Con_Alma;460469 wrote:I'm here. Are you looking for something specific from me??

Wasn't this settled before this thread every started?

I don't think this thread impacted definitions or understandings at all. They remain the same from what I can surmise.

Except you still can't define market value correctly.

Steel Valley Football;460531 wrote:Except you still can't define market value correctly.

In your view has that changed at all? Do you expect it to?

I don't know what you are looking for from me.

I came to the conclusion that I had stated my opinion thus far and really didn't see an further benefit in expanding on it. If you can make me better understand the value in continuing to respond to yours I'll try and do so.

Con_Alma;460569 wrote:In your view has that changed at all? Do you expect it to?

I don't know what you are looking for from me.

I came to the conclusion that I had stated my opinion thus far and really didn't see an further benefit in expanding on it. If you can make me better understand the value in continuing to respond to yours I'll try and do so.

You insisted that your neighbor trying to sell his house has his own market value and wouldn't budge from that price no matter how long his house had to be on the market; that he would wait even if it took 2-3 years to get his asking price. I said that it's because it was listed above market value and wouldn't sell and you said that it wasn't listed too high; that he just had his own idea of market value and he would wait until he got his price.

However, his selling point is his fair value and not market value. You continue to insist otherwise and that's why we're still here. Based on that, you either need to explain your position better or concede that you were not talking about market value, but fair value.

I "need" to explain my position better? I don't even need to oblige your request to have come over and had this discussion with you.

I was also well aware that we disagree on this topic. We still do.

I will add the following to emphasize my point a littler further. Price was not the reason my neighbors house didn't sell faster. Here's why.

If he saw value in selling if for much lower than his asking price...say $700k or even $500K and it was significantly lower than any other home in the area it still wouldn't have sold. It wasn't the price point compared to others. There were no buyers at even the price point of several hundred thousand lower in this geographic area at that time. This is primarily based on the lack of income to support such a purchase. It's not that the home isn't worth or doesn't have the value being advertised but rather there are minimal to no able buyers.


There, are however people moving in from other regions that have the income level and desire to purchase. For example the home was purchased by a couple from Connecticut eventually at very close to his original asking price.

Con_Alma;461168 wrote:I will add the following to emphasize my point a littler further. Price was not the reason my neighbors house didn't sell faster. Here's why.

If he saw value in selling if for much lower than his asking price...say $700k or even $500K and it was significantly lower than any other home in the area it still wouldn't have sold. It wasn't the price point compared to others. There were no buyers at even the price point of several hundred thousand lower in this geographic area at that time. This is primarily based on the lack of income to support such a purchase. It's not that the home isn't worth or doesn't have the value being advertised but rather there are minimal to no able buyers.


There, are however people moving in from other regions that have the income level and desire to purchase. For example the home was purchased by a couple from Connecticut eventually at very close to his original asking price.

Regardless of the numbers involved and the situation of limited buyers, his individual pricing point is called the fair value...because he is one seller. If his pricing point, or his fair value, equaled market value then that's fine. When an individual seller's fair value equals market value then the probability is very high that the property will sell within the neighborhood marketing time (or days on the market). If his marketing time exceeded the avg DOM then his pricing point was likely above the market value and the market then adjusts for that.

Again, his fair value does not determine the market value (as you have maintained all along).

Con_Alma;461168 wrote:I "need" to explain my position better? I don't even need to oblige your request to have come over and had this discussion with you.

I was also well aware that we disagree on this topic. We still do.

I should have been more clear. Your need to explain your position was only for your argument to have validity to any real estate-knowledgeable reader of this thread. It's certainly within your right to not make a valid point.

I think if you go back and read you will find that I have stated these opinions of mine relate to my experiences. Validity as it applies to my experiences does exist when forming my opinions.

Con_Alma;461412 wrote:I think if you go back and read you will find that I have stated these opinions of mine relate to my experiences. Validity as it applies to my experiences does exist when forming my opinions.

That's perfectly fine, but your, or any one person's, real estate experiences do not make market rules - they may fall within market rules, but they do not dictate them.

You stating "the market value of a property is whatever someone is willing pay for it" is simply not true. That is fair price - not market value.

I am glad that it's perfectly fine with you.

I have never implied or suggested that I make nor dictate market rules.

I have never stated that the market value of a property is "what someone is willing to pay for it". For example, if I want to pay a $1 for my neighbor's home it's not market value...in fact it's not even fair price.

We disagree on this issue.

No, we don't disagree - you have the definition wrong.

Steel Valley Football;461490 wrote:...

You stating "the market value of a property is whatever someone is willing pay for it" is simply not true. That is fair price - not market value.

Con_Alma;462295 wrote:...

I have never stated that the market value of a property is "what someone is willing to pay for it". For example, if I want to pay a $1 for my neighbor's home it's not market value...in fact it's not even fair price.

....

As you can see above we certainly don't agree therefore we disagree.

We even disagree on disagreeing!!! Lol

I have appreciated this dialogue. Thank you for asking me to engage in it. I hope there are more topics that we can dig into in the near future.

Con_Alma;463298 wrote:The market value is the price point when the price a buyer is willing to purchase at meets the price that a seller is willing to sell at.

It's not the most recent, comparable selling price. it's not what the sell thinks it's worth. It's not what the buyer is willing to pay.

It's the price point that both are willing to transact act.

Nope - this one. It's wrong.