Exodus of Faculty

[fjblair]

Not here to argue housing prices but I will tell you that Trulia is the most inaccurate source of real estate information in the country.

Only true source is what is currently listed on the MLS, as it is a measure of what you can currently go out and buy.

The problem is that they do not have a feed from MLS. They gather information from other sources, massage it and publish it. You very often find homes on their site that are not even for sale. Their Zestimate is a joke. You can't sit at a computer in some other state and give values of homes in North Carolina or Virginia or anywhere else. I am not guessing their information is grossly inaccurate.

Are we even talking about the same site? Isn't Zestimate from Zillow?

I've been looking for a house for two years (have purchased/sold a few in my life) and have worked on the computer side of things with Tax Assessors, Realtors, etc for many years so I know a little about how things work.

No matter what they have you believe their numbers come mostly from the same place. MLS may get some first but in the end all the sites get the same numbers. They come from US Census, Tax and Register of Deeds offices and Sales Analysis/ratio reports, etc.

While nothing is perfect (even someone with local knowledge coming in your home), online sites do fairly well in general. Where they do miss it the most is coastal areas, lake areas and mountain areas, etc where being oceanfront, view or mountain views is priced totally different than one without these features. However even so, comparing homes in different areas take these differences in consideration because in the end it comes down to listing price vs sales.

I think Trulia numbers will hold up to get the point across that Boone isn't as high as some may think, plus we all know that there a other things to consider.

Completely 100% false. MLS has NOTHING to do with algorithms and computer estimates of value. Apples and oranges. Zillow and Trulia are widely and rightfully skewered for their computer valuations. In some metro markets with cookie cutter tract housing they can be relatively close buy for most markets they suck. Also the data on their websites is very often dated and inaccurate.

[bcoach]

Not here to argue housing prices but I will tell you that Trulia is the most inaccurate source of real estate information in the country.

Only true source is what is currently listed on the MLS, as it is a measure of what you can currently go out and buy.

The problem is that they do not have a feed from MLS. They gather information from other sources, massage it and publish it. You very often find homes on their site that are not even for sale. Their Zestimate is a joke. You can't sit at a computer in some other state and give values of homes in North Carolina or Virginia or anywhere else. I am not guessing their information is grossly inaccurate.

Are we even talking about the same site? Isn't Zestimate from Zillow?

I've been looking for a house for two years (have purchased/sold a few in my life) and have worked on the computer side of things with Tax Assessors, Realtors, etc for many years so I know a little about how things work.

No matter what they have you believe their numbers come mostly from the same place. MLS may get some first but in the end all the sites get the same numbers. They come from US Census, Tax and Register of Deeds offices and Sales Analysis/ratio reports, etc.

While nothing is perfect (even someone with local knowledge coming in your home), online sites do fairly well in general. Where they do miss it the most is coastal areas, lake areas and mountain areas, etc where being oceanfront, view or mountain views is priced totally different than one without these features. However even so, comparing homes in different areas take these differences in consideration because in the end it comes down to listing price vs sales.

I think Trulia numbers will hold up to get the point across that Boone isn't as high as some may think, plus we all know that there a other things to consider.

Completely 100% false. MLS has NOTHING to do with algorithms and computer estimates of value. Apples and oranges. Zillow and Trulia are widely and rightfully skewered for their computer valuations. In some metro markets with cookie cutter tract housing they can be relatively close buy for most markets they suck. Also the data on their websites is very often dated and inaccurate.

Their own inaccurate and dated data even further skews their results. When they have more inventory on the market than really exists what do you think that does to their numbers. They also have peoples homes on the internet without the owner permission. They put the home on different sites and say this home not for sale. It is a shame that the public thinks they are getting good information. Then just to add insult to injury the national media uses them as a source. Their only real talent and they do have it is the ability to buy search placement. Zillow and Trulia are the number one and two real estate sites and are the most inaccurate. Again I will say that if you want accurate information go to a site owned by a realtor or a real estate company. They don't have to guess they have the accurate information. Why? Because they created it. They create and maintain the MLS and have to live by a code of ethics. Non Realtors do not. Now if you can't find one of those at least use realtor.com who is not owned by but works in conjunction with the National Association of Realtors. Why go to an unregulated third party when you can go straight to the source.
Again I am not trying to argue or disparage anyone's remarks just trying to help out fellow Mountaineer fans.

[StumpyCulbreath]

I'm pretty sure our Profs are leaving to escape the vortex of the Mountaineer Message Board.

[Rekdiver]

More likely AppFan.....

[Maddog1956]

Completely 100% false. MLS has NOTHING to do with algorithms and computer estimates of value. Apples and oranges. Zillow and Trulia are widely and rightfully skewered for their computer valuations. In some metro markets with cookie cutter tract housing they can be relatively close buy for most markets they suck. Also the data on their websites is very often dated and inaccurate.

Their own inaccurate and dated data even further skews their results. When they have more inventory on the market than really exists what do you think that does to their numbers. They also have peoples homes on the internet without the owner permission. They put the home on different sites and say this home not for sale. It is a shame that the public thinks they are getting good information. Then just to add insult to injury the national media uses them as a source. Their only real talent and they do have it is the ability to buy search placement. Zillow and Trulia are the number one and two real estate sites and are the most inaccurate. Again I will say that if you want accurate information go to a site owned by a realtor or a real estate company. They don't have to guess they have the accurate information. Why? Because they created it. They create and maintain the MLS and have to live by a code of ethics. Non Realtors do not. Now if you can't find one of those at least use realtor.com who is not owned by but works in conjunction with the National Association of Realtors. Why go to an unregulated third party when you can go straight to the source.
Again I am not trying to argue or disparage anyone's remarks just trying to help out fellow Mountaineer fans.

Keep drinking the "Realtor Koolaid".

I have access to the MLS along with the other sites and have found most sales data to be the same across the board (some of the web sites will be update slightly behind is the main difference) Also the MLS may omit FSBO data. Sales data is sales data (and listing price is listing price) even in Va., believe what you want but that info is available everywhere.

Remember realtors are trying to get the listing when they give an estimate (btw, that's where the company makes their money, selling is just a bonus) so they almost always overstate it. Because naturally you're going to list with the realtor that gives you a higher price. Or they want to lowball to turn it quick. Like I said having watched many properties the only time that I've found the web sites real miss the mark is special features (ocean, canal, lake front, mountain view, etc) but realtors miss the mark in these locationa also. (ie. just watched one that was listed at $800k go for $550k seems like the MLS didn't help them any). But in comparing a region, there isn't much difference. Again the estimates are just that, but the web sites offer sqft data and recent sales data so you can judge for yourself.

But that's fine, if you think only a realtor has the correct information that's ok, forgo any research yourself, go in cold and just believe everything they tell you. They'll be glad to take you money.

The point of my post was just suggesting that Boone may not be that expensive (thus not the main reason professors are leaving), because I've also seen the same thing stated in US News and World reports and Forbes etc. If Trulia,(etc) is SO wrong prove the assumption is wrong, using the MLS or other data. Otherwise, I'll take it that the info is correct.

[asutrnr81]

I prefer purple places.

Say it isn't so Patch......You like Furman....and Western.....now here is an argument we can hang our hat on.....

...but are our faculty leaving for Western and Furman too?

[Watauga72]

More likely AppFan.....

Definitely AppFan....probably yosef82 has contacted each faculty member and accused them of being Moore Monkeys!

[bcoach]

Completely 100% false. MLS has NOTHING to do with algorithms and computer estimates of value. Apples and oranges. Zillow and Trulia are widely and rightfully skewered for their computer valuations. In some metro markets with cookie cutter tract housing they can be relatively close buy for most markets they suck. Also the data on their websites is very often dated and inaccurate.

Their own inaccurate and dated data even further skews their results. When they have more inventory on the market than really exists what do you think that does to their numbers. They also have peoples homes on the internet without the owner permission. They put the home on different sites and say this home not for sale. It is a shame that the public thinks they are getting good information. Then just to add insult to injury the national media uses them as a source. Their only real talent and they do have it is the ability to buy search placement. Zillow and Trulia are the number one and two real estate sites and are the most inaccurate. Again I will say that if you want accurate information go to a site owned by a realtor or a real estate company. They don't have to guess they have the accurate information. Why? Because they created it. They create and maintain the MLS and have to live by a code of ethics. Non Realtors do not. Now if you can't find one of those at least use realtor.com who is not owned by but works in conjunction with the National Association of Realtors. Why go to an unregulated third party when you can go straight to the source.
Again I am not trying to argue or disparage anyone's remarks just trying to help out fellow Mountaineer fans.

Keep drinking the "Realtor Koolaid".

I have access to the MLS along with the other sites and have found most sales data to be the same across the board (some of the web sites will be update slightly behind is the main difference) Also the MLS may omit FSBO data. Sales data is sales data (and listing price is listing price) even in Va., believe what you want but that info is available everywhere.

Remember realtors are trying to get the listing when they give an estimate (btw, that's where the company makes their money, selling is just a bonus) so they almost always overstate it. Because naturally you're going to list with the realtor that gives you a higher price. Or they want to lowball to turn it quick. Like I said having watched many properties the only time that I've found the web sites real miss the mark is special features (ocean, canal, lake front, mountain view, etc) but realtors miss the mark in these locationa also. (ie. just watched one that was listed at $800k go for $550k seems like the MLS didn't help them any). But in comparing a region, there isn't much difference. Again the estimates are just that, but the web sites offer sqft data and recent sales data so you can judge for yourself.

But that's fine, if you think only a realtor has the correct information that's ok, forgo any research yourself, go in cold and just believe everything they tell you. They'll be glad to take you money.

The point of my post was just suggesting that Boone may not be that expensive (thus not the main reason professors are leaving), because I've also seen the same thing stated in US News and World reports and Forbes etc. If Trulia,(etc) is SO wrong prove the assumption is wrong, using the MLS or other data. Otherwise, I'll take it that the info is correct.

Don't know what kind of ax you have to grind but you are just plain wrong on most points, and on one I have no idea what you are talking about. The first sentence makes no sense to me at all. They make their money giving estimates and selling the property is just a bonus? I also never said to call a realtor. I said go to the sites they own to get the MLS data. Use what you want. I could care less. I see you don't believe my statement about sales data on county sites. Well you would be wrong. Call the State attorneys office and check for yourself. Call some appraisers and they will also tell you the same thing. Sure they check county records but then run to the MLS. If they ever used Trulia or Zillow they would be laughed out of the business. Again I am not guessing. I know exactly what I am talking about. I am involved in real estate matters every day. The 800-550 comment also makes no sense. Listen you can go use whatever you want. What the heck do I care. For the others that want accurate information I gave one way to get it.

[bcoach]

More likely AppFan.....

Definitely AppFan....probably yosef82 has contacted each faculty member and accused them of being Moore Monkeys!

That is probably the real answer.

[Maddog1956]

Don't know what kind of ax you have to grind but you are just plain wrong on most points, and on one I have no idea what you are talking about. The first sentence makes no sense to me at all. They make their money giving estimates and selling the property is just a bonus? I also never said to call a realtor. I said go to the sites they own to get the MLS data. Use what you want. I could care less. I see you don't believe my statement about sales data on county sites. Well you would be wrong. Call the State attorneys office and check for yourself. Call some appraisers and they will also tell you the same thing. Sure they check county records but then run to the MLS. If they ever used Trulia or Zillow they would be laughed out of the business. Again I am not guessing. I know exactly what I am talking about. I am involved in real estate matters every day. The 800-550 comment also makes no sense. Listen you can go use whatever you want. What the heck do I care. For the others that want accurate information I gave one way to get it.

The first sentence makes no sense to me at all. They make their money giving estimates and selling the property is just a bonus?

Ask a real estate agent how it works.

No ax you just made a statement about something you're obviously clueless about but I can accept that. Back to the original conversation, if you can show that the Boone real estate market is higher than Denver using MLS data because Trulia data is so wrong do it, otherwise this conversation is over on my part.

[bcoach]

Don't know what kind of ax you have to grind but you are just plain wrong on most points, and on one I have no idea what you are talking about. The first sentence makes no sense to me at all. They make their money giving estimates and selling the property is just a bonus? I also never said to call a realtor. I said go to the sites they own to get the MLS data. Use what you want. I could care less. I see you don't believe my statement about sales data on county sites. Well you would be wrong. Call the State attorneys office and check for yourself. Call some appraisers and they will also tell you the same thing. Sure they check county records but then run to the MLS. If they ever used Trulia or Zillow they would be laughed out of the business. Again I am not guessing. I know exactly what I am talking about. I am involved in real estate matters every day. The 800-550 comment also makes no sense. Listen you can go use whatever you want. What the heck do I care. For the others that want accurate information I gave one way to get it.

The first sentence makes no sense to me at all. They make their money giving estimates and selling the property is just a bonus?

Ask a real estate agent how it works.

No ax you just made a statement about something you're obviously clueless about but I can accept that. Back to the original conversation, if you can show that the Boone real estate market is higher than Denver using MLS data because Trulia data is so wrong do it, otherwise this conversation is over on my part.

Which one of my agents should I ask smart guy. I own a real estate company and have been on local and state boards. I am past president of our broker council. I sit on the ethics committee. I sit on the standard forms committee that writes our contracts. So just what is it I am clueless about in your little hobby.

[Maddog1956]

Which one of my agents should I ask smart guy. I own a real estate company and have been on local and state boards. I am past president of our broker council. I sit on the ethics committee. I sit on the standard forms committee that writes our contracts. So just what is it I am clueless about in your little hobby.

But I still love ya!

[bcoach]

Which one of my agents should I ask smart guy. I own a real estate company and have been on local and state boards. I am past president of our broker council. I sit on the ethics committee. I sit on the standard forms committee that writes our contracts. So just what is it I am clueless about in your little hobby.

But I still love ya!

The feeling is mutual!

[appbio91]

So you are saying obama got 93% of the black votes because of where he stood on global warming and his foreign policy right?
Ok...

Everone knows it was his flip flop on Gay marriage.

It was because he was a Democrat. His percentage of the black vote wasn't much different than any other Democratic candidate for president. In fact, blacks have shown a much high proclivity for voting for white candidates than whites do for black candidates.

You're absolutely right. I don't remember the numbers but the black % was only slightly higher than for other past white democratic presidential candidates. Women and young people made the difference both times. That is why Romney was so shocked and waited so long to concede. They were convinced that especially the young people were not going to turn out in the numbers that they did in 2008.

BTW if black folks were not willing to vote for white candidates they might as well stay home the majority of the time.

[TheMoody1]

I don't remember the numbers but the black % was only slightly higher than for other past white democratic presidential candidates.

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2013/04/2 ... 73673.html

America's blacks voted at a higher rate than other minority groups in 2012 and by most measures surpassed the white turnout for the first time, reflecting a deeply polarized presidential election in which blacks strongly supported Barack Obama while many whites stayed home.

Had people voted last November at the same rates they did in 2004, when black turnout was below its current historic levels, Republican Mitt Romney would have won narrowly, according to an analysis conducted for The Associated Press.

[bcoach]

I just wonder how many stayed home because they felt there was just no one to vote for having nothing at all to do with race? How many that are tired of flipping a coin will join that group in the future? The press and the parties themselves have created a situation where many good people just don't want to run. I really think that race has less to do with voting patterns than out right hatred for "The other guy".

[hapapp]

I don't remember the numbers but the black % was only slightly higher than for other past white democratic presidential candidates.

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2013/04/2 ... 73673.html

America's blacks voted at a higher rate than other minority groups in 2012 and by most measures surpassed the white turnout for the first time, reflecting a deeply polarized presidential election in which blacks strongly supported Barack Obama while many whites stayed home.

Had people voted last November at the same rates they did in 2004, when black turnout was below its current historic levels, Republican Mitt Romney would have won narrowly, according to an analysis conducted for The Associated Press.

You also fail to take into consideration that the white vote as a percentage of the overall electorate has been trending down for a decade or more and will continue to do so.** No one doubts that the black vote was significant in Obama's win but as a percentage of blacks voting his take was not that much different than previous Democratic candidates. Having a black as a major party candidate was no doubt going to attract a large black turnout. It was the first time that the black turnout percentage was higher than that of whites. Obama also won the highest share of the Latino vote in history.

**In 1976 whites made up 89% of the electorate. By 2000 it was down to 80% and in 2012 it was 72%.

[TheMoody1]

You also fail to take into consideration that the white vote as a percentage of the overall electorate has been trending down for a decade or more and will continue to do so.**

Not my words. Tell the Huff Post.

[ASUMountaineer]

Ugh, so the answer is that no one currently knows why faculty members are leaving? I hate to break up the discussion of real estate markets and the habits of black voters, but I am actually interested in the actual thread topic.

[WVAPPeer]

Ugh, so the answer is that no one currently knows why faculty members are leaving? I hate to break up the discussion of real estate markets and the habits of black voters, but I am actually interested in the actual thread topic.

Sorry ASUmountaineer but what I heard from a friend who has a cousin who dated someone at ASU is that Charlie Cobb was reading all the time on the MMB that he "should fire the whole bunch" and he "mistakenly" thought the reference was to teaching faculty ---