3 bed 2.5 bath 2,200 square feet or 4 bed 2.5 bath 1,900 square feet (RE market, square footage, foreclosed)
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
Two homes in the same neighborhood, built by the same builder in 2001, both have the same size lot, are 1 block apart, are both bank owned, and both have very differant asking prices. Both have similar features and if you were to see either one they have a similar style and are both kept up in a similar manner.
Here are the differances: The 3 bed 2.5 bath is a 2,200 square foot home with an asking price of $270,000 and it is under contract now.
The 4 bed 2.5 bath is 1,900 square feet with an asking price of $319,000 and is available. We like this home just want to offer $290,000. Our realtor has told us that the bank may not accept the offer based on what others have sold for in the area.
Does the bank only figure other 4 bedroom homes in this situation?
Your Realtor should know the area and comps and as such is in the best position to offer advice. Their is no consistency in what banks do or how they price homes. I'd offer what I felt was a fair price as compared to similar recently sold homes. For all we know, the one under contract may close at a higher price than asking if it had multiple bids.
I take square footage over anything... who cares if its 4 beds when they are TINY... I have seen tiny houses and I don't like them one bit... not even for a second... I live in a 3000+ house and I still think its tiny... sigh... my wife thinks its too big... especially since I am living there by myself...
I take square footage over anything... who cares if its 4 beds when they are TINY... I have seen tiny houses and I don't like them one bit... not even for a second... I live in a 3000+ house and I still think its tiny... sigh... my wife thinks its too big... especially since I am living there by myself...
I've seen many a smaller sq ft home that should be a 3 bedroom but they try to squeeze in the 4th bedroom and they all turn out to small. Four bedrooms are a plus unless you cram them into a 3 bedroom house.
I seen a 1000 sq foot home with 3 bedrooms, a kitchen, a dining area, and a living room... it was so pathetic... Two of the bedrooms were about 10 feet x 6 feet... it could fit ONE twin size bed which would of taken up half the room... the largest room was only a little bigger which could fit a full size bed and that's it.... I couldn't believe that people actually live in something like this and I couldn't believe someone was willing to pay $200k for this during the housing boom... right now its worth 25% of that and its still a bad deal...
An extra bedroom by design (actual room, not a converted garage or "addtl living space added") is worth considerably more to me, as someone having kids... The 300 sqft could be negligible depending how it was laid out.
What's funny is how there's no science here - it's why Zillow can never work 100%... That stats can only go so far and there's way too many variables. The house is worth exactly what you're willing to pay/mortgage/get approved for.
The most shocking thing is a REO getting $150+ / sqft... wow.
I grew up in a 1,100 square foot home with 3 bedroom and 2 baths. Every home in that neighborhood looked exactly the same or was a mirror image of the others. When those homes were built in 1958 the "laundry room" was in the kitchen. What that meant was that the kitchen also had a washer. The dryer was outside in the back yard and consisted of two poles set 20 feet apart with four lines running between them. My parents added on to that home to make it a 1,600 square foot home. They sold that home in 2003 for $338,000 or $211 a square foot. It resold in 2005 for $432,000 or $270 a square foot. Recently I saw a home near there on the market for $230,000 that also had a similar addition selling for $230,000 or $153 a square foot. I saw another this past week that was on the market for $200,000 that had never had an addition. It was still 1,100 square feet or $181 a square foot.
In my first post the four bedroom had sold for just under $600,000 back in 2006 or around $315 a square foot. I bring all this up to compare how in this market the price per a square foot is low compared to what it cost in the past or near the top of the bubble.
Lets compare that with Surprise Arizona where my parents now live. Most of the housing stock in Surprise was built in the last 10 years. You can get a 1,800 square foot, 4 bed, 2 bath home in surprise that was built in 2003 for $79,000 or $41 a square foot.
What I am getting at is that the price per a square foot depends on the location that you reside in.
Two homes in the same neighborhood, built by the same builder in 2001, both have the same size lot, are 1 block apart, are both bank owned, and both have very differant asking prices. Both have similar features and if you were to see either one they have a similar style and are both kept up in a similar manner.
Here are the differances: The 3 bed 2.5 bath is a 2,200 square foot home with an asking price of $270,000 and it is under contract now.
The 4 bed 2.5 bath is 1,900 square feet with an asking price of $319,000 and is available. We like this home just want to offer $290,000. Our realtor has told us that the bank may not accept the offer based on what others have sold for in the area.
Does the bank only figure other 4 bedroom homes in this situation?
You can argue about what the correct valuation is with whoever you like but if the seller doesn't accept your offer it doesn't matter who is right.
Our realtor has told us that the bank may not accept the offer based on what others have sold for in the area.
Does the bank only figure other 4 bedroom homes in this situation?
*The Bank*?
Is this a foreclosure?
Mortgage or no mortgage, bottom price or not, financing whathaveyou......
Step away from foreclosed properties. They may seem like a good deal on the surface, for the price, for the time, for the place, but.....
It may be the mistake of a lifetime to buy a property right now which is (*cough*) a bank owned foreclosure and on the market for a comparative steal.
I'd rather live in a tent by the railroad tracks than lose my life savings in some kind of title fraud fiasco which is currently in vogue in the real estate business.
Think twice--and thrice--before investing your life and your money in today's cooked and diced home foreclosure market.
I grew up in a 1,100 square foot home with 3 bedroom and 2 baths. Every home in that neighborhood looked exactly the same or was a mirror image of the others. When those homes were built in 1958 the "laundry room" was in the kitchen. What that meant was that the kitchen also had a washer. The dryer was outside in the back yard and consisted of two poles set 20 feet apart with four lines running between them. My parents added on to that home to make it a 1,600 square foot home. They sold that home in 2003 for $338,000 or $211 a square foot. It resold in 2005 for $432,000 or $270 a square foot. Recently I saw a home near there on the market for $230,000 that also had a similar addition selling for $230,000 or $153 a square foot. I saw another this past week that was on the market for $200,000 that had never had an addition. It was still 1,100 square feet or $181 a square foot.
In my first post the four bedroom had sold for just under $600,000 back in 2006 or around $315 a square foot. I bring all this up to compare how in this market the price per a square foot is low compared to what it cost in the past or near the top of the bubble.
Lets compare that with Surprise Arizona where my parents now live. Most of the housing stock in Surprise was built in the last 10 years. You can get a 1,800 square foot, 4 bed, 2 bath home in surprise that was built in 2003 for $79,000 or $41 a square foot.
What I am getting at is that the price per a square foot depends on the location that you reside in.
Pretty obvious you're talking about CA now... Additionally, I think it's fairly obvious that things there are still completely out of whack.
Unless there's something specifically redeeming about the property (waterview/front, "downtown access", walkable, etc); I don't see how you justify prime price / sqft out in the generic suburbs. Maybe it's just me.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
