Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Zillow seeks to sell 7k homes for $2.8B after flipping halt

bloomberg.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

351–360 of 634 posts

Re: Zillow seeks to sell 7k homes for $2.8B after flipping halt

#351

Post by [deleted] »

WarOnPrivacy wrote: post #138
whimsicalism wrote: post #79

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Yes, that - plus the rapid reversal of white flight to the suburbs among young people in the last 10-15 years (more of an east coast phenomena). It is both a demand and supply problem, but short of creating a Hukou system I don't see any solution but building.

> the rapid reversal of white flight to the suburbs among young people in the last 10-15 years The massive buy-ups in West & Central FL have led to an unprecedented shortage in housing. Rentals get 400 applicants each day and people with money in the bank are facing homelessness. People without have little hope.

[deleted]

Re: Zillow seeks to sell 7k homes for $2.8B after flipping halt

#352

Post by jiveturkey »

mikysco wrote: post #275
game_the0ry wrote: post #255

Former real estate finance professional, here. If you were hoping this was a sign of the real estate market falling and perhaps its your chance to get a bargain, think again. > The company is seeking roughly $2.8 billion for the houses, which are being pitched to institutional investors, according to people familiar with the matter. Institutional investors (Blackstone, Blackrock, Colony, et al) will be being in bulk,…

Aren't all these homes required to be listed on the MLS before being sold? My understanding is a home (at least in California) can't be sold unless publicly listed for X days on the MLS.

Curious to know how and where you got that impression. There is no such requirement.

There are similar private requirements for the cartel known as NAR. What this means in practice is that pocket listings actually make to to the MLS for one day before apparently being sold "in 1 day".

Zillow as property owner is not part of NAR. Zillow as broker is also not part of NAR, although if they were, they'd do exactly as individuals using pocket listings do. Arrange a sale privately with an institution, place the listing on MLS, then sell it "on the open market" in 1 day.

Re: Zillow seeks to sell 7k homes for $2.8B after flipping halt

#353

Post by mediaman »

VBprogrammer wrote: post #307
mediaman wrote: post #283

Earlier quoted context omitted.

A note on the mortgage: I understand your aversion to debt, but choosing a shorter duration mortgage can increase the probability of default, even if it shortens the time to the point that you are debt free, because for any given amount of cash reserves you have it shortens the runway you have if you lose your income. As long as mortgage money is cheap, the most profitable course of action is to use the 30 year mortg…

Compound interest means that you will be paying a lot more money for the same house if you buy over 30 rather than 15 years. However, for someone disciplined, taking a 30 year mortgage and paying it off like a 15 year mortgage with significant over payments is a good strategy. It means if you need to tighten your belt you can always drop down to the normal payment for a spell without so much as having to speak to the…

A better strategy is to use the 30 year, and then invest the monthly difference in the market. Why pay down long-term funding of 3.25% cost of money and lose out from a long-term market return of 7%?

You're right about the compound interest, but compound interest can work for you as well.

Re: Zillow seeks to sell 7k homes for $2.8B after flipping halt

#354

Post by _fat_santa »

SN76477 wrote: post #77

I hope this bubble bursts. In less than 3 years the rent in our working class city went up 45%. Not to mention the absurd qualifications one needs to rent. 4 times the income to rent, very good credit and background checks. This is not sustainable for working class people.

It's worse in some areas. I was trying to rent a place in Denver, it was a 1bd going for $1,300 but the landlord wanted someone with 5X net earnings. I told the landlord he was delusional. 5X net earnings to qualify for that place would be close to $160k pre-tax and anyone earning that much isn't looking at a place like this.

Re: Zillow seeks to sell 7k homes for $2.8B after flipping halt

#355

Post by rubyn00bie »

mikysco wrote: post #275
game_the0ry wrote: post #255

Former real estate finance professional, here. If you were hoping this was a sign of the real estate market falling and perhaps its your chance to get a bargain, think again. > The company is seeking roughly $2.8 billion for the houses, which are being pitched to institutional investors, according to people familiar with the matter. Institutional investors (Blackstone, Blackrock, Colony, et al) will be being in bulk,…

Aren't all these homes required to be listed on the MLS before being sold? My understanding is a home (at least in California) can't be sold unless publicly listed for X days on the MLS.

I worked in real estate tech for like five years...

An MLS is nothing but an local organization. There are zero laws requiring a property to be posted on an MLS. I know of zero states with any regulations like what you propose. There's also confusion around the term "Realtor" because "Realtor" isn't actually a thing. It's a brand, a "real estate agent" on the other hand is an actual job.

The real estate industry is *truly* and exceptionally fucked up. The confusion around MLS, "Realtor," and probably loads of other things I'm forgetting are intentional.

Re: Zillow seeks to sell 7k homes for $2.8B after flipping halt

#356

Post by lordnacho »

monkmartinez wrote: post #227
ineedasername wrote: post #30

Sounds like they got in too close to the peak (not to mention delays & increased costs in refurb) and didn't factor increased carrying costs on the potential that these would sit on the market a bit longer if they wanted to sell at a higher premium. A hard lesson for them that listing aggregation & analysis of the market is far different than direct investments & flipping. Flippers take a big risk and offset inevitab…

They simply overpaid. My neighbor received an offer of $150k over the z-estimate in Tucson. He felt that it would be stupid not to sell and wasn't even thinking about selling before the offer came in, so he sold. He paid a slight premium to buy his new house out in the boonies, but the gain offset the rise in price. They are currently listing his old house at the zestimate... I doubt they find a buyer even at that pr…

And $150k is how much of the house? Needs some more numbers so we can get an idea of the scale of overpayment.

Because if they're just off a few percent, I don't know why Zillow wouldn't just hold on for a bit.

Re: Zillow seeks to sell 7k homes for $2.8B after flipping halt

#357

Post by fragmede »

BuckRogers wrote: post #304
randomopining wrote: post #282

Earlier quoted context omitted.

What's your dilemma? If you're gonna live there for 10 years, get a large utility out of the house in general and also owning your own place, then just go for it. If you're buying just to buy, then hold off.

My dilemma is balancing inflation risks through all this increased government spending, with short-term market timing. I think that these risks are more likely than ever, and imminent. On the inflation risks. I really wish the Democrats would cancel all their ideas about child care and what not, and just shift the tax burden from the working class that punch a clock, to the investment class that live off of IRS-defin…

The specifics of your aside aren't especially interesting here, but they are quite important to you before making such a large investment. My time machine's just as good as yours, and anyone that claims their's is any better is trying to sell you something. Risks is inherent in everything. If I were trying to sell anything "rock solid" in Feb 2020; it's possible time would have proven that to be a total lie.

If you have a great mistrust of the future, then there's never going to be a good time to buy a house. If you think politicians are going to mess things up yet again, buying a house is foolish. Hanging off every word the next three or four presidents make is going to make your heart sink and your blood pressure rise on bad news, and curse the name of whomever convinced you to buy an millstone of a house to hang around your neck.

If, however, you're convinced that buying a house (for you to live in, not as part of a basically-liquid REIT) is your path to financial freedom, then when the refrigerator or other large appliance breaks, that's just part of owning a home, and you'll relish in picking the one you want.

How do you want to live for the next few years? (One thing to keep in mind is that houses can be sold before the full 15-30 years is up, which may be advantageous, depending on your finances.)

Re: Zillow seeks to sell 7k homes for $2.8B after flipping halt

#358

Post by ineedasername »

BuckRogers wrote: post #272
game_the0ry wrote: post #255

Former real estate finance professional, here. If you were hoping this was a sign of the real estate market falling and perhaps its your chance to get a bargain, think again. > The company is seeking roughly $2.8 billion for the houses, which are being pitched to institutional investors, according to people familiar with the matter. Institutional investors (Blackstone, Blackrock, Colony, et al) will be being in bulk,…

I'm a 39 year renter flush with cash from 15 years of a professional job while living in austerity for the entire time. Soliciting free advice. You sound bullish so I wanted to share five risks in the short term that have been on my mind lately: 1) Evictions now allowed in 43 states after a pandemic moratorium on them. My state allowed them October 3rd. Supply. 2) A China conflict at any point. Disruption. 3) Taxes g…

Are you investing or looking to move? If it's the later, none of the issues mentioned matter as much because it's all paper money once you buy. You haven't lost or gained anything unless you anticipate the need to resell the home in the near future (in which case, yes, be a little more careful). That said, my advice is not "buy now". I don't know your specifics, those of your area, etc. Home ownership & maintaining a home is also very different than renting. So, what follows are response to your individual points, not justifications for why you should buy now:

1) This will impact rentals much more than home sales, and evicted renters aren't going to increase demand in the home sales market. It's also a positive factor if you're buying: Don't be in a hurry, wait 2-3 months to see how the end of the moratorium impacts supply. If supply increases, sticker price should go down-- you win.

2) This seems too vague of a threat to factor in. Neither side wants an all out trade war (though idiot meaningless wars have been waged before) If you mean military? Well, anything significant enough to trickle into the housing market may not spare you as a renter either. Outcomes in that scenario are beyond the event horizon. If you really think that's a significant enough threat to factor into home buying decisions then you should be buying a home way outside of urban circle-- one with solar power, well water & purification, and two levels of basement for all of your prepper material.

3) Easy enough: factor that possibility in to what you're willing to spend. Let's say a worst case is a 10% increase to your marginal rate. Unless you're over $400k/year that is very unlikely anyway from the (still too few) details I've seen out of congress.

4) Okay, just don't crash the market on purpose. The rest of us have to live here too

5) From areas (NYC) that have implemented these mandates, non-compliance has been very small. And I'm willing to bet that extremely few hold outs are from people who would lose their home & suffer economic ruin over a refusal. Anyway, there's a simple solution here too: wait 2-3 months to see how they shake out.

Re: Zillow seeks to sell 7k homes for $2.8B after flipping halt

#359

Post by BuckRogers »

mullingitover wrote: post #309
BuckRogers wrote: post #272

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I'm a 39 year renter flush with cash from 15 years of a professional job while living in austerity for the entire time. Soliciting free advice. You sound bullish so I wanted to share five risks in the short term that have been on my mind lately: 1) Evictions now allowed in 43 states after a pandemic moratorium on them. My state allowed them October 3rd. Supply. 2) A China conflict at any point. Disruption. 3) Taxes g…

> 4) Rates going up to counter inflation. I want this one since I have cash and don't care if rates are 2% or 20%. You're likely making a bad bet by holding on to cash. The inflation and low rates are doing their job for the most part by driving investment and spending, and you're swimming against the current by doing exactly what you're not supposed to be doing: hoarding cash. > 5) Vaccine mandate job losses. Supply…

That's what this is about, getting rid of my cash. As I mentioned to someone else, before inflation kicks in bigtime, and timed around these risk factors. I've hoarded cash up until this point almost accidentally, I've just been too busy working to spend. I do like a cushion, but not the cushion I have now.

On the mandate job losses, I think a lot remains to be seen. We have the airline issue going on right now, and I think that's directly related. Not sure there's any in-person "nice safe job" honestly. This is so far from being over in regards to variants, there's just no sense in all this. The only mandate people need is a mandate on employers that any job that can be done at home, shall be done at home. Then mandating hazard pay for those that must do their jobs in-person. Those are the only mandates that make sense to me, and I would hope that by Jove, even our most brainwashed vaccine-loving brethren could get onboard with.

Re: Zillow seeks to sell 7k homes for $2.8B after flipping halt

#360

Post by aeternum »

traceddd wrote: post #280
BuckRogers wrote: post #272

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I'm a 39 year renter flush with cash from 15 years of a professional job while living in austerity for the entire time. Soliciting free advice. You sound bullish so I wanted to share five risks in the short term that have been on my mind lately: 1) Evictions now allowed in 43 states after a pandemic moratorium on them. My state allowed them October 3rd. Supply. 2) A China conflict at any point. Disruption. 3) Taxes g…

Personally I went through a lot of the same considerations and the indecision and flip flopping got quite tiring. Eventually I just simplified things. Living in a property you own gives so much more for your money compared to what one could afford at the same level renting. And on a long enough timeline crashes have had minimal impact. Many of those disruptions would affect the financial markets too so unless you’re…

>Living in a property you own gives so much more for your money

This isn't true everywhere. Prop13 in California for example means that a long-time owner can rent out a property at below market and still make money since they're paying near-zero property tax. Both the renter and landlord come out ahead.

Post reply on HN