Picture this: a 3300 square foot brick center hall colonial with lots of upgrades, impeccable furnishings and appointments, beautiful decor and furniture, located in a swanky suburb. When I arrived to show it to my buyers, we see a crummy space heater in the dining room, 10 feet from an heirloom chandelier. What are these people thinking? A house like this is selling a lifestyle, so why are the people too cheap to turn up the heat for 15 minutes to get their house sold? What a colossal waste.

If a home is being shown that day, people need to dispense with the space heaters, turn on the lights (don’t make me grope around in the dark), and get lost. Your utility bill will be $50 higher that month but your home will sell for more money, faster.

Another showing later that afternoon, same buyer clients: the co-listing agents meet us, and “double team” my buyers. He’s got the husband engaged in the den, talking about God Knows What, she’s got the wife in the master bedroom blathering about the closets. My showing. My clients. They either saw me glaring or realized on their own that this was too much because they backed off a minute later. This was the worst case of divide and conquer I have seen in ages; what made it worse was a reference one of them made to my client that they had spoken on the phone once a long while ago.  

I should note that both of these listings were nightmares to get scheduled. I blogged about them last week when I wrote Unseen= Unsold. This business isn’t rocket science, folks. A little common sense goes a long way. Turn on the lights. Ditch the space heater. Don’t elbow in on another agent’s buyer clients. We don’t split atoms. It shouldn’t be this hard.  

Here in New York, Today is the day that the Coney Island Polar Bear Club (or, as my late father referred to them “those idiots”) have their annual winter dunk at the beach. They actually do this crazy thing once a week, but they get all their publicity (and presumably, do most of their recruiting) today.

I really don’t know what sort of bet I’d have to lose to do this sort of thing. I categorize swimming in frigid water on a 15 degree day along with skydiving, streaking, or running a marathon. I just don’t have the guts. I’d rather speak in front of 50,000 people.

Still, God bless them. They pay their taxes and charity does benefit from their efforts.

By the way, if you, like I always thought it was just old crazy guys with too much back hair that do this, you’d be interested to know that many of them are women, and women who look just fine in a bathing suit too.

I have been meaning to post on this for a while. As unpalatable as it is to say, assaults and even murders of agents who unwittingly meet the wrong person in the wrong place do occur. A female agent alone at an open house I ran into recently seemed genuinely glad to see me because a person who had left before I arrived unnerved her. As a broker-owner, I take these concerns seriously. Security knows no gender, but here are a few things that should be done to watch your back.

• Never hold an open house alone, especially if it is off the beaten path. If you are in an apartment or row home area with lots of people nearby, that is one thing. But if literally no one can “hear you scream” you are vulnerable.
• Let others in your office, family or team know where you’ll be, especially when you are meeting someone for the first time. All my appointments are recorded in my outlook.
• Document ahead of time when, where and with whom you are meeting someone, especially if it is a first contact. If I were to go on a listing appointment at an axe murderer’s house, my wife need only check my outlook calender for the name, number and address of the prospect. If I am late, she calls my cell phone to check on me.
• Carry pepper spray or mace. No kidding. They can be on your keychain. Some agents carry a whistle.
• Never leave without that cell phone. If you are at an open house and someone is behaving erratically, call the cops or an associate. Err on the side of caution.
• Casually mention that others know where you are and with whom you are meeting. If you are showing a vacant home, for instance, work it into the conversation. The best thing is to not be alone.
• Never make a blind appointment. Know who you are meeting with and get their information. If someone different shows up, reserve the right to terminate the meeting.
• Insist that people sign in at an open house. We yield too often about this, presumably because we don’t wish to offend. Screw that. Our sign in sheets have a contact opt out box if people just don’t want to be called afterward. But we have too much exposure to liability to not document who is walking through a client’s private home. One broker I know has two agents at all opens, and will not allow people to walk through without holding their driver license. Hey, it is New York. But if you want to enter one of my opens, signing in isn’t optional.

We don’t sit at mahogony desks all day for our work. We are in the field, on the road, and meeting strangers all the time. While the odds of something terrible happening are remote, prevention and caution should give us that ever important peace of mind.  

This might be a sensitive subject to some. However, I feel that my thoughts need to be expressed and our industry should be a leader and not a passive observer. I view gay marriage as an equal housing issue, and therefore something that should be supported by licensees.

The building bloc of society is people coupling up as families. Families buy real estate; single people are more prone to rent. To cut to the chase, legal gay marriage will attract more couples who will buy houses, period. The ripple effect will be considerable, because homeowners pay taxes, buy cars, washing machines, fences, new roofs, lawnmowers, and many other things that circulate money. If gay people wish to couple up and buy houses, we should support that. We should enthusiastically broker those deals. Many of us have already worked with gay clients (whether we knew it or not). But without the legal status that comes with marriage, those numbers will be suppressed.

Some might find it ironic that a straight, relatively conservative Roman Catholic would support gay marriage, but I find it more ironic that millions more of us think gay people are good enough to watch on TV in makeover or redecoration shows but not good enough for us to stick out our necks. Simply put, we should support gay marriage as real estate professionals. I am not on a soapbox advocating radical social change. As a matter of fact, mainstreaming gay marriage is actually a rather fiscally conservative, libertarian notion. To me, its very prohibition is antithetical to freedom and equality.

The United States has long been a nation where legal agreements between consenting people, so long as they do not harm others, should be respected and free from fear. Secular, non-religious covenants should not be offensive to religious precepts. Religion, which seems to be the biggest opponent, does not have to sanction, support or recognize any practice it does not sponsor, but do you ever see nuns picketing a civil wedding, which is also not recognized by the Church? Of course not. The gay things spooks people.

Let me tell you about the gay thing, and if you have a gay friend or loved one you’ll know what I mean.  As a New York agent, home of the original melting pot, I can confidently state that gay people are no more a big deal than you or I. Hollywood has let gay people down. The media, especially the news outlets, has just hammered gay people. Here in North Jersey, an Indian American opened fire in a church and murdered two people. It was news for about a day. Elsewhere, some gay protesters disrupted a  church service and it was in the talkshow fodder for WEEKS. Consequently, you have the uninformed harboring outlandish generalities about gay people. Do we in the 21st century tolerate other stereotypes? Why are gays, then, the last victims of Jim Crow?

 I have never understood how gay people being married hurts the institution of marriage or our nation’s moral fiber. I am not trying to be relativist, either, although I know some straight marriages that don’t exactly edify marriage either. I do know this: since the fall of the iron curtain, Europe, which has far more tolerant attitudes about gays, has experienced unprecedented peace and prosperity. I seriously doubt that gay rights in Europe have undermined the EU’s progress. It has in many ways probably helped.

Most minds will not be changed by my one commentary, and this is not the end justifying the means if your opinion is still not open to allowing gay marriage. If you think the gay lifestyle is immoral, don’t practice it. However, if you think that by assisting gay couples who wish to buy real estate that you are sanctioning immorality, you are skating on very thin ice from an equal housing perspective. Jack Daniel’s whiskey is produced in a dry county. No one views that as hypocritical, nor should they. The same principle applies to our industry and support of gay marriage. It is good for our industry and morally ambiguous to us personally.

If you are undecided or ambivalent, I encourage you to join me in sticking your neck out. Benign neglect is not enough. There is an under-serviced market out there, the service of which is mutually exclusive to puritanical mores. Separate your morality from equality. America is a nation where people who would be mortal enemies abroad engage in amicable and peaceful commerce. And, regardless of our personal prejudices, where there is commerce and prosperity, there is peace and harmony.

It is in our interest to extend a hand to gay and lesbian Americans and vocally offer them our best. I assert that it is best for the nation as a whole as well.

Those of you who have listed and sold homes of divorcing couples will attest to the frequent difficulty of those files. The NY Times has an article on how the slow market is causing the liquidation of marital real estate to be far more difficult in some cases, causing the people to remain living together in some cases. In an acrimonious divorce, this can just perpetuate hell on earth, I am sure.

But what if it isn’t the war of the Roses, and being compelled to live together actually forces people to reconcile their differences? One quote in the Times article from a divorcee stuck with me:

if she had known how little money she would get “I might have stuck with it a little more; I don’t know,” Ms. Tomasko said, adding, “Maybe it would’ve made me think a little harder.”

To be sure, the slower market makes most divorces worse, because it takes the idea of a fast settlement off the table. But for some, it might be the impetus for detente, then negotiation, understanding, and, just maybe, a new beginning. Call me a hopeless romantic, but I’d love to hear a story like that for real.

It is 2008. The government has nationalized the banking industry. We are in a recession, and the real estate market has yet to hit bottom. And there remain sellers out there that don’t realize that if they make seeing their home difficult, the home won’t get sold. In 2004, if it was difficult to get a showing in, we all waited patiently, knowing that when we did see it that there would be other potential buyers right there with us. Today, there are literally dozens of other options. People need to wise up.

Today, a listing agent I have been trying to reach since before Christmas called me back and told me some rather ridiculous parameters for showing her listing, including that it would not be available to show until this coming weekend.

Why, I have to ask, is the house even active on the market? Why isn’t it temporarily withdrawn? After some further discussion, I was told her client is a physician, which apparently grants him a dispensation from the same rules the rest of us must play by.

Our job is to educate our clients, not kiss their caboose just because they are doctors or lawyers. Listing agents who do not instruct their clients how destructive it is to be so difficult in this market are enablers of some very damaging behavior.

Not long ago, the following was written:

“you should be strongly advocating foreclosures – not mitigation or refinance – in your marketplace.”

They stated that foreclosures would restore confidence in the market. I beg to differ. With rare exception, foreclosures hurt everyone and should be avoided at all costs. They harm the borrower, the lender, and even innocent bystanders (unless, of course, you like a vacant, derelict home on your block).

The mitigation he refers to-more commonly known as short sales-are, to my way of thinking, the best way to restore market stability with the least amount of harm to all. My rationale is hard to argue with, by the way, since it is commonly referred to as “math.”

To be sure, a short sale is just that-a short, and in some cases very low- payoff of the home loan. If the bank did not forgive the shortfall, it could yield a deficit of tens of thousands of dollars in many cases. However, it really is the lesser of two evils from the lender’s point of view. The potential loss to the lender would be far worse if they had foreclose, because time is money. Whatever the loss is in a short sale, it would be compounded enormously in a foreclosure scenario.

Here in New York, it typically takes a lender a year to foreclose. The house is then auctioned but most of the time it becomes a non-performing asset on the REO market for at least another 6 months to a year before the lender can recover anything. In the meantime, they have to pay the taxes, manage the property, and the final cost on the REO market is always less than if the home were occupied by the original owner. So you have a double whammy: the house sells for less, and the mathematical loss is larger. But there is also a third hit the lender incurs, and that is the legal costs associated with the repossession.

Therefore, if the loss on a short sale is $50,000, with another 6-12 months of arrearage, 6-12 months of back taxes (which in New York can be astronomical), legal fees, upkeep, winterization, and a final price which is easily 10% lower, and the bank can be in the red another $100,000. Yet many loss mitigators cannot comprehend that.

The borrower isn’t unscathed, but they avoid foreclosure, and that goes a long way in helping them get re-established. They do lose the house, but on more civilized terms. By avoiding the repo man, they are able to get back on their feet sooner, which will aid us all long term. Moreover, they retain their dignity. I know people who have lost their homes and will never buy a home again, not because they cannot, but because they lost their dream. That is a tragedy.

There is also the collateral damage of foreclosures to consider. Let’s suppose you keep your nose clean, borrow less on your home than most, and you have a neighbor who is frantically trying to sell their house at a loss. If they sell the home in a successful short sale, you have seamless transition to a new owner occupant neighbor. If the bank doesn’t cooperate and it goes to REO, you have a derelict house next door. How does that reward your hard work and prudence? Really enhances the neighborhood, huh? And for a good long time, too! How does that restore confidence?

The fastest, least costly means of restoring market stability is to wring the bad loans out via short sales, period. It is better for the accounting department, better for the borrowers, better for the neighbors, and far faster and cheaper than more foreclosures. We should all be pressuring the governing authorities to lean on the banks to do more short sales and to streamline the process.

My 2 goals are simple:

• Make more money;
• Work less.

2008 was a difficult year for me compared to 2007, and I got caught up in a pattern of putting out fires and working more reactively than executing a plan. I will not let history repeat itself.

My 5 resolutions are designed to fulfill my goals. This posting isn’t the full enchillada for my 2009 plans, but it is a halfway decent overview. Here are my 5 resolutions:

1. Take one day off per week no matter what. I’ll do better the other 6 days rested and recharged.
2. Create specific goals. I used to do this, and it went out the window in the scrambling, scatterbrained year of 2008. Goals get me juiced. I’m good when I’m juiced.
3. Plan my work. I am making an annual overall plan and I am going to pursue it via a quarterly, monthly and weekly plan review/evaluation.
4. Blog more. I mean leveraging the web as a marketing tool more via posting my listings in more places, linking to my company website more, and yes, writing more. I have an English degree and writing is therapeutic. If it helps me make money that is a double win.
5. Laugh more. I don’t mean I’m going to watch more Richard Pryor videos, although that isn’t a bad idea. The fact of the matter is that in our business, we are the product. When people list their house with me, they get me. I should therefore take better care of myself and do the things that feed my soul. So in 2009 I’ll walk the dog more when I could just as easily let him out into the yard. I will take Luke to his first Yankee game and explain to him why the Boston Red Sox are evil. I’ll visit Mom more. That sort of thing.

Putting this out in public makes this more than a private “I should” that can be dismissed in a weak moment. I know this works, so I am prepared to be hung by my tongue. My wish for everyone reading this is that you also make more money, work less, and laugh more yourself.

Those of us who live in the NY Metropolitan area (otherwise called the Tri-State area) know all about scandals involving our state governors. Since 2002, all three governors of NY, NJ and CT have resigned amidst scandal. And their offenses paled in comparison to Illinois Rod Blagojevich arrest for trying to sell a US Senate seat. But, they did leave office. Spitzer’s offense was literally a peccadillo in comparison, as was former NJ Gov. Jim McGreevey’s affair. Connecticut’s John Rowland quit in 2004 not after a marital affair but for corruption. And at the time of his resignation he was just being investigated. But none of these governors were led out of office in handcuffs like Rod Blagojevich was.

To summarize:

• Elliot Spitzer: Adultery, but with a prostitute, which isn’t good when you made a living prosecuting prostitution rings. Handcuff not involved, according the the hooker. Check.
• John Rowland: Corruption. Resigned while being investigated, pled guilty, spent time in prison and house arrest. Handcuffs involved, but after his resignation. Check
• Jim McGreevey: Ironically, seemed like he was running for his second term moments after taking oath. Resigned when his appointment to head NJ homeland security threatened to sue him for sexual harrassment. Oh, and the plaintiff would have been a guy, which would damage an ostensibly straight, married sitting governor. Came out in his resignation speech. Lost his marriage. Handcuffs may or may not have been involved. But he did quit. Check.

Now in Illinois we have a guy who has been caught on tape admitting that he wanted all sorts of quid pro quo for Obama’s seat in the Senate, been arrested and led out in handcuffs and he’s still governor! A few news outlets cover his defiance, but where’s the public outcry for his resignation or impeachment? Why isn’t Barack Obama, the rest of the Illinois government or anyone else that matters pushing in a meaningful way for this man to be removed? You would think that he had damaging information about the very people who should be kicking him out of the governor’s mansion (is it a mansion in Illinois?).

This isn’t about Blagojevich. It is about us. When a senator from a small state gets caught with his pants down in an airport mens room, it stays in the news. When a 20-year old starlet with marginal talent gets arrested for driving drunk, it stays in the news. And when a governor gets arrested for selling a senate seat? I need only direct you to this morning’s home page of the NY Times (nothing) the Drudge Report (nothing) and Google News front page (below a fluff piece on Caroline Kennedy and above Obama’s taking his daughters to the dolphin show).

What does that say about us? Where are the protesters? Are we that desensitized? We don’t have the will to sack a defiant, unpopular governor?

Now this doesn’t really relate to real estate and is admittedly off-topic and will be categorized as such. Yet even those of us that are NAR members know that if one of us gets out of line that we have a code of ethics and a grievance process to police ourselves. Can we not expect the same of our government and the free press?

My company is 30 minutes or less from the Bronx, Dutchess County, and Rockland County. I belong to the Westchester-Putnam MLS. I sell in other counties, though, and guess what? I belong to half a dozen other MLS systems to make that happen. Not only is this expensive, it is crazy.

We all get the same TV and radio stations, read the same newspapers, and shop in each other’s towns. Yet, if I want to do business 10 miles away across the Tappan Zee Bridge, I almost need a passport.

The Greater Hudson Valley MLS, Mid-Hudson MLS, Westchester-Putnam MLS MLS of Long Island and Bronx MLS should all be one system, or at least share data. In Connecticut, the whole state just consolidated down to just three, and that number looks to be shrinking. It makes sense. Not only is it more broker-friendly, it is more consumer friendly. People don’t spend their lives in one town anymore. Americans are more mobile now, and the trend has always been a sort of evolution from areas in and closer to NYC to the suburbs. How many more houses in Rockland would sell if the Bronx agents could access that data? How many more people in Westchester, one of the most expensive counties in the Union, would live in southern Dutchess if they had more access to the inventory?

Why should we have to incur the expense of more dues to belong to a different MLS systems just because they are across a county line or a Bridge? Who does that help, except the MLS accounts receivable? Do we need a statewide system like Connecticut? I doubt it- I have no designs on doing business in Buffalo or Schenectady. But the New York City Metropolitan area is a different matter. We should no longer have to pay so many extra exorbitant fees just to do business in our own back yards.