Considering leaving bay area selling my condo, good idea? (San Jose: flat fee, transfer)

[ggcd951]

Originally Posted by Nell Plotts

I recommend renting your condo if your CC&Rs permit that.

Originally Posted by aslowdodge

Are you that good of a trader?

10 yrs adhoc experience i d say i am average. Mentally i think i have gotten better: last time lost 13k$ in a span of minutes, all i did was one big swear and moved on w/o losing sanity.

[NoMoreSnowForMe]

You need to do the math. If you use a realtor, their fee is usually around 7%. Then there are other seller fees.

Then, if you don't reinvest the profit you take out of it within a certain time frame, you get taxed on it like crazy.

If you keep it, your property taxes will only increase by 2% per year. If you sell it, then buy again at a higher price, you will pay 2% per year on the higher valued property.

I hated owning a condo in Davis with a HOA. So, I get that completely.

You just need to think about all of the above - and - the cost of housing for you going forward.

I don't know how much equity you have in it, but once you pay the agent, and your seller's fees, and potentially high taxes on the profits, you might not have as much money in hand after selling it as you thought.

Maybe you could go talk to a tax advisor.

[ggcd951]

you sure it is 7% on each??? i was told by my agent it is ~2.5% either side.
i do admit i never sold it though only bought.
regarding 3rd rail law, yes i am aware of it.

[ggcd951]

Originally Posted by NoMoreSnowForMe

You need to do the math. If you use a realtor, their fee is usually around 7%. Then there are other seller fees.

Then, if you don't reinvest the profit you take out of it within a certain time frame, you get taxed on it like crazy.

If you keep it, your property taxes will only increase by 2% per year. If you sell it, then buy again at a higher price, you will pay 2% per year on the higher valued property.

I hated owning a condo in Davis with a HOA. So, I get that completely.

You just need to think about all of the above - and - the cost of housing for you going forward.

I don't know how much equity you have in it, but once you pay the agent, and your seller's fees, and potentially high taxes on the profits, you might not have as much money in hand after selling it as you thought.

Maybe you could go talk to a tax advisor.

What this person talks about appears all sham information and blowing smoke. 7% agent fee, requirement to reinvest on sale, i know up to 250k for single is tax exempt but if u manage to back ur sham info with credible soirce, i ll bow out and respect for bringing to my attention.
https://www.google.com/amp/www.bankr...le-1.aspx/amp/

[NoMoreSnowForMe]

Originally Posted by ggcd951

you sure it is 7% on each??? i was told by my agent it is ~2.5% either side.
i do admit i never sold it though only bought.
regarding 3rd rail law, yes i am aware of it.

I have no idea what 3rd rail law is.

Your agent said all you have to pay is a 2.5% commission? Not likely. More like 2.5% on top of their commission.

As I recall, the rough estimate for the total cost for selling your property, is about 10% total with all fees. You need to do more homework.

[ggcd951]

Originally Posted by Nell Plotts

I recommend renting your condo if your CC&Rs permit that.

it does not bring much. Already discussed with nieghbourl klady she regularly did in the past. Too much money locked up for too little biz.

[ryman554]

Originally Posted by dogandcat

Too much conspiration theory for me there. I prefer to minimize risks of my potential losses, especially having kids to feed up. And yeah, last market crisis was in 2008.

No, no consipracy theory. I'm not saying that you should go all guns and ammo. Quite the contrary. But, if you think you know the market and what it will do, you are wrong. If you're going to time the market or day trade, you have to guess correctly twice. I don't like those odds. My father "knew" that the market was ready for a correction. And pulled most $$ out in ... 2011. He's still waiting to get back in. It will likely be a long wait.

Face it, it's a chaotic system. Impossible to predict. And you are armed with less knowledge than the pros. You have no idea what will come next, only that the *expected* value will go up over a period of years. So, if you want to feed your kids in the future, better invest in the total market. If you hold in cash, then your guaranteed value *goes down* due to inflation.

Note: you said correction and not crisis. These don't happen that often. 2008 was one. The worst since 1929 (or arguably 1973). 2000 was a crisis before it. You have to go back to 1981 or 1973 to get another crisis. Corrections (>10% loss of S&P 500) happen all the time. 2011 (I was incorrect in my orignal post) was the one I was thinking of, but you also have 2015, 2016.

By the definition of a bull market (recovering from the last bear), that really only started mid 2012 or so.

Here's some charts: https://www.yardeni.com/pub/sp500corrbear.pdf

But let's talk about feeding the kids:
1. If you need the money to feed the kids, or for anything in 1-5 years, you really shouldn't have it invested in the market at all. Too much short term risk. I agree, bank account is the way to go.
1a. And keep an emergency fund just in case.
2. If you are saving for the future, go all in. While history shouldn't be your guide, it's the best data we have, and the *safest* place to stick it is in a broad-total-world-index fund. It's not sexy, but it's good to be average in this case.

And if the market goes down, whatever you do, *don't sell*. Buy more instead, if you can. I'm not talking about individual stocks, but the *entire market*. If you don't sell, then things like 2008 are but a bump in the road to wealth.

The joy of investing in the entire market is that you get to ride on the coattails of those who have the most to lose, and those that have the most knowledge. If you can't beat 'em, you should join them.

[aslowdodge]

Originally Posted by NoMoreSnowForMe

I have no idea what 3rd rail law is.

Your agent said all you have to pay is a 2.5% commission? Not likely. More like 2.5% on top of their commission.

As I recall, the rough estimate for the total cost for selling your property, is about 10% total with all fees. You need to do more homework.

where is this 7% coming from? Is there something I'm missing? The standard is 6% although some agents will list for as low as 4.5%. The split between listing and buying agent can vary.
So selling a million dollar property nets only $900K?
When I sold a house 2 years ago in Ca I paid 5% commision.

[cardinal2007]

With all due respect to realtors, if they tell you any fees of 7%, tell them you will look elsewhere. (and you don't even have to be that polite)

The bottom of the barrel brokerage is Redfin, which will work on 4.5%, and 6% is considered full commission. What traditionally happens is that it is 6% and split 3% to buyers agent and 3% to seller's agent. Some brokerages to get more businesses will discount their end, so their office will take 2 - 2.5% while the buyer's agent gets 3%. Redfin will take only 1.5% themselves, but don't expect them to advertise beyond their site, and MLS.

Don't expect any buyer's agent to simply take less than 3%, discount brokerages will give the difference to the buyer for closing costs, not the seller.

In a typical market the closing costs on the seller are at most a few thousand, about 2k, then on top of that inspection issues usually end up being split 50-50 as long as it is less than 5k. Since this is a sellers market most offers come with the buyers buying it as it is. If this were 2010 you would see it go the other way, and Sellers having to offer to pay all closing costs and inspection issues.

I imagine in total it would be some costs like $2000 for closing costs, and then whatever commissions you're asked to pay. Personally paying the 4.5% at a discount place would still be too much for me unless I were sure I won't move back to the Bay Area. If you have a 600k condo, that is $27000 going to agents, on a full cost brokerage that will be $36000, plus the closing costs.

But anyone telling you you have to spend $60000 to sell the condo is crazy.

[ggcd951]

the whoever said above 7% is blowing smoke. Perhaps he thought i and others are some sort of dumbs and when asks him to back his claim, he murmured again some incomprehensible stuff. Good thing this sort of sham artist is far and few between and majority of people provide opinion and information sincerely. The bottom line is: read more people's thoughts instead of one or two.