[El Scorcho]

Originally Posted by nep321

Now I feel like a total jerk for offering the poor seller 15% below asking price lol. I should have started it at 10% off lol. I feel bad for her because she is already asking for $28K less than what she paid for it just two years ago. It's sad, you know?

Do you really feel bad? I'm planning on moving back to CT within the next year. I have found a house that suits my (future) needs almost perfectly and my present needs perfectly.

I found the house online back in April after mistakenly entering in 100K over my budget into the search criteria. Since then, it was taken off the market and reposted 100K less then when I found it. Now is it 100K less than that. That means it has gone down 25% since I first saw it. I cannot say how long it has been on the market.

When I visit next month, I will make an offer of 50% of the asking price. I plan to negotiate up, but not much. There is so much on the market right now and not much comparable.

We'll see. The worst they can say is no. And no, I won't feel bad offering 50 % less.

[JViello]

Originally Posted by El Scorcho

Do you really feel bad? I'm planning on moving back to CT within the next year. I have found a house that suits my (future) needs almost perfectly and my present needs perfectly.

I found the house online back in April after mistakenly entering in 100K over my budget into the search criteria. Since then, it was taken off the market and reposted 100K less then when I found it. Now is it 100K less than that. That means it has gone down 25% since I first saw it. I cannot say how long it has been on the market.

When I visit next month, I will make an offer of 50% of the asking price. I plan to negotiate up, but not much. There is so much on the market right now and not much comparable.

We'll see. The worst they can say is no. And no, I won't feel bad offering 50 % less.

There's just a *little* bit of difference between negotiating the markets of $800,000 homes and $160,000 homes. Just a little.

[dazzleman]

Originally Posted by Lintu

I don't feel that fewer people will want houses in the future, but that's just me. Where they will want to buy houses may change, but homeownership I still feel will be desirable (unless laws are changed about mortgage interest tax deductions).

The mortgage interest tax deduction provides no real benefit. Housing prices simply increased to reflect the benefit people were getting from the interest deduction.

I think homeownership will always be desirable. The question is at what point the market will reach equilibrium. I think it's better for society for it to reach equilibrium at a lower point than where it is now.

[Lintu]

Originally Posted by dazzleman

The mortgage interest tax deduction provides no real benefit. Housing prices simply increased to reflect the benefit people were getting from the interest deduction.

I think homeownership will always be desirable. The question is at what point the market will reach equilibrium. I think it's better for society for it to reach equilibrium at a lower point than where it is now.

Maybe for future homeowners, but not so great for the 60%+ of people who already own!

[nep321]

I have just done some analyses in Excel and found that if I were to stay in the house for 5 years, I will only have spent about 5% more in cash outflows as compared with renting. However, this doesn't take into account the fact that my income will probably rise over those 5 years while the total mortgage payment will stay approximately the same. Rents seem to keep increasing every damn year.

[Lintu]

Originally Posted by nep321

I have just done some analyses in Excel and found that if I were to stay in the house for 5 years, I will only have spent about 5% more in cash outflows as compared with renting. However, this doesn't take into account the fact that my income will probably rise over those 5 years while the total mortgage payment will stay approximately the same. Rents seem to keep increasing every damn year.

That's one nice thing that *can* happen...if inflation happens and your income at least keeps pace with it (which is certainly not always the case), it starts to make your mortgage feel cheaper and cheaper. But, then there's the increases in property taxes or insurance or heating oil...

[dazzleman]

Originally Posted by Lintu

Maybe for future homeowners, but not so great for the 60%+ of people who already own!

Very true, but they'd have to phase it out over time. I doubt it will happen anyway. But it is another one of those government 'benefits' that didn't work out the way it was supposed to.

[jp03]

Originally Posted by nep321

As some of you may know, I have been arduously looking for house over the past few months. I am absolutely concerned about resale value. One of the things I've noticed is that numerous houses, many of which I became interested in, have been on the market for WAY too long. Seriously, like 50% of the houses on the market have been on the market for at least 90 days. This scares me, honestly. In the future, if I want to sell my house, I do NOT want to wait more than 2-3 months for it to sell. So, in this thread, I ask the following:

(1) How long is considered too long for a house to be on the market? Is there a rule of thumb?

(2) Should I even concern myself with this, or is it a non issue?

I'm starting to wonder if holding off on buying next year would be smartest. Things just dont show signs of stabilizing.. Its such a guessing game. You are better off buying than renting,, but buying in a dropping market means LOSS. Especially if you dont plan on staying a long time...Its really a tough decision.

[JViello]

Originally Posted by nep321

I have just done some analyses in Excel and found that if I were to stay in the house for 5 years, I will only have spent about 5% more in cash outflows as compared with renting. However, this doesn't take into account the fact that my income will probably rise over those 5 years while the total mortgage payment will stay approximately the same. Rents seem to keep increasing every damn year.

Have you considered a 5/1 arm since you seem pretty sure on this 5 year thing? That gives you a much lower fixed rate for 5years and would allow you to take the savings and roll it back into equity for the same end payment. It can be a couple hundred dollars per month.

If you decide to stay after 5 years you can refi and if you sell, no harm done. Of course it's a bit more risky, but that's finance/investment sometimes.

[Cambium]

Originally Posted by JViello

Have you considered a 5/1 arm since you seem pretty sure on this 5 year thing? That gives you a much lower fixed rate for 5years and would allow you to take the savings and roll it back into equity for the same end payment. It can be a couple hundred dollars per month.

If you decide to stay after 5 years you can refi and if you sell, no harm done. Of course it's a bit more risky, but that's finance/investment sometimes.

Thats kinda what started this whole foreclosure snowball effect and what got people in trouble... years fly by and after their 1/1 arm, 3/1 arm and 5/1 arm expired they couldnt refinance because the home was worth less so either they had to pay the big increase of mortgage payment or say ba bye. Then the job market tanked and all hell broke loose.

Positive thing about doing the 5/1 arm now...chances are much much lower that the home will be worth less in 5 years so a refinance is possible......but then you have to ask yourself...do you think rates will stay low in 5 yrs from now?