NWMLS: Mostly Bad News For Buyers In October

Get access to the full spreadsheets used to make the charts in this and other posts, as well as a variety of additional insider benefits by becoming a member of Seattle Bubble.

October market stats were published by the NWMLS this morning. They haven’t posted their press release yet, so I don’t have the usual excerpt from that. Let’s take a look at the numbers.

CAUTION

NWMLS monthly reports include an undisclosed and varying number of
sales from previous months in their pending and closed sales statistics.

Here’s your King County SFH summary, with the arrows to show whether the year-over-year direction of each indicator is favorable or unfavorable news for buyers and sellers (green = favorable, red = unfavorable):

October 2016 Number MOM YOY Buyers Sellers
Active Listings 3,025 -18.2% -1.3%
Closed Sales 2,514 -0.1% +9.3%
SAAS (?) 0.90 -25.8% -14.3%
Pending Sales 2,829 -3.1% +5.8%
Months of Supply 1.20 -18.1% -9.6%
Median Price* $550,000 +2.2% +14.6%

September was a mixed bag, with some numbers moving in buyers’ favor, but October was pretty much all bad news for buyers. The only news that wasn’t pretty terrible for home buyers was that pending sales were down slightly in a month that often sees a slight increase in other years.

Here’s your closed sales yearly comparison chart:

King County SFH Closed Sales

Closed sales were basically flat from September to October, and were up nine percent from a year earlier. Demand is still fairly strong.

King County SFH Pending Sales

Pending sales fell three percent in October. In eleven out of the last sixteen years, pending sales have gone up between September and October, so a slight dip is at least not terrible news for buyers. However, we saw about the same drop last year, so it’s probably nothing to get too excited about. Pending sales were still up six percent year-over-year.

Here’s the graph of inventory with each year overlaid on the same chart.

King County SFH Inventory

Listings are back in the red from a year earlier, falling one percent from October 2015 and eighteen percent from just a month ago. Last year listings fell ten percent between September and October.

Here’s the supply/demand YOY graph. “Demand” in this chart is represented by closed sales, which have had a consistent definition throughout the decade (unlike pending sales from NWMLS).

King County Supply vs Demand % Change YOY

Both lines have moved back into sellers’ territory.

Here’s the median home price YOY change graph:

King County SFH YOY Price Change

Year-over-year home price gains shot back up from ten percent the past two months to nearly fifteen percent in October.

And lastly, here is the chart comparing King County SFH prices each month for every year back to 1994 (not adjusted for inflation).

King County SFH Prices

October 2016: $550,000
July 2007: $481,000 (previous cycle high)

The Seattle Times hasn’t posted their article yet. I’ll most likely post some kind of reporting roundup on Monday with the NWMLS press release and any local stories that post over the weekend about the October data.

0.00 avg. rating (0% score) - 0 votes

About The Tim

Tim Ellis is the founder of Seattle Bubble. His background in engineering and computer / internet technology, a fondness of data-based analysis of problems, and an addiction to spreadsheets all influence his perspective on the Seattle-area real estate market. Tim also hosts the weekly improv comedy sci-fi podcast Dispatches from the Multiverse.

470 comments:

  1. 1
  2. 2

    The pending sales are really somewhat incredible given the inventory levels. A record level for the month (at least since 2008) even though inventory was also at/near a record low for the month.

  3. 3
    GoHawks says:

    Sure feels like 2017 will be a repeat of 2016. The new year will start off with nothing to choose from.

  4. 4
    Justme says:

    Amazon closed today down 11% from ATH (all-time hgh) and down 9% since the
    earnings announcement. Facebook and other FANG/FANTA stocks are also not
    doing well lately.

    CALCULATE: 755.05/811 = 0.931011097410604
    CALCULATE: 755.05/847.21= 0.891219414312862

    Bullish! Seattle is different!

  5. 5
    GoHawks says:

    RE: Justme @ 4 – Wow, Amazon is “only” up 12% now this year, sky must be falling!

  6. 6
    Screenname345 says:

    If you want to talk about Seattle stocks MSFT EXPE BA SBUX all had great quarters. AMZN has been going straight up for a while, it’s a good thing it’s dropping now. It will still probably be the most valued tech company in the US in a few years. FB and GOOG will still be strong growth companies as well. Stop grasping at straws, its pathetic and embarassing dude.

  7. 7
    pfft says:

    By ESS @ 1:

    Speaking of bad news for buyers………

    http://www.marketwatch.com/story/residential-building-cant-keep-pace-with-seattles-surging-job-market-2016-10-31

    I read that the places with a large number of new jobs being created and a lagging housing supply market are seeing the largest increases in home prices.. like san francisco.

  8. 8
    Doug says:

    RE: Screenname345 @ 6 – Agreed. Nothing to see here. The S&P is on a 9-day losing streak. So what? AMZN will blow through $900 before you know it.

    Separately, I don’t see how the Fed can raise in December based on this morning’s paltry NFP number. Then again, I thought the same thing last December.

  9. 9
    Doug says:

    RE: Kary L. Krismer @ 2 – Emphasis on incredible. Pending sales at an all-time high for the period with closed sales basically also at all-time highs for the period. Meanwhile inventory is at an all-time low for the period.

    This spring is going to be an absolute frenzy.

  10. 10
    ESS says:

    By Doug @ 8:

    RE: Screenname345 @ 6 – Agreed. Nothing to see here. The S&P is on a 9-day losing streak. So what? AMZN will blow through $900 before you know it.

    Separately, I don’t see how the Fed can raise in December based on this morning’s paltry NFP number. Then again, I thought the same thing last December.

    Ah – interest rates, like stock market prices are very hard to predict. I would only suggest that the employment numbers released this week were good enough for a small increase. I would guess the Fed is concerned that it needs to get interest rates back to historical norms so they have options for the next recession. I would guess a 25 basis point increase in December which should not harm the economy nor housing may be seriously considered. If nothing else – the election will (finally) be over, and the Fed would not be accused of being political.

    One shouldn’t feel bad about missing interest rate changes – many had repositioned their bond fund investments to reflect the impending major increases of interest rates this past year. Only problem – no major interest rate increases this past year – whoops – as long term bond fund significantly outperformed their shorter term peers for that period.

  11. 11
    Justme says:

    RE: Screenname345 @ 6

    You forgot Tableau Software (DATA). They are only down 66% since the 2015 high of 131.34.

    CALCULATE: 44.7/131.34 = 0.340338053905893

  12. 12
    Justme says:

    RE: Screenname345 @ 6

    >>MSFT EXPE BA SBUX all had great quarters

    Of these 4, only MSFT is higher than it was on Jan1. SBUX is essentially flat. BA and EXPE are down. So they had “great quarters”, eh?

  13. 13
    Justme says:

    Hm, maybe we need an acronym for those overvalued Seattle-based
    companies. I got it, The B-DAMES:

    B-DAMES = Boeing – Data/Tableau Amazon Microsoft Expedia Starbucks

  14. 14
    Doug says:

    RE: Justme @ 13 – What do you think is undervalued right now?

    If you had $1mm to invest, where would it go?

  15. 15
    Justme says:

    RE: Doug @ 14

    Not taking your bait, Dougie. Stop trolling. I’ll turn it around, though: What do YOU think is *overvalued* right now?

  16. 16
    whatsmyname says:

    RE: Justme @ 12
    While these Seattle stocks were declining, Seattle population and real estate went up. Do you remember tech wreck 2000? That was also not a bad time for Seattle real estate.

  17. 17
    Justme says:

    RE: whatsmyname @ 16

    >>Do you remember tech wreck 2000? That was also not a bad time for Seattle real estate.

    Really? Then you should be hoping for another one. Bullish!

    Don’t be daft. In 2000, the FRB reduced interest rates in order to replace the tech bubble with a housing bubble. This time, 2016, there is nowhere to go. We already have ZIRP.

    Are you really going to argue that if the B-DAMES go downhill, it will be “not a bad time” for RE in Seattle? Then Seattle must really be special.

  18. 18
    Doug says:

    RE: Justme @ 15 – It’s a genuine and fair question, honestly — no trolling here. Always interested where people would put their money.

    Re: overvalued, I don’t know. I’m not much of a short seller so I hesitate to say anything is overvalued. I suppose I’ve been short GoPro basically since its IPO.

    Re: undervalued, I generally like real assets right now in the current rate environment and you could hedge that by also being long the financials.

  19. 19
    redmondjp says:

    RE: Doug @ 18 – Doug,
    What is your definition of ‘real assets’?

  20. 20
    Doug says:

    RE: redmondjp @ 19 – Physical assets. Anything that you might consider an inflation hedge, particularly gold and real estate.

    I think the miners are more interesting than gold itself.

  21. 21
    whatsmyname says:

    RE: Justme @ 17
    How long have you been arguing that it’s a “bad time” for real estate in Seattle?
    How long have you been waiting for better conditions to buy?

  22. 22
    Hugh Dominic says:

    I bought earlier this year. I feel so fortunate, like I was the last one aboard a rocket ship from a doomed planet of renters.

  23. 23
    ESS says:

    Another interesting figure gleaned from the information provided this month is that YOY prices are accelerating in King County. This month it was an almost 15% increase as of the same time last year.

    One wonders if that increase is a result of heightened demand coupled with a limited supply, very expensive and/or new construction that are skewing the numbers, an increased number of foreign buyers , or some other factor (s) that having a dramatic impact on price increases. Or is it a confluence of events that are all working in unison to impact prices. Any ideas?

  24. 24

    RE: ESS @ 1
    Yeah….a Bunch of Chump Amazon Slave Shop Jobs at Like $10-12/hr or P/T

    Swimming in new NWO “Make work” jobs….Hades doctors are quitting in droves because Medicare billing [now it requires a business degree, it was done by American High School kids??? LOL] grabs all the money. We have become a nanny state….the fire department was high school, now ya gotta have a degree?

    Where’s Boeing 737 Auburn Fab, Flow Systems [now Mor Furniture], Exotic Metals, etc in Kent/Auburn??? Those jobs paid like $40/50/hr [inflation adjusted]…we exported most of the 737 life cycle production sales out of Seattle and straight to like Japan…..the 787 is already 90% outsourced by our “buddy?” Boeing.

    We’re another 3rd world nation Detroit with more “multi-generational” rich old money to keep afloat a few more years? When it dries up soon we’re screwed?

    https://www.yahoo.com/finance/m/dc385eed-bfb0-35e6-afe0-d38398fc3c4b/ss_why-a-lot-of-people-are.html

  25. 25
    Deerhawke says:

    I have been pretty bullish on Seattle real estate since mid 2011 and these numbers would make me pretty bullish on continued vigor in the Seattle market going into 2017.

    However…. four real estate agents I have talked to in the last week said their business was solid through the summer and then completely tanked in mid-September. Their stories were a mix of discouraged buyers, wary/greedy sellers and a boatload of uncertainty in advance of the election. These are experienced people and despite real effort, they all feel like they are sucking air.

    Real estate agents please way in. Is this a sampling error? Or have you also seen a big drop in your business?

    If there has been, do you think it is:
    1) just the reassertion of the normal pattern where the market goes to sleep in the fall
    2) hesitance before the election
    3) a sign that the market is seeing a plateau so prices should level out
    4) something else

  26. 26

    RE: Deerhawke @ 25 – I don’t usually talk about my current or even recent business, but I will say I haven’t seen an increased issue with discouraged buyers. But we’ve never had a buyer do a pre-inspection–I can see where that would wear out buyers faster. And we generally have not had an issue getting our buyers into contract.

    One thing I will say is I often go off on this spammer over at Zillow/Trulia who is basically promoting their book on getting an agent who only represents buyers. Ignoring the spam aspect, it’s the most naive/ignorant concept in the world. I see buyers’ agents write offers where they don’t have a clue what sellers are looking for because they never do the job representing the other side. They are also probably agents who are writing offers the same way they did back in 2011. So if you have one of those agents, I can see you’d also get worn out and not have a clue why things weren’t going well.

    On the election I’ve heard more from sellers on that than buyers, but not enough to make it even close to a valid sample.

  27. 27
    billyshears says:

    @deerhawke I’ll say this – i’m on the market to buy and that partly describes my scenario. very few homes in our price range that fit our requirements, but lots of things that are “close” or priced a little high seem to sit on the market for a while. we’ve had very discouraging offer scenarios where we lose out – sometimes badly, sometimes near misses – in escalation wars. when dealing with builders (flips or new construction), very greedy and willing to pull things off the market and carry them through the winter for expected higher prices next spring. my issue is – I believe they’ll get those higher prices, so i fee pressure to “overpay” now. as of last week, we have put the search on pause until after the election. if the sky isn’t falling, we will probably overbid on something we like to lock it up and avoid the potential higher rates+higher prices next year which would mean us getting less for our money.

  28. 28
    GoHawks says:

    Simply put, 1.20 months worth of supply……..prices are heading higher.

  29. 29
    pfft says:

    Last polling update.

    nate silver has hilary at a 65% chance of winning. most others are much higher. Princeton at 99% and Dailykos at 90%. Drew Linzer did the dailykos model and he had been one of the most accurate.

    http://www.nytimes.com/interactive/2016/upshot/presidential-polls-forecast.html?_r=0#other-forecasts

    you can check out the state by state %.

    http://www.nytimes.com/interactive/2016/upshot/presidential-polls-forecast.html?_r=0#state-by-state

    Princeton has the Dems with a 78% chance of winning the Senate.

  30. 30
    pfft says:

    By GoHawks @ 28:

    Simply put, 1.20 months worth of supply……..prices are heading higher.

    lemme guess more buyers than sellers? don’t they know about ZIRP? does shadowstats have an estimate of inventory? is the government lying?
    :)

  31. 31

    RE: Deerhawke @ 25

    Not sucking air. Was kind of hoping to be before I head to L.A. for Thanksgiving on the 19th. I was also hoping the last two would be less competitive. First one had 16 offers and the one early this week had 8 offers. Both properties were in less than stellar condition and should not have had that many offers this time of year. I have my sellers on back burner doing projects until after Feb 1 or so. One buyer who can’t go slower and one I’ll likely put on “after the 1st of the year” status before I leave unless something unusual comes on this week.

    Not unusual to mostly “close out” end of August, but not so for me this year. August, September, October and even now still busier than usual for this season. The number of offers seems to have gone up after a lull in August-September instead of down, and surprisingly so. That 16 offers end of October surprised me as it was not underpriced, but that was Bellevue. Bellevue just keeps getting more and more popular.

  32. 32
    Doug says:

    RE: pfft @ 29 – No one cares about politics. At least, no one should care about politics.

  33. 33
    redmondjp says:

    By Doug @ 32:

    RE: pfft @ 29 – No one cares about politics. At least, no one should care about politics.

    And more accurately, none of use care what pfft thinks about politics. Keep on cashing those Soros-funded checks, pfft! The Housing Bubble Blog has its own resident Soros-paid troll as well.

  34. 34
    Blurtman says:

    Barrington Park is 50% sold. You can snap up this beauty for around $1.3 million:

    http://www.zillow.com/homes/21340-NE-2nd-Ct-Sammamish,-WA-98074_rb/

  35. 35
    pfft says:

    By redmondjp @ 33:

    By Doug @ 32:

    RE: pfft @ 29 – No one cares about politics. At least, no one should care about politics.

    And more accurately, none of use care what pfft thinks about politics. Keep on cashing those Soros-funded checks, pfft! The Housing Bubble Blog has its own resident Soros-paid troll as well.

    I’ve been here so long…that’s just getting tired. don’t you guys have something new? I used to post at the HBB. too much anti-immigrant sentiment there though.

    are you a trumper? probably. then nobody cares what you think and most probably fell sorry for you.

    hillary is going to win, get used to a woman president!

  36. 36
    Blurtman says:

    RE: pfft @ 29 – A Democrat pollster came to my home today. She seemed a bit surprised by my Jill Stein and Dave Reichert vote. Seemed disturbed that I might not vote for Patty Murray (Clinton super delegate.) Didn’t seem to care that I voted for Inslee. Dismayed that I voted for Kim Wyman.

  37. 37
    pfft says:

    By Doug @ 32:

    RE: pfft @ 29 – No one cares about politics. At least, no one should care about politics.

    are you kidding? politics very important. Politics has sent many of my family members to war. Politics has insured that over 20 million more people have healthcare than before. this matters.

  38. 38
    Doug says:

    RE: pfft @ 37 – Politics are a joke. The president is just a puppet — regardless of party.

    All that matters is the Fed.

  39. 39
    Cap''n says:

    RE: Doug @ 38

    Don’t forget agenda 21. Lol. I’ve laid out my prediction based on gut instincts here before. 650k median in Seattle city limits. Then bounce around that for awhile followed by price increases close to inflation. That gets us to 2021. Then my crystal ball gets hazy. Probably cause it’s all in the Fed’s hands.

  40. 40

    By redmondjp @ 33:

    By Doug @ 32:

    RE: pfft @ 29 – No one cares about politics. At least, no one should care about politics.

    And more accurately, none of use care what pfft thinks about politics.

    In pfft’s defense I was surprised he cited to Nate Silver, since Nate is leaning more Trump than others.

    That polls almost always tighten makes me wonder if it’s just the pollsters covering their bets. “Yep, it was heading that direction–the numbers we were seeing showed that.”

  41. 41
    Basho says:

    https://fortress.wa.gov/esd/employmentdata/docs/economic-reports/current-monthly-employment-report

    When construction and government are the sectors driving employment, it’s likely that the economy is late in the cycle. Growth in construction requires accelerating growth… if the same amount of buildings are built as last year the growth rate is 0%.

    In WA, growth in government is strongly linked to growth in construction, as construction drives growth in sales tax revenue (approximately 25% of Seattle sales tax revenue currently comes from taxable construction), property tax revenue (through additions of taxable real property), and excise tax revenue (through sales of completed developments).

    Last words: No imminent downturn, but no strong fundamentals to support future growth.

  42. 42
    Kit says:

    RE: Deerhawke @ 25

    RE: billyshears @ 27

    I told my agent that we are going to keep an eye on it, but we aren’t really looking anymore. We aren’t going to keep pre-approval up either. We have time to wait and see what life brings – it may not be the most efficient route if we end up settling in one of those houses as I feel bullish, but it is crushing to keep making tours of homes, see tons of others at open houses, rush through this, pay any inspection fees, and all to see the house go over by 100k+ within a week.

  43. 43
    ESS says:

    RE: Kit @ 42

    What areas were you looking in that houses for sale were so competitive?

  44. 44

    One Political Factoid

    If you’re floating in 100s millions like the Clintons or even billions like Trump….those two can afford Seattle RE.

    The bottom 90% of household incomes [$100K and lower] eat cake…

    Sooooo, I suggest voting your pocketbook if you want mortgage money is this over priced area:

    Trump taxes the avg household income [approx $60K/yr] at 20% less federal taxes than Clinton.
    Trump wants Obamacare and its OUTRAGEOUS price hikes eliminated and replaced.
    Trump wants the daycare deduction reinstated.
    Trump wants those $40-50/hr Boeing 737 parts jobs that were outsourced from Kent/Auburn to like Japan….returned back to America [hopefully Kent/Auburn] or 35% TARIFFS.

    What does Hillary offer your pocketbook besides financial NWO failures for Seattle?

    Someone help me here.

  45. 45
    pfft says:

    By Basho @ 41:

    https://fortress.wa.gov/esd/employmentdata/docs/economic-reports/current-monthly-employment-report

    When construction and government are the sectors driving employment, it’s likely that the economy is late in the cycle. Growth in construction requires accelerating growth… if the same amount of buildings are built as last year the growth rate is 0%.

    In WA, growth in government is strongly linked to growth in construction, as construction drives growth in sales tax revenue (approximately 25% of Seattle sales tax revenue currently comes from taxable construction), property tax revenue (through additions of taxable real property), and excise tax revenue (through sales of completed developments).

    Last words: No imminent downturn, but no strong fundamentals to support future growth.

    the construction industry is still kind of down though. new home construction hasn’t really recovered. my guess is the mom and pop builders went out of business and haven’t recovered or as too gun shy to build spec homes.

  46. 46
    Kit says:

    RE: ESS @ 43

    Mainly Greenlake, Wallingford, Montlake, Roosevelt, and Ravenna. Wallingford didn’t go over as much, but anything not close to the highway still went fast. I’d say Roosevelt/Ravenna has the most “over-asking” prices as far as I can tell. There was just a place that asked for 1 mil and got 1.3 million if I recall correctly. Montlake is kind of nuts and even though we look, I don’t think we could get a reasonable place there. Also, some Northgate, Beacon Hill, Bellevue/Kirkland, and Capitol Hill (was not expecting to find much in Cap).

    If you need a house soon and have money, you can find some decent stuff. For us, we are being picky because we have a 2 bedroom place at 1500 in Fremont, not a huge amount in cash, and realistically, even for the places we like, I don’t want to get involved in the whole mess. We – being part of the masses – liked what most people liked. Most open houses had 2-5 other units of people looking at the same time as us, including entire families. I’d see inspections going on during some of my tours.

  47. 47
    pfft says:

    It appears that the big orange baby had his twitter account taken away from him by his campaign. SAD!

    If he had not done any tweeting and not campaigned after he had won the primaries he’d be doing a lot better. Kinda like if he had just put his large inheritance in an index fund many years ago he’d have more money. SAD!

  48. 48
    ESS says:

    By Kit @ 46:

    RE: ESS @ 43

    Mainly Greenlake, Wallingford, Montlake, Roosevelt, and Ravenna. Wallingford didn’t go over as much, but anything not close to the highway still went fast. I’d say Roosevelt/Ravenna has the most “over-asking” prices as far as I can tell. There was just a place that asked for 1 mil and got 1.3 million if I recall correctly. Montlake is kind of nuts and even though we look, I don’t think we could get a reasonable place there. Also, some Northgate, Beacon Hill, Bellevue/Kirkland, and Capitol Hill (was not expecting to find much in Cap).

    If you need a house soon and have money, you can find some decent stuff. For us, we are being picky because we have a 2 bedroom place at 1500 in Fremont, not a huge amount in cash, and realistically, even for the places we like, I don’t want to get involved in the whole mess. We – being part of the masses – liked what most people liked. Most open houses had 2-5 other units of people looking at the same time as us, including entire families. I’d see inspections going on during some of my tours.

    Interesting – I have a friend who lives in that area, so sometimes we go for a walk in his neighborhood and view both the new construction and the houses for sale. I have also stopped in and looked around at a number of open houses in the north end – there are always other people there when I am looking. The prices are amazing.

    I wonder if the Roosevelt/Ravenna area is so hot because of impending arrival of light rail. In a city that is increasingly more difficult to get around – those few folks that will live near light rail will be major benefactors.

    Happily we reside in our own house further north, so other than watching our taxes increase and monitor rents, we are more observers of this market rather than participants. Years ago we made the decision to stay north rather than buy out partners of a duplex I had a half interest with in the U district. Lots were bigger – mortgage and taxes were less, and the profits of that sale went to two small rentals in the area near us. Of course if we had held on to that duplex………… On the other hand – the prices north have sort of kept up proportionally – although the market does not appear to be as frenetic as in Seattle itself.

    Good luck how ever you decide. With prices for real estate as they are in Seattle, it is not an easy decision.

  49. 49
    kenmorem says:

    RE: ESS @ 48

    curious if you have an opinion on distance to a light rail station to make it influence a property.

    we have a property in licton springs that is about 1 mile easy walking to the future light rail station. i’m thinking this is right on the border of okay, but not too far. i’ve been debating pulling the plug on this property and cashing out, but the thought of light rail sprucing things up keeps me holding on.

  50. 50

    By pfft @ 47:

    It appears that the big orange baby had his twitter account taken away from him by his campaign. SAD!

    Part of Melania Trump’s campaign to stop Internet bullying. Or maybe Trump watched SNL this week and realized that those weren’t private posts!

  51. 51

    RE: kenmorem @ 49 – I still have a save search of properties that are within 1/2 mile of south end light rail stations. That is a draw for buyers who commute to downtown.

  52. 52
    Kit says:

    RE: ESS @ 48

    You are right: I tend to be extra hard on what isn’t close to light rail.

    Thank you for the wishes of luck. We are gainfully employed, so even if we don’t get the best deal we could have, we will be ok. I don’t know how any of my friends who aren’t in tech (teachers for autistic kids, factory workers, etc.) will get a house short of inheriting what their parents have or having partners who are in tech.

    RE: kenmorem @ 49

    If it helps, one of the first things I do is take the address, plug it into Google Maps, and then see if it is a 10-15 min walk to light rail. If it is not, I tend to consider it not “near” light rail and am harsher. So, for example, Maple Leaf is a fine community, but I tend to compare it to Wedgewood over Roosevelt.

  53. 53
    Kit says:

    RE: kenmorem @ 49

    If it helps, one of the first things I do is take the address of a listing and look to see if it will be within a 10-15 min walk of the expected light rail station. 1 mile is outside of that (20 min). So for example, even though maple leaf is a fine community, I tend to be harsher when looking at it and compare it to other places not “near” light rail.

  54. 54
    ESS says:

    By kenmorem @ 49:

    RE: ESS @ 48

    curious if you have an opinion on distance to a light rail station to make it influence a property.

    we have a property in licton springs that is about 1 mile easy walking to the future light rail station. i’m thinking this is right on the border of okay, but not too far. i’ve been debating pulling the plug on this property and cashing out, but the thought of light rail sprucing things up keeps me holding on.

    We have been contemplating a similar situation to yours.

    I had done some research on light rail, and the consensus is that the “sweet spot” for property owners in the area of light rail is to have property located between one half and one mile away from a station. Apparently there are problems being too close to light rail stations (crime, noise, nearby development that negatively impacts one’s property, and more than a mile away the financial benefits are lost as over one mile is generally perceived as being too far away to walk to a light rail station.

    I believe there are some other considerations regarding the areas of light rail that have been approved and will be funded by ST1 and 2 to consider:

    – Seattle and area is particularly difficult to drive in. I believe I read that it has the 4th worse traffic congestion, although other cities have greater population numbers. With the major increase in density that Seattle has recently undergone, getting around on the freeway and surface streets has become worse. I personally not only plan my trips in conjunction with traffic, but actually avoid certain areas if one must traverse through Seattle or Bellevue on the interstate during certain times of the day.

    -Through intentional and unintentional happenstance, it is impossible to obtain inexpensive or free parking in the Seattle core, and this phenomena is expanding to other areas and neighborhoods as new on street paid parking is instituted. and development continues with less concern to parking. As most governments have insatiable demands for income, this new paid parking cash cow is only going to be milked for more income. Thus light rail is becoming a more attractive option for those wishing to travel to downtown Seattle for work or pleasure, and will continue as the situation deteriorates.

    -The light rail that has been approved by taxpayers and will be installed in the next six years or so up north will service relatively few individuals and will not resolve traffic issues in that area. But for those lucky few, it will be a much easier commute to downtown Seattle than driving or taking the bus. Thus property in those areas should sell for a greater premium than in cities with more “normal” light rail systems that service a greater area of the city and suburbs.

    Thus I would suggest that having a property a mile away from a light rail station in most cities generally does not increase the value of the property significantly because that property is located on the periphery of the so called “sweet spot”. But for Seattle and its particular transportation problems, a light rail station, even a mile away, especially if accessed by regular bus service to the light rail station can only help property values increase in good times and minimize decreases when property values drop. Keep in mind that by design, there will be little parking near these stations as the hope is that people will leave their cars home and bus it to the light rail stations, thus making residences adjacent to or near light rail stations even more desirable.

    There have been studies discussing these impacts and I have included one below:

    http://uli.org/infrastructure-initiative/uli-research-roundup-the-impact-of-transit-on-property-
    values/

    There are other studies that have reached the same conclusion.

    Good luck!

  55. 55

    RE: ESS @ 53 – There’s one light rail station on Beacon Hill that is underground. You don’t even know you’re near the light rail.

    Other than possible parking issues, the main issue with being too near light rail is that it runs down a busy street. So it’s not just distance from a station, it’s direction.

  56. 56
    Doug says:

    Greenspan out today calling for 5% on the 10-year driven by higher inflation. Does he still have any credibility? Or is that a buy signal?

  57. 57
    Craig says:

    All those green arrows for sellers… It is amazing to me that Kary still charges 6% even though it’s obviously very, very easy to sell a home these days.

  58. 58

    By Craig @ 57:

    All those green arrows for sellers… It is amazing to me that Kary still charges 6% even though it’s obviously very, very easy to sell a home these days.

    Were you also Sam Hunter?

    Seriously. Give it up. Otherwise I’ll be forced to again repeat why I’m worth 10% more than whatever it is you charge for your services. Only ignorant sellers would look at only one element of costs of sale instead of net proceeds.

  59. 59
    pfft says:

    By Doug @ 56:

    Greenspan out today calling for 5% on the 10-year driven by higher inflation. Does he still have any credibility? Or is that a buy signal?

    I don’t know but I do know that it means there is no chance the 10 yr will hit 5%!!!

  60. 60
    pfft says:

    I’v been thinking about why home prices seem so resilient.

    1. an oversupply of savings- i.e. low interest rates

    2. the great recession lead to too little building and we are paying now

    3. less occupants per dwelling

    4. new home construction isn’t keeping up with increasing workers in areas like san francisco

    5. geography. places like coastal california and manhattan just have a limited amount of space.

    6. zoning. this is the big one. you can’t build apartments and etc in the suburbs. nobody in DC wants to ruin the character of the neighborhood and build taller buildings. everyone wants to keep their neighborhood the same.

    I have links somewhere I will try to find them.

  61. 61

    RE: pfft @ 60 – 7. A lot of people held off buying for 7 years, which would be a significant portion of their adult homebuying life. Together with others just entering that period of their life, they are creating quite a surge.

  62. 62
    Craig says:

    RE: Kary L. Krismer @ 58 – Net of what??? Do you actually have a crystal ball? Other than by making stuff up, how are you able to say your services at 6% get a better gross price than my services at 1%?

    You can’t, and nobody can. All that can be known with certainty is that if a seller uses your services, they will incur 6% in transaction costs, whereas they’ll incur 1% if they use mine. Everything else is smoke is smoke and mirrors. “Ignore that man behind the curtain, I am the great and powerful OZ!!! I promise you I’ll sell your home for more money (or at least give you a balloon ride home).”

  63. 63
    js says:

    For the 2nd month in a row, there is a huge difference between Seattle and Eastside inventory trends:
    Seattle YoY Inventory (SFH) 7.96%
    Eastside YoY Inventory (SFH) -14.41%

    With the numbers this low, we’re probably just bouncing off the bottom. But interesting, nonetheless.

  64. 64

    By Craig @ 62:

    RE: Kary L. Krismer @ 58 – Net of what??? Do you actually have a crystal ball? Other than by making stuff up, how are you able to say your services at 6% get a better gross price than my services at 1%?

    I said 10%. Quit devaluing the benefit of my services based on your misleading claims aimed at gullible people.

    But you’ve already hijacked at least two threads (Seattle is Wealthy and Zillow) promoting your scheme of a system. Let’s not make it a third.

  65. 65
    Anonymous Coward says:

    By Craig @ 62:

    RE: Kary L. Krismer @ 58 – Other than by making stuff up, how are you able to say your services at 6% get a better gross price than my services at 1%?

    Well, without making stuff up, he *could* post completed sales data demonstrating that he’s able to achieve a higher price/square foot than you* (or just the overall market). Or that he’s able to to achieve a higher list/sales price ration than you* (or just the overall market). I’m going to guess that neither of y’all are going to be willing to put up real numbers…

  66. 66
    ESS says:

    By Kary L. Krismer @ 55:

    RE: ESS @ 53 – There’s one light rail station on Beacon Hill that is underground. You don’t even know you’re near the light rail.

    Other than possible parking issues, the main issue with being too near light rail is that it runs down a busy street. So it’s not just distance from a station, it’s direction.

    Another issue for us in the suburbs is that the population density for light rail is so low as to make future ridership lower than what the planners are hoping for. As a result, comprehensive plans, and the zoning maps are being changed in order to accommodate high density/high rise apartments. Great for those who can sell out and benefit, not so wonderful for those who bought years ago with the anticipation that they would always reside in a quiet suburb and now have new neighbors, or those who can’t sell as a result of being caught between two oversized developments.

  67. 67
    CoBuy says:

    This is quite bad news for anyone attempting to get into a new home before the holiday season. The ever-increasing median price is especially troubling for first-time buyers who are likely shopping for less expensive homes. They could find themselves priced out of what they may have been able to afford a few months ago. Waiting until more homes come on the market may not be the best strategy considering homes are appreciating at the third fastest rate in the nation.

    One solution for first-time buyers trying to get on the property ladder is to buy with friends. The New York Times and other publications have written recently about this rising trend. By pooling money with friends or family, people can afford more desirable homes than they otherwise would have. In a market such as Seattle, it may be the only way for first-time buyers to compete with their more established counterparts.

    This approach makes especially good sense for younger people who are already living with friends and have enough combined for a down payment. Often times the mortgage will be less than what the individuals were paying for rent! Zillow’s breakeven horizon for South Lake Union is only 1.5 years. That’s nothing for young professionals. It also makes good sense for parents with the funds to help their child into a home. If the market continues on it’s current trajectory, which most experts predict will happen, a joint-property purchase like this is a great investment.

  68. 68
    CoBuy says:

    RE: pfft @ 59
    Part of the issue is that the majority of new construction is dedicated to higher end homes that first-time buyers cannot afford. There is currently no incentive for builders to construct starter homes, which the market desperately needs.

  69. 69
    Brian says:

    By CoBuy @ 67:

    This is quite bad news for anyone attempting to get into a new home before the holiday season. The ever-increasing median price is especially troubling for first-time buyers who are likely shopping for less expensive homes. They could find themselves priced out of what they may have been able to afford a few months ago. Waiting until more homes come on the market may not be the best strategy considering homes are appreciating at the third fastest rate in the nation.

    Yep, that’s me. It’s going up so fast that I’ve considered holding off until things calm down. The number of all-cash buyers tells me there’s a lot of investors in the market right now trying to make a quick and easy buck.

  70. 70
    Brian says:

    By CoBuy @ 68:

    RE: pfft @ 59
    Part of the issue is that the majority of new construction is dedicated to higher end homes that first-time buyers cannot afford. There is currently no incentive for builders to construct starter homes, which the market desperately needs.

    Yes, every house being built on the Eastside is 2500+ sq ft and $800k+. I would be happy as a first time buyer with 1200-1600 sq ft.

  71. 71
    kenmorem says:

    RE: CoBuy @ 67
    bad idea. as a co-buyer myself, i can tell you that life changes in a few years’ time. you do not want to be looped in together with a friend, only to have both/all of your lives change and priorities change. managing the house when one or more leaves the coop is fun!

  72. 72
    sleepless says:

    Is anyone voting for Darrell Castle? Why to vote for the corrupt witch Hitlary Klinton, or arrogant Moron Trump or Clown Johnson? Darrell Castle is from constitution party, the guy who believes in the rule of law, limited government and civil liberties? Stop voting for the same power hungry democrats and republicans. What is wrong with the people today?

  73. 73
    jon says:

    Self-driving cars will make it much easier to get to and from a rail station. That will reduce the benefit of houses that are located within a mile of a station. Even at best it will be quite a few years before those cars are generally available, but then again the rail stations themselves are still a few years away. The synergy of the two will be quite strong and will benefit job hubs such as Seattle, since traffic will be less of a concern to employers as well. That benefit to employers will start to happen immediately since employers will not be as worried about having to relocate in the future as they grow.

  74. 74

    By CoBuy @ 68:

    RE: pfft @ 59
    Part of the issue is that the majority of new construction is dedicated to higher end homes that first-time buyers cannot afford. There is currently no incentive for builders to construct starter homes, which the market desperately needs.

    I’m not sure that’s true, but to get the starter homes you need to look further out.

    My comment about starter homes is more that the community is often poorly designed/constructed such that it will likely not hold value well.

  75. 75
    Brian says:

    By Kary L. Krismer @ 74:

    By CoBuy @ 68:

    RE: pfft @ 59
    Part of the issue is that the majority of new construction is dedicated to higher end homes that first-time buyers cannot afford. There is currently no incentive for builders to construct starter homes, which the market desperately needs.

    I’m not sure that’s true, but to get the starter homes you need to look further out.

    My comment about starter homes is more that the community is often poorly designed/constructed such that it will likely not hold value well.

    Definitely true.

    King county, homes less than 2500 sq ft (167 results). Take a look at the Eastside, there’s a whopping 7 results between lake washington and lake sammamish:
    https://www.redfin.com/county/118/WA/King-County/filter/sort=lo-sqft,property-type=house,max-sqft=2.5k-sqft,include=fsbo+construction

    King county, homes greater than 2500 sq ft (662 results):
    https://www.redfin.com/county/118/WA/King-County/filter/sort=lo-sqft,property-type=house,min-sqft=2.5k-sqft,include=fsbo+construction

  76. 76

    RE: Brian @ 75 – I’m not sure I’d use square footage as a definition of starter home. And by further out I wasn’t limiting buyers to King County.

  77. 77
    Justme says:

    RE: Kary L. Krismer @ 74

    >>My comment about starter homes is more that the community is often poorly designed/constructed such that it will likely not hold value well.

    This is an interesting topic. Would you care to expand on this comment? What are the top several factors in terms of community design and construction that tends to detract from long-term value?

  78. 78
    Blurtman says:

    RE: Brian @ 75 – The lack of more affordable smaller homes keeps the riffraff out, e.g., Erik.

  79. 79

    RE: Justme @ 77 – First let me say that in this market I should have said not appreciate as quickly. In this market just about everything has gone up, but some things have gone up more than others.

    But the type of things I’m thinking of would be narrow roadways, perhaps so narrow that fire regulations don’t allow any parking. Or construction where 5 years later the siding already has mildew or the fascia boards already need paint. Things where when it comes time to sell prospective buyers will not be as attracted relative to other neighborhoods.

    A lot of it though will also depend on the owners. There was a SFR development down in Skyway built in 2000 that already looked like crap in 2006 because almost no one maintained what they owned.

    Edit: BTW, this is really just a subset of a larger issue. In today’s market buyers really need to be concerned about things that will make a house more difficult to sell in a more normal market. It could be something as simple as being on a busy street. Buyers need to make sure they consider resale when they buy.

  80. 80
    Brian says:

    By Kary L. Krismer @ 76:

    RE: Brian @ 75 – I’m not sure I’d use square footage as a definition of starter home. And by further out I wasn’t limiting buyers to King County.

    Square footage seems like a very good indicator to me. The very definition of starter home is that it is relatively small and inexpensive. 2500 sq ft is not relatively small. And in general, larger homes need a larger piece of land and more building materials and time, which equals a higher price.

    Also,
    Pierce county:
    222 out of 574 (39%) are <2500 sq ft
    Snohomish county:
    199 out of 442 (45%) are <2500 sq ft
    King county:
    167 out of 829 (20%) are <2500 sq ft

    Builders are not helping first time buyers and new families find something they can afford without going out into the boonies and commuting for half a day to and from their job.

  81. 81
    redmondjp says:

    RE: Kary L. Krismer @ 79 – LOL Kary!

    Narrow streets? You just described most of residential Seattle.

    Cheap construction and needing paint almost immediately? That equally describes the $1M McMansions down the street from me as much as it does starter homes.

    Square footage is a pretty good baseline for determining a starter SFH – after that, it comes down to other amenities and finishes, not to mention the desirability of the neighborhood.

  82. 82

    By Brian @ 80:

    By Kary L. Krismer @ 76:

    RE: Brian @ 75 – I’m not sure I’d use square footage as a definition of starter home. And by further out I wasn’t limiting buyers to King County.

    Square footage seems like a very good indicator to me. The very definition of starter home is that it is relatively small and inexpensive. 2500 sq ft is not relatively small. And in general, larger homes need a larger piece of land and more building materials and time, which equals a higher price.

    Also,
    Pierce county:
    222 out of 574 (39%) are <2500 sq ft
    Snohomish county:
    199 out of 442 (45%) are <2500 sq ft
    King county:
    167 out of 829 (20%) are <2500 sq ft

    You you’re going to prove your disputed point by posting more statistics using the same disputed point?

    FYI, the boxy architecture used in a lot of modern construction makes for larger square footage. You can have a 2,500 square foot house built on a 3,300 square foot lot.

  83. 83
    Brian says:

    By Kary L. Krismer @ 82:

    By Brian @ 80:

    By Kary L. Krismer @ 76:

    RE: Brian @ 75 – I’m not sure I’d use square footage as a definition of starter home. And by further out I wasn’t limiting buyers to King County.

    Square footage seems like a very good indicator to me. The very definition of starter home is that it is relatively small and inexpensive. 2500 sq ft is not relatively small. And in general, larger homes need a larger piece of land and more building materials and time, which equals a higher price.

    Also,
    Pierce county:
    222 out of 574 (39%) are <2500 sq ft
    Snohomish county:
    199 out of 442 (45%) are <2500 sq ft
    King county:
    167 out of 829 (20%) are <2500 sq ft

    You you’re going to prove your disputed point by posting more statistics using the same disputed point?

    No, I proved my disputed point with the argument above the statistics. Maybe you just skimmed my post, saw the statistics, and went straight to reply?

  84. 84

    By redmondjp @ 81:

    RE: Kary L. Krismer @ 79 – LOL Kary!

    Narrow streets? You just described most of residential Seattle..

    Hardly. Most streets in Seattle allow parking on both sides and there is still room for fire trucks.

    I’ll give you the point that construction methods don’t necessarily correlate perfectly to price. You see that in 10-15 year old neighborhoods not all built by the same contractor.

  85. 85

    By Brian @ 83:

    No, I proved my disputed point with the argument above the statistics. Maybe you just skimmed my post, saw the statistics, and went straight to reply?

    Nope, you only think you proved something. All you proved is the percentage of homes built over and under a certain size. You’re making the claim that shows starter homes without offering any proof, or even any explanation.

    But maybe we should back off a bit, because we are once again in a market where buyers are paying a premium for new construction. If that is important to a first time buyer and they have the ability to do that fine, but I’m not sure that’s the best decision.

  86. 86
    Brian says:

    By Kary L. Krismer @ 85:

    By Brian @ 83:

    No, I proved my disputed point with the argument above the statistics. Maybe you just skimmed my post, saw the statistics, and went straight to reply?

    Nope, you only think you proved something. All you proved is the percentage of homes built over and under a certain size. You’re making the claim that shows starter homes without offering any proof, or even any explanation.

    But maybe we should back off a bit, because we are once again in a market where buyers are paying a premium for new construction. If that is important to a first time buyer and they have the ability to do that fine, but I’m not sure that’s the best decision.

    Sigh… I gave you an explanation. Larger home = more expensive. Starter home = less expensive. Plain and simple. My argument: Builders are building very few new starter homes. Status: Confirmed – most of the new homes are huge and expensive McMansions that by definition are not starter homes.

  87. 87
    Craig says:

    RE: Anonymous Coward @ 65 – Well, on my end you’re mistaken. I am all about transparency – and am also appalled by the lack of hard data to support ANY theory of “proven effective marketing” in real estate. There is anecdotal evidence aplenty, every real estate broker talks until they are blue in the face about the value they add beyond their rather hefty fee.

    In fact, I am seriously considering simply manually compiling market data in a spreadsheet to shed a little light onto the relationships between list price, DOM, and sale price. I’ll let you know when I’ve got something to say… ;-)

    Finally, as to my sale numbers: They are limited. It is a new model, so unfortunately I don’t have even much anecdotal evidence. But I do know for a fact that my listing fee beats every other by 2+% (and up to 5%, or more). That’s good enough for me, for now. As the numbers roll in, I’ll tabulate and report. I’m certain the model works and sellers make more money.

  88. 88
    Doug says:

    RE: Craig @ 87 – 1% is great no doubt, but why % instead of a flat fee?

    Do you do more work on a $1mm sale than a $500k sale that justifies an extra $5k in commission?

  89. 89
    ESS says:

    Regarding “starter” homes – sometimes cost and size are confused.

    In a trendy area of Seattle or Bellevue, the complaint heard is that there are no “starter” homes as the prices tend to start at over half a million dollars for a small simple single family house on its own lot.

    In other parts of the country, a quarter of a million dollars purchases a very nice 1500 -2000 sq. foot residence on a nice lot that folks here could only dream about.

    Of course the term “starter house” is an artificial, marketing one implemented for many reasons – families with two parents and children have been raised in houses between 1000 and 1300 sq feet. There is real no such thing as a “starter house”, other than the use of the term as a marketing tool.

    As per another matter, I had always heard that the floodgates of sellers would be unleashed once owners overcame their underwater situations and could dump their properties without taking a financial bath. Furthermore, the banks where holding on to the “shadow inventory” until prices returned to their former highs.

    Housing prices in many parts of the Puget Sound area are at their all time high, but yet inventory is experiencing precipitous decreases. What happened?

  90. 90
    Justme says:

    RE: Brian @ 86

    May I make a friendly suggestion not to quote indiscriminately the whole text you are responding to? For me it makes it less likely I will read your post.

    If you just hit Reply and not Quote the reader can still easily backtrack by the comment number.

  91. 91
    Justme says:

    RE: ESS @ 89

    >>What happened?

    Some things never change: Greed, memory loss, “it’s different this time”.

  92. 92
    pfft says:

    By Blurtman @ 78:

    RE: Brian @ 75 – The lack of more affordable smaller homes keeps the riffraff out, e.g., Erik.

    and apartments in the burbs.

  93. 93

    By Doug @ 88:

    RE: – 1% is great no doubt, but why % instead of a flat fee?

    Why is 1% great? Would it be great if I charged .5% but only advertised your property in The Little Nickel paper (assuming that still exists)? The Seattle Times is less expensive to get the Digital Edition with Sunday delivery than without, because the Times wants to increase circulation of the ads, and advertisers understand the importance of exposure and willing to pay more. http://www.seattletimes.com/subscribe/signup/ When you are selling virtually anything you want to have the greatest possible exposure relative to cost. If you want to only pay 1% LOC there are options with much more exposure than what Craig offers. So again, why is 1% great? 1% is just a part of the end number that gets you to net proceeds.

    When it comes to real estate sales, exposure is particularly important in strong seller markets and strong buyer markets. In strong seller markets increased exposure increases the chance of bidding wars which can increase the sold price by 10% or more. In strong buyer markets it increases the chance of finding perhaps the only person who is going to buy your property. I left my first firm in large part because that firm’s listings weren’t getting to Realtor.com. When I moved that relatively small change made a noticeable difference.

    Finally, note I’m not dealing at all with SOC–that’s an entirely different issue.

  94. 94
    Doug says:

    RE: Kary L. Krismer @ 93 – Do you think that sites like Redfin flatten one agent’s ability to market the home over another?

    I personally never used a newspaper to find the 2 homes I’ve purchased. I have exclusively used Zillow and then Redfin once I learned that Zillow lacks in accuracy.

  95. 95
    Craig says:

    Kary – In what hopefully is a sign of the national reconciliation that will follow today’s election… I agree with you!!
    “When you are selling virtually anything you want to have the greatest possible exposure relative to cost.”
    That’s it, Kary! Now, stay with me: I charge 1%, list on Zillow, and reach most buyers; you charge 6% – or 10% meaning you charge a 7% LOC + 3% SOC which is absurd but whatever – and reach essentially all buyers. Does the increased exposure justify the increased cost, a whopping 5% of the sale price?

    I believe no – not even close. Zillow is sufficient to garner Fair Market Value, period. But time will tell, because neither I nor Zillow are going anywhere soon.

    Why percentage, versus flat fee? Basic business principles, Doug. Why work for a flat fee when you can work on points? I’m trying to change enough about real estate – who needs the MLS! – the last thing I need to do is find more things to change.

  96. 96
    Craig says:

    RE: Kary L. Krismer @ 93 – Of course, other than the quote in my previous comment, you are completely off in left field. NOBODY charges 1% TOTAL to sell a home, but me. I am the only one. Because I am the only one that doesn’t include an SOC.

    So Kary, you can’t say, “… but none of this includes the SOC.” That’s like saying pigs fly, because gravity doesn’t apply. Of course gravity – and the SOC – are part of the equation. You offer one, I don’t. As a result, you – and every other broker – charges way more than me.

    To tie this back into the thread: And why the heck not. It is obviously easy to sell a house these days.

  97. 97
    Justme says:

    LOC= listing office commission
    SOC = selling office commission (meaning: BUYING office commission)

  98. 98

    By Doug @ 94:

    RE: Kary L. Krismer @ 93 – Do you think that sites like Redfin flatten one agent’s ability to market the home over another?.

    What I think is that sellers should want to have their listing on as many sites as possible. At a minimum, all the broker sites, Trulia, Zillow and Realtor.com. You can’t control where buyers look, so you want to be as close to everywhere as possible.

  99. 99

    By Craig @ 95:

    Kary – In what hopefully is a sign of the national reconciliation that will follow today’s election… I agree with you!!
    “When you are selling virtually anything you want to have the greatest possible exposure relative to cost.”
    That’s it, Kary! Now, stay with me: I charge 1%, list on Zillow, and reach most buyers; you charge 6% – or 10% meaning you charge a 7% LOC + 3% SOC which is absurd but whatever – and reach essentially all buyers. Does the increased exposure justify the increased cost, a whopping 5% of the sale price?.

    Why do you want to deceive people?

    First, the 10% was a claim that my listings will get 10% more than yours. It was facetious, making fun of your absurd 5% savings claim and doubling it. But you know I don’t discuss my commissions on-line, so you know I wasn’t discussing what my commission typically is.

    Second, even accepting your absurd “it’s always 6%” claims, you do not get to a 5% saving as you are once again claiming. That assumes a 0% SOC in your absurd world. I’m going to assume you don’t want to have your sellers hanging out there with no buyer’s agent. That you’re not pushing them under a bus to get your 1%. And I assume you think that a buyer’s agent will be compensated. Do you really think it’s in the seller’s interest to not pay the buyer’s agent? If so, do you also tell your sellers to not pay the Real Estate Excise tax? They could make that a term of their listing too. But only really stupid sellers (mainly a couple of banks) do that. Why? Because it’s not in the seller’s interest because it greatly reduces the number of buyers that can bid on a property and/or forces them to get less favorable financing.

    So please stay away from the false and misleading claims. That 90% (or whatever) of buyers start on the Internet does not mean buyers will see your listings. And no there is not a 5% savings if you charge only 1%. Only gullible people would fall for either of those false and misleading claims.

  100. 100

    By Justme @ 97:

    LOC= listing office commission
    SOC = selling office commission (meaning: BUYING office commission)

    Thank you for helping people with that.

    To further explain, the reason selling office is used is the listing agent might be the selling agent (either representing only the seller or being a dual agent). Thus Buyer’s Office Commission wouldn’t work because it would imply representing the buyer when that might not be the case.

    It’s just one of those things, like putting a “sold” sign up when the house goes pending.

  101. 101
    Craig says:

    RE: Kary L. Krismer @ 100 – It’s not “one of those things.” It is an artifact from how the MLS used to operate, before buyer agency. The Listing Agent took the listing and got the seller to sign the listing agreement. The Selling Agent brought the buyer, i.e. “sold” the home. Per the MLS listing agreement, the seller pays two agents – the traditional 6%. And back then, BOTH agents worked for the seller. Hence “listing” and “selling.”

  102. 102
    Craig says:

    RE: Kary L. Krismer @ 99 – “Do you really think it’s in the seller’s interest to not pay the buyer’s agent? ” Hey, we’re clicking today, Kary – yes I do!!!

    You know that agent works for the buyer, right? All the value of that agent’s skill and expertise flows to the buyer? The buyer chooses the agent, and the seller has no say whatsoever? Are you kidding me??? Heck yes, I think the buyer and not the seller should pay the buyer’s agent.

    Are my sellers asked to pay a commission when the buyer is using an agent? Sure. And we negotiate that seller-paid concession accordingly. So some of my clients have sold for 102.9% listing price – the seller’s counter in my model on a full price, full SOC offer. Saving my client almost all of that 3% expense.

  103. 103
    S-Crow says:

    RE: Kary L. Krismer @ 100RE: Craig @ 101

    It might help the conversation if you used REAL dollars in your conversation. Percentages get lost in the real estate minutea . In other words, if you take the average or median price of a Seattle or Bellevue/Redmond/Kirkland home at 6% the cost to have real estate agents handling the transaction would be about $30, 000 on a run of the mill average style $500,000 home. In contrast, if a seller and buyer came together at the same price and with some modest help from an attorney at $1000.00 or so to oversee the transaction, our escrow office would close the transaction for an obscene $850 plus tax and other customary closing costs (title, recording, excise etc.). So, the question is whether people think there is a benefit to pay (finance, *cough cough) $30,000.00 or they think that they are at a disadvantage by not paying $30,000.

    I can’t speak for agents and the value each individual brings to the transaction, but is there more escrow work involved in a $1M home vs a $500K home? Rarely. Sometimes closing a mobile home transaction involves more work and time.

    S-Crow

  104. 104
    Blurtman says:

    RE: softwarengineer @ 44 – What have you done!!!???

    Markets plunge worldwide as Trump shows surprising strength
    https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/wonk/wp/2016/11/08/markets-plunge-worldwide-as-trump-shows-surprising-strength/

  105. 105
    Justme says:

    President Trump will crash the real-estate market, buy up all the ensuing defaulted/foreclosed properties for himself, and become the largest landlord in the country. Bwahahahahaha. Suckers!

    Only halfway joking. He might do exactly that. Residential and/or commercial property may be in play.

  106. 106
    pfft says:

    This is really close. Trump might win. the winner will probably have 270 or 280 in electoral votes.

  107. 107
    Doug says:

    RE: Justme @ 105 – Market down 5%. 10y down 14 bps. This better not extend into the Seattle RE market.

    I never actually believed there were this many idiots in the US.

  108. 108
    Doug says:

    RE: pfft @ 106 – I guarantee the winner will have 270 electoral votes.

  109. 109
    pfft says:

    By Doug @ 108:

    RE: pfft @ 106 – I guarantee the winner will have 270 electoral votes.

    meaning the winner will be in the 270s or 280s.

  110. 110
    Sid says:

    RE: pfft @ 106 – Almost certain now that he will win.

  111. 111
    sleepless says:

    By pfft @ 109:

    By Doug @ 108:

    RE: pfft @ 106 – I guarantee the winner will have 270 electoral votes.

    meaning the winner will be in the 270s or 280s.

    Trump has won. pfft, you can suck it up and go and cry in your moms basement now. All you Trump supporters, I would want to see what you say about Trump not living up to the expectation when he doesn’t deliver on promise and won’t make America great again. I voted no one in this election, but I am glad the corrupt witch lost, even thought I don’t like Trump. But I will take Trump over the rotten witch any time…

  112. 112
    sleepless says:

    By pfft @ 109:

    By Doug @ 108:

    RE: pfft @ 106 – I guarantee the winner will have 270 electoral votes.

    meaning the winner will be in the 270s or 280s.

    Trump wins by landslide – 300+ vs 230+. You have been proven wrong again pfft, you always have…

  113. 113
    sleepless says:

    Trump a new US president is not something I am happy with, I don’t like Trump, but nothing pleases me more than seeing the corrupt witch losing. Even Trump winning doesn’t upset me as much… Now, lets see if Trump can deliver on promise and appoint a special prosecutor to investigate corruption at DNC, Clinton Foundation and Clintons family.

  114. 114
    Screenname345 says:

    Trump is going to be a housing bears worst nightmare. Imagine the regulations he will make disappear so he can make more coin as a real estate developer while in office. The rich are about to get much richer. Any drop in the stock market is going to be a blip and a buying opportunity probably much faster than anyone expects. Not sure what to make of all this outside of knowing the hillbillies that voted this guy in are going to be hurt the most.

  115. 115
    Doug says:

    RE: Screenname345 @ 114 – Lol, the irony. Sounds like a page straight out of What’s the Matter with Kansas?

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/What%27s_the_Matter_with_Kansas%3F

    We’ll have to see how the market reacts tomorrow, but we’re already well off the lows. 10y has almost pared all of it’s gains.

  116. 116
    sleepless says:

    By Screenname345 @ 114:

    Trump is going to be a housing bears worst nightmare. Imagine the regulations he will make disappear so he can make more coin as a real estate developer while in office. The rich are about to get much richer. Any drop in the stock market is going to be a blip and a buying opportunity probably much faster than anyone expects. Not sure what to make of all this outside of knowing the hillbillies that voted this guy in are going to be hurt the most.

    I am not sure if anything going to change for better or worse, but I don’t see anything fundamentally changing in the government. Trump will keep ramping up the national debt, the jobs will continue to be outsourced to mexico and china, the great trump wall will not be built and mexicans will keep crossing the boarder and sucking of the gubmint tit. Nothing is going to change, i don’t even believe Trump will ever deliver on promise to repeal obamacare.

  117. 117
    redmondjp says:

    RE: sleepless @ 116RE: sleepless @ 116 – We’ll just have to wait and see. Having a Republican president, house and senate hasn’t happened for a long, long time. Theoretically, that should make it easier to get things done. Time will tell.

    Obama promised that he was going to close Gitmo, and that never happened either, in not one but two presidential terms.

  118. 118
    Screenname345 says:

    Futures are already coming back guys. Maybe there won’t even be a buying opportunity for anyone tomorrow. Wouldn’t that be a hoot.

  119. 119
    Blake says:

    Good times ahead!! ;-(
    This is spot on….
    http://www.nakedcapitalism.com/2016/11/bill-black-liberals-didnt-listen-the-immense-cost-of-ignoring-tom-franks-warnings.html
    “A period of enormous corruption and elite fraud is coming soon as the Trump administration brings its signature characteristic – crony capitalism – to bear to control all three branches of government. Trump promises to deregulate Wall Street, appoint top supervisors chosen for their unwillingness to supervise, and appoint judges who will allow CEOs to loot with impunity. Trump promises to outdo even the savage anti-media and anti-whistleblower policies of the Obama administration. The House and Senate committee chairs will intensify their blatantly partisan use of investigations while refusing to conduct real oversight hearings revealing the elite fraud and corruption…”

    IMHO… Congress is even worse that Trump!! No holds barred now… Laissez-faire!

  120. 120

    By S-Crow @ 103:

    I can’t speak for agents and the value each individual brings to the transaction, but is there more escrow work involved in a $1M home vs a $500K home? Rarely. Sometimes closing a mobile home transaction involves more work and time.

    S-Crow

    There can be more work in a more expensive house. For example, I’ve had listings where I’ve had to go check the house out after each showing. Beyond that, the commission is more expensive for the same reason you escrows charge more for more expensive houses: Greater legal risk.

    Somewhat out of context, but I used to say that if you lived on Lake Washington there was a 50% chance one of your two neighbors was an A-hole, and if not, you probably were the A-hole. A-holes with lots of money can be litigious. People buying sub-median properties aren’t going to sue unless they have a damn good reason.

  121. 121

    By sleepless @ 116:

    I am not sure if anything going to change for better or worse, but I don’t see anything fundamentally changing in the government. Trump will keep ramping up the national debt, the jobs will continue to be outsourced to mexico and china, the great trump wall will not be built and mexicans will keep crossing the boarder and sucking of the gubmint tit. Nothing is going to change, i don’t even believe Trump will ever deliver on promise to repeal obamacare.

    We’ll see. The one thing I don’t see changing, and actually increasing, is the use of executive orders which are unconstitutional in scope. Trump will push the power of the Presidency even further than Obama. The only good thing in that regard is Trump is more likely to be impeached, which might finally reign in future Presidents.

    As to jobs, I don’t think Trump probably has any knowledge of the tax laws that send jobs to other countries and keeps money outside, so I’m not sure he can do much there. Trade wars would be more my concern. Then of course there’s what he might or might not do with illegal immigrants. If he does what he said he’d do (doubtful), there could be meaningful pay increases for very low income people.

  122. 122

    This is from the October Stats Listings Decline thread:

    By Kary L. Krismer @ 45:

    By Blake @ 44:

    They [Hilary and Trump] are fortunate to run against each other, because if either of them ran against almost anyone else they would lose!

    Back in 2000 I was saying that Bush and Gore were the only candidates each party could run that could lose to the other. They were very bad candidates. I think Gore only made one decent speech in his entire career, and Bush just seemed like a simple fool.

    Look how that one turned out!

    Well, history repeats itself. For the second time Democrats thought that something leftover from the Clinton Administration would make a good candidate for President. So much so that they didn’t really even try to find an alternative. And for why I don’t know. 2008 already proved Hilary was not a good candidate. The main difference between 2000 and 2016 is that Gore was merely boring, where Hilary is strongly disliked and has been for over 20 years. The Democrats could have run just about anyone else and easily beat Trump. The Republicans got lucky that Trump’s takeover didn’t sink them.

    FWIW, I don’t like either one of them, so the election only leaves me a bit surprised, not disappointed. I was disappointed months ago. I’m not even sure what to think of the effect on the Supreme Court. The Court has become much too political for me, so maybe that will be a change for the better.

  123. 123
    David B. says:

    RE: Kary L. Krismer @ 122 – “FWIW, I don’t like either one of them, so the election only leaves me a bit surprised, not disappointed. I was disappointed months ago. I’m not even sure what to think of the effect on the Supreme Court. The Court has become much too political for me, so maybe that will be a change for the better. ”

    Fat chance. It will continue to be political but in a rightward direction.

  124. 124
    David B. says:

    RE: Kary L. Krismer @ 122 – “Well, history repeats itself.”

    And it looks like Trump has also repeated Dubya’s accomplishment of winning a majority of the electoral votes without a majority of the popular ones.

  125. 125

    By David B. @ 123:

    RE: Kary L. Krismer @ 122 – “FWIW, I don’t like either one of them, so the election only leaves me a bit surprised, not disappointed. I was disappointed months ago. I’m not even sure what to think of the effect on the Supreme Court. The Court has become much too political for me, so maybe that will be a change for the better. ”

    Fat chance. It will continue to be political but in a rightward direction.

    What I meant by that is that maybe a non-politician would nominate someone less political. Under Trump they would likely be conservative (absent the mistake any President can make) but conservative in their legal views rather than their political views.

  126. 126
    Blurtman says:

    RE: pfft @ 109 – Nate Silver!!!

  127. 127
    Blurtman says:

    RE: Kary L. Krismer @ 122 – Bernie would have thumped Trump.

  128. 128

    By David B. @ 124:

    RE: Kary L. Krismer @ 122 – “Well, history repeats itself.”

    And it looks like Trump has also repeated Dubya’s accomplishment of winning a majority of the electoral votes without a majority of the popular ones.

    Which is due to the fact that large population centers not surprisingly have large populations, and they tend to vote for Democrats.

    That sort of thing is why we have the Electoral College (and the Senate)-to keep larger states from having too much power. California had almost 2.5M more people vote for Hilary than Trump, but it doesn’t matter. Colin Kaepernick gets a pass (no pun intended). The power of large states is based on their total size, and not concentrated because they tend to think the same way.

    On the topic of CA, they voted in favor of the death penalty on two initiatives. How bizarre is that. Voting overwhelmingly for Hillary but in favor of the death penalty.

    One other thing. DC went 93% for Trump. Clearly the people of DC are not anti-establishment.

  129. 129

    By Blurtman @ 127:

    RE: Kary L. Krismer @ 122 – Bernie would have thumped Trump.

    Probably. For one thing, Bernie isn’t anti-gun, which would have helped a lot in the rural areas. But the Republicans could have run someone besides Trump who would have beat Bernie. That’s the idea behind picking two candidates who are very weak–just about any change changes the result.

  130. 130
    Brian says:

    So what, if any, effect do you think a Trump presidency will have on the real estate market? Will foreign investors get spooked? Will there be regulatory changes?

  131. 131

    By Brian @ 130:

    So what, if any, effect do you think a Trump presidency will have on the real estate market? Will foreign investors get spooked? Will there be regulatory changes?

    The price of expensive mansions will go into a free fall as Hollywood celebrities move to Canada (but not Vancouver, where they will be taxed).

  132. 132
    Doug says:

    RE: Brian @ 130 – Market expecting inflation. Huge move in the 10y from overnight highs which in turn is sending the financials to the moon.

    This feels like it won’t be good for real estate. Then again real estate is a great inflation hedge so who knows.

  133. 133
    Sam Zell says:

    @Doug. Trump is going to be great for Seattle real estate in particular. They love Donald Trump for some reason: http://www.thedailybeast.com/articles/2016/07/11/china-s-strange-trump-love.html

  134. 134
    Blake says:

    RE: Kary L. Krismer @ 121
    Re: “Trump is more likely to be impeached”
    …?? By who?
    I think he’ll play ball with the Repugs in Congress…

    Trump is a know-nothing, but so was Reagan. It’ll depend on who he picks for his cabinet/advisors. At first I thought Trump would go down in flames, but now I worry that his huge tax cuts and infrastructure/deficit spending could be the stimulus the economy needed, and he my be successful! Oiii…

    With only 51 votes now needed in the Senate to confirm cabinet and lower court appointments, Trump will be able to fill his cabinet and courts with whoever he wants… it should be very interesting to say the least!

    IMHO Hillary’s “deplorables” comment was the final straw that broke this election in his favor… non-college educated whites made up 33% or the electorate and voted for Trump in record numbers with high turnout. “Trump won them by 39 percentage points, according to exit polls, far surpassing 2012 Republican nominee Mitt Romney’s 25 percent margin.”
    http://turcopolier.typepad.com/sic_semper_tyrannis/2016/11/the-revolt-of-the-deplorables.html
    The economy was their #1 issue (>50% vs. only 15% that said immigration was #1) and the Clinton/Obama neoliberalism/free trade hurt these working class Americans the most and swung Ohio, Penn, Mich, Wisconsin… Her deplorables comment confirmed their impression that the East Coast Elites have contempt for them, mobilized this large chunk of the electorate and elected Trump!
    Fact: Losing to Trump really puts Hillary in the short list of worst candidates EVER! Amazing…
    Liz Warren or Bernie would have carried those rust belt states.

  135. 135
    Blake says:

    By Doug @ 132:

    RE: Brian @ 130 – Market expecting inflation. Huge move in the 10y from overnight highs which in turn is sending the financials to the moon.

    Bonds rates dropped sharply last night, but completely reversed course today and are much higher!! As I wrote above, I think the market is anticipating a large stimulus package (tax cuts, infrastructure spending = deficits) which will also be somewhat inflationary. I’d expect the Fed to raise rates .25% asap.

  136. 136

    By Blake @ 134:

    RE: Kary L. Krismer @ 121
    Re: “Trump is more likely to be impeached”
    …?? By who?
    I think he’ll play ball with the Repugs in Congress…

    Trump is a know-nothing, but so was Reagan.

    He’s not really well liked by Republicans and if they impeach him a “real” Republican would become President. That’s why he’s more likely to be impeached. I’m not saying he will be, but it’s more likely than any other President of recent vintage. Obama killed at least two American citizens without any court oversight, and not any real talk of impeachment. I don’t think you’ll see that kind of restraint with Trump.

    Agree with you on the Reagan comment. I’ve been comparing Trump to Reagan myself.

  137. 137
    greg says:

    RE: Doug @ 115

    Most people don’t understand the polices of either Hillary or Trump, instead they vote based on “gut” how they “feel”. In this case we have just seen tens of millions of people vote directly against their best financial interests…..

    Housing is likely to continue to inflate during Trump’s reign. Of course he might not be able to implement his plans, but with all 3 branches it is very likely Trump will be able to do whatever he wants, and he clearly stated he wants to reduce taxes on the wealthy, reduce taxes on corps and reduce taxes on passive income.

    One caveat might me the impact a Trump presidency could have on foreign investment. How that plays out i really dont know.

    But I guess this is a huge win for Real estate investors…. we may well see this bubble extend for a few more years…..

    ess should be delighted!!

  138. 138
    pfft says:

    By Kary L. Krismer @ 122:

    This is from the October Stats Listings Decline thread:

    By Kary L. Krismer @ 45:

    By Blake @ 44:

    They [Hilary and Trump] are fortunate to run against each other, because if either of them ran against almost anyone else they would lose!

    Back in 2000 I was saying that Bush and Gore were the only candidates each party could run that could lose to the other. They were very bad candidates. I think Gore only made one decent speech in his entire career, and Bush just seemed like a simple fool.

    Look how that one turned out!

    Well, history repeats itself. For the second time Democrats thought that something leftover from the Clinton Administration would make a good candidate for President. So much so that they didn’t really even try to find an alternative. And for why I don’t know. 2008 already proved Hilary was not a good candidate. The main difference between 2000 and 2016 is that Gore was merely boring, where Hilary is strongly disliked and has been for over 20 years. The Democrats could have run just about anyone else and easily beat Trump. The Republicans got lucky that Trump’s takeover didn’t sink them.

    FWIW, I don’t like either one of them, so the election only leaves me a bit surprised, not disappointed. I was disappointed months ago. I’m not even sure what to think of the effect on the Supreme Court. The Court has become much too political for me, so maybe that will be a change for the better.

    Both Hillary and Gore won the popular vote.

    if you think obamacare is a mess now, wait until the repeal and whatever replaces it. up to 25 million could lose their health insurance. if it’s repealed. the republicans will find a way to mess things up.

    it look like they are going to repeal dodd-frank…

    who knows though. trump has never held office and who knows if they will get a long with ryan.

    one bright spot is TPP probably won’t get passed. right?

  139. 139

    By greg @ 137:

    In this case we have just seen tens of millions of people vote directly against their best financial interests…..

    I think you may have that backwards. For most people, particularly in the middle of the country and Clinton’s “firewall” states, the economy and jobs markets both suck. No real wage increases after inflation, no jobs for many not withstanding government unemployment data.

  140. 140
    Blurtman says:

    RE: greg @ 137 – Trump has said that assets are in a bubble, attributed to low interest rates. He has also blasted the Fed for what he perceives as a very manipulated economy. What happens to home prices if rates go up substantially?

  141. 141
    Blurtman says:

    RE: pfft @ 138 – The corrupt DNC ran a very weak candidate. It’s like the Repubs used to do – hey old Moldy is next up, let’s give him the nod.

    What happens when folks go underground and their preferences can’t be captured?

  142. 142
    pfft says:

    By sleepless @ 111:

    By pfft @ 109:

    By Doug @ 108:

    RE: pfft @ 106 – I guarantee the winner will have 270 electoral votes.

    meaning the winner will be in the 270s or 280s.

    Trump has won. pfft, you can suck it up and go and cry in your moms basement now. All you Trump supporters, I would want to see what you say about Trump not living up to the expectation when he doesn’t deliver on promise and won’t make America great again. I voted no one in this election, but I am glad the corrupt witch lost, even thought I don’t like Trump. But I will take Trump over the rotten witch any time…

    trump messes up everything. so do the republicans.

    “But I will take Trump over the rotten witch any time…”

    this is a pretty inappropriate comment. like nothing is wrong with trump? remember when he said he bribed politicians?

  143. 143
    pfft says:

    By Kary L. Krismer @ 139:

    By greg @ 137:

    In this case we have just seen tens of millions of people vote directly against their best financial interests…..

    I think you may have that backwards. For most people, particularly in the middle of the country and Clinton’s “firewall” states, the economy and jobs markets both suck. No real wage increases after inflation, no jobs for many not withstanding government unemployment data.

    kary all of those people who don’t believe the governments stats now are going to believe them when trump is in office. same with the monthly jobs numbers. suddenly if the unemployment rate is 4.7% it will be that and not 40% unemployment.

    another good thing about trump for libs is we might get an infrastructure bill.

    will schemer filibuster like republicans have to almost all of obama’s term?

  144. 144
    pfft says:

    By Blurtman @ 141:

    RE: pfft @ 138 – The corrupt DNC ran a very weak candidate. It’s like the Repubs used to do – hey old Moldy is next up, let’s give him the nod.

    What happens when folks go underground and their preferences can’t be captured?

    hillary won the popular vote. if all the votes are in. doesn’t that count for something?

  145. 145

    By pfft @ 138:

    Both Hillary and Gore won the popular vote.
    [and]
    hillary won the popular vote. if all the votes are in. doesn’t that count for something?

    That’s because of the urban areas going heavily Democratic. Again, we have the Electoral College and the Senate to keep the large states from having too much power. Winning the popular vote isn’t important because those are the rules.

    People in urban areas are much more dependent on government services than people in rural areas. It’s the difference between the way people in New Orleans reacted after Katrina and the way people in Oso reacted after the slide. Neither side can understand the other because their lives are totally different. And it affects greatly their view of politics.

  146. 146
    Blake says:

    A few observations:
    1. Last night was the “mortgage crisis” of electoral forecasting… the entire polling and election forecasting industry collapsed in a shattered heap!
    2. Trump emerged from a fierce Darwinian primary contest, while Clinton’s path was gilded by party insiders and planners – – and she still almost lost to a 75 year old Jewish socialist from Vermont!
    3. Clinton suffered her biggest losses in places where Obama was strongest among white voters… it is not a simple racism story.
    4. The President-Elect is currently under investigation for serial sexual assault, some charges involving minors.
    5. Trump is about to be in charge of the most invasive, and barely accountable, intelligence agency in the world.
    6. Finally… older, wealthier people voted for Trump.
    This is an electoral map for how young people voted: https://twitter.com/EByard/status/796317753749729280?s=03

  147. 147

    By Blake @ 145:

    6. Finally… older, wealthier people voted for Trump.

    Good points.

    As to this one it would be interesting to somehow get a breakdown on how many people voted for McGovern and then 44 years later voted for Trump and Hillary.

    My suspicion is people are more liberal in their younger years.

  148. 148
    Blake says:

    Hmmm… if the Fed has to raise rates to 6% by 2018, what do you think will happen to the housing market bubbleheads!?
    The Trump Administration Could Test Whether Deficits Help the Economy
    http://www.nytimes.com/2016/11/10/upshot/the-trump-administration-could-test-whether-deficits-help-the-economy.html
    The conservative-leaning Tax Foundation, for example, estimates that Mr. Trump’s tax plan would reduce federal revenue by about $12 trillion over the next decade, and faster growth would offset only about $2 trillion of that. Assuming that those forecasts are right and that Mr. Trump’s tax and spending plans sharply increase the deficit, the open question is what it means for the economy. For the last few years, the world has suffered from a chronic shortage of demand, depressing inflation and interest rates worldwide. If those conditions persist, a Trump administration may have some room to expand deficits without triggering a spike in interest rates that would undo any economic boost those deficits create.

    Mark Zandi, chief economist at Moody’s Analytics, was skeptical in a much-discussed paper released earlier in the year estimating the economic impact of a Trump administration. He assumed that if Mr. Trump’s policies were taken at face value, it would increase the deficit from 3.5 percent of G.D.P. this year to more than 10 percent by the end of Mr. Trump’s term. He said this would cause the Federal Reserve to raise interest rates above 6 percent in 2018 to prevent inflation.

    Even for people who don’t like Mr. Trump’s proposed tax cuts or the rest of his policy agenda, if he gets his way on taxes and infrastructure spending, it will be a test of whether deficits really matter in a world that has been locked in a slow-growth reality for years.
    (end quote)

  149. 149
    greg says:

    RE: Kary L. Krismer @ 139RE:

    I get that people are upset, and they should be, they have been ignored for decades. often i have posted here about how we need to extend the social safety net and invest in the future of this nation.
    often i have posted how the USA has become a nation of “winners and Losers” . But Trump was not the answer, he was and is part of the problem.
    I don’t want to spend two hours debating Trump’s tax policy, but having thoroughly reviewed it and digested it. It is very clear to me Trump’s policy is intended to benefit the wealthy , employers and corporations. there is virtually NOTHING there for lower income states like Wisconsin . Sure the average low wager is angry but voting for a tax system that diverts trillions of dollars to the top few percent is voting against yourself.

    Lets not pretend that cutting “tax rates” will benefit households that earn at Milwaukee income levels . Those folk will lose, and they will lose both in the short term and the longer term.

  150. 150
    greg says:

    RE: Kary L. Krismer @ 147

    I agree with people being more liberal when younger. I would add often they stay the same, but society moves to catch up or even pass them.

    When i was a kid i supported legalising weed, gay marriage and a bunch of other liberal junk. I never believed that as i aged i would go from being in a small minority to being part of the majority. Maybe by the time i am 99 i will look like a ultra conservative without having changed my views at all… who knows.. :)

  151. 151

    By greg @ 149:

    But Trump was not the answer, he was and is part of the problem.

    I would agree Trump isn’t the answer–I was just dealing with why some people are frustrated.

    Remember a while back I said my worst nightmare was a campaign between Jeb and Hillary, but that they managed to come up with an even worse constest! It’s too bad we didn’t get a tie or a state going third party so that we might have ended up with someone besides the two we were offered.

  152. 152
    Doug says:

    What’s fascinating to me is today’s market reaction. We have been told for months that a Trump presidency would send the stock market reeling. Looks like another case of Wall Street duping the muppets.

    Makes you wonder if a Hillary victory would have been a classic case of buy the rumor sell the news.

  153. 153
    Screenname345 says:

    @Doug. Agreed. Looks like there is going to be a big end of year rally now. Market was just waiting for election overhang to pass. Trump will probably be good for people who are in the market and real estate.
    Positive byproduct for those that voted against him but will still benefit I guess.

  154. 154
    Justme says:

    RE: Blake @ 148

    Right on. All the noise Trump is making about “infrastructure” tells me that he will run up the deficit more than any other president in US history. (sarc mode:) Either that or he will sell all the US Post Offices and US Mint buildings to himself and turn them into luxurious whorehouses for profit.

  155. 155
    Blurtman says:

    RE: Blake @ 146 – That 13 year old Epstein rape story was bunk.

  156. 156
    Blurtman says:

    RE: Doug @ 152 – Trump is for lower taxes and less regulation. He has discussed his dislike of Dodd-Frank. Wall Street likes that.

  157. 157
    pfft says:

    By Justme @ 154:

    RE: Blake @ 148

    Right on. All the noise Trump is making about “infrastructure” tells me that he will run up the deficit more than any other president in US history. (sarc mode:) Either that or he will sell all the US Post Offices and US Mint buildings to himself and turn them into luxurious whorehouses for profit.

    the Senate majority leader said today term limits was not going anywhere in the senate and infrastructure is a low priority. they can’t even agree amongst themselves. I don’t know how things are going to get done. take obamacare. there are huge vested interests in the law now that it passed and is up and running. hospitals could lose lots of money. insurance companies could too. big pharma is not going to like repeal. will they even agree on what repeal will be? republican governors just expanded medicaid. plus what will happen when they realize that they will throw tens of millions of the insurance rolls? the only thing worse than obamacare is a repeal and possible replace. when the republicans finally agree the dems in the Senate can filibuster.

  158. 158
    Blake says:

    By Doug @ 152:

    What’s fascinating to me is today’s market reaction. We have been told for months that a Trump presidency would send the stock market reeling. Looks like another case of Wall Street duping the muppets.

    The Intercept had a report about Trump’s top transition advisors… a bunch of lobbyists for the likes of Goldman Sachs, Aetna, Koch Industries, etc etc… I am sure they had a few conference calls with the Wall Street bigwigs last night to tell them “don’t worry… business as usual”… and the markets calmed down – – and then rallied.

    What will be interesting to watch is if and when he tries to pursue many of the things he promised in his contract, Republican insiders and big business will shut him down. I.e. No TPP, renegotiate NAFTA, trade war with China, five-year ban on officials becoming lobbyists after they leave government service.
    http://www.thetrumpcontract.com/
    What will he do?
    IMHO… it was all for show and he’ll sell out the commoners as per usual!

  159. 159
    Eastsider says:

    By Screenname345 @ 153:

    @Doug. Agreed. Looks like there is going to be a big end of year rally now. Market was just waiting for election overhang to pass. Trump will probably be good for people who are in the market and real estate.
    Positive byproduct for those that voted against him but will still benefit I guess.

    10-year treasury yield shot up .2% today. If it holds, you can expect mortgage rate to go up as much. This increase is in advanced of the .25% FED rate hike that we have been speculating for almost a year. Is higher mortgage rate good for real estate? I doubt so.

  160. 160
    Screenname345 says:

    @Eastsider, a .25% hike will have zero affect on real estate. In fact last year’s hike drove buyers. The Fed has talked about 3 hikes over the next 12 months btw. Still won’t affect real estate here especially considering over half of the transactions here are cash only. I bought my first house in the late nineties at 7%, I don’t recall that being an issue for anyone back then anyway and I am pretty sure there was way more inventory ta boot. There is nothing on the horizon to slow prices in Seattle.

  161. 161
    Eastsider says:

    By greg @ 149:

    I get that people are upset, and they should be, they have been ignored for decades. often i have posted here about how we need to extend the social safety net and invest in the future of this nation.
    often i have posted how the USA has become a nation of “winners and Losers” . But Trump was not the answer, he was and is part of the problem.
    I don’t want to spend two hours debating Trump’s tax policy, but having thoroughly reviewed it and digested it. It is very clear to me Trump’s policy is intended to benefit the wealthy , employers and corporations. there is virtually NOTHING there for lower income states like Wisconsin . Sure the average low wager is angry but voting for a tax system that diverts trillions of dollars to the top few percent is voting against yourself.

    Lets not pretend that cutting “tax rates” will benefit households that earn at Milwaukee income levels . Those folk will lose, and they will lose both in the short term and the longer term.

    Ultimately, jobs is the only way to revitalize the Rust Belt, not transfer payment. By lowering corporate tax rate to 15% to repatriate overseas profit, we may bring home 2 trillion(!) dollars. That alone will create a big boom in the economy which will benefit our workers and the economy.

  162. 162
    David B. says:

    RE: Kary L. Krismer @ 147 – “As to this one it would be interesting to somehow get a breakdown on how many people voted for McGovern and then 44 years later voted for Trump and Hillary.”

    How could one vote for *both* Trump and Hillary? You mean vote for Hillary in the 08 primary and Trump this year?

    My parents voted for both McGovern and Hillary (this year). I still remember McGovern losing super-badly in 1972. I was nine years old then. Interestingly enough, they also voted for Reagan twice.

    Egads, does this election outcome ever suck. I’ve never been much a Reagan fan but I recently watched some old YouTube videos of his press conferences. He’s just so responsible and presidential compared to what we have coming down the pike.

  163. 163
    David B. says:

    RE: pfft @ 157 – “the Senate majority leader said today term limits was not going anywhere in the senate and infrastructure is a low priority. they can’t even agree amongst themselves. ”

    I suppose Trump could surprise everyone and rule as a moderate despite campaigning as a fascist, passing things like infrastructure bills with a bipartisan coalition. We’ve entering such bizarre and surreal territory that I really can’t definitively rule out *any* possibility at this point.

  164. 164

    By David B. @ 162:

    RE: Kary L. Krismer @ 147 – “As to this one it would be interesting to somehow get a breakdown on how many people voted for McGovern and then 44 years later voted for Trump and Hillary.”

    How could one vote for *both* Trump and Hillary? You mean vote for Hillary in the 08 primary and Trump this year?

    By “breakdown” I meant showing those who voted for McGovern and Trump this year and then McGovern and Hillary this year.

  165. 165
    Eastsider says:

    By David B. @ 163:

    RE: pfft @ 157 – “the Senate majority leader said today term limits was not going anywhere in the senate and infrastructure is a low priority. they can’t even agree amongst themselves. ”

    I suppose Trump could surprise everyone and rule as a moderate despite campaigning as a fascist, passing things like infrastructure bills with a bipartisan coalition. We’ve entering such bizarre and surreal territory that I really can’t definitively rule out *any* possibility at this point.

    We will witness the art of the deal in action soon enough!

  166. 166
    Eastsider says:

    By Screenname345 @ 160:

    @Eastsider, a .25% hike will have zero affect on real estate. In fact last year’s hike drove buyers. The Fed has talked about 3 hikes over the next 12 months btw. Still won’t affect real estate here especially considering over half of the transactions here are cash only. I bought my first house in the late nineties at 7%, I don’t recall that being an issue for anyone back then anyway and I am pretty sure there was way more inventory ta boot. There is nothing on the horizon to slow prices in Seattle.

    The .2% swing in one day is a BIG deal in the massive US treasury market. That is a whopping 11.2% change and equivalent to a 2,000-point swing in the Dow Jones Industrial Average. Granted that a .25% increase in mortgage rate may have negligible effect in the short term, the trend could mean a 30-year rate going from the current 3.75% to 4.5% or even 5% in a year’s time. And if the liquidity dries up in the meantime, the higher mortgage interest rate will definitely make housing less affordable, thus driving down prices. I am not making a prediction here, just pointing out economic basics.

  167. 167
    Blake says:

    By Eastsider @ 161:

    By lowering corporate tax rate to 15% to repatriate overseas profit, we may bring home 2 trillion(!) dollars. That alone will create a big boom in the economy which will benefit our workers and the economy.

    You are living in fantasyland… The 2004 tax amnesty was a fiasco!
    http://www.wsj.com/articles/SB10001424052970203633104576623771022129888
    WASHINGTON — The 15 companies that benefited the most from a 2004 tax break for the return of their overseas profits cut more than 20,000 net jobs and decreased the pace of their research spending…

    Yeah… pass another tax holiday “for the workers.” Ha ha hah hah… the CEOS and shareholders laugh all the way to the bank! They used over 90% of it for stock buybacks and dividend hikes.

  168. 168
    sleepless says:

    Liberals go over each other in Seattle, shoot each other… so pathetic. I wonder if all those “stronger togethers” would move to Canada now. It would be nice if significant number of leftists decide to sell their homes and move out of the US. it would, after all, help the housing prices and, actually, make America great again. Do you really want a chick with a dick taking a dump next to your 6 yo daughter in the same restroom? Think about it…

  169. 169
    Eastsider says:

    RE: Blake @ 167

    The net job loss (following the 2004 tax holiday) likely would have happened anyway. We could tie the lower repatriation tax rate to investment and job creation (e.g. similar to the EB-5 Immigrant Investor Program.) Even if the repatriated profits are used for dividend payouts and stock buybacks, the money will find its way into the economy.

  170. 170
    Craig says:

    RE: S-Crow @ 103 – The discussion got blown up, of course. But a quick reply is in order.

    Your numbers are correct. I offer the services of a licensed real estate broker. I market homes without using the MLS. As a result, I can charge a very low fee, currently $5,000 (using that $500k sale price). Kary offers the services of a licensed real estate broker who employs the traditional marketing method of the MLS (which includes a split of the commission). As a result, he charges $30k or so.

    The question posed by me originally: In this historic market, does a seller need to incur that extra $25k in transaction costs to get FMV for the home? Where either way that seller employs a sales professional to market and negotiate its sale? I think the answer is obvious.

    As for your other point, yes I agree. The work alone does not “justify” working on points versus a set fee. There is some difference, and additional risk, but not commensurate with the increasing costs further up the price scale. But like I said originally here, I can only change so much in real estate…

  171. 171
    ESS says:

    A guess on the future of what will happen to the housing market in light of the current election results. Wonder if this prediction is any more accurate than the election predictions……..

    The only thing that is certain about the future is that it is uncertain

    http://www.marketwatch.com/story/what-donald-trumps-election-could-mean-for-residential-real-estate-2016-11-09

  172. 172

    By Craig @ 170:

    The question posed by me originally: In this historic market, does a seller need to incur that extra $25k in transaction costs to get FMV for the home? Where either way that seller employs a sales professional to market and negotiate its sale? I think the answer is obvious.

    Quit pretending that everyone else charges a certain percentage. Quit ignoring the fact that the bigger issue is exposure of the listing to buyers. The more buyers that know about a listing the more likely the property is to sell faster, the more likely the house will sell for a much higher price.

    The WaLaw model was inspired. Your current model is incredibly stupid. It’s a model that only offers services to sellers while mainly benefiting buyers (non-clients). I don’t even know how you thought it up and didn’t come to the conclusion that it was a really stupid idea. It’s like circuit breaker box in the shower stupid. http://i.imgur.com/GxhJbl6.png

  173. 173
    QA Buyer says:

    By Kary L. Krismer @ 128:

    By David B. @ 124:

    RE: Kary L. Krismer @ 122 – “Well, history repeats itself.”

    And it looks like Trump has also repeated Dubya’s accomplishment of winning a majority of the electoral votes without a majority of the popular ones.

    Which is due to the fact that large population centers not surprisingly have large populations, and they tend to vote for Democrats.

    That sort of thing is why we have the Electoral College (and the Senate)-to keep larger states from having too much power. California had almost 2.5M more people vote for Hilary than Trump, but it doesn’t matter. Colin Kaepernick gets a pass (no pun intended). The power of large states is based on their total size, and not concentrated because they tend to think the same way.

    On the topic of CA, they voted in favor of the death penalty on two initiatives. How bizarre is that. Voting overwhelmingly for Hillary but in favor of the death penalty.

    One other thing. DC went 93% for Trump. Clearly the people of DC are not anti-establishment.

    One other thing. DC went 93% for Trump. Clearly the people of DC are not anti-establishment.

    Kary, I think you got your stats mixed up. DC voted 94% for Clinton. Having lived there, I know the District is about as blue as it gets!

    http://wtop.com/dc/2016/11/dc-2016-general-election-results/

  174. 174
    Doug says:

    RE: Eastsider @ 166 – Correct! And we’re another 2 bps higher today.

    Might be worth The Tim updating the affordability numbers if we get a sustained move higher in rates.

  175. 175
    Craig says:

    RE: Kary L. Krismer @ 172 – You are such a pleasant man.

    I don’t “pretend” anything. My listing contract obligates seller to pay me 1% – but you won’t even tell us what you charge!!! Regardless, we know it is almost certainly 6%. You put it on the MLS, I put it on Zillow. Both of us get FMV for the property. Super simple, super straightforward.

    But I don’t expect dinosaurs to go extinct quietly. I look forward many more insults from you!! :-)

  176. 176
    Sam Hunter says:

    Very true Craig. Kary is just mad his dinosaur ass is going extinct!

    BTW be careful Craig. Tim will censor you if you disagree with him and Kary his cronie.

    No joke!

    He has taken away all my vowels. FAILING BLOG

    ABCDEFGHIJKLMNOPQRSTUVWXYZ

    S4D T1M

  177. 177
    Sam Hunter says:

    ALL,

    KARY IS PAYING TIM TO CENSOR PEOPLE WHO DISAGREE WITH HIM.

    SAD FAILING BLOG

    HE HAS TAKEN AWAY ALL MY VOWELS

    SEATTLE COMMUNIST

  178. 178
    kenmorem says:

    RE: Kary L. Krismer @ 172

    i think craig’s model is quite good. if you tell me that you, as an RE agent, provide me with $30k worth of services to sell my $500k house, i would love to see justification. in this market, a house sells virtually no matter what. bidding wars occur no matter what. the RE agent is just there to manage paperwork, not offer gads of wisdom that is supposedly mystical.

  179. 179
    pfft says:

    Trump is considering Jaimie Diamond for TresSec. how is hillary looking now?

  180. 180
    Screenname345 says:

    Guys are you watching Home Depot (HD), Lowes (LOW), homebuilders/construction etfs (XHB, PKB) last two days? Financials are rallying and going parabolic because lending standards are about to loosen along with regulation. Trump is going to create a real estate bubble for realz now. On the flip side he might through Bezos in jail! Heh.

  181. 181
    Brian says:

    Wow, 30yr mortgage interest rates I’m being quoted are already .25% higher… 3.875% vs 3.625%.

  182. 182
    Blake says:

    By pfft @ 179:

    Trump is considering Jaimie Diamond for TresSec. how is hillary looking now?

    His name is Jamie Dimon and he’s a f*cking Wall Street Democrat you idiot!I
    I thought you’d be praising this possibility as a bi-partisan selection… someone that Hillary might have selected! Your favorite man Obama praised him: “one of the smartest bankers we’ve got!”
    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jamie_Dimon
    Political endeavors: Dimon donates primarily to the Democratic Party… After Obama won the 2008 presidential election, there was speculation that Dimon would serve in the Obama Administration as Secretary of the Treasury… Dimon has had close ties to some people in the Obama White House, including former Chief of Staff Rahm Emanuel. Dimon was one of three CEOs—along with Lloyd Blankfein and Vikram Pandit—said by the Associated Press to have had liberal access to former Treasury Secretary Timothy Geithner.”

  183. 183
    Doug says:

    RE: Screenname345 @ 180 – Financials are rallying because the long end is selling off, not because lending is about to loosen. “Long end selling off” means investors are selling the 10y UST causing the yield to increase.

    I mentioned the other day I like real assets which is a bet on low interest rates and perhaps more QE. I also mentioned you could hedge that by going long the financials which would rally if rates rose.

    Banks borrow short and lend long, referred to as Net Interest Margin. In the last 3 days they have dramatically increased the return on lending while the rate at which they fund themselves has remained the same.

  184. 184
    Blurtman says:

    RE: pfft @ 179 – She’d have considered chum Robert Rubin for a return trip.

    Look out Dodd-Frank!

  185. 185
    pfft says:

    By Blake @ 182:

    By pfft @ 179:

    Trump is considering Jaimie Diamond for TresSec. how is hillary looking now?

    His name is Jamie Dimon and he’s a f*cking Wall Street Democrat you idiot!I

    I don’t blindly follow dems. I don’t think he would make a good treasury secretary.

    since we are talking about donations, trump and his whole family gave money to clinton in 2006 when she was up for Senate reelection.

    Diamond gives more to Dems but he’s given nearly $50,000 to Republicans over the years.

    The Dimons have also been somewhat generous to politicians on the other side of the aisle, contributing $48,800 to Republicans.

    https://www.opensecrets.org/news/2009/07/jpmorgan-ceo-jamie-dimon-donat/

  186. 186
    pfft says:

    By Blurtman @ 184:

    RE: pfft @ 179 – She’d have considered chum Robert Rubin for a return trip.

    Look out Dodd-Frank!

    you know that Trump wants to get rid of dodd-frank?

    Trump’s Transition Team Pledges to Dismantle Dodd-Frank Act
    http://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2016-11-10/trump-s-transition-team-pledges-to-dismantle-dodd-frank-act

  187. 187
    Justme says:

    RE: Doug @ 183

    Today is that special day when I agree with almost an entire post that Doug made with the exception of “liking” real assets.

  188. 188
    Justme says:

    RE: Kary L. Krismer @ 120

    >>Somewhat out of context, but I used to say that if you lived on Lake Washington there was a 50% chance one of your two neighbors was an A-hole, and if not, you probably were the A-hole. A-holes with lots of money can be litigious.

    Does overpaying for real estate tend to make people into A-holes? YES
    Does people who are already A-holes tend to overpay for real estate? YES

  189. 189

    By Craig @ 175:

    Both of us get FMV for the property.

    Nope, your model would get less. I’ve explained why repeatedly. I suspect you know what I say is true and you’re just trolling for more gullible victims/clients.

  190. 190

    By kenmorem @ 178:

    RE: Kary L. Krismer @ 172

    i think craig’s model is quite good. if you tell me that you, as an RE agent, provide me with $30k worth of services to sell my $500k house, i would love to see justification. in this market, a house sells virtually no matter what. bidding wars occur no matter what. the RE agent is just there to manage paperwork, not offer gads of wisdom that is supposedly mystical.

    Bidding wars don’t occur no matter what. You need multiple interested persons and you need to not overprice. Of course you also need a buyer that can perform at the higher price if they are borrowing the money, so appraised value is a concern if they don’t have extra cash. Bidding wars can easily provide $30,000 of extra proceeds even on houses priced below $500,000.

    When I represent a buyer I love agents who don’t have an offer review date or some alternative method to keep the property on the market, and are willing to accept an offer before the property has even been on the market over one weekend. It’s great. If I had a buyer client interested in one of Craig’s listings that would be even better. The less competition the better.

  191. 191

    By pfft @ 179:

    Trump is considering Jaimie Diamond for TresSec. how is hillary looking now?

    On Facebook I suggested it would be Penn Jillette.

  192. 192
    Blake says:

    RE: pfft @ 185
    It’s so funny pfft, because by pointing out that Trump might appoint Dimon – a Democrat and a man Obama praised and a man Hillary may have also considered – you inadvertently point out the narrowness between the corporate Dems and frickin’ Donald Trump!

    I don’t think Trump will appoint Dimon… he would be ridiculed relentlessly after campaigning to “drain the swamp” – – Jamie is king of the swamp!

    Meanwhile… Bernie and Liz are throwing down the gauntlet and reaching out to Trump to fulfill his campaign promises to improve the lives of working families in this country… What will the Donald do? https://www.donaldjtrump.com/contract/
    http://www.ibtimes.com/political-capital/elizabeth-warren-bernie-sanders-tell-donald-trump-theyll-work-him-key-economic
    In a speech at the nation’s largest labor federation, Massachusetts Democratic Sen. Elizabeth Warren said Americans are right to be angry that “Washington dithers and spins and does the backstroke in an ocean of money, while the American Dream moves further and further out of reach for too many families.” She credited Trump for spotlighting the problem.

    “President-Elect Trump spoke to these issues. Republican elites hated him for it. But he didn’t care,” she told the AFL-CIO. “So let me be 100 percent clear about this. When President-Elect Trump wants to take on these issues, when his goal is to increase the economic security of middle class families, then count me in. I will put aside our differences and I will work with him to accomplish that goal. I offer to work as hard as I can and to pull as many people as I can into this effort. If Trump is ready to go on rebuilding economic security for millions of Americans, so am I and so are a lot of other people-Democrats and Republicans.”

    Sen. Bernie Sanders, the Vermont independent who challenged Hillary Clinton for the Democratic nomination, expressed a similar sentiment.

    “Trump tapped into the anger of a declining middle class that is sick and tired of establishment economics, establishment politics and the establishment media,” he said in a press release. “To the degree that Mr. Trump is serious about pursuing policies that improve the lives of working families in this country, I and other progressives are prepared to work with him.”

  193. 193
    Blurtman says:

    RE: pfft @ 186 – Yes, reduced regulation. That will likely cause another bubble. Bullish on RE. Then folks may think of getting out before that one pops.

  194. 194
    Blurtman says:

    RE: Blake @ 192 – Wow!

  195. 195
    Blake says:

    By Justme @ 188:

    RE: Kary L. Krismer @ 120

    Somewhat out of context, but I used to say that if you lived on Lake Washington there was a 50% chance one of your two neighbors was an A-hole, and if not, you probably were the A-hole. A-holes with lots of money can be litigious.

    Does overpaying for real estate tend to make people into A-holes? YES
    Does people who are already A-holes tend to overpay for real estate? YES

    I grew up out east in New Jersey and Connecticut around a lot of wealthy people. From a very young age I realized quite clearly that money does not buy happiness and – to the contrary – the most horrible people I knew were the wealthiest. (Including some relatives…) Partly it is that a-holes like Trump constantly screw people over in contracts and payments and lawsuits enriching themselves, but it is also that the idle rich have so much time to just sit around and stew and complain about all the “ingrates” and “leaches.” IMO these miserable rich are sick people… narcissistic sociopaths. Wouldn’t want them as neighbors… or leaders!
    https://www.amazon.com/Sociopath-Next-Door-Martha-Stout/dp/0767915828/

  196. 196
    cm says:

    RE: pfft @ 35 – hillary is going to win, get used to a woman president!

    How’d that work out for you?

  197. 197
    sleepless says:

    People, look at Trump’s cabinet, it is filled with corporate establishment. Same crooks who have been raping this country for decades now start start filling the spots. Drain the swamp? Are you kidding me? You can forget most of what Trump promised, 99% will not be delivered. What you can expect from Trump: more corporate welfare (lower taxes, repealing Dodd-Frank, etc), more military spendings, more spying on the citizens, expanding executive powers, more of the same. What you wouldn’t expect from Trump: draining the swamp – the same crooks will be around, he will not build the wall, neither he will stop the flood of illegals to the country, he will not repeal obamacare, even if he does, he will replace it with even worse trump care, he will not take the US out of NATO, neither other countries will start paying for their “protection”, he will not prosecute Clintons family for their crimes. You are delusional if you believe electing Trump changes anything. He might not be a radical as Clinton, but he is not much different for the “establishment”.

  198. 198

    RE: sleepless @ 197 – I wouldn’t disagree with much of that, but I’d take reports about what Trump’s cabinet will look like with a huge grain of salt. I don’t think his transition team is that far along, and reportedly they hadn’t even discussed the topic with him prior to Wednesday, if even then.

    But also, for some of those posts he almost has to pick from Congress or corporations and people are going to female dog about that either way.

  199. 199

    Here’s a good piece on something I’ve discussed a lot–Obama’s extreme use of Executive Orders and decrees. By having gone that route much of what he did will disappear the first week of a Trump Presidency, as a simple signature will make them disappear, but also Trump will feel emboldened to sign his own Executive Orders–the point of this piece.

    http://thelibertarianrepublic.com/liberal-tolerance-trump/

  200. 200
    Craig says:

    RE: Kary L. Krismer @ 189 – Oh. So you KNOW that your model gets a higher price than mine, every time. Your “fair market value” price to be obtained is higher than mine. Hmm.

    Kary, I hate to tell you this, but you don’t have a crystal ball. You don’t have the ability to see the future. You don’t. But it sure does help your business if you can convince people otherwise. Like I said, dude, you’re the All Knowing Oz. Sad.

    Kenmorem, you are right on.

  201. 201

    RE: Craig @ 200 – Craig, I get that you need to drag gullible people to your failed model. (For those who don’t know, Quill Realty failed and Craig is already on the second firm of this model.) So you have to pop up here from time to time in a desperate attempt to lure suckers, I mean clients. But either quit denying what I’m saying, make a legitimate argument against it, or admit you don’t understand real estate and the real estate market.

    As I said in another thread I’d have no problem with what you’re doing if your pitch was something like: “Do you hate the standard real estate model and are willing to try to change it even if it means it will cost you money?” That would be fine. But to mislead consumers with claims regarding how many people start their search on the Internet or claiming a 5% savings, I find that is nothing short of disgusting. I don’t know how you sleep at night.

  202. 202
    Eastsider says:

    The Trump administration should look into monopolistic practices of the real estate industry. Many developed countries have RE commissions at far less than half of what consumers pay in the Untied States. The only people defending the 6% commissions are the beneficiaries of the extortion scheme.

    Such practices are similar to those of medical monopolies. E.g. “Let’s take an example of how these low costs work. In Denver, where I live, if you get an MRI of your neck region it’s $1,200, and the doctor we visited in Japan says he gets $98 for an MRI.” April 15, 2008, Interviews – Naoki Ikegami | Sick Around The World | FRONTLINE | PBS.

  203. 203

    RE: Eastsider @ 202 – That’s probably due to our insurance system, not monopoly. Unless maybe Japan doesn’t license doctors. (Actually, I doubt that’s even true, unless MRI machines are now a lot cheaper than what they were.)

  204. 204
    Anonymous says:

    I am looking at houses and I saw this come up in Bellevue. https://www.redfin.com/WA/Bellevue/13828-NE-48th-Pl-98005/home/430369

    I asked my realtor why it was sold in 9/26/16 for $855k and now on 11/9/16 it listed for $1.05. She asked the listing agent and they said they bought it for a deal and cleaned it and 6 weeks later are flipping it for $150k more for cleaning it. No updates, nothing different just hired some people to clean.

    I wonder if this will sell? 20% in 6 weeks?

  205. 205
    Eastsider says:

    RE: Kary L. Krismer @ 203

    Drug prices (e.g. EpiPen) is obviously another example. Stop giving excuses for blatant monopolistic practices. Medical and real estate industries both contribute heavily to politicians to maintain their monopolies. It’s about time to drain the swamp and lower burdens on the society.

  206. 206
    Eastsider says:

    By Brian @ 181:

    Wow, 30yr mortgage interest rates I’m being quoted are already .25% higher… 3.875% vs 3.625%.

    The 10-yr UST rate has gone up .3% in the last 5 days. That translates directly to higher mortgage interest rates. So it is not inconceivable that mortgage rate will hit 4.5%-5% in the next year as I mentioned above.

    Now explain how home prices will go up in face of higher interest rate…

  207. 207

    By Eastsider @ 205:

    RE: Kary L. Krismer @ 203

    Drug prices (e.g. EpiPen) is obviously another example. Stop giving excuses for blatant monopolistic practices. Medical and real estate industries both contribute heavily to politicians to maintain their monopolies. It’s about time to drain the swamp and lower burdens on the society.

    Actually the EpiPen is another good example of the effect of insurance. You have two similar products, and then one goes off market. The price of the other one will rise as a result, but because of insurance maybe 70% of the customers buying the product are not impacted by the price increases. That means the price increases for the rest have to be even greater than what they otherwise would be.

    In the past I noted the cost increases of Nasonex and the cost of prescription Prilosec vs OTC Prilosec. I assume Nasonex has probably dropped now that there are so many OTC options, but it is probably still much higher than the OTC options. And I assume the prescription Prilosec is still more expensive than Prilosec OTC. (With the demise of Drugstore.com I don’t have a good source for pricing now.)

    In a way, insurance is similar to price controls–it adversely affects the market and leads to some absurd results.

    BTW, when you’re talking about prescription drugs you are by definition talking about a monopoly, unless there is a generic or other substitute available. When you’re talking real estate you’re not dealing with a monopoly at all. There are low barriers to entry.

  208. 208

    RE: sleepless @ 113
    Did You Notice on Trump’s Victory?

    The elite with no skin in the game or backbone voted progressive…..hence Trump didn’t take Wash St, Oregon or California. Trump wasted no money on us, he already had Florida, Ohio, North Carolina, etc….when he grabbed a big chunk of ethic votes there….yes Latinos for Trump….LOL

  209. 209

    RE: Eastsider @ 202
    Its So Nice to Have a Business Major in the WH

    I’m so sick of attorneys [on both sides of issues] not obeying Constitutional Laws and tying up everything in courts….what jobs does this produce? Nada, IOWs.

  210. 210

    By softwarengineer @ 209:

    RE: Eastsider @ 202
    Its So Nice to Have a Business Major in the WH.

    Wasn’t W (Bush) an MBA? MBA is the most over-rated degree ever.

  211. 211

    RE: Kary L. Krismer @ 207 – One more thing about prescription drugs. If the Affordable Care Act had made TV ads for prescription drugs illegal, as has been the case for cigarettes for decades, it actually would have done something to make prices affordable rather than just having an Orwellian name.

  212. 212
    Eastsider says:

    RE: Kary L. Krismer @ 211

    Stop spilling the nonsense. A simple act to allow consumers to import drugs from Canada will crash drug prices in a hurry.

  213. 213
    pfft says:

    By softwarengineer @ 209:

    RE: Eastsider @ 202
    Its So Nice to Have a Business Major in the WH

    I’m so sick of attorneys [on both sides of issues] not obeying Constitutional Laws and tying up everything in courts….what jobs does this produce? Nada, IOWs.

    how many times has trump declared bankruptcy? how times has one of his ventures failed? trump inherited a lot of money and would have been better off putting it into index funds. in business terms he has destroyed value not created it.

    Trump Worth $10 Billion Less Than If He’d Simply Invested in Index Funds
    http://finance.yahoo.com/news/why-probably-better-investing-donald-233020366.html

  214. 214
    pfft says:

    By cm @ 196:

    RE: pfft @ 35 – hillary is going to win, get used to a woman president!

    How’d that work out for you?

    well she did get more votes.

    how’s trump working out? Diamond as Treasury Secretary? Chris Christie is so unpopular in NJ he wouldn’t get reelected. He’s leading trump’s transition team. he’s going to help trump staff our government. meanwhile some from christie’s are going to jail for bridge gate. how’s that draining the swamp going?

    trump’s repeal and replace of obamacare is going to cost $500,000,000,000 dollar and throw 21,000,000 off of their insurance.

    trumpcare will cost $500 billion. but bernie and hillary were going to bankrupt us? $500 billion added to the deficit in one of his first acts are president! I think that was the cost over ten years of bernie’s college plan. trump will use that money to throw people off of their insurance plan and bernie would have educated our younger generation.

  215. 215

    By Eastsider @ 212:

    RE: Kary L. Krismer @ 211

    Stop spilling the nonsense. A simple act to allow consumers to import drugs from Canada will crash drug prices in a hurry.

    Please explain how having an alternative idea that might also help somehow makes my idea nonsense? No need to answer that–I know you don’t have a clue.

    But if any idea is nonsense it’s yours. If that happened, the price of drugs in Canada would rise. Do you think they would do something to stop that, like prevent the export? Naive much?

  216. 216
    Screenname345 says:

    By Eastsider @ 206:

    By Brian @ 181:

    Wow, 30yr mortgage interest rates I’m being quoted are already .25% higher… 3.875% vs 3.625%.

    The 10-yr UST rate has gone up .3% in the last 5 days. That translates directly to higher mortgage interest rates. So it is not inconceivable that mortgage rate will hit 4.5%-5% in the next year as I mentioned above.

    Now explain how home prices will go up in face of higher interest rate…

    Fyi, “Jeffrey Gundlach says Treasury yield rise about 80 percent of the way through”.

    Per Tony Dwyer ” 1-day US 10-yr rate spikes of >5% have led to SPX gains six months later EVERY time since 1962.”

    Gold cratering all week.

    Against all predictions it looks like we are going to be in a goldilocks scenerio for the economy and financial markets next year at least. It’s going to take Trump a year or so into office to start screwing up things if he does.

  217. 217
    pfft says:

    By sleepless @ 197:

    People, look at Trump’s cabinet, it is filled with corporate establishment. Same crooks who have been raping this country for decades now start start filling the spots. Drain the swamp? Are you kidding me? You can forget most of what Trump promised, 99% will not be delivered. What you can expect from Trump: more corporate welfare (lower taxes, repealing Dodd-Frank, etc), more military spendings, more spying on the citizens, expanding executive powers, more of the same. What you wouldn’t expect from Trump: draining the swamp – the same crooks will be around, he will not build the wall, neither he will stop the flood of illegals to the country, he will not repeal obamacare, even if he does, he will replace it with even worse trump care, he will not take the US out of NATO, neither other countries will start paying for their “protection”, he will not prosecute Clintons family for their crimes. You are delusional if you believe electing Trump changes anything. He might not be a radical as Clinton, but he is not much different for the “establishment”.

    if I lived in eastern europe trump’s nato comments would scare me.

  218. 218
    whatsmyname says:

    By Eastsider @ 206:

    The 10-yr UST rate has gone up .3% in the last 5 days. That translates directly to higher mortgage interest rates. So it is not inconceivable that mortgage rate will hit 4.5%-5% in the next year as I mentioned above.

    Now explain how home prices will go up in face of higher interest rate…

    Well, let’s do a thought experiment on that very thing. Let’s pretend that we live in an area where the homeownership rate is down significantly from where it was 10 years ago. That suggests either changing preferences or pent up demand. Let’s suppose also, that the population is growing rapidly; possibly faster than housing, but certainly faster than owner occupied housing. And let’s suppose a lot of the newcomers have and make better than median money.

    Let us suppose that low interest rates have made houses “more affordable” than they used to be for debt based buyers. That would suggest cushion to expand debt risk for those who were really motivated. If we also had record numbers of cash sales, that would imply even more possibility to absorb more debt for the truly motivated.

    Let’s suppose supply/demand is such that a lot of houses are getting multiple offers over asking, yet many others are just waiting out the unpleasant levels of competition, and hoping for better value later. Now let us imagine that with all that demand, and all that capacity, the debt driven buyers are looking at a higher cost future quite outside of anything in the RE market. Suppose that waiting means the same money will cost more for that cohort, but that many competitor bidders do not have that pressure.

    If the higher rates cause a recession, then prices will not go up and probably go down – where there is a recession. But if not, and where not, then higher rates will create an urgency for many to bid and buy. More bidders with more capacity makes for higher prices. Put another way, if you had 2007 level demand that was not dependent upon the supply of marginal credit, and only half the inventory, where would prices go?

    I don’t know the future. Higher rates could well cause a recession in Seattle. But they could also cause higher prices in Seattle. Be careful what you wish for.

  219. 219

    RE: whatsmyname @ 218

    Rates are up, the question is whether or not this is a short term blip or will they be higher or lower a week from now. Is it a knee jerk reaction to the election at this point, without regard to future real change due to policy shifts?

    Also, could be my imagination but I think I am seeing more inventory in the last few days. I do expect inventory to rise a bit, not because people are leaving the Country but because those who were holding on to “accidental landlord” properties were not wanting to sell before the upswing was complete. They are nervous enough to be dumping the rental properties that they never had intention of owning as rental properties and only rented them because they were underwater. In fact anyone who was thinking of selling but holding on because of the market upswing is likely nervous enough at this point to end the greed and take their gains now.

    Maybe that all will mean 4 offers instead of 8 to 16 that I was seeing the week before, which would have zero impact on the stats. But it’s a good time to pay attention to the detail of what is selling vs just noting that it sold for more than asking in less than a week. What we will see first are fewer offers to sell in the same time, and that will not appear in the data except possibly as to bid outs being for less of a % over asking. But I don’t think so. I think it will go to fewer offers partially due to higher rates, partially due to more inventory and partially due to a big shake up of consumer confidence.

    As to leaving the Country, I do think some non-citizens here on work visas may leave and have already heard that as a possibility. I do think there is a possibility that fewer people from other Countries will agree to come here on work visas than in the past, if they are relatively happy where they are in their own Country.

    All of these things will move to a small degree and impact the market on a combined basis, I think causing it to become flat as best case scenario in the next 6 to 12 months. Though a lot can happen in the 2nd quarter of next year to change that.

  220. 220
    Eastsider says:

    RE: whatsmyname @ 218

    As you brought up, there had been record numbers of cash sales in the past few years. This is not normal, and is probably due to QEs and foreign money.

    USD has been on a tear since election, i.e. our RE is becoming more expensive to foreign buyers. We saw what happened to Vancouver RE when foreigners left.

    There are many variables affecting RE prices. But after a bull run unparalleled in history, my gut feel is it is too late to the party.

  221. 221
    Blurtman says:

    RE: pfft @ 217 – Them dang Rooskies! Let’s git ’em!

    Cannon to right of them,
    Cannon to left of them,
    Cannon behind them
    Volley’d and thunder’d;
    Storm’d at with shot and shell,
    While horse and hero fell,
    They that had fought so well
    Came thro’ the jaws of Death
    Back from the mouth of Hell,
    All that was left of them,
    Left of six hundred.

  222. 222
    Eastsider says:

    By Kary L. Krismer @ 215:

    But if any idea is nonsense it’s yours. If that happened, the price of drugs in Canada would rise. Do you think they would do something to stop that, like prevent the export? Naive much?

    Hahaha. Do you expect me to respond to this twisted argument from you? I can see this is going nowhere. I rest my case.

  223. 223

    On the EpiPen topic, per this article part of the reason for the huge price increase is you now have to buy two of them! Most articles (including this one) don’t mention the competing product going off the market, but I’ve yet to see one mention needing to buy two. Rather deceptive reporting if true.

    http://jessejones.com/story/epipen-manufacturer-posts-third-quarter-losses-of-119-8m/

    The GoodRX.com site there has data that the price of Nasonex has only moderated slightly, but Prilosec has dropped like a rock!

  224. 224

    By Eastsider @ 222:

    By Kary L. Krismer @ 215:

    But if any idea is nonsense it’s yours. If that happened, the price of drugs in Canada would rise. Do you think they would do something to stop that, like prevent the export? Naive much?

    Hahaha. Do you expect me to respond to this twisted argument from you? I can see this is going nowhere. I rest my case.

    Twisted? Do you have a clue at all about the concepts of supply and demand? No need to answer, it’s clear you don’t. You are incredibly ignorant.

    It’s actually really amazing to me how so many people on a site that is mainly concerned about the price of real estate don’t have half a clue about economic issues. No wonder Craig can convince some gullible sellers to try is method of selling, and why he thinks this is a ripe market for potential clients.

  225. 225
    whatsmyname says:

    RE: Ardell DellaLoggia @ 219 – Rates are up, and that is consistent with a lot of longstanding political pressures, and uncertainty, but also with a rising stock market. Still, at this point it just seems to noisy to tell; who knows what policies will really be? And what about China? Lot’s of hope for an upward drift, but I think a strong upward movement without real inflation would be recessionary which would force them right back down. I think a lot of other places in the country would find a new recession a lot more painful than here, so I think there is real pressure there. But who knows?

    I really liked the information in your comments on the local market. It is fun to learn new things. It will be interesting to watch the inventory numbers for accidental landlords. I am surprised to say that I know 2 people who are planning to become landlords with the houses they currently have.

    I think 4 offers instead of 8 would still mean increasing prices, especially if lower prices tomorrow are likely higher payments tomorrow anyway. I think people do the theoretical math. I still don’t think rates will rise very quickly, but if it seemed possible and you were looking at the affordability razor – which risk do you take? Do you think the departing visa workers will be replaced with American workers? Or will the jobs just go back with them? Or will they go to yet another country?

    It sure promises to be an interesting year.

  226. 226
    whatsmyname says:

    RE: Eastsider @ 220 – It’s very early to know what’s happened to the Vancouver market: Sales down, starts down, prices – not so much. And what’s happened to those buyers? The media says that some portion of them are redirected here now. That doesn’t seem like a precursor for decline. If one has cash to stash in offshore RE, I think one can find a property that fits. I think the currency issue goes more to “where is the currency heading?” That is a different consideration than a tax. I do agree it feels late, but there is a whole country waiting to be lifted up. I don’t know if they’ll get that. Change is opportunity for someone. It might not be us. Or it might be.

    I almost forgot my item for potential threat to real estate prices: ST3
    High RE taxes are bad for prices, but still don’t make life cheaper for buyers.

  227. 227
    Screenname345 says:

    The USD had a huge spike in 2014 it only brought more foreign money here. It’s been in a range ever since, don’t see signs of it breaking out if you look at the $USD chart. It is not even at the peak in Feb 2014.

    I know people are not happy with our president elect but anyone in the stock market has seen their portfolios go up at least 5% this week and that is being conservative. For those of us who grew up in NYC, we already know Trump is a clown. He will disappear and party for the next 4 years, but he will make sure to enrich himself with favorable financial policy like a good Republican.

    I am actually optimistic he is going to surround himself with good people if the rumor about Jamie Dimon is anywhere near true. I read last night Al Gore reached out to him about heading up climate change policy. What if, I mean, what if this guy actually does prove us all wrong? I am trying to stay open minded at least.

  228. 228
    ARDELL says:

    RE: whatsmyname @ 225

    As to your 2 people deciding to become landlords, I too see no change as to new landlords. I am talking about people who left their homes purchased at peak but rented them because they were underwater at the time they left. Those that hung on past break even point. Having tasted potential loss, they are more prone to take their gains now than risk being back to where they were when they converted to rental status.

    Consumer confidence decline will boost or at least bolster rent prices. But the gamble that they could end up back in the red from peak price when they purchased in 2007 is causing them to let go now.

    I am not unnerved by the Trump win myself, but locally that is not the general feeling. Perception vs reality is more likely to cause problems here vs nationally unless people adjust their thinking quickly.

    Kind of answers the shadow inventory question someone raised earlier. Shadow inventory comes into the market in small enough doses to be barely noticed except on an anecdotal basis.

  229. 229
    ess says:

    By whatsmyname @ 226:

    RE: <a

    I almost forgot my item for potential threat to real estate prices: ST3
    High RE taxes are bad for prices, but still don't make life cheaper for buyers.

    Maybe yes, maybe no. Remember – ST3 taxes are across the board for properties that are both owner occupied as well as rentals. If Puget Sound continues to be a tight buyers and renter’s market, those increases will work their way into both markets. Both renters and homeowners are going to be paying for this very expensive system for many years to come.

  230. 230
    Screenname345 says:

    The USD spiked in 2014 and topped out. If anything there is an argument it brought more foreign money here not less. It’s been in a range ever since, even after this week. What’s interesting is if you look at the chart it looks like a head and shoulders pattern is forming and it’s going to drop next year!

    I understand many of us are disappointed about the election but the stock market was up 5% this week. Like I already pointed up housing related stocks all had huge rallies. Don’t be one of those people who is too slow to profit, because things are happening right now and a very clear trend has emerged or is emerging.

    Trump is going to be Bush 2.0. All asset classes are going up. Then IMHO a bubble will form and pop eventually. Anyone who grew up in NYC knows Trump is most likely going to be too busy partying the next 4 years but hopefully the heavy lifting will be done by sane credible people like Jamie Dimon.

  231. 231

    By Kary L. Krismer @ 198:

    RE: sleepless @ 197 – I wouldn’t disagree with much of that, but I’d take reports about what Trump’s cabinet will look like with a huge grain of salt. I don’t think his transition team is that far along, and reportedly they hadn’t even discussed the topic with him prior to Wednesday, if even then.

    This shakeup would tend to confirm my suspicions. Ira will love the fact that one of his least favorite politicians was demoted!

    http://www.bloomberg.com/politics/articles/2016-11-11/pence-said-to-replace-christie-as-head-of-trump-transition

  232. 232
    Andrew says:

    RE: ARDELL @ 227 – IMO if the accidental landlords don’t see benefits of rental income then yes more likely once they get their money back, perhaps plus some, they would rather exit the game. However, if the experience being a landlord wasn’t discouraging wouldn’t they be inclined to keep doing it? also having been able to weather the downturn might increase confidence to look at longer trend of investment. Is rental demand, driving income from that aspect, insignificant/volatile that being a landlord for those folks might not produce break-even with monthly payment (or if property was bought without leverage, the operating cost + capital expenses)?

  233. 233
    Anonymous Coward says:

    By Eastsider @ 212:

    RE: Kary L. Krismer @ 211

    Stop spilling the nonsense. A simple act to allow consumers to import drugs from Canada will crash drug prices in a hurry.

    What would stop the drug companies from raising their Canadian prices?

  234. 234

    By Anonymous Coward @ 232:

    By Eastsider @ 212:

    RE: Kary L. Krismer @ 211

    Stop spilling the nonsense. A simple act to allow consumers to import drugs from Canada will crash drug prices in a hurry.

    What would stop the drug companies from raising their Canadian prices?

    My argument was they would raise their prices. It would be in response to the increased demand from US buyers. And the rest of my argument was that Canada would act to ban the export of drugs, which would return demand and prices to the prior levels.

    Drug prices are different in different countries due to different demand in different countries, primarily due to different income levels and different health systems (insurance, etc.). No country wants the US demand driving up their prices. This is somewhat similar to the discussion we’ve been having about foreign buyers driving up the prices of real estate in Vancouver, and the government reacting to that increased foreign demand.

  235. 235

    RE: Kary L. Krismer @ 233 – Anonymous Coward, I mistakenly thought you were asking me that.

  236. 236
    whatsmyname says:

    RE: ess @ 228 – The thing is, taxes are a recurring expense, a drag on the value of the asset. On a rental, you can enhance your efforts to pass the expense along, diminishing the effect. On your residence, you can only pass that on to yourself, and eventually the next owner gets the same thing. I’m not saying it will be huge. But it will be a negative.

  237. 237
    Eastsider says:

    By Anonymous Coward @ 232:

    What would stop the drug companies from raising their Canadian prices?

    The following Slate article answers your question. All developed countries spend far less on drugs. Remove the artificial barriers and drug prices will collapse immediately. The same monopolistic practices are prevalent throughout the industry. That is the primary reason why healthcare is so expensive. If we just get rid of medical monopolies, most middle income families will be able to afford healthcare on their own and purchase additional catastrophic insurance for unforeseen circumstances.

    I haven’t researched this. But I suspect we are spending more on health insurance premiums than other developed countries spend on actual healthcare. Without subsidies, many families are paying $20k Obamacare premiums next year. Think about it!

    Why Do Drugs Cost Less in Canada?
    http://www.slate.com/articles/news_and_politics/explainer/2000/05/why_do_drugs_cost_less_in_canada.html

  238. 238
    Anonymous Coward says:

    RE: Eastsider @ 236 – Thank you. According to the article, the answer is”price controls”. How’s that working out for Venezuela? Where 30% of all hospital admissions now end in the death of the patient….

  239. 239
    Eastsider says:

    By Anonymous Coward @ 237:

    RE: Eastsider @ 236 – Thank you. According to the article, the answer is”price controls”. How’s that working out for Venezuela? Where 30% of all hospital admissions now end in the death of the patient….

    So what is the opposite of ‘price controls’? To allow big pharma to get away with high prices through monopolistic practices? It makes no sense when consumers are forced to pay significantly higher prices for the same drugs available in other developed countries! Note I am not advocating price control here. But we should not impose artificial geographical barriers to prop up prices. Would you allow Tesla to sell its cars at 5 times the price it sells in Canada?

  240. 240
  241. 241
    pfft says:

    And so it begins. Trump will repeal obamacare and replace it with trumpcare. it will cost $500 billion and will make 21 million uninsured.

    Now Ryan is going to voucherize medicare.

    what is wrong with these people that they would do this to human beings?

    Paul Ryan just announced his plans to phase out Medicare with privatization using vouchers
    http://www.dailykos.com/story/2016/11/11/1596527/-Paul-Ryan-just-announced-his-plans-to-phase-out-Medicare-with-privatization-using-vouchers

  242. 242
    ess says:

    By whatsmyname @ 235:

    RE: ess @ 228 – The thing is, taxes are a recurring expense, a drag on the value of the asset. On a rental, you can enhance your efforts to pass the expense along, diminishing the effect. On your residence, you can only pass that on to yourself, and eventually the next owner gets the same thing. I’m not saying it will be huge. But it will be a negative.

    Point taken. But at least the homeowner gets a larger tax write off if they are itemizing.

    Most renters have no personal relationship between the real estate taxes that are voted on by the public and their rent, although renters indirectly pay for real estate taxes and these tax increases.

    And of course with this more or less permanent tax increase, it just got a bit harder for a renter with marginal earning power to afford to own their own residence, prices and interest rates remaining equal.

    Plus I wonder how many former renters who finally become homeowners are more than a little annoyed when they discover just how high real estate taxes are, and start to view these initiatives in a new and different light.

    And we should count or blessings – both in California for buyers, as well as on the east coast – property taxes are out of sight. I have a couple of friends who own houses back there that are worth about what my house is, and their real estate taxes are double the amount I currently pay. And in both states they have sales and state income taxes.

  243. 243
    greg says:

    RE: Kary L. Krismer @ 233

    Kary you are perhaps the most ignorant poster I have ever read on this board.

    I told you before, STICK TO RE , you don’t have clue about the greater world and you repeatedly make a fool of yourself.

    I recall not so long ago you thought VAT in the EU was in fact the primary tax!! when in reality is it just a sales tax.

    Now you are spouting on about Canada and cross border drug sales.

    let me help you , Canada caps drug prices based on the prices charged in a basket of countries ( US and mostly EU off the top of my head)

    The only way drug prices can go above the state mandated price is if the state decides to increase the price, and they are highly unlikely to.

    Now I know you will twist and turn and look to find some tangent to claim you are right. But sorry you completely balls up….

  244. 244
    Blake says:

    By pfft @ 240:

    Paul Ryan just announced his plans to phase out Medicare with privatization using vouchers

    Think about it pfft… Medicare is a very popular program. Ryan and his colleagues in Congress are both stupid… and widely reviled by the public. Trump is also the most unpopular man ever elected President and there is no way he can enact even half the stupid policies he campaigned on… especially the policies to drain the swamp and help the middle class.
    = Train wreck ahead for the Repugs!!!!

    Big question … Who will lead the Dems?
    More corporatist shills????

  245. 245
    pfft says:

    By Blake @ 243:

    By pfft @ 240:

    Paul Ryan just announced his plans to phase out Medicare with privatization using vouchers

    Think about it pfft… Medicare is a very popular program. Ryan and his colleagues in Congress are both stupid… and widely reviled by the public. Trump is also the most unpopular man ever elected President and there is no way he can enact even half the stupid policies he campaigned on… especially the policies to drain the swamp and help the middle class.
    = Train wreck ahead for the Repugs!!!!

    Big question … Who will lead the Dems?
    More corporatist shills????

    I agree that many of the unpopular proposals will not go thru but how knows? trump did get elected even though he lost the popular vote. strange things can happen. I don’t know if trump knows how to govern though. my guess is because the dems are a cohesive bloc and the republicans aren’t we might see trump work more with dems than one would think. trump is not the CEO now, he’s in a very important position but he has congress to deal with. as CEO trump was in charge but now every faction has their own agendas.

    I will give trump credit for two things. he has moved on from christie who might get impeached in NJ. he’s also moved away from some of his promises that didn’t look doable.

    also, did anyone notice I just praised trump? can anyone here say they did the same for obama.

  246. 246

    RE: Andrew @ 231

    Andrew,

    Just telling you what I am seeing and hearing anecdotally as to houses that are for sale or recently pending. Even before the result of the election the nastiness of it and projected outcome regardless of who won was encouraging some to just take their gains. It’s not that they hated being landlords, just that it was feeling like time to sell. This has been true since summer and increasingly so, and continues to be so.

    I myself have been advising since Jan 20 or so that it is a better time to sell than to buy and likely said so here as well a few times this year. I have always been a strong believer in Presidential Cycle Theory and more so in the 8 year cycle than the 4 year cycle, so remember even late last year predicting things to go a bit bearish in 2016 and 2017. But then I was also a Greenspan girl back in the day. :)

    Doesn’t mean the market isn’t going to go up. Just means if the reason you rented it was because you were underwater…now is a good a time as any to not be rolling the dice further.

    Mainly this is the case because even if you are going to own a rental property, sometimes the one you just happen to own is not the best choice of rental property. Sometimes it is, but often it isn’t. If the same client wanted to own a rental we still might sell the one they have and buy one better suited to future appreciation and rental prospects than the one they just happen to own.

    In any case, I am seeing more houses on market that the owner once did live in, left, rented for a few years since they left and are now selling. Just an anecdotal fact, not necessarily deciding for each one whether it was right or wrong for them to do that. The ones my clients are selling, then yes, I would be advising. But the ones my clients are buying I have no idea why the seller chose now as the time to cash it in and not continue renting it, except those who very recently told me it was because of the election. Obviously that is all very new news. :)

    I’m hoping people just get over it, but based on the comments here something tells me maybe not.

  247. 247
    whatsmyname says:

    RE: ess @ 241 – All good points, although I read today that some in the incoming regime would like to eliminate federal deductions where state taxes are concerned. Property tax deductions may be safe for now, but boy do things keep changing.

  248. 248

    By greg @ 242:

    RE: Kary L. Krismer @ 233 – The only way drug prices can go above the state mandated price is if the state decides to increase the price, and they are highly unlikely to.

    I don’t think the system is quite as simply in Canada as what you think. Read this–particularly section 3.2. http://paperroom.ipsa.org/papers/paper_34461.pdf It’s not just a simple mechanical calculation to get to a price. It is really more of a regulated price than a controlled price, and regulated prices change as is evidenced by Canada having had increasing drug prices. They aren’t set in stone.

    Will the Canadian regulators increase price if the drug companies don’t increase the supply when volumes go up. Or will they cut off exports as I suggested? You are familiar with what happens under price controls, right? Canada is already known for drug shortage issues (although so is the US to some extent). Anyway, one way or another things will change if Americans start using the Canadian system to any extent.

    What I’d like to know is how the regulated price in Canada compares to what the insurance companies (and VA???) negotiate with the drug companies down here. To the extent Canada acted as a single buyer (which I’m not sure they do) they could leverage their buying power to a greater extent than what occurs down here. To the extent we allowed the same thing down here we could probably get similar if not better results, but Congress has limited that option.

  249. 249

    BTW, medical is an area where cost data can easily be manipulated.

    On the topic of drugs, I have a prescription that if I got it filled every month it would cost over $120 a year. Getting it filled once a year it’s only $43. Try getting an insurance company to pay for it that way would be impossible. But if you had drug coverage with copays it would almost certainly be cheaper to just avoid insurance and do that. I doubt many people do that because they don’t ask. In any case, a significant portion of the cost of many cheaper drugs is the cost of the pharmacy processing the prescriptions. And prices vary from pharmacy to pharmacy (apparently in Canada too).

    Also, my last doctor bill was something like $270, but because I have insurance it was only about $165. The insurance company didn’t pay a dime, but that’s their negotiated rate with the provider. So what is the cost of going to the doctor?

  250. 250
    Screenname345 says:

    @Ardell. Why are you using folks who mistimed the market the first time around by purchasing a home they couldn’t afford at the peak, been underwater for 8 or 9 years and now deciding to sell at the weakest time of the year as any kind of credible datapoint for our real estate market in 2017?

    I see more signs that consumer confidence might be stronger next year than this year so far but of course it’s way too early to know how things will shake out. What I do know is the election is over, wages are growing, GDP is supposed to improve year over year and the stock market just had it’s strongest week in 2 years. People thinking about buying expensive housing here should feel pretty good about their own personal situation once we get past the shock of Trump winning.

    Trump has also been caving on his campaign rhetoric since he uttered his first words of his acceptance speech which has been pleasantly shocking for me at least.

Leave a Reply

Use your email address to sign up with Gravatar for a custom avatar.
Your email address will not be published.

You may use these HTML tags and attributes: <a href="" title=""> <abbr title=""> <acronym title=""> <b> <blockquote cite=""> <cite> <code> <del datetime=""> <em> <i> <q cite=""> <s> <strike> <strong>

Please read the rules before posting a comment.