On bended knee: “May almighty god spare us from a world in which facts can be checked.”
Catherine Reagor in today’s Arizona Republic:
Check out the listings on homes: The phrase “motivated investor” describing the seller is pretty common.
There are 46,680 active listings in the Arizona Regional Multiple Listings Service right now. This is a lot, close to double what would have been considered normal three years ago.
How many of those listings say “motivated investor”?
One.
You read that number right. Out of 46,680 active listings, precisely one says “motivated investor”. None of the homes currently under contract uses that language.
I looked at everything, as well, just for the sake of completeness. Out of about 840,000 total listings — active, pending, sold, cancelled, expired — how many say “motivated investor”?
Eleven. Total. Going back more than four years.
Why wouldn’t a listing say “motivated investor” even if the home is owned by a motivated investor? Because using that language would hand the buyer an untoward advantage. Without the seller’s written instructions, this would be an agency violation. It would be a wonderful, wonderful thing if real estate reporting were done by people who know something about the real estate business.
But how did Catherine Reagor get the idea that, “The phrase ‘motivated investor’ describing the seller is pretty common,” is something that can be found by checking out “the listings on homes” when this is in fact almost impossible to find in the MLS system?
I think she just made it up. How about you…?
Technorati Tags: arizona, arizona real estate, phoenix, phoenix real estate, real estate, real estate marketing
Jim Duncan says:
Just to be the devil’s advocate – in our MLS we have agents’ and public remarks – did you search both? In my MLS, there are a few more listings with “motivate” in the agents’ remarks than in the public ones …
–Jim
August 20, 2006 — 7:19 am
Greg Swann says:
You bet. The two remarks fields are the only reliable way to identify tenant-occupied homes in ARMLS, so I’ve worn the corners round on those two boxes over the years. Of the eleven total listings, seven were from one field, four from the other.
I catch Reagor in stupidities and insipidities all the time, but this is the second time I’ve seen here engaged in or complicit in actual deceit. This is the other time, where either the Mahlerwein family lied to her or she deliberately shaded the truth of their story.
August 20, 2006 — 7:41 am
Dave Barnes says:
Greg,
I am confused.
ZipRealty says: “There are 53,301 homes for sale in Phoenix, AZ as of 7 minutes ago.” while you write: “There are 46,680 active listings”.
This is a huge difference. Eight thousand or 16%. Why the difference?
thanks,
dave
August 20, 2006 — 8:13 am
Greg Swann says:
> This is a huge difference. Eight thousand or 16%. Why the difference?
As a guess, I’d say they’re including the homes that are currently contracted to be sold but have not yet closed. This is bad practice, but it illustrates why you have to be careful to listen for precisely which numbers are being named.
Right at this smoment, there are 46,686 Active listings, which means homes you could conceivably put under contract. There are 926 Active-With-Contingencies listings, which means they are under contract but one or more buyer contingencies may impede closing. And there are 6,643 homes listed as Sale Pending. Normally, this would mean the listing agent and seller have a high degree of confidence that the contract will close. In the current market, I suspect some portion of these would be listed as AWC except that Sale Pending stops the Days on Market clock, where AWC does not. In any case, the grand total is 54,255, of which only 46,686 are available for purchase.
I don’t know that this is what ZipRealty is doing, but the numbers are close enough to suggest that it might be. They work from a feed, I think, rather than from the live MLS, so there could be an accretion of discrepancies between the two databases.
August 20, 2006 — 8:28 am
Greg Swann says:
Oh, incidentally, I checked when I wrote this entry: None of the AWC or Pending listings say “motivated investor”.
August 20, 2006 — 8:30 am
Jonathan Dalton says:
Wait … are you saying the Republic got something wrong?
What will come next? The sun rising in the east? High temperatures over 100 degrees? My wife wanting take out rather than cooking dinner?
I’m shocked, I say. Shocked!
August 20, 2006 — 10:38 am
Jonathan Dalton says:
Not backing away from the statement the Republic is wrong most of the time, but where did you get that quote, Greg? I’m looking at Catherine’s article online and I don’t see any references to “motivated investors.”
Was this from a different day, not today’s story on first-time home buying?
August 20, 2006 — 10:44 am
Greg Swann says:
Oh, you had me spooked! It’s still there, for now at least. The Republic‘s links are evanscent, so eventually this link will fail.
August 20, 2006 — 10:56 am
Jonathan Dalton says:
Got it … you’re far more intrepid than I. I can barely bring myself to read the articles much less the notes columns. 🙂
August 20, 2006 — 11:07 am
Todd Tarson says:
Clearly the media, and the likes of the bubble boys, are framing the argument… and on loose facts, if any facts at all.
I actually wish there was a category for less than motivated sellers… err… scratch that. There is such a category. It’s the top end price for any segment of property.
This is the story that should be reported on in my opinion.
August 20, 2006 — 11:25 am