Housing Market in San Antonio? (new house, neighborhood, buyers) - Texas (TX) - City-Data Forum

Dino1 · 12-10-2010, 06:20 AM

Has anyone notice an upswing at all? Is it any better? Still very bad in the part of FL I own property in (Tampa Bay area). Would be impossible for me to sell my place there.

kevcrawford · 12-10-2010, 07:29 AM

It's still strong. Prices stagnated in some areas. Dipped a bit in others. But overall, it's still very strong.

scuba steve · 12-10-2010, 08:38 AM

I got an offer after 3 viewers / under 10 days. Working from moving it from an offer to a realistic or good offer at the moment.

TexasRedneck · 12-10-2010, 10:23 AM

Unfortunately, you've got the bottom-feeders out there that think that folks ALL are desparate. My sister is a Realtor, and she tells me that while the market definitely softened, it's still doing okay - not as good as it was, but "okay". She's seeing an uptick as well. Note that she usually is running in the $175k+ range. It's the $1mil plus market that took the biggest hit.

scuba steve · 12-10-2010, 07:19 PM

Yep, that's what he was. It's fine - the place that's currently Pending will probably set a new $ / sq ft record for the neighborhood when it moves to "Sold." If he'd like to come back later this one will not be working in his favor.

Proffer · 12-11-2010, 11:22 AM

Well, according to the opinions in this thread, a "bottom feeder" in San Antonio is an oxymoron. You need to have a "bottom" in the market for a "bottom feeder" to exist, or be a problem. Considering that San Antonio's market has consistently remained "very strong" according to the resident realtor(s), bottom feeding and "desperate" sellers are moot points.

TexasRedneck · 12-11-2010, 11:57 AM

No - "bottom feeder" is an appropriate term for some of the folks running around the market right now. They've read all the books tellin' 'em how to "buy for bottom dollar" and presume that everyone they run across HAS to sell. And there ARE sellers that made the mistake of committing to the new house before the old one sold....and now they have two mortages to pay. In many cases, they factored that in, and can survive the pinch - but the buyers act like they're doin' 'em a favor.

kevcrawford · 12-11-2010, 01:50 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by TexasRedneck

No - "bottom feeder" is an appropriate term for some of the folks running around the market right now. They've read all the books tellin' 'em how to "buy for bottom dollar" and presume that everyone they run across HAS to sell. And there ARE sellers that made the mistake of committing to the new house before the old one sold....and now they have two mortages to pay. In many cases, they factored that in, and can survive the pinch - but the buyers act like they're doin' 'em a favor.

Yep! They're still out there. See them every day (I'm a Realtor). It's amazing how many buyers get offended if you don't accept their low offers. There are plenty of motivated sellers out there, but what people have to understand is that if they're having financial difficulties, they probably bought their house with very little or nothing down, so if they have to sell a few years later, there's no equity, meaning they'll have to pay money at the table. Which they probably don't have.

Folks still think that we're the same as the national market though, and are making ridiculous offers that folks couldn't accept even if they wanted to.

That being said, there are still good buyers out there and lots of homes being sold. I've already closed two in December and have at least three more lined up before Jan 1.

Drzy · 12-11-2010, 01:59 PM

I'm curious to hear people's thoughts on lower offers when the buyer is nice about it. From my point of view, they're simply making an offer which the seller doesn't have to accept. It's the seller's choice, so why would a low offer be so terrible? Aren't they just providing an option to the seller?

scuba steve · 12-11-2010, 04:01 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Drzy

I'm curious to hear people's thoughts on lower offers when the buyer is nice about it. From my point of view, they're simply making an offer which the seller doesn't have to accept. It's the seller's choice, so why would a low offer be so terrible? Aren't they just providing an option to the seller?

There really is no being nice about it - it's basically a number that you as a seller get along with a copy of a check and some other paperwork. Some flat out don't respond because they take the buyer as someone who is either unqualified or not serious about the transaction. But it sets the tone for the negotiation. I'll go ahead and counter a lowball (higher than I would've otherwise countered) but it's annoying going in that the negotiation will be an old school union vs. management type deal where one or both parties are trying to completely screw the other over at every possible opportunity. The buyer can really set themselves up too... things like spare keys, batteries to garage door remotes, touch up paint, leftover tiles, manuals and warranty paperwork. It's amazing how quickly that stuff can disappear at move out time because none of it was included in any of the closing documents.

Someone who wants to lowball everyone from what I've heard can be a buyers agent's nightmare. They will run around looking at a lot of houses and continue to play the game - I've known of some who will blame the agent and get a new one thinking it's their fault that they didn't get to steal the place.