What the NAR Does Not Want You To Know

[don]

It's Still A Terrible Time To Buy

Why?

By Patrick Killelea, last updated Fri Apr 30, 2010

Because house prices will keep falling in most places. Prices are still dangerously high compared to incomes and rents. Banks say a safe mortgage is a maximum of 3 times the buyer's annual income with 20% downpayment. Landlords say a safe price is a maximum of 15 times the house's annual rent. Yet on the coasts, both those safety rules are still being violated. Buyers are still borrowing 6 times their income and putting only 3% down, and sellers are still asking 30 times annual rent, even after recent price declines. Renting is a cash business that proves what people can really pay based on their salary, not how much they can borrow. Salaries and rents prove that prices will keep falling for a long time. Anyone who bought a "bargain" this time last year is already sitting on a very painful loss.

1. Because it's still much cheaper to rent than to own the same size and quality house, in the same school district. On the coasts, annual rents are 3% of purchase price while mortgage rates are 6%, so it costs twice as much to borrow the money than it does to borrow the house. Renters win and owners lose! Worse, total owner costs including taxes, maintenance, and insurance come to about 9% of purchase price, which is three times the cost of renting and wipes out any income tax benefit. Buying a house is still a very bad deal in the richer neighborhoods, but it does make sense to buy in some relatively poor neighborhoods where prices have already fallen into line with salaries and rents. Check whether you should rent or buy in your own area with this NY Times calculator. The only true sign of a bottom is a price low enough so that you could rent out the house and make a profit. Then you'll know it's safe to buy for yourself because then rent could cover the mortgage and all expenses if necessary, eliminating most of your risk. The basic buying safety rule is to divide annual rent by the purchase price for the house:
   
   annual rent / purchase price = 3% means do not buy
   annual rent / purchase price = 6% means borderline
   annual rent / purchase price = 9% means ok to bSo for example, it's borderline to pay $200,000 for a house that would cost you $1,000 per month to rent. That's $12,000 per year in rent. If you buy it with a 6% mortgage, that's $12,000 per year in interest instead, so it works out about the same. Owners can pay interest with pre-tax money, but that benefit gets wiped out by the eternal debts of repairs and property tax, equalizing things. It is foolish to pay $400,000 for that same house, because renting it would cost only half as much per year, and renters are completely safe from falling house prices.
2. Because it's a terrible time to buy when interest rates are low, like now. Realtors just lie without shame about this fundamental fact. House prices fall as interest rates rise, because a fixed monthly payment covers a smaller mortgage at a higher interest rate. Since interest rates have nowhere to go but up, prices have nowhere to go but down. The way to win the game is to have cash on hand to buy outright at a low price when others cannot borrow very much because of high interest rates. Then you get a low price, and you get capital appreciation caused by falling interest rates. To buy at a time of low interest rates and high prices like now is a mistake for both reasons. It is far better to pay a low price with a high interest rate than a high price with a low interest rate, even if the mortgage payment is the same either way.
   • Your property taxes will be lower with a low purchase price.
   • A low price gives you the ability to pay it all off instead of being a debt-slave for the rest of your life.
   • As interest rates fall from high to low, house prices increase.
   • Paying a high price now may trap you "under water", meaning you'll have a mortgage larger than the value of the house. Then you will not be able to refinance because there you'll have no equity, and will not be able to sell without a loss. Even if you get a long-term fixed rate mortgage, when rates inevitably go up the value of your property will go down. Paying a low price minimizes your damage.
   
   
3. Because buyers already borrowed too much money and cannot pay it back. They spent it on houses that are now worth less than the loan. This means most banks are actually bankrupt. But since the banks have friends in Washington, they get special treatment that you do not. The Federal Reserve prints up bales of new money to buy worthless mortgages from the most irresponsible banks, slowing down the buyer-friendly deflation in prices and socializing bank losses. As if that were not enough corruption, Congress authorized vast amounts of TARP bailout cash taken from taxpayers, to be loaned directly to the worst-run banks, those that already gambled on mortgages and lost. The Fed and Congress are letting the banks "extend and pretend" that their mortgage loans will get paid back.
4. Because buyers used too much leverage. Leverage means using debt to amplify gain. Most people forget that debt amplifies losses as well. If a buyer puts 10% down and the house goes down 10%, he has lost 100% of his money on paper. If he has to sell due to job loss or a mortgage rate adjustment, he lost 100% in the real world. The simple fact is that the renter - if willing and able to save his money - can buy a house outright in half the time that a conventional buyer can pay off a mortgage. Interest generally accounts for more than half of the cost of a house. The saver/renter not only pays no interest, he also gets interest on his savings. Leveraged housing appreciation, usually presented as the "secret" to wealth, cannot be counted on, and can just as easily work against the buyer. In fact, that leverage is the danger that got current buyers into trouble.
   Higher-end houses especially are now set up for a huge fall in prices, since there is no more fake paper equity from the sale of a previously overvalued property. Without that equity, most people don't have the money needed for a down payment on an expensive house. It takes a very long time indeed to save up for a 20% downpayment when you're still making mortgage payments on an underwater house.
   It's worse than that. House prices do not even have to fall to cause big losses. The cost of selling a house is 6% because of the realtor lobby's corruption of US legislators. On a $300,000 house, that's $18,000 lost even if prices just stay flat. So a 4% decline in housing prices bankrupts all those with 10% equity or less.
5. Because the housing bubble was not driven by supply and demand. There is huge supply because of overbuilding, and there is less demand now that the baby boomers are retiring and selling. Prices in the bubble, even now, are entirely a function of how much the banks are willing to lend. Most people will borrow as much as they possibly can, amounts that are completely disconnected from their salaries or from the rental value of the property. Banks have been willing to accomodate crazy borrowers because banker control of the US government means that banks do not yet have to acknowledge their losses, or can push losses onto taxpayers through government housing agencies like the FHA.
6. Because there is a massive and growing backlog of latent foreclosures. Millions of owners have simply stopped paying their mortgages, and the banks are doing nothing about it, letting the owner live in the house for free. If a bank forecloses and takes possession of a house, that means the bank is responsible for property taxes and maintenance. Banks don't like those costs. If a bank then sells the foreclosure at current prices, the bank has to admit a loss on the loan. Banks like that cost even less. So there is a tsunami of foreclosures on the way that the banks are ignoring, for now. To prevent a justified foreclosure is also to prevent a deserving family from buying that house at a low price. One day, those foreclosures will wash over the landscape, decimating prices, and benefitting millions of families which will be able to buy a house without a suicidal level of debt, and maybe without any debt at all! Why is it that news articles about foreclosure never mention the happy young families that can finally buy at a low price?
7. Because first-time buyers have all been ruthlessly exploited and the supply of new victims is very low. From The Herald: "We were all corrupted by the housing boom, to some extent. People talked endlessly about how their houses were earning more than they did, never asking where all this free money was coming from. Well the truth is that it was being stolen from the next generation. Houses price increases don't produce wealth, they merely transfer it from the young to the old - from the coming generation of families who have to burden themselves with colossal debts if they want to own, to the baby boomers who are about to retire and live on the cash they make when they downsize." House price inflation has been very unfair to new families, especially those with children. It is foolish for them to buy at current high prices, yet government leaders never talk about how lower house prices are good for American families, instead preferring to sacrifice the young and poor to benefit the old and rich, and to make sure bankers have plenty of debt to earn interest on. Every "affordability" program drives prices higher by pushing buyers deeper into debt. Increased debt is not affordability, it's just pushing the reckoning into the future. To really help Americans, Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac and the FHA should be completely eliminated, along with the mortgage-interest deduction. Canada has no mortgage-interest deduction at all, and has a more affordable and stable housing market because of that.
   The government pretends to be interested in affordable housing, but now that housing is becoming truly affordable via falling prices, they want to stop it? Their actions speak louder than their words.
8. Because boomers are retiring. There are 70 million Americans born between 1945-1960. One-third have zero retirement savings. The oldest are 64. The only money they have is equity in a house, so they must sell. This will add yet another flood of houses to the market, driving prices down even more.
9. Because there is a huge glut of empty new houses. Builders are being forced to drop prices even faster than owners, because builders must sell to keep their business going. They need the money now. Builders have huge excess inventory that they cannot sell at current prices, and more houses are completed each day, making the housing slump worse.

Who disagrees that house prices will continue to fall?

Everyone making money off you!

1. Buyer's agents disagree, because they get nothing if there is no sale. Agents want their clients to buy no matter how bad the deal is, which is the exact opposite of the buyer's best interest. Agents take $100 billion each year in commissions from buyers. Agents claim the seller pays the commission, but always fail to mention that the seller gets that money from the buyer. Think about it: who brings the money to the table - the seller or the buyer? All money comes from buyers. No buyer, no money. Real estate in America is all about deception. There is no free market because bids on houses are never published and bids are often faked to get you to think you have to pay more. There should be a law to make all bids public and validated by a bank, but the NAR is one of the largest lobbyists in Congress, so don't expect any changes soon.
   Quote from a patrick.net reader: "When I'm told that the seller has multiple offers, I tell the broker that we've also put offers on several other houses. Fear of loss works both ways..."
   If a house is a really good deal, you'll never hear about it from any realtor. Great quote from patrick.net reader Linda:
   Realtors ALWAYS GET FIRST DIBS AT EVERY HOUSE even before it is listed. Realtors always have a shot at the best deals. In fact, IF A LISTED HOUSE WAS NOT ALREADY PURCHASED BY A REALTOR OR one of their buddies---that means IT IS A BAD DEAL. If it were a "good" deal---they would have bought it. Under the REALTOR / MLS monopoly system--- prospective buyers only get to look at the junk left over that Realtors and their "friends" do NOT want.
   This means that your best chance of finding a good deal is by looking at the listings the MLS is hiding from you: FSBO sites, Craigslist, foreclosures, builder inventory. It's also productive to talk to people you know who might want to sell, or send out postcards in a certain area. Avoid the realtors and you'll come out way ahead.
   Why should you give up nearly two years of your life working to pay a realtor who is not even really helping you? 6% of the 30 years it takes to pay off a house is 1.8 years of donating your working time to realtors. Just find a house on your own, hopefully a house for sale by owner, and get a real estate lawyer by the hour to draw up the offer and complete the sale.
   There are buyer's agents who really believe they are helping the buyer, but they're in denial about their conflict of interests. Author Upton Sinclair had a great explanation for this: "It is difficult to get a man to understand something when his salary depends on his not understanding it." The NAR (National Association of Realtors) has harmed America far more than terrorism did. At some level, people know this, and that's why realtors are consistently rated the lowest "profession".
2. Mortgage brokers disagree, because they take a percentage of the loan. They want buyers to take out the biggest loan possible to maximize their commission. Even worse - mortgage brokers get paid according to how bad the deal is for the buyer. The worse the deal is (higher interest rate, points, fees, etc) the more the mortgage broker gets!
3. Government agencies like Fannie, Freddie, and the FHA disagree, because their own existence (read "executive salaries") depends on guaranteeing private loans with public money. These agencies are perhaps the largest scam ever devised. Most people will borrow as much as they possibly can to buy a house. The existence of Fannie and Freddie just make it possible to borrow yet more money by pushing lending risk onto taxpayers, benefitting bankers with larger interest payments, and harming buyers with higher housing costs. Strangely, Fannie and Freddie drive up the cost of housing in the name of "affordability". The public is unlikely to ever understand this. The perfect crime.
4. Banks disagree, at least when they can get origination fees and then sell the mortgage, because in that case they do not care about the bankruptcy of borrowers. Banks sold most loans to the government agencies Fannie Mae or Freddie Mac, and now use the FHA the same way. The conversion of low-quality housing debt into "high" quality government debt was the main support for the housing bubble. Fannie and Freddie already imploded, and the FHA is now on the edge. The other way for banks to dump the risk of loan default has been the Wall Street market for mortgage-backed securities. Now that mass foreclosures have eliminated the loan-resale market, banks are under pressure to increase loan quality.
5. Appraisers disagree, because they are paid by mortgage brokers and banks, so they are going to give the appraisals that mortgage brokers and banks want to see, not the truth. Appraisers that kill a deal by telling the truth do not get called back to do other appraisals.
6. Newspapers disagree, because they earn money from advertising placed by realtors, lenders, and mortgage brokers. Papers are pressured by that money to publish the real estate industry's unrealistic forecasts. Worse, realtors have a near-monopoly on sale price information, and newspaper reporters never ask realtors hard questions like "how do we know you're not lying about those prices?" The result is an endless stream of stories reporting that the National Association of Realtors (NAR) says it's a good time to buy. Asking the NAR about housing is like walking into a used car dealership and asking the salesman if today would be a good day to buy a car.
7. The Federal Government disagrees, because everyone in Congress gets campaign bribes (oops -- I meant campaign donations) from the NAR and from the banks. So every Federal law will be aimed squarely at increasing commissions for the NAR and increasing interest payments to banks. Buyers lose, because they have no lobbyists in DC. The very laws of our country have been corrupted to squeeze more profits out of you.
8. Current owners disagree, because they do not want to believe they are going to lose huge amounts of money. Anyone who owns is likely to encourage you to buy too, to prop up their own house value via comps, and so that they can feel that they are not alone in their sinking boat.

http://patrick.net/housing/crash.html

[cjppjc]

Re: What the NAR Does Not Want You To Know

And you expected the NAR to say.........?

[GRG55]

Re: What the NAR Does Not Want You To Know

And you expected the NAR to say.........?

http://davidlereahwatch.blogspot.com...olish-and.html

[cjppjc]

Re: What the NAR Does Not Want You To Know

Many "experts and spokespeople" said "The problems are contained to subprime only." I'm not looking to defend the NAR, I used to joke with my broker every time he would quote the NAR in meetings. But this is the way spokespersons talk.

[GRG55]

Re: What the NAR Does Not Want You To Know

...But this is the way spokespersons talk.

It's a global phenomena...

http://news.sky.com/skynews/Home/Sky...20080641086736

"...There is no presence of American infidels in the city of Baghdad," he declared to journalists on the roof of the Palestine Hotel as gunfire echoed across the city and tanks fired from the banks of the Tigris just a few hundred yards away..."

[c1ue]

Re: What the NAR Does Not Want You To Know

Patrick does good work.

But to be fair, there is such a thing as an ethical real estate broker/agent.

These are the ones who have been working the business for decades as part of the community.

Selling a house to someone and then living in their community is a very different proposition than selling a bunch of houses to strangers then retiring to Bora Bora.

[metalman]

Re: What the NAR Does Not Want You To Know

good article but why does patrick set up the nar as the straw man? the nar is a real estate lobbying group...

NAR Lobbying. Real Representation. Real Advantages.

NAR’s Government Affairs Division works to develop, advance and implement the federal legislative objectives of the REALTOR® Association. We work with Congress and the Executive Branch to achieve these public policy objectives through lobbying, policy development, political field representatives, political communications and grassroots advocacy and the nation’s largest contributor of direct contributions to federal candidates: REALTORS® Political Action Committee (RPAC).

Lobbying
NAR lobbyists have the most extensive contact with Members of Congress and the Senate, carrying NAR’s message on a range of important public policy issues that affect the ownership and operation of real estate. In 2006 NAR is advocating policy initiatives that will result in the continued creation of a fundamentally sound and dynamic U.S. real estate market fostering vibrant communities in which to live and work.
Learn more >

Political Field Staff
NAR field representatives are the face of government affairs at the grassroots level, identifying and working with politically active REALTORS® who assist in delivering NAR’s public policy messages. The field staff also develop and maintain ties with key activists in each congressional district to serve as a conduit between NAR and Members of Congress to influence public policy.

Policy Development
The policy staff are NAR’s subject matter experts. Policy staff analyze legislative and regulatory proposals and formulate association policy in consultation with NAR leaders, members, public policy committees and lobbyists. The issues staff maintain constant and regular communication with congressional committee staff and federal officials on important issues and developments affecting the real estate industry.

Political Communications and Grassroots Advocacy
NAR is widely known for the strength of its grassroots activities, utilizing the legislative and political expertise and involvement of REALTORS® to help advocate our public policy agenda. Through our powerful action tool, NAR Action Center, NAR is able to keep our state and local REALTOR® Associations abreast of the latest policy information and alert REALTORS® to important legislative activity.

REALTORS® Political Action Committee (RPAC)
RPAC is a separate entity that raises money for the political activities of NAR's Government Affairs division and disseminates contributions to congressional candidates. As one of the largest and most influential political action committees in the nation, RPAC is on target to raise a record $11,000,000 in the 2005-2006 election cycle. The national Trustees have budgeted for over $4 million in direct contributions to federal candidates with the remainder spent in a handful of highly competitive electoral races in support of candidates who have been champions of the REALTOR legislative agenda.

NAR’s Government Affairs Division is committed to providing the best available programs, resources and representation to help our member’s business interests.
Learn more >

[Milton Kuo]

Re: What the NAR Does Not Want You To Know

good article but why does patrick set up the nar as the straw man? the nar is a real estate lobbying group...

The NAR doesn't present itself to the general public as a lobbying group. In fact, the material I've seen from the NAR that is intended for general public consumption portrays them as a knowledgeable group of real estate specialists who are offering sound advice.

The NAR's cheerleading during the bubble is borderline criminal especially when you consider that there is good reason to believe they knew there was a housing bubble and the advice they were pushing was absolute bunk. In a way, the NAR's fear-mongering during the housing bubble, "Buy now or be priced out forever," is akin to shouting, "Fire!" in a crowded theater.

The patrick.net article is a good one, in my opinion. The NAR's most recent propaganda is focused on fooling the public that housing now is the most affordable it's been in a long time. A partial truth--it doesn't mean that housing is actually affordable when compared to incomes.

[metalman]

Re: What the NAR Does Not Want You To Know

The NAR doesn't present itself to the general public as a lobbying group. In fact, the material I've seen from the NAR that is intended for general public consumption portrays them as a knowledgeable group of real estate specialists who are offering sound advice.

The NAR's cheerleading during the bubble is borderline criminal especially when you consider that there is good reason to believe they knew there was a housing bubble and the advice they were pushing was absolute bunk. In a way, the NAR's fear-mongering during the housing bubble, "Buy now or be priced out forever," is akin to shouting, "Fire!" in a crowded theater.

i picked the nar lobbying info right off its site... hidden in plain sight.

the villains here are the msm who put the nar on the air & quoted them in the press without identifying them as a rre lobbying group. why doesn't partick id them as a lobbying group?

[Milton Kuo]

Re: What the NAR Does Not Want You To Know

i picked the nar lobbying info right off its site... hidden in plain sight.

the villains here are the msm who put the nar on the air & quoted them in the press without identifying them as a rre lobbying group. why doesn't partick id them as a lobbying group?

Point taken. The mainstream media is beholden, inept, or a combination of the two. As for patrick.net, I guess his excuse is that he's not a real journalist. An oversight but at least he's trying to help people make a good decision on whether to buy or rent.

[don]

Re: What the NAR Does Not Want You To Know

There are some good, old-fashion rule-of-thumb property tools in this piece, none discovered by the author but helpfully included all in one place. The rent/buy ratios, the basic concept that lower mortgage rates mean higher asking prices, something EJ made a point of a while back (and furiously counter-promoted 24/7 by the MSM), listing the benefits of a lower buying price vs lower mortgage interest*, etc. For any iTulipers looking to buy and not familiar with these concepts, this article is a saver.

*The propaganda pushed by everyone that benefits from higher pricing was most recently on display in the Federal Tax Credit expiration on home buying induced stampede. An increase in excess of the tax credit was in many cases immediately added to the listed price of housing. Typical was a bump of $12,000, "offset" by the $8,000 maximum tax credit. The cherry on top to go with all the additional indebtedness that goes with a higher priced home. If you're a buyer, know how the game is played

[reallife]

Re: What the NAR Does Not Want You To Know

As a renter with no mortgage or bills to pay, I am waiting for the government bailout attempts to fade away before even beginning to look for a home after selling and relocating in 2008. My biggest fear is that my wife will 'fall in love' with something while upper-end home prices in our area are still dropping steadily. The banks are sitting on a lot of empty homes in the Puget Sound area. I've been collecting 'for sale' sheets for two years. I've been following the same properties as the sellers tried unsuccessfully to sell, dropping the listing prices with zero buyer interest. Now, 79 of the 321 listings in my zipcode are foreclosures and still not much buying activity. I know of about five really nice, waterfront properties that were listed in 2008 and 2009, unsold, currently vacant, without so much as sign out front, no longer listed on the MLS, just being held by the fraudulant banking industry using bailout money to avoid settling their bad investments. Meanwhile, some of my wife's new friends are 'retired real estate agents' who are spewing the NAR line. My wife is gullible and very much wants her own home so I have a lot of difficulty countering the BS from these women, who will become 'un-retired' when the local market finally does reach bottom, in two to five years, IMHO.

[chr5648]

Re: What the NAR Does Not Want You To Know

Buyer's agents disagree, because they get nothing if there is no sale. Agents want their clients to buy no matter how bad the deal is, which is the exact opposite of the buyer's best interest. Agents take $100 billion each year in commissions from buyers. Agents claim the seller pays the commission, but always fail to mention that the seller gets that money from the buyer. Think about it: who brings the money to the table - the seller or the buyer? All money comes from buyers. No buyer, no money. Real estate in America is all about deception. There is no free market because bids on houses are never published and bids are often faked to get you to think you have to pay more. There should be a law to make all bids public and validated by a bank, but the NAR is one of the largest lobbyists in Congress, so don't expect any changes soon.
Quote from a patrick.net reader: "When I'm told that the seller has multiple offers, I tell the broker that we've also put offers on several other houses. Fear of loss works both ways..."
If a house is a really good deal, you'll never hear about it from any realtor. Great quote from patrick.net reader Linda:
Realtors ALWAYS GET FIRST DIBS AT EVERY HOUSE even before it is listed. Realtors always have a shot at the best deals. In fact, IF A LISTED HOUSE WAS NOT ALREADY PURCHASED BY A REALTOR OR one of their buddies---that means IT IS A BAD DEAL. If it were a "good" deal---they would have bought it. Under the REALTOR / MLS monopoly system--- prospective buyers only get to look at the junk left over that Realtors and their "friends" do NOT want.
This means that your best chance of finding a good deal is by looking at the listings the MLS is hiding from you: FSBO sites, Craigslist, foreclosures, builder inventory. It's also productive to talk to people you know who might want to sell, or send out postcards in a certain area. Avoid the realtors and you'll come out way ahead.
Why should you give up nearly two years of your life working to pay a realtor who is not even really helping you? 6% of the 30 years it takes to pay off a house is 1.8 years of donating your working time to realtors. Just find a house on your own, hopefully a house for sale by owner, and get a real estate lawyer by the hour to draw up the offer and complete the sale.
There are buyer's agents who really believe they are helping the buyer, but they're in denial about their conflict of interests. Author Upton Sinclair had a great explanation for this: "It is difficult to get a man to understand something when his salary depends on his not understanding it." The NAR (National Association of Realtors) has harmed America far more than terrorism did. At some level, people know this, and that's why realtors are consistently rated the lowest "profession".

Everyone knows one or two of these idiots. I got a realtor neighbor who keeps telling me house prices are gonna keep going up like they did 5 years ago.

I know one old fellow in the business and asked him in 2007 if prices are gonna go down, and he said the banks and .gov will stop at nothing to keep prices up. So you should expect prices to keep going up. He mentioned the banks won't take a loss, (eventual bailouts and 0% interest) pretty good prediction. At least he had a good reason for prices to go up. hahaha.

[don]

Re: What the NAR Does Not Want You To Know

As a renter with no mortgage or bills to pay, I am waiting for the government bailout attempts to fade away before even beginning to look for a home after selling and relocating in 2008. My biggest fear is that my wife will 'fall in love' with something while upper-end home prices in our area are still dropping steadily. The banks are sitting on a lot of empty homes in the Puget Sound area. I've been collecting 'for sale' sheets for two years. I've been following the same properties as the sellers tried unsuccessfully to sell, dropping the listing prices with zero buyer interest. Now, 79 of the 321 listings in my zipcode are foreclosures and still not much buying activity. I know of about five really nice, waterfront properties that were listed in 2008 and 2009, unsold, currently vacant, without so much as sign out front, no longer listed on the MLS, just being held by the fraudulant banking industry using bailout money to avoid settling their bad investments. Meanwhile, some of my wife's new friends are 'retired real estate agents' who are spewing the NAR line. My wife is gullible and very much wants her own home so I have a lot of difficulty countering the BS from these women, who will become 'un-retired' when the local market finally does reach bottom, in two to five years, IMHO.

I have a house-wanting wife as well. Articles like this help to keep her grounded. Sure, people in the industry hype their biz. The problem for most Americans is they hear no rebuttals- the NAR dogma is literally everywhere. At least without doing some digging...and joining the 'Tulip ;)

[don]

Re: What the NAR Does Not Want You To Know

Most iTulipers know the following but here's my drill on property search.

On Trulia.com enter the zip/city and then use the large map, zeroing in on the area you're interested in. Click on the green balloons for listing details. Then click the Sale tab up on the top of the map to see the discrepancy between what's being asked and what it really took to sell. Pay attention to sale dates, they can be quite a while ago.

(On properties of interest I open a second window and go to Zillow.com. Copy and paste the address into Zillow, skip their guesstimates, and go to the charts (best part of the site) on the property. Look at the 10 year version. Now you have the boom and bust and sales history of that property over the last decade. You can usually get taxes paid as well.)

Open a third window and duplicate in another Trulia.com where you are in the first one. Go to Rentals. Find the means.

You now have a better profile of the area you're interested in than 90% of the realtors with listings in that area. You can crank out the investor numbers, etc. to fill out your data.

Hope this helps