«
»

Monday, February 21st, 2011 at 10:30 PM

CV Mix

Initially this comparison of two sales on the same street had the appearance of  an extra-wide spread; $810,000 to $1,100,000.  But in the end it was about right - an add of 10% for a bigger south-facing canyon-front backyard, and a minus-5% roughly for short sales. 

It helped re-inforce how uniform the pricing is around the tract-house-heavy Carmel Valley, where buyers loaded with internet data are making similar decisions.

So instead of adding the two model-matches across the street from each other on Foxhound that sold within $10/sf of each other, I tacked on two recent foreclosures and a short-sale: 

Posted on Monday, February 21st, 2011 at 10:30 PM in Bubbleinfo TV, North County Coastal | 8 Comments » | Print Print You can follow any responses to this entry through the RSS 2.0 feed. You can leave a response, or trackback from your own site.

Reader Comments: 8 Responses

  1. Hello,
    You mentioned Adam a couple of times in this video. Who is Adam? A fellow agent?

    Rico | February 22nd, 2011 at 1:00 am

  2. Does the bottle of Jager in the last one convey?

    Genius | February 22nd, 2011 at 1:10 am

  3. Yes, Adam is a friend and fellow realtor who was interviewed on video here a while back.

    Jim the Realtor | February 22nd, 2011 at 6:22 am

  4. Cry every time you see a solar panel that’s not in some remote off the power grid location. Generally speaking, they take a barrel of oil to create, and only return a half barrel of oil over its life, all subsidized by you, the electricity rate and state tax payers.

    Dan Tanner | February 22nd, 2011 at 10:06 pm

  5. Loved the Doobie Bros music

    Otto Maddox | February 22nd, 2011 at 11:26 pm

  6. Love the name Caramel Valley. Maybe we could change it to that? Sounds yummy. You have an eye for the odd detail, Jim.

    Kathy | February 23rd, 2011 at 7:12 am

  7. Dan Tanner-As they say over at Wikipedia, [Citation Needed]. Even if your figures are correct (which I doubt), you are not factoring in construction costs on a regular power plant (that is, a solar power plant replaces an natual gas, coal, or other plant, which also takes oil to build). You are also not factoring in the reduction of pollution.

    Anonymous | February 23rd, 2011 at 8:01 am

  8. First, Dan Tanner’s figures on solar panel payback are wrong. In time, solar panels will prevail thanks to several things: Monostructured (amorphous) silicon developed by Mitsubishi and going on-line at Chinese factories, tinted and preformed panels that approximate conventional roofing and building code adoption of dual AC/DC home electrical standards.

    Second, I really like the color of the floor tiles in this video. Nice touch.

    Peter | February 23rd, 2011 at 2:14 pm

Post a new comment