You've seen first time home buyers buy $1.6 million houses for $300k off by teaming up with a corrupt slum-lord whose wife bought an adjacent, EMPTY property at full price? Riiiiight. Suuuure you have. Something tells me this rationalization of obvious fraud would not be coming from the libs if the involved parties were not liberals...
Similar percentage off of the initial asking price. You can play your little conspiracy theory paranoid game of something had to have happened because the seller agreed to come down from their initial asking price. In fact sellers often come down from their initial selling price. It isn't suspicious sounding really.
Here is another story describing the obvious scam and horrible judgment. The Rezko Connection: Obama's Achilles Heel? Obama's Connection With an Accused Political Fixer Raises Questions By BRIAN ROSS and RHONDA SCHWARTZ Jan. 10, 2008 In sharp contrast to his tough talk about ethics reform in government, Sen. Barack Obama, D-Ill., approached a well-known Illinois political fixer under active federal investigation, Antoin "Tony" Rezko, for "advice" as he sought to find a way to buy a house shortly after being elected to the United States Senate. The parcel included an adjacent lot which Obama told the Chicago Tribune he could not afford because "it was already a stretch to buy the house." On the same day Obama closed on his house, Rezko's wife bought the adjacent empty lot, meeting the condition of the seller who wanted to sell both properties at the same time. Rezko had been widely reported to be under investigation by the U.S. attorney and the FBI at the time Obama contacted him and has since been indicted on corruption charges by a federal grand jury in a case that prosecutors say involves bribes, kickbacks and "efforts to illegally obtain millions of dollars." This week, a federal judge in Chicago ordered the Rezko trial to begin Feb. 25. Obama maintains his relationship with Rezko was "above board and legal" but has admitted bad judgment, calling his decision to involve Rezko "a bone-headed mistake." Rezko's behind-the-scenes connection in the Obama house deal became public as Rezko revealed personal financial details as he sought to post bail. While Rezko's wife paid the full asking price for the land, Obama paid $300,000 under the asking price for the house. The house sold for $1,650,000 and the price Rezko's wife paid for the land was $625,000. http://abcnews.go.com/Blotter/story?id=4111483
It certainly doesn't look good, Trader_J. And this isn't from the Washington Times. Saying it was "bone-headed" was a bit of an understatement from Obama. Folks, no matter how you spin it, this is exactly the kind of insider "sweet deal" we rail about when we hear that a Republican has been caught at it. Can you imagine the uproar if Hillary Clinton had done this? And Sishir is right... if Obama can't handle explaining this (hopefully he can and will), then what is he going to do during the general election in response to Rovian tactics? I normally dismiss your posts as sad attempts at humor, Trader_J, but I have to say this one has more meat than usual. Impeach Bush and Save Us From Another War.
This is just sad. I do not support Obama, but if he loses, I would want it to be for legitimate reasons, not something cooked up to look like more than it really is. If I own a home, I can sell it to whoever I like at whatever price I want. If I want to say that I sold my house to a celebrity or political personality, I can sell it at a discount if I would like. This isn't a Whitewater deal we're talking about here. Also, if we are going to lambast Obama for being buddies with a corrupt businessman, in fairness we have to mention that Bush was cozying up to those Enron guys before their corporation collapsed and they went to prison. Hell, those guys were helping to draft our energy policy. Neither Obama nor Bush appear to have known what was going on with their corrupt business contacts. This is NOT an issue.
so the house was originally listed for 1.95M and Obama was able to negotiate and buy it for 1.65M. It's not that really far fetched that the sellers were simply asking 15% more than what the house's market value.
The house was brought in June 2005? That was at the height of the housing bubble, no seller was taking a 300k cut from asking price.
you meant from the market price.. anyone can list their property 20% more than its really worth.. i'm just saying I can't base my judgement on solely the seller's asking price.. and not seeing how long has the properties been out on the market or what kind of offers or none it has been receiving on the 2 properties..
Have you brought a house before? That's just not how real estate transaction works. Even if they seller listed the house 20% more than its really worth, they don't just take an offer that's 300k below, usually they would lower the asking price first when they receive no offers. Even when they get an offer that's way below their asking price, there is usually some back and forth on the price to meet somewhere in the middle. 300k below asking price at the height of the housing bubble? no way.
thanks for echoing my thoughts Deck. TJ normally hurts the cause more than help with his over the top style, but this is one time that I agre with him. I doubt the media will play much on it though. Obama's free pass from the media is still in effect it seems.
I was looking at buying a house during the same time. I put in an offer at 10% below asking price, the house sold for 15% above asking price.
yeah i'm going to wait till next year actually. everyone's telling me it's gonna get worse, plus the national housing depression hasn't really hit NYC full strength yet.
They might. It depends on a lot of things. Sometimes people will take offers below the asking price if the buyer puts up a good deal more for the down payment than some of the higher offers. If the buyer wants to close on a certain date and the other offers are contingent on their own homes being sold, and so they won't be able to close on that date. There are plenty of reasons why even at the height of the real estate boom higher end homes would sell for below the asking price.
Now you are just making stuff up. Down payment means nothing if the buyer can line up the financing. As long as buyer can get the mortgage, why would the seller leave money off the table? During the height of housing boom, if you make an offer that's contingent on selling your own house, usually the seller won't even consider your offer. During that time, the high end homes in desirable locations such as this house were at such a premier people were biding up the price, (New York, SF, Boston, Chicago). The better the location, the more you see the price go up. Dude, you have no clue on how real estate transaction works. 300k below asking price? No f'king way.
Look, the $300k below asking price is just the tip of the iceberg as to why this deal stinks to the HIGH HEAVENS. 1) RezkObama himself said it was 'boneheaded' 2) RezkObama admitted not being able to afford the house and went solicited a 'favor' (read: bribe) from a known slum-lord and politically corrupt operative 3) Rezko, a real estate professional, bought an adjacent tract for full price. That land was empty. They closed on the same day. 4) Rezko was one of RezkObama's biggest donors If this isn't a case of political corruption, then one just simply doesn't exist. Notice how few libs are actually defending this move, and the ones who are defending him are doing a really bad job. There is no defending a sweetheart real estate deal on a steeply discounted house, purchased with the help of a politically corrupt slum-lord. Keep it real, libs.
You are right. We all are, making stuff up, because none of us know what's involved. Down payment actually does mean a lot, because my wife and I underbid for our current home, but because we had a larger down payment we were accepted. People with more cash often seem more secure to sellers than buyers who don't have anything on hand but are still trying to buy. Yes I understand how a real estate transaction works, having bought a home about two and half years ago, in Los Angeles(high demand market), at the same time Obama bought his. It was the height of the real estate boom, and the most movement on price did come from the higher end homes. It was around that time that I was doing all the research talking with many different real estate agents, etc. It is somewhat pointless to argue this, because there aren't enough facts about it in the open. Even at the height of the boom, there were people who weren't getting their asking price. The biggest shortage of property was for those who would be first time buyers, and not higher end markets. Many things can and do help to determine which offer is taken including closing date, down payment, etc. We don't know this is what happened, and we certainly don't know that anything corrupt happened either. It's all supposition at this point, and I think it is silly to accuse someone of being corrupt over pure supposition.
