Top-end real estate is at a tipping point from seller’s market to buyer’s market

It’s essential for real estate agents to understand the current marketplace so they can get the best deal for their clients. And after years of watching the market favor sellers, many agents say they’ve seen a recent shift that has affected luxury property sales across the globe: We’ve entered a buyer’s market.

Jed Garfield, president of Leslie J. Garfield & Co., a New York–based brokerage that focuses on town houses, said he saw signs of this trend in late 2015, when properties that were listed at a fair market price didn’t sell. But recently, the impact has been dramatic. For example, a town house on East 70th Street between Park and Lexington avenues that was bought for $31 million in 2013, re-listed for $32.5 million a year and a half ago—and then dropped down to $22 million three months ago.

“The market is not what it was,” Garfield said. There’s an expectation that real estate prices will rise 3% to 5% each year, he added, but buyers won’t stand for that anymore. “You’d be very hard-pressed to find anybody who would pay more than 2015 prices today,” he added.

NYC doesn’t mean anything to me…all real estate is local…

1 Like

They called it wrong a year ago

Fear mongering… how many times have the “experts” called a market top. Eventually the broken clocks will be right though.

1 Like

Be creative, not always use the same song.

Do you recall how the Taoist prays for rain? They are always right because they continue to pray till rain.

1 Like

Shiller predicted the crash for years…It finally happened…He went from the boy who cried wolf to genius…There is money in the gloom and doom business

That’s why his analysis never struck a cord in my mind. How did he win the Nobel prize anyway?

1 Like

I’m also wondering

This is much more interesting analysis. .

The surprising news? Homebuilding’s impact – or a lack of it in some places – is by far and away the biggest influence when it comes to inventory woes, outweighing other explanations by a large margin. Across the 100 largest metros, our findings show that:

New home construction is strongly related to inventory. Every one percentage point increase in a market’s housing stock between 2010 and 2016 is, on average, correlated with inventory that is approximately 13% higher.
Investor ownership is tied to lower inventory. Every one percentage point increase in the housing stock owned by investors in a market is, on average, correlated with inventory that is 2.8% lower.
Older households – by hanging on to their homes – aren’t necessarily driving down inventory, at least not yet. Every one percentage point increase in the housing stock owned by those aged 55 and over is, on average, correlated with inventory that is actually 3.6% higher.

1 Like

Build baby build. …been my mantra on redfin forums since 2009…Been my whole career. .I have helped build thousands of homes despite the nimby, environazi wack jobs that run all our BA cities…No more for me though…happily retired in Tahoe, will never build another new house… but will keep remodeling till I die…

The Shiller Nobel prize was for stock predictions not housing prices…Amazing he is famous for something he knows about very little.

http://www.nobelprize.org/nobel_prizes/economic-sciences/laureates/2013/shiller-facts.html

Oh my god, how come I didn’t win a Nobel prize? Ok, now I know the system is rigged :slight_smile:

Most academic research is only useful in a very narrow sense. I’m not convinced that Shiller is good at predicting stock prices or housing prices. If he’s good at it, please show me his trading record

1 Like

IF Shiller was a genius stock predictor he would be rich

He spent too much time doing academic research and neglected investing. So, he is not rich.

Perhaps Warren Buffett should be the next Nobel Prize winner.

And why is there a Nobel prize for stock investing anyways?

Nobel prize winner better stay in their ivory tower. Asset price prediction without personal capital in stake is a hoax.

Shiller is overly zealous in forecasting market while he stays poor. If he has no confidence to invest his own capital, why should others believe him?

Too many fake scientists. Yes, Nobel prize winner can also become a fake scientist when he talks about things he does not know

I think he actually developed a Shiller P/E index where he demonstrated stocks were at historic highs even back in 2012. And I think perhaps that’s why he won the Nobel prize? Of course those who listened to him missed out on the gains 5 years straight. Meanwhile he pocketed his $500k prize money. What irony!

Many academians are useless in real life. Their usefulness is in journals and maybe a little in the classroom.

Many of them are overrated by brainwashing their students