With roughly 29 percent of the homes currently listed for sale in San Francisco have been reduced at least once, which is three percentage points higher than at the same time last year, we turn our attention to the various verbiage and positioning now in play.
There’s the straightforward “Price Reduced,” along with escalating variants of the same, including exclamation points (“Price Reduced!”), qualifiers (“Major price reduction!”), multipliers (“Another Price Reduction”) and big numbers (“$500,000 PRICE REDUCTION”).
There’s the more positive “New price!” angle, again with a host of escalating variants, caps and qualifiers (“NEW GREAT PRICE!”, “Fantastic New Price!”, “Hot New Price!” and “Priced to sell!”).
And then there’s the increasingly popular “Transparent Pricing!” addendum, a tag which is typically attached to a listing following a list price increase, versus reduction, and hints at an expected bidding war that’s failed to materialize and list price gamesmanship gone awry.
Does this count the number of properties pulled and relisted at lower prices?
Not unless they’ve since been reduced anew.
NYT follow up to that terrible piece in the spring saying that we would be drowning in IPO millionaires and that the average home price would be $5mm with all cash buyers: Where Are the Tech Zillionaires? San Francisco Faces the I.P.O. Fizzle
Who could have possibly seen that coming?
“The I.P.O. cash-out hasn’t played out as I mentioned in my original presentation,” [Deniz Kahramaner, then a real estate data analyst with the property brokerage Compass], said.”
Or that.
Thanks for linking to the previous thread. Re-reading it is enlightening. Back then “Ohlone California” wrote:
Well, here we are over eight months later and LYFT is down by over 31%! I’d say the people shorting LYFT then are sitting on some pretty sweet profits right now.
Yeah, it’s interesting, as I said. And it will be interesting to see what happens with LYFT and Uber in the future as well …. airbnb too.
Last spring every janitor in town was going to be a millionaire. Now it’s every Tom, Dick and Susie missed out on the gravy train from now until the end of time.
You know it was the same writer, right?
If a journalist prints over-the-top predictions from so-called “experts who know the market” and those predictions don’t actually come to pass, then writing a follow-up piece afterwards letting readers know those experts were all wet indicates a laudable devotion to the truth.
Yes, well, your summation strikes me as a rather binary reading as compared to the intent and constructions of the actual articles as written. As for truth, in my opinion truths of matters are generally nuanced.