According to the National Association of Realtors, condo sales were flat last month, unchanged from the previous month. During the same period, single-family home sales rose by 2.7%, USA Today reported Friday. Southern and western states recorded the highest number of home sales, while the northeast had no growth over the previous month.
Apparently many Americans are still fond of trees, lawns and backyard barbecues.
What a dumbass snarky blog this is. Not to mention the facts don't even support the idiotic claim; turnover in SFHs means people want them? In what universe does that make any sense? These are EXISTING home sales, not new home sales (the latter showing demand outpacing existing supply). Newsflash - new home sales have dropped yet again. The blogger should try and at least obtain a cursory understanding of what he's talking about if he's going to be a snarky, uppity asshole about it. The facts show the EXACT OPPOSITE of what this know-nothing claims.
ReplyDeletedyer got owned...again
ReplyDelete8:19 Nobody owns me, ever. 8:08 is comparing his anecdotal opinions to the actual statistics I had in my post. Not very convincing, but he did make his MoCo political faction look bad with his vulgar language. Stay classy, MoCo Machine.
Delete"anecdotal opinions to the actual statistics"
ReplyDeleteAre you illiterate or just in denial? I quoted the facts; you're simply incapable of understanding them, apparently. I explained to you how you OBVIOUSLY are misconstruing the data. If you had even a modest understanding of housing or economics you'd realize how idiotic you sound.
There's a reason why you're unable to defend your inane, baseless, uneducated opinion. Pretending turnover of existing housing is indicative of demand does not make it so, so try shutting your mouth on things you don't understand and stick to cheesecurls reviews.
You didn't quote the facts. The facts are that sales of SFHs exceeded those of condos, which remained flat. Hence, more houses were purchased than condos, meaning demand for homes was greater than that for condos. What is the point of dispute?
DeleteWhile I think ANon @ 8:08 and 2:02pm is a little harsh, I do agree with him (albeit in the spirit of constructive criticism).
ReplyDeleteI frequent this blog (or used to) because of the up-to-date and informative posts about business and development updates around Bethesda.
Lately, there have been more and more posts such as this one and the one regarding Dave & Busters in Texas--little more than neocon rants often devoid of logic or facts, but chock-full of personal opinion, unsubstantiated claims, cherry picking, and anecdotal 'evidence.' For instance, even if there were a "suburban comeback" as you claim I'm sure any level-headed economist or real estate analyst from NY to TX would agree that your evidence is extremely shaky at best. Just last week the WBJ reported that new home sales were down 2.4%. Instead of making broad claims based on sound bites or cherry-picked numbers, you should try some actual research into long-term trends, various market forces, and externalities.
Anyways, these type of posts really hurt your credibility. I've read some of the comments on these posts and I'm clearly not alone in my observations, (although I question the mental stability of some of the more er, boisterous, commenters). Also not helping your credibility are your impetuous accusations of anyone who disagrees with your clearly opinionated posts as being a County Council stooge or part of the "MoCo Machine" is just as juvenile and absurd as some of the other comments on here.
Just to be clear, it's not that I disagree with your posts, it's the wild, unsubstantiated claims being reported as facts and the accompanying off-putting tone. The periodic "Destruction of Beloved White Flint" rants were tolerable, but now it seems that every other post is along those same lines.
I don't see the "wild, unsubstantiated claims" in any of the articles on here. The Brookings Institution reported suburbs outpacing cities back in May. A sale of an existing home means that someone bought a home. You make it sound like a homeowner just abandons their home, and it became vacant. A sale requires a buyer, as well as a seller.
ReplyDeleteThere were more buyers out there for homes than for condos last month. Less condos sold. That's factual data, not an unsubstantiated claim.
As long as my posts are based on fact, that shouldn't discourage anyone from enjoying whatever content is on here.
Do you really consider someone who starts off with foul language to be a civil, intellectual commenter, as 8:08 did? There's no nasty talk in my posts.
The problem for some is not the opinions I express, but the presentation of data and facts that is contrary to their relentless propaganda. "The rest of the story" is the part that many don't want the public to receive, and that results in the sort of nasty comments that are posted here.
Are you prepared to comment on Montgomery County's fake job creation report that made "wild, unsubstantiated claims" at taxpayer expense? I haven't heard anybody ripping the politicians for doing that.
What is "neocon" about anything written on here? I doubt anyone who knows me would refer to me as a "neocon." That's more of a foreign policy ideology than anything to do with real estate development. Did socialism cause the closure of Dave and Buster's? If not, how could it be "neo-con" to oppose the closure?
Would you say my "tone" is more off-putting than that of Harriet Tregoning, Matthew Yglesias or David Alpert? I think most people would have a hard time believing so.
Oh well, if you're really that ignorant of what the numbers mean, then feel free to spout whatever garbage you want. Educated people will disagree in the comments and hopefully everyone who wastes their time reading the post sees the actual facts in the comments section.
ReplyDeleteIn Dyer's mind people selling off their SFHs and holding onto their condos means SFHs are awesome and condos are shit...granted that has no logical or economic basis, but feel free to say whatever you want on your blog. Just be prepared for people who actually know what they're talking about to call you out on the idiocy.
6:26 AM - What it means is that there were buyers and demand for single-family homes, and no equivalent demand for condos. If you have no takers for the condo you are selling, you stay in it. That does equate being thrilled about condos. It just means you're stuck, and possibly underwater with your mortgage.
DeleteBob's "Destruction of Beloved White Flint" "rants" were so crazy and unpopular that Gawker, BuzzFeed and the Washington Post rehashed them.
ReplyDelete