Why have they torn down a 300k house? (Realtors, fee, buyers)
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.
Don't expect top-dollar offers with that strategy.
Actually, if the house is a scraper, then this is a very good tactic.
No commissions.
In my neighborhood you can determine the scraper price easily. And, the sign will attract at least 5 developers.
If a person locks down a price with a contract with an agent he then loses his chance to raise the price during the contract period with no penalties. Is this not true?
The Seller is in charge of the list price. Some agents may amend the listing agreement to reflect a higher price but some may want to stick with the provision that if a purchaser is found at the original list price, then a commission would be owed...so you need to be aware of that possibility. From a practical standpoint, however, if it's listed for a while at a lower price without a sale, then the chances of it selling it at a higher price are slim. It's best to simply determine your asking price at the time of listing.
Actually, if the house is a scraper, then this is a very good tactic.
No commissions.
In my neighborhood you can determine the scraper price easily. And, the sign will attract at least 5 developers.
Perhaps...but to me it sounds like an invitation for low-ball offers. Anything is possible, but I doubt that strategy would work well in my area since it seems geared towards investors. Investors usually want to get good deals because, as they say, their money is made on the "buy" side.
Of course, hot markets can overcome a number of marketing approaches.
Actually, if the house is a scraper, then this is a very good tactic.
No commissions.
In my neighborhood you can determine the scraper price easily. And, the sign will attract at least 5 developers.
People do this in my town quite often. When I look back and see what the developers paid for the property, I often find the seller got the short end of the stick.
Perhaps...but to me it sounds like an invitation for low-ball offers.
Quote:
Originally Posted by MikePRU
People do this in my town quite often. When I look back and see what the developers paid for the property, I often find the seller got the short end of the stick.
We have 32 blocks of essentially identical lots. All zoned for duplexes.
All you need are the 4 most recent sales.
People do this in my town quite often. When I look back and see what the developers paid for the property, I often find the seller got the short end of the stick.
who knows better the market value of a property? 97% of consumers or the developers?
A home in my sisters neighborhood sold for about 325,000. The homes are older in a desired area and also a lot of them have what is now considered double lots. With the city's approval, of course more taxes, they divided the lot into two and developer built two homes that are priced at 1 million each. A new price point for that neighborhood. It has my sister concerned about her own taxes now being affected by that sale.
Yes it is. I can see the house being torn down right now. I know that land values around here are up and the area very desirable but I cant grasp the economic reason. Another house near by with the same age and built by the same builder in 1951 was not torn down but renovated and increased in size recent then flipped for about a 50% increase in the flippers buying price. I understand this much , starting from scratch I dont.. thanks
Highest and best use. For example, if a neighborhood is older and now mostly has newer, larger houses, some of the houses that are original to the neighborhood do not represent the highest and best use. In other words, the original house won't be as valuable as a new, modern and larger house
My wife's sister and her husband bought a home in Silicon Valley for $17,000 in 1961. After their deaths (a few weeks ago she died), her children sold the home as a tear down for a tear down for $2,300,000. It is now gone and construction is starting on the new home.
They had estimates of value the home was estimated at $1,400,000 but friends and neighbors started to make offers without Realtors involved, and bid it up to $2,300,000 in a matter of days. They enjoyed the $300,000 each more than was expected.
Three years ago a house near me sold for almost 300k. Now I see that the owners who have rented it out for the past two years are having it demolished. There hasn't been a fire or flood or earthquake etc that would make it necessary yet they are bulldozing it down. Public records show the land value is 150k. Why would they do it? Thanks
To put a $900K house in its place.
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.
