For those of you not living in New York or who don't follow NBA basketball, the toast of Gotham is Jeremy Lin, an unheralded, undrafted, and un-scholarshipped (is that a word?) point guard who just led the Knicks to their 4th straight win over the Lakers. He scored 38 points to pace the Knickerbockers, playing without their two stars, over LA 92-85. Lin is an amazing story: after leading his high school to the state championship, no college offered him a scholarship. I read last night that a coach at UCLA, Lin's dream school, admitted that had they been wise enough to recruit him, he would have started for the Bruins. He played at Harvard and was undrafted by any NBA team. Two clubs cut him before the Knicks picked him up. He's only been in town a couple of weeks and probably would still be on the bench if the squad weren't plagued by injuries. And all he's done is play out of his mind and lead the Knickerbockers to 4 straight wins. 

One of the announcers tonight mentioned that Jeremy is staying at his brother's house on the lower east side on a couch. They went on to say that some real estate agents must be licking their chops, because Lin is not leaving New York anytime soon. I agree- Mr Lin is not going to be some journeyman who gets cut, waived, traded or sent back to D-League. He's staying in Madison Square Garden and he's going to have to do better than his brother's couch. 

If Jeremy wanted to live in the suburbs, Westchester would be the best choice in my mind, and I think I know a good broker for him to call. However, I think he'll stay in Manhattan, and that gets my wheels turning because I know an agent or two that, if I were in his shoes, I would use to find a home. 

I have done business with Eileen Hsu for years and she'd be a phenomenal choice. Eileen is a tremendous talent, a great advocate and negotiator, and possesses an incredibly committed work ethic. I have had a front row seat in some transactions of a highly difficult nature where Eileen gave virtuoso performances and got the job done elegantly. 

My friend Doug Heddings also comes to mind. Heddings Property Group is perhaps the most forward thinking and innovative real estate brokerage in Manhattan. The firm's growth proves that Dog knows where this industry needs to go to truly serve the public. 

Of course, Knick hall of famer and announcer Walt Frazier's son Walt Frazier Jr is an agent with Keller Williams in Manhattan, and he may already be on the job. I had the good fortune of meeting Walt at the New York RE Bar camp last month, and I remembered him from his own illustrious college basketball career at Penn when he played some great games against my alma mater, Villanova, and ruined our chances of winning the Big 5 in 1988-89. Walt, who has the heart of a champion, runs a great operation. 

But alas, in the post game tonight the commentators mentioned that Jeremy has been offered the apartment of ex-teammate David Lee in White Plains. 

What really gets me jazzed about Jeremy Lin is not the pipe dream of being his real estate agent. My 9-year old son Luke has coincidentally discovered a love of basketball in the last few months. Luke has ADD and last year, prior to his diagnosis, he had to endure some difficult times in school both academically and socially. It is not easy for a father to see that, and Ann and I have worked hard to help him. I had ADD too and sports made a huge difference for me. It is beginning to make a difference for Luke. He and I will be going to some games aside from the ones we play in the driveway, and a role model like Mr Lin makes a father's job easier. His story of perseverance and faith is an inspiration. And that's why Madison Square Garden is electric again. 

Update: Lin is out in front again- NY Post already reported he's househunting! 

Every so often I get a call from a home seller asking me a variation of this question:

What will the commission be if I find my own buyer?

It could be a seller client or someone considering listing their home with my company. Typically, the discussion that follows reveals that the questioner

• either wants a complete exemption from commission because it is "their" buyer or:
•  a steep discount because they think most of the work is now done. 

This shows a fundamental lack of understanding of the role their broker plays in the sale of their home. 

To backtrack: In 2004, a person could make an offer on a home, get it accepted, and get a mortgage in 30-40 days without much effort or hand holding from their agent. I know this firsthand; I was a loan officer from 2001 until about 2005 when I started my company. It was so easy to get a mortgage back then that it was almost scary- there were no income loans, no documentation loans, and all sort of other programs that required a pulse and little else. If a person liked a home and wanted it, you sent them to the mortgage broker down at the corner, left them alone, and they moved in 60 days later. All that was needed for a house to sell was a person that liked the place. 

Since the housing downturn, the pendulum has swung the other way. Banks are so cautious and strict in their underwriting that even seemingly well qualified people have a hard time getting to the closing table. The scrutiny from bank underwriters not only borders on suspicion, sometimes it feels like they are looking for an excuse to avoid lending the money.

In this climate, finding the buyer is just the beginning of the work. Not only are the banks more cautious, buyers also proceed with far more trepidation and hesitation than they ever did in years past. Even when people simply love a house, I have seen deals implode over draconian underwriting or buyers who have gotten spooked over a seemingly easy to fix problem on the seller's side, such as an open permit or high radon reading. 

Today, an accepted offer is anti climactic. Once a buyer makes an offer, we have to navigate an obstacle course of home inspections, attorney haggling over contract verbiage (which can drag on for weeks here is lawyer happy New York), appraisal issues, title concerns, commitment conditions, challenges to get a clear to close and a ton of other possible "gotchas" that we often doubt a closing will happen until all parties show up. 

No sane person dislikes saving money. I sure don't. But if a seller has a cousin or a neighbor they run into at the store who expresses an interest in their home, they should immediately refer them to their agent and ensure that the deal has the best chance of closing. You never as a seller want to compete with your own agent. It is tempting for some to think that they can "save" by bargaining their agent to a lower (or no) commission by procuring their own buyer. But the skill set that it takes to carry that buyer over the finish line is far more than most regular folks possess. 

There are rare cases when a seller might have a solid buyer lined up where an exclusion could be negotiated for a reduced commission IF the buyer is a quick knockout punch. But the sort of prospect who can truly close quickly with no time on market or the associated expenses is rare. Often the the seller is seduced by mere interest, as if it were 2004 again and all they need do is send their prospect down the street. In this day and age, that doesn't occur much. In a transaction the magnitude of selling a home, the best thing to do is have your professional do the job, and rest assured that you are getting what you paid for. 

If you want a do it yourself project, build a go-cart. For real estate, use your broker no matter where the buyer might come from. 

I have often said that nearby Pleasantville is aptly named. It borders Briarcliff Manor to the east and is idyllic: a picturesque, charming little village on the Harlem line of Metro North with shops, eateries, and culture. The latest feather in the village's cap is that GQ magazine voted it the second best smelling city in the world. 

Good for them. I'm no expert on aroma but I can tell you that living in Pleasantville would never stink. My first job ever, which paid for my junior prom in 1984, was washing dishes at Pace University. When I took a year sabbatical from life in 2000 before I got married I tended bar at Mediterraneo. As a matter of fact, I proposed to Ann over a nice meal from Mediterraneo, but it was takeout. They still get credit. I meet every other Friday at Jean Jacques with my networking group. And the Jacob Burns Center is Westchester County's premier theater for cultural films. 

We love to do business in Pleasantville. Stephanie Solano, one of our top agents, lives in Pleasantville and is a local expert. 

In 2011, 47 homes sold in Pleasantville at a median price of $495,000. 
There are currently 40 homes for sale in the Pleasantville school district at a median list price of $649,450.  

It is a great time to be a buyer, and if central Westchester County is a good location for you, you should check Pleasantville out. Better yet, reach out to Stephanie. (914) 645-2433

Previous posts on Pleasantville.

View homes for sale in Pleasantville with or without registration. 

Pleasantville Named Best Smelling 'City': MyFoxNY.com

For the third time in the past 4 weeks, I have been contacted by a buyer who chose to call me directly instead of having their agent call me because their offer was not accepted. In each case, I have told the agent-and the buyer when they called- that I'd be happy to know what comparable sale they used to justify their price. In each case, I have heard the same thing in lieu of any other fact: It is a buyer's market.

This is what I wrote earlier this week on the "buyer's market:"

 the "buyer's market" phrase was thrown around as if it were some childhood game wildcard phrase that granted immunity from logic or true market forces.

In other words, there were no other sales they could use to justify their price- it was just a speculative pipe dream. 

One of the properties we are dealing with is a condominium in Chappaqua in the Old Farm Lake complex. Even though the 4th quarter of 2011 was not good and prices across the Westchester market were down about 5% from last year, the condominium market in Chappaqua is actually up. Here are some facts:

• In 2009, the median price of a condo in Chappaqua was $453,000. 
• In 2010, the median price of a condo in Chappaqua was $467,000.
• In 2011, the median price of a condo in Chappaqua was $505,000. 

New York State has something known as settlement conferences for homeowners facing foreclosure. It is a good law. Distressed borrowers can go to the courthouse and meet with lawyers of their lender face to face in front of a judge or court appointed referee. The referee is there to make sure that the bank is treating the borrower fairly, and if the borrower is trying to modify their loan, they are given every chance to do so with the conference process in place to ensure fair treatment. 

I have accompanied quite a few clients to these hearings. I have seen referees discuss with bank lawyers lost faxes, red tape, and much of the other nonsensical stuff that banks often subject their borrowers to, and the referee/judge doesn't have much room for that sort of thing. It is the closest thing to compassion by statute I have ever seen for borrowers facing foreclosure. 

Now, while this sounds well and good, the borrowers who get these letters calling them to schedule a conference are beyond stressed. They are frightened. Nothing I can say makes them comfortable about going to court in front of a judge and facing the lawyer who represents the bank in the foreclosure proceeding. The only role I can play when I go with my clients is that of support. It makes a difference. 

About 2 weeks ago, I went with another client to one of these conferences. It was the same as you'd expect- a stressed out borrower with his home listed with me as a short sale with a manila folder filled with his records. He couldn't afford a lawyer. We waited in the hall together outside the court room, which acted as a waiting room of sorts for the foreclosure lawyers while the judge held the conferences in her chamber. 

You have to appreciate the place filled with other borrowers behind on their mortgages waiting for their sessions. They show up with thick folders, they speak in hushed tones, and the scent of fear is heavy in the air. It's like a wake or a hospital emergency room waiting area. Even when the borrower can afford their own attorney, it is somber. One husband and wife showed up with their toddler daughter, wide eyed and adorable. I can imagine the mental gymnastics they were going through to be strong for her. 

I debated even posting about this, and while it is not the Zapruder film or conclusive proof of the Yeti, it is significant because it speaks to the times we live in.

We were about 10 feet from the door, and our session was for 10am. We didn't get in front of the judge until 11:30, so we had 90 minutes together in the hall while we heard the bank attorneys in the next room talk. 

And these guys were having a good old time. A laugh a minute. It was just a good old boy, back slapping, bull session among colleagues who were either oblivious to the suffering of the people 10 feet away, or they just didn't care. Now since they could see us and walked past us every time they went to get a drink or go to the men's room, and since they knew why we were there, I have to conclude that they just didn't care. Not a lick.

My client just shook his head. It dawned on me that I had my mobile phone, so, for science, I ran the camera for 60 seconds to see if I could capture our friends in a few carefree laughs. They didn't disappoint. I have never seen this kind of behavior outside a settlement conference in any other courthouse. It's almost like they were rubbing it in; Hey pal, we're all lawyers in suits with this steady gig representing the bank, and you're not. So sit there and marinate in your stress and fear- we'll be 10 feet away, yucking it up in our little carefree club, and revel in our joy of not being you. It went on all morning. 

Like I said: I have been to conferences in counties all over the Hudson Valley, and I won't name which courthouse this one was. But none of the other ones was remotely like this. I might add that the woman in the foreground closest to the door was the lawyer for my client's bank. She couldn't have been a nicer lady, and her discomfort with the contrast between the rooms was obvious to me over the 90 odd minutes. But her colleagues? When they get theirs I won't shed a tear. So yuck it up and rub my guy's nose in it boys. Your time will come. Karma's a bitch. 

Go to about 0:30.

Inman news is reporting a Youtube announcement from ARG (Abbott Realty Group) that they are not  permitting their listings to be viewed on 3rd party syndicators such as Zillow, Trulia and even Realtor.com. The link is already behind Inman's paywall so I have embedded the video below. This comes in the wake of a similar announcement from midwest Giant Edina Realty's decision to do the very same thing this past November. Jim Abbott, broker and president of ARG, gives what I consider a very well reasoned explanation for his company's decision. You may not agree, but his explanation is compelling. 

As much as I'd like to be the enlightened, philosophical, transparency embracing dude I strive to be, the small business owner in me is quietly applauding Mr Abbott's guts. Here's why: You might expect on Zillow or Trulia that if you click on the smiling face next to the advert for more information that you'll be put in touch with the listing agent, but you would be wrong much of the time. I spend 5 figures annually to keep myself as the contact on my listings on these sites, because they are in the business to sell zip codes to agents posting themselves as the local experts. In other words, that smiling face might be some guy who never saw the house in his life but wrote a check to be the contact for the zip code. Any  consumer who has ever made inquiries on Zillow and Trulia knows this.

Some listing agents view this as extortion, because they provide the websites the content, but then have to pay for the privelege of being the recipient of the consumer inquiry on their own listing. 

The argument for syndication (and the natural rebuttal to Mr Abbott) has always been the same thing: exposure. When a broker is hired to market a property, it is our fiduciary duty to maximize exposure of the home, and these websites get mammoth traffic. It is also a matter of raw competition: "I'll put your listing on Zillow and Trulia" is the 2012 version of "I'll buy an ad in the supermarket homes magazine," which was the better mousetrap when I was first licensed in 1996. Here's the problem with that: The data is often inaccurate and not up to date, and I'm not so sure we are doing our clients any favors when we allow inquiries on their homes to go to some guy at another firm who never set foot in their living room. "Hire me and I'll make sure the guy who bought the zip code gets the calls" doesn't sound too compelling to me.

This is where the syndicators play both ends against the middle: they sell their high traffic and exposure, then have a highly caffeineted sales team contact agents and promise them buyer leads if they pay $XX a month. This puts the agent next to anyone's listings in that zip code who haven't paid themselves. I virtually pay an annuity every month to box out Joe Meatball from getting the calls on my listings, and I get a perk for being the contact guy on Bertha Hairnet's listings. Fair? Hardly, it is the cost of doing business.  

When a home is multiple listed, it goes to literally hundreds of websites automatically thanks to the IDX (Internet Data Exchange) feed to search sites of cooperating brokerages, association searches (Like MLSLI.com on Long Island) and national aggregators. The IDX feed is the real time data from MLS. If the information is wrong, it is the fault of the broker, so they have to be on their toes. The trend appears to be that the providers of the content, the listing brokers, are taking back control of their data to ensure accuracy and certainty that they field the consumer inquiries. This takes the property off some popular websites, but if more firms do this those websites may also lose their popularity. That could make them re-think some of their policies. 

ARG -and Edina- have made  their counterpunch. ARG, with about 25 agents and 41 listing on their website is about the same size as my firm. This took some thought and backbone. 

I have written before on what a buyer's market is and what a buyer's market isn't. Westchester County and our surroundings are a sought after destination; even if a home has been on the market for a year, once the price is right it will sell. I wish I could impress this upon a few buyers who have lost opportuntities when more motivated people came along and outbid them.  

We recently listed a newer build in a desirable subdivision. While it was a short sale, it was also upscale. Not long afterward, an offer came in almost 15% below asking price, a hefty discount not supported by any other market activity. The rationale? It's a buyer's market!

The seller countered, and the would-be buyer raised their number gradually, but well short of what we thought we could submit to the bank for acceptance (by "we" I mean my seller and their attorney). This went on for weeks. They never came up to the bottom line number we felt we could work with, and this resulted in some frustrated emails and phone calls from the agent. Then even the buyer called me directly. I don't know if the buyer thought they could be more convincing than the professional they had representing them, but I told the person both times that there was no comparable sale that justified accepting the offer. 

"But it's a buyer's market!" I was told. The house has been for sale for TWO WHOLE MONTHS and hasn't sold. I was risking having the bank take the house back if my client didn't take their offer. Furthermore, I was told, they were perfectly happy to wait until the bank repossessed and buy it at foreclosure to get their price. 

How lovely. This actually happened with two different byers on the same house- the same pattern and rationale. 

In each case, I asked the agent to ask the buyer to stop contacting me and go through their rep. 

Not long afterward, another buyer came along and made a stronger bid, which was accepted. They got the house.

Fatal mistake number one: Buyers should NEVER assume that they are the only game in town.  
Fatal mistake number two: A "buyers market" does not give the buyer fiat to set the market unilaterally. Comparable sales matter. 
Fatal mistake number three: When a buyer circumvents their agent and tries to negotiate on their own, they aren't accounting for the fact that they probably suck at negotiation and are hurting their own cause.  

In all three cases, the "buyer's market" phrase was thrown around as if it were some childhood game wildcard phrase that granted immunity from logic or true market forces. And in that buyer's market, the would-be buyers lost a home because they were their own worst enemy. The people believed that if they gave in just a little that they'd "lose." 

Pigs get fat, hogs get slaughtered. 

This is one of those topics I have been meaning to write about for a dog's age (sorry) and I finally have the time and inspiration to do just that. 

It is my view that an inordinate percentage of real estate agents are dog lovers. Canine devotees. Poochophiles. And they aren't just dog owners, they rescue them  adopt them, and give them foster homes. When I peruse Facebook, I can bet that the people who are posting about a dog that needs a home are real estate licensees. 

My very non-scientific observation in my 44 years is that a higher percentage of real estate people are dog people than any other occupation I know. Their dogs were always in their print and home magazine ads, they are on their web pages, in their cars, and often in their offices. They love their dogs. Actually, I should say WE love our dogs because I am one of them. We own a rescued 90 pound purebred German Shepherd who is a big goofy loveball, thinks I am the cats meow the greatest guy in the world, and adores the children. Before Max we had two yellow labs, Logan and Bella, and Logan was also a rescue who was nursed back from heartworm and near death. 

I was around dogs when I was a kid. That's my excuse. Do dogs cause people go go into real estate, or is it something else that causes the canine mania in so many of my colleagues? 

I actually think that the dog things does go hand in hand with a love of homes. Dogs make a house a home. They bring love and warmth, companionship and warm fuzzies. And when you are all about a home, a dog is not a far leap. 

But I think it is deeper than that, and I think what I am about to say should make our profession proud. We have compassion. By and large we are a benevolent group. Sure, there are some crummy, mercenary shazbuts in our ranks but overall we're a home loving (often dog loving), softed hearted crowd. If we weren't we wouldn't be so devoted to our furry family. 

Reading so many blogs and listening to my own team of agents, we lose sleep over our clients. We mother hen. We worry. We SO want them to win. We invest our selves and our efforts in a happy outcome for them. We literally bet our income we can make a difference for them. The public might think that all we see is a commission, but that's the minority. When we look at our clients, we see a noble mission. Is it any wonder that so many of us see the same when we look into a dog's eyes? 

That's my theory- any other ideas? 

I'm seldom political-I'm a capitalist, not a ideologue- and while I like President Obama, I have to say that I am incredibly disappointed by the State of the Union speech this evening for one good reason: he barely touched on housing or what he'd do to fix the industry. It is among our biggest problems and he barely went there.  I could also do without the camera on the person Mr Obama was just about to mention, because it made the whole thing seem like a choreographed effort between journalists and politicians, but I guess that's nothing new. 

It was a grand speech and he's a marvelous rhetoritician. There were some inspiring things he said. I agree that the American worker is the best in the world. I love the commitment to freedom around the world, and agree that nation building should start in our own back yard. But where I feel let down is the very brief minutes discussing housing that followed his patting himself on the back for the recovery of the auto industry.

What good is importing cars to Korea when you can't pay off your mortgage with the offer on your home? There was one promise to help people reduce their principle or be able to refinance withour red tape, and that was met with a heartbreakingly tepid response from the chamber. I shook my head. 

GM is the largest auto maker int he world. Swell. I guess we should just have millions of at risk homeowners who have no equity and no straight forward way out live in their cars instead. That might as well have been the solution. It was a 75 minute campaign speech with 90 seconds devoted to our most pressing issue, housing. 

We deserve better. They aren't listening to us.