The Real Estate Wonk

Baltimore-area new condos: Lots to go around

2009-11-08T12:00:00Z

In the market for a new condo? You've got a lot choose from in the Baltimore metro area.

Delta Associates, a real estate information and consulting firm, counts 2,586 unsold units -- enough to last six-and-a-half years at the current pace of sales. And that's not all:

In addition, there are 1,111 units planned with probable sales within the next 36 months. There are an additional 3,200 units in the long-term pipeline in the Baltimore metro area, as well as 6,100 multifamily units planned as either condominiums or rental units.

But it could be worse, or rather it has been: "The inventory-to-sales ratio of condos in the Baltimore metro area has dropped significantly over the past six months," Delta notes.

All told, builders recorded 32 net sales in the Baltimore metro area during the summer, Delta said. The "net" is important -- it accounts for the negative effect of buyers canceling contracts.

Prices in September fell about 7 percent vs. a year earlier across the metro area. The decline is less in the city -- about 5 percent -- and more than 10 percent in the northern suburbs, Delta said.

Who's eligible for the repeat-buyer tax credit?

2009-11-07T12:00:00Z

Many people are homeowners, so it's not surprising that many people have been asking if they'd be eligible for the new, $6,500 tax credit intended for repeat buyers. One sticking point has been the legislative language used to explain eligibility:

In the case of an individual (and, if married, such individual's spouse) who has owned and used the same residence as such individual's principal residence for any 5-consecutive-year period during the 8-year period ending on the date of the purchase of a subsequent principal residence, such individual shall be [eligible for the credit] with respect to the purchase of such subsequent residence.

Does that mean people who lived in their homes for the past five years and want to move on? People who lived in their homes for at least five years after late 2001, have since been renting it out and now want a new primary residence? People who lived in their homes for at least five years after late 2001, sold the place and now want to buy again?

I posed this to a Senate Finance Committee aide, and he said yes. Yes to all three.

I wondered that to begin with, but the "ending on the date of the purchase of a subsequent principal residence" part made me second-guess myself.

I urge you all not to spend that $6,500 before it's a sure thing that you can get it -- let's see what the IRS has to say, eh? But Wonk reader SSK, it does look like you can take advantage of the credit. (SSK posed this question: "I lived in my Baltimore house for 12 years. Just sold it in July. I re-located to Ohio and am renting. I'm about to bid on a new home. So, I lived in my home for more than 5 years, but I'm temporarily renting now. Do I qualify?")

]]> And you, too, Mark. (He notes, "My wife and I sold our previous home on 9/10/09. We had owned that home for 9 years. We have been living in an extended stay hotel ever since, while we are looking for our next home. We expect to purchase our next home before the end of this year. We meet the income requirements of this bill. So will we be eligible for this $6500 tax credit even though we have already sold our previous home about 2 months ago?")

But you can't qualify if you already bought the new home, the situation that reader Carrie Nelson is in. "We closed on our new home on September 18, 2009. We have just rented our old home because we were unable to sell it. Will we be eligible for the repeat home buyer credit? Why can't they just approve it for any home purchased in 2009. Isn't that something that was done for the first-time homebuyer tax credit?"

The $8,000 version of the first-time buyer credit, passed in February, was made retroactive to the beginning of the year. But the IRS said Friday -- as the legislation was signed into law by President Barack Obama -- that the new provisions would go into effect today, Nov. 7.

Exactly who qualifies should be clearer as soon as the IRS offers more details, as it did with the first and second versions of the first-time home buyer credit. On its home buyer tax credit page, it promised "more to be added soon."

Guess the hidden-gem neighborhoods

2009-11-06T13:00:00Z

Next Friday, I'll unveil the long-awaited list of hidden-gem neighborhoods -- nice, off-the-radar and relatively affordable spots in the Baltimore region. In the meantime, can you guess the 10? Photos of each are above.

The person with the most correct guesses wins a copy of Our Lot: How Real Estate Came to Own Us by Alyssa Katz. Anyone with at least one correct guess is entitled to a Real Estate Wonk magnet.

Remember, each of the 10 is in the Baltimore metro area and had an average sale price under $250,000 in the first half of the year. More than half were suggested by you lovely Wonk readers.

Two hints: Each Baltimore-area jurisdiction has at least one. And a few of the spots are really communities, not neighborhoods.

You don't have to squint at the photos. Click on any and a larger version will pop up.

Expanded home buyer tax credits to become law

2009-11-06T12:00:00Z

It took a while for the Senate to hammer out an agreement on the home buyer tax credit, but only a day for the House to pass an identical measure. President Barack Obama is expected to sign it into law today.

The National Association of Realtors says the new provisions -- a longer time frame for the $8,000 first-time buyer credit, higher income limits and a $6,500 credit for certain repeat buyers -- will go into effect as soon as pen hits paper. The trade group has a handy "compare the tax credits" chart that you can find here.

You can also read more about the details on yesterday's tax-credit blog post.

The first-time buyer tax credit, hailed by the real estate industry as a stabilizing force for the battered housing market, has its critics. They say it's a lot of money, much of it going to people who probably would have bought anyway and some of it going to tax cheats (including 19,000 who didn't actually purchase a home). Some of you have said you think it's a stimulus that won't help in the long run.

In this running Wonk poll, I asked you a simple question about the bill: Thumbs up, down or sideways? The voting was overwhelmingly thumbs up at first. But as of last night, the results were split: 49 percent down, 47 percent up and 4 percent sideways.

I chatted yesterday with Heather Fernandez, vice president of marketing with real estate search engine Trulia. She's enthusiastic about the soon-to-be-law, though not without reservations. One reason to cheer, she said, is that consumers pump money into the economy after buying a home ($30,000 within the first six months on items ranging from furniture to hot water heaters, Trulia found in a study last year). She also thinks the credits will help move more foreclosures and cushion prices in the short term.

There's a significant "but," though: "What happens to real estate demand on May 1?" Fernandez asks. April 30 is the last day you can sign a contract and still qualify for the first-time or repeat-buyer tax credits.

"While this may spur tremendous activity in the short term, what's going to stop demand from dropping off a cliff?" she said.

]]> We'll know when we get there. U.S. Senator Johnny Isakson, the Georgia Republican who championed an expanded tax credit (his proposal: $15,000 for every buyer), said in a statement Wednesday that this third version of the tax-credit program is really and truly the last one. "Tax credits like this only work by creating the sense of urgency to take advantage of them," he said.

Fernandez said one thing's for certain: The credit extension and expansion has a lot of people thinking about real estate. When we talked yesterday afternoon, Trulia's traffic was on track to be the best ever for a Thursday. For that to happen in November -- during housing's slow season -- is really something, she noted. Trulia launched in 2005.

I asked you in another recent Wonk poll how the credit would affect you. Here's what you said, as of last night:

26 percent: I'd qualify as a repeat buyer, and I plan to sell my current home and buy another one

20 percent: I'm a taxpayer, that's how it affects me. ARRRGGGGH.

16 percent: I don't qualify as a first-time or repeat buyer, to my frustration

10 percent: I already got a first-time home buyer tax credit

7 percent: I'd qualify as a first-time buyer, and I plan to buy my first home by April 30

5 percent: I'd qualify as a repeat buyer, and I plan to buy but not sell

4 percent: I'd qualify as a first-time or repeat buyer, but I'm not planning to buy soon

4 percent: I work in the real estate industry and hope it'll help business

2 percent: I don't qualify as a first-time or repeat buyer, but I don't mind

And a few of you wrote in your own answers. For instance, "It would make it easier for me to sell my house to a first-time buyer." And: "I'm a repeat; my spouse a first-time. Unsure if we qualify for any credit together."

Married couples can't qualify for the first-time credit unless both of them are first-timers under the rules (which actually define a first-time buyer as someone who hasn't owned a principal residence for the previous three years). But I don't see why a couple that's half repeat-buyer, half first-timer couldn't get the repeat buyer credit as long as they qualify on income. (Let me know if you hear otherwise.)

The IRS answered lots of scenario questions about the first and second versions of the first-time buyer credit. Presumably the agency will do the same for this expanded credit program.

Senate passes home buyer credits

2009-11-05T12:00:00Z

Here's something Republican and Democratic Senators agree on: tax credits for home buyers.

With a 98 to 0 vote Wednesday, the Senate passed legislation to extend the credit for first-time buyers and add a credit for certain repeat buyers. It's expected to move to the House floor today.

It seems to be the same proposal we've been talking about for the last few days. Highlights:

--$8,000 for first-timers signing contracts through April 30 and closing by June 30. That credit was due to expire at the end of the month.

--$6,500 for repeat buyers who have "lived in their current residence for five consecutive years out of the last eight," the Los Angeles Times reports. But Sen. Harry Reid's press release phrases it as "those who have owned a home for five consecutive years within the previous eight years." More on this in a moment.

--Individual tax filers making no more than $125,000 and joint filers making no more than $225,000 could take the full credit, a significant increase of the income cap. The credit would decrease in value for people making more than those amounts, phasing out completely after $145,000 for singles and $245,000 for couples, the Times says.

--If the home you're buying is priced over $800,000, you can't partake.

You might be wondering what this "five consecutive years out of the last eight" really means for potential repeat buyers. I did, because it makes a difference whether it's "lived in their current residence for five consecutive years out of the last eight," as the Times writes, or "those who have owned a home for five consecutive years within the previous eight years," as Reid puts it -- or something else entirely.

]]> For instance, could the credit go to homeowners-turned-landlords who are renting out their properties after living there five years and who now want to sell? Or what if you bought your home in, say, January 2003 and sold it last December? That would be five consecutive years out of the last eight, after all.

I went on an hour-and-a-half-long search last night for the actual text of the legislation. (Can I get an "ARRGGH"?) I finally did find it, or what appears to be it. Here's what it says about repeat buyers:

In the case of an individual (and, if married, such individual's spouse) who has owned and used the same residence as such individual's principal residence for any 5-consecutive-year period during the 8-year period ending on the date of the purchase of a subsequent principal residence, such individual shall be [eligible for the credit] with respect to the purchase of such subsequent residence.

So ... er ... clear?

Sigh.

Fortunately, the text notes later that the repeat-buyer credit "shall apply to residences purchased after the date of the enactment of this Act." So that clears it up a bit.

If you're a first-timer hoping to take advantage of the higher income limits, keep in mind that the same timeline applies.

Not that this is a done deal quite yet, of course.

Housing markets: Baltimore vs. Washington (and BWI)

2009-11-04T12:00:00Z

Home-sale trends are generally stronger in and around Washington, but the Baltimore area is showing some signs of life. That's the conclusion of a new report by Delta Associates, a real estate information and consulting firm, and Metropolitan Regional Information Systems, which runs the region's multiple-listing service.

Sales in the summer were up about 7 percent from a year earlier in the D.C. region, and there were 5.4 months of inventory -- "below the normal, healthy standard of 6 months, signaling that demand is beginning to outpace supply," the report notes. ("Months of inventory" refers to the time it would take homes listed for sale to find buyers at the current pace of transactions.)

In the Baltimore metro area, sales in the summer rose a bit faster -- about 8 percent from a year earlier. But there's more catch-up to do: 8.8 months of inventory.

Homes are sitting longer on the market here as well: 117 days in the Baltimore area compared with 81 in the Washington area.

The market decline hit our southern neighbor first, and it started to recover first, too. D.C.'s job market is one of the strongest in the nation, which doesn't hurt.

The Delta and MRIS report also shone a spotlight on neighborhoods around BWI, a market between Baltimore and Washington. It offered some illuminating statistics about what exactly is selling.

]]> Speaking of prices, they're down 8 percent from a year ago in the BWI area. But the inventory is quite low -- 2.1 months. Remember, six months is considered normal and healthy. All else being equal, you'd think a 2.1-month inventory would mean a strong seller's market -- this is the sort of number we saw in the go-go housing bubble days. But all else isn't equal.

The Delta/MRIS report says that although the BWI area "seems well-positioned for future housing market growth and recovery, ... until foreclosures and short sales abate further, near-term price declines are not improbable."

How are foreclosures and short sales affecting housing trends near you?

Houses and house parties

2009-11-02T12:00:00Z

For those of you wondering what people with lavish houses do with all the space: Howard County police say a Columbia mansion -- a 4,600-square-foot spread -- was being rented out for a Halloween party this weekend that drew more than 100 people, possibly much more.

They're clear on the "more than 100" part, because that's how many people were still there when officers arrived in response to 911 calls about gunfire. A 19-year-old was killed and a 22-year-old was badly injured.

Police think the house was also rented out for a party that took place in June.

The Sun's Annie Linskey reminded me that several years ago, a big Anne Arundel County house was the site of a non-fatal shooting while rented out to two NFL players. Neighbors complained that the place was being used as an unauthorized nightclub even before that point.

Do you live near homes that are frequently used for parties, with or without cover charges?

(Photograph of the Columbia house by Algerina Perna / Baltimore Sun)

Sprinkler-system requirement survives challenge

2009-11-01T12:00:00Z

Should sprinkler systems be installed in every new single-family house? Fire safety advocates think so. Home builders aren't nearly as enthusiastic, noting the cost.

It's a national argument that last week came to Baltimore, during hearings held by the International Code Council. The ICC -- the organization that writes the building-safety rules adopted by states, counties and cities across the country -- entertained a proposal by the National Association of Home Builders that sprinklers be a "mandatory option" rather than a mandatory non-option. (A mandatory option might sound like an impossibility, but it would mean a feature that builders have to offer as an add-on, leaving the choice to buyers.)

Under the ICC's current code, sprinkler systems will be required in newly constructed single-family homes by 2011. The home builders are trying to get that changed, but sprinkler proponents outvoted sprinkler opponents. (Though it's not a done deal until the ICC's conference in May, it was a key vote.)

Sprinklers are already mandatory in all new townhouses in Maryland. Would you want sprinkler systems installed in all new single-family houses? What do you think of them, if you've had up-close and personal experience with them?

Given a choice, would you pay extra to have them in your home?

Home buyer tax credits: Are you in?

2009-10-31T11:00:00Z

I asked you to give the Senate's proposed tax credits for first-time and repeat home buyers a thumbs up, down or sideways, and oh boy, you responded. As of 10 p.m. last night, nearly 500 people had weighed in on the Wonk poll.

Almost 80 percent of voters offered a thumbs up. Five percent don't love it or hate it and gave it a sideways thumb. The rest say no thanks.

Some commenters wondered what personal situations were influencing these choices. Sounds like a poll:

Need a refresher? The tentative Senate deal would extend the $8,000 first-time home buyer tax credit -- you could sign a contract through April 30 as long as you closed by June 30. It would also create a new tax credit of up to $6,500 -- starting Dec. 1 -- for repeat buyers who have been in their current homes for at least five years and are getting a new primary residence.

For more details (income limits, price limits, etc.), read this home buyer tax credit post.

Home buyer tax credit: More details and a lot of angst

2009-10-30T11:00:00Z

More details about the tentative Senate agreement to extend and expand the first-time home buyer tax credit:

--As you probably already heard, the credit would be available to buyers signing contracts through April 30 and closing by June 30. First-timers would continue to be eligible for up to $8,000. Other buyers could get up to $6,500, starting Dec. 1, if they've lived in their current home for at least five years.

--Income limits would be increased to $125,000 for individuals and $225,000 for couples, with the credits phasing out above those amounts.

--Repeat buyers must be getting a primary residence, not a vacation or investment property. But you're allowed to keep your current home.

--Eyeing a home priced above $800,000? You can't get this credit, the senators say.

--Read their lips: No more credits for 4-year-olds. First-time buyer tax credit fraud, including money funneled to preschoolers and to people who didn't actually buy anything, prompted senators to require that buyers be at least 18 and submit copies of their HUD-1 settlement statements when applying for the credit.

News of this extension and expansion touched off a firestorm of discussion here, and emotions of all sorts. Hope among some homeowners who could use $6,500. Frustration among those who would miss out under the proposed restrictions. Aggravation among renters who think credits are artificially propping up the market at taxpayers' expense.

]]> A nameless reader who's rooting for passage wrote: "I bought a house 5 years ago and now it's worth way less then what i owe."

Lee opined, "I think the 5 year requirement is a bit excessive and a little discriminatory ... Why not 3 or 4 years? What about those who have had to move most recently to keep their jobs?"

Chase, who is trying to buy his second home because he's more than 60 miles away from his job, bemoans the fact that he and his wife have only been in their first home 3 1/2 years. "I really wished this program, if approved, would allow for any second time home buyers that has not already participated in the 'first time home buyer tax credit', even if it was phased out based on how long you had owned your home. For example 5 years = 6500, 4 = 5500, 3 years = 4500, etc..."

Krista writes, "We are neither first time homebuyers nor do we currently own a home. We took a big hit when we relocated two years ago on our house that we sold. We are renters right now. So if you want to stimulate the economy we should get tax breaks before those who already own. Where do we fit in??"

Kevin R said these comments -- plus more along the same lines -- were making him feel nauseated. "Too many people looking for a handout," he wrote.

Jelena, who has been looking for a house for a while now, says she's against the proposal even though she could qualify as a first-time buyer. In her opinion, "this is just prolonging the agony. Now the prices won't fall (read - adjust to the realistic level) for another year or so, but they will fall after all the tricks end eventually. Sadly, we really have to move soon and, as a result of this credit, now we'll have to face higher prices and, possibly, bidding wars."

But Darwin Rules, who frequently predicts here that home prices in the Baltimore area will fall to 1999 levels, is unfazed: "The higher you fly, the harder you fall. I'll just sit back and wait a bit longer for the inevitable carnage - will be a bit more tenderized after the harder landing."

Many of the comments were negative -- either of the "where's mine?" or "stop wasting money" variety. But as of last night, 80 percent of the people taking the Wonk poll gave the proposal a thumbs up. Five percent more opted for a thumbs sideways.

Wherever you stand on the issue, you'll probably get a laugh out of semiconscious's tongue-in-cheek reaction: "The government should just give us all money to buy homes. ... In fact, we should get money for cars, clothes, vegas vacations and a couple of Gulfstream jets."

First-time AND second-time home buyer credit?

2009-10-29T13:32:52Z

Senators have cut a deal to extend and expand the popular first-time home buyer tax credit, though -- as The Wall Street Journal notes -- don't count on it just yet.

The tentative agreement worked out by Senate negotiators would allow buyers to sign contracts through April 30 as long as they close by June 30. First-timers would continue to be eligible for up to $8,000, while some repeat buyers could get up to $6,500.

Which repeat buyers? "The reduced credit would be available to all home buyers who have been in their current residence for a consecutive five-year period in the past eight years," the WSJ reports.

This hasn't yet passed the Senate, which is trying to decide which other economic measures to tack on to a bill, and it faces skepticism in the House. (As you'll recall, a number of people have allegedly claimed the credit despite not qualifying as first-time buyers, not being old enough to buy a house, not actually buying a house, etc.)

What do you think? Weigh in:

Foreclosures and financial protection

2009-10-29T11:00:00Z

The Center for Responsible Lending, a watchdog group that predicted the national implosion of subprime loans before it happened, has a few numbers it wants you to think about:

--134,923: Maryland homeowners behind on their mortgages at the end of June.

--163,479: Maryland foreclosures it predicts between this year and 2012. (If that comes to pass, it would be one in every seven homes with a mortgage, according to my quick check of Census Bureau data.)

The center has numbers for every state -- under the headline "The Impact of Bad Lending" -- and it's reminding us of this now because it's trying to rally support for the proposed Consumer Financial Protection Agency.

As real estate columnist Kenneth Harney notes, the agency would oversee real estate and mortgage matters, plus "credit cards, debit cards, consumer loans, payday loans, credit reporting agencies, debt collection, stored-value cards and even investment advisory and financial advisory services, to name only part of the list."

]]> No thanks, says the American Bankers Association. It issued a statement last week to say it has major concerns about "the very broad, ill-defined authority that is granted to this new agency that could be used to justify essentially any regulatory action."

(The bankers do think more regulatory muscle is needed -- just not flexing in their direction. In Congressional testimony, Edward L. Yingling with the bankers group said regulators ought to better enforce rules among "non-bank providers of financial services.")

Another proposal is for a "council of regulators" to keep an eye out for big economic risks like, let's see, an easy-money-fueled housing bubble. But Douglas Elliott of the Brookings Institution is skeptical this would work. He's quoted in a Forbes piece as saying he fears the regulators would be ineffective because we like our tulip manias, thank you very much:

"[Financial bubbles] are invariably quite popular. They arise because a large portion of the population accepts some tenet, such as the inevitability of rising house prices," says Elliott. Imagine if the council had tried to stop the housing bubble in 2005. Instead of averting the Great Recession, they'd be remembered as the regulators who murdered the great wealth-generating housing boom for no reason.

How would you suggest the country try to avoid bubbles in the future? More regulation? Less regulation? Different regulation?

Anti-bubble czar?

Is "not as bad" the new good?

2009-10-28T11:00:00Z

What qualifies as a housing-market turnaround? I'm curious what you all think as analysts digest Standard & Poor's newest Case-Shiller numbers, which show home prices falling more slowly than before.

Prices in August -- the numbers released Tuesday -- were down about 11 percent from a year ago among the 20 large metro areas Case-Shiller tracks (Washington among them, but not Baltimore). Compare that with a 19 percent year-over-year drop in January. And August prices were up slightly compared with the previous month.

Sean Hannon at the Seeking Alpha blog is not impressed. "If artificially low interest rates, home buyer tax credits, and foreclosure moratoriums could not drive prices higher and lead to a boom in home sales, what hope is there for a stimulus-free recovery?" he asks.

David M. Blitzer, chairman of the index committee at S&P, also had words of caution in a statement released with the numbers. He noted the planned expiration of the first-time buyer tax credit after Nov. 30 and "anticipated higher unemployment rates through year-end."

"Both may have a dampening effect on home prices," Blitzer said.

Forget the analyst-speak and macroeconomics for a moment. What do you want to see to convince you -- as a homeowner or renter -- that the housing market has recovered? Prices no longer dropping? Prices increasing a certain amount? Prices back to their 2006-or-so peaks? Or something else altogether?

And are you holding off on doing something -- buying, selling, renovating, job-hunting -- until you see it?

Home buying and selling in the Baltimore area

2009-10-27T11:00:00Z

More buyers signed contracts for homes in the Baltimore metro area last month than a year earlier -- 32 percent more. You knew this already if you've been crunching numbers or hanging on my every word, but here's something I haven't mentioned already: Homes newly listed for sale last month were down slightly.

Fewer homes coming into the pipeline, more going out -- that's all to the good for would-be sellers.

We're not back to a pre-bubble balance between new contracts and new for-sale listings, though. Here's a graph that tells the tale, showing stats for the month of September throughout the decade:]]>

Source: Baltimore Sun analysis of Metropolitan Regional Information Systems data

The number of new listings was 62 percent larger than newly signed contracts last month. By comparison, new listings were about 40 percent more numerous than new contracts in September of 2000 and 2001.

On the upside: 62 percent more new listings than new contracts is a lot closer to normal than 119 percent (September '08) or 165 percent (September '07).

The approximately 4,300 new listings that hit the market last month are also the lowest since 2003, when they dropped below 4,000.

Remodeling in a down market

2009-10-26T11:00:00Z

To remodel or not to remodel? It's a question that bedevils homeowners who don't have the answer staring them in the face, i.e. "might as well redo the master bathroom as long as we're fixing the flooding caused by the hole in the roof." Falling home values make the situation that much harder because many folks who might want to update their kitchen or build an addition don't have the equity to do it.

Thus renovations and maintenance work have taken a hit just like home sales. As Lorraine Mirabella reported in a Sunday story about the remodeling business:

Residential permits for alterations, additions and repairs have plummeted 27 percent in metro Baltimore this year through August, compared with the corresponding period in 2008, according to statistics from the Baltimore Metropolitan Council. The number of permits issued through August - 4,552 - has fallen by nearly half since 2006, when activity for the January-to-August period peaked at 8,250 permits, council statistics show.

Some remodeling companies are seeing an increase in business -- one firm recently did work for a customer who'd bought a foreclosure and needed to fix it up, for instance.

All this makes me wonder how many people would be knee-deep in home-improvement projects if this wasn't a down housing market and rough economy. Hmm ... sounds like a poll:

If you're eying a home-improvement project purely because you want to sell soon, keep in mind that your return on investment will probably be negative. At least that's what real estate agents have found since the bubble popped.]]> 2007 "cost vs. value" report by Remodeling magazine, which collected construction-cost estimates and surveyed appraisers, agents and brokers about resales, concluded that projects producing the most value for money were mostly exterior:

Of projects that saw national cost recovery rates of more than 80 percent in 2007, only one — a minor kitchen remodel, with 83 percent of cost recovered — was a strictly interior job. The others were an upscale siding replacement using fiber cement materials (88.1 percent), a wood deck addition (85.4 percent), midrange vinyl siding replacement (83.2 percent), and upscale vinyl and midrange wood window replacements (81 percent and 81.2 percent, respectively).

On the other hand, if your home is really outdated -- or in screaming need of maintenance -- then you're eliminating a lot of potential buyers if you put it on the market without working on it first. Decisions, decisions.

Buyers: If you could wave a magic wand and fix one thing about most of the homes you've seen, what would it be?