patrick.net

Patrick.net has been a wonderful source of practical and useful information. It really has been our go to site for real estate news. We are also happy with the choices we have made. Every time we were on the fence, we checked patrick.net, heard both sides, and went away informed. We still read and contribute to the posts. I still want to see prices go back to normal so my students and family can either own a home or rent at a comfortable cost. We keep checking in and hoping to see the situation turn around for everyone, especially for the left out generations under 40. We are hopeful. Between my uncle who is an economist, and patrick.net, things are looking better this year.

retire59 says

We got a great buy in a great neighborhood for much less than rent and including maintenance. This is very important for those of us on a fixed income.

Good for you!

retire59 says

Cheers to these 'Bears' who keep us smart.

Keep it smart
keep it real
keep every inch you win
never give up

I thought the bears were only supposed to cheer when someone does NOT buy.

Strategist says

I thought the bears were only supposed to cheer when someone does NOT buy.

its about how much you paid not if you bought or not...

as always, backed by Shillers data, rational past prices plus inflation is about much

You should be paying...may mean going back to 1995-96 prices plus inflation.

Your unlikely to go bankrupt over underpaying for your home.

thomaswong.1986 says

Strategist says

I thought the bears were only supposed to cheer when someone does NOT buy.

its about how much you paid not if you bought or not...

as always, backed by Shillers data, rational past prices plus inflation is about much

You should be paying...may mean going back to 1995-96 prices plus inflation.

Your unlikely to go bankrupt over underpaying for your home.

So both bears and bulls agree he should have bought.
Does this mean the bull vs bear war is finally over?
I always said - Make love, not war.

Strategist says

So both bears and bulls agree he should have bought.

Does this mean the bull vs bear war is finally over?

I always said - Make love, not war.

so called Bulls on Pnet are mainly Realtors, who have a vested interest

in keeping home prices higher with all kinds of goofy reasoning.

they are still very much wrong! Its easy to spot, they keep ignoring

past historical prices... and keep throwing in distractions like Chinese

buyers.

thomaswong.1986 says

so called Bulls on Pnet are mainly Realtors, who have a vested interest

in keeping home prices higher with all kinds of goofy reasoning.

Notwithstanding the ridiculousness of that statement--realtors' vested interest is in sales volume, not higher prices.

tatupu70 says

Notwithstanding the ridiculousness of that statement--realtors' vested interest is in sales volume, not higher prices.

get rid of the 6% off the TOP Inflated Price and go with flat service fee like every other service provider in our economy.

Call it Crazy says

Sales volume without higher prices bankrupts companies (and people).... Volume does NOTHING for you if you're not making money...

What the hell are you talking about. We're talking about realtors, not businesses. Realtors make 6% of every transaction. More transactions, more money.

thomaswong.1986 says

get rid of the 6% off the TOP Inflated Price and go with flat service fee like every other service provider in our economy.

I think that's a good idea actually. But don't fool yourself into thinking realtors are that worried about getting the highest price for the sellers. They want a completed sale--at whatever price it takes to get the sale done. An extra $100 on a $6K sale is next to meaningless.

tatupu70 says

An extra $100 on a $6K sale is next to meaningless.

$100K over asking, creating a new price floor each month, repeating every month, month over month... adds up pretty quickly. There is no other industry which manipulates prices so widely. Not even OPEC has that much pricing power. So we were up 300-400% very quickly in less than a decade.

Oh yes.. Blind Multiple Offers... keeps the buyers dumb and blind.

Call it Crazy says

More transactions, more money???

OK, which is more beneficial for commissions?

3 transactions on $825K house sales

or

7 transactions on $320K house sales??

That's approx. 140% more "transactions", right??

So, do you want to try again??

No--I'm right. No need. No realtor is going to get $825K for a $320K house no matter how good he/she is. So, your example is crap.

Call it Crazy says

tatupu70 says

Notwithstanding the ridiculousness of that statement--realtors' vested interest is in sales volume, not higher prices.

Another doozie:

tatupu70 says

We're talking about realtors, not businesses.

I though we were talking sales versus volume..... but since you brought it up, aren't realtors/real estate agencies businesses??

So, when I said "REALTOR'S vested interest", you took that to mean businesses? You're wrong. You didn't read closely. Own it.

Call it Crazy says

Yep, your comments show just how much you don't understand about the economy OR business...

My comments were about the interest of realtors so they obviously have no relevance to the overall economy or business.

Call it Crazy says

More transactions, more money???

OK, which is more beneficial for commissions?

3 transactions on $825K house sales

or

7 transactions on $320K house sales??

That's approx. 140% more "transactions", right??

So, do you want to try again??

tatupu70 says

Notwithstanding the ridiculousness of that statement--realtors' vested interest is in sales volume, not higher prices.

Another doozie:

tatupu70 says

We're talking about realtors, not businesses.

I though we were talking sales versus volume..... but since you brought it up, aren't realtors/real estate agencies businesses??

Yep, your comments show just how much you don't understand about the economy OR business...

What Tatupu is trying to say is......realtors will not jeopardise a $40,000 commission for an extra $1,0000.
He is right.

retire59 says

We continue to review the market and are happy with this home. We could not have done this without the guidance of this site. Thank you Patrick and all the wise contributors. Cheers to these 'Bears' who keep us smart.

Patrick is a good man. This whole site is really just one big friendly and thoughtful caveat.

(As an aside, I was in the theater the other night, and I saw a preview for a film with Joaquin Phoenix in it, and I thought for sure the director must have stolen the character's look from Patrick!)

Strategist says

What Tatupu is trying to say is......realtors will not jeopardise a $40,000 commission for an extra $1,0000.

He is right.

Step 1...
"We have multiple offers, can you bring your best and highest offer"

Step 2... Repeat Step 1

Call it Crazy says

Your original statement was that sales volume (transactions) was more important than higher prices...

You missed it completely with your 825K for a 320K response above..

My point was, more money (commissions) is made on higher sales prices versus volume, if there is a choice...

My example was, does a realtor want to spend their time selling $320K houses or sell more expensive $825K houses??? What volume do they have to see of each to make the same dollars???

You have to understand business to be able to do the math... apparently you don't...

I give up. Others obviously understand the point--that you don't is a reflection on you....

I will presume the meaning of asset "mispricing" is clear. (If necessary, see:
http://showrealhist.com/RHandRD.html

Asset mispricing has equal & opposite effects on buyer and seller -- net = zero.
Asset mispricing has equal & opposite effects on all asset holders taken together, and on all asset non-holders taken together -- net = zero.

Per Robert Shiller, roughly recalled: rational asset pricing is preferable, because it gives a more stable environment for all of us to plan our lives.

The foregoing seems simple to me. But why are the likes of
http://showrealhist.com/RHandRD.html
kept out of sight?? Simple again: conpersons-in-control.

ttsmyf says

Asset mispricing has equal & opposite effects on buyer and seller -- net = zero.

OK.

ttsmyf says

Asset mispricing has equal & opposite effects on all asset holders taken together, and on all asset non-holders taken together -- net = zero.

OK.

ttsmyf says

Per Robert Shiller, roughly recalled: rational asset pricing is preferable, because it gives a more stable environment for all of us to plan our lives.

OK.

ttsmyf says

The foregoing seems simple to me. But why are the likes of

http://showrealhist.com/RHandRD.html

kept out of sight?? Simple again: conpersons-in-control.

The only mis pricing is due to under pricing, which means prices must go up.

Strategist,
HoHoHo!
See BOOM TIMES in this NYT chart.
http://www.nytimes.com/imagepages/2006/08/26/weekinreview/27leon_graph2.html

Over 1958-1998, both nominal home prices and CPI-U rose a factor 5.6, giving an unchanged Real Homes. Deception by omission is false advertising, which is a fraud, which is a federal felony. Lots of F's.

ttsmyf says

Strategist,

HoHoHo!

See BOOM TIMES in this NYT chart.

http://www.nytimes.com/imagepages/2006/08/26/weekinreview/27leon_graph2.html

Over 1958-1998, both nominal home prices and CPI-U rose a factor 5.6, giving an unchanged Real Homes. Deception by omission is false advertising, which is a fraud, which is a federal felony. Lots of F's.

Where's 2008? and 2012 and 2013?
Did someone say false advertising?
Merry Xmas to you to. ho ho ho.

Strategist says

ttsmyf says

Strategist,

HoHoHo!

See BOOM TIMES in this NYT chart.

http://www.nytimes.com/imagepages/2006/08/26/weekinreview/27leon_graph2.html

Over 1958-1998, both nominal home prices and CPI-U rose a factor 5.6, giving an unchanged Real Homes. Deception by omission is false advertising, which is a fraud, which is a federal felony. Lots of F's.

Where's 2008? and 2012 and 2013?

Did someone say false advertising?

Merry Xmas to you to. ho ho ho.

Episodic bubbles on a flat baseline, last one not finished.
Better just keep this out of sight! http://showrealhist.com/RHandRD.html

Wrong.
Realtors make whatever percentage you negotiate with them.
If you are negotiating 6% you are a fool.

tatupu70 says

Call it Crazy says

Sales volume without higher prices bankrupts companies (and people).... Volume does NOTHING for you if you're not making money...

What the hell are you talking about. We're talking about realtors, not businesses. Realtors make 6% of every transaction. More transactions, more money.

This is the punishment we merited when we let hawaii in...

Strategist says

What Tatupu is trying to say is......realtors will not jeopardise a $40,000 commission for an extra $1,0000.

He is right.

Strategist,
Do you do sociology?
The Establishment seek to keep real asset price histories out of sight, because truth disserves:
http://showrealhist.com/RHandRD.html

Do you know folks who had kids to have somebody to sell high to??

ttsmyf says

Strategist,

Do you do sociology?

The Establishment seek to keep real asset price histories out of sight, because truth disserves:

http://showrealhist.com/RHandRD.html

Do you know folks who had kids to have somebody to sell high to??

There is no such thing. Another conspiracy theory.
Real asset prices are everywhere on the internet. You got yours from the internet, didn't you? Or did you make it up?

Strategist,
The status quo is that these histories are nearly never shown:
"The Public Be Suckered"
http://patrick.net/?p=1230886

Here is your song.

The Public Be Suckered
The Public Be Suckered
The Public Be Suckered
Yoh!

The Public Be Suckered
The Public Be Suckered
The Public Be Suckered
HoHoHo