May 17, 2012

Buyers Fear They Could Lose Out On A Deal

The Sun Chronicle reports on Massachusetts. “Now that there are signs of recovery in the housing market, the hand-wringing has resumed over the shortage of homes in the state. Long-standing anti-growth policies of towns have kept the housing supply chronically low in comparison to the demand, says Paul McMorrow, an editor at CommonWealth Magazine. This drives up both home prices and rents. Let’s admit the obvious, though it often seems politically incorrect. The people who can afford the homes in the suburbs have good jobs and are high achievers.”

“They are richer, healthier, fitter, smarter and probably prettier than people who live elsewhere. Such is life. The admitted downside is that many young families can only aspire to live in the suburbs. Sadly, some decide they have no alternative but to leave the state.”

The MetroWest Daily News in Massachusetts. “According to the Re/Max of New England Monthly Housing Report for March, the region is experiencing an increase in home sales, a decrease in inventory and stabilization in median home prices. In Wayland, where home sales rose from 10 in March 2011 to 15 in March 2012, the median price increased 8.5 percent, to $540,000. In Hopkinton, where home sales increased 11 percent, the median price increased 6.58 percent to $437,000.”

“Price is a carefully watched statistic. After all, real estate is an investment and who doesn’t want their investment to become more valuable?”

CBS Boston in Massachusetts. “The state’s housing recovery is proving especially kind to sellers of high-end homes, a Boston Business Journal analysis indicates. Sales of homes that fetched $2 million or more were up 27 percent over the same period. ‘Buyers are coming off the sidelines with more speed as they see inventory dropping and fear they could lose out on a deal,’ said Kevin Ahearn, president of Otis & Ahearn. ‘The combination of historically low interest rates and prices that have bottomed and are moving up have convinced buyers that this is the time to buy to get the best opportunity on price.’”

“The median price for a single-family home sold during the first four months of 2012 was $269,000 — down 2 percent from the median during the same months in 2011. The median price for a $2 million-plus home sold during the first four months of 2012 was $2.6 million — down 4 percent from the average during the same months in 2011.”

“Beth Dickerson, an agent at Gibson Sotheby’s International Realty, said high-end properties tend to sell at a discount because they are priced too high as most sellers are convinced their homes are special and will command a larger number. Unlike some other major cities, the Hub has been unable to absorb higher prices, she said. ‘Typically,’ she added, ‘buyers make a bid low and meet somewhere in the middle. But this is nothing new, no one pays asking prices for these over $5 million properties.’”

WBUR in Massachusetts. “Crowded open houses. Multiple offers. Selling above the asking price. It may sound like 2004, but we’re talking 2012. Home sales in Jamaica Plain are coming back to life. Randal Engelmann is the Realtor selling this townhouse. Two stories, three bedrooms, one-and-a-half baths. The listing price is $419,000. He and the seller started taking bids on Monday. Within two hours, the seller accepted the highest of four offers – all above asking price. ‘Multiple offers on many, many properties,’ Englemann said. ‘I sold the unit two doors down from here — and we had 11 offers on that. That went for about 5 percent over the asking price, so good for the seller!’”

“Sheryl Howard and her partner started looking for a place a few months ago. ‘Because we’re first-time buyers, and we both like to mull over big purchases, we didn’t really understand how quickly you had to ask and put in an offer,’ Howard said.”

The New York Times. “Three months ago, when Wei Min Tan, a broker at Rutenberg Realty, negotiated a deal for a new $3 million three-bedroom condominium at the Aldyn on the Upper West Side, he was able to save his buyers $95,000 in transfer taxes and other costs, as well as to finagle a free storage space. But now, Mr. Tan said: ‘I don’t know if I could get the same deal. Literally a month ago, the market turned, and there is now a feeding frenzy.’”

“Lack of inventory is largely responsible for the trend. At the same time, the pace of signed deals in Manhattan is the highest it has been since UrbanDigs began collecting data in 2008, said Noah Rosenblatt, the site’s founder. This winter, Isabelle Lambotte of Princeton, N.J., and her family were looking for an investment property and pied-à-terre in New York City. They settled on Chelsea, specifically a new condominium conversion at 422 West 20th Street.

“She bought a two-bedroom apartment for more than the asking price. She declined to reveal the amount she had paid because the deal has not closed, but two-bedrooms are listed for $1.075 million to $2.095 million, according to the building Web site. ‘There were so many other people interested, it was crazy, with everyone placing offers,’ Ms. Lambotte said, ’so we wondered if the unit would even be available. We were told there was no flexibility, and honestly, we didn’t even think about negotiating.’”

From UPI. “Standard and Poor’s Rating Services’ estimates that the time it will take to clear the supply of distressed homes, or the shadow inventory, on the U.S. market is now 46 months. For the city with the greatest estimate of the time it will take to clear its inventory of foreclosures and short sales, New York City, it will take 202 months, or nearly 17 years.”

From MarketWatch. “The New York metro area’s serious delinquency rate rose to 11.4% in December, according to Crain’s New York. That rate is the share of loans in foreclosure plus the share of loans delinquent 90 or more days. The rate for the 100 largest metro areas was 9.7% for December. As of March, based on the number of foreclosures, it will take 69 years for New York state’s seriously delinquent mortgages to clear.”

The New Jersey Spotlight. “Nationwide, foreclosure rates were flat in March, although the inventory of 1.4 million homes was down slightly from a year ago, according to CoreLogic. But New Jersey ranked second — behind only Florida — because of new cases piling up on top of the backlog. ‘In New Jersey, we’re not even at the top yet’ of the surge in foreclosures, said Phyllis Salowe-Kaye, executive director of New Jersey Citizen Action. ‘What’s coming is larger than anyone has imagined.’”

The Record in New Jersey. “The house on Edel Avenue is just one of thousands of vacant homes left by the housing bust all across North Jersey. Neighbors say they’re discouraged and disheartened by the sight of these neglected homes, which can remain empty for years while the foreclosure process grinds slowly forward. ‘It just detracts from the whole neighborhood,’ said Maywood homeowner Joe Leichtnam. ‘It definitely has an impact on the value of the homes in the area.’”

“It now takes, on average, more than 2½ years for lenders to go through the legal process to evict New Jersey homeowners who can’t pay their mortgages. The New Jersey foreclosure pipeline came to a near-halt in 2011 over sloppy paperwork by lenders — called ‘robo-signing’ because lender representatives allegedly signed documents without checking them.”

“The blight has not hit just lower- and middle-income areas. On McCain Court in Closter, for example, an empty McMansion sits in a cul-de-sac of half a dozen similar houses. The owner paid $929,000 for the home in 2000, but lender Keystone Nazareth Bank and Trust filed to foreclose in July 2008, according to public records.”

“Today, the house sits with expensive but overgrown landscaping, a knocked-over mailbox and signs of damage in a high corner where the side wall meets the roof. There’s a notice on the door from United Water, dating to December, warning that the water’s about to be turned off because of an unpaid bill of $1,367.”

“Laura and Jim Jackson in Bloomingdale worry that living next to a vacant home lowers the value of the ranch that they’ve lovingly renovated. ‘It’s sad to look at, to tell you the truth,’ said Jim Jackson. His wife went out to do some yard work the other day, but then quit in disgust as she looked at the neighboring property. ‘Why do I bother?’ she asked.”

The Press of Atlantic City in New Jersey. “Absecon Gardens is expected to be a key component of the city’s efforts to revitalize its downtown. But before the large condominium complex could open, it was stuck in a controversial statewide issue that involves allowing developers to let anyone live in homes previously zoned only for people age 55 and older. The project’s developer hopes to begin selling 48 units by July, but residents who want to keep the age restriction are continuing their legal battle.”

“Absecon Gardens was originally zoned for 55-and-older housing — a popular option for many area developers in the past decade. But after the real estate market collapsed, the market dried up and it became difficult to sell them.”

“For some properties, the issue is more about broadening the market or not being built at all. Jack Plackter, a lawyer representing the Visions at the Shore development, said he would appeal before the city’s Zoning Board at the May 15 meeting to propose 400 units of mostly two-bedroom apartments. Plackter said they were seeking a waiver to no longer require senior housing at the site. The original developer built 42 senior units and sold 17 of them to seniors, he said. The new owner, Amboy Bank, is renting the remaining units, he said. The bank seeks this approval and then will try to sell the plan to another developer, he said.”

“Plackter said he sympathized with the seniors who already bought homes there but said the complex might not get built if the zoning remained the same. He said they were trying to work out a solution with the current residents. ‘We tried to see if it would be feasible to continue the senior housing, but we’ve found there is no desire for it in the area,’ he said. ‘We feel bad for them. It’s a shame.’”

“Resident Vern Roswell, 71, said those who live at Visions wanted to keep the development age-restricted. ‘If they bring in rental units, we won’t be able to sell our homes to anybody,’ he said.”




RSS feed

47 Comments »

Comment by Cantankerous Intellectual Bomb Thrower©
2012-05-17 05:35:00

“The New York metro area’s serious delinquency rate rose to 11.4% in December, according to Crain’s New York. That rate is the share of loans in foreclosure plus the share of loans delinquent 90 or more days. The rate for the 100 largest metro areas was 9.7% for December.”

9.7% of what? How many loans are there in the 100 largest metro areas?

With maybe 44 million mortgages overall, and the significant concentration of U.S. population inside metro areas, I am guessing the number is something like 30 million mortgages in the 100 largest metro areas, implying 3 million or so loans in foreclosure or serious delinquency.

Got shadow inventory?

Comment by McDoc
2012-05-17 06:41:59

Wonder how much of that is (or isn’t) Manhattan.

Rents are up in my building this year, running ~ $50/sqft/year.

Prices for sales still run around quadruple (really) 1997

 
Comment by MaaacDoc
2012-05-17 06:45:35

Wonder how much of that is (or isn’t) Manhattan..

Rents are up in my building this year, running ~ $50/sqft/year.

Prices for sales still run around quadruple (really) 1997

Comment by WT Economist
2012-05-17 09:00:00

I can tell you where it is. It is in gentrifying neighborhoods like Crown Heights and Bed-Stuy Brooklyn.

There, the sharks sent checkbooks that created automatic mortgages, and promises of free money, to poor and working class homeowners who had inherited houses or purchased them cheap back in the crack and herion days.

They didn’t care that the borrowers couldn’t pay, because they figured they’d throw them out and sell for a big profit to some yuppie.

Then the politicos got involved, the courts found that the sharks hadn’t done any paperwork, and the process slowed down. So there we are.

 
 
 
Comment by Cantankerous Intellectual Bomb Thrower©
2012-05-17 05:38:00

“As of March, based on the number of foreclosures, it will take 69 years for New York state’s seriously delinquent mortgages to clear.”

These houses will be razed before 69 years is up.

In the long run we are all dead.

– John Maynard Keynes

Comment by Cantankerous Intellectual Bomb Thrower©
2012-05-17 05:41:15

“For the city with the greatest estimate of the time it will take to clear its inventory of foreclosures and short sales, New York City, it will take 202 months, or nearly 17 years.”

Will it take 17 years or 69 years?

Come on, liars, get your facts straight!

Comment by Ben Jones
2012-05-17 06:16:34

I think it’s the difference between seriously delinquent and foreclosures/short sales on the market.

 
Comment by Blue Skye
2012-05-17 06:20:45

There can be no logical analysis of how long it will take to clear the system without a critical path analysis. I laugh at the assumption that the courts are the bottleneck.

The banks do not want to foreclose. They are not forced to foreclose and recognize their losses because accounting rules have been suspended. This will go on until we have reform. We don’t seem to be making any progress in that direction, yet.

Comment by Ben Jones
2012-05-17 06:33:49

I’ve mentioned this before; IMO the robo-signing thing gave the asset managers cover to manipulate the market. But I don’t see how this stands up to scrutiny:

‘Three months ago a broker was able to save his buyers $95,000 in transfer taxes and other costs, as well as to finagle a free storage space. But now, Mr. Tan said: ‘I don’t know if I could get the same deal. Literally a month ago, the market turned, and there is now a feeding frenzy.’

‘Lack of inventory is largely responsible for the trend.’

These people are being played for fools. How can 3 months change so much? I smell bubble fever, however it is coming about.

‘Isabelle Lambotte and her family were looking for an investment property in New York City. They settled on Chelsea, specifically a new condominium conversion…two-bedrooms are listed for $1.075 million to $2.095 million, according to the building Web site. ‘There were so many other people interested, it was crazy, with everyone placing offers,’ Ms. Lambotte said, ’so we wondered if the unit would even be available. We were told there was no flexibility, and honestly, we didn’t even think about negotiating’

A million dollar condo conversion is an investment? You were ‘told’ there was no flexibility?

Hey Isabelle; you better get down to Phoenix and snap up one of those $500k Scottsdale foreclosures before the Canadians buy them all. And don’t even think of offering less than asking!

(Comments wont nest below this level)
Comment by sfrenter
2012-05-17 09:14:35

These people are being played for fools. How can 3 months change so much? I smell bubble fever, however it is coming about.

Hope you are right Ben. The feeding frenzy is here in SF, too. Asking and selling prices have literally jumped up 20-50K since January.

Here’s hoping that this is just a spring bump up coupled with a short-term mania.

 
Comment by Cantankerous Intellectual Bomb Thrower©
2012-05-17 16:24:23

“These people are being played for fools. How can 3 months change so much? I smell bubble fever, however it is coming about.”

When many of these latest greater fools are in default a few years from now, you can expect politicians will play them for fools again by promising some kind of ’save our homes’ bailout program that only delivers for precious few.

 
 
Comment by polly
2012-05-17 07:44:00

They don’t own the loans. They don’t own the loans. They don’t own the loans.

Keep repeating until you understand it.

Englishman in NJ, what do the typical servicer agreements say that provide the incentives for what we are seeing? I know what my guesses are, but you have actually read a lot of them, right?

(Comments wont nest below this level)
Comment by Blue Skye
2012-05-17 09:09:43

OK Polly, I hear you. If they don’t own the loans then it is a puzzle of who is gaming whom. It has to be a pretty simple incentive for so many to be behaving just so.

 
Comment by polly
2012-05-17 12:10:40

Looks like EinNJ isn’t around today, so you get my guess.

The servicing agreements pay them $x every month they are “servicing” a loan. When they stop servicing the loan the payments stop. If they do anything substantially different than anyone else, they risk a lawsuit for not doing whatever their obligations are to the bond holders. But they can get an economist to say flooding the market with foreclosures will lower prices and reduce the total amount collected. Said economists are assuming things that are likely untrue (like that household formation will increase substantially in the next year or so), but they can justify their assumptions with historical data. So they definitely DON’T risk flooding the market by working through the inventory as quickly as they can.

And they also get to keep collecting those easy monthly payments. All they have to do to collect those is send out a bunch of computer generated letters, add magic numbers as additional interest and penalties to the amount owed to the bondholders (never to be collected), and lose paperwork sent to them for consideration for refis. Good business for them.

 
Comment by Blue Skye
2012-05-17 13:08:58

And my guess beyond that is that the bond fund managers generally know the “holders” are fooked. Nobody blink.

Some of these things blew up in the beginning of the downturn. Now it is all quiet, as the wave swells…..

 
Comment by Arizona Slim
2012-05-17 13:48:53

And they also get to keep collecting those easy monthly payments. All they have to do to collect those is send out a bunch of computer generated letters, add magic numbers as additional interest and penalties to the amount owed to the bondholders (never to be collected), and lose paperwork sent to them for consideration for refis. Good business for them.

I’d like to get a job in the Department of Lost Paperwork. Sounds like steady work.

 
 
Comment by Arizona Slim
2012-05-17 10:15:04

The banks do not want to foreclose. They are not forced to foreclose and recognize their losses because accounting rules have been suspended.

In my part of Tucson, most of the foreclosed houses are of the in-VEST-or variety. They were purchased during the late years of the bubble, and the hope was for house prices that would keep on rising to the sky.

They didn’t.

So, now the houses just sit there, tenants long gone, and the weeds are growing ever higher. Doesn’t make us neighbors very happy.

This is a non-judicial foreclosure state, which means that people can be kicked out of houses a lot faster than, say, in Florida. But that still doesn’t mean that the banks are in any hurry to recognize their losses.

(Comments wont nest below this level)
Comment by Salinasron
2012-05-17 11:30:14

Hey AZ, how do you grow weeds? Shouldn’t everything revert back to el natural desert scape?

 
Comment by Arizona Slim
2012-05-17 13:52:44

Hey AZ, how do you grow weeds? Shouldn’t everything revert back to el natural desert scape?

They just come up naturally.

Some of our more noxious ones are non-native grasses like Bermuda and buffelgrass, which goes up like a torch. Real hazard, that buffelgrass.

 
 
 
 
 
Comment by WT Economist
2012-05-17 06:11:57

Sounds like a wonderful economy is taking hold.

The market clearing price of labor, even for those who went to college, particularly for young adults but also for those older and unemployed, is now zero.

And the price of housing is going up.

It’s a great time to be in the one percent, or retired with a pension and heading for Florida. Anyone else is screwed.

Comment by Ben Jones
2012-05-17 06:19:27

Remember when people would post here about the bitter renters and the new landed class?

‘The people who can afford the homes in the suburbs have good jobs and are high achievers. They are richer, healthier, fitter, smarter and probably prettier than people who live elsewhere.’

Comment by Blue Skye
2012-05-17 06:22:28

I can hear that play with a Boston accent.

 
Comment by Posers
2012-05-17 06:36:41

But are they stronger or more angry?

 
Comment by sfrenter
2012-05-17 09:15:47

‘The people who can afford the homes in the suburbs have good jobs and are high achievers. They are richer, healthier, fitter, smarter and probably prettier than people who live elsewhere.’

Hey, I’m pretty. And fit. Now gimme a house.

Comment by In Colorado
2012-05-17 09:44:56

I think they’re “prettier” because rich guys have trophy wives.

(Comments wont nest below this level)
 
 
Comment by whirlyite
2012-05-17 10:14:04

Darwinian theory of real estate? Survival of the richest, healthiest, fittest, smartest, prettiest, ad nauseam…

 
Comment by snake charmer
2012-05-17 11:19:43

The recent stuff I’ve been reading indicates that younger people, regardless of their wealth, attractiveness, fitness or intelligence, want to live in a more urban environment and think the suburbs are an emotionless social dead zone full of Stepford wives. Are Massachusetts suburbs that desireable?

Comment by In Colorado
2012-05-17 14:19:53

YMMV. The young pups I work with want a house in one of Denver’s more select suburbs.

(Comments wont nest below this level)
 
Comment by GrizzlyBear
2012-05-17 19:13:50

The younger people I know want a big house with room to store the toyhauler and all their toys, trucks, etc., and a yard to play with the kids in.

(Comments wont nest below this level)
 
 
Comment by nickpapageorgio
2012-05-17 20:09:00

“‘The people who can afford the homes in the suburbs have good jobs and are high achievers. They are richer, healthier, fitter, smarter and probably prettier than people who live elsewhere.’”

That is some of the most unbelievable bubble nonsense that I have had the pleasure of reading on this blog, but it is also funny as hell. Keep it coming.

Comment by Ben Jones
2012-05-17 20:26:03

Just wait until tomorrows desk clearing.

(Comments wont nest below this level)
 
 
 
Comment by Blue Skye
2012-05-17 06:27:21

The economy of debt took over from the economy of labor over the last 40 or so years. Labor isn’t really worthless, it just cannot compete with debt. Labor might cease, but debt is relentless.

 
Comment by Posers
2012-05-17 06:35:27

That’s correct.

$30K SF houses now can be had in Columbus, Indianapolis, Muskegon, Milwaukee, Des Moines, Springfield, Pittsburgh, Lansing, St. Louis.

Unfortunately, a good many with college degrees cannot afford them.

Quite the statement, huh?

Smart elitists riding the generational Ponzi scheme don’t talk about their $100K+ salaries. Instead, they keep their mouths shut. And they don’t whine about the dwindling exclusivity of their exclusive communities while nursing the public teet.

Who knows? Perhaps today’s young will turn on them en masse.

Comment by sfrenter
2012-05-17 09:17:21

Who knows? Perhaps today’s young will turn on them en masse.

Yeah, but if and when the SHTF do you want to be a renter or a homeowner?

If it really blows then I suppose it won’t matter.

 
 
Comment by scdave
2012-05-17 07:26:32

It’s a great time to be in the one percent, or retired with a pension and heading for Florida. Anyone else is screwed ??

Yeah, and the safety net insurance that you contribute to that would guarantee you some sustenance in old age is under full fledge assalt…

PRIVATIZE IT says Bush….Give your contribution to Jamie Dimon…He will protect it for you…I promise…

Comment by WT Economist
2012-05-17 09:03:11

You bet. Who’ll get the Social Security money, the only money most have when they can no longer work? The one percent or the unionized public employees?

 
 
 
Comment by irmaron
2012-05-17 08:01:15

‘Buyers are coming off the sidelines with more speed as they see inventory dropping and fear they could lose out on a deal,’

‘The combination of historically low interest rates and prices that have bottomed and are moving up have convinced buyers that this is the time to buy to get the best opportunity on price.’”

‘There were so many other people interested, it was crazy, with everyone placing offers,’ Ms. Lambotte said, ’so we wondered if the unit would even be available. We were told there was no flexibility, and honestly, we didn’t even think about negotiating.’”

There is no end to stupid out there. Just create the illusion of shortage, add the facade of easy money and everyone wants it and you can sell anything to the public at large.

Comment by Arizona Slim
2012-05-17 10:17:09

There is no end to stupid out there. Just create the illusion of shortage, add the facade of easy money and everyone wants it and you can sell anything to the public at large.

Still seems like a sucker’s rally to me.

Comment by Beachchic
2012-05-17 15:55:54

I hope this is a sucker’s rally. I am here in So Cal and the same thing is occuring here. I am still renting, going on 7 years now. I am stuck, hoping my landlord doesn’t raise the rent, because apparently people are lined up to rent places (LA Times article posted here yesterday) that are a lot more expensive than my current rent. I don’t want to be a buyer, placed in a bidding war, for the few places for sale. And I have noticed a huge drop in available home inventory. There are only 5,883 listings in all of OC during the peak season? This does not make sense. Talk about manipulation…

Comment by Arizona Slim
2012-05-17 17:03:01

That paltry number of listings has me concerned too. It reminds me of the summer of 2003 here in Tucson. There was a real shortage of listings back then.

Of course 2003 was followed by 2004, when things were still tight and then 2005, when the listings seemed to come up like mushrooms after a summer monsoon storm.

(Comments wont nest below this level)
 
 
 
 
Comment by 2banana
2012-05-17 08:49:32

Long-standing anti-growth policies of towns have kept the housing supply chronically low in comparison to the demand, says Paul McMorrow, an editor at CommonWealth Magazine. This drives up both home prices and rents. Let’s admit the obvious, though it often seems politically incorrect. The people who can afford the homes in the suburbs have good jobs and are high achievers.”

Except people keep leaving the commonwealth…

——————
The Boston Globe
Mass. exodus
By Jeff Jacoby
January 15, 2006

FOR THE second year in a row, the Census Bureau reports, the population of Massachusetts has shrunk. During the 12 months ending July 1, 2005, the Bay State experienced a net loss of more than 8,600 residents, or 0.1 percent of its population. It was one of only three states to end the year with fewer people than it had started…

——————

Why Are People Leaving Massachusetts?
March 22, 2011
Jon Keller
CBS Boston

BOSTON (CBS) – New census numbers are out, and while Massachusetts saw modest gains in the last ten years, we’re not keeping pace with some other states.

That will cost the Bay State a congressional seat next year.

Comment by In Colorado
2012-05-17 14:24:38

Not everyone wants population growth, especially in the parched west, where every last drop of water in the Colorado River (or any river) is spoken for. Water rights are a big deal out her, and every new human unit requires more water, water that isn’t there. I recall a few years ago that some guy who owned land on the Big Thompson River was caught illegally taking water from the river (as in pumping it). He got into a whole lotta trouble for that, as every gallon in the Big T had an owner down stream.

Comment by AbsoluteBeginner
2012-05-18 06:07:22

As far as I understand it, you can not even capture rainfall in cisterns in Colorado also. Every drop of water that falls on your property belongs to watershed/aquifer/state.

 
 
Comment by Groped By A Realtor
2012-05-17 16:28:22

BINGO 2Banana.

Depopulation will accelerate in NewEngland/Northeast in the coming years….. just like before the bubble.

Comment by Arizona Slim
2012-05-17 17:04:28

You can already seeing this playing out in the northern halves of Vermont and New Hampshire. Those places are emptying out.

However, the same is not true in Quebec. Go across the border and you’ll see prosperous towns, tidy farms, and happy people.

Comment by Housing Is Cratering
2012-05-17 18:36:20

Exactly AZ.

Although nobody in their right minds would dare endure VT or upstate NY winters past their mid thirties. Combine that with the long term economic deterioration and you have the perfect storm driving depopulation.

(Comments wont nest below this level)
 
 
 
 
Comment by josap
2012-05-17 19:02:03

The RE market seemed to go from frozen to over heated in a few months. No stable period in between. Never seen that happen before. No idea what is driving all the “buy, buy, buy now” thinking.

I haven’t seen anything that would cause the change. Sure interest is low and prices are way down, but it’s been that way for awhile now. Why weren’t people buying a year ago? Why all of a sudden now?

Maybe I just have to accept that change in market thinking. Although I hope house prices don’t go insane again. Hit some level and get stable would be best.

 
Name (required)
E-mail (required - never shown publicly)
URI
Your Comment (smaller size | larger size)
You may use <a href="" title=""> <abbr title=""> <acronym title=""> <b> <blockquote cite=""> <cite> <code> <del datetime=""> <em> <i> <q cite=""> <strike> <strong> in your comment.

Trackback responses to this post