Daily Archives: May 16, 2012
The headline poses a personal puzzle: Why do women choose bad boys ? because they certainly never chose me, but the accompanying article expands that to include “Sexy, handsome bad boys”. One out of three was obviously inadequate to get the job done.
Nothing to report town wide so far (2:40). No sales whatsoever, a couple of accepted offers on cheap condos and one on a modest house asking $875,000. Two Riverside price reductions but one, on a house that I liked, is still $300,000 (just over $2 million) above where I suggested to a client months ago it might sell for, so that’s not exciting and the other, also under $2 million, is still priced well above what it was bought for in 2010. Owners are stuck in a time warp, perhaps?
Anyway, that’s it. I’ll check the GMLS again after its final report at 4:30 and report back.
UPDATE, 5:45: Nothing changed while I was out. Still no sales, still just that one modest accepted offer, still no significant price reductions. Bah.
123 West Lyon Farm has been reported as sold today for $817,000, no home run, because it was purchased for $1,032,500 in 2007 (and $895,000 in 2003). But here’s what I find annoying: the condo was actually originally priced at $1.1 million and on the market for 479 days, but the “original listing price” is reported as $875,000 and “adjusted days on market” as a mere 54.
I don’t know who’s diddling market statistics like this, the reporting agent, the Greenwich Association of Realtors or its subdivision, the Greenwich Multiple Listing Service, but employing such tactics or tolerating them creates a false impression of the strength of the market by showing just a brief time on the market and a sales price close to the “original price”, thus misleading other homeowners trying to sell their own property and rendering useless our own board’s statistics for us realtors. That pisses me off. Membership in both the GAR and the GMLS is mandatory and costs quite a bit of money. For that, I expect some kind of benefit.
UPDATE: For the Board’s CYA reply and my answer thereto, see the comments. I’m tempted to cut my own throat and sue these people for monopolistic practices, just because I’m tired of their bullshit.
But Barbara Boxer has certainly taken the lead for title of dumbest broad on Capital Hill (males run in different heat). Boxer, who, by the way, is, with Pelosi and Feinstein, one of the three wealthiest members of Congress, all thanks to their husbands, now says the ruined economy is the result of a vast Republican conspiracy.
SEN. BOXER: I think that’s a great idea and the president put forward a grand plan that would reduce the deficit, get us on a path to a balanced budget, save social security and medicare, make the investments we need and ask the wealthiest 1% who earn over $1 million to pay their fair share. And the republicans took a walk. The situation is this — we have — but most people don’t know this but under the arcane rules of the Senate, budgets are not laws. They’re just guidelines. The budget control act is actually a law, for two years. And we set budget caps for ten years. So my opinion is let’s stop quibbling over process, let’s get the job done.
Boxer must not be aware of this inconvenient truth:Democrats On Track To Extend No-Budget Streak: “Senate Democrats are poised to continue their impressive streak of budgetary negligence on Wednesday by unanimously rejecting as many as five different budgets, including the one offered by President Obama. Republicans, meanwhile, are hoping that voters will pick up on the disturbing trend.”
Boxer must be equally ignorant of the fact that it is her party that controls the Senate (assuming she knows what party she belongs to).
37 Perryridge, a 2012 renovation that was priced at $3.3 million and reported as having an accepted offer a few weeks is back on the market as an active listing, now priced at $2.9. This is a really nicely done renovation but I was a little surprised to see it go so quickly when no other house on Perryridge has sold above $2 million (the spec job of 2009 that tried for $4 was rented, eventually, after its builder gave up selling it). No telling why a deal falls through, though in this case I’m sure it had nothing to do with the quality or condition of the house itself, so any one of a handful of factors could have done it in, from simple buyer remorse, a change in plans or a failure to obtain financing. Whatever the cause, it’s now again available for purchase.