Forum Replies Created
-
AuthorPosts
-
pemeliza
Participant“The markets are the flippers. The appraisals are using the comps that the flippers are selling.”
lol
Maybe if you are in the market for a “turnkey” house with a 5k home depot kitchen and a couple of 1k Ikea bathrooms. There are a decent number of “organic” sellers trying to sell great locations and great bones for fair market values. I think the real problem with the market is that for whatever reason 50-75% of the homes on the market are way overpriced with respect to recent comparable sales. With nary an exception, flipper or no flipper, houses priced to sell are the only houses moving these days.
Participant“The markets are the flippers. The appraisals are using the comps that the flippers are selling.”
lol
Maybe if you are in the market for a “turnkey” house with a 5k home depot kitchen and a couple of 1k Ikea bathrooms. There are a decent number of “organic” sellers trying to sell great locations and great bones for fair market values. I think the real problem with the market is that for whatever reason 50-75% of the homes on the market are way overpriced with respect to recent comparable sales. With nary an exception, flipper or no flipper, houses priced to sell are the only houses moving these days.
Participant“So, while “the market” (buyers?) sets the price, it is the most foolish buyer who’s willing to take the greatest risks who sets the price in a supply-constrained market.”
That was true during the bubble years but now? I don’t see it much at least not in my neck of the woods. What I see are buyers that are sitting back and waiting for the market to come to them. The buyers are more picky and in tune with market value than I have seen in a long time. Right now, if you are a seller you had better have a damn sharp list price or your listing is going to sit, sit and then sit some more. If you really want to sell right now and your are priced above 750k it is best to start at 5% under recent sales and be prepared to work down from there. There is a short sale in my area that sold for 875k at the peak and eventually got reduced to 599k to find a buyer. That is 31.5% off of the peak price in mission hills and guess what the house just got relisted for sale. A few months ago that would have been a screaming price for an upgraded house. Now not so much. Who knows why the buyer walked but maybe it was not being able to close before the tax credit expired. If my guess is correct, the buyer had a deal 31.5% under peak and walked for 8k. As another example, there was a recent listing for 750k in north mission hills which was pretty much in line with recent comps in that area given the square footage. Well it went pending and ended up closing for 680k. There is another house on a prime street listed at least 50k probably 100k under the previous sale and the house is sitting.
I could give you dozens of examples. Basically, the type of foolhardy buyer you speak of may still be out there to a very limited extent but right now the market is being ruled by buyers that are doing their homework, looking at the recent comps, taking 5-10% off of that and working down from there. There have been some flippers in my area but when they list higher than market the house sits endlessly and then they end up selling it for 10-20% under there original wish price just to get out from under a sinking ship.
Participant“So, while “the market” (buyers?) sets the price, it is the most foolish buyer who’s willing to take the greatest risks who sets the price in a supply-constrained market.”
That was true during the bubble years but now? I don’t see it much at least not in my neck of the woods. What I see are buyers that are sitting back and waiting for the market to come to them. The buyers are more picky and in tune with market value than I have seen in a long time. Right now, if you are a seller you had better have a damn sharp list price or your listing is going to sit, sit and then sit some more. If you really want to sell right now and your are priced above 750k it is best to start at 5% under recent sales and be prepared to work down from there. There is a short sale in my area that sold for 875k at the peak and eventually got reduced to 599k to find a buyer. That is 31.5% off of the peak price in mission hills and guess what the house just got relisted for sale. A few months ago that would have been a screaming price for an upgraded house. Now not so much. Who knows why the buyer walked but maybe it was not being able to close before the tax credit expired. If my guess is correct, the buyer had a deal 31.5% under peak and walked for 8k. As another example, there was a recent listing for 750k in north mission hills which was pretty much in line with recent comps in that area given the square footage. Well it went pending and ended up closing for 680k. There is another house on a prime street listed at least 50k probably 100k under the previous sale and the house is sitting.
I could give you dozens of examples. Basically, the type of foolhardy buyer you speak of may still be out there to a very limited extent but right now the market is being ruled by buyers that are doing their homework, looking at the recent comps, taking 5-10% off of that and working down from there. There have been some flippers in my area but when they list higher than market the house sits endlessly and then they end up selling it for 10-20% under there original wish price just to get out from under a sinking ship.
Participant“So, while “the market” (buyers?) sets the price, it is the most foolish buyer who’s willing to take the greatest risks who sets the price in a supply-constrained market.”
That was true during the bubble years but now? I don’t see it much at least not in my neck of the woods. What I see are buyers that are sitting back and waiting for the market to come to them. The buyers are more picky and in tune with market value than I have seen in a long time. Right now, if you are a seller you had better have a damn sharp list price or your listing is going to sit, sit and then sit some more. If you really want to sell right now and your are priced above 750k it is best to start at 5% under recent sales and be prepared to work down from there. There is a short sale in my area that sold for 875k at the peak and eventually got reduced to 599k to find a buyer. That is 31.5% off of the peak price in mission hills and guess what the house just got relisted for sale. A few months ago that would have been a screaming price for an upgraded house. Now not so much. Who knows why the buyer walked but maybe it was not being able to close before the tax credit expired. If my guess is correct, the buyer had a deal 31.5% under peak and walked for 8k. As another example, there was a recent listing for 750k in north mission hills which was pretty much in line with recent comps in that area given the square footage. Well it went pending and ended up closing for 680k. There is another house on a prime street listed at least 50k probably 100k under the previous sale and the house is sitting.
I could give you dozens of examples. Basically, the type of foolhardy buyer you speak of may still be out there to a very limited extent but right now the market is being ruled by buyers that are doing their homework, looking at the recent comps, taking 5-10% off of that and working down from there. There have been some flippers in my area but when they list higher than market the house sits endlessly and then they end up selling it for 10-20% under there original wish price just to get out from under a sinking ship.
Participant“So, while “the market” (buyers?) sets the price, it is the most foolish buyer who’s willing to take the greatest risks who sets the price in a supply-constrained market.”
That was true during the bubble years but now? I don’t see it much at least not in my neck of the woods. What I see are buyers that are sitting back and waiting for the market to come to them. The buyers are more picky and in tune with market value than I have seen in a long time. Right now, if you are a seller you had better have a damn sharp list price or your listing is going to sit, sit and then sit some more. If you really want to sell right now and your are priced above 750k it is best to start at 5% under recent sales and be prepared to work down from there. There is a short sale in my area that sold for 875k at the peak and eventually got reduced to 599k to find a buyer. That is 31.5% off of the peak price in mission hills and guess what the house just got relisted for sale. A few months ago that would have been a screaming price for an upgraded house. Now not so much. Who knows why the buyer walked but maybe it was not being able to close before the tax credit expired. If my guess is correct, the buyer had a deal 31.5% under peak and walked for 8k. As another example, there was a recent listing for 750k in north mission hills which was pretty much in line with recent comps in that area given the square footage. Well it went pending and ended up closing for 680k. There is another house on a prime street listed at least 50k probably 100k under the previous sale and the house is sitting.
I could give you dozens of examples. Basically, the type of foolhardy buyer you speak of may still be out there to a very limited extent but right now the market is being ruled by buyers that are doing their homework, looking at the recent comps, taking 5-10% off of that and working down from there. There have been some flippers in my area but when they list higher than market the house sits endlessly and then they end up selling it for 10-20% under there original wish price just to get out from under a sinking ship.
Participant“So, while “the market” (buyers?) sets the price, it is the most foolish buyer who’s willing to take the greatest risks who sets the price in a supply-constrained market.”
That was true during the bubble years but now? I don’t see it much at least not in my neck of the woods. What I see are buyers that are sitting back and waiting for the market to come to them. The buyers are more picky and in tune with market value than I have seen in a long time. Right now, if you are a seller you had better have a damn sharp list price or your listing is going to sit, sit and then sit some more. If you really want to sell right now and your are priced above 750k it is best to start at 5% under recent sales and be prepared to work down from there. There is a short sale in my area that sold for 875k at the peak and eventually got reduced to 599k to find a buyer. That is 31.5% off of the peak price in mission hills and guess what the house just got relisted for sale. A few months ago that would have been a screaming price for an upgraded house. Now not so much. Who knows why the buyer walked but maybe it was not being able to close before the tax credit expired. If my guess is correct, the buyer had a deal 31.5% under peak and walked for 8k. As another example, there was a recent listing for 750k in north mission hills which was pretty much in line with recent comps in that area given the square footage. Well it went pending and ended up closing for 680k. There is another house on a prime street listed at least 50k probably 100k under the previous sale and the house is sitting.
I could give you dozens of examples. Basically, the type of foolhardy buyer you speak of may still be out there to a very limited extent but right now the market is being ruled by buyers that are doing their homework, looking at the recent comps, taking 5-10% off of that and working down from there. There have been some flippers in my area but when they list higher than market the house sits endlessly and then they end up selling it for 10-20% under there original wish price just to get out from under a sinking ship.
Participant“Sure. Off the top of my head, there was one on Babilonia that sold for ~$645K at auction. The flipper sold it with little or no improvements in the $900K-$1MM range.”
I may be mistaken but I think you are talking about the house on Bolero that sold for 910k. At 910k
the ppsf is $198 which sounds about like market value for something in that area with that kind of view (at least at the time it was purchased).The REO at 2618 Obelisco place sold for 880k and was smaller and probably didn’t have quite as good a view. That house came on at 800k and got bid up to 880k. The demand was strong on that house because I bid 825k all cash and I did not get the house. I serious doubt the end buyer of Obelisco or Bolero was an FHA buyer with 3% down.
I would say the flipper bought the house on Bolero probably for a 1998-1999 nominal price. I believe this because I looked at and seriously considered buying a similar but smaller house in the area that sold for 700k in 2000.
I would say with some degree of confidence that the flippers have had no impact on the market values of houses in La Costa Estates.
BTW, the market is still screaming to the downside in that area as evidenced by the two 1M listings on Babilonia that are dueling it out. You may have lost the battle for Bolero, but you are clearly winning the war as your deflation thesis seems to be gaining traction.
Participant“Sure. Off the top of my head, there was one on Babilonia that sold for ~$645K at auction. The flipper sold it with little or no improvements in the $900K-$1MM range.”
I may be mistaken but I think you are talking about the house on Bolero that sold for 910k. At 910k
the ppsf is $198 which sounds about like market value for something in that area with that kind of view (at least at the time it was purchased).The REO at 2618 Obelisco place sold for 880k and was smaller and probably didn’t have quite as good a view. That house came on at 800k and got bid up to 880k. The demand was strong on that house because I bid 825k all cash and I did not get the house. I serious doubt the end buyer of Obelisco or Bolero was an FHA buyer with 3% down.
I would say the flipper bought the house on Bolero probably for a 1998-1999 nominal price. I believe this because I looked at and seriously considered buying a similar but smaller house in the area that sold for 700k in 2000.
I would say with some degree of confidence that the flippers have had no impact on the market values of houses in La Costa Estates.
BTW, the market is still screaming to the downside in that area as evidenced by the two 1M listings on Babilonia that are dueling it out. You may have lost the battle for Bolero, but you are clearly winning the war as your deflation thesis seems to be gaining traction.
Participant“Sure. Off the top of my head, there was one on Babilonia that sold for ~$645K at auction. The flipper sold it with little or no improvements in the $900K-$1MM range.”
I may be mistaken but I think you are talking about the house on Bolero that sold for 910k. At 910k
the ppsf is $198 which sounds about like market value for something in that area with that kind of view (at least at the time it was purchased).The REO at 2618 Obelisco place sold for 880k and was smaller and probably didn’t have quite as good a view. That house came on at 800k and got bid up to 880k. The demand was strong on that house because I bid 825k all cash and I did not get the house. I serious doubt the end buyer of Obelisco or Bolero was an FHA buyer with 3% down.
I would say the flipper bought the house on Bolero probably for a 1998-1999 nominal price. I believe this because I looked at and seriously considered buying a similar but smaller house in the area that sold for 700k in 2000.
I would say with some degree of confidence that the flippers have had no impact on the market values of houses in La Costa Estates.
BTW, the market is still screaming to the downside in that area as evidenced by the two 1M listings on Babilonia that are dueling it out. You may have lost the battle for Bolero, but you are clearly winning the war as your deflation thesis seems to be gaining traction.
Participant“Sure. Off the top of my head, there was one on Babilonia that sold for ~$645K at auction. The flipper sold it with little or no improvements in the $900K-$1MM range.”
I may be mistaken but I think you are talking about the house on Bolero that sold for 910k. At 910k
the ppsf is $198 which sounds about like market value for something in that area with that kind of view (at least at the time it was purchased).The REO at 2618 Obelisco place sold for 880k and was smaller and probably didn’t have quite as good a view. That house came on at 800k and got bid up to 880k. The demand was strong on that house because I bid 825k all cash and I did not get the house. I serious doubt the end buyer of Obelisco or Bolero was an FHA buyer with 3% down.
I would say the flipper bought the house on Bolero probably for a 1998-1999 nominal price. I believe this because I looked at and seriously considered buying a similar but smaller house in the area that sold for 700k in 2000.
I would say with some degree of confidence that the flippers have had no impact on the market values of houses in La Costa Estates.
BTW, the market is still screaming to the downside in that area as evidenced by the two 1M listings on Babilonia that are dueling it out. You may have lost the battle for Bolero, but you are clearly winning the war as your deflation thesis seems to be gaining traction.
Participant“Sure. Off the top of my head, there was one on Babilonia that sold for ~$645K at auction. The flipper sold it with little or no improvements in the $900K-$1MM range.”
I may be mistaken but I think you are talking about the house on Bolero that sold for 910k. At 910k
the ppsf is $198 which sounds about like market value for something in that area with that kind of view (at least at the time it was purchased).The REO at 2618 Obelisco place sold for 880k and was smaller and probably didn’t have quite as good a view. That house came on at 800k and got bid up to 880k. The demand was strong on that house because I bid 825k all cash and I did not get the house. I serious doubt the end buyer of Obelisco or Bolero was an FHA buyer with 3% down.
I would say the flipper bought the house on Bolero probably for a 1998-1999 nominal price. I believe this because I looked at and seriously considered buying a similar but smaller house in the area that sold for 700k in 2000.
I would say with some degree of confidence that the flippers have had no impact on the market values of houses in La Costa Estates.
BTW, the market is still screaming to the downside in that area as evidenced by the two 1M listings on Babilonia that are dueling it out. You may have lost the battle for Bolero, but you are clearly winning the war as your deflation thesis seems to be gaining traction.
Participant“Right now, there is a ppsf differential of about 100 bucks between mission hills and North Park, but with substantially more variability ”
If you look at the sales prices and not list prices, I think things are tighter than that. I just took a look at redfin for zip codes 92103 and 92104 market trends for houses.
In 92104 the listing price for houses averages $397 a foot while the sold prices average $421 a foot. The sales to list price 98.13%.
Meanwhile, in 92103 the listing price for houses averages $514 a foot while the sold prices average $429 a foot. The sales to list price is 94.57%.
I realize that these are rough data and 92103 also includes Hillcrest, but the trend can be confirmed if you look at recent sales on a house per house basis. For whatever reason, the ppsf differential between 92103 and 92104 is collapsing for houses.
Participant“Right now, there is a ppsf differential of about 100 bucks between mission hills and North Park, but with substantially more variability ”
If you look at the sales prices and not list prices, I think things are tighter than that. I just took a look at redfin for zip codes 92103 and 92104 market trends for houses.
In 92104 the listing price for houses averages $397 a foot while the sold prices average $421 a foot. The sales to list price 98.13%.
Meanwhile, in 92103 the listing price for houses averages $514 a foot while the sold prices average $429 a foot. The sales to list price is 94.57%.
I realize that these are rough data and 92103 also includes Hillcrest, but the trend can be confirmed if you look at recent sales on a house per house basis. For whatever reason, the ppsf differential between 92103 and 92104 is collapsing for houses.
-
AuthorPosts
