Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Omg, that's a REALTORS best gimmick, "Oh, pay more because your money payments go up XYZ, isn't that fine!"
Overpaying at any time suks, bad. Paying a couple hundred more $$$ per month of interest because your realtor wouldn't fight for your interests suks bad too.

And yes, overpay on the entry means less profit on the exit. Any appreciation will go towards getting your property to fair market value first, then profit (less sales fees/taxes).

Is anyone spending as much time finding the perfect mortgage as you are in picking a house?

What does this mean?

Anonymous wrote:

Omg, that's a REALTORS best gimmick, "Oh, pay more because your money payments go up XYZ, isn't that fine!"
Overpaying at any time suks, bad. Paying a couple hundred more $$$ per month of interest because your realtor wouldn't fight for your interests suks bad too.

And yes, overpay on the entry means less profit on the exit. Any appreciation will go towards getting your property to fair market value first, then profit (less sales fees/taxes).

Is anyone spending as much time finding the perfect mortgage as you are in picking a house?

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Help me understand this. Let's say OP pays $100k more for this house rather than waiting or buying another house that's priced correctly. When it comes time to sell, won't OP walk away with $100k less?

I always hear people saying an extra $50k or $100K is nothing because the difference in your monthly payment is negligible. But what about when it's time to sell? If you borrow $100K more, then when you sell you will have $100k less in appreciation and will come away with $100k less in your pocket, right? Or am I missing something?

The difference in your mortgage payment of $50-100K is not negligible to most people. It easily equals several hundred dollars a month. Some of us budget and dont want throw money away, even if we have it.

Omg, that's a REALTORS best gimmick, "Oh, pay more because your money payments go up XYZ, isn't that fine!"
Overpaying at any time suks, bad. Paying a couple hundred more $$$ per month of interest because your realtor wouldn't fight for your interests suks bad too.

And yes, overpay on the entry means less profit on the exit. Any appreciation will go towards getting your property to fair market value first, then profit (less sales fees/taxes).

Your time horizon should help as well. Less than 5-7 years you better not overpay. Over that and you could weather a dip or flatline better.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:OP, if this is the house that you are looking at, then yes, go ahead and make an offer:
http://www.realtor.com/realestateandhomes-detail/5606-Midwood-Rd_Bethesda_MD_20814_M57155-03962?ex=MD558881438

The house is shamelessly overpriced. The house is tiny and dated. No garage or carport. It really has only two bedrooms. The third bedroom is the finished attic space above the former garage. The fourth bedroom is the finished attic space above the taller part of the house.

I think the owner is serious about selling, though.

I saw this house two weeks ago, 48 hours after it had been put on the market. The agent bragged about already having received two offers and expecting "many more" that weekend. Well, this is the result. People are not stupid, even if this is the only house under $ 1 M within walking distance to Bethesda metro in that part of the town.

WTF why are people randomly guessing about OP's house when we don't even know what state it's in?! Someone guessed Reston and now Bethesda . . .

That's what I have been thinking. I mean, there merely tens of thousands of properties in the larger area...

"most people are underwater"

Maybe most people who bought or refinanced in 2006 are underwater. That in no way constitutes "most people."

Anonymous wrote:PP, you are ignoring the fact that getting a mortgage is much more difficult: higher credit standards, lenders require money down, ie, skin in the game, and, lenders have limited capacities to process and close.

PP, also doesn't understand that most people are underwater and cannot sell their homes to move into a larger homes (or smaller home). PP is also ignorant of the large demographic shift waiting to happen, coupled with the tightened lending standards you mention.

PP, you are ignoring the fact that getting a mortgage is much more difficult: higher credit standards, lenders require money down, ie, skin in the game, and, lenders have limited capacities to process and close.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Sorry this is 2012 not 2009-10 bottom of the market buyer's market its now a seller's market.

Right. It is a seller's market for the handful of people actually selling. Seriously, inventory is low and propping up the inflated values. I think we will have flat house prices for the foreseeable future.

that doesn't make sense, inventory is low so prices are going to be flat? Did people stop needing to live somewhere?

http://online.wsj.com/article/SB10000872396390444246904577575072488703032.html

"Help me understand this. Let's say OP pays $100k more for this house rather than waiting or buying another house that's priced correctly. When it comes time to sell, won't OP walk away with $100k less"

Salea price is just one variable. What kind of a mortgage do you have? Is it interest only? Arm? Fixed? And over hw many years?

Your neighbor in the modest house who lives on less and has a smaller income could be wealthier than you

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Sorry this is 2012 not 2009-10 bottom of the market buyer's market its now a seller's market.

Right. It is a seller's market for the handful of people actually selling. Seriously, inventory is low and propping up the inflated values. I think we will have flat house prices for the foreseeable future.

so magically there are less people buying houses, especially with the lowest rates on record? PLEASE

Anonymous wrote:Sorry this is 2012 not 2009-10 bottom of the market buyer's market its now a seller's market.

Right. It is a seller's market for the handful of people actually selling. Seriously, inventory is low and propping up the inflated values. I think we will have flat house prices for the foreseeable future.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I would make sure I had a decent second choice property lined up if I was going to offer low. We turned down an offer that was 10% under asking three years ago. But, supply was low and the buyer really didn't have other choices. They ended up with a higher-priced unit in a much worse location (like, gang central). As for us, the low offer was the only offer we got. Sucked, but rents were skyrocketing so we ended up renting the place out for a few years. Just talked to the realtor this week and she thinks market is now at the price we originally wanted. We'd be happy with 5% under that original price, but we don't regret for a minute that we refused a 10% punch in the face by a buyer who was clearly trying to take advantage of the panic in 2009.

Great that you are happy you chose to rent and wait for the market to turn around, but why do you think, even in hindsight, that the 2009 offer was a punch in the face? If it was so unreasonable, then you would have received higher, more reasonable offers. If you had been willing to negotiate, maybe that buyer would have have met you in the middle. This kind of irrational response on the part of a seller is a perfect illustration of what OP could be up against.

Wait, how am I irrational? We turned down a lowball offer. Sat on the property for three years, losing nothing. Now we are looking at selling for the amount we want. The family that made the lowball offer paid more than our list price for a tiny condo in gangland. We lost nothing. They lost a much better property. I just don't get how that makes us irrational.

Now, I know the general theory is that the sales price is the market and since we got one offer, that was the market price for our property. But in 2009, as now, it is tough for even well-qualified buyers to get loans and property values everywhere were affected by abnormally high foreclosure rates. Those aren't normal market conditions but they are factors that pushed prices down, some would say artificially. We simply chose to wait it out.

Oh and we did offer to meet in the middle but the lowball buyers refused to budge. They knew we needed to move and felt they had us over a barrel. We did not shut down negotiations, though, until they asked us what the racial make-up of the other owners was. At that point we decided they weren't serious and that they were looking for a steal, not a deal.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Help me understand this. Let's say OP pays $100k more for this house rather than waiting or buying another house that's priced correctly. When it comes time to sell, won't OP walk away with $100k less?

I always hear people saying an extra $50k or $100K is nothing because the difference in your monthly payment is negligible. But what about when it's time to sell? If you borrow $100K more, then when you sell you will have $100k less in appreciation and will come away with $100k less in your pocket, right? Or am I missing something?

How long are you going to live in the house?
How realistic is your sales price going to be in the future?

Sometimes nothing beats living out of a car

Maybe, but the principle is still the same. You should pay only what the house is worth to you, and you should never, ever pay more than you can afford. There are plenty of other houses out there. Once we lost a few houses (back in the insane market of 2004,) we learned that firsthand. Something else will always come along.