2018 DFW County Appraisals & Assessments Thread (Houston, Dallas: apartment, rental, buying)

[octo]

Originally Posted by bigbear63

Really? Where did you get this nugget of information from? This is nowhere near reality mr/ms realtor!

Commission = x% of sales price. So if property values go up, commission goes up proportionally.

[Rakin]

Originally Posted by octo

Well, as a realtor your income goes up with property values so you are one of the very few who has little reason to complain.

I'd much rather have a stable slowly appreciating market. The type of market we've had the last 3 years has made it brutal for many home buyers, older couples looking to down size, ect. I don't like the market we've seen the last few years.

I don't like paying high property taxes as much as anyone.

[Rakin]

Originally Posted by octo

Commission = x% of sales price. So if property values go up, commission goes up proportionally.

Prices go up = Buyers can't afford homes x 0% = No Commission

I've had a lot of 1st time buyers and older couples wanting to down size get priced out of the market.

[aggie972]

Looks like I'm up 3.8% over last year. But it's still $25k less than we paid for it last month, so I'm not sure I'd have much of a case if I protested.

[octo]

Originally Posted by Rakin

Prices go up = Buyers can't afford homes x 0% = No Commission

I've had a lot of 1st time buyers and older couples wanting to down size get priced out of the market.

Well, *someone* sells and someone buys these properties so while you personally may not make the cut, some other realtor will. If these expensive properties wouldn't sell in the grand scheme then the overall values wouldn't shoot up that much.

I guess it is related to your performance. As it should be.

[Nn2036]

Originally Posted by octo

Well, *someone* sells and someone buys these properties so while you personally may not make the cut, some other realtor will. If these expensive properties wouldn't sell in the grand scheme then the overall values wouldn't shoot up that much.

I guess it is related to your performance. As it should be.

There is usually an influx of RE agent when prices go up. More competition, can have less income.

[Aceraceae]

17% in Melissa.

[imranb]

My house is currently listed on MLS with a value under 37K from what is appraised by collin (75035). I tried to protest online but the appraiser sent an offer which is still 15K over my MLS value. Should I just take my listing to the hearing and let them know that I have not received an offer? Will that work? I am doing this in-case I don't get any good offers this year and at least my taxes are represented of the market.

[Katana49]

Originally Posted by imranb

My house is currently listed on MLS with a value under 37K from what is appraised by collin (75035). I tried to protest online but the appraiser sent an offer which is still 15K over my MLS value. Should I just take my listing to the hearing and let them know that I have not received an offer? Will that work? I am doing this in-case I don't get any good offers this year and at least my taxes are represented of the market.

Your listing alone is not going to be sufficient. I assume you are working with a realtor and they ran comps for other homes in the area which sold to determine your listing price. Those are what you need to show the tax office, you need to justify why your listing price is what it is.

[Contango]

I don't mean to derail the thread, but...

Originally Posted by octo

Well, *someone* sells and someone buys these properties so while you personally may not make the cut, some other realtor will. If these expensive properties wouldn't sell in the grand scheme then the overall values wouldn't shoot up that much.

While it's invariably true that given X<Y then X*3% < Y*3%, I believe your argument fallaciously assumes that rising home prices are necessarily accompanied by stable or increasing trading volume. There's a well documented phenomenon by which illiquid assets (in this case homes) experience theoretical value appreciation/depreciation during a period over which trading volume actually decreases substantially. This is a huge practical problem in calculating accurate net asset value for ETFs/mutual funds/other communal investment vehicles that specialize in illiquid assets like deep non-investment grade corporate bonds/real estate/physical commodities/microcap companies with minimal floats who just added "Blockchain" to their name.

As an outrageously simplified example, consider a neighborhood of 100 homes during a year in which aggregate supply and aggregate demand are both perfectly matched and stable over the course of the year. If both supply and demand are adequately high, all 100 homes could turn over during a single year, but because the supply and demand curves are fixed, their intersection remains fixed. Therefore, homes trade at stable valuations but with high volume. Assuming there is not a gross oversupply of realtors in the neighborhood, they do quite well.

Suppose the next year, aggregate demand for homes in this neighborhood remains the same, but supply collapses: only a single home comes to market. In such an extreme scenario the single home would be ferociously bid and would trade at a level far exceeding that which may have been predicted based on the previous year's activity. Because this is the only transactional data point for this neighborhood, homeowners might reasonably make substantial upward adjustments to their expectations with respect to the price for which they could sell their homes. The local tax authority, I presume, would be inclined to agree.

In which year were the individual realtors in the neighborhood more likely to net higher commissions?

TL;DR: While it's true that *someone* needs to buy/sell *a* house (or a few houses) for value estimates to rise, this does not necessarily imply an increase in the number of total transactions. If average transaction values increase but total transactions fall, it's not a given that individual realtors will realize increased income.