[cyphire]

Rustico – I am very sympathetic to jg’s point of view. I also live in La Jolla and am pretty uncomfortable with the public school system. La Jolla and Carmel Valley (two of the 3 places I have lived since coming here from NY 8 years ago) have the best schools in SD – but they are sorely lacking in comparison to east coast public schools and private schools.

Each child is different, each parent and home life is different and different things work for different people (apologize for using different so many times…). I have one child in private school (Junior High) and one who is in public (but both have been in both private and public). Schools are financed very differently out here than lets say in NY. I think that the NY system is horrifically unfair but it does create great public schools for the better towns. Carmel Valley and La Jolla schools are some of the best that SD has to offer and I am so underwhelmed.

The second child is pretty bored by public school and is amazed at the lack of civility. The kids curse, are mean to each other, etc. In the public school it is 100% different. The kids are held to the kind of standard that the last 3 pages of this blog envision as the gold standard. My son hadn’t heard a kid cursing the whole time he was in private school (and it is a non-religious school) but witnessed kids cursing at teachers here in LJ.

Don’t get me wrong – I don’t think the school is terrible. But to get him into private school in 7th grade I am going to get a tutor, keep having him excel at home (he has to write a report weekly on a weekly book to earn weekend video games), and otherwise be very involved from a parenting standpoint. He is a smart sensitive kid and I wish that the public school emulated the private schools – but they don’t. Even in the most expensive communities, they are trapped in a system which doesn’t reward excellence and must serve all levels of intelligence, mental problems, family issues, etc. all on a very tiny budget.

p.s. What makes NY so unfair is that a percentage of the property and business taxes are directly given to the school system. In poor areas with no businesses, they have a tiny fraction of the money that rich areas have. This works against societies long term interests… Here in LJ (and CV) the parents dig in and sell, create, fund, etc. but they have the money to add to the schools resources. In other parts of SD they don’t have the economics to support it so it’s pretty much the same around the US. Also you get what you pay for. In NY the taxes on the house we sold in the north county would be around 30K – here they were 20K and only because we bought so recently.

[cyphire]

Rustico – I am very sympathetic to jg’s point of view. I also live in La Jolla and am pretty uncomfortable with the public school system. La Jolla and Carmel Valley (two of the 3 places I have lived since coming here from NY 8 years ago) have the best schools in SD – but they are sorely lacking in comparison to east coast public schools and private schools.

Each child is different, each parent and home life is different and different things work for different people (apologize for using different so many times…). I have one child in private school (Junior High) and one who is in public (but both have been in both private and public). Schools are financed very differently out here than lets say in NY. I think that the NY system is horrifically unfair but it does create great public schools for the better towns. Carmel Valley and La Jolla schools are some of the best that SD has to offer and I am so underwhelmed.

The second child is pretty bored by public school and is amazed at the lack of civility. The kids curse, are mean to each other, etc. In the public school it is 100% different. The kids are held to the kind of standard that the last 3 pages of this blog envision as the gold standard. My son hadn’t heard a kid cursing the whole time he was in private school (and it is a non-religious school) but witnessed kids cursing at teachers here in LJ.

Don’t get me wrong – I don’t think the school is terrible. But to get him into private school in 7th grade I am going to get a tutor, keep having him excel at home (he has to write a report weekly on a weekly book to earn weekend video games), and otherwise be very involved from a parenting standpoint. He is a smart sensitive kid and I wish that the public school emulated the private schools – but they don’t. Even in the most expensive communities, they are trapped in a system which doesn’t reward excellence and must serve all levels of intelligence, mental problems, family issues, etc. all on a very tiny budget.

p.s. What makes NY so unfair is that a percentage of the property and business taxes are directly given to the school system. In poor areas with no businesses, they have a tiny fraction of the money that rich areas have. This works against societies long term interests… Here in LJ (and CV) the parents dig in and sell, create, fund, etc. but they have the money to add to the schools resources. In other parts of SD they don’t have the economics to support it so it’s pretty much the same around the US. Also you get what you pay for. In NY the taxes on the house we sold in the north county would be around 30K – here they were 20K and only because we bought so recently.

[cyphire]

Chris I agree… I think the parallel is in the housing market. Greed and complacency created the housing market. And I don’t mean greed in the more negative sense, but most money is invested without being actively managed. And everyone wants the extra buck around the corner. People are afraid to buck a trend which still shows positive because they are worried about the extra margin they might lose at the top by getting out.

The complacent investor becomes the frightened one bolting for the door when we have the next major correction. Too many people lost big in the tech bust to have forgotten the lesson of how fast it can get bad. Instead of riding the wave down (like so many of us did in tech, people will take 20% losses in their portfolio to not get wiped out again. (Which seems contrary to logic as the tech stocks were really based on ridicules fundamentals, not just bad ones like our current P/E’s.

Personally – I don’t want a tragedy. Even though I am 90% in cash and bonds I don’t want the economy to do what I fear it is going to – that is implode. Anyway I am not worried about losing a huge upside – I would rather forgo the upside and protect the downside right now. That is why I sold my house and am renting. The housing market has already begun it’s descent and the stock market will go with it when housing becomes a superdrag on consumer spending.

[cyphire]

Chris I agree… I think the parallel is in the housing market. Greed and complacency created the housing market. And I don’t mean greed in the more negative sense, but most money is invested without being actively managed. And everyone wants the extra buck around the corner. People are afraid to buck a trend which still shows positive because they are worried about the extra margin they might lose at the top by getting out.

The complacent investor becomes the frightened one bolting for the door when we have the next major correction. Too many people lost big in the tech bust to have forgotten the lesson of how fast it can get bad. Instead of riding the wave down (like so many of us did in tech, people will take 20% losses in their portfolio to not get wiped out again. (Which seems contrary to logic as the tech stocks were really based on ridicules fundamentals, not just bad ones like our current P/E’s.

Personally – I don’t want a tragedy. Even though I am 90% in cash and bonds I don’t want the economy to do what I fear it is going to – that is implode. Anyway I am not worried about losing a huge upside – I would rather forgo the upside and protect the downside right now. That is why I sold my house and am renting. The housing market has already begun it’s descent and the stock market will go with it when housing becomes a superdrag on consumer spending.

[cyphire]

Absolutely true LA_renter. I agree it’s an emotional issue. Being on the sidelines (and very, very happy about it) obviously makes me root for the correction. I don’t want people hurt – but in the long term it will allow people that have been prudent to be able to buy homes. It is emotional. What is more emotional is the people who own their homes (or more than one) and/or make money in real estate. It is very hard to argue against your self-interest.

I saw something on one of these posts about the stages of all bubbles. We are now in the denial stage. All booms have these stages. Most people know that there has been a flattening of the market, but still look at short term return to increase because that fulfills their desire. We haven’t entered the next stage which will be a mass exit. And when I say mass exit I don’t mean everyone will sell – I just mean that anyone who will need to sell within the next 5-10 years will probably try to do so sooner than later – because the market will realize that it is only getting worse.

What I am most concerned with is that with a true public understanding that the equity they have is being eroded that consumer confidence will tank. Consumers spend 70% of the economy. With decreased business, companies will try to protect the bottom line. In our society – letting people go is very simple. With higher unemployment and wages going flat or down we will have increased economic danger. And unlike the housing market, the stock market can turn on a dime. With both equity and investments wiped out (and a catastrophic debt hanging over our economy) I think that we as a nation will be like the folks that are getting foreclosed on right now.

I hope its softer than this – but hoping doesn’t make it happen.

[cyphire]

Absolutely true LA_renter. I agree it’s an emotional issue. Being on the sidelines (and very, very happy about it) obviously makes me root for the correction. I don’t want people hurt – but in the long term it will allow people that have been prudent to be able to buy homes. It is emotional. What is more emotional is the people who own their homes (or more than one) and/or make money in real estate. It is very hard to argue against your self-interest.

I saw something on one of these posts about the stages of all bubbles. We are now in the denial stage. All booms have these stages. Most people know that there has been a flattening of the market, but still look at short term return to increase because that fulfills their desire. We haven’t entered the next stage which will be a mass exit. And when I say mass exit I don’t mean everyone will sell – I just mean that anyone who will need to sell within the next 5-10 years will probably try to do so sooner than later – because the market will realize that it is only getting worse.

What I am most concerned with is that with a true public understanding that the equity they have is being eroded that consumer confidence will tank. Consumers spend 70% of the economy. With decreased business, companies will try to protect the bottom line. In our society – letting people go is very simple. With higher unemployment and wages going flat or down we will have increased economic danger. And unlike the housing market, the stock market can turn on a dime. With both equity and investments wiped out (and a catastrophic debt hanging over our economy) I think that we as a nation will be like the folks that are getting foreclosed on right now.

I hope its softer than this – but hoping doesn’t make it happen.

[cyphire]

I will PerryChase. We built a home in NY about 12 years ago by taking a 2,200 foot house on 2 1/2 acres and adding 5K feet to it. (The original house was just to the left of the low black roof on the right). We had architects but I took their drawings and computerized them (found some flaws, etc) and our builder built the whole thing for about 380K). It was the most fun I had, only problem was that it definitely interferes with your actual day job!

For some reason whenever we remodel a home, we end up selling. I’m not the typical home buyer – I have some gypsy in me which makes owning a home an even bigger problem as the selling costs are dramatic.

As good a job as I can do, I probably will buy something that someone else has over upgraded as it is hard to justify giving up a year of your life to build a house. We also had to move out and rent for a period both times and that is a hassle. If I do build a custom house (and when I say me I mean the guys that actually can use power tools) I probably will keep renting and then do just what you suggest.

I hope the market comes to some level of normalcy, not to get a deal (although that would be nice) but to make me feel good about the long term economics. Again – if I was going to be there for 20-30 years it would be irrelevant, but I unusually don’t so I have to be a bit more economically prudent.

Hey this blogging stuff is fun!!! Even though I am a computer guy this is my first real experience actually commenting and not just reading!

[img_assist|nid=3552|title=House we built|desc=House|link=node|align=left|width=466|height=462]

[cyphire]

I will PerryChase. We built a home in NY about 12 years ago by taking a 2,200 foot house on 2 1/2 acres and adding 5K feet to it. (The original house was just to the left of the low black roof on the right). We had architects but I took their drawings and computerized them (found some flaws, etc) and our builder built the whole thing for about 380K). It was the most fun I had, only problem was that it definitely interferes with your actual day job!

For some reason whenever we remodel a home, we end up selling. I’m not the typical home buyer – I have some gypsy in me which makes owning a home an even bigger problem as the selling costs are dramatic.

As good a job as I can do, I probably will buy something that someone else has over upgraded as it is hard to justify giving up a year of your life to build a house. We also had to move out and rent for a period both times and that is a hassle. If I do build a custom house (and when I say me I mean the guys that actually can use power tools) I probably will keep renting and then do just what you suggest.

I hope the market comes to some level of normalcy, not to get a deal (although that would be nice) but to make me feel good about the long term economics. Again – if I was going to be there for 20-30 years it would be irrelevant, but I unusually don’t so I have to be a bit more economically prudent.

Hey this blogging stuff is fun!!! Even though I am a computer guy this is my first real experience actually commenting and not just reading!

[img_assist|nid=3552|title=House we built|desc=House|link=node|align=left|width=466|height=462]

[cyphire]

I hear you sdrealtor – my confusion comes in the big picture and I’m a big picture kind of guy. I always loved economics but was a little frustrated by the complexity of reality (why economics usually can’t get it right). That being said – most people aren’t as you describe. It would be great to think so, but I don’t think it works that way.

Most home buyers are calculating their earning power, seeing what they can afford, and buying a home. Warren Buffet has more money than God, he still lives in the same middle-class home that he always did. He isn’t a home buyer.

The typical US citizen and especially Californian’s buy a house for many reasons – good schools, good neighborhoods, good quality of life, but they don’t do it because they have great long term assets and can afford their lifestyle.

With the current price structure of homes here in SD the vast majority of people are spending a large amount of their disposable income on their home, and are working long hard hours to afford it. From the working guys to the execs they are all buying homes in the best neighborhoods they can with the best schools.

People are paying 1.5M for cruddy tiny houses in La Jolla or 1.2M for stucco boxes in Carmel Valley. They want to get their kids into schools which while still are mediocre, are way above the other California schools. They have no choice the prices are the prices and the rental market is for single professionals (by and large). Home ownership has been sold as the gold standard by realtors and by our society.

I would venture to say that 9 out of 10 buyers are buying what they can almost not afford. That doesn’t mean they are all stupid, that is the way it is. They aren’t all getting subprime or even alt-A mortgages. They have great credit. They live within their means (not many but some!!!). They put down 20-30 percent which is most of their savings outside of 401K’s and other investments, but they don’t have a million (or half a million) in the bank in excess of this.

After dipping into a little home equity to get some of the things they want (after all we are a credit society) as long as they have good jobs and no major problems in their lives they will be fine – just perpetually not increasing their wealth as the price they are paying for these homes has become more and more out of touch with fundamentals.

I love the idea that we should all have a deep investment pool and buy where we can afford – but that is the exception not the rule.

I’m 46 years old and have a wide group of friends and people I talk to. I see 2 groups of people generally… Those that bought at least 10 years ago which have great equity in their homes (but usually have tapped quite a bit of it for investments, vacations, second homes, etc.) and the other group which bought within the last 5 years and has about as much equity or less than what they put down on their homes. I’m an entrepreneur and don’t work for a company – but am amazed at how hard people work for others and how stressed their lives are all to afford (or not afford) the lifestyle they are living.

Even after mortgage deductions a person making 160K per year probably only nets around 120K. That doesn’t go far in SD and it is pretty hard to save. I’m of the opinion that we have become a more and more debt ridden society. Cheap money easy credit etc. have put their mark on this market more than anything else and it has to correct.

Just my opinion at looking at the typical buyer – I’m not a realtor so I could be wrong (by the way most home purchases are done for emotional reasons (actually all sales are somewhat emotional) rather than looking at cold hard logic. We have to keep our wives/children happy. And our society puts a premium on the bling bling (did i say that right?) lifestyle.

Keep up the dialog, I’m having fun!

[cyphire]

I hear you sdrealtor – my confusion comes in the big picture and I’m a big picture kind of guy. I always loved economics but was a little frustrated by the complexity of reality (why economics usually can’t get it right). That being said – most people aren’t as you describe. It would be great to think so, but I don’t think it works that way.

Most home buyers are calculating their earning power, seeing what they can afford, and buying a home. Warren Buffet has more money than God, he still lives in the same middle-class home that he always did. He isn’t a home buyer.

The typical US citizen and especially Californian’s buy a house for many reasons – good schools, good neighborhoods, good quality of life, but they don’t do it because they have great long term assets and can afford their lifestyle.

With the current price structure of homes here in SD the vast majority of people are spending a large amount of their disposable income on their home, and are working long hard hours to afford it. From the working guys to the execs they are all buying homes in the best neighborhoods they can with the best schools.

People are paying 1.5M for cruddy tiny houses in La Jolla or 1.2M for stucco boxes in Carmel Valley. They want to get their kids into schools which while still are mediocre, are way above the other California schools. They have no choice the prices are the prices and the rental market is for single professionals (by and large). Home ownership has been sold as the gold standard by realtors and by our society.

I would venture to say that 9 out of 10 buyers are buying what they can almost not afford. That doesn’t mean they are all stupid, that is the way it is. They aren’t all getting subprime or even alt-A mortgages. They have great credit. They live within their means (not many but some!!!). They put down 20-30 percent which is most of their savings outside of 401K’s and other investments, but they don’t have a million (or half a million) in the bank in excess of this.

After dipping into a little home equity to get some of the things they want (after all we are a credit society) as long as they have good jobs and no major problems in their lives they will be fine – just perpetually not increasing their wealth as the price they are paying for these homes has become more and more out of touch with fundamentals.

I love the idea that we should all have a deep investment pool and buy where we can afford – but that is the exception not the rule.

I’m 46 years old and have a wide group of friends and people I talk to. I see 2 groups of people generally… Those that bought at least 10 years ago which have great equity in their homes (but usually have tapped quite a bit of it for investments, vacations, second homes, etc.) and the other group which bought within the last 5 years and has about as much equity or less than what they put down on their homes. I’m an entrepreneur and don’t work for a company – but am amazed at how hard people work for others and how stressed their lives are all to afford (or not afford) the lifestyle they are living.

Even after mortgage deductions a person making 160K per year probably only nets around 120K. That doesn’t go far in SD and it is pretty hard to save. I’m of the opinion that we have become a more and more debt ridden society. Cheap money easy credit etc. have put their mark on this market more than anything else and it has to correct.

Just my opinion at looking at the typical buyer – I’m not a realtor so I could be wrong (by the way most home purchases are done for emotional reasons (actually all sales are somewhat emotional) rather than looking at cold hard logic. We have to keep our wives/children happy. And our society puts a premium on the bling bling (did i say that right?) lifestyle.

Keep up the dialog, I’m having fun!

[cyphire]

Hey sdrealtor… a couple of things. First i didn’t realize that there is a sdrealtor and an SD Realtor so excuse me if I am confused who is who.

Second, I think I might have been a little harsh in my last post. I don’t think that you are a brutal salesperson taking advantage of the little people, but I have been buying and selling homes for 16 years and the quality of the realtors has come down…. way down…. So in general most realtors I have come across, not all but most, embarass me because I am a good salesperson… and they suck.

I have been looking for a home in La Jolla, and have come across some quality realtors but mostly exhousewives, exteachers, exarchitects, exeverything and each one is less competent and less knowledgeable than the one before. They will say anything (and have) about buying a house here in LJ. The problem is that for years prices have been going up, and now when they say the same tired lines it is a somewhat criminal act… that is if I actually belived them. I almost fell for it and would have been screwed… But logic prevailed and prices are still retreating. So I am a little skittish… That isn’t to say that all realtors stink, but as a profession a large amount of housecleaning is in order.

Anyway – excuse my current and past venting (also on the Orange County Wacked post)… and will try to find out who is who.

p.s. If I ever treated any of my customers like most realtors do business – I wouldnt be in business… This business has to change

[cyphire]

Hey sdrealtor… a couple of things. First i didn’t realize that there is a sdrealtor and an SD Realtor so excuse me if I am confused who is who.

Second, I think I might have been a little harsh in my last post. I don’t think that you are a brutal salesperson taking advantage of the little people, but I have been buying and selling homes for 16 years and the quality of the realtors has come down…. way down…. So in general most realtors I have come across, not all but most, embarass me because I am a good salesperson… and they suck.

I have been looking for a home in La Jolla, and have come across some quality realtors but mostly exhousewives, exteachers, exarchitects, exeverything and each one is less competent and less knowledgeable than the one before. They will say anything (and have) about buying a house here in LJ. The problem is that for years prices have been going up, and now when they say the same tired lines it is a somewhat criminal act… that is if I actually belived them. I almost fell for it and would have been screwed… But logic prevailed and prices are still retreating. So I am a little skittish… That isn’t to say that all realtors stink, but as a profession a large amount of housecleaning is in order.

Anyway – excuse my current and past venting (also on the Orange County Wacked post)… and will try to find out who is who.

p.s. If I ever treated any of my customers like most realtors do business – I wouldnt be in business… This business has to change

[cyphire]

I see your point, but it doesn’t seem real world to me. Realtors are always using the catch phrases you toss around like:

“They are more concerned with living the life they have earned and choose to live.”

No one wants to overpay for this right, but thats where prices are right now (and declining). No one earns the right to buy a depreciating asset. 98% of your clients are paying a price which is economically a bad deal for them, although a great deal for the people pocketing the 6%.

Example:

An exec buys a house in Carmel Valley. Pays 1.5M for a 5,000 square foot lot with a 4,000 foot home. Pays approx $6,000.00 mortgage on each 1M so pays $9,000.00 interest only plus taxes which makes it $10,500.00 / month. You say that is 100% mortgage, but i’m just doing it for illustration because the exec is losing the interest on any down payment (it’s buried in the house) so the cost of money is the same. After tax benefits it is roughly $8,000.00/month.

Lets say the house goes down in price to $1M… I don’t know anyone that would be happy in this scenario.

The house should sell for $600,000. At this price it is justified economically.

Using Carmel Valley as an example, everyone I know there works like a dog to afford this “Lifestyle they have earned”. They do have a quality of life but it’s not all good quality!!!

I hate the ‘dream’ that realtors sell. Even the home descriptions on the MLS make you want to vomit. I’m gonna write one right now:

A slice of heaven awaits you in this Tuscan manor. Four bedroom, 3 bath at the end of a cul-de-sac. Kitchen a professional chef would die for. Your dog at your side while the fireplace beckons. Enjoy your gorgeous home in villa like surroundings. Gentle waterfall sounds and jasmine perfume the air and you sleep on a cloud of dream dust while your mortgage rate gently upwardly adjusts!

“The data is all out there and has been for quite some time.”

What the heck does this mean? My house which sold for $2,050,000 in December 2006 still shows as $2,300,000 on the realtors web site, but listed as SOLD. This is the quality data that you refer to. No wonder realtors hate zillow… It actually shows the $2,050,000 price I sold for 6 months ago (Can’t have too much ‘quality’ data out there can we sdrealtor?)

“While you are sitting on the sidelines, those that can afford it and want to buy a home will continue to do so. Nothing you can say or do will make it otherwise.”

Thats true… nothing i say or do will change what most people will do… they will follow the herd and then cry when they realize they are in trouble.

Are they really making informed decisions? or are realtors convincing them that prices will go up, and mortgage brokers that they can afford it? The one consistent fact is that realtors make money selling houses whether or not it is a good deal for their clients. Like many kinds of sales, after the house is sold you walk away and the owner has to deal with the aftermath. This is fine. This is business. But it’s not exactly ethical to sell a product at this magnitude and comment on the economic feasibility of it. Your job is to show houses, not proclaim a rosy future.. This is why Real Estate is such a dirty word to most people. They know that realtors will say anything to sell a house.. Even statements which they are unqualified to utter.

Realtors should open doors and show off features. They are ethically responsible for the statements they say. So in today’s market they should just stay quiet and not say the following:

“and the price you will ultimately have to pay or not pay for that matter.”

This is the ultimate salesperson’s tool – putting the buyer (or potential buyer) in fear. This is a somewhat sly reference to the fact that you feel that I am on the sidelines while prices go up. And I will ultimately pay for it (if I choose to).

If you said this in 2000 I would agree… In today’s market it seems somewhat irresponsible.

[cyphire]

I see your point, but it doesn’t seem real world to me. Realtors are always using the catch phrases you toss around like:

“They are more concerned with living the life they have earned and choose to live.”

No one wants to overpay for this right, but thats where prices are right now (and declining). No one earns the right to buy a depreciating asset. 98% of your clients are paying a price which is economically a bad deal for them, although a great deal for the people pocketing the 6%.

Example:

An exec buys a house in Carmel Valley. Pays 1.5M for a 5,000 square foot lot with a 4,000 foot home. Pays approx $6,000.00 mortgage on each 1M so pays $9,000.00 interest only plus taxes which makes it $10,500.00 / month. You say that is 100% mortgage, but i’m just doing it for illustration because the exec is losing the interest on any down payment (it’s buried in the house) so the cost of money is the same. After tax benefits it is roughly $8,000.00/month.

Lets say the house goes down in price to $1M… I don’t know anyone that would be happy in this scenario.

The house should sell for $600,000. At this price it is justified economically.

Using Carmel Valley as an example, everyone I know there works like a dog to afford this “Lifestyle they have earned”. They do have a quality of life but it’s not all good quality!!!

I hate the ‘dream’ that realtors sell. Even the home descriptions on the MLS make you want to vomit. I’m gonna write one right now:

A slice of heaven awaits you in this Tuscan manor. Four bedroom, 3 bath at the end of a cul-de-sac. Kitchen a professional chef would die for. Your dog at your side while the fireplace beckons. Enjoy your gorgeous home in villa like surroundings. Gentle waterfall sounds and jasmine perfume the air and you sleep on a cloud of dream dust while your mortgage rate gently upwardly adjusts!

“The data is all out there and has been for quite some time.”

What the heck does this mean? My house which sold for $2,050,000 in December 2006 still shows as $2,300,000 on the realtors web site, but listed as SOLD. This is the quality data that you refer to. No wonder realtors hate zillow… It actually shows the $2,050,000 price I sold for 6 months ago (Can’t have too much ‘quality’ data out there can we sdrealtor?)

“While you are sitting on the sidelines, those that can afford it and want to buy a home will continue to do so. Nothing you can say or do will make it otherwise.”

Thats true… nothing i say or do will change what most people will do… they will follow the herd and then cry when they realize they are in trouble.

Are they really making informed decisions? or are realtors convincing them that prices will go up, and mortgage brokers that they can afford it? The one consistent fact is that realtors make money selling houses whether or not it is a good deal for their clients. Like many kinds of sales, after the house is sold you walk away and the owner has to deal with the aftermath. This is fine. This is business. But it’s not exactly ethical to sell a product at this magnitude and comment on the economic feasibility of it. Your job is to show houses, not proclaim a rosy future.. This is why Real Estate is such a dirty word to most people. They know that realtors will say anything to sell a house.. Even statements which they are unqualified to utter.

Realtors should open doors and show off features. They are ethically responsible for the statements they say. So in today’s market they should just stay quiet and not say the following:

“and the price you will ultimately have to pay or not pay for that matter.”

This is the ultimate salesperson’s tool – putting the buyer (or potential buyer) in fear. This is a somewhat sly reference to the fact that you feel that I am on the sidelines while prices go up. And I will ultimately pay for it (if I choose to).

If you said this in 2000 I would agree… In today’s market it seems somewhat irresponsible.

[cyphire]

Hey SDRealtor… My wife wonders what kind of Californian’s keep their homes for ‘generations’. Also I was wondering… could you tell me where these homes are??? I mean just the general area – no specifics… I hope that they aren’t in La Jolla because 1.7 will buy you a run down 2200 square foot 3 bed 2 bath from 1950… are these the custom homes? Or are they in Del Mar Mesa where custom McMansions start at around 2.8M???

[Author]

Posts