This listing touted “close by Thanksgiving to buy this [townhouse] for only $949,000!” and lo and behold, the sale of Chelsea Park (3620 19th Street) #3 closed escrow on 11/26/08 with a reported contract price of…$917,000. Asking $1,120,000 two months prior.
At least 5 of the 39 units (13%) remain available since first hitting the market eleven months ago.
∙ Chelsea Park (Phase I): On The MLS And Opening Tomorrow (1/27) [SocketSite]
∙ The Latest Listing Verbiage From Chelsea Park: “Prices Slashed” [SocketSite]
Have any of the early buyers asked their agents who made $30K on their sales why they paid $200K more than they are selling for now? I’d honestly like to know how they answer.
some sucker jsut paid $917K for that unit. Whoa nelly!
“I’d honestly like to know how they answer.”
Lol. First, they’d duck the call (I know, I know, they won’t – the mythical referral business, hehehehe).
Second, if you got them to answer, they’d say that there’s no evidence that your unit went down, and they might even say that we really don’t know that prices have gone down yet because the units at the new lower prices haven’t closed yet. In other words, no one really knows what happened here.
Third, the always reliable, “no one could have foreseen this”. Hoocoodanode?
Fourth, if none of those answers fly, they would point out how much more your downpayment $$ would have lost had it been in the stock market, because as you know being long the S&P is the only game in town. In fact, you owe them additional commission $$ for saving you from that fate!
Last, if all else failed, they’d gently remind you that they said at the time you should have considered a really hot neighborhood like Miraloma Park, for instance, where appreciation was still hot, but that you still really shouldn’t be too upset. An investment in primo Cali like SF will always do well. Just give it time, and you’ll be phoning them to thank them for “negotiating” the sweet deal you got.
Think I have what it takes to pass those daunting ethics (especially conflicts) questions on the realtor qualification exam?
Anna – It would really be difficult to know the answer without knowing the relationship between the agent and client.
Or you can just spout vitriol on a website. You choose.
The agent for early buyers would say that the prices never go down. But this is a really bad time to sell due to the credit tightning. If you could wait for a year or two, you would make out like a bandit.
All other agents would also say that real estate is one sure recipe for wealth creation. The early buyer must have paid too much in this case.
🙂
I’m just glad Anna and others are asking the tough questions these days. it’s not vitriol she’s spouting on this website.
It’s calling it like we see it. It’s talking about the lack of ethics and values that we see today with many realtors and agents. I hope this downturn cleans out the dead wood…but that’s unrealistic too.
Noearch – There’s a difference between asking the “tough questions” and ones that already assume a lack of ethics on the realtor’s part.
Because no one’s ever bashed realtors on this site, right?
LMRISB (laughing monied renter in satchel’s brain), why do you constantly feel the need to bait on a personal level? You don’t do the other half of your e-persona — Mr. Ever Willing to Bestow Market Wisdom — any favors. Really, “hee hee hee” again? You’re f***ing weird, dude.
To Ana’s question, I would ask about the other side of the hypothetical. Extra compensation toward realtors with clients who bought in 2003, say, and sold in 2007. Where are the bonuses for getting clients to time the market perfectly?
To the Chelsea Park query, specifically, what of the people who sell 10 years from now who more than double their investment? Are they going to be angry they didn’t sell the moment the sales office lowered the pricing?
All really very lousy theorizing, IMO. This is a silly platform from which to hang yourselves, usual suspects.
“what of the people who sell 10 years from now who more than double their investment?”
Are you serious, fluj? Doubling in 10-years assumes an annual appreciation rate of 7.2%. Every year. Pre-bubble, San Francisco real estate has historically appreciated at 3-5%/year.
“All really very lousy theorizing, IMO. This is a silly platform from which to hang yourselves”
The same could be said for half the comments you’ve made here historically. Including the one above.
“To Ana’s question, I would ask about the other side of the hypothetical. Extra compensation toward realtors with clients who bought in 2003, say, and sold in 2007. Where are the bonuses for getting clients to time the market perfectly?”
Does that mean that Realtors are acting as investment advisor’s these days? I’d be all for the extra compensation if it meant they would also be willing to be held liable for any bad “advice” they give as well.
Real estate agents serve the person that hires them. The only entrance exam that has any real meaning is the one that you give them prior to working with them. Anyone who does business in our relatively free market knows all about evaluating reputations, claims, offers and the ever present risk of fraud. Expecting realtors to be any different from any other type of sales shark doesn’t make sense.
Right. It is all rather silly, especially the initial supposition that people who sell r.e. within a year’s time are somehow owed money by their realtors. (Since we are being literal, this is a development with a sales office, right? How many of these hypothetical buyers even used realtors?) I picked “doubled” because that is what my 2003 to 2007 period may have seen. But really, don’t be so literal about a hypothetica! I just tried to illustrate the other side of the coin. I even said it was nonsense myself, yet you still go “are you serious?” Well are you serious, asking me if I’m serious?
You probably think that my doubled comment is actually me shilling for the NAR on here or something. Wow. Thanks for the quick math skills dissecting an off the cuff remark about a hypothetical.
A lot of people feel, as I do that simply put:
Realtors charge too much money for what many perceive to be a relatively simple service. That’s the essence, for me, of my main beef against the real estate industry. It’s not that hard to become one. The fees are notoriously outrageous. Many of them simply puff up a crap piece of property to sell it.
That’s why, to me, it is about ethics and values. (and no, Fluj, I’m not attacking you personally, so relax.)
“To Ana’s question, I would ask about the other side of the hypothetical. Extra compensation toward realtors with clients who bought in 2003, say, and sold in 2007. Where are the bonuses for getting clients to time the market perfectly?”
How about the $30K they got for making the sale? If that $30K doesn’t include helping clients make good investment decisions then what does it include? Scanning the MLS, going to open houses and doing paper work?
I bought in 2002 and sold in 2007, so pretty dang close to Fluj’s scenario. We chose the years to buy and sell based on our personal circumstances, but our agent did help us prepare for the sale and pushed us to get the house ready earlier than we might have. And his bonus is that I will use him in my next transaction if I buy in his area.
@LMRIM
The ethics section of the test is pretty difficult actually. It’s probably the section that kept me from passing it the first two times. Some areas of study come more easily to others I guess.
My argument was point-counerpoint, fee minus penalty in a loss versus fee plus bonus in a gain. Some of you want to argue, “realtors suck eggs” instead. If nothing else thanks for the consistency. Some of you are very consistent indeed.
“Expecting realtors to be any different from any other type of sales shark doesn’t make sense.”
Hmmm…that isn’t how it is supposed to be. Agents owe a fiduciary duty to their clients unlike others involved in sales. Of course, the reality is different in some cases. I’m sure some agents take their duties more seriously than others.
That said, real estate agents must advise based upon the reasonably-knowledgeable-agent standard. I don’t think accurately forecasting the future of the real estate market is within that standard. Unfortunately, many homeowners rely on their agent for just that kind of advice.
“How about the $30K they got for making the sale? If that $30K doesn’t include helping clients make good investment decisions then what does it include? Scanning the MLS, going to open houses and doing paper work?”
Seems to me that a fixed fee arrangement may make more sense than a sales commission, and I’d love to see the industry adopt that going forward.