Of course I realize that the Northeast continues to recover from and dig out of perhaps the worst snow storm ever which hit during the past few days.
I also realize that if it were my job in any of those communities to sell real estate that I wouldn't let a major snow stop me from updating and promoting those properties.
Chances are that real estate investors as well as those who are truly motivated to buy a home in these areas are not going to stop because of the snow storm, whether or not they live within these areas. In other words, the show must go on.
The saying "The early bird gets the worm" should be the motto of the day. If I were an investor looking to buy and flip, or perhaps buy in order to rent out houses, I would know that today (the Monday after the huge Friday and weekend storm) would be the day to be in hot pursuit. It's not as though the listing agents are going to be visiting their listings today or conducting business outside. Many do not go to a physical office location at all even on the nicest of days. Either way, they should have the ability to work online. Selling listed homes and properties is still their job, no matter what the conditions are.
I decided to use the hard-hit (with snow) Portland Maine area as my "test" market, and went on the Portland Press-Telegram (largest local newspaper) web site to begin my search, as if I was an investor.
Unfortunately, I was not surprised when I didn't find even ONE listing advertisement, out of close to 100 I looked at, which had entered even the slightest adjustment to their advertisement which referenced the huge winter storm.
In other words, the same real estate agents who insist on utilizing the latest and most up-to-date technology are not even using it to help their clients. If this were 20 years ago when advertisement publishing deadlines were a couple of days in advance of the publication date, I could understand. But it is 2013 when agents have easy access to their listings and advertisements online. And if they are advertising on a source which cannot be easily updated, they should think again.
Since so many people have cameras, even if on their phone, it is no longer a challenge to get a "current" photo of a home, have it sent by e-mail, and uploaded within minutes or hours. Yet, out of all of the 100 or so "home for sale" ads I looked at, not one of them had so much as a photo updated to show the snowy conditions. Not to mention that some had no photos at all, but that's for another day.
You just know that there are some communities which were plowed and shoveled reasonably quickly so that the owners and residents could get out and go about their business. What a GREAT way to promote a home for sale, if you can immediately show that "If you lived here, you'd be out shopping now", or "Our streets are well maintained, even in the worst of storms".
If you are the seller or the agent, all you need is one buyer. This storm could and should be creating opportunities for those with homes for sale.
As I see it, today and this week is the best opportunity an investor and a buyer would have in Portland, and in Maine, CT, MA, and points beyond. You can get the attention of an agent or seller today who should have significant time on their hands to discuss and hopefully be able to show a property, and listen to offers.
Otherwise, some buyers and investors might be waiting a couple of weeks for the coming great meltdown of the snow, and be able to see for themselves where the flooding, poor sewer systems, and communities which don't plow or clear their streets very well are. It is possible both the quantity and quality of offers could suffer within those communities.
Instead, a potential buyer or investor, looking in Portland, and using the real estate site of the largest newspaper in the area, continues to find advertisements such as this:
http://www.zillow.com/homedetails/14-Romasco-Ln-Portland-ME-04101/84892853_zpid/
Not only does this advertisement not mention anything about the storm, but the poor photos included tell all that it's an empty house. The Zillow ad is linked directly from the Press-Telegram web site, therefore alerting potential buyers that this house was listed last summer and didn't sell.
Since it is empty, what happens if water from the melting snow gets inside?
It's one thing that the advertisements for the same area were not "updated" from the storm. But it's another that this particular advertisement is so set up to fail.
The main point here is that there continues to be missed opportunity in the selling of homes and other real estate. Hip deep in snow or not.
Monday, February 11, 2013
Friday, February 8, 2013
Wasted Opportunities In Milwaukee
Back to solving the real estate crisis one city at a time. It's bad enough that I find too many realty associations using far too much of their collective man power coming up with market statistics that seem more often to be negative than to help.
For some odd reason, the President of the Greater Milwaukee Association of Realtors is waiting on government money he may or may not get instead of taking action on behalf of the city and the members of the Association he leads.
This story, published by the Milwaukee Journal-Sentinel, presents the situation:
http://www.jsonline.com/business/realtors-association-chief-asks-walker-to-fund-more-foreclosure-remediation-758m7ok-190085531.html
There is no debating the problems with the marketplace created by abandoned homes that were foreclosed upon and/or not sold for whatever reason. However, I thought the local realty association should be in place to HELP its members and help the community, instead of begging for government money to make their 'industry' look good.
Nobody asked me, but there is a much better solution. The article states that the average cost to raze these abandoned properties which "hurt" the neighborhoods they sit within is $15,000.
Meanwhile, it seems to me that there are plenty of investors and rehabbers out there who are looking for opportunities to cash in over the next few years.
So here is how to solve the problem without waiting to find out whether or not the community will ever get the government money.
Have the City of Milwaukee sell these properties for land value PLUS $15,000 each. Use that "extra" $15,000 to fund the razing of the home on that property, clearing the way for the buyer to build a brand new home from the ground up and sell it. The buyer gets a period of, say, 24 months to build on this land.
Everybody wins. The city gets rid of the abandoned homes which are causing problems for "real" home sellers and for residents near these properties in terms of property value and neighborhood image, and they do so, in effect, at no cost. The buyer/investor/rehabber gets a highly profitable opportunity to build and sell within 2 years at a nice profit.
And, instead of waiting for someone else to help their industry, chances are some realty agents (members of this Association) would earn a buyer's commission for each transaction they work with. While helping their local community to improve.
Instead of asking for millions of dollars to solve the problem, just take a few thousand dollars to hire someone on behalf of the City of Milwaukee to coordinate this effort.
In this instance, if you tear it down, they will come.
For some odd reason, the President of the Greater Milwaukee Association of Realtors is waiting on government money he may or may not get instead of taking action on behalf of the city and the members of the Association he leads.
This story, published by the Milwaukee Journal-Sentinel, presents the situation:
http://www.jsonline.com/business/realtors-association-chief-asks-walker-to-fund-more-foreclosure-remediation-758m7ok-190085531.html
There is no debating the problems with the marketplace created by abandoned homes that were foreclosed upon and/or not sold for whatever reason. However, I thought the local realty association should be in place to HELP its members and help the community, instead of begging for government money to make their 'industry' look good.
Nobody asked me, but there is a much better solution. The article states that the average cost to raze these abandoned properties which "hurt" the neighborhoods they sit within is $15,000.
Meanwhile, it seems to me that there are plenty of investors and rehabbers out there who are looking for opportunities to cash in over the next few years.
So here is how to solve the problem without waiting to find out whether or not the community will ever get the government money.
Have the City of Milwaukee sell these properties for land value PLUS $15,000 each. Use that "extra" $15,000 to fund the razing of the home on that property, clearing the way for the buyer to build a brand new home from the ground up and sell it. The buyer gets a period of, say, 24 months to build on this land.
Everybody wins. The city gets rid of the abandoned homes which are causing problems for "real" home sellers and for residents near these properties in terms of property value and neighborhood image, and they do so, in effect, at no cost. The buyer/investor/rehabber gets a highly profitable opportunity to build and sell within 2 years at a nice profit.
And, instead of waiting for someone else to help their industry, chances are some realty agents (members of this Association) would earn a buyer's commission for each transaction they work with. While helping their local community to improve.
Instead of asking for millions of dollars to solve the problem, just take a few thousand dollars to hire someone on behalf of the City of Milwaukee to coordinate this effort.
In this instance, if you tear it down, they will come.
Tuesday, February 5, 2013
Who's Noise Is It Anyway?
Since I do not have any real estate marketing clients in Dallas at the moment, I can comment on a current story instead of being on the phone showing a current client how I can generate future sales for him or her.
I have recently been following the story about a Dallas restaurant and bar which is open every night until 2 AM and the noise complaints from a very nearby condo building. As this recent news story puts it, it's "getting ugly":
http://www.bizjournals.com/dallas/news/2013/01/29/katy-trail-ice-house-facing-opposition.html
Although I'm not taking either party's side on this, I can't believe that at least one realty agent or office has yet to take the initiative to get involved. The condo building needs to stop the noise for more than just its current residents. News articles such as the one linked above have also served, indirectly, to put out 'bad vibes' about living at Park Towers. People aren't going to want to move in there if they think they won't be able to get a decent night's sleep. Therefore, current residents could face a tough challenge trying to sell, and some of the units already sold for more than $500,000.
Local realty agents could very well be losing future opportunities for large commissions by not stepping in. It is obvious the condo association understands the seriousness of this, given that it (according to the news stories) has hired a law firm and has commissioned a study in this matter. Neither are cheap.
If an agent or realty office in that community were to step in and be instrumental in working a solution that allows condo residents to sleep and the bar's 150 employees to continue at their jobs, that agent or office stands to gain a tremendous amount of positive local publicity. And you can bet they'll get their share of future buyers (and sellers) from that condo building.
From what I have read about this, it appears to be resolved with both sides making an effort instead of defending their rights to exist under these tense circumstances.
Instead of waiting for the next set of negative sales statistics for that area, it just might be time to get out there and seize an opportunity to drive future business. And help the real estate market.
I have recently been following the story about a Dallas restaurant and bar which is open every night until 2 AM and the noise complaints from a very nearby condo building. As this recent news story puts it, it's "getting ugly":
http://www.bizjournals.com/dallas/news/2013/01/29/katy-trail-ice-house-facing-opposition.html
Although I'm not taking either party's side on this, I can't believe that at least one realty agent or office has yet to take the initiative to get involved. The condo building needs to stop the noise for more than just its current residents. News articles such as the one linked above have also served, indirectly, to put out 'bad vibes' about living at Park Towers. People aren't going to want to move in there if they think they won't be able to get a decent night's sleep. Therefore, current residents could face a tough challenge trying to sell, and some of the units already sold for more than $500,000.
Local realty agents could very well be losing future opportunities for large commissions by not stepping in. It is obvious the condo association understands the seriousness of this, given that it (according to the news stories) has hired a law firm and has commissioned a study in this matter. Neither are cheap.
If an agent or realty office in that community were to step in and be instrumental in working a solution that allows condo residents to sleep and the bar's 150 employees to continue at their jobs, that agent or office stands to gain a tremendous amount of positive local publicity. And you can bet they'll get their share of future buyers (and sellers) from that condo building.
From what I have read about this, it appears to be resolved with both sides making an effort instead of defending their rights to exist under these tense circumstances.
Instead of waiting for the next set of negative sales statistics for that area, it just might be time to get out there and seize an opportunity to drive future business. And help the real estate market.
Monday, February 4, 2013
Not Exactly A Million Dollar Idea
No matter what you think of the status of today's real estate market, there are some buyers out there who can afford and are looking for million dollar homes. One would think that high end homes would warrant an extra effort to be marketed and sold. But think again.
This afternoon I checked one ad for a one million dollar home in the San Diego area, and for a one million dollar home in the Miami area, thinking it would be interesting to compare the major selling points. After all, these are both warm weather areas on the ocean, even if 3,000 miles apart. Would they promote the interior features ahead of the exterior ones? How similar would these advertisements be?
Alas, the agents representing these totally separate properties seem to both treat these prestigious listings as if they are mobile homes. Frankly, I'm amazed that the sellers are not outraged at the poor treatment their homes are being given, especially since the commissions are going to be in the $50,000 range if these homes ever sell.
First, I randomly chose this one in San Diego via the San Diego Union Tribune web site:
http://homes.realestate.signonsandiego.com/homes/for-sale-2951-four-corners-st-chula-vista-ca-91914-sdut_mls_120060244-d#fullDetail
Upon first impression, the photo, which has a large tree blocking some of the view, makes it difficult to tell that it is one property, so that was not a good start. But it only gets worse. The description starts with "Traditional Home For Sale". Let me get this straight. I just went to the major newspaper's web site and searched for "homes for sale" in a specific area and price range. And the listing agent tells me, ahead of anything else, that this home is "For Sale"?
If possible, it gets even worse. The "property detail" goes on to say "6 bedrooms/6 baths". Nothing wrong with that information in the property detail. Usually. However, up above the detail, next to the questionable photo, we are told his $1,100,000 listing has "5 bedrooms/5 baths".
Later, the advertisement includes "monthly fees". It includes the "H.O. fees 3144.0", and "Total Monthly Fees: 356" in that portion of the ad. The other costs shown fail to add up to 356 or 3144. That's certainly not the only thing which doesn't add up in this advertisement.
One more time. This is a million dollar property being promoted.
Next, it was off to look for a Miami area property. Via the Miami Herald web site, I randomly chose this one, based on a challenging thumbnail photo:
http://www.homefinder.com/FL/Miami-Beach/401-Alton-Rd-92791419d
The headline of the ad for this $1,000,000 home says "Direct Ocean and Bay Views". And the primary photo of it is that of a fitness room. Say what?
Once I figured out the photo is a fitness room, I was curious as to whether the home is being sold by an athlete or showbiz performer who needs to stay in top shape. I'm thinking maybe he/she/they have a fitness room installed in a room with one of those views. A look at the remaining photos proved that theory wrong, as most of the remaining photos are of the amenities for the building in which this $1,000,000 unit is located. But it gets worse.
The only two actual interior photos are both of a bathroom! And, quite honestly, based on these photos, I have seen better looking bathrooms in homes valued at a lot less. And then, no other interior photos.
But it gets worse.
The description also includes "Easy to show - see broker remarks".
Based on my previous experience when I have mentioned these internal or MLS notes appearing in "public" advertising, I'm sure I'll have some agents respond by telling me that some of these publications and web sites pick up the copy from the MLS. I'm not disputing that. Comments of that sort have no business being in the MLS or anywhere else for that matter, especially for a one million dollar property. This advertisement is an embarassment to the industry.
I'll say this again. These were the only two "million dollar property" ads I looked at today. These listing agents are totally letting their selling clients down. It is clear the agents don't even check their ads. A conflicting number of bedrooms? Please!
Any truly qualified buyer that can spend a million dollars on a home has the intelligence and ability to notice the same flaws in these advertisements that I did. They will no not to bother with the careless agent handling the listing, when there are other million dollar homes available in these marketplaces.
People still need reasons to spend a million dollars. How about it?
This afternoon I checked one ad for a one million dollar home in the San Diego area, and for a one million dollar home in the Miami area, thinking it would be interesting to compare the major selling points. After all, these are both warm weather areas on the ocean, even if 3,000 miles apart. Would they promote the interior features ahead of the exterior ones? How similar would these advertisements be?
Alas, the agents representing these totally separate properties seem to both treat these prestigious listings as if they are mobile homes. Frankly, I'm amazed that the sellers are not outraged at the poor treatment their homes are being given, especially since the commissions are going to be in the $50,000 range if these homes ever sell.
First, I randomly chose this one in San Diego via the San Diego Union Tribune web site:
http://homes.realestate.signonsandiego.com/homes/for-sale-2951-four-corners-st-chula-vista-ca-91914-sdut_mls_120060244-d#fullDetail
Upon first impression, the photo, which has a large tree blocking some of the view, makes it difficult to tell that it is one property, so that was not a good start. But it only gets worse. The description starts with "Traditional Home For Sale". Let me get this straight. I just went to the major newspaper's web site and searched for "homes for sale" in a specific area and price range. And the listing agent tells me, ahead of anything else, that this home is "For Sale"?
If possible, it gets even worse. The "property detail" goes on to say "6 bedrooms/6 baths". Nothing wrong with that information in the property detail. Usually. However, up above the detail, next to the questionable photo, we are told his $1,100,000 listing has "5 bedrooms/5 baths".
Later, the advertisement includes "monthly fees". It includes the "H.O. fees 3144.0", and "Total Monthly Fees: 356" in that portion of the ad. The other costs shown fail to add up to 356 or 3144. That's certainly not the only thing which doesn't add up in this advertisement.
One more time. This is a million dollar property being promoted.
Next, it was off to look for a Miami area property. Via the Miami Herald web site, I randomly chose this one, based on a challenging thumbnail photo:
http://www.homefinder.com/FL/Miami-Beach/401-Alton-Rd-92791419d
The headline of the ad for this $1,000,000 home says "Direct Ocean and Bay Views". And the primary photo of it is that of a fitness room. Say what?
Once I figured out the photo is a fitness room, I was curious as to whether the home is being sold by an athlete or showbiz performer who needs to stay in top shape. I'm thinking maybe he/she/they have a fitness room installed in a room with one of those views. A look at the remaining photos proved that theory wrong, as most of the remaining photos are of the amenities for the building in which this $1,000,000 unit is located. But it gets worse.
The only two actual interior photos are both of a bathroom! And, quite honestly, based on these photos, I have seen better looking bathrooms in homes valued at a lot less. And then, no other interior photos.
But it gets worse.
The description also includes "Easy to show - see broker remarks".
Based on my previous experience when I have mentioned these internal or MLS notes appearing in "public" advertising, I'm sure I'll have some agents respond by telling me that some of these publications and web sites pick up the copy from the MLS. I'm not disputing that. Comments of that sort have no business being in the MLS or anywhere else for that matter, especially for a one million dollar property. This advertisement is an embarassment to the industry.
I'll say this again. These were the only two "million dollar property" ads I looked at today. These listing agents are totally letting their selling clients down. It is clear the agents don't even check their ads. A conflicting number of bedrooms? Please!
Any truly qualified buyer that can spend a million dollars on a home has the intelligence and ability to notice the same flaws in these advertisements that I did. They will no not to bother with the careless agent handling the listing, when there are other million dollar homes available in these marketplaces.
People still need reasons to spend a million dollars. How about it?
Monday, January 28, 2013
When The Photos Hurt The Cause......
A picture is worth 1,000 words. Everywhere except in real estate advertising, where many of the photos seem to do more harm than good. This needs to change in order to generate home sales which are not due to foreclosures or short sales.
Today, I decided to randomly look at a pair of advertisements for homes in big cities priced at $259,900. One such home is in Houston, and the other in Minneapolis where two agents with two separate companies each have the responsibility to advertise for a buyer of a quarter-million dollar home.
This Houston home, which is advertised online via the Houston Chronicle, has a primary photo which is clearly reduced in size compared with the space allowed, as well as making it smaller than other properties in the same area. (Already one strike against this ad!)
The little bit of copy about this home says it is “free standing”, yet the (reduced) photo shows the home as practically right up against a similar looking home next door. It appears that had the photo been taken from the right side of the home instead of the left, it would have shown the corner in the background and actually LOOKED as though it really is “free standing”. In other words, the photo destroys part of the copy instead of reinforcing it.
In addition, the copy tells of “additional flex/gameroom space”, yet fails to provide any information about the size of this room or area. Thus, a potential buyer has no idea whether or not a home theater, pool table, etc. might even fit in this space. A look through the interior photos provided either did not show this “space” or showed it as a functional area instead of “additional” space as promoted via the copy.
Then, the “fenced back deck patio” stated in the copy does appear within the photo spread. However, the photo shows two uncomfortable looking chairs up against a wall next to the A/C unit. That description only would have left a lot more to the imagination. The photo hurt the cause big time.
To sum up, these photos say “nice compact space in the big city” while the description says “spacious”. Anyone looking for a home priced at over $250,000 has enough intelligence to notice the conflicting information. And then move on to explore other homes available in the same price range.
Next, it was on to the frigid north to check for the same priced home in Minneapolis. The first advertisement I found, via the Minneapolis Star Tribune, for a home there priced at $259,900, was, according to the web site “Updated on Dec. 11”. It was January 25th when I found this ad.
Granted, that “updated” information being on the page was probably not the fault of the advertiser, but that doesn’t make it any more acceptable. But there’s more about this ad which is the fault of the advertiser. It’s the height of winter in the Twin Cities. Yet, the primary (and only) photo of this home shows bright sunshine, leaves on the trees and bushes, and green grass. In January in Minneapolis?
Before reading any of the copy, the readers of this prominently placed ad already know this home has been on the market for months and no one has bought.
I thought I’d give the advertising copy a chance anyway. And then the second sentence starts with “Built in 1946…….”. Let me get this straight. Out of all of the selling points of this home, the best the advertising agent could muster up is that this home is more than 66 years old? No matter how old this photo is, there’s nothing in it to have you think this home was worth more than $250,000 many years ago either.
Remaining copy points out a “finished basement”, “patio”, “corner lot”, and a “view of downtown”. Yet, the outdated photo provides zero proof that ANY of these selling points exist.
This is not to say the home is not worth that price or close to it. But it is to say that the right photo would have made a huge difference. Why not use an interior photo to show that finished basement? Or, use an exterior photo from a clear day showing the view of downtown?
Instead, the advertiser uses an outdated photo and highlights the age of the home within its ‘first impression’ time.
Neither of these two homes are labeled as foreclosures or short sales. Nor are they rehabs. Investors and flippers are not likely to look at these homes. Actual potential buyers (who would live there) are. If and when the photos and the copy match up, there might be some activity on these.
(The links to these ads:)
http://realestate.chron.com/eng/sales/detail/185-l-2822-75999834/5806-kansas-f-lazy-brook-timbergrove-houston-tx-77007
http://www.startribune.com/lifestyle/homegarden/183514621.html
Today, I decided to randomly look at a pair of advertisements for homes in big cities priced at $259,900. One such home is in Houston, and the other in Minneapolis where two agents with two separate companies each have the responsibility to advertise for a buyer of a quarter-million dollar home.
This Houston home, which is advertised online via the Houston Chronicle, has a primary photo which is clearly reduced in size compared with the space allowed, as well as making it smaller than other properties in the same area. (Already one strike against this ad!)
The little bit of copy about this home says it is “free standing”, yet the (reduced) photo shows the home as practically right up against a similar looking home next door. It appears that had the photo been taken from the right side of the home instead of the left, it would have shown the corner in the background and actually LOOKED as though it really is “free standing”. In other words, the photo destroys part of the copy instead of reinforcing it.
In addition, the copy tells of “additional flex/gameroom space”, yet fails to provide any information about the size of this room or area. Thus, a potential buyer has no idea whether or not a home theater, pool table, etc. might even fit in this space. A look through the interior photos provided either did not show this “space” or showed it as a functional area instead of “additional” space as promoted via the copy.
Then, the “fenced back deck patio” stated in the copy does appear within the photo spread. However, the photo shows two uncomfortable looking chairs up against a wall next to the A/C unit. That description only would have left a lot more to the imagination. The photo hurt the cause big time.
To sum up, these photos say “nice compact space in the big city” while the description says “spacious”. Anyone looking for a home priced at over $250,000 has enough intelligence to notice the conflicting information. And then move on to explore other homes available in the same price range.
Next, it was on to the frigid north to check for the same priced home in Minneapolis. The first advertisement I found, via the Minneapolis Star Tribune, for a home there priced at $259,900, was, according to the web site “Updated on Dec. 11”. It was January 25th when I found this ad.
Granted, that “updated” information being on the page was probably not the fault of the advertiser, but that doesn’t make it any more acceptable. But there’s more about this ad which is the fault of the advertiser. It’s the height of winter in the Twin Cities. Yet, the primary (and only) photo of this home shows bright sunshine, leaves on the trees and bushes, and green grass. In January in Minneapolis?
Before reading any of the copy, the readers of this prominently placed ad already know this home has been on the market for months and no one has bought.
I thought I’d give the advertising copy a chance anyway. And then the second sentence starts with “Built in 1946…….”. Let me get this straight. Out of all of the selling points of this home, the best the advertising agent could muster up is that this home is more than 66 years old? No matter how old this photo is, there’s nothing in it to have you think this home was worth more than $250,000 many years ago either.
Remaining copy points out a “finished basement”, “patio”, “corner lot”, and a “view of downtown”. Yet, the outdated photo provides zero proof that ANY of these selling points exist.
This is not to say the home is not worth that price or close to it. But it is to say that the right photo would have made a huge difference. Why not use an interior photo to show that finished basement? Or, use an exterior photo from a clear day showing the view of downtown?
Instead, the advertiser uses an outdated photo and highlights the age of the home within its ‘first impression’ time.
Neither of these two homes are labeled as foreclosures or short sales. Nor are they rehabs. Investors and flippers are not likely to look at these homes. Actual potential buyers (who would live there) are. If and when the photos and the copy match up, there might be some activity on these.
(The links to these ads:)
http://realestate.chron.com/eng/sales/detail/185-l-2822-75999834/5806-kansas-f-lazy-brook-timbergrove-houston-tx-77007
http://www.startribune.com/lifestyle/homegarden/183514621.html
Thursday, January 24, 2013
Will There Be Buyers At Higher Home Prices?
We're getting more proof that as foreclosures go, so goes the real estate market. The number of foreclosed upon residences has taken a drop around the nation over the past few months. Fewer properties are offered up for short sale. Presto! These factors have combined to reduce the inventory of available homes in the majority of areas.
The investors who were able to take advantage of the low prices and wait for the market to turn can now begin to list and expect to begin profiting. Less inventory means that home prices can increase, and that's what is happening.
Even in the Sarasota FL area, there are fresh signs of progress, and that has been one of the nation's most depressed real estate markets in recent years. Even Sarasota County had no problem allowing about 400 trees to be (legally, as far as we know) removed in order for construction to begin next week on a 24 acre development, "Pacifico". What makes this even more significant is that the builder had actually purchased the 77-acre site back in 2005. Wisely, they waited before constructing, or it likely would have been a financial disaster. Now, they have the confidence to build. The Sarasota Association of Realtors reported the most property sales (for 2012) since, you guessed it, 2005.
Before you think this is because of people from the north relocating to Florida and looking for a ripe area, look again. This trend is popping up in several less likely locations.
In Wisconsin, the WI Association of Realtors just reported a 21% jump in closed sales for 2012, compared with 2011. The Indianapolis IN Association of Realtors reported that its 13 county metro showed a larger sales increase than the remainder of the state of Indiana did. Obviously, people are not moving to or within these areas because of the weather and/or retirement conditions. Snohomish County in Washington showed its biggest sales increase since 2007.
Of course, I'm always the first to point out that most buyers are not buying because of recent statistics. Now, many of these sales (everywhere) are a result of people getting great prices on foreclosures and short sales. Prices had been driven so low that too many people are over-reacting to the increases in median home prices.
While these latest statistics are encouraging to some, it's really too early to tell. We don't know what percentage of these recent buyers are looking to flip their properties and now will stop buying more because there are not as many "steals" out there.
We're still a long long way from the days of offers before the For Sale sign goes up. The "serious" sellers will still need to do a lot more to market and distinguish their properties. Hopefully that area (advertising & marketing) will improve, too. It's time!
The investors who were able to take advantage of the low prices and wait for the market to turn can now begin to list and expect to begin profiting. Less inventory means that home prices can increase, and that's what is happening.
Even in the Sarasota FL area, there are fresh signs of progress, and that has been one of the nation's most depressed real estate markets in recent years. Even Sarasota County had no problem allowing about 400 trees to be (legally, as far as we know) removed in order for construction to begin next week on a 24 acre development, "Pacifico". What makes this even more significant is that the builder had actually purchased the 77-acre site back in 2005. Wisely, they waited before constructing, or it likely would have been a financial disaster. Now, they have the confidence to build. The Sarasota Association of Realtors reported the most property sales (for 2012) since, you guessed it, 2005.
Before you think this is because of people from the north relocating to Florida and looking for a ripe area, look again. This trend is popping up in several less likely locations.
In Wisconsin, the WI Association of Realtors just reported a 21% jump in closed sales for 2012, compared with 2011. The Indianapolis IN Association of Realtors reported that its 13 county metro showed a larger sales increase than the remainder of the state of Indiana did. Obviously, people are not moving to or within these areas because of the weather and/or retirement conditions. Snohomish County in Washington showed its biggest sales increase since 2007.
Of course, I'm always the first to point out that most buyers are not buying because of recent statistics. Now, many of these sales (everywhere) are a result of people getting great prices on foreclosures and short sales. Prices had been driven so low that too many people are over-reacting to the increases in median home prices.
While these latest statistics are encouraging to some, it's really too early to tell. We don't know what percentage of these recent buyers are looking to flip their properties and now will stop buying more because there are not as many "steals" out there.
We're still a long long way from the days of offers before the For Sale sign goes up. The "serious" sellers will still need to do a lot more to market and distinguish their properties. Hopefully that area (advertising & marketing) will improve, too. It's time!
Wednesday, November 28, 2012
Market Getting Better - Even If The "News" Isn't
Still another example of a realty association shooting itself in the foot with a "news" story it had control over:
http://www.albertleatribune.com/2012/11/21/states-home-sales-rise-8-percent-in-october/
The above story is based on a news release from the Minnesota Association of Realtors. The story begins with a most positive spin, statistically supporting how home sales were up, as well as home prices, for the month of October 2012. And this report was issued before the end of November, thus making it reasonably "fresh" news.
This should be a positive for current home sellers, as well as those thinking of listing their home. However, instead of continuing the press release with more positives, the next few sentences go on to reveal that almost half of the regions of the state covered did not show these positive results.
If this was an investigative report, or a story not provided by the realty association itself, I could understand these facts being provided.
However, if I was an agent, or a current home seller located within any of the six regions which "were flat or had fallen" in comparison, I'd be very steamed at the Association right now.
This story becomes the equivalent of going on a job interview with a superior portfolio, being asked back for a second interview, and then saying "although I missed 20 days of work due to various illnesses just last year".
In real estate these days, the saying "Any publicity is good publicity" does NOT apply, when millions of dollars and the economy of the nation are at stake.
Then we get news stories such as this one:
http://www.ctpost.com/news/article/Police-Trumbull-Realtor-stole-competitor-s-for-4057770.php
This story was done by a local reporter, but it puts realty agents in a bad light in the eyes of some consumers. Sure, one bad agent doesn't make the rest bad. But one more negative story at a time when there should be a lot more positive reporting, is bad.
http://www.albertleatribune.com/2012/11/21/states-home-sales-rise-8-percent-in-october/
The above story is based on a news release from the Minnesota Association of Realtors. The story begins with a most positive spin, statistically supporting how home sales were up, as well as home prices, for the month of October 2012. And this report was issued before the end of November, thus making it reasonably "fresh" news.
This should be a positive for current home sellers, as well as those thinking of listing their home. However, instead of continuing the press release with more positives, the next few sentences go on to reveal that almost half of the regions of the state covered did not show these positive results.
If this was an investigative report, or a story not provided by the realty association itself, I could understand these facts being provided.
However, if I was an agent, or a current home seller located within any of the six regions which "were flat or had fallen" in comparison, I'd be very steamed at the Association right now.
This story becomes the equivalent of going on a job interview with a superior portfolio, being asked back for a second interview, and then saying "although I missed 20 days of work due to various illnesses just last year".
In real estate these days, the saying "Any publicity is good publicity" does NOT apply, when millions of dollars and the economy of the nation are at stake.
Then we get news stories such as this one:
http://www.ctpost.com/news/article/Police-Trumbull-Realtor-stole-competitor-s-for-4057770.php
This story was done by a local reporter, but it puts realty agents in a bad light in the eyes of some consumers. Sure, one bad agent doesn't make the rest bad. But one more negative story at a time when there should be a lot more positive reporting, is bad.
Thursday, November 8, 2012
Stats and Philosophies vs. the Housing Market
If more than half of your friends and family members bought a new car this month, would that make you go out and buy one?
I didn't think so.
But some unknown reason far too many people think this way about the real estate market, and therein lies at least some of the problem. Statistics and philosophies have become dominant. Not overly positive, and not overly negative (for a change). Just dominant.
If you want positive stores about the real estate market, you don't have to spend as much time looking this month as you did a few months back. Here is one example:
http://www.heraldnet.com/article/20121105/SCBJ02/711059889/1011/BIZ02
Although the above story provides encouraging statistics for the local Washington (state) market, I find one important element lacking in this story. Specific local market reasons why. The story fails to provide even one reason for the increase. It's as if they think that buyers and investors are going by the statistics from six months or a year ago.
Personally, I have not been to the area featured in the above story link. But after reading that story, I have no idea WHY those properties seem to be more in demand this month when compared to the recent past. Is there a lot of new construction? A new shopping development? A new expressway? Did the property taxes drop?
In other words, what is the cause? Now, I don't mean for this to be negative. What I do mean is that, just as the realty agents and associations should not be releasing negative market statistics (like they have been doing non-stop for the past three years), they also need to provide a positive slant.
I'll put it this way. Home sales in that area are clearly on the rise. But that also means more people are selling and getting out of there. Or does it? With nothing to indicate WHY people are getting out, it could negate the positives of why others are moving in. I don't have the answer. But that's my point.
Yet, it is not just statistics. There are those who are overly philosophical. Over the past three weeks, I had several potential clients (for advertising services) tell me that they "want to wait and see how the election turns out". The 'wise guy' in me wanted to call them on Wednesday morning (hours after the election was complete) to ask them if they are ready to move forward.
I'd love to have been able to ask them what they thought could change. Aren't they still going to be in business and needing to attract more clients after the election, no matter what?
All houses are not the same. Some are larger, some smaller. The number of bedrooms and baths differs, and so on. It takes a lot more than statistics and philosophies to get them bought and sold. If only that information was more readily available.
I didn't think so.
But some unknown reason far too many people think this way about the real estate market, and therein lies at least some of the problem. Statistics and philosophies have become dominant. Not overly positive, and not overly negative (for a change). Just dominant.
If you want positive stores about the real estate market, you don't have to spend as much time looking this month as you did a few months back. Here is one example:
http://www.heraldnet.com/article/20121105/SCBJ02/711059889/1011/BIZ02
Although the above story provides encouraging statistics for the local Washington (state) market, I find one important element lacking in this story. Specific local market reasons why. The story fails to provide even one reason for the increase. It's as if they think that buyers and investors are going by the statistics from six months or a year ago.
Personally, I have not been to the area featured in the above story link. But after reading that story, I have no idea WHY those properties seem to be more in demand this month when compared to the recent past. Is there a lot of new construction? A new shopping development? A new expressway? Did the property taxes drop?
In other words, what is the cause? Now, I don't mean for this to be negative. What I do mean is that, just as the realty agents and associations should not be releasing negative market statistics (like they have been doing non-stop for the past three years), they also need to provide a positive slant.
I'll put it this way. Home sales in that area are clearly on the rise. But that also means more people are selling and getting out of there. Or does it? With nothing to indicate WHY people are getting out, it could negate the positives of why others are moving in. I don't have the answer. But that's my point.
Yet, it is not just statistics. There are those who are overly philosophical. Over the past three weeks, I had several potential clients (for advertising services) tell me that they "want to wait and see how the election turns out". The 'wise guy' in me wanted to call them on Wednesday morning (hours after the election was complete) to ask them if they are ready to move forward.
I'd love to have been able to ask them what they thought could change. Aren't they still going to be in business and needing to attract more clients after the election, no matter what?
All houses are not the same. Some are larger, some smaller. The number of bedrooms and baths differs, and so on. It takes a lot more than statistics and philosophies to get them bought and sold. If only that information was more readily available.
Tuesday, October 30, 2012
Thinking Ahead of the Box
This is still another story about an upcoming business and residential development in the Houston area, separate from the one I referenced last week.
http://www.chron.com/business/sarnoff/article/Sarnoff-Another-project-rouses-from-its-slumber-3965709.php
If you are a real estate agent or a current or potential home seller within minutes of the referenced area, my suggestion is to take heed of this valuable information.
If you are a real estate agent or current or potential home seller not in this section of Houston, you should start looking for information such as this which is pertinent to your area.
Buyers and investors are not looking at statistics about sales and prices from months or a year ago. They are looking for a good deal, and for future potential.
Using this Houston area as an example, homeowners near that development now have the opportunity to sell an ideal location where more jobs will soon be available. Where more shopping, both in terms of quantity and quality, will soon be available. Chances are this development will enhance or add to current local public transportation options.
In other words, don't look at it as though you are "close to an empty lot". Start looking at it in terms of the opportunity you will have to offer a potential buyer seeking a quality place to work and/or to shop nearby.
A sharp realty agent should be researching how and WHERE property values have risen upon the opening of such a development in other parts of the same region. If you can't find anything close by, keep looking. You can also look by population. So if you can't find anything similar in terms of eventual sales success in Houston, then perhaps you will find something in Dallas, or Philadelphia, or some other city as large as Houston, which you can use to "sell" the potential.
Chances are that the home you will want to sell is not the only "3 bedroom 2 bath home with...." (whatever amenities it offers) in your region. But if your home is closer to this development, and the jobs, shopping, and transportation it brings, you have a selling point that your competition does not.
You are marketing more than just the home and the property. A little research, especially ongoing, can go a long way toward a faster sale at a better price.
http://www.chron.com/business/sarnoff/article/Sarnoff-Another-project-rouses-from-its-slumber-3965709.php
If you are a real estate agent or a current or potential home seller within minutes of the referenced area, my suggestion is to take heed of this valuable information.
If you are a real estate agent or current or potential home seller not in this section of Houston, you should start looking for information such as this which is pertinent to your area.
Buyers and investors are not looking at statistics about sales and prices from months or a year ago. They are looking for a good deal, and for future potential.
Using this Houston area as an example, homeowners near that development now have the opportunity to sell an ideal location where more jobs will soon be available. Where more shopping, both in terms of quantity and quality, will soon be available. Chances are this development will enhance or add to current local public transportation options.
In other words, don't look at it as though you are "close to an empty lot". Start looking at it in terms of the opportunity you will have to offer a potential buyer seeking a quality place to work and/or to shop nearby.
A sharp realty agent should be researching how and WHERE property values have risen upon the opening of such a development in other parts of the same region. If you can't find anything close by, keep looking. You can also look by population. So if you can't find anything similar in terms of eventual sales success in Houston, then perhaps you will find something in Dallas, or Philadelphia, or some other city as large as Houston, which you can use to "sell" the potential.
Chances are that the home you will want to sell is not the only "3 bedroom 2 bath home with...." (whatever amenities it offers) in your region. But if your home is closer to this development, and the jobs, shopping, and transportation it brings, you have a selling point that your competition does not.
You are marketing more than just the home and the property. A little research, especially ongoing, can go a long way toward a faster sale at a better price.
Tuesday, October 23, 2012
It's Not Just Home Prices
Real estate agents, as well as sellers, need to look at more than the local home sales and price trends, although it appears that not very many do.
You can know the neighborhood as well as or better than everyone else, but it's how you use that knowledge toward generating home sales that makes the difference.
Just last week, I saw a business news story from Texas about a grocery chain expanding in the Houston area by adding 3 full-size food stores in the region. Granted, I don't see every newsletter, flyer, or web page that comes from local agents. But I have yet to see or hear of any of the area's real estate agents mention this in any way.
What does another grocery store mean to a specific area in terms of housing? Actually, plenty. Stop to think about it. Having a new grocery store increases local competition, provides those living nearby with a significant added convenience, and creates more local jobs. For starters.
If you are looking to sell a home within a square mile of any of those new locations, wouldn't this be helpful information? You bet!
You would soon (based on the scheduled completion of the store) have the ability to save your buyer or tenant travel time in the car on every shopping trip (which saves time and gas money).
This is another example of why real estate agents (or the advertising/marketing specialist they retain, if I may toss in a hint) should be on top of local business stories and activity. This sort of story should be a reason (or "excuse" if you must) to contact local home owners whether they are your clients or not. You can remind them that if and when they are thinking of selling, they now have an additional hot point with the brand new major grocery store coming in.
And, you can alert them that if anyone in the household is looking for local employment that you know of an opportunity for them. Between those two possibilities, a sharp agent should be able to generate some local phone calls.
Back to the main point. Factors such as a new business (employment, growth, etc.) should really be more of an influence than the number of homes that sold in the same neighborhood 6 months or one year ago.
For example, since most large cities have increased local transportation costs this year, the need is greater than ever to point out homes which are (really) close to transportation. Point out the savings if a buyer can avoid a car ride or extra bus fare every day by moving to close proximity.
To that point, the National Housing Conference has just released its study about the impact of transportation and other costs on the housing market. Although it's not positive, it does offer some good insight in terms of what is (or should be) important when selling or buying a home:
http://www.nhc.org/media/files/LosingGround_10_2012.pdf
Crunch some numbers for a potential buyer.
Suppose your home is listed at $5,000 more than other homes in your area, but yours is the closest to the commuter train station (or commute needs of the buyer). Show that potential buyer how they could save at least $5 per week ($20+ per month). ("No using up gas plus having to pay $1 to park at the train station when you live here!") Next, point out that they would still have at your home, because the $5,000 additional on the purchase price comes out to only about $14 per month more on a 30-year loan. Your "additional savings" outweigh that.
OK, you might be able to poke holes at that idea, but it's the concept that's important. It seems as though agents and sellers don't think that way. And they would otherwise reduce their price by $5,000 to not lose out to a home that is further away and doesn't offer the same benefits.
New grocery store or not, that's food for thought, too.
You can know the neighborhood as well as or better than everyone else, but it's how you use that knowledge toward generating home sales that makes the difference.
Just last week, I saw a business news story from Texas about a grocery chain expanding in the Houston area by adding 3 full-size food stores in the region. Granted, I don't see every newsletter, flyer, or web page that comes from local agents. But I have yet to see or hear of any of the area's real estate agents mention this in any way.
What does another grocery store mean to a specific area in terms of housing? Actually, plenty. Stop to think about it. Having a new grocery store increases local competition, provides those living nearby with a significant added convenience, and creates more local jobs. For starters.
If you are looking to sell a home within a square mile of any of those new locations, wouldn't this be helpful information? You bet!
You would soon (based on the scheduled completion of the store) have the ability to save your buyer or tenant travel time in the car on every shopping trip (which saves time and gas money).
This is another example of why real estate agents (or the advertising/marketing specialist they retain, if I may toss in a hint) should be on top of local business stories and activity. This sort of story should be a reason (or "excuse" if you must) to contact local home owners whether they are your clients or not. You can remind them that if and when they are thinking of selling, they now have an additional hot point with the brand new major grocery store coming in.
And, you can alert them that if anyone in the household is looking for local employment that you know of an opportunity for them. Between those two possibilities, a sharp agent should be able to generate some local phone calls.
Back to the main point. Factors such as a new business (employment, growth, etc.) should really be more of an influence than the number of homes that sold in the same neighborhood 6 months or one year ago.
For example, since most large cities have increased local transportation costs this year, the need is greater than ever to point out homes which are (really) close to transportation. Point out the savings if a buyer can avoid a car ride or extra bus fare every day by moving to close proximity.
To that point, the National Housing Conference has just released its study about the impact of transportation and other costs on the housing market. Although it's not positive, it does offer some good insight in terms of what is (or should be) important when selling or buying a home:
http://www.nhc.org/media/files/LosingGround_10_2012.pdf
Crunch some numbers for a potential buyer.
Suppose your home is listed at $5,000 more than other homes in your area, but yours is the closest to the commuter train station (or commute needs of the buyer). Show that potential buyer how they could save at least $5 per week ($20+ per month). ("No using up gas plus having to pay $1 to park at the train station when you live here!") Next, point out that they would still have at your home, because the $5,000 additional on the purchase price comes out to only about $14 per month more on a 30-year loan. Your "additional savings" outweigh that.
OK, you might be able to poke holes at that idea, but it's the concept that's important. It seems as though agents and sellers don't think that way. And they would otherwise reduce their price by $5,000 to not lose out to a home that is further away and doesn't offer the same benefits.
New grocery store or not, that's food for thought, too.
Friday, October 12, 2012
If You Build It - You Have To Let People Know
Here is another example of my overall point that a BIG part of the real estate crunch is because of how poorly marketed it is. And it's not just the shoddy advertising of properties that plagues the residential real estate community.
Now the Niche Report is informing us about the MILLIONS of home owners who could be benefitting from the HARP Program, which is designed to enable "under water" home owners to refinance at a lower rate. In many cases, it's the difference of being able to keep a home or being out on the street with years of consequences.
http://www.thenichereport.com/uncategorized/harp-is-failing-3-4-million-homeowners/
Let me tell you there is a lot to be said for the "Some people don't know about it" reference in this story. Personally, I am in contact with at least 200 mortgage lenders and banks (which handle mortgage loans) around the country every week. Yet, only a small handfull devote even a portion of their outside advertising to the HARP Program.
Even if more of them did, it doesn't mean that the road is easy. Frankly, it's not, and it should be. This Niche Report story doesn't even begin to tap the surface of how ridiculous it is out there. Some of these lenders, including the banks, don't seem to know to execute the program properly even when they get applications for it.
I recently had a situation where Fifth Third Bank "blamed" a computer glitch for not being able to complete a HARP loan application. That didn't explain why the applicant was not notified that the loan couldn't be completed until AFTER the scheduled closing. Then the manager who "decided" this ducked e-mails, phone calls, and an in-person visit attempt to clarify. The applicant got another bank to correct this supposed "glitch" within 2 business days - and to eventually complete the loan. (Even though the promised deadline was missed by nearly 3 weeks.)
So, yes, unfortunately it takes more than educating the public about this. Some of the lenders and banks need to be educated about servicing what they sell, and customer relations, just as badly.
This totally impacts the real estate community as much as the mortgage lenders. The more people that can afford their home, the more buying and selling there will be.
Now the Niche Report is informing us about the MILLIONS of home owners who could be benefitting from the HARP Program, which is designed to enable "under water" home owners to refinance at a lower rate. In many cases, it's the difference of being able to keep a home or being out on the street with years of consequences.
http://www.thenichereport.com/uncategorized/harp-is-failing-3-4-million-homeowners/
Let me tell you there is a lot to be said for the "Some people don't know about it" reference in this story. Personally, I am in contact with at least 200 mortgage lenders and banks (which handle mortgage loans) around the country every week. Yet, only a small handfull devote even a portion of their outside advertising to the HARP Program.
Even if more of them did, it doesn't mean that the road is easy. Frankly, it's not, and it should be. This Niche Report story doesn't even begin to tap the surface of how ridiculous it is out there. Some of these lenders, including the banks, don't seem to know to execute the program properly even when they get applications for it.
I recently had a situation where Fifth Third Bank "blamed" a computer glitch for not being able to complete a HARP loan application. That didn't explain why the applicant was not notified that the loan couldn't be completed until AFTER the scheduled closing. Then the manager who "decided" this ducked e-mails, phone calls, and an in-person visit attempt to clarify. The applicant got another bank to correct this supposed "glitch" within 2 business days - and to eventually complete the loan. (Even though the promised deadline was missed by nearly 3 weeks.)
So, yes, unfortunately it takes more than educating the public about this. Some of the lenders and banks need to be educated about servicing what they sell, and customer relations, just as badly.
This totally impacts the real estate community as much as the mortgage lenders. The more people that can afford their home, the more buying and selling there will be.
Wednesday, October 3, 2012
Needed Help For Some Renters
Normally I dislike additional fees and government intervention, one community is taking an important step to help renters. It's time someone did.
No matter what the local real estate market is now showing, in terms of home prices and sales, the reality for many people is that they don't have the ability to qualify and/or don't choose to take the financial risks of buying.
However, renters have been faced with higher rents and tougher guidelines because so many consumers have been put into that situation. In what seems like the majority of instances, the local real estate community has not helped, fearing that helping making it smoother for renters means fewer people looking to buy. It remains to be seen whether or not those consumers remember that down the road if and when they start looking at buying.
Even worse, there have been scattered reports of crooked landlords doing things like renting out units and then walking away, leaving tenants to be victims of foreclosures on these landlords and being forced to move with little to no notice.
Buffalo Grove IL, a northern suburb of Chicago, has decided to take action. Landlords in the Village will be required, starting in January 2013, to pay an annual fee of $75 (for single family houses which are rented out) and, more importantly, to submit to annual inspections. For apartment buildings, the landlord will pay $150 per year plus $30 per rental unit.
A news article in the local Daily Herald newspaper about this contains a quote from a Village official admitting that they likely won't have time to inspect every available rental building. (I would include the link, but that newspaper goes by sign-ups and I won't link my readers to something that isn't guaranteed to come up, so blame the Daily Herald.)
The idea is for the Village to "license" its landlords, thus increasing or maintaining responsibility toward the tenants.
From where I sit, this looks like an excellent idea. Even the threat of an inspection by the Village and the added accountability should be a comfort to renters. If and as Buffalo Grove is the only community in the area to adopt this plan, it could be good for the local economy by encouraging renters to consider and to stay.
It's good to see this community looking at it in terms of "residents" rather than just home owners. Having solid and responsible landlords helps to assure that all property taxes are paid and regulations are met.
Hopefully more communities will explore and implement a similar program.
No matter what the local real estate market is now showing, in terms of home prices and sales, the reality for many people is that they don't have the ability to qualify and/or don't choose to take the financial risks of buying.
However, renters have been faced with higher rents and tougher guidelines because so many consumers have been put into that situation. In what seems like the majority of instances, the local real estate community has not helped, fearing that helping making it smoother for renters means fewer people looking to buy. It remains to be seen whether or not those consumers remember that down the road if and when they start looking at buying.
Even worse, there have been scattered reports of crooked landlords doing things like renting out units and then walking away, leaving tenants to be victims of foreclosures on these landlords and being forced to move with little to no notice.
Buffalo Grove IL, a northern suburb of Chicago, has decided to take action. Landlords in the Village will be required, starting in January 2013, to pay an annual fee of $75 (for single family houses which are rented out) and, more importantly, to submit to annual inspections. For apartment buildings, the landlord will pay $150 per year plus $30 per rental unit.
A news article in the local Daily Herald newspaper about this contains a quote from a Village official admitting that they likely won't have time to inspect every available rental building. (I would include the link, but that newspaper goes by sign-ups and I won't link my readers to something that isn't guaranteed to come up, so blame the Daily Herald.)
The idea is for the Village to "license" its landlords, thus increasing or maintaining responsibility toward the tenants.
From where I sit, this looks like an excellent idea. Even the threat of an inspection by the Village and the added accountability should be a comfort to renters. If and as Buffalo Grove is the only community in the area to adopt this plan, it could be good for the local economy by encouraging renters to consider and to stay.
It's good to see this community looking at it in terms of "residents" rather than just home owners. Having solid and responsible landlords helps to assure that all property taxes are paid and regulations are met.
Hopefully more communities will explore and implement a similar program.
Monday, September 24, 2012
Floating Past The Riverside
As I continue to review home sale "news" from around the country, I continue to be astounded at how the real estate community stays in the same rut day after day instead of working hard to seriously market properties.
In Riverside CA, media outlets are reporting that DataQuick's sales statistics for the month of August 2012 "are down 3.4%, compared to the same month a year ago", and that "home prices are up $20,000 from the same period". The same published report states that "A total of 3,520 homes changed hands in Riverside County last month".
Sorry, but two negatives out of three "facts" does more harm than good.
First, telling the public within and well outside of the Riverside area that homes are not selling as well as even one year ago makes the area seem less appealing to a potential buyer. That potential buyer knows how poor the real estate market has been over the past 4+ years, and can easily find statistics on other areas which have shown an increase in home sales over the same time.
Next, telling potential buyers and investors within and well outside of the area that "home prices are up" is also a negative when presented in this context. Why? The message sent is that "fewer people are paying even more" to live there. Thus, an investor looking for a good deal sees that he/she is highly unlikely to find one or more in Riverside County in the near future.
A potential seller in Riverside County could take notice at selling prices being higher. However, the negative publicity about home sales in the area being down also tells that potential seller that it could still be long hard road toward attracting an interested and qualified buyer/investor to their area.
Yet, the statistic that "a total of 3,520 homes changed hands last month" could be a significant one. Frankly, the local realty agents and offices should already have separate press releases circulating today focused only on that piece of information. If potential buyers and investors ONLY saw that information without the negatives, it might make them take notice.
The news media is going to report the statistics they are given, even when they don't make a lot of sense or generate positive local favorable publicity.
Meanwhile, many other parts of Southern California were able to report improved sales compared with recent months (not worrying about last year) along with some rises in average home sale prices. Usually, I continue with my research to compare with such information from other areas.
This time, I decided to search for additional "home sales" news specific to Riverside County. Yet, all I could find were these mostly negative - and unnecessary - home sales statistics.
Frankly, if I were a current or potential seller in Riverside County at the moment, I'd be furious. More needs to be done to make areas still struggling to seem more appealing. Everyone benefits.
For example, in Ohio, the Cincinnati Area Board of Realtors issued a report showing how their area had the "best August in five years and a 16.8% gain from 2011" as the lead portion of the story. These positive statistics serve all concerned very well, and appear much more significant due to the absence of negative reporting. The additional part of the story showing a slight increase in sales prices, in this case, becomes a positive.
NOW, it shows that more people are buying and pushing prices up, which indicates there is a demand. The message is great for the marketplace. It alerts potential buyers that they might want to look sooner rather than later since the 'good deals' are starting to evaporate. It alerts current and potential sellers that perhaps there is a reason to pursue a listing and sale once again. And hopefully it alerts the local realty agents to increase their marketing and advertising efforts to surrounding areas.
Just like the house itself, it's the same with these statistics. They need to be in tip-top shape, ready for "showing" and highlight only the positive!
In Riverside CA, media outlets are reporting that DataQuick's sales statistics for the month of August 2012 "are down 3.4%, compared to the same month a year ago", and that "home prices are up $20,000 from the same period". The same published report states that "A total of 3,520 homes changed hands in Riverside County last month".
Sorry, but two negatives out of three "facts" does more harm than good.
First, telling the public within and well outside of the Riverside area that homes are not selling as well as even one year ago makes the area seem less appealing to a potential buyer. That potential buyer knows how poor the real estate market has been over the past 4+ years, and can easily find statistics on other areas which have shown an increase in home sales over the same time.
Next, telling potential buyers and investors within and well outside of the area that "home prices are up" is also a negative when presented in this context. Why? The message sent is that "fewer people are paying even more" to live there. Thus, an investor looking for a good deal sees that he/she is highly unlikely to find one or more in Riverside County in the near future.
A potential seller in Riverside County could take notice at selling prices being higher. However, the negative publicity about home sales in the area being down also tells that potential seller that it could still be long hard road toward attracting an interested and qualified buyer/investor to their area.
Yet, the statistic that "a total of 3,520 homes changed hands last month" could be a significant one. Frankly, the local realty agents and offices should already have separate press releases circulating today focused only on that piece of information. If potential buyers and investors ONLY saw that information without the negatives, it might make them take notice.
The news media is going to report the statistics they are given, even when they don't make a lot of sense or generate positive local favorable publicity.
Meanwhile, many other parts of Southern California were able to report improved sales compared with recent months (not worrying about last year) along with some rises in average home sale prices. Usually, I continue with my research to compare with such information from other areas.
This time, I decided to search for additional "home sales" news specific to Riverside County. Yet, all I could find were these mostly negative - and unnecessary - home sales statistics.
Frankly, if I were a current or potential seller in Riverside County at the moment, I'd be furious. More needs to be done to make areas still struggling to seem more appealing. Everyone benefits.
For example, in Ohio, the Cincinnati Area Board of Realtors issued a report showing how their area had the "best August in five years and a 16.8% gain from 2011" as the lead portion of the story. These positive statistics serve all concerned very well, and appear much more significant due to the absence of negative reporting. The additional part of the story showing a slight increase in sales prices, in this case, becomes a positive.
NOW, it shows that more people are buying and pushing prices up, which indicates there is a demand. The message is great for the marketplace. It alerts potential buyers that they might want to look sooner rather than later since the 'good deals' are starting to evaporate. It alerts current and potential sellers that perhaps there is a reason to pursue a listing and sale once again. And hopefully it alerts the local realty agents to increase their marketing and advertising efforts to surrounding areas.
Just like the house itself, it's the same with these statistics. They need to be in tip-top shape, ready for "showing" and highlight only the positive!
Wednesday, August 22, 2012
Comments Sell Homes - At Least They Should
I know I have pointed this out before, but it happened again today. A Chicago Tribune article about a former player for the Chicago Bears listing his home for sale appeared today.
Yet, even with not one but TWO agents sharing the listing, the story shows that both "declined to comment on the listing":
http://www.chicagotribune.com/business/breaking/chi-exbear-punter-maynard-lists-long-grove-mansion-20120822,0,2019545.story
It's certainly not necessary to the story, but as an advertising and marketing expert specifically for real estate and mortgages for the past 23 years, I'd certainly like to know why both of these agents would "decline" to comment on a listing.
In these days of mostly negative real estate news and statistics all over the media, I would like to think that an agent would seize the day at the opportunity to "comment" on a prime listing.
Face it. If this home was not owned by a former local pro football player (or anyone with celebrity status), this home being listed would not be "news". There are numerous other properties in this and higher price ranges that have come on the market within the past 30 days, but were not picked up by the biggest newspaper in a city the size of Chicago.
Positive publicity, as well as individual publicity of this magnitue, for any agent is hard to come by. What a blown opportunity.
How can they "decline to comment"?
Is there something about this home that will keep it from selling? Is it not priced right?
Don't get me wrong. I am not implying that there is a problem with the listing or that it will or won't sell at the pace set by the current market.
These agents do not have to comment about the former football player or anything personal in order to make this the positive opportunity it should be.
What at least one of the agents should have said:
"I hope the buyers are as happy there as the previous owner."
"This home won't last long. It is the best price in the area."
"What an ideal place to raise a family in luxury."
"Such a rare opportunity to live in beautiful Long Grove. We don't get listings of this caliber very often at all."
I could go on, but (obviously) these agents are not advertising or marketing clients of mine. You get the idea. One comment along those lines from the listing agent and it results in thousands of dollars of free publicity for them and for the property.
What do you think when you hear someone answer even a simple question with "No comment"?
Exactly. It isn't good.
When you are next selling (or representing) a property, the agent or seller had better be ready to "comment" about it at any opportunity.
The more positives in real estate news, the faster things will turn around.
Yet, even with not one but TWO agents sharing the listing, the story shows that both "declined to comment on the listing":
http://www.chicagotribune.com/business/breaking/chi-exbear-punter-maynard-lists-long-grove-mansion-20120822,0,2019545.story
It's certainly not necessary to the story, but as an advertising and marketing expert specifically for real estate and mortgages for the past 23 years, I'd certainly like to know why both of these agents would "decline" to comment on a listing.
In these days of mostly negative real estate news and statistics all over the media, I would like to think that an agent would seize the day at the opportunity to "comment" on a prime listing.
Face it. If this home was not owned by a former local pro football player (or anyone with celebrity status), this home being listed would not be "news". There are numerous other properties in this and higher price ranges that have come on the market within the past 30 days, but were not picked up by the biggest newspaper in a city the size of Chicago.
Positive publicity, as well as individual publicity of this magnitue, for any agent is hard to come by. What a blown opportunity.
How can they "decline to comment"?
Is there something about this home that will keep it from selling? Is it not priced right?
Don't get me wrong. I am not implying that there is a problem with the listing or that it will or won't sell at the pace set by the current market.
These agents do not have to comment about the former football player or anything personal in order to make this the positive opportunity it should be.
What at least one of the agents should have said:
"I hope the buyers are as happy there as the previous owner."
"This home won't last long. It is the best price in the area."
"What an ideal place to raise a family in luxury."
"Such a rare opportunity to live in beautiful Long Grove. We don't get listings of this caliber very often at all."
I could go on, but (obviously) these agents are not advertising or marketing clients of mine. You get the idea. One comment along those lines from the listing agent and it results in thousands of dollars of free publicity for them and for the property.
What do you think when you hear someone answer even a simple question with "No comment"?
Exactly. It isn't good.
When you are next selling (or representing) a property, the agent or seller had better be ready to "comment" about it at any opportunity.
The more positives in real estate news, the faster things will turn around.
Thursday, August 16, 2012
Great Idea - 2 Buildings For Price of 1
The agent doing this is not one I recall every speaking to, nor a marketing client of mine, but I give him a ton of points for coming up with a real estate marketing innovation.
Here is the story which calls attention to this:
http://www.bizjournals.com/albany/blog/2012/08/two-old-bank-buildings-one-novel.html
He realizes that, unlike residential real estate, not all commercial investment properties have a "location location location" priority. There are often companies or investors seeking a certain amount of space, and/or including external possibilities for warehousing, supplemental administrative staff, meeting or conference space, and/or to be able to appear to compete with a primary business. It could also be to house a wholesale and retail division, executive offices, or storefront with separate administrative offices.
When a business or investor is seeking more than one location, it means they need to review separate sets of property data and combine to fit their specific needs.
By marketing two buildings as one listing, a potential buyer can more easily gather the needed data, such as total square footage and overall facilities available. If this can truly be marketed as one transaction rather than two, it saves significant time and money compared with seeking two separate properties simultaneously and then attempting to negotiate separate deals on both.
Kudos to Rick Kessler of Prudential for taking this approach on these listings.
This is exactly the sort of thing that needs to become the norm in the real estate community. Based on the article, the buildings' owner had zero takers to this point. Without investigation, I'm guessing it was the usual two separate buildings advertised along with other commercial properties in a publication or two and on the usual web sites, and few cared or responded.
Yet, now, see what difference creativity could make. Granted, I'm not looking for commercial property near Albany, NY. However, the writer of the article was attracted to this story and saw the value to interest his readers. I saw the story, read it, and now know that I have a wonderful idea to add on to my advertising and marketing clients.
It already has me thinking how this concept could be adapted toward residential property selling as well. On occasion I'll see neighboring homes listed for sale through competing realty firms. Now I can suggest to my residential agent clients that if and as this happens to them (a neighboring property for sale via another agent) that they consider working together.
You won't get a situation where in-laws or brother/sisters with families could move in next to each other if you don't promote it as a possibility!
Let the others waste their time coming with up the statistics about home sales six months ago. Find the ways to get available properties sold.
Here is the story which calls attention to this:
http://www.bizjournals.com/albany/blog/2012/08/two-old-bank-buildings-one-novel.html
He realizes that, unlike residential real estate, not all commercial investment properties have a "location location location" priority. There are often companies or investors seeking a certain amount of space, and/or including external possibilities for warehousing, supplemental administrative staff, meeting or conference space, and/or to be able to appear to compete with a primary business. It could also be to house a wholesale and retail division, executive offices, or storefront with separate administrative offices.
When a business or investor is seeking more than one location, it means they need to review separate sets of property data and combine to fit their specific needs.
By marketing two buildings as one listing, a potential buyer can more easily gather the needed data, such as total square footage and overall facilities available. If this can truly be marketed as one transaction rather than two, it saves significant time and money compared with seeking two separate properties simultaneously and then attempting to negotiate separate deals on both.
Kudos to Rick Kessler of Prudential for taking this approach on these listings.
This is exactly the sort of thing that needs to become the norm in the real estate community. Based on the article, the buildings' owner had zero takers to this point. Without investigation, I'm guessing it was the usual two separate buildings advertised along with other commercial properties in a publication or two and on the usual web sites, and few cared or responded.
Yet, now, see what difference creativity could make. Granted, I'm not looking for commercial property near Albany, NY. However, the writer of the article was attracted to this story and saw the value to interest his readers. I saw the story, read it, and now know that I have a wonderful idea to add on to my advertising and marketing clients.
It already has me thinking how this concept could be adapted toward residential property selling as well. On occasion I'll see neighboring homes listed for sale through competing realty firms. Now I can suggest to my residential agent clients that if and as this happens to them (a neighboring property for sale via another agent) that they consider working together.
You won't get a situation where in-laws or brother/sisters with families could move in next to each other if you don't promote it as a possibility!
Let the others waste their time coming with up the statistics about home sales six months ago. Find the ways to get available properties sold.
Monday, August 13, 2012
One Suburb Welcomes People, Another To Lose Them
As I tell my real estate agent advertising and marketing clients, a lot of the most helpful information they can find during the course of a day is the local Business news.
Interesting story about how Sugar Land TX, a Houston suburb (about 20 miles outside), is about to add a 6,500 seat concert and event facility to its current offerings in the hopes of attracting even more Houston area residents to visit the community.
http://www.sugarlandtx.gov/tools/np/program/view.asp?ID=12498
What does this have to do with area real estate agents? The answer should be "a lot more" if the Real Estate market is to make a comeback.
Adding this venue means a lot of near future construction and engineering jobs, and later on many jobs related to events and operation of the venue.
For current home owners in the Sugar Land area interested in selling, this information makes now a much better time to place their property on the market. The listing agent could be advertising it in a union or construction related publication and/or web site in search of unemployed or underemployed workers who are currently renting in areas with fewer employment opportunities.
Of course, adding a large venue also means it is likely that more restaurants, shops, and possibly hotels will soon look to add or start a new location within proximity of this venue. Again, more construction and more jobs for these establishments being created over the next couple of years.
Real estate investors are probably already seeing this opportunity to buy "low", upgrade, and hopefully turn a profit a couple years (or sooner) down the road when the construction and upgrades are in place.
Potential buyers should be made aware of the growth potential within the Sugar Land area, in the event they would consider moving to a new growth area adding larger businesses. This is also likely to be sure that streets and upgraded to handle the traffic flow.
On the other hand, current property owners who may wish to get away from the coming additional hustle and bustle now have an opportunity to plan an exit before others with a similar philosophy realize the idea.
Meanwhile, separate and unrelated business stories in the Chicago area have two large corporations, United Airlines and Motorola, both announcing (coincidentally) within the past week that literally thousands of workers are going to be relocated from suburban offices to downtown Chicago locations.
This is (or should be treated as) a bigger story for realty agents than anyone else, other than those who will be impacted by the move.
Such an announcement is right now putting many workers in a challenging position. Right now, there are hundreds, if not thousands, of employees of each of these companies who live within a 30 minute drive of their workplace. They enjoy free parking and a suburb to suburb commute, not necessarily involving use of a busy expressway during the heavy traffic periods.
Having to commute to downtown Chicago from these suburban areas could add one hour or more to their commuting time each workday. This will send many to instead take commuter trains and to make the changes of routine that go along with it. It does not mean fewer expenses by not driving to work when it really means increased train fares as well as driving and parking at the train station.
From a real estate marketing standpoint, this news does not only impact those workers who have decisions coming up. At least, it shouldn't only impact those workers.
Anyone looking to sell that lives within a reasonable walking distance of a train station within range of the current locations of Motorola and United should be on the phone with their listing agent by the end of the day. Agents with listings in the downtown Chicago area should be targeting those same suburbs.
There are potentially thousands of people who will be forced to make some decisions as their jobs are relocating in the months to come.
You can't sit back. It's amazing that people don't react to these types of news stories, and they happen daily in many more places than Chicago and Houston.
I have my own example. The Realtor I most recently used is not one of my clients. Even with her 25 years of local experience, I actually provided her with statistics relative to local home sales based in "my" area showing how proximity to area train stations has a direct impact. She was not aware of that research. Only THEN did it start appearing in her advertising of my property.
Taking action on this information now means a lot more than waiting for statistics on whether home sales went up or down in these areas last month.
Start looking for 'news you can use' to your benefit. The Business section is an ideal place to start!
Interesting story about how Sugar Land TX, a Houston suburb (about 20 miles outside), is about to add a 6,500 seat concert and event facility to its current offerings in the hopes of attracting even more Houston area residents to visit the community.
http://www.sugarlandtx.gov/tools/np/program/view.asp?ID=12498
What does this have to do with area real estate agents? The answer should be "a lot more" if the Real Estate market is to make a comeback.
Adding this venue means a lot of near future construction and engineering jobs, and later on many jobs related to events and operation of the venue.
For current home owners in the Sugar Land area interested in selling, this information makes now a much better time to place their property on the market. The listing agent could be advertising it in a union or construction related publication and/or web site in search of unemployed or underemployed workers who are currently renting in areas with fewer employment opportunities.
Of course, adding a large venue also means it is likely that more restaurants, shops, and possibly hotels will soon look to add or start a new location within proximity of this venue. Again, more construction and more jobs for these establishments being created over the next couple of years.
Real estate investors are probably already seeing this opportunity to buy "low", upgrade, and hopefully turn a profit a couple years (or sooner) down the road when the construction and upgrades are in place.
Potential buyers should be made aware of the growth potential within the Sugar Land area, in the event they would consider moving to a new growth area adding larger businesses. This is also likely to be sure that streets and upgraded to handle the traffic flow.
On the other hand, current property owners who may wish to get away from the coming additional hustle and bustle now have an opportunity to plan an exit before others with a similar philosophy realize the idea.
Meanwhile, separate and unrelated business stories in the Chicago area have two large corporations, United Airlines and Motorola, both announcing (coincidentally) within the past week that literally thousands of workers are going to be relocated from suburban offices to downtown Chicago locations.
This is (or should be treated as) a bigger story for realty agents than anyone else, other than those who will be impacted by the move.
Such an announcement is right now putting many workers in a challenging position. Right now, there are hundreds, if not thousands, of employees of each of these companies who live within a 30 minute drive of their workplace. They enjoy free parking and a suburb to suburb commute, not necessarily involving use of a busy expressway during the heavy traffic periods.
Having to commute to downtown Chicago from these suburban areas could add one hour or more to their commuting time each workday. This will send many to instead take commuter trains and to make the changes of routine that go along with it. It does not mean fewer expenses by not driving to work when it really means increased train fares as well as driving and parking at the train station.
From a real estate marketing standpoint, this news does not only impact those workers who have decisions coming up. At least, it shouldn't only impact those workers.
Anyone looking to sell that lives within a reasonable walking distance of a train station within range of the current locations of Motorola and United should be on the phone with their listing agent by the end of the day. Agents with listings in the downtown Chicago area should be targeting those same suburbs.
There are potentially thousands of people who will be forced to make some decisions as their jobs are relocating in the months to come.
You can't sit back. It's amazing that people don't react to these types of news stories, and they happen daily in many more places than Chicago and Houston.
I have my own example. The Realtor I most recently used is not one of my clients. Even with her 25 years of local experience, I actually provided her with statistics relative to local home sales based in "my" area showing how proximity to area train stations has a direct impact. She was not aware of that research. Only THEN did it start appearing in her advertising of my property.
Taking action on this information now means a lot more than waiting for statistics on whether home sales went up or down in these areas last month.
Start looking for 'news you can use' to your benefit. The Business section is an ideal place to start!
Thursday, August 9, 2012
Alarming News For Sellers
Another day in the world of real estate, and another set of statistics about homes being bought and sold, and how recent trends compare with previous months and years. That means another day of little to no information to help those who truly need to sell their home.
In the Chicago area, one of today's news stories is quite alarming for hopeful sellers, even if it is encouraging for buyers and investors with some serious money. Realty Trac Inc. published several statistics for the month of July.
For the 7 county area including and surrounding Chicago (in Illinois only - does not include any of NW Indiana or SE Wisconsin), the service reports that 3,274 homes went to court ordered sale during July. Keep in mind - that is for ONE MONTH. In addition, they report at an additional 3,237 homes became "bank owned".
Total those up, and it means that within one expanded major metropolitan area, more than 6,500 homes are just sold or NOW available, mostly at discounted prices compared with their earlier value.
If someone is looking to buy or invest in the Chicago area this week, they don't need to look on a realty office web site or search the local Real Estate section to find the true "best deal" on a property. Yet, the web sites and publications featuring area homes for sale continue to show the "regular" listings for sale as if nothing else is going on in the marketplace.
Where is the "argument" to look at these properties instead of the "now" stock of discounted properties? More importantly, WHAT is the argument to look at those properties?
Suppose the typical 3 bedroom home in a western suburb is listed at $250,000 and shows up on a local realty firm's web site with the typical "move-in condition, must see" advertising and not even a photo of the interior. The listing agent is waiting for responses and telling other agents about this home being available.
However, the savvy buyer or investor instead can find out about upcoming court sales and REO homes, most likely at much lower prices. He/she/they could go in and bid $200,000 at an upcoming court sale or offer it to the bank which "owns" it. Part of the "argument" for the $250,000 listed home is that the buyer knows the condition of the property and can get it with due process at a pre-determined time.
Yet, part of the reasoning "against" it is that the buyer at $200,000 could spend, say, $10,000 on improvements, and still save $40,000 over the "regular" listed house.
My theory stands. Part of the problem in today's real estate market is within the advertising and marketing of properties. The "home for sale" ads are too similar. And now they are comparing against other "home for sale" ads, and NOT against the discounted homes now abundant in the market. (Certainly not just the Chicago area.)
Those looking to sell a property, and the agents representing them, need to address the real competition they are up against. Tell potential why this property is a better deal than a discounted home with similar qualities. Something has to give.
In the Chicago area, one of today's news stories is quite alarming for hopeful sellers, even if it is encouraging for buyers and investors with some serious money. Realty Trac Inc. published several statistics for the month of July.
For the 7 county area including and surrounding Chicago (in Illinois only - does not include any of NW Indiana or SE Wisconsin), the service reports that 3,274 homes went to court ordered sale during July. Keep in mind - that is for ONE MONTH. In addition, they report at an additional 3,237 homes became "bank owned".
Total those up, and it means that within one expanded major metropolitan area, more than 6,500 homes are just sold or NOW available, mostly at discounted prices compared with their earlier value.
If someone is looking to buy or invest in the Chicago area this week, they don't need to look on a realty office web site or search the local Real Estate section to find the true "best deal" on a property. Yet, the web sites and publications featuring area homes for sale continue to show the "regular" listings for sale as if nothing else is going on in the marketplace.
Where is the "argument" to look at these properties instead of the "now" stock of discounted properties? More importantly, WHAT is the argument to look at those properties?
Suppose the typical 3 bedroom home in a western suburb is listed at $250,000 and shows up on a local realty firm's web site with the typical "move-in condition, must see" advertising and not even a photo of the interior. The listing agent is waiting for responses and telling other agents about this home being available.
However, the savvy buyer or investor instead can find out about upcoming court sales and REO homes, most likely at much lower prices. He/she/they could go in and bid $200,000 at an upcoming court sale or offer it to the bank which "owns" it. Part of the "argument" for the $250,000 listed home is that the buyer knows the condition of the property and can get it with due process at a pre-determined time.
Yet, part of the reasoning "against" it is that the buyer at $200,000 could spend, say, $10,000 on improvements, and still save $40,000 over the "regular" listed house.
My theory stands. Part of the problem in today's real estate market is within the advertising and marketing of properties. The "home for sale" ads are too similar. And now they are comparing against other "home for sale" ads, and NOT against the discounted homes now abundant in the market. (Certainly not just the Chicago area.)
Those looking to sell a property, and the agents representing them, need to address the real competition they are up against. Tell potential why this property is a better deal than a discounted home with similar qualities. Something has to give.
Monday, August 6, 2012
The Vanishing Home Owners
Here we go again. Fewer and fewer home owners in the USA. Many of us feared it and/or expected it. Today it is confirmed.
http://economistsoutlook.blogs.realtor.org/2012/08/06/home-ownership-rate-forecast/?utm_source=feedburner&utm_medium=feed&utm_campaign=Feed%3A+EconomistsOutlook+%28Economists%27+Outlook%29
The above linked analysis points out that the number of "new" homeowners is on the rise as if to provide hope of a market turnaround.
However, the statistical charts fail to point out an important factor. We don't know what percentage of these "new" home owners are really investors buying up the foreclosures and REO properties around the country. After all, they count as a statistic the same as a young family of 4 just starting out.
Another news story out over the weekend makes for an example of where home sales are often coming from:
http://www.freep.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=2012308030121
This story is about how an investment group essentially purchased almost an entire town, acquiring more than 600 properties via auction, the majority at substantially discounted prices. Granted, this acquisition is not a part of the graphics shown in the first story, but it provides a picture that "new" homeowners are not quite what the graph shows them to be.
Yet, the big concern should be that the ownership forecast, which shows how the number of home owners has dropped significantly over the past 6 years, was issued by none other than the National Association of Realtors.
While it is an Association function to keep on top of market statistics, their release of this information and the graphics to back it up is another instance of shooting itself in the foot. I could understand if Bloomberg or WSJ (or other such quality news gathering organization) developed these graphs and statistics by investigation. But the realty association?
This information does not help its hundreds of thousands of member agents and brokers. It does not help the thousands and thousands of people hopeful of selling a property who have it listed through an Association member. And it certainly doesn't help the market.
Somehow, this is backwards. It should be that the Detroit Free Press is reporting the negative statistics about the drop in home owners over the years around the country to alert its readers. And the National Assn. of Realtors should be reporting that more than 600 properties in a town in Michigan were purchased in one day.
http://economistsoutlook.blogs.realtor.org/2012/08/06/home-ownership-rate-forecast/?utm_source=feedburner&utm_medium=feed&utm_campaign=Feed%3A+EconomistsOutlook+%28Economists%27+Outlook%29
The above linked analysis points out that the number of "new" homeowners is on the rise as if to provide hope of a market turnaround.
However, the statistical charts fail to point out an important factor. We don't know what percentage of these "new" home owners are really investors buying up the foreclosures and REO properties around the country. After all, they count as a statistic the same as a young family of 4 just starting out.
Another news story out over the weekend makes for an example of where home sales are often coming from:
http://www.freep.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=2012308030121
This story is about how an investment group essentially purchased almost an entire town, acquiring more than 600 properties via auction, the majority at substantially discounted prices. Granted, this acquisition is not a part of the graphics shown in the first story, but it provides a picture that "new" homeowners are not quite what the graph shows them to be.
Yet, the big concern should be that the ownership forecast, which shows how the number of home owners has dropped significantly over the past 6 years, was issued by none other than the National Association of Realtors.
While it is an Association function to keep on top of market statistics, their release of this information and the graphics to back it up is another instance of shooting itself in the foot. I could understand if Bloomberg or WSJ (or other such quality news gathering organization) developed these graphs and statistics by investigation. But the realty association?
This information does not help its hundreds of thousands of member agents and brokers. It does not help the thousands and thousands of people hopeful of selling a property who have it listed through an Association member. And it certainly doesn't help the market.
Somehow, this is backwards. It should be that the Detroit Free Press is reporting the negative statistics about the drop in home owners over the years around the country to alert its readers. And the National Assn. of Realtors should be reporting that more than 600 properties in a town in Michigan were purchased in one day.
Tuesday, July 17, 2012
Build On Better Builder Confidence
It's nice to see something positive come from another set of real estate statistics, as the National Association of Home Builders has just issued a report showing reasons to be encouraged based on June 2012 statistics:
http://www.nahb.org/news_details.aspx?newsid=15401
The past month's increase brings the Housing Market Index (HMI) to its highest point since March of 2007, which happens to be around the time the real estate crash started hitting hard.
Yet, there should be more to this story. Although it could be a positive indication, those within the real estate community need to be alerted to continue or begin to take action to help the upswing.
Since this report is from the Builders Association, these indications are based on "newly built" homes around the country. However, many areas of the country that continue to have a huge number of homes on the market, have not had recent construction and therefore are not reflected.
I'm not pointing this out to shoot down these NAHB findings. I am pointing out that these findings, while positive, have their limitations in certain regions, and this is what needs to be in the mindset of those in real estate.
Obviously, realty agents are in business to earn money, and it has been a challenge over the past five years. Reports like this one from the NAHB are likely to drive more agents representing buyers to steer them toward the "recently built" properties, since these statistics seem to favor them for purchase.
That's fine for the agents who do and who now will do this, and fine for buyers looking for new or newer construction as a factor in their upcoming purchase. But it's not "fine" for the thousands (or should I say "millions"?) of home owners looking to sell an older property.
For them, this NAHB report is more of a thorn than a help. There is no "older home" bureau or agency to create and distribute statistics to make buying them more favorable, such as the NAHB has just done for newer construction properties.
As pointed out here on numerous occasions, the local (and even the national) realty associations seem too consumed with putting out negative and/or meaningless statistics about local home sales, but fail to make any distinction about the age and condition of those homes.
Sellers of homes more than 15 years old, and the realty agents representing them, need to be asking the question, "Why would a buyer want this home when they could have a much newer one?".
The answer might be price, amenities, proximity, schools, or hopefully a combination of those and other key elements.
Whatever that answer is, THAT is what should be advertised and marketed to help sell that home. Agents should be coming up with their own local statistics, where applicable, about how many "older" homes are selling compared to newer ones within their farm area.
If "older" homes are not going to be publicized and marketed as they should be, it means a much longer recovery time for the overall real estate market. Shorter is better. In this case, if it was built long ago, they should still come. It just takes more reminding.
http://www.nahb.org/news_details.aspx?newsid=15401
The past month's increase brings the Housing Market Index (HMI) to its highest point since March of 2007, which happens to be around the time the real estate crash started hitting hard.
Yet, there should be more to this story. Although it could be a positive indication, those within the real estate community need to be alerted to continue or begin to take action to help the upswing.
Since this report is from the Builders Association, these indications are based on "newly built" homes around the country. However, many areas of the country that continue to have a huge number of homes on the market, have not had recent construction and therefore are not reflected.
I'm not pointing this out to shoot down these NAHB findings. I am pointing out that these findings, while positive, have their limitations in certain regions, and this is what needs to be in the mindset of those in real estate.
Obviously, realty agents are in business to earn money, and it has been a challenge over the past five years. Reports like this one from the NAHB are likely to drive more agents representing buyers to steer them toward the "recently built" properties, since these statistics seem to favor them for purchase.
That's fine for the agents who do and who now will do this, and fine for buyers looking for new or newer construction as a factor in their upcoming purchase. But it's not "fine" for the thousands (or should I say "millions"?) of home owners looking to sell an older property.
For them, this NAHB report is more of a thorn than a help. There is no "older home" bureau or agency to create and distribute statistics to make buying them more favorable, such as the NAHB has just done for newer construction properties.
As pointed out here on numerous occasions, the local (and even the national) realty associations seem too consumed with putting out negative and/or meaningless statistics about local home sales, but fail to make any distinction about the age and condition of those homes.
Sellers of homes more than 15 years old, and the realty agents representing them, need to be asking the question, "Why would a buyer want this home when they could have a much newer one?".
The answer might be price, amenities, proximity, schools, or hopefully a combination of those and other key elements.
Whatever that answer is, THAT is what should be advertised and marketed to help sell that home. Agents should be coming up with their own local statistics, where applicable, about how many "older" homes are selling compared to newer ones within their farm area.
If "older" homes are not going to be publicized and marketed as they should be, it means a much longer recovery time for the overall real estate market. Shorter is better. In this case, if it was built long ago, they should still come. It just takes more reminding.
Tuesday, June 26, 2012
Home Sales Up & Down At Same Time
Consumers still do not buy or sell properties based on statistics. This week, the news stories reflect how "new" home sales are up while others, at the same time, reflect that used home sales are down.
If consumers really must see this constant barrage of statistics, perhaps it is time for the real estate community to be working on statistics which really could or would encourage home sales. Or, at the very least, start to establish a hint of faith that the real estate market will improve in our lifetimes.
Simply put, homes should be sold "against" other similar homes, and not based on sales statistics from weeks, months, or years ago.
In order to encourage sales, the time has come to use recent sales of specific categories of homes in specific regions. Make it positive and current statistics only.
The realty agents and offices should be finding and including only the most favorable statistics for their local area(s) within their approach. Never mind the "fewer than two years ago" crap.
Tell us that "Five more north harbor homes were sold last month than in the south harbor area", or that "More homes were sold in East Springfield than West Springfield over the past two months". This type of statistics promotes the fact that homes have sold in each of these "local" areas very recently, which is more important than one area out-selling another.
At the same time, a listing for sale in West Springfield (the 'lesser' sales area) could be advertised with "More homes priced under $150,000 were sold in West Springfield than East Springfield" as an appeal to people looking in that price range.
The point is that this is the type of statistic that will reach the potential home buyers. A family which is qualified for a $140,000 property in the Springfield area will jump on the above statistic a lot faster than reading that the local Realty Association "reports" a decrease in home sales for the month of May compared with the two previous years.
Like with sports, TV ratings, and many other financial avenues, there are true statistics out there to make most any property statistically attractive. This is what the realty agents should be spending their time finding and "reporting" via their advertisements, blogs, and social networking. Remind local consumers about which areas and categories are most recently selling compared with others, and you'll be planting the seeds for future business.
If two other homes on your block have sold within the past three months, but none within two blocks either way, that should be making your home a lot more attractive.
Everyone needs to keep in mind that a home for sale is in competition with other homes in the same general area to be sold. Not with what did or didn't sell months or years ago. I'm 100% sure of that.
If consumers really must see this constant barrage of statistics, perhaps it is time for the real estate community to be working on statistics which really could or would encourage home sales. Or, at the very least, start to establish a hint of faith that the real estate market will improve in our lifetimes.
Simply put, homes should be sold "against" other similar homes, and not based on sales statistics from weeks, months, or years ago.
In order to encourage sales, the time has come to use recent sales of specific categories of homes in specific regions. Make it positive and current statistics only.
The realty agents and offices should be finding and including only the most favorable statistics for their local area(s) within their approach. Never mind the "fewer than two years ago" crap.
Tell us that "Five more north harbor homes were sold last month than in the south harbor area", or that "More homes were sold in East Springfield than West Springfield over the past two months". This type of statistics promotes the fact that homes have sold in each of these "local" areas very recently, which is more important than one area out-selling another.
At the same time, a listing for sale in West Springfield (the 'lesser' sales area) could be advertised with "More homes priced under $150,000 were sold in West Springfield than East Springfield" as an appeal to people looking in that price range.
The point is that this is the type of statistic that will reach the potential home buyers. A family which is qualified for a $140,000 property in the Springfield area will jump on the above statistic a lot faster than reading that the local Realty Association "reports" a decrease in home sales for the month of May compared with the two previous years.
Like with sports, TV ratings, and many other financial avenues, there are true statistics out there to make most any property statistically attractive. This is what the realty agents should be spending their time finding and "reporting" via their advertisements, blogs, and social networking. Remind local consumers about which areas and categories are most recently selling compared with others, and you'll be planting the seeds for future business.
If two other homes on your block have sold within the past three months, but none within two blocks either way, that should be making your home a lot more attractive.
Everyone needs to keep in mind that a home for sale is in competition with other homes in the same general area to be sold. Not with what did or didn't sell months or years ago. I'm 100% sure of that.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
Posts
