[rpachigo]

Another spike in inventory the last week! Some 75 properties added below my target threshold in select areas built within the past several years. Most properties added like this in the past several weeks. Must be another leg down.

[whowhatwhere]

Originally Posted by olecapt

Realty Tracs number are easily refuted by simply checking the Clark County Tax base to see how many homes are owned by the banks. There are less than 14,000. One obvious problem is that RealtyTrac is counting those listings that they have marked as "sold". It would be obvious to most that "sold" homes are no longer available to sell. There are also many homes marked as bank owned which have not been foreclosed.

Yes Pendings and Contingents and Temps are part of some inventories and not part of others. They are not available for sale and therefore are not part of the inventory which is available for sale. A new buyer can't buy them.

If you think that the Clark County tax roll is in any way accurate and up to date than show me. I'll go grab some popcorn while you find your evidence.

I asked you to show me something that refutes RealtyTracs numbers and all I got from you was blah blah blah. You don't seem to have any demonstrable or provable evidence to back up your bashing of RealtyTrac. And no, you word alone is not good enough. Especially when you continue to say that pendings and contingents are not available for sale. They are.

[whowhatwhere]

Originally Posted by airics

if you don't pay nothing.. you get nothing!!!!

Thanks for that insightful nugget of news.

[olecapt]

Originally Posted by whowhatwhere

If you think that the Clark County tax roll is in any way accurate and up to date than show me. I'll go grab some popcorn while you find your evidence.

I asked you to show me something that refutes RealtyTracs numbers and all I got from you was blah blah blah. You don't seem to have any demonstrable or provable evidence to back up your bashing of RealtyTrac. And no, you word alone is not good enough. Especially when you continue to say that pendings and contingents are not available for sale. They are.

Page 1000 of Realty Trak had 10 entries. One was not in foreclosure, three were marked as sold. One was not trackable(too many possibilities) Four were in the MLS in some non saleable category. One was trustee saled but not in the MLS. It was however in and properly coded in the tax data base.

So of those ten houses one may actually be for sale and one may be for sale eventually. That is how they get to the big numbers...

The Tax data base has a couple of week lag in the data entry but is otherwise reasonably accurate. There are data entry errors but they are generally easily caught. And reasonably low in number. It is quite well suited to statistical analysis.

Note by the way that RealtyTrac and similar are fed by the MLS and the County data bases. There are no other sources.

[whowhatwhere]

Originally Posted by olecapt

Page 1000 of Realty Trak had 10 entries. One was not in foreclosure, three were marked as sold. One was not trackable(too many possibilities) Four were in the MLS in some non saleable category. One was trustee saled but not in the MLS. It was however in and properly coded in the tax data base.

So of those ten houses one may actually be for sale and one may be for sale eventually. That is how they get to the big numbers...

The Tax data base has a couple of week lag in the data entry but is otherwise reasonably accurate. There are data entry errors but they are generally easily caught. And reasonably low in number. It is quite well suited to statistical analysis.

Note by the way that RealtyTrac and similar are fed by the MLS and the County data bases. There are no other sources.

Funny thing about page 1000 in RealtyTrac - they don't show the actual house number unless you pay for their services, which is something you would clearly never do. So, how did you actually verify the information? I can tell you that of the 10 listings there were 3 condos which I could verify and all of them had an NOD and a Trustees Deed, but none of them were listed on the MLS. Yet. Of the remaining 7 listings I could verify that 5 had NOD filed with one of those having a trustees deed, and one property having a trustees deed without the NOD being filed.So out of the 10 properties I could verify 9 of them, of which NONE are listed on MLS. And the one I couldn't verify looks to have had a NOD filed on 04/23. If you're using the county assessors website to verify this stuff, that would explain why your numbers are so far off. You're looking in the wrong place. Anyone who works in your field should know that they are MONTHS behind. MONTHS, not weeks.

And the notion that you know how many of those(maybe one or two - as you stated) will end up on the market is specious at best. Unless you have some evidence to the contrary I'll have to think you're just making that up.

[olecapt]

Originally Posted by whowhatwhere

Funny thing about page 1000 in RealtyTrac - they don't show the actual house number unless you pay for their services, which is something you would clearly never do. So, how did you actually verify the information? I can tell you that of the 10 listings there were 3 condos which I could verify and all of them had an NOD and a Trustees Deed, but none of them were listed on the MLS. Yet. Of the remaining 7 listings I could verify that 5 had NOD filed with one of those having a trustees deed, and one property having a trustees deed without the NOD being filed.So out of the 10 properties I could verify 9 of them, of which NONE are listed on MLS. And the one I couldn't verify looks to have had a NOD filed on 04/23. If you're using the county assessors website to verify this stuff, that would explain why your numbers are so far off. You're looking in the wrong place. Anyone who works in your field should know that they are MONTHS behind. MONTHS, not weeks.

And the notion that you know how many of those(maybe one or two - as you stated) will end up on the market is specious at best. Unless you have some evidence to the contrary I'll have to think you're just making that up.

You simply don't understand. there is more than enough information to track down all of those houses. I did not bother with one because I did not want to sort through 600+ to find the one I want ...

But I have the address on all ten and simply lack the unit number on the one in MGM Signature. Seven of the remaining nine are disposed of and are not available to show. One is not bank owned and never was. The remainder of the nine is bank owned and has not been marketed.

If you had any idea what we are discussion you would know that doing this is actually very simple. All you need is access to the suitable tools.

Here is the content of page 1000 right now...

8271 /HUXLEY ST 934539 C
5270 /PARADISE SKIES 914664 S
2978 /JUNIPER HILLS BL 926426 S
3844 /SPIRIT SUN CT 913127 S
191 FLYING HILLS AVE 912904 L
2132 /CABRINI CT 913935 C
3445 /EL CAMINO REAL 918520 S
3770 /SPECULA WING DR 920839 S
1352 /SILVER SIERRA ST 908542 S
8690 S MARYLAND PKWY Land

If you want to see the page I have a PDF but it probably has not changed yet. Note the L - Leased. One of the strange things happening to some of the mysterios inventory.

I also have the list of the listings in the tax data base for May 21. Be glad to provide it to you and you can point out which entries are mssing. Looks mostly complete to me...but that is only three weeks ago and you are sure that can't be right.

[olecapt]

Those who just have to see page 1000...

http://www.donohueteam.com/Realtor/R...rts/pg1000.pdf

[olecapt]

And here is a RE Columnist quoting someone with whom I obviously agree..

Analysts exaggerating foreclosure projections, broker says - Las Vegas Sun

[whowhatwhere]

As I stated with my very first post - we look at the market differently. You're a broker and it's your job to spin the market and make it look better than it is. That's what you were trained to do. That's what all Realtors are trained to do. And somehow I'm supposed to take you as credible when your name shows up in the paper. Hardly. You're still a broker who thinks that there are only two sources of information that are required when studying the housing market. So take your two sources and go forth and mislead the general public at large, not to mention your clients. I on the other hand will take my many sources of information and tell the truth. It's what I get paid to do. There is a reason that financial institutions, lawyers, accountants, and governments hire economists and not Realtors when they want to know what's truly going on. You have your place and I have mine.

And really - how am I supposed to take you seriously when your own corporate website says things like, "Stable and slow is the best description. The pricing has now been stable for 18 months", and "High rise condominiums are the latest thing in Las Vegas?" It's quite obviously you put as much effort into your study of the economy as you do your corporate image.

Good luck to you and your two sources of information Jim. Good Luck. See ya at the bottom.

[whowhatwhere]

BTW - if the most recent local numbers you have are from May 21 you really are looking in the wrong place.