Forum Replies Created
-
AuthorPosts
-
urbanrealtor
ParticipantWow.
THis thread got sideways and angry almost as bad as that one where sdr flipped out at everybody.
This seems to happen whenever I leave the country.
Hmmmm.
Coincedence.???
Participant[quote=DataAgent]”One of my last short listings had an offer accepted within 2 hrs of going live.”
Did the lender accept the deal?
[/quote]Sort of.
They came back asking for 20k more and the comps did not support that.
The buyer came back offering 10 more and the lender was good with it.
There is room for slippage here.
Participant[quote=DataAgent]”One of my last short listings had an offer accepted within 2 hrs of going live.”
Did the lender accept the deal?
[/quote]Sort of.
They came back asking for 20k more and the comps did not support that.
The buyer came back offering 10 more and the lender was good with it.
There is room for slippage here.
Participant[quote=DataAgent]”One of my last short listings had an offer accepted within 2 hrs of going live.”
Did the lender accept the deal?
[/quote]Sort of.
They came back asking for 20k more and the comps did not support that.
The buyer came back offering 10 more and the lender was good with it.
There is room for slippage here.
Participant[quote=DataAgent]”One of my last short listings had an offer accepted within 2 hrs of going live.”
Did the lender accept the deal?
[/quote]Sort of.
They came back asking for 20k more and the comps did not support that.
The buyer came back offering 10 more and the lender was good with it.
There is room for slippage here.
Participant[quote=DataAgent]”One of my last short listings had an offer accepted within 2 hrs of going live.”
Did the lender accept the deal?
[/quote]Sort of.
They came back asking for 20k more and the comps did not support that.
The buyer came back offering 10 more and the lender was good with it.
There is room for slippage here.
ParticipantI know you did not ask me but I must point out that we don´t know what the contingent price is.
It could be higher than asking.
I don´t have inside info.
Also, the seller probably does not care what price it sells for as long as the seller´s lender accepts it.
One of my last short listings had an offer accepted within 2 hrs of going live.
The problem with the angry taxpayer argument is that we have not had the relevant strings attached to the money we give them.
As an agent, I don´t read the bailout package notices when I list a property. My client is the seller, not the bank or uncle sam.
ParticipantI know you did not ask me but I must point out that we don´t know what the contingent price is.
It could be higher than asking.
I don´t have inside info.
Also, the seller probably does not care what price it sells for as long as the seller´s lender accepts it.
One of my last short listings had an offer accepted within 2 hrs of going live.
The problem with the angry taxpayer argument is that we have not had the relevant strings attached to the money we give them.
As an agent, I don´t read the bailout package notices when I list a property. My client is the seller, not the bank or uncle sam.
ParticipantI know you did not ask me but I must point out that we don´t know what the contingent price is.
It could be higher than asking.
I don´t have inside info.
Also, the seller probably does not care what price it sells for as long as the seller´s lender accepts it.
One of my last short listings had an offer accepted within 2 hrs of going live.
The problem with the angry taxpayer argument is that we have not had the relevant strings attached to the money we give them.
As an agent, I don´t read the bailout package notices when I list a property. My client is the seller, not the bank or uncle sam.
ParticipantI know you did not ask me but I must point out that we don´t know what the contingent price is.
It could be higher than asking.
I don´t have inside info.
Also, the seller probably does not care what price it sells for as long as the seller´s lender accepts it.
One of my last short listings had an offer accepted within 2 hrs of going live.
The problem with the angry taxpayer argument is that we have not had the relevant strings attached to the money we give them.
As an agent, I don´t read the bailout package notices when I list a property. My client is the seller, not the bank or uncle sam.
ParticipantI know you did not ask me but I must point out that we don´t know what the contingent price is.
It could be higher than asking.
I don´t have inside info.
Also, the seller probably does not care what price it sells for as long as the seller´s lender accepts it.
One of my last short listings had an offer accepted within 2 hrs of going live.
The problem with the angry taxpayer argument is that we have not had the relevant strings attached to the money we give them.
As an agent, I don´t read the bailout package notices when I list a property. My client is the seller, not the bank or uncle sam.
June 22, 2009 at 2:42 PM in reply to: Why do Republicans think we should all have short term memory? #418847Participant[quote=luchabee]Real-estate right?
Ever tried running a small machine shop or done manufacturing, etc? You want to talk about regulation . . .
Obviously, many business owners in CA are not as nimble, as they are fleeing the state, closing shop, letting people go. My sister-in-law just got laid off from a small firm. Another family member of mine let his employees go, as the compliance and taxes didn’t warrant their continued employment and the burden managing them. Out in the I.E., we may approach a 20% real unemployment rate, but the CA legislature is doing nothing to promote growth. In fact, after the largest tax increase in history, they still want to increase taxes.
From my perspective, a taste of what is to come from the federal government. Maybe those millions and millions of green jobs will save us though? I’ve always wanted a windmill on top of my car.[/quote]
Real estate, financial holding firm, performance venue, coffee shop, restaurant.
I have a lot of experience in business.
I really don’t think that its the taxes that are keeping us down.
Just dropping taxes fixes little right now.
I do think there is a good argument for some deregulation of some industries but deregulation again does little just as a mindless mantra.The neo-classical view that the economy always achieves the best when left alone flies in the face of reason and centuries of economic history. The credit freezes that riddle our history from 1800 to 1910 are testament to that. It makes more sense to say that sometimes the economy sucks and sometimes the government is in a position to help with that.
If you can’t run a business that succeeds, it is a weak argument to say that the government forced you into failure. It reminds me of Hillary (or John McCain or John Kerry or Al Gore) claiming that the media caused them to lose. If you can’t play, step back.
“The game is the game”
-Marlo StanfieldJune 22, 2009 at 2:42 PM in reply to: Why do Republicans think we should all have short term memory? #419076Participant[quote=luchabee]Real-estate right?
Ever tried running a small machine shop or done manufacturing, etc? You want to talk about regulation . . .
Obviously, many business owners in CA are not as nimble, as they are fleeing the state, closing shop, letting people go. My sister-in-law just got laid off from a small firm. Another family member of mine let his employees go, as the compliance and taxes didn’t warrant their continued employment and the burden managing them. Out in the I.E., we may approach a 20% real unemployment rate, but the CA legislature is doing nothing to promote growth. In fact, after the largest tax increase in history, they still want to increase taxes.
From my perspective, a taste of what is to come from the federal government. Maybe those millions and millions of green jobs will save us though? I’ve always wanted a windmill on top of my car.[/quote]
Real estate, financial holding firm, performance venue, coffee shop, restaurant.
I have a lot of experience in business.
I really don’t think that its the taxes that are keeping us down.
Just dropping taxes fixes little right now.
I do think there is a good argument for some deregulation of some industries but deregulation again does little just as a mindless mantra.The neo-classical view that the economy always achieves the best when left alone flies in the face of reason and centuries of economic history. The credit freezes that riddle our history from 1800 to 1910 are testament to that. It makes more sense to say that sometimes the economy sucks and sometimes the government is in a position to help with that.
If you can’t run a business that succeeds, it is a weak argument to say that the government forced you into failure. It reminds me of Hillary (or John McCain or John Kerry or Al Gore) claiming that the media caused them to lose. If you can’t play, step back.
“The game is the game”
-Marlo StanfieldJune 22, 2009 at 2:42 PM in reply to: Why do Republicans think we should all have short term memory? #419344Participant[quote=luchabee]Real-estate right?
Ever tried running a small machine shop or done manufacturing, etc? You want to talk about regulation . . .
Obviously, many business owners in CA are not as nimble, as they are fleeing the state, closing shop, letting people go. My sister-in-law just got laid off from a small firm. Another family member of mine let his employees go, as the compliance and taxes didn’t warrant their continued employment and the burden managing them. Out in the I.E., we may approach a 20% real unemployment rate, but the CA legislature is doing nothing to promote growth. In fact, after the largest tax increase in history, they still want to increase taxes.
From my perspective, a taste of what is to come from the federal government. Maybe those millions and millions of green jobs will save us though? I’ve always wanted a windmill on top of my car.[/quote]
Real estate, financial holding firm, performance venue, coffee shop, restaurant.
I have a lot of experience in business.
I really don’t think that its the taxes that are keeping us down.
Just dropping taxes fixes little right now.
I do think there is a good argument for some deregulation of some industries but deregulation again does little just as a mindless mantra.The neo-classical view that the economy always achieves the best when left alone flies in the face of reason and centuries of economic history. The credit freezes that riddle our history from 1800 to 1910 are testament to that. It makes more sense to say that sometimes the economy sucks and sometimes the government is in a position to help with that.
If you can’t run a business that succeeds, it is a weak argument to say that the government forced you into failure. It reminds me of Hillary (or John McCain or John Kerry or Al Gore) claiming that the media caused them to lose. If you can’t play, step back.
“The game is the game”
-Marlo Stanfield -
AuthorPosts
