Crib Chatter Update: Changes to the Site
This is an update on some changes that will occur to the posts on the site.
I’m getting some grief from the Northern Illinois MLS for posting information from their listings. I don’t want to run afoul of any copyright laws (as we’ve discussed on the site in the past) so for the near-term there will be less pictures in the posts. The links to the properties will remain.
If you soon see a woman standing outside your house that’s for sale taking pictures from the other side of the street in a big winter coat- that would be me.
I appreciate all the support from the real estate community- in terms of sending me tips, information and pictures of properties. (Yes- please keep sending me permission to use your pictures!)
I’m trying to keep the peace by making these changes.
Crib Chatter is just another source of information for property buyers and sellers and I’d like to keep it that way.
Thanks to all chatterers, as well, for your comments (and suggestions) on improving the site.
I’ll keep everyone up to date on future developments on this issue. But for now- bear with me.
Thanks!
Sabrina
I’m sorry to hear the MLS is giving you grief about the photos, Sabrina. I find them to be some of the best parts about this blog; seeing the interiors without having to click gets me interested in reading more about the property.
As a DINK looking to move back into the city with great credit and expendable income, I’d say it’s the realtor’s loss in the end. Why would I want to work with people who are that controlling and small-minded?
As if the MLS doesn’t have anything better to do. It is amazing how people feel they can spin their way out of reality. Keep up the good work Sabrina!!
Screw the MLS!
The MLS is just trying to protect its product.
But I feel confident that most agents/brokers will not have any problem with me posting some pictures of their properties.
But in the meantime, until I get a system in place, there will be less photos.
“Crib Chatter is just another source of information for property buyers and sellers”
Well, that’s your problem right there.
If you just reclassify yourself as a cult deprogramming resource site you may be eligible for federal matching funds and legal support to fight frivolous lawsuits.
John
Sabrina, I promise not to mock your photos even if you do take them with your camera.
Sabrina,
The pics you take from across the street while in a giant winter coat will probably be better than 1/2 the photos the realtors take. In fact, you might be able to sell the rights to some of the lazier RE agents we see on this site. Keep up the good work. NIMLS sucks!
Silly – I would think everyone would WANT exposure….heck, to get they should pay you instead! Oh well, just very controlling I suppose.
This is remarkably short-sighted of the No. Ill. MLS–and not at all surprising. (Though I do wonder which protectionist attack dog set them on you, and I have my suspicions, which I’m sure others here share.) This is free publicity for their clients (real estate agents). They are not “protecting” their product; they are undermining it.
I also do not believe they have a leg to stand on legally. It’s clearly “fair use”; you are using a miniscule portion of the mls to offer a “review” of it. I know some IP lawyers; I’ll ask their opinion.
The Real Estate Cartel is going to come crumbling down soon. This is their last stand to try to preserve the old system as long as possible. No longer will Realtors be able to collect an easy 6% just for throwing a listing on the MLS. Actual work and salesmanship will be required to make any money.
I know many realtors have been hard workers all along, but a large number of lazy ones have really damaged the reputation of the industry. It’s time for them to be washed out.
So Bela Lugosi wasn’t talking about realtors in Ed Wood?
Bela: Eddie, why did you chase them?
Ed: Bela, those people are parasites! They just wanna exploit you.
Bela: So what? Let them. Finally the press is interested again in Bela Lugosi. There is no such thing as bad press, Eddie. Man from New York even said he was going to put me on the front page — first celebrity ever to check into rehab.
What I’m amazed by, frankly, is that no one has simply started a competitor database. Server space is cheap. Search software is ubiquitous and very good. Why not charge people, say, $5 a month to post a listing, which is searchable? You could literally cover the entire US. It could even exist side-by-side with the mls (until it drives mls out of business, which is a crappy, crappy database). Sabrina? I think you should do this. I’m not kidding. It wouldn’t be hard.
Sorry–still typing out loud–it could have links to many google functions (like google maps/earth). I’m no IT person, so maybe I just don’t understand the complexities, but it sounds pretty damn simple.
And while I’m on the subject of telling you what to do 😉 I’ve noticed that I get the “out of CPU” error on your site far more frequently than I used to. Upside: you are getting more traffic! Yay! Downside: you probably need to buy more bandwidth.
Somewhere Zekas is twirling his Snidely Whiplash Snidley moustache
Two reasons why MLS competitors would have a very hard time getting established: First, the Real Estate Cartel. They would file nuisance lawsuits just to block a competitor, regardless of any actual wrongdoing. Look at how the major record labels treated (legal) online music download sites for an example.
Second, the Real Estate Cartel. Agents would ignore the startup site and refuse to show any listings on it, much like they refuse to show FSBOs.
In time, economic circumstances will force the MLS to cede control to other sources but this will be fought tooth and nail by the old guard.
Didn’t Redfin win a legal battle against the NAR regarding MLS info recently?
Pete, please tell me about the “legal” online music download sites you’re talking about. Everyone I know of was clearly violating copyright law.
Sabrina, is there anyone we can contact to politely inform that we support you and that we’d rather not work with companies and realtors who make it difficult for you to publicize listing photos?
Also…an MLS competitor already exists. It’s called Craigslist and in spite of being FREE and open to everyone, it still doesn’t offer nearly the same level of exhaustive listing coverage. Hopefully in the near future there will be a tipping point where so many people list on craigslist and so many buyers look there that not listing on craigslist will have a serious negative impact on someone’s ability to sell a home. Once that happens and free sites can show us 99% of the available inventory, the MLS will have to find a new business model. In the mean time, I wonder if anyone has ever sued an MLS and/or realtor’s association on the grounds that they collaborate to maintain the MLS monopoly. Anybody know?
“What I’m amazed by, frankly, is that no one has simply started a competitor database. Server space is cheap. Search software is ubiquitous and very good. Why not charge people, say, $5 a month to post a listing, which is searchable? You could literally cover the entire US. It could even exist side-by-side with the mls (until it drives mls out of business, which is a crappy, crappy database). Sabrina? I think you should do this. I’m not kidding. It wouldn’t be hard.”
The MLS is a reliable resourse for data. Regular internet sites are not and can be manipulated by whoever is supplying the data. The MLS has many people checking the data for accuracy. If an agent puts false data ont he MLS you face fines and the possibility of a loss in license. See the difference?
“If an agent puts false data ont he MLS you face fines and the possibility of a loss in license.”
Given typical quality control, I’d expect no one to be so sanctioned b/c anyone cited for “false datea” would just plead “what can you expect from someone who can’t spell”.
Someone in my building just sold their place through one of those flat-fee FSBO services that lists your place in the MLS. What I find really fascinating about this sale is that agents always say their commission is justified because they’ll get a higher asking price, but in this case that absolutely wasn’t true. There are two other very similar units for sale in my building (one was identical) with traditional listing agents. Both are priced about 6% more than the FSBO and they’re still sitting. (One of them came on the market BEFORE the FSBO place that just sold and has been waiting for a buyer since April.) I have seen all three units. It wasn’t staging. It wasn’t condition or finishes. It was the fact that one unit was priced 12K less, and the owners could afford to price it that way because they didn’t have to pay that money to an agent. The whole thing really has me thinking about listing my place on my own when things pick up a bit.
Two reasons why MLS competitors would have a very hard time getting established: First, the Real Estate Cartel. They would file nuisance lawsuits just to block a competitor, regardless of any actual wrongdoing. Look at how the major record labels treated (legal) online music download sites for an example.
Second, the Real Estate Cartel. Agents would ignore the startup site and refuse to show any listings on it, much like they refuse to show FSBOs.
In time, economic circumstances will force the MLS to cede control to other sources but this will be fought tooth and nail by the old guard.
In some ways Craigslist is acting like a free “MLS.” It seems that many/most of the listings are agents/brokers posting their properties in parallel with the MLS. But CL certainly has it’s limitations in terms of narrowing searches because it’s a “one-size-fits-all” site. A similar, real estate focused, site might work.
“The whole thing really has me thinking about listing my place on my own when things pick up a bit.”
Okay, but real estate agents may have lowered their rates by the year 2020…
John
Nice try, SHill. You have been here long enough now that your self-serving comments are increasingly obvious, and provably so.
SH now: “The MLS is a reliable resourse for data… The MLS has many people checking the data for accuracy. If an agent puts false data ont he MLS you face fines and the possibility of a loss in license.”
SH then: “Where do you get Sq ft information from? Only 1 out 5 or 6 properties even list sq ft and it is usually wrong anyway.” (http://cribchatter.com/?p=5584#comment-16798)
NOTE: The “1 out 5 or 6” above was a typically inaccurate claim by the SHill that was proven false.
SH: “If an agent puts false data ont he MLS you face fines and the possibility of a loss in license.”
Care to elaborate on what they can face fines on? I honestly can’t think of any. maybe mis-representing taxes or school district, but I highly doubt anyone whether MLS or non-MLS does that.
Agents exaggerate all the time. Agents say things like “easy street parking” or “Oh, that’ll be really easy for you to fix when you move in.” I don’t take my own agent’s word on much, and I certainly don’t believe a THING the seller’s agent says. So, I don’t think of MLS listings as somehow more reliable than listings on Craigslist or anywhere else. They’re all written by people looking out for number one. I’d love to know how many realtors were fined for fraudulent info in the NIMLS last year.
I sold my first house by putting a “for sale” sign in the window. The downside was having to field about ten extra calls from realtors (like pigeons going after bread).
Generally, I’ll search this site first when I buy, then FSBO. If I end up buying my 3rd place from a seller using a realtor, I’ll most certainly offer less than I would if they weren’t using a realtor. Because even on my best price, I’ll want to ensure that I’m not paying for a realtor when it was the seller’s decision to use one.
Sabrina, Have you considered allowing sellers who choose not to list with a Realtor to list on your site themselves for a fee (by providing descriptions and photos to you.)?
Thanks!
Ken,
No mustache to twirl here. I’m more Dudley Do-Right than Snidely.
Kenworthey,
Any “fair use” claim is laughable. Each individual photograph is subject to copyright. “Sabrina” can request permission to use the photos from the agents who are, in many instances, at least co-owners of the copyrights.
No one who has any legal or business understanding at all should be surprised by the MLS’ position. I’d be surprised if “Sabrina” is surprised. S/he has to be acutely aware that s/he’s been engaged in piracy.
Even more laughable are the suggestions that the MLS is easily challenged. Many, many well-funded companies with sophisticated database gurus on staff have died trying.
Real estate agents – and this apparently comes as a shock to you – don’t see having crib-level mockery as being in their best interest.
The local MLS is MRED (Midwest Real Estate Data).
Sabrina,
Don’t let the MLS discourage you. I and all the other posters clearly enjoy your site every day. In fact, I’ve learned a lot about Chicago neighborhoods just from your blog. Keep up the great work – and post the NIMLS number so we can start calling them! Fair is fair…. Also – I can’t believe that you’re not solicited endlessly by agents wanting you to review their properties – particularly in this market. Then again, that would require insight. Keep it up!~
Bobby
Thanks for all the responses (and that includes Joe too.)
As several of you have said- many agents actually want their properties featured on the site and have no problem with them being featured. The more eyes looking at a property, the better (especially in this market.)
There are solutions to these issues so that everyone benefits.
Thanks to those who sent me some good info (on the side) as well. I welcome your suggestions.
Thanks, Sabrina. As you’re aware, we often include CribChatter posts in our “Ripped from the headlines” feature and send visitors your way.
Unbelievable Sabrina- What a waste of energy are the part of MLS- You have probably done more to showcase their properties than hey have
That is unbelieveable – I really enjoy reading your chatter over my first cup of tea in the morning! I hope they get off your back – keep up the momentum, you are doing an amazing job!
“I’m more Dudley Do-Right than Snidely.”
To the RE industry you are Dudley.
Sabrina,
Wait a minute. This has nothing to do with the MLS if you get your photos from the realtor’s site itself. If anyone has a copyright it’s the agent, not the MLS, and if you get the photos outside the MLS then the MLS can’t go after you. And it’s not an issue for the agent unless there’s a copyright notice on the agent’s site.
BTW, the biggest problem with starting up a competitor to the MLS is the chicken and the egg problem. You need the agents to participate in order to have enough content to attract users. And you need the users in order to make it worth while for the agents to use it. The other problem is that the agents would have to enter the detailed information into two different systems so that is a discouragement.
Per John- “Silly – I would think everyone would WANT exposure….heck, to get they should pay you instead! Oh well, just very controlling I suppose.”
Actually, I was living it total fear that our recent listing would end up on cribchatter. That being said, cribchatter is a very interesting read. All the Eyores rip these listings to shreds and if I were a seller or the listing agent I would be ticked to see it show up on this site so I’m not surprised by the recent news. So many buyers google a property…I don’t think it would help to find a site with posts that read “you better lop off 100k OR ELSE!”
“I don’t think it would help to find a site with posts that read “you better lop off 100k OR ELSE!””
Easy way to avoid that–price properties to the current market, not the ’06 market plus 10%.
Reese,
If most potential buyers do google properties when its time to buy mine I’ll beg Sabrina to do an entry on it then I’ll post something under a different pseudoynm like “wasn’t that family murdered here?” and “aren’t there radon issues here?/superfund site” etc. 😀
The discussions are often much more informative than “lop off 100k”. We get postings listing recent closings in the building, other comps in the neighborhood, neighborhood advantages/disadvantages…And a lot of comments posted here should be informative to a seller as well, such as “those paint colors looks awful”, “the living room looks crowded and tiny”, and yeah, repeated comments about “why a 50% profit” since 2005… The earlier a seller hears about these things the better – and a typical seller would only get to hear such info as filtered and reported by two intermediaries with their own agendas (buyer’s and seller’s agent).
Oh – and agents that do a good job marketing listings (such as the one for 919 W Wisconsin) would also benefit. of course, those that use their phone camera to take pictures…have to hope their sellers don’t come across this site (but once again sellers would benefit)
“of course, those that use their phone camera to take pictures…have to hope their sellers don’t come across this site (but once again sellers would benefit)”
Well, we know how much those agents value their clients’ best interests.
Who needs an agent?! We sold our house (listing w/ Prello) in the worst economy certainly in our lifetime…60 days from listing to contract. Closed 3 weeks later.
We made a price change on day 58 and it was like gangbusters- we received no fewer than 15 calls in two weeks- most of those people were too late 🙂
The only two couples who came through for showings made offers. If I sound pleased it’s because I am-in spite of homedelete’s persistent worst case scenarios. Where’s IB when you need him???
And we’re making out like bandits on the construction of our new home.
Here’s to the glass half-full- cheers!
And today the yield on three month treasuries hit negative! Pretty soon Hank Paulson will be paying YOU to borrow more $$$. I can’t wait–I’ve got a big mattress. I’m guessing 4% mortgage rates aren’t far off if the bond market stays like this.
This buying down rates at taxpayer expense is a fix on the economy analogous to giving a recovering heroin addict a bunch of methadone. And boy do they love their methadone.
“Real estate agents – and this apparently comes as a shock to you – don’t see having crib-level mockery as being in their best interest.”
One quick visit to ZipRealty will show me the lousy interior of a unit as well as the price history whether it’s posted here or not. Let’s just make one extra click before we come here and discuss what we can see for free elsewhere (just not here, apparently).
“And today the yield on three month treasuries hit negative! Pretty soon Hank Paulson will be paying YOU to borrow more $$$. ”
That’s what negative interest rates are. They ARE paying you to borrow their money.
Dave–I don’t understand your comment. Rephrase?
I guess my thought is that posting it here isn’t really giving away any property that we can’t otherwise access while having no interaction with a Realtor. I get a lot of info through ZipRealty, to the extent that I’ve sometimes seen all the photos there before I see them here.
Thus, for the realtors who fear the negative comments here if we’re allowed to see their “proprietary” information, we’ve likely already seen the photos elsewhere and can still post an educated opinion regarding them here.
One more thought Sabrina,
I notice you upload photos to your server before inserting them into your post. However, if you are getting them from another Web site that’s not necessary. You can simply insert them directly into the post using the images’ original URL. In that case you are not really “taking” the image. It’s also faster.
Any Realtor who thinks that they can sustain a living by withholding “proprietary” information from their prospective buyers sure does have a lot to learn about the information age. Fighting the internet is like struggling in quicksand. Just ask the major record labels.
No one here seems to address the very legitimate concerns of Realtors, which go well beyond the issue of pirated content and the generally unsophisticated level of the discussion that takes place here.
“Sabrina” hides behind anonymity and has an agenda that’s unknown and unknowable. That’s the major concern, pure and simple, that many Realtors have with this site. It doesn’t take much imagination to see how this site can be used to harm listings or to divert legitimate buyers away from them to the benefit of someone else.
Would you have any trust in or respect for someone who pirated your property? I didn’t think so. Why should Realtors?
joe Zekas – Yep that really is a concern….Sabrina is really a real estate mogul and we’re are all puppets under her control!!! That is scary! Seriously, why do Realtards® get so controlling when they can’t even spell or take good pictures? A frank discussion about properties helps all parties in a transaction and the market in general. Gone are the days where the Realtards® controlled the information regarding real estate. There ought to be a list of the Realtards® that refuse to allow their listing photos posted here. I for one would not use such a person to buy or sell. This is probably one of the very best real estate blogs of any city out there. I for one am impressed. Next the Realtards® will be against Amazon.com’s customer reviews! In this day and age I think people are smart enough not to be manipulated by a few outlier comments. If you can’t take the heat, then get out of the granite countertopped kitchen.
Zekas is just upset that no one visits yochicago. When was the last time someone made a comment on your site Joe?
Stephen,
Way to not address the issue. Typical crib chatter.
We’re transparent in many ways. Our server logs show over 35,000 unique visitors last month to YoChicago – and that’s only one of our sites.
A reasonable percentage of the comments here come from people that I’ve discouraged away from our site or simply banned from being there. Name-calling and repetitive, uninformed juvenile analysis may thrive in the crib, but they’re not encouraged at our site.
This thread is typical of the level of analysis and understanding that I see in the crib. No understanding of or respect for legalities or the complexities of the world we live in. No inclination to undertake any serious thought. Truly appalling ignorance of what the MLS is and what it takes to supplant it.
John,
Your comment illustrates your notion of a “frank discussion,” i.e. adolescent name-calling, mischaracterization of serious positions, and ducking real issues.
“No one here seems to address the very legitimate concerns of Realtors, which go well beyond the issue of pirated content and the generally unsophisticated level of the discussion that takes place here.
“Sabrina” hides behind anonymity and has an agenda that’s unknown and unknowable. That’s the major concern, pure and simple, that many Realtors have with this site. It doesn’t take much imagination to see how this site can be used to harm listings or to divert legitimate buyers away from them to the benefit of someone else.”
Joe,
I could certainly understand why realtors would be concerned about their listings showing up here. Buy anyone who follows trends in social media should know that online discussions can not be stopped or controlled. The appropriate response is to engage in the discussion. If a realtor doesn’t like what is being said on this blog they can defend their listing. If they can’t defend it they better address the underlying issue – usually price.
As for Sabrina’s agenda and anonymity…I don’t know why you keep harping on this. I think it’s pretty clear that she has no agenda. And for those of us who have corresponded directly with her I think we have some idea of who she is.
JZ says, “A reasonable percentage of the comments here come from people that I’ve discouraged away from our site or simply banned from being there.”
I find this hard to believe. Any facts to back it up?
JZ says, ““Sabrina” hides behind anonymity and has an agenda that’s unknown and unknowable. That’s the major concern, pure and simple, that many Realtors have with this site. It doesn’t take much imagination to see how this site can be used to harm listings or to divert legitimate buyers away from them to the benefit of someone else.”
It appears from his comment to only require imagination and absolutely no facts. Odd that, since he is claiming to speak for “many Realtors.” A crusader for transparency like JZ would have noted a pattern, or at least the existence of one, if it was more than “imagined,” right?
As for the pics, can’t there just be a link to the listing on Realtor.com?
G,
You should know by now that JZ is not required to provide proof of anything he only requires it of those who disagree with his point of views on his site.
Gary Lucido,
You say that “anyone who follows trends in social media should know that online discussions can not be stopped or controlled. The appropriate response is to engage in the discussion.”
That’s true, in an abstract sense, and I encourage Realtors to engage, but I wouldn’t encourage them to engage here. The signal-to-noise ratio is simply too low, and the effort is as likely as not to be met with name-calling and shouts to “bring the price down” from people who have no real idea whether the price is reasonable and are unwilling to entertain arguments that it is.
Why should Realtors have to “defend their listing” online against people who’ve never seen it, who have no interest in buying it, and who have an unshakable presumption that the price is too high without having anything but general market conditions to support that presumption? Realtors don’t hesitate to supply facts to buyers who are willing to give those facts a reasonable hearing.
What you see here too often is people who respond to facts with vulgar bile and bashing, and are encouraged by the like-minded to pile on. When ignorant people with ugly biases are allowed to dominate a discussion, you don’t have a discussion worth engaging in.
Ken,
Sounds like a familiar refrain from a familiar voice. Tell G whether you’re one of the commenters I banned at YoChicago.
Joe, “Abstract” are you using words you dont understand again?
No, I was not banned. But the fact that you admit to banning commenters proves my point.
Ken,
The fact that I’ve banned commenters doesn’t prove your point. It doesn’t even support it.
Any group that wants to engage in discussion has to ban the clowns who have no interest in contributing to the discussion, and nothing to contribute. The clowns, for their part, view this as stifling opposing views rather than realizing that they’re clowns.
Oh, the irony.
I used to read YoChicago. The problem is that it doesn’t offer any commentary on the current state of the market that makes it worth reading. Everything that it throws into my Google Reader feed just seems like an advertisement for some building. During the boom that was fine, it was a good aggregator of press leases from buildings so you could know the status of projects. But since we aren’t in a seller’s market now we need more thought and analysis that Yo just doesn’t provide.
I’m not going to say that the signal/noise at crib chatter is great. You do need to read a fair bit to separate the wheat from the chaff. But this is the internets. You should know that is how it works out here.
Sabrina is a person that I trust to give it to me straight. Yo just seems to be like most realtors that are out to move product.
ps. I should give props to Gary Lucido as well for being one of the few realtors that gets it. Your site is great even though it doesn’t get the traffic and comments that crib does.
Joe, the best way to deal with the trolls isn’t to ban them. Banning them is just a different way of feeding of them…
In time they show themselves to be the fools that they are people learn to ignore them. Once they are ignored they eventually fade away.
kp,
I’m well aware of the “don’t feed the trolls and they’ll go away” school of thought. I haven’t seen it work in very many places. More commonly I’ve seen it attract more trolls.
We link out – through our Ripped from the headlines feature – to many sites that report on market conditions and feature discussions of the market. CribChatter is one of those sites, and it obviously serves an audience.
We’re more about product, since we’ve found discussions of market conditions to be largely stale, repetitive, ill-focused wishful thinking, and not terribly useful to people (our target audience) whose primary interest is in purchasing a new construction home. Only a tiny percentage of our content comes from press releases, and almost all of our photography is original.
“Any group that wants to engage in discussion has to ban the clowns who have no interest in contributing to the discussion, and nothing to contribute.”
That’s your opinion that they had nothing to contribute. Your opinion is not fact. Once again you consistently let people whom you agreed with speculate on your site but those whom you didn’t had to provided what you believed to be iron clad proof of their opinions and thoughts.
“…we’ve found discussions of market conditions to be largely stale, repetitive, ill-focused wishful thinking…”
Wishful thinking? I would call the discussions regarding market conditions (by those who you ridiculed) that took place on your site in the last few years prophetic considering what is happening now. And you did everything you could to squelch it. The wishfiul thinking was on your part.
Ken,
Your spin is futile. I disagree with much of what commenters on our site say without interfering with their saying it.
You call the previous discussions of market conditions on our site prophetic if you wish. Most of it fell into the category of wishful thinking – and yes, wishes do occasionally comeo true. Most of it hasn’t, since Chicago still isn’t Florida or California.
I just flipped a coin and predicted it would be heads. It was. How prophetic of me!
Joe,
If you just flipped a coin you would be relying on random chance. People have been posting evidence before this RE bust picked up steam that affordability had disappeared relative to incomes and that the RE price gains and appreciation were being driven by funny money loans, toxic financing and speculators. Wow lo and behold RE prices need to be tied to incomes at the end of the day when financing gimmicks are removed. Who woulda thunk it?
Someone posted data showing that in 1997 the median outstanding mortgage was a 3.2x multiple of the median gross income. This has grown to 4.0x during the height of the boom. Know what I call someone who takes out a mortgage amount that is 4x their gross income? An idiot Joe. I call them an idiot.
Apparently Illinois has enough of them given what was known about our Governor in 2006 and yet he won re-election, so I’m not surprised. Let the idiots take their losses: just like everything else in life you can’t protect people from their own bad decisions forever.
So if your market is cratering Joe don’t blame us interweb naysayers. Blame the idiots who overpaid for real estate.
“You call the previous discussions of market conditions on our site prophetic if you wish. Most of it fell into the category of wishful thinking – and yes, wishes do occasionally comeo true. Most of it hasn’t, since Chicago still isn’t Florida or California.”
“I just flipped a coin and predicted it would be heads. It was. How prophetic of me!”
Your spin is futile. I never recall anyone on your site saying Chicago was Florida or CA. I certainly didn’t. The reality is that Chicago was in a RE bubble, has reverted from it and it is NOT over. Unemployment is rampant, those who are still employed are fearful and foreclosures are ubiquitous. 2009 will not be the begining of the housing recovery.
You can flip a coin all you want to make your predictions. I prefer looking at the fundementals. If you flip a coin enough you’ll have about a 50/50 ratio of heads to tails. In the boom years there was not a 50/50 ratio of bulls to bears. I’m proud to say I was a bear and was correct in being so.
“I disagree with much of what commenters on our site say without interfering with their saying it.”
Berating them and their intelligence is its own form of interference. Take a que from Sabrina and let the dissenters be…they may just be right, as I was.
Bob,
In 1997 your 3.2 ratio was driven by interest rates that had just been at 8%. Let’s go with your 4.0 ratio at the height of the boom, with interest rates at 5.5%. The carry cost a smaller percentage of your income.
What do you call someone who simplifies a very complex picture in that fashion and draws the wrong conclusion from it? Many would be tempted to call that person an idiot. I wouldn’t. I’d just challenge them on their reasoning – and ridicule them if they insisted over and over and over that their argument proved something it didn’t.
Ken,
You might want to check your recall against the facts of what people were saying on our site. Most of it was tediously simplistic: Florida = national = Chicago.
You might also look at the “Peter Schiff was right” videos on YouTube to check your bull-to-bear ratio. You’re way, way off.
Peter Schiff was right, and his analysis was well-informed and right. I didn’t see much of that on our site.
“In 1997 your 3.2 ratio was driven by interest rates that had just been at 8%. Let’s go with your 4.0 ratio at the height of the boom, with interest rates at 5.5%. The carry cost a smaller percentage of your income.”
I hate to do it, but Joe’s totally correct about the numbers. The lowering of mortgage interest rates supported increased valuations.
Now, whether upping the principal b/c the payment was the same was wise for any given individual … I think the current environment is answering that for us.
The mis-pricing of risk has a lot to do with our current situation.
“What do you call someone who simplifies a very complex picture in that fashion and draws the wrong conclusion from it?”
I call them Joe Zekas.
You’re not factoring in the zero money down, i/o arm mortgages that weren’t prevelent during the period that Bob was talking about. Did the exist? Yes. They were 1-2% of the market. They eventually became about 25% of the market. The benefits of the 5.5% mortgages became moot at that point.
He’s also not considering the ramifications of “upping the principal” (as anon put it) in a time of historically low interest rates. “Historically low” meant the buyer should have been much more aware that future rate increases would negatively impact their resale potential. The ignorance of that fact was astounding.
The Peter Schiff stuff was 2006 & 2007. That’s when things where already turning. I have no idea what Mr. Schiff was saying in ’04 & ’05 but those were the true boom years and ther were few bears then. And I will disagree with your assesment that my bull bear ratio was off by the Schiff vids. Note the dissent to Mr Schiff from Art Laffer, Mike Norman, Ben Stein et al.
“Peter Schiff was right, and his analysis was well-informed and right. I didn’t see much of that on our site.”
You saw it from me.
I noted the analysis of bears like Schiff (Robert Schiller, Noriel Rubini, Dean Baker & Paul Krugman) on your site, and gave them credit for it, and was summarily dismissed by you.
~~~~”The lowering of mortgage interest rates supported increased valuations. “~~~~~
Ok so following that logic then when interest rates go up then home prices should fall…so that’s not right either.
Debt to income ratios. That’s what you want to talk about. It used to be pretty standard to have a 28%/36% DTI. The first number being your total mortgage payment (PITI)and the second number being total debt. However, during the boom it got way out of whack. It beamce 30/38, then 36/45, then straight 45/45. And keep in mind the 45% was usually based off an inflated and/or made up income anyway.
Right now we have plenty of people paying a ridiculously high portion of their income towards their mortgage and low and behold they fall behind. Especially with the stated income loan you could have any income you desired to meet the 45%/45% total debt to income ratios.
HD:
“when interest rates go up then home prices should fall…so that’s not right either”
“your total mortgage payment”
If lending is based on your total mortgage payment (PITI), then when the interest goes down, you can “afford” (i.e., get a loan for) more P; when the Interest is higher, it’s less P.
So, yes, it is right that when interest rates go up, home prices should fall (if you assume a stable mix of units available for sale). Why do you think the helicopter pilots are trying to prop up home values by lowering rates (besides the fact that it’s about all they can control)?
Yo Joe – Sorry, but most realtors aren’t smarter then any “Joe” off the street. What makes matter worse is they have an incentive to get people to buy something that may be a very bad financial decision. Heck a lot of them don’t even know the difference between a real wood floor and Pergo™. I love how realtors state that this is a good “investment”….that Suzanne, she is such a good researcher and is typical. The only justice in the bubble has been that realtors and mortgage brokers began to believe their own BS and bought a bunch of condos too… Yo, that’s justice….
Were home prices falling between 2005-2007 when Heli Ben was incrementally raisihg interest rates for 17 straight quarters?
Too much of this is typical of the trash talking that I didn’t think the great majority of home buyers had any interest in.
I say: your argument doesn’t prove what you say it does, and the commenters are off to the races on what I should have said instead of addressing what I did, or even taking the time to undertand what I said. Go apples to apples: 30-year fixed fully-amortizing loan, median income 1997 vs median income 2005, result is lower percentage of income.
Got news for some of you guys – many home buyers aren’t obsessed with the investment value of their home. In my experience, the ones who are frequently make bad decisions or never wind up buying.
Many people who do buy sit tight in a down market rather than selling at a price they don’t find acceptable. That’s a pretty rational decision that ought not subject them to the ridicule that some people want to heap on them.
“many home buyers aren’t obsessed with the investment value of their home.”
I would go so far as to say that every buyer today isn’t obsessed with it, or they wouldn’t be buyers. Maybe not quite all since I guess they could be financially illiterate, too.
Anon(tfo) i’m just arguing for arguing sakes, I’ll knock it off.
Joey Z said: “Many people who do buy sit tight in a down market rather than selling at a price they don’t find acceptable. That’s a pretty rational decision that ought not subject them to the ridicule that some people want to heap on them.”
– Really, that is your advice, thanks Suzanne, er Joe. In real dollar terms that is one heck of a dumb statement. Sell now, rent cheap, for a year or two and then buy at 20% off in real dollar terms…. Let’s see $1M home at $800K, that’s a $200K off! Oh well, Realtards® only look at nominal dollars anyway. Thank goodness they only deal in real estate…
“between 2005-2007 when Heli Ben was incrementally raisihg interest rates for 17 straight quarters”
Only point there is–what happened to mortgage rates and mix of mortgages during that time? ARM rates were pretty flat, no? And everyone was switching to more and more “exotic” mortgage products to maintain PITI totals that vaguely worked.
Your PITI ratio point is good, but you were choosing to ignore that the first I plays the biggest role, at least the first few years. Not that it was a good idea for anyone except sellers, but facts is facts.
“Too much of this is typical of the trash talking that I didn’t think the great majority of home buyers had any interest in.”
Joe, I would say you have it completely backwards and this is exactly why I cannot respect realtors. Home buyers, especially first timers, especially condo buyers with a shorter time horizon for ownership, want the straight story. They’re desperate for the real story. They absolutely cannot get it from the majority of buyer’s agents. It simply isn’t in the agents’ interest. Agents will feed all kinds of crap to their clients. If they think their client is nervous or skeptical, they can simply trash places they sense their clients aren’t interested in and save their praise for the ones the clients fall in love with. In the end agents only care about getting a fixed percentage of some large number.
The beauty of this site is that it brings together a large number of real estate skeptics and others to talk about specific properties from a variety of points of view. I could never have learned from a realtor what I have learned from this site, not even for a five-figure commission. Given that fee, I might easily be better off becoming a licensed agent and home inspector on my own time than getting fleeced by your monopoly.
And that’s why realtors are worthless.
Chris,
You don’t appear to have noticed that I’m not a Realtor.
Nor have you noticed that many Realtors will advise condo buyers with a short time horizon that they shouldn’t buy unless they’re willing to undertake a virtual crapshoot with the odds of winning against them.
I talk to a lot of Realtors and I follow this site closely on occasion. People who have an open mind can learn a lot more in 10 minutes with a good Realtor who knows the local market and product they’re interested in than they can in 10 months of reading this site. Based on your comment, I agree that you’re likely to learn more here.
“Go apples to apples: 30-year fixed fully-amortizing loan, median income 1997 vs median income 2005, result is lower percentage of income.”
Hmmm, I’ll look into that when I get the chance. I seriously doubt that
Short time horizon of ownership, as I said, not a short time to shop. My point is that most people in the market for condos in Chicago will outgrow them eventually and hence buyers need to take extra care to make a good decision, especially given the cut they are coughing up to the agent.
I retract the one word, “your,” in the second-to-last sentence that implies I know anything about you.
This good realtor you mention… I would love to meet him/her. I guess I was talking about the kind you meet every day, the kind real people use, not the strawman whose stellar customer service redeems the whole lot.
“Go apples to apples: 30-year fixed fully-amortizing loan, median income 1997 vs median income 2005, result is lower percentage of income.”
Where did you get that data from Joe?
“Where did you get that data from Joe?”
Ryhmes with class.
If he’s using median **household** income and median priced home, then it may well be true, tho, because **household** income continued to grow in real terms, even if individual medians have been stagnant in real $$.
I wouldn’t bet on it, tho, unless he is also discounting the T & I in PITI. B/c taxes and insurance go up with higher P, and P was much higher in ’05 than in ’97.
Especially in this market, I’d say there’s a 99.9% chance that most Realtor’s advice will consist of whatever will get them the biggest commission.
Incidentally, I am one of the former YoChicago posters who Zekas booted for posting too many dissenting opinions. I still remember when he was denying the very existence of the housing bubble, and then when he was saying it would only affect Florida and California. Basically he was going through the first stages of grief (denial, partial acceptance, rationalization, etc.)
I don’t post at YoChicago anymore despite figuring out how to get around his “ban”. Neither does anyone else, judging by the comment count.
Joe’s biggest problem is that he is so insulated from the average working class rabble that he doesn’t understand how few people can truly afford to pay $500,000 for a city condo, now that bubble financing is gone.
Chris,
I don’t know who you’ve met among Realtors and who you haven’t, so let me tell you a little story.
When the market rebounded in the mid-80s I sold off the 24 units I’d been renting in one of my projects myself. I knew every single detail of my sub-market – DePaul / Sheffield – from having lived there, having been in all of the comps, having known all of the developers, etc. etc. I knew a great many other relevant things, from having practiced law in a large firm for 5 years in a practice concentrated in tax shelter real estate syndications and, during the final year, condo conversions for major developers.
Many buyers walked in to my model, assumed I was a Realtor, and without further ado began ridiculing and sneering at everything I had to say and calling me out as a liar on topics they had no familiarity with and I knew at a very solid and technical level, e.g. property taxes. Other buyers inquired, learned I was the developer and a former large-firm attorney, and treated my words as gospel. The smartest buyers, i.e. generally not the foregoing, asked a lot of questions, challenged my answers with facts or assumptions of their own, and weighed my responses. This group almost invariably wound up finding a good Realtor to work with before coming back to buy. The first and the second groups often latched onto the first Realtor they met that they didn’t positively hate, regardless of that Realtor’s competence.
Which of those buyers are you? On the surface, you appear to fall in the first group.
Pete,
You didn’t get then, and you don’t appear to get now, that what I was clearly saying is a) the Chicago market is unlike California and Florida in many ways, b) Chicago is many markets, not one, and c) I wanted to see more local facts before drawing conclusions. You had a hammer and wanted everything to be a nail. Your notion was that anyone waiting on facts was simply in denial. Hang on to that fact-averse approach and see where it gets you.
My site’s focused on new construction in the city of Chicago – not something the average working class person can afford. With regard to my site, what’s relevant to me is the sheer number of people who make more than enough money to afford new contruction in the city rather than the much larger number who can’t. It’s always seemed to stick in your craw, Pete, that there were so very many people, many of them fresh out of law school and MBA programs, who could afford new homes.
“fresh out of law school and MBA programs, who could afford new homes.”
Where are they now? Did they put a freeze on graduations?
Yes, they did G. Didn’t you hear? That’s why new construction RE in Chicago is hurting. It has nothing to do with bad market fundementals.
“Hang on to that fact-averse approach and see where it gets you.”
Right back at ya Joe.
I forgot to mention earlier, but I was just reminded of the major reason why the “don’t feed the trolls” approach fails. The trolls feed each other.
Joe,
You’re the troll here.
Yum Yum. Tasty words from JZ. Thank you Joe for my afternoon snack!
Joe isn’t a troll, he’s a troglodyte.
So, recapping what I have learned so far:
1) Joe is his own superagent strawman, or could be if he wanted to, but don’t hint in any way that he might be a realtor or risk his offense.
2) I am an uninformed buyer and rude to boot. The main reason I am so obviously an ignorant buyer is because I haven’t hired or met a great agent. The reason I am rude is because I have dared to ask questions and kick the tires the best way I know how. I can show that I have graduated to sophisticated buyerdom when I have hired an agent that impresses other agents (or at least Joe).
The point I tried to make, which Joe has not addressed, and which I still believe is a valid one, is that the majority of realtors out there, serving the major of buyers out there, are neither up to the task of providing honest counsel nor incentivized to do so. If the bubble is really popped forever, if we are really moving away from a no-money-down, hyperconsumption society, and if we are really serious about rebuilding from the ashes of this mess, it seems like we will need a way to get ordinary people good advice about real estate. I doubt whether the existing system or its realtors could deliver that.
Chris,
I have, on many occasions, said that the majority of Realtors are inexperienced and ill-informed. I did address your point, perhaps in too indirect a fashion, based on what I (perhaps mistakenly) interpreted as an unwillingness to spend the time finding a good Realtor or a lack of openness to conceding that they exist.
It doesn’t follow from what I’ve said the second- and third-rate Realtors serve the majority of buyers. It’s generally been the case that 20% of the Realtors do 80% of the business – and recently people have been telling me that the ratio has gone to 10/90.
Look for someone who’s been successful in the business for at least 5, and preferably 10 years. They should be associated with one of the stronger companies and have invested the time and money in acquiring the more demanding NAR-sanctioned credentials, such as CRS. Those people get most of their business from personal referrals – and that doesn’t come to people who don’t serve their clients well. Ask among your acquaintances if they know any such Realtors, and what experience they’ve had with them. Interview 2 or 3.
My company represents a number of large brokerage firms, so I can’t get involved in recommending specific individuals.
The existing system can and does deliver the services that you and other home buyers need. It doesn’t, unfortunately, do it with adequate consistency or transparency.
This is mainly for Ken, Gary, Jon and all the others that need to wake up.
What’s up with the name calling and generalizations? Are you really so small-minded that you can define a person’s integrity and work ethic (or lack there-of) based on their job title?
Yes, I’m a Realtor. No, I’ve never made easy money (I entered the field 16 months ago). Agents that take crappy pictures and mislead clients are idiots and do exist– although MOST agents work in their client’s best interest. If you don’t believe that a Realtor can work in a client’s best interest out of the goodness of their hearts, realize that ours is a referral business and most of us are well aware that treating a client fairly and honestly will garner more business than that single deal.
I love this site, I read it all the time (as do many do my colleagues) and have even directed clients to it. The MLS has a stranglehold on listings, and I hate paying those dues, but I do it and respect the guidelines because it’s the best way to do my job.
Do any of you work on a commission that gets split 4 ways that you have to wait weeks, or months or even years for? And even then there’s no guarantee you’ll get paid until the check is actually in your bank account (not even closing always guarantees you a check)? I work 7 days a week not only showing and listing properties but checking in on my clients and customers as well as keeping myself informed about the market, mortgage rates, lending programs, sales trends, etc.
Reading an article, watching 3 news reports and listening to the Realtor horror story about the cousin of a friend’s sister’s niece- in-law doesn’t make you an expert on Realtors or buying and selling homes. The 45-70 hour work weeks I immerse myself in makes me the expert. You’re entitled to you opinion, but when you ridicule an entire profession you show your misguided arrogance and small mindedness.
If you are inclined to learn the ins and outs of the market, devote the time and energy and money to marketing and showing your place, consult an attorney and ask the right questions regarding liability and conditions; you could do relatively well selling your own place. Depending on how much you value your time you may have saved yourself some money. You could also research a good Realtor, negotiate commission for listings (like everyone else, we don’t work for free even if you seem to think we should) and let an expert handle a very stressful process for you. And contrary to your arguments, statistically homes sold by Realtors sell for higher prices and net higher proceeds. Aside from looking up the facts on NAR and CAR (since it’s likely you’ll say it’s self-serving) you can check the Tribune and Sun-Times archives for that data.
“I entered the field 16 months ago”
“The 45-70 hour work weeks I immerse myself in makes me the expert.”
An expert in 16 months? Seems unlikely in any real profession, but what would I know? I wonder what Joe Zekas would say? How about that, his answer is in the post right before yours.
“Look for someone who’s been successful in the business for at least 5, and preferably 10 years.”
You might find this interesting, too.
“It’s generally been the case that 20% of the Realtors do 80% of the business – and recently people have been telling me that the ratio has gone to 10/90.”
Don’t worry, though, I’m sure your mls dues and ad dollars are still appreciated.
Jessica,
I’m interested in seeing the data that shows that realtors get better prices. While I believe it is possible for a realtor to get better pricing the data that the realtor associations present is totally bogus and I’ve debunked it:
http://blog.lucidrealty.com/2008/03/20/lying-with-statistics-part-i/
However, I am sincerely interested in seeing data that proves what I believe to be true. Unfortunately, I think it’s a very hard thing to prove.
BTW, I don’t believe that all agents are idiots. However, I do believe that about half shouldn’t be in the business.
But isn’t it true that this downturn is weeding out the “bad” agents?
I personally know some agents, even good ones, whose income is down 70% or more in 2008 (versus 2007). And for the “bad” ones- it’s gotta be worse.
The reality of the market will force many agents to find alternative employment.
Yep. The only problem is that the structure of the industry is such that there are two ways to be bad and only one of them really costs you your livelihood:
1) You can do a poor job of taking care of your clients
2) You can do a poor job of getting clients
Eventually #1 becomes #2 but like most sales businesses it’s #2 that will kill you right away. Conversely, if you are really good at #2 you don’t have to be as good at #1 – in the short run.
Gary, you can take care of your clients and you can be great at getting clients….but if the market has a low sales volume then you’re SOL.
G,
I was providing some rough rules of thumb that increase the likelihood of finding a good agent. In no way was I suggesting that it always takes 5 to 10 years to develop expertise. It can be acquired in far less time by a person with the right background and ability who concentrates on a narrow area. The right kind of person also taps the expertise of other agents in the firm to cloe any gaps.
No doubt about it. Except I get the sense that the celebrity realtors are still doing well. That’s the 10% in the 90/10 rule.
I picked on real estate agents and I apologize if I offended Jessica. They are an easy target. The profession suffers from the principal-agent problem that has inevitably lead the bulk of the system to reorganize itself around feeding on clients. Of course there are exceptions but it’s the system as a whole that matters. See also brokers, wealth managers, etc.
Happily for everyone, we live in a time when a freer flow of information has allowed for a new level of disintermediation in all sorts of things. And this process is well underway for real estate agents as well, and in Chicagoland this site is leading the charge. People like Joe who can’t see that are missing something basic.
“This is mainly for Ken, Gary, Jon and all the others that need to wake up.”
“What’s up with the name calling and generalizations? Are you really so small-minded that you can define a person’s integrity and work ethic (or lack there-of) based on their job title?”
Jessica,
as soon as you can point out where in this thread I’ve said anything bad about realtors I’ll be glad to apologize. Until then I’ll wait for my apology from you.
As far as name calling. Yes, I did refer to Joe as a troll which is a common term on a blog or message board and a term he refered to me as on his own site several times in the last several years. If you want to defend and align youself with Joe’s thougts on RE you’re free to do so. But DO NOT act as the moral cop on this site chastizing people for treating Joe badly until you become familiar with the history of how poorly Joe treated some of these same people on his site, including name calling and insults to ones intelligence.
Chris,
I guess I’ve been “missing something basic” since 1993 when the choir began to sing the rapturous song of disintermediation. Many a business model built around the assumption that agents had little value has come and gone in the meantime and the industry remains largely unchanged.
Yeah, I know – “it’s different now.” I’m sorry you can’t see my wry smile.
If you’re serilous about buying a home, find a good agent. The vast majority of home buyers do, and the vast majority of those buyers report having had a satisfactory experience with their agent.
Joe,
USAToday has a good article outlining the causes of the mortgage affordability crisis:
Optional payments on principal —In 2005, 29% of new mortgages allowed borrowers to pay interest only — not principal — or pay less than the interest due and add the cost to the principal. That was up from 1% in 2001, according to Credit Suisse, an investment bank.
• No verification of income —Half of mortgages generated in 2006 required no or minimal documentation of household income, reports Credit Suisse.
• Tiny down payments —In 1989, the average down payment for first-time home buyers was 10%, reports the National Association of Realtors. In 2007, it was 2%.
The sale of new homes costing $750,000 or more quadrupled from 2002 to 2006. The construction of inexpensive homes costing $125,000 or less fell by two-thirds. The biggest boom was in the middle. Homes costing $200,000 to $300,000 became affordable to millions of families.
http://www.usatoday.com/money/economy/housing/2008-12-12-homeprices_N.htm?loc=interstitialskip
Just as the big-3 US automakers would rather sell $40k SUVs as they yield far more profit than smaller cars and arranged their business around this it sounds like RE developers all overshot the market, too. Watch as they fall like dominos in the coming years.
When the housing bubble began to deflate in 2006, history had a sobering lesson to teach. Home values had closely tracked three common-sense measures for many years:
• Income —Home values floated at about three times average household income from 1950 to 2000. In 2006, the average household income was $66,500. Under the traditional model, home prices should have been about $200,000. Instead, the typical home sold for $301,000.
•Rent —Homes traditionally have sold for about 20 times what it would cost to rent them for a year. In 2006, houses were selling for 32 times annual rent.
•Appreciation —Existing homes grew in value by less than 0.5% per year, after adjusting for inflation, from 1950 to 2000. From 2000 to 2006, home prices rose at an average annualized rate of 8.2% above inflation and peaked with a 12.3% jump in 2005. Housing prices began to fall in the second quarter of 2006.
Inflation could help homes recapture their old prices, if not their value. But when inflation is factored in, home prices might not return to their 2006 peak for many years.
“•Rent —Homes traditionally have sold for about 20 times what it would cost to rent them for a year. In 2006, houses were selling for 32 times annual rent.”
No way, something is way off with these numbers. Historical multipliers of 240X monthly rent?
No way.
I think there is a typo in the article; it probably should have been 120x and 192x.
You want to know what realtors are good for?
Chauffeuring.
Unlocking Doors.
Flipping light switches.
Sitting around open houses waiting for someone to show up with a big bag of money.
Seems worth 5% of the value of my home doesn’t it?
For a buyer realtors don’t do a whole lot other than that (maybe, also help answer questions and sort through the MLS which is definitely a service with value). But they don’t cost the buyer anything either.
The way (at least I understand the process) is that the listing agent has a contract with the seller for a percentage of the sale price. If there is a buyer’s agent involved then the buyer’s agent splits that with the seller’s.
So say that a home sold for $100k with a seller’s agent contract for 5%.
If the buyer used an agent:
$95k to seller
$2.5k to seller’s agent
$2.5k to buyer’s agent
If the buyer didn’t use an agent:
$95k to seller
$5k to seller’s agent
Is that wrong? Assuming that is right, agents don’t cost buyers anything because it isn’t like the seller would accept a lower offer from a buyer without an agent because that wouldn’t result in any more money for the seller.
For us as buyers an agent is essential since we are from out of town. The internet has made it possible for us to identify the type of condos and price of condos we are interested in, but we do not know the neighborhoods all that well. We are also going to be in town without a car, for a short period of time, and will be looking at 17 units with the agent driving us around.
So far he has made recommendations against certain buildings that he regards as troublesome or does not meet the criteria we have laid out for him. He will also be able to do the research to allow us to make an offer that has a chance of being accepted without us overpaying.
He’ll earn his 3% (assuming that the realtor’s fee in Chicago is 6%), which I’m guessing he has to split with his broker.
Steve A, whether he earns his 3% depends on how much you spend, right? I’d rather pay someone $500 flat fee for unconflicted advice, and rent a car for the weekend with a GPS. You’d save thousands.
Oh, and kp, damn straight the buyer is paying for that buyer’s agent. Without the seller having to pay a buyer’s agent, the buyer could negotiate down the price of the house more.
In the age of the internet, the real estate agent model is deeply outdated. But there are alternative models, such as a flat fee, or discount brokers.
Wouldn’t a site like this actually be a HELP to a real estate agent? It’s informative, showcases a wide variety of properties and the posts always links back to the original realtor site. Prospective buyers can view different properties here and if they are really interested easily contact the realtor for more information; I’m failing to see what the problem is.
Pilsen Resident: It depends on how the agent views the site. Many have embraced it (as they get quite a bit of traffic to the property when it’s linked.)
The readers here are pretty sophisticated and a lot of people here ARE looking to buy. It’s a good market to tap.
Others feel that they don’t want to see any criticism of the price, the market time, the way they describe the listing etc.
“The lowering of mortgage interest rates supported increased valuations.”
I guess that means with today’s news of mortgage rates being their lowest in nearly 50 years we should expect home prices to skyrocket!
“I guess that means with today’s news of mortgage rates being their lowest in nearly 50 years we should expect home prices to skyrocket!”
Oh, you’re funny. Is that what you want to hear?
In a stable, rational market, if the cost of financing goes down, the typical buyer will be willing to pay higher prices for assets. The current market for houses is neither stable nor rational, so, no, we shouldn’t expect prices to do much different from what they have been doing, which is returning to trend.