[Stratford, Ct. Resident]

Originally Posted by andthentherewere3

New Canaan has strict laws about placing signs in front yards, and has since the 1980's. For instance, "For Sale" signs must be in black and white only, and I think only a phone number can be shown. Maybe not even a phone number. I can't remember the exact law, but the signs you see there are very simple. The idea is to keep the town looking neat and tidy, without the "clutter" of real estate signs. I do think that's going a bit overboard...

Editing to say I think Greenwich and Darien have the same sign law, it's not just New Canaan.

In New Canaan, the signs are not permitted to list the brokerage firm. All signs will say " For Sale By Broker"(or For Rent By Broker). The signs do list the phone # and carry the colors of the brokerage firm. Darien doesn't have this restriction. Their signs list the brokerage firm.

[larsm]

The answer to how much further prices in Fairfield Cty. will fall can be summarized in two words: A LOT.

[trishguard]

Originally Posted by Stratford, Ct. Resident

But, they were positively orgasmic for those states for at least a good 5 years('01-'06). Alas, they've spent their load and no blue pill will cure it.

[HeadedWest]

Originally Posted by andthentherewere3

New Canaan has strict laws about placing signs in front yards, and has since the 1980's. For instance, "For Sale" signs must be in black and white only, and I think only a phone number can be shown. Maybe not even a phone number. I can't remember the exact law, but the signs you see there are very simple. The idea is to keep the town looking neat and tidy, without the "clutter" of real estate signs. I do think that's going a bit overboard...

Yes, it's amazingly stupid.

[Rich Lee]

Getting a bit closer to the topic of this thread:

U.S. home prices tumble at record pace - Real estate- msnbc.com

Keep in mind that not all markets are experiencing the same price decreases...

[usmcfamily]

Originally Posted by Rich Lee

Getting a bit closer to the topic of this thread:

U.S. home prices tumble at record pace - Real estate- msnbc.com

Keep in mind that not all markets are experiencing the same price decreases...

Thanks, Rich! I wasn't aware that Obama's package consisted of allowing refinancing with negative equity. That's my situation and I do want to refinance to a lower rate. We shall see.......

[kidyankee764]

Originally Posted by HeadedWest

Yes, it's amazingly stupid.

My god, do you have anything positive to contribute to this forum?

[jjbradleynyc]

My neighbor put his house on the market, 2 doors down from my house, just last Saturday. The house is a 4 bedroom cape cod with a garage and river view. Super private back yard and on a cul-de-sac. Thing is, it is smaller than my house--it's just 1300 square feet.
Asking price? They want $529,500 for it. It's pretty high for this market. Granted, my house is on a super quiet and very private street in prime mid-city Stamford. We are in a neighborhood with all cape cod houses. But still, that price is high. I'll be curious to see how far they have to drop it to move it. I'd think it will go around $460k or so...maybe $450k.

[HeadedWest]

Originally Posted by kidyankee764

My god, do you have anything positive to contribute to this forum?

Only Pollyannas need apply?

[ShinyNewAccount]

Originally Posted by jjbradleynyc

My neighbor put his house on the market, 2 doors down from my house, just last Saturday. The house is a 4 bedroom cape cod with a garage and river view. Super private back yard and on a cul-de-sac. Thing is, it is smaller than my house--it's just 1300 square feet.
Asking price? They want $529,500 for it. It's pretty high for this market. Granted, my house is on a super quiet and very private street in prime mid-city Stamford. We are in a neighborhood with all cape cod houses. But still, that price is high. I'll be curious to see how far they have to drop it to move it. I'd think it will go around $460k or so...maybe $450k.

If it's the house I think you're talking about, the owner paid $490k for it in August 2005. They seem to think the house is now worth nearly $40k more, despite having bought near peak. If this house sells for anywhere near asking price, I'm willing to bet that the buyer will be attracted by the overall price, and not the price per-square-foot (psq).

Of course, this isn't nearly as egregious as some other properties I've seen on the Stamford market. There's a North Stamford home that's listed for $850k, at nearly $350 psq (2500 sq ft). The owner paid $350k in December 2004, but every single owner of this house for the last half-century has had the same last name.

To be completely fair, the owner *has* made some important and expensive improvements to the house, including a new roof and septic tank, but since this was clearly a below-market family transfer four years ago, and since the owner doesn't live in Stamford, it stands to reason that this is purely a cash cow. The house has been on the market for nearly 5 months without a reduction. I can't imagine that the owner put $500k of improvements into the place, so why not settle for a slightly lower profit and list at a more reasonable price?

Edited to add: I checked the CPI inflation calculator to see what 490k in 2005 would be in 2009 prices. Interestingly enough, 490k in 2005 = 529k in 2009. Perhaps that's where the first house got that price?