors (including emotional ones) that come into play and probably always will be.

[(former)FormerSanDiegan]

“There is a fairly widely held hypothesis that because we can find so much more information online about real estate that the market is more efficient and hence prices should be relatively lower now.”

Regardless of whether the market is efficient or not, I think there is a fundamental flaw in here, and that is the assumption that more efficient means lower prices. A more efficient market would simply respond more immediately to supply and demand. Prices may increase or decrease when this happens.

That said, I think the RE market is signficiantly more efficient than 15 years ago, but still has a long way to go IMO to be as efficient as other capital markets. There are plenty of other factors (including emotional ones) that come into play and probably always will be.

[(former)FormerSanDiegan]

“There is a fairly widely held hypothesis that because we can find so much more information online about real estate that the market is more efficient and hence prices should be relatively lower now.”

Regardless of whether the market is efficient or not, I think there is a fundamental flaw in here, and that is the assumption that more efficient means lower prices. A more efficient market would simply respond more immediately to supply and demand. Prices may increase or decrease when this happens.

That said, I think the RE market is signficiantly more efficient than 15 years ago, but still has a long way to go IMO to be as efficient as other capital markets. There are plenty of other factors (including emotional ones) that come into play and probably always will be.

[UCGal]

Some random thoughts here…

I think sdrealtor has a point – as GOOD properties get more visibility, the price is driven up. As mentioned, kind of an ebay effect. Properties that have issues might get a slight bump – since the good properties act as comps.

As a woman who has purchased 3 houses – and was actively looking, and didn’t buy in another time – I used a full service realtor for 3 of these four searches. And I drove those realtor nuts. The first two times were in 1990 in WA state, and 1993 in PA. I drove the realtors nuts because I had a strict budget (far less than I qualified for) and wanted to see LOTS of properties. I was looking at older houses so I’d head to the basement first – to see the panel box. If it was old fuse style – with lots of DIY wiring, I’d walk right out of the house. Not a typical single female purchaser.

By 2000 I was married, expecting, and looking for a bigger house. Again, I wanted to see EVERYTHING – driving my realtor nuts. At the time realtor.com was big – and I’d call my realtor with listings that she hadn’t heard about. We ended up moving back to CA rather than buying… but it was an 8 month looking process. If we’d found the “just right” house, we would have bought it and stayed there.

The most recent purchase, in 2003, was a family purchase – no realtors, just a title/escrow company. So it doesn’t count.

I agree that in married couples – women drive the purchase decisions. But not all women are swayed by petunias and granite counters… Some ARE capable of looking at infrastructure and maintenance issues.

[UCGal]

Some random thoughts here…

I think sdrealtor has a point – as GOOD properties get more visibility, the price is driven up. As mentioned, kind of an ebay effect. Properties that have issues might get a slight bump – since the good properties act as comps.

As a woman who has purchased 3 houses – and was actively looking, and didn’t buy in another time – I used a full service realtor for 3 of these four searches. And I drove those realtor nuts. The first two times were in 1990 in WA state, and 1993 in PA. I drove the realtors nuts because I had a strict budget (far less than I qualified for) and wanted to see LOTS of properties. I was looking at older houses so I’d head to the basement first – to see the panel box. If it was old fuse style – with lots of DIY wiring, I’d walk right out of the house. Not a typical single female purchaser.

By 2000 I was married, expecting, and looking for a bigger house. Again, I wanted to see EVERYTHING – driving my realtor nuts. At the time realtor.com was big – and I’d call my realtor with listings that she hadn’t heard about. We ended up moving back to CA rather than buying… but it was an 8 month looking process. If we’d found the “just right” house, we would have bought it and stayed there.

The most recent purchase, in 2003, was a family purchase – no realtors, just a title/escrow company. So it doesn’t count.

I agree that in married couples – women drive the purchase decisions. But not all women are swayed by petunias and granite counters… Some ARE capable of looking at infrastructure and maintenance issues.

[UCGal]

Some random thoughts here…

I think sdrealtor has a point – as GOOD properties get more visibility, the price is driven up. As mentioned, kind of an ebay effect. Properties that have issues might get a slight bump – since the good properties act as comps.

As a woman who has purchased 3 houses – and was actively looking, and didn’t buy in another time – I used a full service realtor for 3 of these four searches. And I drove those realtor nuts. The first two times were in 1990 in WA state, and 1993 in PA. I drove the realtors nuts because I had a strict budget (far less than I qualified for) and wanted to see LOTS of properties. I was looking at older houses so I’d head to the basement first – to see the panel box. If it was old fuse style – with lots of DIY wiring, I’d walk right out of the house. Not a typical single female purchaser.

By 2000 I was married, expecting, and looking for a bigger house. Again, I wanted to see EVERYTHING – driving my realtor nuts. At the time realtor.com was big – and I’d call my realtor with listings that she hadn’t heard about. We ended up moving back to CA rather than buying… but it was an 8 month looking process. If we’d found the “just right” house, we would have bought it and stayed there.

The most recent purchase, in 2003, was a family purchase – no realtors, just a title/escrow company. So it doesn’t count.

I agree that in married couples – women drive the purchase decisions. But not all women are swayed by petunias and granite counters… Some ARE capable of looking at infrastructure and maintenance issues.

[UCGal]

Some random thoughts here…

I think sdrealtor has a point – as GOOD properties get more visibility, the price is driven up. As mentioned, kind of an ebay effect. Properties that have issues might get a slight bump – since the good properties act as comps.

As a woman who has purchased 3 houses – and was actively looking, and didn’t buy in another time – I used a full service realtor for 3 of these four searches. And I drove those realtor nuts. The first two times were in 1990 in WA state, and 1993 in PA. I drove the realtors nuts because I had a strict budget (far less than I qualified for) and wanted to see LOTS of properties. I was looking at older houses so I’d head to the basement first – to see the panel box. If it was old fuse style – with lots of DIY wiring, I’d walk right out of the house. Not a typical single female purchaser.

By 2000 I was married, expecting, and looking for a bigger house. Again, I wanted to see EVERYTHING – driving my realtor nuts. At the time realtor.com was big – and I’d call my realtor with listings that she hadn’t heard about. We ended up moving back to CA rather than buying… but it was an 8 month looking process. If we’d found the “just right” house, we would have bought it and stayed there.

The most recent purchase, in 2003, was a family purchase – no realtors, just a title/escrow company. So it doesn’t count.

I agree that in married couples – women drive the purchase decisions. But not all women are swayed by petunias and granite counters… Some ARE capable of looking at infrastructure and maintenance issues.

[UCGal]

Some random thoughts here…

I think sdrealtor has a point – as GOOD properties get more visibility, the price is driven up. As mentioned, kind of an ebay effect. Properties that have issues might get a slight bump – since the good properties act as comps.

As a woman who has purchased 3 houses – and was actively looking, and didn’t buy in another time – I used a full service realtor for 3 of these four searches. And I drove those realtor nuts. The first two times were in 1990 in WA state, and 1993 in PA. I drove the realtors nuts because I had a strict budget (far less than I qualified for) and wanted to see LOTS of properties. I was looking at older houses so I’d head to the basement first – to see the panel box. If it was old fuse style – with lots of DIY wiring, I’d walk right out of the house. Not a typical single female purchaser.

By 2000 I was married, expecting, and looking for a bigger house. Again, I wanted to see EVERYTHING – driving my realtor nuts. At the time realtor.com was big – and I’d call my realtor with listings that she hadn’t heard about. We ended up moving back to CA rather than buying… but it was an 8 month looking process. If we’d found the “just right” house, we would have bought it and stayed there.

The most recent purchase, in 2003, was a family purchase – no realtors, just a title/escrow company. So it doesn’t count.

I agree that in married couples – women drive the purchase decisions. But not all women are swayed by petunias and granite counters… Some ARE capable of looking at infrastructure and maintenance issues.

[5yearwaiter]

Though we are in very advanced internet era – I surprised to see – A unnecessary dominent role of realtor involvement (6% commission) and a lot mortgage closing costs. If anyone take a close look at these these are really waste and unwanted costs that are deviating the current housing trends. Why not streamline much these and naildown those costs to simply near to 1% or 2%? I wish to take the full advantage of internet and stream line several actions in the realestate market not only listing and data but also naildown the lot extra money trasnfer.

A realtor :- Just open the lock and tour the house and throw the 14 pages offer after we signed.

Escrow:- Almost 10K plus closing costs.

My thoughts appear to be bit ruide but still I believe we are not yet taken full advantage of internet. The funny thing is today if you refinance the same house with same lender still you need to ponder a lot money for same title with the same lender – but why ? where is the work that involved that much money to submit after all refinance with in the same lender with same data.

[5yearwaiter]

Though we are in very advanced internet era – I surprised to see – A unnecessary dominent role of realtor involvement (6% commission) and a lot mortgage closing costs. If anyone take a close look at these these are really waste and unwanted costs that are deviating the current housing trends. Why not streamline much these and naildown those costs to simply near to 1% or 2%? I wish to take the full advantage of internet and stream line several actions in the realestate market not only listing and data but also naildown the lot extra money trasnfer.

A realtor :- Just open the lock and tour the house and throw the 14 pages offer after we signed.

Escrow:- Almost 10K plus closing costs.

My thoughts appear to be bit ruide but still I believe we are not yet taken full advantage of internet. The funny thing is today if you refinance the same house with same lender still you need to ponder a lot money for same title with the same lender – but why ? where is the work that involved that much money to submit after all refinance with in the same lender with same data.

[5yearwaiter]

Though we are in very advanced internet era – I surprised to see – A unnecessary dominent role of realtor involvement (6% commission) and a lot mortgage closing costs. If anyone take a close look at these these are really waste and unwanted costs that are deviating the current housing trends. Why not streamline much these and naildown those costs to simply near to 1% or 2%? I wish to take the full advantage of internet and stream line several actions in the realestate market not only listing and data but also naildown the lot extra money trasnfer.

A realtor :- Just open the lock and tour the house and throw the 14 pages offer after we signed.

Escrow:- Almost 10K plus closing costs.

My thoughts appear to be bit ruide but still I believe we are not yet taken full advantage of internet. The funny thing is today if you refinance the same house with same lender still you need to ponder a lot money for same title with the same lender – but why ? where is the work that involved that much money to submit after all refinance with in the same lender with same data.

[5yearwaiter]

Though we are in very advanced internet era – I surprised to see – A unnecessary dominent role of realtor involvement (6% commission) and a lot mortgage closing costs. If anyone take a close look at these these are really waste and unwanted costs that are deviating the current housing trends. Why not streamline much these and naildown those costs to simply near to 1% or 2%? I wish to take the full advantage of internet and stream line several actions in the realestate market not only listing and data but also naildown the lot extra money trasnfer.

A realtor :- Just open the lock and tour the house and throw the 14 pages offer after we signed.

Escrow:- Almost 10K plus closing costs.

My thoughts appear to be bit ruide but still I believe we are not yet taken full advantage of internet. The funny thing is today if you refinance the same house with same lender still you need to ponder a lot money for same title with the same lender – but why ? where is the work that involved that much money to submit after all refinance with in the same lender with same data.

[Author]

Posts