Friday, December 21, 2007

Realtard of the week

This week's Realtard of te week goes to Gail Copley of Evergreen Realty for the listing at
22997 Banbury CTMurrieta, CA 92562. This home is a nice 3700/sf 3 bedroom, 3.5 bath sitting on the 11th tee of Bear Creek Country club. Sales Price $1,029,000

Here's the listing description,

"Price reduced $100,000. This is the best deal in Bear Creek! Beautiful S. Story on 11th tee. Great lake , fairway and mnt. views. 3 fireplaces, sitting rm. in master, casita, custom cabinets, covered patio w/ viking bbq, refr. . Beautiful landscaping with many trees, fountains, firepit and more. Complete sprinkler and outdoor lighting systems. Over 30 trees, block walls, and a lot of grassy areas. Rear yard faces west."

Now most of this is not that bad by Realtor standards. But there are a few obvious realtardisms in there. Who else would abbreviate room (rm) or single (S). Commas, periods, slash marks and exclamation points galore. Caps in odd places. A lot of grassy, it's on a golf course, duh. But none of those are enough to qualify as realtard of the week. The line that clinches her the title is the second one "the best deal in Bear Creek!"

The "Best deal in Bear Creek"? really. So how far do we have to look to find a better deal?
Well, how about RIGHT NEXT DOOR!

22991 Banbury CT, Murrieta, CA 92562 This home is 3667/sf, 4 bedroom and 3.5 bath. From the pictures it looks to have a much nicer kitchen than home 1. It also sits on the 11th tee box of the golf course and the lot size is about the same. Listing Price, $699,000

I might have cut her some slack if this home had just come on the market but it's been listed for 3 months. It's been $300k less the whole time. Interestingly this home is actually priced quite well. Yes, it's expensive but it's a big house on a big lot on a private country club. It sold new in 2001 for $500k. At $700k that only works out to an annual increase of just under 6%. Slightly more than the typical rate of 4% but still within reason. This one's probably a steal if you can get it for $600k.


Anonymous said...

Similar situation in East Highlands Ranch where I live. 2400 sf Standard Pacific 3BR 3Bath REO bilt in 2006 listed for $405K. Just today, same floor plan pops up down the street for $525K. With a smaller yard. Thats a difference of over $50 per sf.

ice weasel said...

It's so nice to see such optimism during these darker times. Silly and quite humourous of course, but there it is anyway.

The real question in Murrietta isn't the value of these homes in particular. I agree that for $600k your comp is probably a decent deal, on paper. The problem is, Murrietta is crashing and burning in a big way. So how many knife catchers are going to go for these properties when there is, quite near them, a ton of other listings with prices diving downward more and more?

When you judge this stuff within their own little areas there's a false appearance of strength. Expand the search just a bit a you see that there are a lot of other options, admittedly maybe not as nice, but with pricing much more flexible.

So how much is that 11th tee worth?

We'll see late next year.

FairEconomist said...

I'm with weasel but for different reasons. In the abstract 600K for a golf course minimansion might not be unreasonable. The problem is the vast oversupply of these huge houses. With the average household size down to 2.6 the need for these monsters is limited. But, as anybody shopping around knows, these huge houses have been almost the norm for the past few years. A lot of these will necessarily end up as multifamily dwellings and you can't get a good price for a place with shared kitchen, entrance, and garage.

golfer_X said...

Whether you think living on Bear Creek is worth an extra $200k or $300k or not is irrelevant, some people do. Even before the bubble living in there cost quite a bit more than living 2 miles down the street. There are many similar sized homes just outside the gates that are listed in the Low $400s (that sold in the $700s 2 years ago). That does not mean Bear Creek will drop that low. The rich folks are always going to want their little alcoves of wealth. They will pay for it too. That 11th tee is worth quite a lot. As bearish as I am, I would seriously consider that house at $600k if Murrietta was somewhere my wife would move to.

Anonymous said...

This is the next problem people will have to overcome. Some seem to think 699,000 is a good price for a house. Face it, there are just toooooooo many 699,000 homes for compared to the number of people that can actually afford it, and that don't already have a 699,000 home. Sure a teaser rate or IO/Loan will get you a lower payment, but tehy are gone and the reality of PITI,HOA, mello roos, are going back into play. Face it 699,000 is a lot to pay. SQ FT, people are going to want it, but they are going to want the lower price even more than the McMansion size.

papasmurf said...

Ain't that the truth anon.

I can't believe how many of my coworkers think $600k is an acceptable price for a house. I might have gone along with them if we were all brain surgeons or something. But we work in a warehouse. Fork lift drivers can't afford $600k homes in 2007. That might not be the case in 2060 but right now a $50k a year worker shouldn't buy a $600k house. To qualify for a $600k home you should be making like $200k a year. That's a reality check my coworkers haven't made yet.

ice weasel said...

G-X, you're right that some people have always been willing to pay that extra to live behind the gate. That said, the difference in the property price, I think, is going to be much more stark in the near future than it's ever been. "Free money" won't be flowing from the taps of ever smiling loan dealer. I wonder if this will have an affect.

As you say, the wealthy have always chosen to live in their own communities but how many of the truly wealthy want to live in Murrietta?


golfer_X said...

There will always be wealthy people in every community. There are enough doctors, lawyers, dentists and business owners in Murrietta/Temecula to fill up Bear Creek 10 times. Plus 1/2 of that development were retired the last time I teed it up in there.

$600k is a lot, but in there, for that house, I think it's a pretty good deal. Us normal folks can live outside the gate for 1/2 that price.

toothlesselsinorewhore said...

Looking a the two homes in my opinion the one for a million looks like a nice home and what not. The one next door looks like it shouldn't even be in the same neighborhood. It is a plain jane stucco box.

That alone will keep the profiled home from ever selling for mansion level pricing.

I'm off to go look at more homes. I just put a 3/2 1150 square foot house in escrow for 99k in my area of Lake Elsinore. It will rent for 1100 or so and is going to be a positive cash flowing house. It only needs about 10k worth of work to be completely rehabbed.

Anonymous said...


I agree with you 1005...except I make $200K a year. And it would be irresponsible for me to pay $600,000 for a house.

According to my financial advisor (Dave Ramsey), my salary maxes me out at closer to $400K.

I'm sticking to fundamentals and will continue to rent until the prices fall more in line with wages.


golfer_X said...

It depends on your DTI. Generally, the rule of thumb has been 2.5x your yearly income is what you should buy. You can comfortably stretch that when interest rates are low. When I bought my first home in 88 I was right at the 2.5X rate. The interest rates back then were 10.5%. Had the interest rates been 6.5% I could have had a much more expensive house for the same payment. Of course if you have other debts such as car payments, school loans or a boat load of credit card bills then you may not be able to handle a 600k house.

If you make $200k your take home should be at least 9-10k per month and that's maxing out your 401K. A 600K house (20% down) would get you a monthly payment of under $4k (with tax and insurance). That's a comfortable amount in most anyones book. The tax benefits would add another $1k per month to your income. You must have the worlds most conservative financial adviser.

Anonymous said...

If it sold new for $500K in 2001, it's worth no more than that, today.

Papasmurf said...

It's worth what someone will pay for it! That's always been the case and will always be the case. You and me might not like it, just like I don't like paying $3 a gallon for gas but if one person is willing to pay $699k for that house then that is what it's worth.

Anonymous said...

Papasmurf said:
"It's worth what someone will pay for it!"

Finally, a freash breath of economic sanity. If the current crop of buyer/sellers (ever wonder why buyers are always written before sellers?) would understand this simple concept, the following correction for the next 12+ months would not take that long to sort out.

In the Office Twice a Week Guy said...

Well now there has been a price reduction to $969k, and the listing now starts,"Price reducuction."

Realtard for sure - at least learn how to spell before you try to make a quick $30k...jeez.