Thursday, February 09, 2006

January Northern New Jersey Residential Home Sales Fall

We've finished gathering the January 2006 Residential Home Sales Data (from GSMLS). This data is ours, gathered by my team. As soon as the prior months statistics are available, we gather that data and compare it, YOY, with the 2003, 2004, and 2005 sales data to determine trends within the current real estate market.

(click to enlarge)


The January numbers were slightly below even our preliminary estimates. Total sales for the counties monitored in January came in at 1705, approximately 15% under January 2005 and 25% under December 2005.

This data is not seasonally adjusted and consists of sales of GSMLS listed properties in Bergen, Essex, Hudson, Morris, Passaic, Somerset, Sussex, Union, and Warren counties. This data does not include sales from other listing services (NJMLS or Hudson MLS) nor does it contain FSBO sales. However, GSMLS is the largest MLS service in Northern NJ, thus we're confident that the data provided is representative of the market.

Caveat Emptor!
Grim

67 Comments:

Blogger Metroplexual said...

I think for next month you may have to change the scale on that left margin! ;)

2/09/2006 03:29:00 PM  
Blogger skep-tic said...

listing realtors should be sharing this data with their clients. this is a crash. pretending it is not real is not going to help anyone. it is just gaining momentum week by week

2/09/2006 04:02:00 PM  
Blogger Metroplexual said...

Grim,

Is this your list of NNJ. Just curious where you define the region. Is it where the counties are mostly above I-78? My line for SNJ is below I-195. Everything elso is central.

2/09/2006 04:14:00 PM  
Blogger grim said...

They will not. It's the same reason why Greenspan, the NAR, and other notable economists and politicians won't. Because what they say has the power to shift public sentiment.

Just because they aren't talking publically, doesn't mean they don't see it.

Public acknowledgement of the bubble by notable individuals will only serve to further exacerbate the problem. It would be like throwing gasoline on a fire.

During the Carter era, economist Alfred Kahn publically spoke out (and loudly so), about the recession. He comitted a cardinal sin, he actually used the word "recession". Carter and crew didn't like it one bit, he was forbidden to use the word publically. So instead, when asked about upcoming recession, he substituted the word "banana" for it.

Consumer Sentiment and the Media

Many economists realize the bubble. Look at the data, it screams out at you. However, they also realize what the ultimate outcome of a bubble collapse would be.

So there is no bubble.. It's just a pretty balloon.

grim

2/09/2006 04:18:00 PM  
Blogger RentinginNJ said...

Probably wishful thinking, but I hope once this bubble bursts we will get some reform in the RE industry. For starters, there should be a market monitor like the SEC and more mandatory disclosue of market conditions.

2/09/2006 04:20:00 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

All we need is for Abbey Joseph Cohen to announce that she's selling some real estate investments... my theory is that her comments in March 2000 really created the bull market for stocks

2/09/2006 04:27:00 PM  
Blogger grim said...

Yes, my definition of Northern NJ includes:

Bergen
Essex
Hudson
Passaic
Morris
Somerset
Sussex
Union
Warren

It doesn't include Hunterdon or Middlesex. Many have asked and in retrospect I should have begun collecting data on those counties as well, but I didn't. I thought about increasing the scope of my definition, however, it would cause a signficant shift in many of the stats I've already collected. It would be a significant undertaking for me to recompile my data to include those counties..

grim

2/09/2006 04:28:00 PM  
Blogger Metroplexual said...

I was just curious. Those regions are fuzzy in NJ anyway. When I met my wife who is from Bergen she thought I was from South Jersey. I lived in Middlesex at the time. A former coworker of mine said his definition of NNJ versus SNJ is whether you have sand in your yard (I did).

It is an arbitrary delineation and something I have had a fascination with since I had a cultural geography course in college that focused on NJ and the various subtleties of the state. Your definition is good in my book.

Keep up the good work.

2/09/2006 04:41:00 PM  
Blogger Rob Ryley said...

Grim,

Thanks for freely sharing your data.

I'm curious though. How would seasonally adjusting the data affect the comparisons?

I had thought that unadjusted data might overstate the slide in sales. But, considering the terrible weather last winter, to have sales lower than they were at the same point in 2005 would lead me to believe these unadjusted numbers do not reveal the extent of the slowdown in sales.

Speaking off the top of my head, if my speculation is true, it looks very grim indeed for the NNJ real estate market (pun intended).

2/09/2006 05:14:00 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

denial and greed can harmful to one's financial position.

2/09/2006 05:18:00 PM  
Blogger Richard said...

as long as grim's methodology is consistent for all data points no matter the year, the trend is obvious. he also has enough data points to satisfy any statistical trend requirements. its clear sales are sizably under starting late 2005.

i hear alot of talk amongst realtors that this will be a solid year with people buying before the rates go up. heard that one before and it sounds like alot of hope talk. so far the 2006 numbers are disappointing. the only possible thing sellers can hope for is tight inventory to keep prices inflated. i still see condo properties being released recently with prices listed more than any comparable prior sales. sellers still aren't getting it.

2/09/2006 06:40:00 PM  
Blogger skep-tic said...

the longer sellers resist cutting prices, the worse off they will be. credit is drying up. inventory is rising. If I was a seller, I would be 10% below every house on my block. the exits are closing

2/09/2006 10:07:00 PM  
Blogger Grim Ghost said...

I was reading one of the kannekt boards and there is a lively discussion on whether there is a bubble or not in the US.

http://tinyurl.com/7bg2j

Look at post #38. Looks like it came from a developer. However, he does make a valid point that the projections of the census bureau were quite inaccurate in the 90s and they underestimated population growth in Hoboken, Hudson county etc (when compared to actual numbers) and may be doing the same now. I hate to admit it, but I think the guy may be right. There is no way Hudson county is loosing population.

of course, he also talks boldly of demand support, ignoring the huge amount of supply coming on in the market.

2/09/2006 11:10:00 PM  
Blogger grim said...

revising some of my comments

2/10/2006 08:12:00 AM  
Blogger Grim Ghost said...

Given the new construction in Hoboken, JC etc. I was amazed to see from the census bureau estimates that Hoboken was losing population. I think it quite likely that the census bureau is wrong since they rely on past trends and can miss shifts.

Grim -- your building permit data would indicate that Hoboken is growing faster than the official Census Bureau projections. And I don't think the demographic argument favors us either because the people moving in are younger.

I'm in strong agreement with you 99% of the time, but here I have to disagree with you.

There does seem to be demand for the newer units in Hoboken still. Edgewater is dead as a dodo, other NJ markets are cool, but Hoboken still has some demand. I don't know if there is demand for older units, maybe not. We may see the same dynamic we see now in Edgewater, where new units depress the prices of existing units.

We've speculated sometimes on which market in NJ will crack last. It may not be Alpine or Far Hills or Mendham, it may be Hoboken. And I think that day is coming, but its not there yet.

2/10/2006 08:26:00 AM  
Blogger grim said...

First lets talk about census error. The census numbers were off, but why? Likely because their estimates are based on history and predictable events. So what was so unpredictable between 1990 and 2000?

Well, for one, the technology bubble and the start of the housing bubble. The tech bubble was in swinging into full force in 1997 and the beginnings of the housing bubble were starting.

So how can we prove this? Well, lets look at building permits over the same period. Why? Because I believe it to be a good indicator due to the fact that the real estate market is relatively efficient. If there is demand, they will build.

I don't have the Hoboken permits numbers handy, so I'll just use what was posted in the other thread (Hoboken Pop) as well as Hudson Permits. I'm using both of these to illustrate trends, pay no attention to the actual numbers.

Year/Hoboken Pop/Hudson Permits
d1990 33,392 486
e1991 33,244 260
e1992 33,435 259
e1993 33,385 440
e1994 33,287 464
e1995 33,268 294
e1996 33,274 360
e1997 33,364 702
e1998 33,258 1788
e1999 33,413 1921
d2000 38,577 1338

Whoa.. Look at that. The census estimates were were in line with building permits from 1990 to 1996, but then something happened.

Exactly, something happened. So the census estimates were off due to an unexpected increase in population.

Which leads in to the second point. Net population change is a poor indicator of housing demand. Why? Demographics. The number we need to look at is household formation. Newborns don't buy homes, households do.

(to be cont.)

grim

2/10/2006 08:27:00 AM  
Blogger grim said...

grim ghost,

I'd live in one of the new buildings in Hoboken. The premium isn't bad all things considered. I've actually tossed around the idea of taking a contract position in NYC and moving to Hoboken. Would be able to get by with one less car, insurance, and fuel.

JC? Nah. Weehawken? Nope. Edgewater? No way. Hoboken? Perhaps. I've always liked Hoboken, one of the only areas of NJ with any real charm. I was at Stevens for 2 yrs.

But, there are two different things happening here. Increased demand on the NJ waterfront and the housing bubble. Simultaneous, but different.

grim

2/10/2006 08:50:00 AM  
Blogger grim said...

Hoboken Households
2000 19,418
1990 15,036
Net Household Increase (1990-2000) 4,382

Hoboken Housing Units(Vacancy Home/Rent)
2000 19,915 (0.6/1.7)
1990 17,421 (10.8/8.4)
Net Unit Increase (1990-2000) 2,494

Wow, certainly very strong growth into 2000. Very sudden and high demand, illustrated by the lag in permits and the significant drop in vacancy rates.

In 2000, Hoboken was certainly very, very hot. But that was 6 years ago, what about today?

Hoboken Population (Households)
2000 38,707 (19,418)
2001 39,325
2002 39,331
2003 39,560
2004 40,175 (~20,200, my estimate)
Net Pop Increase (2000-2004) 1,468
Est. Net Household Increase (2000-2004) 782

Hoboken Building Permits (Total Units)
2000 319
2001 269
2002 264
2003 555
2004 272
Units Increase (2000-2004) 1,679

476 additional units approved were in 2005.

Looks like builders have stepped up to meet the demand. Look like there were potentially double the units authorized as we had new household formation.

Data from the Census Dept & http://www.nj.gov/labor/lra/

2/10/2006 09:54:00 AM  
Anonymous Roxanne said...

"They will not. It's the same reason why Greenspan, the NAR, and other notable economists and politicians won't. Because what they say has the power to shift public sentiment."

Aww that's not a fair statement Grim! While, I certainly can't speak for all agents, I have been trying to inform my clients as well as my site visitors of the market changing.

If I go on a listing an appointment and give a seller "false hopes" so to speak, and they price their home according to what happened last year, their home will sit; which means I won't get paid. It really doesn't benefit me in any way.

If you consider the expenses of advertising a home, which is all out of pocket for an agent, and the home doesn't sell because its over priced etc, its a total financial loss. I'd rather not take the listing and save myself a lot of money.

Of course, I can't speak for all agents. But, when I go on a listing appointment I come armed with all the statistics and market trends for their town and their price range. Many times sellers do not like hearing what I have to say. So, if they end up choosing another agent because of it, I really don't care. I won't be wasting money trying to market their home.

Luckily, I deal with mostly relocation buyers. Since Im not primarily a listing agent, the change in the market will actually give most of my clients the upper hand (which Im very happy about). The last couple of years have been very tuff on buyers, with 8 - 10, sometimes 12 offer bidding wars.

The concern of course is for those looking to purchase and relocate again a few years from now. Quite a few of them are 100% financing home buyers. I can't predict the future I can only inform them of the trend that is taking place now and ask them to consider the "what ifs". I feel stuck between a rock and a hard place heh. What's an agent to do in these situations?

2/10/2006 10:02:00 AM  
Blogger grim said...

Thanks for your comments Roxanne, everyone here appreciates them.

You wouldn't happen to be realestaterox roxanne would you?

jb

2/10/2006 10:14:00 AM  
Anonymous realestaterox :) said...

yes it's the same one :) sorry for the confusion

2/10/2006 10:20:00 AM  
Blogger grim said...

Well, then you should introduce yourself..

For those who don't know Roxanne, her blog is:

Southern New Jersey Real Estate News

grim

2/10/2006 10:26:00 AM  
Blogger Richard said...

another re-list under a new MLS and reduction. what's the matter sellers, 130 days on the market didn't look good on the property sheet? there should be a law against actions that purposely try to deceive buyers. there's no other reason for doing this.

original listing now withdrawn:
http://listings.gsmls.com/SearchDetail/Scripts/PrtBuyFul/PrtBuyFul.asp?prp=Mls&MlsNumList=2111428

new listing:
http://listings.gsmls.com/SearchDetail/Scripts/PrtBuyFul/PrtBuyFul.asp?prp=Mls&MlsNumList=2244454

2/10/2006 10:45:00 AM  
Blogger grim said...

Not only the DOM, but the price reductions as well..

$649,000 to $579,000.

Tsk tsk Debra from Burgdorf.

Purchased 8/2003 for $428,500 if anyone cares.

grim

2/10/2006 10:54:00 AM  
Blogger chicagofinance said...

Grim:

As long as some of this blog relates to Hoboken, let me throw in this item.

Off the top of my head - anyone please correct me - the high school enrollment in town has decreased dramatically over time. In the 1980's in used to be roughly 1200-1400, and now it is in the 800 range (vague recollection).

Also an anecdote - in 1999 my wife and I lived across the street from a 4 story walk-up that was all rentals. The owner of the building converted the apartments to condos and sold off the units one by one after overhauling each unit. The building probably had 5 or 6 families each with 2 or 3 kids. The replacements in most every instance were two single young professionals.

The overall population numbers do not necessarily do justice to the population and socio-econimic mix in Hoboken over the last 20 years.

chicago

2/10/2006 11:08:00 AM  
Blogger grim said...

chicago,

1990 Census
2.17 pers/household (Hoboken)
2.70 pers/household (NJ)

2000 Census
1.92 pers/household (Hoboken)
2.68 pers/household (NJ)

2/10/2006 11:18:00 AM  
Blogger Richard said...

it's obvious to anyone that has spent time in hoboken what's going on there. it's full of 20-something singles living with roommates who mostly work in NYC. they can't afford NYC so they come here which is almost as convenient. the new hi-rise buildings are attracting newly married couples and in certain cases those with young kids. still the 'family with kids' demographic is small and getting smaller.

2/10/2006 11:21:00 AM  
Blogger Richard said...

i've seen this complex. used to be stores and shops converted to townhouses. more analysis on the new providence townhouse.

at $579k they're looking to make $150k in less than 2 1/2 years time? hah!

the maintenance is atrocious. last year it was $465 a month and now it's $515. that's $6180 a year non-tax deductible. property taxes are another $8500. assume you can write off 25% of that you're paying $6375. add that to maint and you get $12,555 a year or $1000 a month not including mortgage payment.

you'd have to be a complete idiot to pay more than high $400's for this, and that's if you really wanted it.

i'm going to watch this one sit a while. the folks that have $4500-$5000 a month to spend on a property are shrinking rapidly.

2/10/2006 11:30:00 AM  
Blogger skep-tic said...

"it's obvious to anyone that has spent time in hoboken what's going on there. it's full of 20-something singles living with roommates who mostly work in NYC. they can't afford NYC so they come here which is almost as convenient."

so, then, shouldn't Hoboken's demographics be considered in conjunction with NYC? that would seem to make more sense

2/10/2006 11:33:00 AM  
Blogger RentinginNJ said...

It looks like the yield curve has fully inverted.

2 yr 4.64%
5 yr 4.53%
10 yr 4.52%
30 yr 4.48%

(Marketwatch Data )
http://tinyurl.com/av8wa

So, is this a case of high demand for the long end from foreign investors or a signal that we might be headed toward a recession?

2/10/2006 11:40:00 AM  
Blogger grim said...

Throw in the 6mo bill at 4.67% for good measure..

2/10/2006 11:47:00 AM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

"another re-list under a new MLS and reduction. what's the matter sellers, 130 days on the market didn't look good on the property sheet?"

I had actually seen that listing a week ago, and thought it looked interesting, but with no backyard.

Anyone know that area at all? Schools? Crime? Etc...

Address on MLS listing is:

41 Murray Hill Square
New Providence, NJ 07974


But Google maps only recognizes "41 Murray Hill Blvd" which doesn't seem to be the same property.

I think it's located very near Floral Ave, and appears 1 block from the train station?

Anyone familiar with the area where this property is located?

http://listings.gsmls.com/SearchDetail/Scripts/PrtBuyFul/PrtBuyFul.asp?prp=Mls&MlsNumList=2111428

2/10/2006 11:49:00 AM  
Blogger chicagofinance said...

"it's obvious to anyone that has spent time in hoboken what's going on there. it's full of 20-something singles living with roommates who mostly work in NYC. convenient. the new hi-rise buildings are attracting newly married couples and in certain cases those with young kids. still the 'family with kids' demographic is small and getting smaller."

I don't agree. The last 5 years has been a change. I would say that there are kids of professionals as old as 10-12 years old. There really aren't many good options for middle schools, so you can delay leaving town for an extra 4-8 years. There are also more empty nester types and the usual cadre of DINKS.

The area north of 10th and east of Park is just too expensive for 20-somethings. All the restaurants that have appeared in the last 5 years reflect that fact. The adults dine until 10PM, the youngsters only go to drink and close the place down.

chicago

2/10/2006 11:50:00 AM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

Just noticed Richard's post on the New Providence townhouse.

Thanks for the info -- looks like a sucker's bet.

That maint is insane.

2/10/2006 11:56:00 AM  
Blogger Grim Ghost said...

I actually looked at the New Providence townhouse from inside a few months back. Its pretty nice from inside (very high ceilings), and looks like a Manhattan brownstone. And its really an easy walk to the train station.

But
1) Maintenance is outrageous in the complex at $515 per. Thats over 220 $ above other townhouse complexes The claim is that this is because each building is individual.
2) New Providence property taxes are quite high.
3) They say its a 3 bedroom, but in reality 1 bedroom is in the attic, another is in the basement. [ Theres a sort of open area they called a den].
4) Unless you have a live-in servant or an in-law, the extra bathroom is a waste.
5) While nicely laid out inside, its really fairly small.
6) There is no private back yard.


This complex was an attempt by New Providence and the developer to create an identifiable downtown area for New Providence (like Summit). It failed, so we have only housing there now.

I think they dropped the price to $579 because another unit in the complex is selling for $579K. Historically, this complex has seen lower prices than other townhouses because of the higher maintenance (and because its older). Each unit is somewhat individual, but even larger units sold for only $500K max. Then last year, some idiots apparently got into a bidding war over one unit, driving its price up to $571K. That probably led these owners to think they could charge more. But that was an anomaly.

2/10/2006 12:01:00 PM  
Blogger Grim Ghost said...

New Providence is a nice town, overall. Solid professional population, excellent schools. Taxes are a little on the high side though and IIRC, there are no school buses.

Cheaper than Summit and Short Hills, more expensive than towns further down Route 78. No identifiable downtown either, which is a bit of a problem for teens.

2/10/2006 12:04:00 PM  
Blogger grim said...

Saw this piece posted up over at the BusinessWeek Hot Properties blog as well as housing panic. Great look into the past. I might just need to see if I can get out of work early and dig up some old Jersey articles from the last real estate bust.

THE DAY LOS ANGELES'S BUBBLE BURST
By BENJAMIN STEIN ; BENJAMIN STEIN'S LATEST BOOK IS ''FINANCIAL PASSAGES.''
Published: December 8, 1984

My pal Jerry P. just bought a condominium in Century City, in Beverly Hills, for 60 percent of what it sold for in 1980. Down the street from me here in the Hollywood hills, four houses have been on the market since 1981. The asking prices now are about one-third less than they were three years ago. Up and down Sunset Boulevard in West Hollywood, apartment houses that were converted to condos lie empty, boarded up, not one unit sold, in bankruptcy, with banks holding title.

The Southern California residential real estate boom began in about 1974. It was not just a boom. It was a superboom, with miserable bungalows in Santa Monica running up from $40,000 in 1974 to $400,000 by 1980. Two-story colonials in Beverly Hills went from $200,000 to $800,000 and then over a million. One-bedroom condos in Hollywood were built and sold for $100,000 - what a house in Beverly Hills had been five years before. Every day, home buyers would look at the prices and say, ''It can't go on.'' But every day, for five years, it did go on. Middle-class families were priced out of the market, and the brokers said, ''But the rich will always be able to buy.'' Ordinary rich people were squeezed out of the market in some areas, but the brokers said, ''Never mind, the music business people will buy anything.'' The music business fell into a depression in 1979, and the brokers said, ''The foreigners are buying. Compared with Paris or Teheran, real estate in Holmby Hills is a bargain.''

Everyone wanted to get in to the game, get the down payment on a house, somehow struggle with the payments for a year, then sell out and get rich quick. Inflation pushed housing prices into the stratosphere. But even when inflation stopped, brokers said, ''The prices have nothing to do with inflation. Everyone on earth wants to live in L.A. The price will go up forever here, no matter what else happens in the rest of the country.''

Then the music stopped, some afternoon in 1980. As if a spell had fallen over the city, suddenly things began to stay on the market for three months, six months, a year, two years. Buyers disappeared. Asking prices stayed high, but nothing sold.

The great Southern California real estate boom was over. Prices had gotten so high that they could no longer be justified by inflationary expectations, or the influx of foreigners, or the climate, or for any other reason.

Now, four years later, those brokers who are still in the game tell sellers to expect that their houses will be on the market for two years. Other brokers have sold their BMW's and are now working as ''financial planners'' or public-relations people, dreaming of the days when they worked for 6 percent of infinity.


How quickly we all forget the past.. Or just choose not to remember, all the while telling ourselves "it's different this time."

Caveat Emptor

2/10/2006 12:05:00 PM  
Blogger grim said...

Another one..

HOUSING BOOM GOES BUST IN LOS ANGELES
By BENJAMIN J. STEIN
Published: August 17, 1981

2/10/2006 12:12:00 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

Thanks for the additonal info on New Providence, and that specific townhouse.

Does anyone know what the MLS "Status" codes mean?

So far, I thinhk I've figured these out:

W - Withdrawn
S - Sold, already closed
P - Sold, pending close
A - Active
A* - Attorney review???

Are these assumptions correct? Did I miss any other MLS codes?

2/10/2006 12:21:00 PM  
Blogger Richard said...

your codes are right. an additional one is X for cancelled. kind of synonymous with W but W was supposed to mean they could re-list at a later time.

2/10/2006 12:47:00 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

Thanks Richard. I also just noticed a "T" code? I know the property has been pulled off the market.

Any ideas on that one?

2/10/2006 12:52:00 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

X - expired?

2/10/2006 12:53:00 PM  
Blogger NJGal said...

No one told this FSBO that home sales are declining:
http://newjersey.craigslist.org
/rfs/132470399.html

When I looked, just a week ago the property had been listed for 50K less. If it doesn't sell just raise the price!

(an ugly one too, just blows my mind)

2/10/2006 01:07:00 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

Those early 1980's articles about housing bubbles should scare the hell out of no money down leveraged buyers and sellers.

This bubble is much bigger.

It is going to get ugly.

2/10/2006 01:09:00 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

NJGAL
Where did you find that on craigslist? I have been looking on the NJ listings and can't find that one.

2/10/2006 01:17:00 PM  
Blogger NJGal said...

I just typed in "Ridgewood" in the real estate for sale section and found it.

2/10/2006 01:46:00 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

TKS, just figured out how to do that... Are you looking in Ridgewood?

2/10/2006 01:51:00 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

FYI

I came across a property that the original listing was withdrawn and then relisted under a different mls number.

Please excuse that fact that I don't know how to add the link into this post but it's on the GSMLS system.

Withdrawn Original Listing#2078496 on the market for about 180 days LP $215,600

Relisting#2241237 on the market for about 10day with reduced price $205,600

Same property, different price. I guess this realtor is trying a different marketing approach??

2/10/2006 01:52:00 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

"I came across a property that the original listing was withdrawn and then relisted under a different mls number. ... ame property, different [lower] price. I guess this realtor is trying a different marketing approach??"

This is standard procedure, as deceptive as it seems.

Oddly enough, any realtor (such as a buyer agent) can just search by the address, and see all prior listing info for the property, so there's virtually zero strategic advantage to changing the MLS # when dropping the price, except that the property might rise to the top of some reports as a "new" listing, where it will take 3 seconds to realize it's the same old listing.

Seems foolish.

2/10/2006 01:56:00 PM  
Blogger NJGal said...

Nope, Anon at 1:51, but I have family there who has urged me to look there. I just like to keep up. While it's a cute town, I find it terribly crowded. I hate southern Bergen County, really - I find it all overcrowded - there's a problem when a mall has to be shut down for 6 hours at the holidays because of traffic. Route 17 gives me the shivers (and I'm a LI girl born and bred - I have braved the LIE and Belt Pkwy and still think Rt. 17 is bad!)

2/10/2006 02:57:00 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

NJGAL - OK, just wondering. I'm looking in Bergen too, same general area.

2/10/2006 03:31:00 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

Thanks for all the tools to search.

Heard another recent horror story with someone in over their head.
You would think making $180k should shield you from finanical troubles. Not so.

This is going to be really ugly. just feel it.

2/10/2006 04:41:00 PM  
Blogger REwatch said...

Have any of you seen the number of homes on the market in Warren(78), Basking Ridge(163), Bernardsville(68)? REALTOR.COM

I've been looking occasionally to do comps in that upper tier market.
A lot of these homes have been on for a while and there seems to be an abundance of new construction out west and several in Summit(where we live) not moving!

Remember the days of buyer bidding wars...?? I've got a great new concept. Have my realtor go out to say five houses I am definitely interested in buying within the same price point. Tell the sellers that I want THIER best and final offer on my desk by 2:00 Sunday (maybe to include a famiy photo and bio on how desparate they are to get out of the market) House with the lowest price/best value I'll buy. :)

OK I know this will never happen....but the tables are turning!

2/10/2006 06:06:00 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...


Rewatch Said...

Remember the days of buyer bidding wars...?? I've got a great new concept. Have my realtor go out to say five houses I am definitely interested in buying within the same price point. Tell the sellers that I want THIER best and final offer on my desk by 2:00 Sunday (maybe to include a famiy photo and bio on how desparate they are to get out of the market) House with the lowest price/best value I'll buy. :)



I love the idea. I think if things get real bad, I will try that approach. From the Realtors mind, they are thinking they should get at least one out of the five. Could be a win-win!

2/10/2006 06:43:00 PM  
Blogger grim said...

Just posted up a new piece.

I ask that everyone please take the time to read it.

grim

2/10/2006 07:18:00 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

Going to squeeze every last penny out of these sellers when the time comes. Lets see how they like the BS in reverse!

2/11/2006 01:38:00 PM  
Blogger jomarp said...

Another MLS staus code is "UC" for Under Contract. A no-brainer, but should be added for completeness.

X - Cancelled (no re-listing)
W - Withdrawn (possibly re-listed)
UC - Under Contract
T - Contract terminated??
S - Sold, already closed
P - Sold, pending close
A - Active
A* - Attorney review???

4/03/2006 10:48:00 AM  
Anonymous Rick J said...

I have been following a site now for almost 2 years and I have found it to be both reliable and profitable. They post daily and their stock trades have been beating
the indexes easily.

Take a look at Wallstreetwinnersonline.com

RickJ

4/19/2006 01:18:00 AM  
Blogger Eddie said...

Hello, Just wandering the blogosphere and here I am at your blog. I enjoy the style of how you have put it all together. I'll be coming back again.

Regards,

condo for rent

4/24/2006 08:10:00 AM  
Blogger James Baker said...

Hi Blogger!I like your blog! Keep up the
good work, you are providing a great resource on the Internet here!
If you have a moment, please take a look at my site:
loans center
It pretty much covers loans center related issues.
Best regards!

5/06/2006 04:36:00 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

If I spent as much time working on my own real estate sites as I do slogging thru blogging, I'd probably make more money. But I enjoy a good read. Thanks for the break. Stop by my site if you can.

5/10/2006 02:23:00 PM  
Anonymous general contractors said...

Some people believe that to create is great but build is like changing the past forever... If you want to create a beautiful home Visit general contractors and you can see what a little change can create..

5/10/2006 10:29:00 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

Nothing beats a good blogging trip, but I think I have to get back to work on my own real estate sites. May as well stop on a high note, which your blog seems to be. Thanks for the read. Visit my site if you have a chance.

5/12/2006 07:03:00 AM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

Every time I am about to give up blogging, I run into something which catches my attention � like your blog � which is a pleasant distraction from the difficulties of my own real estate work. Thanks for the read. Visit my site if you have a chance.

5/12/2006 11:42:00 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

I can never spend enough time blogging because I�m busy with my own real estate work, but I enjoyed your site. Too brief a visit, but thanks for the insight. Visit my site if you have a chance.

5/13/2006 10:44:00 AM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

I can never spend enough time blogging because I�m busy with my own real estate work, but I enjoyed your site. Too brief a visit, but thanks for the insight. Visit my site if you have a chance.

5/13/2006 11:27:00 AM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

Been looking for compatible real estate sites, and I guess your site doesn't quite fit. Still, I did enjoy the visit. Stop by my site if you can.

5/13/2006 02:30:00 PM  

Post a Comment

<< Home