Domain: tiger-web1.srvr.media3.us User Profile: RedFox | TigerDroppings.com
Favorite team:LSU 
Location:
Biography:
Interests:
Occupation:
Number of Posts:1316
Registered on:1/23/2009
Online Status: 

Forum
Message

People desparate to sell houses

Posted by RedFox on 2/15/09 at 2:52 pm
My wife and I are looking for a house to buy, and I went to see one of them and the owner happened to be there. The house was listed for 109k. The owner said that the real estate agency had the house listed for two years and he just wanted to get rid of it and he was willing to sell it directly to a buyer for 60k. The house has a new roof, new sheet rock, new wiring, new plumbing and he claims to have the paperwork to prove all of this.


That's a 49k discount just because I happened to run into the owner and the owner is desperate to unload the house. Not that its my problem, but if he does sell it directly to me, can the real estate company come and sue him to get their commission?

Freedom Fries

Posted by RedFox on 2/6/09 at 5:34 pm
Freedom Fries: And Other Stupidity We'll Have to Explain to Our Grandchildren


Great film. Available on netflix instant watch. Not as partisan as one would think.

re: Is this a good deal?

Posted by RedFox on 2/5/09 at 5:46 pm to
I think he said he was $500. He estimated total closing costs, which includes everything from points to the title search to his fee, etc. etc. to be around 3k.

re: Is this a good deal?

Posted by RedFox on 2/5/09 at 5:44 pm to
quote:

However, what can you get with only 100k?



More and more as housing prices continue to slide.

Is this a good deal?

Posted by RedFox on 2/5/09 at 5:16 pm
My wife and I make together $69,000. My wife has near perfect credit (one $35 collection from 3 years + a 25k s loan in perfect standing), I have good but not perfect credit . (One open collection from 4 years ago for $100 + one more in dispute from recent for $70 + years of perfect credit card history and high credit limits but very low balances).

We were offered $100,000 in financing at 5.375% for 30 years fixed with 3.5% down. Is that a good deal?

re: RENTING =/= THROWING MONEY AWAY!

Posted by RedFox on 2/4/09 at 3:34 am to
quote:

i'm starting to come over to this side of the line. i have always thought that if i am paying $1100 a month rent, then I might as well pay $1600 a month and build up equity and then i'd get my money back when I sell. now I am thinking that with a downpayment, insurance costs, mortgage that what i would pay renting for a few years wouldn't equal to the interest i'd be paying on the mortgage plus all additional costs to own.





I'm look for a home now and I'm going for paying less than what I pay in rent for the note, taxes, and insurance. If I can't do it for less I will keep renting.

Tell that pools can be a major f*cking pain in the arse. Unless they really really like swimming its not worth it. I'd much rather just have the space than the pool.

Superbowl - watching it for the ads?

Posted by RedFox on 1/30/09 at 3:28 pm
The very idea sickens me. I can't believe people actually do this. Yeah, I find the ads entertaining, but I'm watching the game for the football. There are people who don't even care about football who watch the game for the ads. Imagine that. So what do they do it for? To be advertised to, that's it.
quote:


help me understand why i am the last person who needs to be home shopping right now


I think if you can find a house that cheap that is good for you, you should take it. 50k just isn't that big of a loan for a home - that's what, 300 bucks a month? You'll probably need a 10% down payment though these days.
quote:

Why can it not be like Florida at Texas and have loyal fan support for football and basketball and compete on the highest level of each?


Because all us loyal football fans only have time to be fanatical about one sport.


Besides, who cares about college basketball until the playoffs? Hardly anyone. This is one thing football needs to heed when it decides to make a playoff finally - the bracket should be no larger than is necessary to certainly encompass the #1 team. Given teams like Utah - I'd say we need a top 8 bracket. Top 4 would be too small as teams with legit claims to #1 would be left out sometimes. 6 would probably work but why not have 8 if you're gonna have 6.

16 would be way too big and would encompass teams that have no business whatsoever in an NC game.