Market Update

What is the 2025 Spring Market Like?

by John Rice

I have no idea what the rest of the year is going to be like in real estate, but the spring 2025 market is super hot in and around Lexington Ky.

I have sold 12 houses in the past 9 weeks. I think that might be a record for me. Five have been cash purchases. Five have been in multiple offers. Two went $60,000 or more over the list price.

If you see a new listing that looks amazing, be prepared to be in multiple offers and view the list price as the starting point for any offer.

Don’t want to get in a bidding war? Well, don’t look at houses that are newly listed. Stick with the inventory of homes that have been on the market for at least a week.

I am going to take a nap now.

    August 17th the Y2K for Real Estate?

    by John Rice

    Here we are just a few days from the date that the media thinks is going to change the entire real estate market.

    Leading up to this reminds me of most of the year 1999. Back then, the media took the opportunity to let us know that most computers were never prepared for the year 2000. Doomsday was scheduled to begin January 1st 2000 since the computers would think the year was 1900 instead of 2000. This was called Y2K. People stocked up on cash, water and food in case the world froze up.

    Of course, what happened on 1/1/2000 was that everybody woke up to find nothing had changed. Whenever I see a pantry stuffed full of a lifetime supply of canned goods, I wonder if that is somebody’s leftover Y2K stash.

    All of us will wake up on 8/17/2024 and find that the real estate market kept going, just as it always has since the first person hired somebody to be their real estate agent whenever that was.

    There are a few changes, and they are not at all like the so called journalists predict. Housing prices will not go down. No real money will be saved by anybody. Commissions in my area have dropped a little. I used to see mostly 3% offered to Buyer’s Realtors with an occasional 2.5%. I am now seeing a lot of 2.5% commissions. The change is really more of a technical inconvenience than anything mind blowing.

    What will change is basically the equation to get to the same solution that has always existed.

    In the “Old days” of right now, the Seller’s Realtor had a certain commission they wanted to make for selling the house. They would add an amount to that for the Buyer’s Realtor. The sum of those two numbers were what the total commission was going to be. By the way, commissions have always been negotiable.

    The new model pretty much does the same thing…..at least in my market. A seller will have 3 options when signing a listing agreement with their Realtor: 1) The Seller’s Realtor is paid a larger commission and will offer to give part of it to the Buyer’s Realtor. This is the old fashion way. YES, it still will exist! 2) The Seller’s Realtor will charge their own commission PLUS the Seller will offer an amount to the Buyer’s Realtor to be paid directly by the Seller. 3) The Seller may choose at that time to not offer any commission to the Buyer’s Agent. Option 3 is the one everybody is assuming will change the industry. Well, time will tell if I am wrong, but I don’t really see Option 3 being viable in anything less than the absolute hottest real estate market ever. Why? Because history has proven that Buyer’s want their own Realtor involved. That is why most For sale By Owner listings fail to sell. Almost all Buyers prefer to have their own Realtor involved.

    On the Buyer side of all this there are a few things I want to point out: The National Assoication of Realtors (NAR) is wanting it’s members to have Buyers sign an agreement which details how their Realtor will get paid. There has been no change in Kentucky’s state law at all. Why? Because commissions have always been negotiable. The NAR is a professional organization whose membership is voluntary. You can be a real estate agent without being a member of NAR, you just can’t call yourself a Realtor because they own that word. You would have to call yourself a real estate agent. This new NAR rule is really like being a member at a country club and having to wear a tie to dinner because it is a rule.

    So back to how things change for Buyers. Well, for those real estate agents that use the NAR form, there will be a place to put what commission is to be paid by either the Buyer or Seller for the Buyer’s Realtor. This has always been on existing Buyer Representation Agreements, so the concept is nothing new. This is the part the media is in a frenzy over……but hold on, there is more to this. Our new offer to purchase contracts have a paragraph now for Buyer’s Realtor commission. Yep. You can write on the offer that you want the commission for your own Buyer’s Realtor to be paid for by the Seller. Aaaaaand this is something I think most all Buyers will want to do since few have the cash to pay for their representation.

    There will be Sellers who try not to pay, either directly or indirectly, for a Buyer’s Realtor. They will probably find that not many Buyers look at their home. This is effectively like a For Sale By Owner situation, something most Sellers fail when attempting, largely because most Buyers want their own Realtor involved.

    So in the end, what we have is a lot of hoopla with little real change. Most all Sellers will either directly or indirectly pay for the Buyer’s Agent commission one way or another. The Seller now just has a choice of how to do it. The Buyer now has to write in their offer how much, if anything, their Realtor is to be paid by the seller.

    3+3=6

    3.5+2.5=6

    6-3+3=6

    6+0=6

    Yay, you get to pick your own equation now. Any numbers you want which will total somewhere between 5-6% commission when selling your house, just as it always has. Keep in mind too that a Seller’s Realtor is not going to do 100% of the work for both a Buyer and Seller for the same price. Also, just like any market, there is a point where it just isn’t profitable to do the work. Commissions can only go so low before Realtors just say no.

    Can it be both a Seller’s Market & a Buyer’s Market?

    by John Rice

    I was on the phone with a good friend of mine who is an agent with my office. As usual, we got to chatting about what the market is like right now.

    I said that it seems like we are back to a more normal market where the best of the best listing are still going fast and sometimes for over the list price, while everything else is just sitting on the market waiting for a buyer to even notice it is for sale.

    I then when on to postulate that this was due to the COVID market. Back then, the new listings of the day were the pending sales of the next day. Instead of Days on the Market, it was more like Hours on the Market. Every house seemed to sell immediately so there was no need to keep mental track of what was on the market. I think that got buyers and their agents in the habit of only looking at new listings and those with fresh price reductions. If a buyer or their agent wasn’t impressed with the house when it was a new listing or had just gotten a price reduction, it is like it disappeared. It was forgotten forever. It has always been hard to get people to revisit a stale listing, but it got even harder after COVID.

    I think I went on and on for a little while longer. Then my good friend said he had heard somebody say this about the current market: “The first 10 days a house is on the market, it is a Seller’s Market. After that it is a Buyer’s Market.”

    I told him I thought this was an incredibly simple way of explaining where and why the market is where it is right now. Then I went on to tell him that with me being so wordy, I would probably take 500 words to explain that to somebody……..which I apparently did in only the first 225 words of this post!

    Why buying now always beats waiting

    by John Rice

    I reckon this is sort of like a market update type of post.

    I showed a very affordable house in Berea last weekend. It was very nice. Good sized. More than one bathroom. In good condition with a couple of nice features. The list price was $229k.

    The house sold 15 months ago for $205k. From the pictures of when it sold back then, about all that is different is that it was vacant.

    15 months ago was a little different of a market. We had just seen rates rapidly rise to about where they are today. Buyers were still in a little bit of shock. Back then I predicted that the market would pick back up as people acclimated to current rates and the period of super low rates disappeared in the rearview mirror. Guess I was correct although that was a pretty safe prediction to have made.

    The house sat on the market for a few months back then. It being vacant didn’t help. If at all possible, you always want to sell your house with some furniture in it to warm it up a bit. Most buyers have a hard time envisioning what a house would be like when it is empty.

    Back to today. We were one of four offers. We went $5k over the list price and waived the home inspection. Know what? We still didn’t get it.

    That means this house sold for at least 14% more in those 15 months. That’s a really good return for not having done any updates and in a small town that isn’t really considered a hotbed for growth.

    I am totally sure that the seller of this house was anxious about their purchase 15 months ago. They probably felt like they paid top dollar for it and were anxious about their interest rate. Want to be this person? All you have to do is think about where you’ll be a year, five years, ten years down the road and not focus on today’s fear. Other than the Great Recession, it’s hard to go wrong with homeownership.

    Are Investors ruining the market?

    by John Rice

    Are real estate investors who buy single family homes ruining the market for other buyers and driving up rent?

    Unpopular opinion, but I say no.

    Sure, many of these investors might make terrible landlords. None of us like the robocalls we get asking to sell our houses to them…..but they are not ruining the market and driving up rent. I am by no means defending them or their actions. I am just saying that they are not the root of the problem.

    I spent a couple weeks in Florida recently where I read an article saying how large scale investors were ruining the market. They were outbidding other buyers. They were reducing the number of homes available for owner-occupant buyers. They were raising the rent and making housing unaffordable.

    This type of logic drives me crazy. Let me pick apart a few things here:

    For every house for sale, that means there is both a Buyer and a Seller. If one Buyer is outbidding another, that means there are not enough houses for sale. This is a Supply and Demand issue. Also, the never mentioned seller who is about to become a buyer is happy with the terms they got.

    Are they reducing the number of homes for sale? Yes, but isn’t the same true for anybody who buys an available home? Again, the issue is the imbalance between Supply and Demand.

    Are they raising rent and making housing unaffordable? This one always amazes me. We have all just survived a crazy period of inflation where the cost of everything went up. Somehow most people single out housing, as if that shouldn’t have also been affected by inflation. Like we are shocked and appalled that housing costs, whether renting or buying, went crazy at the same time when everything else did too?

    What this article seems to forget is the tenants. Where would they be if all the sudden there were no properties to rent? It isn’t like investors are buying these houses and keeping them empty. There is just as much demand for single family rental homes as there are for people wanting to buy them and live in them. If rent exceeds market demand, houses will sit vacant and investors will have to lower the rent to get a tenant. Again, Supply and Demand.

    Are you seeing a theme here? Supply and Demand. There is a short supply of houses for sale for investors and owner-occupants. There is a short supply of houses for rent for those who cannot afford to buy or choose not to. Having more demand than supply is the problem here.

    Some say that the issue is sellers just aren’t selling these days. Okay, true. But let’s think this through. We have far more people wanting to buy AND to rent houses. If all the sudden everybody decided to move, we would still have more people than houses because everybody living in their current house would also need another house. What’s that? Supply and Demand.

    Building more homes is the only real solution to this. It is what the writers of the article I read should be encouraging if they honestly feel like everyone should be able to afford to buy or rent a home. The demand is there. The supply is the issue. Until there is a better balance, prices for buyers and tenants will not change.