Real Estate "Trump Cards" -- Buyer's Version

Fanning the Fear of Loss

If the ultimate trump card available to Sellers is the existence of multiple offers (see, "Is it REALLY in Multiples?"), what is the equivalent for Buyers?

The threat to move on to another home.

So, how credible is such a threat?

Interestingly, the three-step analysis for Sellers parallels the one confronting Buyers facing potential competing offers.

Move on to What?

Step One. Is the threat plausible based on the house and the market?

If there are ten similar homes for sale nearby that are all about the same price and in the same condition, and the Buyer says that they'll move on if their offer (counter-offer) is rejected . . . you'd tend to believe them.

Even if that's a stretch, if the home in question has been on the market for awhile, it may be hard for the owner to pass up the Buyer -- and offer -- in front of them.

That's especially true if showings have been few and far between.

By contrast, a Buyer who threatens to "move on" is less credible when: a home is new(er) on the market; it's priced very competitively relative to its peer group; and its location, design or other features make it relatively unique (i.e., it has no close substitutes).

Good agents know the competing inventory, and whether a given home is poised to sell -- or sit.

Step Two. Probe the Buyer's Agent.

Just like Buyers' agents have been known to ask the identity of other bidders, Listing agents can certainly ask what other properties the Buyer is considering.

They may not answer (and don't have to), but simply the way they field the question can be telling.

I represented a Buyer two years ago who had exhaustively studied the market, and had rank-ordered their top three choices (which were all virtually tied).

When negotiations to buy their first choice stalled, I informed the Listing agent that my client was ready to move on.

"To what?," came the instant reply.

Without hesitating, I gave the addresses of the two "runner-up" homes, and proceeded to rattle off each one's merits and drawbacks relative to the subject home, their market history, current asking prices, etc.

The Seller came around.

Step Three. If neither of the foregoing techniques work, there is always a surefire way to determine whether a given Buyer's threat to "move on" is real.

Wait.

If they were bluffing -- or couldn't get an attractive enough deal on house #2 (or #3 or #4) -- they'll be back (undoubtedly with a stronger offer!).

On the other hand, if house #2 goes "Pending" two weeks later, and the Selling agent is the same one you were just negotiating with . . . it wasn't a bluff.

"Bidding War" Dynamics Shift

Sellers Fret Over Scaring Off Buyers

Interesting tidbit from today's Wall Street Journal (my paraphrase):

Whereas a few years ago the two rival Buyers might have been drawn into competitive bidding, this time the Seller "concluded that the risk of the first Buyer terminating its discussions with the Seller outweighed the benefits" of soliciting an offer from another Buyer.

A would-be home Seller trying not to scare off a prospective Buyer?

Not exactly.

The article, titled "Gap Widens Between Tech Richest and the Rest," discusses Starent Networks Corp. and its decision not to jeopardize an offer on the table from Cisco by soliciting a competing bid from Juniper Networks.

Starent accepted Cisco's $2.9 billion offer last October.

Subtract 5 zeroes, and the foregoing applies pretty well to today's housing market.

"Highest & Best" -- Games & Abuses

The "Highest-and-Best, I-Really-Mean-it-This-Time" Offer

I've previously blogged about the practice of "highest and best" offers ("Highest and Best, Explained.") Typically used by banks selling foreclosures, "highest and best" is a way to efficiently sort out multiple offers and identify a winning bidder.

Implicit in "highest and best" is a quid pro quo between the bank and would-be Buyers: Buyers "cut to the chase" and put their highest offer -- with the best terms (closing date, contingencies, etc.) -- on the table.

In exchange, the bank agrees to select the best offer -- one more round, no counters.

Except in practice, that's not what the banks have been doing (at least in many cases).

"Highest & Best" Redux

I've been in at least five deals the last few months where my client was told, after submitting an offer, to re-submit their "highest and best" offer -- which they did.

After a few days elapsed, guess what the listing agent (representing the bank) called to tell me?

There was still no clear winner, so my client was invited to -- you guessed it -- "submit their 'highest and best' offer" once again. (I suppose this would be their "really-highest-and-best-I'm-not-kidding" offer.)

Since my client already submitted their (genuinely) highest and best offer the first time . . . they dropped out.

Feeling manipulated, no doubt other bidders did as well.

No wonder you see so many foreclosure deals fall apart, start over, and otherwise stagger across the finish line.

May '09 Case-Shiller Stats

Market Snapshot: Case-Shiller vs. Ross Kaplan

According to the just-released S&P/Case-Shiller home-price index, Minneapolis home prices rose 1% in May. If you like raw statistics, the May number was 109.77, vs. 108.51 in April.

Notwithstanding the "scientific" ring of such precise numbers, my Realtor's, "boots-on-the-ground" take is that things are much more amorphous.

Here's what I can confidently report as of late July:

--the window for getting a great deal on a foreclosure is closed, at least for now. The supply is down dramatically, and anything priced below market routinely draws multiple offers, negating whatever discount there may have been.

--the top end of the Twin Cities market -- high six figures and above -- remains very soft, with supply approaching almost 3 years.

--Overall Twin Cities inventory has quietly shrunk, from a peak of 34,000 units, to about 23,000 units now. Given that a balanced market is high teens, and a Seller's market mid-teens or lower . . . downward price pressure has clearly abated. In other words, we're bottoming (I do believe the Case-Shiller numbers are correctly reflecting that).

--That said, the "wild card" now isn't supply, but demand. Specifically, stuff like wages, jobs, and consumer confidence. The Buyers I'm working with are pleasantly surprised by their choices, but still quite cautious.

As I've previously written on this blog, the "one-size-fits-all" approach to the local housing market obscures lots of nuances.

(Another) Foreclosure Feeding Frenzy

Home Focus: 38xx Harriet Ave. (South Mpls.)

What: 2 BR/2 BA; 1,364 FSF in South Minneapolis' Kingfield neighborhood
When: On market 4/17/09; closed: late May
List Price: $75,000
Sold Price: $91,000
% Over List: 21%

This home sold for $91,000 -- a mere 21% over asking price. I was told that there were at least 8 offers on this home within 2 days.

Lots more of these deals are in the pipeline, because they came on the market earlier this Spring, and are just closing now.

Based on what I saw, I wouldn't be surprised to see at least a few bank-owned foreclosures that fetched 50% over asking price (imagine telling your client what the asking price is, then telling them what they likely have to bid to actually have a chance of getting the property).

I'm also hearing that Seller bad behavior is -- surprise, surprise -- begetting Buyer bad behavior: namely, the best way of winning one of these "real estate lotteries" is to buy lots of "tickets" (submit offers on multiple properties simultaneously).

As a consequence, the fall-through rate on these deals apparently is astronomical.

"April Showers, May Flowers"

Appraisal Issues Back on the Front-Burner

As the saying goes, "April showers bring May flowers."

In the real estate market this Spring, the equivalent is, "April multiple offers bring . . . May appraisal issues" (OK, so it doesn't have the same ring to it).

One of the consequences of a home selling in multiple offers is that the winning bidder may easily drive the ultimate price well past what's supported by the comp's ("comparable sold properties"). That's especially the case in neighborhoods where all the recent sales are foreclosures being dumped by their bank-owners.

What happens if the house doesn't appraise? There are generally 5 possibilities:

One. The Buyer puts up more money.

Two. The Seller reduces their price.

Three. Some combination of #1 and #2.

Four. Neither #1 nor #2, in which case the Buyer's financing fails, and the deal derails.

Five. Buyer or Seller challenge the appraisal and/or the individual appraiser (and try to get another one).

Until recently, option #2 was a fairly common outcome.

Now, depending on how much equity the Seller has -- or doesn't -- that option can be off the table.

South Minneapolis Foreclosure Sale: 36% over List

Where: 37XX 17th Ave. South, Minneapolis

What: 4 BR/2 BA, 2,386 FSF

When: on market, April 3; closed, May 22; days on market: 2

How much: list price - $88,900; sold price - $121,000

Want an example of a too-cheap foreclosure setting off a feeding frenzy?

This spacious 1 1/2 story (much bigger than it looks) in south Minneapolis attracted more than 10 offers -- my client's was one of them -- and ultimately sold for $32,100, or 36%, over the asking price.

While these numbers are eye-popping, they are by no means unusual these days: I've personally seen at least two dozen of these real estate lotteries just in the last two months.

They create a handful of winners, plus a whole lot of losers: all the runners-up Buyers and agents who wasted their time in a process that looks and feels manipulative; the banks, who may or may not be selling their foreclosed homes at market prices; and the people who own the banks that own the foreclosures: the taxpayers.

Multiple Offers

Is it REALLY in Multiples? How to Tell

With multiple offers making a comeback -- especially bank foreclosures that are "priced to sell" (and then some) -- it once again bears asking: 'how do you know if the property you're interested in is really in multiple offers?'

Herewith are the four ways to tell.

One. When it comes to multiple offers, it's not "location, location, location" -- it's "context, context, context."

The only way Realtors -- or appraisers, for that matter -- have to determine value is by looking at similar, recent sales. Called "comp's" ("comparable sold properties"), they typically are the 3 most recently closed sales of similar properties.

So if you're contemplating buying a 1928 Tudor (3 BR's/2BA; 2,100 FSF) in Minneapolis' Longfellow neighborhood that's asking $249.9k, and the last three sales have been $270k, $300k, and $304k . . . it's certainly plausible.

To know for sure, though, you'd have to have some firsthand knowledge of the other Tudor's.

Did they have the same FSF, bedrooms, baths, etc?

Were they updated?

What were the floor plans?

Were the mechanical's, roof, appliances, etc. all new -- or a mess?

Once you're armed with that information, the likely selling range for any given home usually becomes apparent.

Two. Usually, but not always, multiple offers materialize early in a listing.

For the same reason you don't see too many $100 bills lying around, you don't see too many $125k homes linger on the market at $85k -- even in a Buyer's market with lots of inventory and tighter credit.

So if the home in question has been on the market 3 days, and the listing agent says that there are multiple offers . . . you'd certainly find that a lot more credible than if the corresponding market time was 203 days.

The one exception to that is a home that has suffered serial price reductions over a very protracted listing period, to the point where it is now arguably undervalued (again, based on the comp's).

It's not unheard of for multiple buyers to simultaneously reach that conclusion, and enter into a mini-bidding war causing a "bounce" in the home's selling price.

Three. Who's the agent?

If it's a reputable agent, and they say that there are multiple offers . . . there are. Period. End of story.

Depending on my Seller's schedule and wishes, I'll frequently tell prospective Bidders in a multiple offer situation that "all offers will be presented at my office at 2 p.m. Thursday." If they want to know if there are other bidders or not, all they have to do is show up at my office.

Even when the offers are not presented in person, listing agents lie about multiple offers at their peril.

While listing agents typically cannot divulge anything about competing offers, simply how they field questions can be instructive. When there is another offer, the rebuff's tend to be quick and straightforward; when it's a bluff, there's more hesitation and fumbling.

Too, good listing agents know that Buyer's agents will know the comp's. If the home in question is tens of thousands more than the comp's, it's simply not credible that there would be multiple offers. An agent who says otherwise has no credibility -- on this deal, or future ones.

Four. Wait.

Even if there are multiple offers, it doesn't necessarily mean that any of them are strong offers.

And it's certainly possible that an agent marketing a unique, hard-to-price home might succumb to temptation, and (convincingly) fabricate the existence of another offer.

So how can you know for sure?

If you wait a week and the home is "Pending," they were telling the truth.

If they were lying, you'll know because the listing agent will call your agent to see if you're "still interested," and dangle a big price concession.

"Highest & Best," Explained

Multiple Offer "Rules of Engagement":
Highest (Offer) & Best (Terms)

Careful readers of MLS listings these days will notice more references to the phrase "highest and best" -- as in "highest and best offers due by noon, Tuesday."

What exactly is the listing agent talking about? Two things.

First, multiple offers have been received for the property in question (duh!).

Yes, these are increasingly common at the lower end of the market, particularly with bank-owned foreclosures priced, shall we say, "conservatively."

Once it's apparent that there are going to be numerous offers, a standard tack is to inform both prospective Buyers who've already submitted offers, as well as those who are on the verge of doing so. A deadline 24 or 48 hours away is announced, and everyone gets a chance to (re)bid.

Two. "Highest and Best" also means, "one round, with no chance to raise."

I've had more than one client, who, upon learning that their offer in a "multiples" situation fell short, insist on submitting a higher offer.

Unh-unh -- that's not how "highest and best" works (assuming, of course, the Seller is playing by the rules).

In fact, that's the whole logic behind "highest and best."

Instead of going multiple rounds with multiple Buyers, the Seller is basically saying, "cut to the chase and get to your highest offer -- with the best terms (contingencies, closing date, etc.) -- now."

Buyers in this situation not only have to decide what the property is worth to them -- they also have to guess what it's worth to the competition!

What Offers Did the Banks See?

More B.S. ("Bait & Switch")
from the Foreclosure Banks

The water cooler is long gone, but that doesn't mean Realtors don't engage in "water cooler talk."

One of the hottest topics at the moment is foreclosures.

Here's how it appears to the (above) average Realtor -- OK, me -- who's had some passing involvement representing would-be Buyers in foreclosure deals this Spring, and has compared notes with a number of colleagues:

--A handful of Twin Cities Realtors appear to have "cornered the market" as listing agents, simultaneously representing anywhere from dozens to hundreds (no typo) of foreclosed homes.

--A small but growing number of foreclosed homes appear to be intentionally priced dramatically below market.

There's nothing wrong with pricing conservatively -- I routinely warn my Selling clients of the risks associated with doing the opposite.

However, there's pricing at or slightly below market, to create a sense of Buyer urgency and elicit more than one offer -- and then there's pricing 30% - 50% below market.

The result, as you might expect, is a feeding frenzy: I've now seen -- and participated in -- several deals where there were more than 15 offers on a single home.

More B.S. ("Bait and Switch") from the Banks

That's not savvy marketing; that's financial bait and switch. It's also a violation of Realtor ethics, and likely, state law. (Note: technically, a listing on MLS is not what attorneys call an "offer to sell." Rather, it's a solicitation of an offer.)

Some more details:

--The sales process accompanying many multiple offers is not exactly a model of clarity, punctuality, or fairness (or so it would seem to someone who's handled more than 100 deals).

To put a finer point on it: often times, the whole process smells.

The listing agent is uncommunicative about the status of the property, any required municipal inspections, or the timetable for responding to offers.

The deadline for submitting offers is either unclear, or not enforced.

The prospective Buyer must get pre-approved by the bank selling the foreclosure, even if they have their own financing (from a more reputable lender) lined up.

Even after the bank has accepted an offer, the listing agent's front desk is often unaware(?), and confirming new showing requests. ("Hmm . . . if we leave the door ajar, maybe an even better offer will materialize.")

Nothing is more annoying to a busy Realtor -- or their client -- than wasting your time on a property that you subsequently find out was already sold when you showed it (MLS rules strictly prohibit this, by the way).

Conflicts of Interest

Of course, the biggest issue of all regarding the conduct of foreclosures in multiple offers is, who won (and why)?

Surprise, surprise, in many situations the winning bidder is represented by . . . . wait for it . . . the agent representing the bank!

This is called dual agency, and is fraught with conflicts of interest. Perhaps that's why 42 states -- but inexplicably, not Minnesota -- prohibit it.

Even when the winning bidder is represented by another agent, it's hardly evident how -- or why -- that bid won.

I've represented one client now who, in the span of three weeks, has lost out on three multiple offers, each time bidding anywhere from 10% to 30% over asking price, within 48 hours of the property hitting the market. Other Realtors tell me they've participated -- and lost -- on even more multiple offer deals.

Is this just sour grapes, or, is something else going on?

"I'm Never Going to Tell. Hang me"

It's certainly possible that the bank chose the highest and best offer, after carefully weighing the various offers' financing, closing dates, and other key terms.

However, given all the murkiness surrounding these deals, you certainly wonder.

The biggest question on the lips of the Realtors representing all the runners-up -- many who also offered well over asking price: exactly what offers did the bank actually see?

The potential for mischief -- or worse -- in foreclosure deals reminds me of a favorite joke:

A posse hunting a bank robber finally apprehends the suspect. However, he doesn't speak English, so the head of the posse has to find an interpreter. Through the interpreter, he tells the robber, "if you don't tell us where you hid the money, we're going to hang you."

The interpreter relays the warning to the robber, who blurts out (in Spanish): 'I hid it under a big oak tree a mile west of town.' The interpreter pauses a moment, then tells the posse leader (in English): 'he says, 'I'm never going to tell, hang me.''

P.S.: Foreclosure Feeding Frenzies

(More) Market Manipulation?

In my last post, "Banks Price Low to Elicit Multiple Offers," I discussed the increasingly popular tactic of foreclosure Sellers pricing low to precipitate bidding wars.

What I left out was the identity of the banks who appear to be behind many of them: notorious, sub-prime lenders such as Countrywide and Indymac.

Just to refresh your memory, these are the same folks at the epicenter of the real estate market melt-down in places like Southern California and Florida.

While credit was free-flowing, they handed out such exotic fare as option-ARM's (the borrower decides how much to pay, with any interest shortfall added to the principal); mortgages with initial teaser rates on loans that later "explode"; and various other, negative amortizing products.

When people refer to "Liar Loans" (no documentation of any kind required), these are the lenders who handed them out. Big surprise: such lenders made their money originating such loans and re-selling them.

So nice to see how far we've come . . . not.

Foreclosure Feeding Frenzies

Banks Price Low to Elicit Multiple Offers

Real-estate brokers say multiple offers on certain homes have recently become more common in parts of California and Arizona and the Washington, D.C., and Minneapolis-St. Paul metropolitan areas. . . Brokers say banks appear to be deliberately setting asking prices low in some cases to provoke bidding battles

--James Hagerty, "Bidding Wars Are Emerging on Foreclosures"; The Wall Street Journal (4/23/09)

I can personally vouch for the "deliberately setting asking prices low" part of the above quote: I'm working with a client who is now zero-for-three bidding on foreclosed homes in the last two weeks.

In each case, my client saw the property within hours of the property hitting the market (I'm watching like a hawk); submitted an offer for as much as 25% over asking price by the end of the day; waived all Seller disclosures, agreed to buy "As Is," etc. . . . and still lost.

In at least one of these deals -- all in Minneapolis -- the Seller had failed to provide a mandated (non-waivable) Truth-in-Sale of Housing disclosure. That's a big "no-no" that can be fined up to $1,000.

According to a Realtor representing one of the banks, the purpose is to create a feeding frenzy -- and a rash of instant offers -- that the bank can pick and choose from.

It may accomplish that, but it leaves lots of Buyers feeling chafed, and convinced that the system is "gamed."

Hard to argue that they're wrong . . .

P.S.: just underscores the wisdom of an astute Buyer like Warren Buffett, who never, ever gets into multiple offers on companies he wants to buy.

Fern Hill Ascendant

The Market Bottoms . . in Fern Hill

The first hint of a bottom came around Thanksgiving, when this non-descript rambler in St. Louis Park's Fern Hill neighborhood came on the market for $189,900.

What happened next could only be described as a feeding frenzy: 17 offers in less than 72 hours, with the winning bid, $226,000, almost 20% over the asking price.

What were they fighting over? Most likely not the house -- a solid but rough, 1,800 FSF rambler -- but the .33 acre lot, itself assessed at $235,000 and located just six blocks west of Minneapolis' Cedar Lake.

Market Dynamics

What happened next was fairly predictable: the 16 losing bidders vowed to offer more aggressively next time.

So when a nearby home, 2641 Kipling, hit the market in February, the result was an even bigger frenzy ("Multiple Offers and $40k Over Asking Price"). The hold ultimately sold for more than 24% over asking price.

Two questions: 1) do you think the next Fern Hill foreclosure (assuming there is one) is going to attract more or less interest?; and 2) if the bottom of the neighborhood is being pushed up, does that spill over to more expensive, surrounding homes?

Answers: "more," and "yes."

Longfellow Feeding Frenzy

Multiple Offer Premium > Discount?

Where: 30XX 43rd Ave South, in Minneapolis' Longfellow neighborhood (and just 5 blocks west of the Mississippi)
How much: $17,900
Tax assessed value: $143,000 (land - $44,200; building - $98,000)
On Market: 3/13/09
Off Market: 3/16/09

So what are the chances that the ultimate Buyer is actually going to pay $17,900 for this foreclosed property? Not very high.

Which is the whole point in listing it so low.

While the house is described as a mess, a lot alone in this location is likely worth at least $30k-$40k. By pricing so low, the bank (and Realtor) precipitate a feeding frenzy intended to drive the selling price above market value.

So do I recommend such a strategy to my selling clients? No, for three reasons:

One. If you put blood in the water . . . don't be surprised if you attract sharks.

More often than not, "giveaway" list prices attract, shall we say, aggressive Buyers who will resort to dubious tactics to win the inevitable bidding war. That's also why reputable Realtors avoid using language like "must sell," "make an offer," and other language designed to convey desperation (real or not).

As a listing agent, the best way to control a three-ring circus is not to create one in the first place.

Two. Not only do such circuses attract the kind of Buyer you likely don't want, they can repel the type of Buyer you do want.

In his current letter to shareholders, Warren Buffett makes a point of saying he will never participate in a bidding war to buy a company. Similarly, many disciplined, well-qualified home Buyers will simply walk away rather than get caught up in a bidding war where their pocket books can become hostage to their emotions.

Three. Feeding frenzies like this have a high "wash-out factor."

Once the excitement and frenzy subside, more than one winning bidder has been known to experience buyer's remorse and reconsider. They belatedly realize they made a hasty decision (they did) and/or are unhappy with the price they agreed to pay.

So, they (mis)use the Inspection Contingency to get out.

Or, to win the bidding war, the Buyer overstated their financial wherewithal (surprise, surprise) and can't perform.

Either way, the deal falls through, and the whole process starts over.

I've found that the best way to sell homes is fairly, openly, and in an atmosphere of (professional) trust to Buyers who have the same expectations.

Creating feeding frenzies is at odds with those values.

Multiple Offers and $40k Over Asking Price

[Editor's Note: want to see what happend to this house? See, Fern Hill Flip]

Where: 2641 Kipling, in St. Louis Park's Fern Hill neighborhood

What: 3 BR/2 BA; 1,678 FSF

Asking Price: $165k

Sold Price: $205k

Days on Market: 3

Closed: 3/9/09

Forty thousand over asking price??

That isn't supposed to happen in a market flooded with inventory, and specifically, bank-owned foreclosures like this one. And yet, that's exactly what happened here.

I profiled this home one month ago when it went pending after less than 3 days on the market ("What's Selling? Fern Hill Foreclosure"). At the time, I speculated that it went in multiple offers, and that the ultimate selling price would be over the asking price -- perhaps well over.

Good call (if I say so myself).

One of the biggest misconceptions in today's market is that, no matter where a house is priced, it will ultimately sell for a big discount from that price.

Sellers who subscribe to that mindset invariably pad their asking price -- and then wonder why they aren't selling.

Buyers who subscribe to that mindset miss out on a lot of great deals (and waste a lot of time and energy writing unrealistically low offers).

Hot Property (Really!)

Want a Deal? How about *82% off?

Where: 22xx Vincent Ave. North; Minneapolis
How much: $42,500
Key Stats: 4BR/2BA; 1,363 FSF
Last sale*: $240,000 (6/2006)
Tax assessed value: $165,000

No, it's not in Edina or Wayzata. And, yes, it's a foreclosure, with all the headaches that can be involved (including less than pristine condition).

However, this brick-and-stone rambler is just minutes from downtown Minneapolis, a block off stately Victory Memorial Drive just northeast of Theodore Wirth.

Apparently, the market agrees: another agent who has an offer in told me that he's competing with eight(!) other offers.

Investment Opportunity!

Wanted: Investor Looking For a Steal

What: Investment Property
How much (asking): $293,000 below current tax assessed value (56% below tax value)
Where: Twin Cities
When: Deadline for offers is 2 p.m. Monday

Who says that there aren't multiple offers any more?

A bank-owned 4-Plex hit the market this morning for a whopping $293,000 below its current tax assessed value. Even in a depressed market, that kind of discount stands out.

The listing agent has already received offers, and has indicated that they'll be reviewed this Monday at 2 p.m. The instructions are "highest and best" -- realtor-code for, this is a game of one-card stud. In other words, you won't get a chance to top any higher offers.

Interested? Call me at 612-710-3282 to set up a showing this weekend.

At least on paper, this is as good a deal as I've seen . . .

Next: How to tell if there really are multiple offers.

Multiple Offers on X-mas Day??

Slow Market? Not for this Property!

Even in a slow market, real estate is bought and sold every day of the week. Even Christmas Day.

Don't believe me?

Check out 3253 Holmes Avenue South, a fourplex just east of Lake Calhoun that hit the market this morning (yes, Christmas Eve):

http://matrix.northstarmls.com/de.asp?k=411903X1JL0&p=DE-38861690-592

According to the listing agent, the property needs about $100k in various capital improvements, including new windows and boilers. But at $139k, it's still a screaming bargain, given the proximity to Lake Calhoun, the assessed tax value (just under $500k), and potential upside.

The agent said there's a line eight deep to see the property tomorrow (she's in FL today, and can't show it till then). She also said that she's already received multiple offers, sight unseen -- and I don't doubt it.

Best guess is that it sells as soon as the bank contact is available, presumably Friday, for well over asking price.

P.S.: I'd love to have an investor for this, but I don’t, at least at the moment. If you see this post before 5 p.m. on Christmas day and are interested . . Call me! I'd be happy to show you the property, then head straight back to my office to write an offer.

Christmas Day update (4:14 p.m.): the listing agent called to say that my showing request today was declined, because the property was sold, apparently to a Buyer who has yet to see it.