A lot of these listings should indicate "smells like wet dog real bad" or not

2 hours ago, jjakucyk said:

Here's a good example of what I'm seeing in the areas I'm looking.  Basically, you either get something like this, which I would not consider livable, https://www.zillow.com/homes/for_sale/34222016_zpid or

 

It comes with an anvil:

 

1 hour ago, GCrites80s said:

A lot of these listings should indicate "smells like wet dog real bad" or not

 

A lot of people never figure out that you have to get up on the roof 1-2 times per year and clean out the gutters.  A clogged gutter is the beginning of the end for a house.  It's like a 30 minute chore, max. 

 

A full rehab of that $75,000 house on Highland Ave. is beyond the capabilities of a single person.  You could do it, but even if you quit your job it would take 6+ months of work.  No way could you get it done just working nights and weekends.  And you'd need help for some of the stuff like repairing that back porch. 

 

A lot of the cosmetic stuff with houses is way easier to do by yourself than people think.  There are youtube videos for everything now. 

2 hours ago, jmecklenborg said:

A lot of the cosmetic stuff with houses is way easier to do by yourself than people think.  There are youtube videos for everything now. 

 

My parents have such difficulty finding anyone reputable down in Kentucky to do remodeling projects, so they have taken up to looking up everything on YouTube or going to the free Lowes classes (which are seemingly packed with seniors like my parents). They were quoted something like $1,500 for a tile backsplash in the kitchen, which seemed absurdly high. They completed the project for just a few hundred dollars and found it "very easy" to do it themselves.

 

They are now watching YouTube videos to do tiling in the bathroom now.

59 minutes ago, seicer said:

 

My parents have such difficulty finding anyone reputable down in Kentucky to do remodeling projects, so they have taken up to looking up everything on YouTube or going to the free Lowes classes (which are seemingly packed with seniors like my parents). They were quoted something like $1,500 for a tile backsplash in the kitchen, which seemed absurdly high. They completed the project for just a few hundred dollars and found it "very easy" to do it themselves.

 

They are now watching YouTube videos to do tiling in the bathroom now.

$1500?  I don't think that would be "high" since you don't mention the size of the space, design, materials utilized and labor.  I would also state, if this is a remodel job, you need to account for any damage, uncovered, that need repair.

 

However, I think DYI tiling, in a simple pattern can be done much cheaper than hiring a professional, as your parents have found out. I hope that tile grouting was done properly. ????

29 minutes ago, MyTwoSense said:

$1500?  I don't think that would be "high" since you don't mention the size of the space, design, materials utilized and labor.  I would also state, if this is a remodel job, you need to account for any damage, uncovered, that need repair.

 

However, I think DYI tiling, in a simple pattern can be done much cheaper than hiring a professional, as your parents have found out. I hope that tile grouting was done properly. ????

 

A simple subway tile backsplash, but considering that the people never came out to do the job, it wasn't that much of a loss since they found out it was easy to do and a labor of love. Plus, they got the idea to add some creativity to the project they wouldn't have been able to do before.

 

It's pretty tough to find a reputable handyman in my parents area, surprisingly. They wanted tiling done in the bathroom and one supposedly good outfit in Ashland KY kept making excuses on when the tiles would be in, only to charge them a "deposit" fee and never following up with actual installation (they had the charges revoked from the credit card side of things). They had an equally horrible experience getting carpet put down years ago with delayed delivery dates and doped up installers.

The tiling in the kitchen has been in for about a year now and it looks great.

17 hours ago, jmecklenborg said:

It's easy to imagine one of those home improvement shows hacking away at this perfectly functional kitchen and bathroom.  $20,000 for a new kitchen and $15,000 for a new bathroom just so you can impress people you don't like on Instagram.

 

 

You'd be hard pressed to find a "functional" original 1950's bathroom today.  They have a lifespan.  It has passed. Waterproofing didn't exist back then.  My house (1952) had those same bathrooms.  Everyone used those same tiles and fixtures in different combos in the 50's.  The downstairs tub/shower was tile directly over plaster veneer over rocklathe.  We used it sparingly.  When we tore it out, there was moisture permeating all the way to the studs through the cracks in the veneer and the porous rocklathe.  Mildew in the stud cavities. The string grid they used as tile spacers worked nicely as wicks of moisture. But you wouldn't know it looking at that gleaming 50's porcelain.  The upstairs standup shower was a fat mud job, took two weekends to demo with a sledge.  At some point the lead shower pan was replaced/augmented with a pvc liner.  It still leaked and rotted the bottom quarter of most of the studs and even water damaged the hardwood floors of the master bedroom.  Fun stuff.

It is incredible how much damage long term water infiltration can do and how poorly some people try to fix it. I am converting a double to a single in Lakewood (I’m sorry urbanohio, I promise I’m adding density back in other parts of cleveland), and I brought both bathrooms down to the studs. On the outside, one bathroom looked wayyyy better than the other with standard updates, but when I got that one down to the studs...holy hell I can’t believe no one fell through the floor. I had to replace 4 floor joists entirely. I couldn’t even reinforce them, because they were rotted all the way through. The other less attractive bathroom was as solid as the day it was built

On 1/4/2020 at 2:10 PM, jmecklenborg said:

 

It comes with an anvil:

 

 

Doesn't every house?

^ I'm no expert but the wiring might not be up to code. 

On ‎1‎/‎4‎/‎2020 at 5:09 AM, MyTwoSense said:

I was waiting for the Connors to come out!  That couch.

 

 

 

Love that this is three years in a row where Central has been over 100k.

Old brooklyn is getting pretty close to light green as well!

 

maybe this should go under Weird Real Estate Listings, but perhaps home prices are really on the upswing in NE Ohio when a house that looks like this (and this small) in Painesville (of all places) can be listed for nearly 100K ? (although obviously a lot of work was done inside, there's a complete disconnect in my mind between the interior and exterior pictures--lol)

 

https://www.zillow.com/homedetails/144-E-Walnut-Ave-Painesville-OH-44077/34475331_zpid/

 

  

 

     

 

          

The size/features certainly don't add up to that price in my opinion. I'm wondering if that space above the garage is a second rentable living space. If so, the price would make sense to me if its for a two unit (though the listing doesn't indicate). Also a great example of houses being rehabbed with nothing going in to add any curb appeal. So many listings I see where the inside is beautifully rehabbed, and yet the exterior and yard still look like a dump. Makes no sense at all to me.

2 hours ago, PoshSteve said:

The size/features certainly don't add up to that price in my opinion. I'm wondering if that space above the garage is a second rentable living space. If so, the price would make sense to me if its for a two unit (though the listing doesn't indicate). Also a great example of houses being rehabbed with nothing going in to add any curb appeal. So many listings I see where the inside is beautifully rehabbed, and yet the exterior and yard still look like a dump. Makes no sense at all to me.

 

yeah, the space above the garage must have something to do with the price. Don't understand why it's not mentioned in the listing. ? That said, I doubt if they'll get anywhere near 100K. 

Cleveland and suburban Cuyahoga County home prices up in January over a year ago

Today 7:11 AM

By Rich Exner, cleveland.com

 

CLEVELAND, Ohio - Home sale prices in Cuyahoga County were up in January over a year ago in both the suburbs and the city of Cleveland.

In the suburbs, the median price for a single-family home was $136,750 last month, up from $125,000 from January 2019, cleveland.com’s monthly tracking of county home sales data found.

 

In the city of Cleveland, the median price last month was $47,500, up from $39,900 in January 2019.

 

https://www.cleveland.com/datacentral/2020/02/cleveland-and-suburban-cuyahoga-county-home-prices-up-in-january-over-a-year-ago.html

On 1/10/2020 at 6:04 PM, KJP said:

 

 

Another look at this data, taking the average home sales over the last 3 years and showing more granularity:

 

 

Here is the change in sale prices for the 3 year period over the prior 3 years. Positive growth in all but 4 neighborhoods and overall growth of 21%

 

 

Rent continues to creep up in the 3C's

 

For city limits -- avg apartment rents:

 

$1,105 - Cleveland

$1,008 - Cincinnati

$944 - Columbus

 

https://www.cleveland19.com/2020/02/18/rent-cleveland-continues-climb-heres-how-much-you-need-make-afford-it/

Edited February 19, 20205 yr by MuRrAy HiLL

Pulling from the most reliable five year ACS Profiles for 2014-2018 these are the median rents, and rental vacancies of the Three Cs:

 

Urbanized Area (2010):

 

Cincinnati: $828 / 5.4%

Cleveland: $814 / 6.7%

Columbus: $949 / 5.2%

 

Metro Area:

 

Cincinnati: $817 / 5.4%

Cleveland: $800 / 6.5%

Columbus: $925 / 5.4%

 

City Proper:

 

Cincinnati: $709 / 7.0%

Cleveland: $700 / 6.7%

Columbus: $928 / 5.2%

 

County:

 

Hamilton: $779 / 6.1%

Cuyahoga: $790 / 6.9%

Franklin: $942 / 5.2%

Edited February 19, 20205 yr by aderwent

^What you gain in sample size with the 5-year ACS, you'll lose in current-ness, and I reckon that matters a lot for rents.  

It could also be the difference in using median vs. average (mean). 

1 hour ago, freefourur said:

It could also be the difference in using median vs. average (mean). 

 

This makes a big difference.

This is extra-mondo-hyper-crazy:

 

How do grown adults with money make such bad decisions?

 

 

https://constructioncoverage.com/research/cities-investing-the-most-in-new-housing-2020.  

 

The table at the end of the article really shows what's been going on in metro housing markets in a way I haven't seen elsewhere. 

Edited April 18, 20205 yr by Z

7 minutes ago, Z said:

what's been going on

 

Dallas and Houston are what's going on.  Early-2010s predictions that both of them will surpass Chicago in size in the 2030s are still on track.   

 

Nashville is going bust in 2020.  Austin is already growing much faster and it will widen its lead. 

 

 

 

 

11 hours ago, jmecklenborg said:

 

Dallas and Houston are what's going on.  Early-2010s predictions that both of them will surpass Chicago in size in the 2030s are still on track.   

 

Nashville is going bust in 2020.  Austin is already growing much faster and it will widen its lead. 

 

 

 

 

The total value of new housing construction in Detroit was greater than that in Cincinnati in 2019. That's astounding. Cincinnati can't even keep up with the city that has defined societal failure for generations. 

While Detroit certainly fell hard, it still has more than double Cincinnati's population (and at peak population in the 1950s that difference was nearly 4x), while also having double the land area.  So total value is a pretty weak metric to compare, because they can have less than half the per capita or percentage growth and still "win" if you only look at the total.  

41 minutes ago, jjakucyk said:

While Detroit certainly fell hard, it still has more than double Cincinnati's population (and at peak population in the 1950s that difference was nearly 4x), while also having double the land area.  So total value is a pretty weak metric to compare, because they can have less than half the per capita or percentage growth and still "win" if you only look at the total.  

That argument has some validity, but will it convince investors and businesses assessing metro area stats when they decide where and how to invest? They see Cincinnati's slower new construction, lower property values, and only slightly higher population growth and decide against investing in the Queen City.  Cincinnati has to work hard to overcome headline data that makes it look bad and I don't know of an American city that does a worse job of selling itself that Cincinnati. Cincinnati's elite almost seems to resent that it should even HAVE to sell itself, but when it's seen in the context of other metros, it clearly has to sell itself as hard as it can. 

Edited April 18, 20205 yr by Z

2 hours ago, Z said:

 Cincinnati's elite almost seems to resent that it should even HAVE to sell itself,

 

Is this "Matt" from Aaron Renn's website?  I didn't even broach the subject of Cincinnati and off you go.  Just like "Matt". 

41 minutes ago, jmecklenborg said:

 

Is this "Matt" from Aaron Renn's website?  I didn't even broach the subject of Cincinnati and off you go.  Just like "Matt". 

My comments weren't in response to yours. You presume everything is about you. Just like "Jake".

6 hours ago, Z said:

That argument has some validity, but will it convince investors and businesses assessing metro area stats when they decide where and how to invest? They see Cincinnati's slower new construction, lower property values, and only slightly higher population growth and decide against investing in the Queen City.  Cincinnati has to work hard to overcome headline data that makes it look bad and I don't know of an American city that does a worse job of selling itself that Cincinnati. Cincinnati's elite almost seems to resent that it should even HAVE to sell itself, but when it's seen in the context of other metros, it clearly has to sell itself as hard as it can. 

Part of this in relation to housing is most Ohio metros are not really on the radar for institutional capital funding large housing deals for the multi-family sector. Columbus is starting to have the institutional players dip their toes in but it has been light compared to say the Texas or NC markets. Cincy and Cleveland are much more on the private equity side and do not get the institutional investors yet. Now if Cincy ever merges with Dayton, it vaults them into a top 20 metro and changes the perception some and then some of the larger players may give them more of a look. 

16 hours ago, Brutus_buckeye said:

Part of this in relation to housing is most Ohio metros are not really on the radar for institutional capital funding large housing deals for the multi-family sector. Columbus is starting to have the institutional players dip their toes in but it has been light compared to say the Texas or NC markets. Cincy and Cleveland are much more on the private equity side and do not get the institutional investors yet. Now if Cincy ever merges with Dayton, it vaults them into a top 20 metro and changes the perception some and then some of the larger players may give them more of a look. 

So, Cincinnati's elite likes having the Queen City all to itself. It benefits from not having to compete with "institutional players" who have better access to capital and more experience in managing projects. Flying under the radar of companies with better access to capital and more successful development experience benefits a local elite that depends on it's control of Cincinnati. That explains a lot. Thanks.

Edited April 19, 20205 yr by Z

You are Matt aren't you?  How does "most Ohio metros are not really on the radar for institutional capital funding" lead to the conclusion "Cincinnati's elite likes having the Queen City all to itself"?  As if Apple or Amazon would relocate their HQ's here, or some large national developer would drop 5,000 apartment units on the city if only we'd just let them.  

14 minutes ago, Z said:

So, Cincinnati's elite likes having the Queen City all to itself. It benefits from not having to compete with "institutional players" who have better access to capital and more experience in managing projects. Flying under the radar of companies with better access to capital and more successful development experience benefits a local elite that depends on it's control of Cincinnati. 

Ha, Hardly. There are about 10-12 really large institutional players in the multi-family sector. there are similar amounts in other sectors. Typically, the institutional players will not enter a market if they are a lone wolf, they need 2-3 of their competitors to join them to make a market viable because essentially, they are going and trading the properties amongst themselves every 3-4 years.  In pretty much all Ohio cities (although columbus is seeing some light institutional players come to the market) the institutions are not looking to play there yet because they can't essentially get their partners to trade there. So while 1 or 2 big players may be interested in say Cincinnati, they end up passing until a few others show interest in the market too. This is true for cities like Pittsburgh, Milwuakee, Cleveland, San Antonio. It just happens to be a preference on where some of these players want to put their money at the present time.

 

There is a ton of outside capital coming into cincinnati, it is just not through institutional players. Over 50% of all apartment purchases in 2019 in the Cincinnati market were from owners out of state. There is a lot of money coming from NY to Cincinnati, just not in the form of institutional money. 

 

 

28 minutes ago, Z said:

So, Cincinnati's elite likes having the Queen City all to itself. It benefits from not having to compete with "institutional players" who have better access to capital and more experience in managing projects. Flying under the radar of companies with better access to capital and more successful development experience benefits a local elite that depends on it's control of Cincinnati. 

Also, large institutional players are playing in other sectors in all of Ohio's big cities. In the Industrial Sector or Office Sector Cincinnati and Cleveland have large players. Storage REITS love Ohio and most of their cities including Dayton, Akron, Toledo, etc.

So so say big institutional money period skips Ohio is false too. Right now they are not playing in the apartment sector. 

24 minutes ago, Brutus_buckeye said:

Ha, Hardly. There are about 10-12 really large institutional players in the multi-family sector. there are similar amounts in other sectors. Typically, the institutional players will not enter a market if they are a lone wolf, they need 2-3 of their competitors to join them to make a market viable because essentially, they are going and trading the properties amongst themselves every 3-4 years.  In pretty much all Ohio cities (although columbus is seeing some light institutional players come to the market) the institutions are not looking to play there yet because they can't essentially get their partners to trade there. So while 1 or 2 big players may be interested in say Cincinnati, they end up passing until a few others show interest in the market too. This is true for cities like Pittsburgh, Milwuakee, Cleveland, San Antonio. It just happens to be a preference on where some of these players want to put their money at the present time.

 

There is a ton of outside capital coming into cincinnati, it is just not through institutional players. Over 50% of all apartment purchases in 2019 in the Cincinnati market were from owners out of state. There is a lot of money coming from NY to Cincinnati, just not in the form of institutional money. 

 

 

Your original point about "institutional" investors is important. Individual bit players are able to participate in Cincinnati's real estate market BECAUSE institutional investors are not. Buying a few rental income properties doesn't threaten the local elite's ability to keep property values to low and stagnant to attract institutional investors. 

28 minutes ago, Z said:

Your original point about "institutional" investors is important. Individual bit players are able to participate in Cincinnati's real estate market BECAUSE institutional investors are not. Buying a few rental income properties doesn't threaten the local elite's ability to keep property values to low and stagnant to attract institutional investors. 

Elites really have no control over how moneyed institutions from out of state choose to deploy their capital. In fact, most welcome it as a way to add to their wealth. Institutional players are playing all over Cincinnati, just not in the apartment sector, but you go to any other sector and institutional investors are all over the city. So to say that the elites are forging some sort of conspiracy to keep the big players out just is not accurate

8 minutes ago, Brutus_buckeye said:

Elites really have no control over how moneyed institutions from out of state choose to deploy their capital. In fact, most welcome it as a way to add to their wealth. Institutional players are playing all over Cincinnati, just not in the apartment sector, but you go to any other sector and institutional investors are all over the city. So to say that the elites are forging some sort of conspiracy to keep the big players out just is not accurate

They do have control over taxes, public services, roads, institutional structures, political machines, etc....all the things that affect property values profoundly. Every place has an elite and every elite has a set of class interests. Whether you see socioeconomic class as a "conspiracy" or a set of shared interests, low property values certainly serves the interests of Cincinnati's elite. They have no incentive to 'sell' Cincinnati to institutional investors. If they did, institutional investors might take them up on their offer and marginalize the local elite's power as a class in Cincinnati. Local politics ultimately serve the interests of those who currently dominate a place, not those who might dominate it in the future. 

3 minutes ago, Z said:

They do have control over taxes, public services, roads, institutional structures, political machines, etc....all the things that affect property values profoundly. Every place has an elite and every elite has a set of class interests. Whether you see socioeconomic class as a "conspiracy" or a set of shared interests, low property values certainly serves the interests of Cincinnati's elite. They have no incentive to 'sell' Cincinnati to institutional investors. If they did, institutional investors might take them up on their offer and marginalize the local elite's power as a class in Cincinnati. Local politics ultimately serve the interests of those who currently dominate a place, not those who might dominate it in the future. 

Then why are they investing in other sectors in Cincinnati like office and industrial at an extremely high rate?

3 minutes ago, Brutus_buckeye said:

Then why are they investing in other sectors in Cincinnati like office and industrial at an extremely high rate?

What evidence of that do we have? If they're investing so much, why are office and industrial property still so cheap in Cincinnati? https://f.tlcollect.com/fr2/418/63842/MarketFlash_Louisville_Office_Market_Affordability_-_2nd_in_US_-_5-15-18.pdf

I bet Cranley does not want the big boys coming to town.

1 hour ago, Z said:

What evidence of that do we have? If they're investing so much, why are office and industrial property still so cheap in Cincinnati? https://f.tlcollect.com/fr2/418/63842/MarketFlash_Louisville_Office_Market_Affordability_-_2nd_in_US_-_5-15-18.pdf

Here is a recent press release from a large industrial REIT. 

If you look downtown at the office towers, Hines is one of the largest office REITs and has a few holdings downtown. The GE building on the Banks was sold a few years back too to an institutional player. So, they are playing in Cincinnati.

You want to look to Retail? look to Kenwood Towne Centre as a perfect example of an in demand retail center

Drive down the highway, look at any Extra Space Storage, Public Storage, Life Storage, and you have some of the largest national REITs in the country. 

 

https://www.globenewswire.com/news-release/2019/02/04/1710207/0/en/Dream-Industrial-REIT-Announces-Acquisition-of-CAD-235-Million-US-179-Million-Logistics-Portfolio-in-Five-Cities-Across-the-Midwest-U-S-and-125-Million-Equity-Offering.html

 

https://www.bizjournals.com/cincinnati/news/2016/10/17/ge-s-global-operations-center-at-the-banks-sold.html

 

 

On 4/18/2020 at 1:22 PM, jmecklenborg said:

 

Is this "Matt" from Aaron Renn's website?  I didn't even broach the subject of Cincinnati and off you go.  Just like "Matt". 

 I cannot think of Cincinnati now without thinking of "incestuous" social, economic, and political elites. Not that the description is necessarily wrong(I really don't know the city)but the phrasing is in my brain now re: "The city that shall not be named" lol.

 

*interesting on that link that Z posted is that Cbus is smack in the middle(so typical). Also for Cbus 50 percent is multi-family units which is a bit higher than some nearby metros.

Edited April 19, 20205 yr by Toddguy

53 minutes ago, Brutus_buckeye said:

Here is a recent press release from a large industrial REIT. 

If you look downtown at the office towers, Hines is one of the largest office REITs and has a few holdings downtown. The GE building on the Banks was sold a few years back too to an institutional player. So, they are playing in Cincinnati.

You want to look to Retail? look to Kenwood Towne Centre as a perfect example of an in demand retail center

Drive down the highway, look at any Extra Space Storage, Public Storage, Life Storage, and you have some of the largest national REITs in the country. 

 

https://www.globenewswire.com/news-release/2019/02/04/1710207/0/en/Dream-Industrial-REIT-Announces-Acquisition-of-CAD-235-Million-US-179-Million-Logistics-Portfolio-in-Five-Cities-Across-the-Midwest-U-S-and-125-Million-Equity-Offering.html

 

https://www.bizjournals.com/cincinnati/news/2016/10/17/ge-s-global-operations-center-at-the-banks-sold.html

 

 

That looks like a bit of bargain hunting from larger investors looking to diversity away from more expensive cities...which is almost all cities Cincinnati's size or larger. Cincinnati property may be nothing more than a tax write-off for such investors. Potential investors see Cincinnati's very cheap property, its low wages, and weak job growth and look elsewhere unless Cincinnati gives them some other reason to reconsider it. Cincinnati, and other stagnant metros, will only succeed if they want to...and Cincinnati's leadership doesn't want to. Their strategy is one of 'managed decline' allowing them to extract all the residual value out of Cincinnati to support their financial and political positions. There's no financial scenario for anyone to invest in Cincinnati's housing markets or anything else now. Until that changes, it will continue to drift lower in the hierarchy of American metros. 

1 hour ago, Z said:

That looks like a bit of bargain hunting from larger investors looking to diversity away from more expensive cities...which is almost all cities Cincinnati's size or larger. Cincinnati property may be nothing more than a tax write-off for such investors. Potential investors see Cincinnati's very cheap property, its low wages, and weak job growth and look elsewhere unless Cincinnati gives them some other reason to reconsider it. Cincinnati, and other stagnant metros, will only succeed if they want to...and Cincinnati's leadership doesn't want to. Their strategy is one of 'managed decline' allowing them to extract all the residual value out of Cincinnati to support their financial and political positions. There's no financial scenario for anyone to invest in Cincinnati's housing markets or anything else now. Until that changes, it will continue to drift lower in the hierarchy of American metros. 

that is certainly an interesting take. Comically wrong, but an interesting take nonetheless

17 hours ago, Brutus_buckeye said:

that is certainly an interesting take. Comically wrong, but an interesting take nonetheless

How is something "interesting" and  "wrong?" Either way, Cincinnati's incredibly cheap real estate stands as a fact to be explained. Markets are important for understanding how human societies work. Cincinnati's only hope is understanding its place in larger markets and accepting it as a basis for getting the world to value Cincinnati in some way. Circling the wagons and sharing happy talk with each other won't help Cincinnati's housing market or overall economy. But, maybe Cincinnati doesn't want others to see value in Cincinnati.....like a beaten down person who wants nothing more than to be left alone rather than face the risk of more failure. Mabye Cincinnati works as a place to hide away from the world. Still, I think there are some who can envision more in the Queen City. 

Edited April 20, 20205 yr by Z