As of yet, I have not made too many costly blunders. I have to thank my father, who was born poor and delivered papers to help his family. I also have to thank my mom who taught me the importance of spending frugally, but learning to pay more for quality so you don't have to keep repurchasing.
Of course, now I'm in grad school, making a little less than my husband who doesn't make much, and had to buy a new car because his died. We have a savings, and try not to dive into that or use our credit cards. And now he's unemployed.
I can thank my frugal spending and consistently re-evaluating every bill to save a dollar here and there will help. But being 26 and married, it still keeps me up at night. I know we'll make it because of the savings, but now we may not be able to buy a house next summer, or go on a vacation we've wanted to take. But those are the sacrifices I'm willing to make so that we can make it through.
Lesson learned: Sometimes parents know what they are talking about and to read all of these blogs to learn from others
How it happened, and why it will keep happening, is this: I wrote my article, did a spell check, and had typed something like 'hwo' or 'hor', instead of 'how' (this is a guess). Word's spellcheck probably offered something like a list:
hot how home who
I'm a terrible typer, and most of my articles are FILLED with typos. I do my best to find them, but sometimes, I miss them. Since this is a hobby, and not a job, I don't get to put as much time into perfecting these posts as I would like to. Plus, we don't have editors. :)
You wrote your Typo-Nazi-fodder resume "using all those 'hot-to' books and online guides"? There's typo Nazi's out here, too. ;)
All kidding aside, as a writer and a manager (no, really) I consider resume typos, but I'm not hostile about it. The way I figure it, "no typos" is the only golden rule of resumes that everyone should know about. Typos happen, but in this context I need to figure out why it was overlooked.
As a loan officer for a new hampshire based mortgage firm I can assure you that you could not get your own heloc for anywhere close to zero, as their rates are closely tied to the prime, and also that the $3500 fee for the MMA account is actually less than the closing costs on many helocs.
I would be happy to be contacted via the e-mail address I have provided to Wise Bread for further information.
Sincerely,
Denise M> Smith
I know that there are shady real estate agents, just like there are shady lawyers, doctors, financial planners etc. It just irks me that I always seem to read about how agents are trying to screw clients in the media nowadays, and I feel like much of it is unjustified, or at least too generalized. They are many hardworking, honest Realtors out there who genuinely care about their clients and want the best for them. If you or any of your readers have had bad experiences, I apologize on behalf of my profession. The title of your original post especially rubbed me the wrong way.
I would be interested in seeing their study, I guess I will have to pick up the book. I am curious to see how they compiled their data. When they figure out that Realtors made 3.7% more money on their homes, were they figuring that off of gross sales price, or net? I would assume gross, as that is the publicly available number, but I would be interested to see the numbers. To me the 10 extra days part doesn't mean much, the average days on market in my area is about 45 days already. I just don't want your readers to assume that they should wait another 10 days after a first reasonable offer for a better offer that may or may not come. They need to weigh their situation carefully to see if the risk of waiting outweighs the reward.
...but the Freakonomics data also showed that Real Estate brokers get more money for their own houses, and keep them on the market longer, than they do on clients' houses. And doesn't your last paragraph basically prove this point?
I personally don't care as much about how much I make on the sale of the house, I just want to be confident that it actually will sell and that I get paid at some point.
I did not write Freakonomics by the way, I was simply reprting the findings of a well-respected and notably brilliant economist. I suspect that we will never see eye-to-eye on this Scott, as you could never really be impartial considering your profession. But I do thank you for taking the time to write such involved and well-thought-out replies.And I assure you, I read every comment carefully. If I don't quite get the point you were making, that is my fault.
Just wanted to send a quick thank you to everyone who responded to my semi off-topic question about student loans. Everyone has been extremely helpful and I feel I have a better grip on my options.
You have not defined what a "good" offer is. The only definition of a "good" offer I have to go by is that the offer is within the market value of the area. If the market conditions say the average home sells for $270K to 280K in 45 days, and a seller wants to price their home at $300K and is willing to wait six months or more for a "good" offer, I would not list their home. Period.
My job is to tell people what they REALISTICALLY expect to sell their home for, and then work to get them that figure for their home as quickly as I can. The majority of sellers cannot wait, and do not want to wait 6 months for their home to sell. Sellers are extatic when their home is sold in 2 or 3 weeks. They think their Realtor is the greatest. You know what they think a Realtor that takes 6 months to sell it is? A BAD REALTOR!
I have absolutely no control over if/when sellers receive offers. I cannot make someone buy their home. The only tools I have to sell the home are the price, condition, location, and marketing. I only have control over the marketing, with hopefully some influence over the pricing and the condition.
Did you even read my last post? The longer you wait for a "good" offer, the worse the offers get. It is absolutely 100% best to price your home competitively if you want to get the most for it. I know it sounds hard to believe, but if you'd sold a few houses, you'd see what I mean.
The sellers that agree to the price I recommend (I always give them a range, based on the CMA for the area, and they choose within that range), always sell their home quicker and for more money than those who don't. They love me. They are happy. They recommend me to friends & family.
Every time I've taken a listing at a higher price than what the ACTUAL SALES DATA shows the home is worth, the home has not sold in a reasonable amount of time, and the seller ends up getting less for the home than they would have gotten if they'd listened to my advice up front. And you know what, they always somehow blame me, the Realtor for the home not selling quicker and for more money. They refuse to admit that it's their own greediness/stubborness that kept it from selling quickly.
I've got another example for you, as it appears you didn't read my last post.
I sold a house last year that I wanted the owner to price it at $127,900 to $129,900 (based on the ACTUAL SALES DATA for the neighborhood this was on the high end). I told him to expect a sales price of $126,000 to $128,000. He wanted to list it higher, at $132,900. I advised him that we were soon coming into the holiday/winter season where there are fewer buyers looking for homes, and that pricing it competitively (not low, still on the high side for the neighborhood) was very important if he wanted to be out by spring. He disregarded my price and listed for $132,900. The home didn't sell for 5 months, until AFTER a price drop to $129,900. What did it sell for? $125,900. I am 100% confident that had he listed it from the beginning at $129,900, it would have sold much quicker for at least a thousand or two more.
I'm sure you're thinking "how is it possible to sell quickly AND make more money on the sale?". The reason is because if your home is priced competitively for the market you will have more potential buyers looking at it. The more buyers you have, the higher your chances of offers. The more offers you get, the more likely you will get a "good" one. Or even better, multiple offers. That is the best situation to be in as a seller. If your home has been on the market for 30 days or less and is priced right, people won't try to haggle with you. But, if your home has been on the market for 180 days, you'll get lowballers. That's the way it works. Buyer start thinking things like:
What's wrong with that house?
This home has been on the market for 6 months, and they lowered the price, they must be desperate to sell.
Let's throw this number at them and see what they say.
The sad thing is, that many of these sellers by this point are desperate enough that they often take much lower offers than they should out of frustration.
The other thing the seller needs to consider when thinking of pricing too far above the market value is the appraisal. Most homes are bought with a mortgage, and the lender will not lend more money to the buyer on a home than the appraised value. I know of countless situations where sellers "held out" for a "good" offer, and when they finally got a contract for the amount they wanted, the home didn't appraise for as much as the contract, causing the contract to fall through unless the seller lowered the price to match the appraisal.
I never, ever ask someone to price their home lower than what I know they can get. Believe it or not, I have had occasions where the seller wanted to list lower than my reccomendation because they need a quick sale. I discourage people from this, but it is ultimately up to the seller.
Back to your question, if a seller is content waiting 6 months or more to sell their home, I don't want to list their home. I'm not in the business to spend money marketing a home for someone who doesn't really care if they sell or not. If someone had a million dollars worth of gold, and told you that you could be paid 6% on the sale if you could sell it for $1.2 million within 6 months, would you spend your time and 1/3 to 1/2 of your profit trying to find a buyer for them, knowing that it's only worth 1 million? What if you sold cars, and all the other dealers in town charged $40,000 to $42,000 for the same cars your boss expects you to sell for $50,000. Plus, you have to run all your own TV, radio, and print advertisements for the cars and pay for them upfront out of your pocket? How long would it take you to leave and go work for one of the other dealers?
I personally don't care as much about how much I make on the sale of the house, I just want to be confident that it actually will sell and that I get paid at some point. If I know it won't sell for what you've unrealistically "got to have" for it, I'll let someone else list it for you.
my 10yr old son goes thru a new shoe size approx every 3-4 mos. & that's not likely to stop anytime soon if he continues to fit the family growth pattern. so we buy 2 pair each trip - the current fit & the next 1/2 size up in addition to making sure of a good fit.
in defense of "$10 shoes", if said pair is well made & plenty of them are, no harm is inflicted upon the feet. i've known many people who've spent a fortune on shoes only to have horrible feet issues due to poor fit.
Are you seriously saying that as a realtor you have no vested interest in selling homes more quickly? If every one of your clients right now decided to hold out for 6 months until a good offer came along, because right now the market is terrible, wouldn't that leave you out of commission and therefore out of a job? How can you really stay impartial on this, even with your clients' best interests at heart? Surely your own family and income would take precedence.
Freakonomics is making a logical abstract point, but, and it is a big but, houses are not like cartons of milk. The majority of property is unique in one fashion or another. As well, how are the statistics compiled regarding the agents selling their own homes for 3.7% more money? Is this based on sale to list price?
So if an agent's home that is listed at $105,000 sold for $103,700 is compared to one of his client's home which is inferior, but due to the client's wishes was also listed at $105,000 but only sold for $100,000 does that qualify as "having sold his own house for 3.7% more"?
I do not know how anyone could realiably compile this 3.7% stat so that it actually meant anything.
is that your initial topic that says agents don't want to wait around for 1 or 2 weeks to make a seller $10K more is totally wrong. I would gladly wait an extra week or two to make my seller $10K more if I was sure that the scenario would pan out in their favor. The problem is, I can't be sure- THERE IS NO GUARANTEE IF/WHEN YOU WILL RECEIVE A BETTER OFFER. It's not about me wanting my money, it's about me doing my job to help you sell your home.
Quote: "Due to the way commission is structured, it's not in the real estate agent's best interests to get you the best price for you home. Let me repeat that...it is not their priority to get you the most money for your house.
No, they want a good price, but they want a quick sale. It is far more profitable to get you to take the first reasonable offer that comes along, than wait another week or two and get $310,000 instead of $300,000."
You are assuming the reason they want you to take the $300K offer is because they want a "quick sale", when the real reason is more likely that they want you to take a "sure thing", knowing that another offer may be weeks or months (sometimes even years) down the road. I noticed that you said "reasonable" offer. If you had just 6 weeks to sell your home, and you got the offer in this scenario in week 3 or 4, wouldn't you take it? Or would you risk having to pay double mortgage payments, or live apart from your family for months, etc. to POSSIBLY make 3% more? (knowing also there is a possibility you would get less) Would I be a "better Realtor" if I advised you to take that risk?
I have some friends who recently sold a home in Kansas City. They got an offer for $5000 less than asking price within the first month. They decided they really wanted the full price or closer to it, and declined the offer (against the agent's reccomendation). Seven+ months later, after dropping the price that same $5000, paying a lot more interest on the loan, and a few double mortage payments, they ended up taking an offer for $2500 under that.
It doesn't matter what you want for your home, it only matters what someone is willing to pay for it. Every buyer wants a good deal, and every seller wants top dollar. Realtors have to walk a tight rope to balance things to try and achieve a win-win for both buyers and sellers. The homeowner has complete control over how much they will accept for their home, an agent cannot force them to accept an offer. If you have an agent that is trying to bully you into accepting what you consider to be unfair offers, FIND A NEW AGENT!!!
And by the way, the median home price in the Tulsa, OK area is $160- $180K, not $400K. Are there $400K or $550K homes, yes. But there are WAY more homes under $200K than over $400K. That goes back to my point about generalization. Are there agents who think the way you perceive them to think? I'm sure there are. I'm just not one of them.
I am amazed when I hear about housing prices on the west coast (also some parts of the east coast, usually the northeast). Where I live you can find decent houses (1500-1800 sq. ft., nice yard, safe neighborhood) for approx. $200,000 though you certainly have to look and they are not new. On occasion, I meet people who have moved to my town because they could not afford housing where they moved from (California, for example).
I think many of us (me included) feel as if we missed out on the housing boom. There are quite a few sides to the homeowner debate: some say owning a house is not necessary to building wealth (you can still invest whatever you might have left over each month), some say that a home is more a consumable item than an investment (you have to keep pouring money into it to keep it up so that in the end your capital gain is just the result of a stream of payments over time), and still others say (though this sounds more like a relative of mine than an expert), who cares if you have a mortgage when you die? (as long as there are not loved ones who must cover the debt).
We get ripped off all the time. You think banks, businesses, and the ilk wouldn't take advantage of you? I make very little (and i'm a college grad none the less) and I highly doubt $35 is a necessary fee to go into the red. Loans going to 30% because I didn't pay in time once? Now I am not saying turn stick up kids, or steal from one another. but if we are to commune together as "frugal minded consumers" we need to let the companies know we want to be treated fairly. And for now since we're not being treated fairly, it's our time to act as Karma and take back.
You aren't stealing from the cinema by taking food in - you are just buying food from a different source (where I'm from cinemas don't forbid bringing your own food, they just quietly hope that you don't). The same as if you were going to a different supermarket.
The main reason for going to the cinema is to watch a film, and they are within their rights to choose the price they set (if it's to high, don't go).
That they lose out overall is down to their pricing strategy, which they chose to put in place.
In practice I normally buy one of their drinks, but I don't feel bad on the occasions I take a bottle of cola in with me.
DO NOT feel like a loser. Housing is bloody expensive. I wouldn't have been able to afford anything if I hadn't had some inheritance to use as a down payment. Even now, I get help from the 'rents with my mortgage, because it's sky-high. We're not living in times where your average couple with average jobs can easily afford to buy a home.
As of yet, I have not made too many costly blunders. I have to thank my father, who was born poor and delivered papers to help his family. I also have to thank my mom who taught me the importance of spending frugally, but learning to pay more for quality so you don't have to keep repurchasing.
Of course, now I'm in grad school, making a little less than my husband who doesn't make much, and had to buy a new car because his died. We have a savings, and try not to dive into that or use our credit cards. And now he's unemployed.
I can thank my frugal spending and consistently re-evaluating every bill to save a dollar here and there will help. But being 26 and married, it still keeps me up at night. I know we'll make it because of the savings, but now we may not be able to buy a house next summer, or go on a vacation we've wanted to take. But those are the sacrifices I'm willing to make so that we can make it through.
Lesson learned: Sometimes parents know what they are talking about and to read all of these blogs to learn from others
How it happened, and why it will keep happening, is this: I wrote my article, did a spell check, and had typed something like 'hwo' or 'hor', instead of 'how' (this is a guess). Word's spellcheck probably offered something like a list:
hot
how
home
who
I'm a terrible typer, and most of my articles are FILLED with typos. I do my best to find them, but sometimes, I miss them. Since this is a hobby, and not a job, I don't get to put as much time into perfecting these posts as I would like to. Plus, we don't have editors. :)
Someday. Someday.
Great article!
You wrote your Typo-Nazi-fodder resume "using all those 'hot-to' books and online guides"? There's typo Nazi's out here, too. ;)
All kidding aside, as a writer and a manager (no, really) I consider resume typos, but I'm not hostile about it. The way I figure it, "no typos" is the only golden rule of resumes that everyone should know about. Typos happen, but in this context I need to figure out why it was overlooked.
As a loan officer for a new hampshire based mortgage firm I can assure you that you could not get your own heloc for anywhere close to zero, as their rates are closely tied to the prime, and also that the $3500 fee for the MMA account is actually less than the closing costs on many helocs.
I would be happy to be contacted via the e-mail address I have provided to Wise Bread for further information.
Sincerely,
Denise M> Smith
I know that there are shady real estate agents, just like there are shady lawyers, doctors, financial planners etc. It just irks me that I always seem to read about how agents are trying to screw clients in the media nowadays, and I feel like much of it is unjustified, or at least too generalized. They are many hardworking, honest Realtors out there who genuinely care about their clients and want the best for them. If you or any of your readers have had bad experiences, I apologize on behalf of my profession. The title of your original post especially rubbed me the wrong way.
I would be interested in seeing their study, I guess I will have to pick up the book. I am curious to see how they compiled their data. When they figure out that Realtors made 3.7% more money on their homes, were they figuring that off of gross sales price, or net? I would assume gross, as that is the publicly available number, but I would be interested to see the numbers. To me the 10 extra days part doesn't mean much, the average days on market in my area is about 45 days already. I just don't want your readers to assume that they should wait another 10 days after a first reasonable offer for a better offer that may or may not come. They need to weigh their situation carefully to see if the risk of waiting outweighs the reward.
Scott
Wow, Eowyn is bad-ass. Interesting that there was no hobbit version.
And it that's considered slutty in Rivendell... (tries to think of smart-ass comment. Fails).
It does happen. Hell, I get tossed in the spam filter, too.
Virginal
Princess
Slightly Slutty Princess
More.
I know, I've got problems.
Dangit. I think I *was* tossed in the spam filter. Can I be rescued from it, possibly? :D
Andrea,
Thanks for the link! Appreciate it very much.
...but the Freakonomics data also showed that Real Estate brokers get more money for their own houses, and keep them on the market longer, than they do on clients' houses. And doesn't your last paragraph basically prove this point?
I did not write Freakonomics by the way, I was simply reprting the findings of a well-respected and notably brilliant economist. I suspect that we will never see eye-to-eye on this Scott, as you could never really be impartial considering your profession. But I do thank you for taking the time to write such involved and well-thought-out replies.And I assure you, I read every comment carefully. If I don't quite get the point you were making, that is my fault.
Just wanted to send a quick thank you to everyone who responded to my semi off-topic question about student loans. Everyone has been extremely helpful and I feel I have a better grip on my options.
Thanks again
-Mike
You have not defined what a "good" offer is. The only definition of a "good" offer I have to go by is that the offer is within the market value of the area. If the market conditions say the average home sells for $270K to 280K in 45 days, and a seller wants to price their home at $300K and is willing to wait six months or more for a "good" offer, I would not list their home. Period.
My job is to tell people what they REALISTICALLY expect to sell their home for, and then work to get them that figure for their home as quickly as I can. The majority of sellers cannot wait, and do not want to wait 6 months for their home to sell. Sellers are extatic when their home is sold in 2 or 3 weeks. They think their Realtor is the greatest. You know what they think a Realtor that takes 6 months to sell it is? A BAD REALTOR!
I have absolutely no control over if/when sellers receive offers. I cannot make someone buy their home. The only tools I have to sell the home are the price, condition, location, and marketing. I only have control over the marketing, with hopefully some influence over the pricing and the condition.
Did you even read my last post? The longer you wait for a "good" offer, the worse the offers get. It is absolutely 100% best to price your home competitively if you want to get the most for it. I know it sounds hard to believe, but if you'd sold a few houses, you'd see what I mean.
The sellers that agree to the price I recommend (I always give them a range, based on the CMA for the area, and they choose within that range), always sell their home quicker and for more money than those who don't. They love me. They are happy. They recommend me to friends & family.
Every time I've taken a listing at a higher price than what the ACTUAL SALES DATA shows the home is worth, the home has not sold in a reasonable amount of time, and the seller ends up getting less for the home than they would have gotten if they'd listened to my advice up front. And you know what, they always somehow blame me, the Realtor for the home not selling quicker and for more money. They refuse to admit that it's their own greediness/stubborness that kept it from selling quickly.
I've got another example for you, as it appears you didn't read my last post.
I sold a house last year that I wanted the owner to price it at $127,900 to $129,900 (based on the ACTUAL SALES DATA for the neighborhood this was on the high end). I told him to expect a sales price of $126,000 to $128,000. He wanted to list it higher, at $132,900. I advised him that we were soon coming into the holiday/winter season where there are fewer buyers looking for homes, and that pricing it competitively (not low, still on the high side for the neighborhood) was very important if he wanted to be out by spring. He disregarded my price and listed for $132,900. The home didn't sell for 5 months, until AFTER a price drop to $129,900. What did it sell for? $125,900. I am 100% confident that had he listed it from the beginning at $129,900, it would have sold much quicker for at least a thousand or two more.
I'm sure you're thinking "how is it possible to sell quickly AND make more money on the sale?". The reason is because if your home is priced competitively for the market you will have more potential buyers looking at it. The more buyers you have, the higher your chances of offers. The more offers you get, the more likely you will get a "good" one. Or even better, multiple offers. That is the best situation to be in as a seller. If your home has been on the market for 30 days or less and is priced right, people won't try to haggle with you. But, if your home has been on the market for 180 days, you'll get lowballers. That's the way it works. Buyer start thinking things like:
What's wrong with that house?
This home has been on the market for 6 months, and they lowered the price, they must be desperate to sell.
Let's throw this number at them and see what they say.
The sad thing is, that many of these sellers by this point are desperate enough that they often take much lower offers than they should out of frustration.
The other thing the seller needs to consider when thinking of pricing too far above the market value is the appraisal. Most homes are bought with a mortgage, and the lender will not lend more money to the buyer on a home than the appraised value. I know of countless situations where sellers "held out" for a "good" offer, and when they finally got a contract for the amount they wanted, the home didn't appraise for as much as the contract, causing the contract to fall through unless the seller lowered the price to match the appraisal.
I never, ever ask someone to price their home lower than what I know they can get. Believe it or not, I have had occasions where the seller wanted to list lower than my reccomendation because they need a quick sale. I discourage people from this, but it is ultimately up to the seller.
Back to your question, if a seller is content waiting 6 months or more to sell their home, I don't want to list their home. I'm not in the business to spend money marketing a home for someone who doesn't really care if they sell or not. If someone had a million dollars worth of gold, and told you that you could be paid 6% on the sale if you could sell it for $1.2 million within 6 months, would you spend your time and 1/3 to 1/2 of your profit trying to find a buyer for them, knowing that it's only worth 1 million? What if you sold cars, and all the other dealers in town charged $40,000 to $42,000 for the same cars your boss expects you to sell for $50,000. Plus, you have to run all your own TV, radio, and print advertisements for the cars and pay for them upfront out of your pocket? How long would it take you to leave and go work for one of the other dealers?
I personally don't care as much about how much I make on the sale of the house, I just want to be confident that it actually will sell and that I get paid at some point. If I know it won't sell for what you've unrealistically "got to have" for it, I'll let someone else list it for you.
my 10yr old son goes thru a new shoe size approx every 3-4 mos. & that's not likely to stop anytime soon if he continues to fit the family growth pattern. so we buy 2 pair each trip - the current fit & the next 1/2 size up in addition to making sure of a good fit.
in defense of "$10 shoes", if said pair is well made & plenty of them are, no harm is inflicted upon the feet. i've known many people who've spent a fortune on shoes only to have horrible feet issues due to poor fit.
Are you seriously saying that as a realtor you have no vested interest in selling homes more quickly? If every one of your clients right now decided to hold out for 6 months until a good offer came along, because right now the market is terrible, wouldn't that leave you out of commission and therefore out of a job? How can you really stay impartial on this, even with your clients' best interests at heart? Surely your own family and income would take precedence.
Apparently, crocs are good enough for the President . =)
Freakonomics is making a logical abstract point, but, and it is a big but, houses are not like cartons of milk. The majority of property is unique in one fashion or another. As well, how are the statistics compiled regarding the agents selling their own homes for 3.7% more money? Is this based on sale to list price?
So if an agent's home that is listed at $105,000 sold for $103,700 is compared to one of his client's home which is inferior, but due to the client's wishes was also listed at $105,000 but only sold for $100,000 does that qualify as "having sold his own house for 3.7% more"?
I do not know how anyone could realiably compile this 3.7% stat so that it actually meant anything.
Please, someone correct me if I'm wrong.
is that your initial topic that says agents don't want to wait around for 1 or 2 weeks to make a seller $10K more is totally wrong. I would gladly wait an extra week or two to make my seller $10K more if I was sure that the scenario would pan out in their favor. The problem is, I can't be sure- THERE IS NO GUARANTEE IF/WHEN YOU WILL RECEIVE A BETTER OFFER. It's not about me wanting my money, it's about me doing my job to help you sell your home.
Quote: "Due to the way commission is structured, it's not in the real estate agent's best interests to get you the best price for you home. Let me repeat that...it is not their priority to get you the most money for your house.
No, they want a good price, but they want a quick sale. It is far more profitable to get you to take the first reasonable offer that comes along, than wait another week or two and get $310,000 instead of $300,000."
You are assuming the reason they want you to take the $300K offer is because they want a "quick sale", when the real reason is more likely that they want you to take a "sure thing", knowing that another offer may be weeks or months (sometimes even years) down the road. I noticed that you said "reasonable" offer. If you had just 6 weeks to sell your home, and you got the offer in this scenario in week 3 or 4, wouldn't you take it? Or would you risk having to pay double mortgage payments, or live apart from your family for months, etc. to POSSIBLY make 3% more? (knowing also there is a possibility you would get less) Would I be a "better Realtor" if I advised you to take that risk?
I have some friends who recently sold a home in Kansas City. They got an offer for $5000 less than asking price within the first month. They decided they really wanted the full price or closer to it, and declined the offer (against the agent's reccomendation). Seven+ months later, after dropping the price that same $5000, paying a lot more interest on the loan, and a few double mortage payments, they ended up taking an offer for $2500 under that.
It doesn't matter what you want for your home, it only matters what someone is willing to pay for it. Every buyer wants a good deal, and every seller wants top dollar. Realtors have to walk a tight rope to balance things to try and achieve a win-win for both buyers and sellers. The homeowner has complete control over how much they will accept for their home, an agent cannot force them to accept an offer. If you have an agent that is trying to bully you into accepting what you consider to be unfair offers, FIND A NEW AGENT!!!
And by the way, the median home price in the Tulsa, OK area is $160- $180K, not $400K. Are there $400K or $550K homes, yes. But there are WAY more homes under $200K than over $400K. That goes back to my point about generalization. Are there agents who think the way you perceive them to think? I'm sure there are. I'm just not one of them.
You can already buy decent men's suits for less than $100 there. I've received many compliments for my suits and they're dirt cheap.
I am amazed when I hear about housing prices on the west coast (also some parts of the east coast, usually the northeast). Where I live you can find decent houses (1500-1800 sq. ft., nice yard, safe neighborhood) for approx. $200,000 though you certainly have to look and they are not new. On occasion, I meet people who have moved to my town because they could not afford housing where they moved from (California, for example).
I think many of us (me included) feel as if we missed out on the housing boom. There are quite a few sides to the homeowner debate: some say owning a house is not necessary to building wealth (you can still invest whatever you might have left over each month), some say that a home is more a consumable item than an investment (you have to keep pouring money into it to keep it up so that in the end your capital gain is just the result of a stream of payments over time), and still others say (though this sounds more like a relative of mine than an expert), who cares if you have a mortgage when you die? (as long as there are not loved ones who must cover the debt).
not illegal if you don't get caught ;)
We get ripped off all the time. You think banks, businesses, and the ilk wouldn't take advantage of you? I make very little (and i'm a college grad none the less) and I highly doubt $35 is a necessary fee to go into the red. Loans going to 30% because I didn't pay in time once? Now I am not saying turn stick up kids, or steal from one another. but if we are to commune together as "frugal minded consumers" we need to let the companies know we want to be treated fairly. And for now since we're not being treated fairly, it's our time to act as Karma and take back.
You aren't stealing from the cinema by taking food in - you are just buying food from a different source (where I'm from cinemas don't forbid bringing your own food, they just quietly hope that you don't). The same as if you were going to a different supermarket.
The main reason for going to the cinema is to watch a film, and they are within their rights to choose the price they set (if it's to high, don't go).
That they lose out overall is down to their pricing strategy, which they chose to put in place.
In practice I normally buy one of their drinks, but I don't feel bad on the occasions I take a bottle of cola in with me.
DO NOT feel like a loser. Housing is bloody expensive. I wouldn't have been able to afford anything if I hadn't had some inheritance to use as a down payment. Even now, I get help from the 'rents with my mortgage, because it's sky-high. We're not living in times where your average couple with average jobs can easily afford to buy a home.
The Isaac Mizrahi gowns go up to a size 18.
I've never seen the dresses at Lane Bryant. Thanks for the tip!