Bobby's house for sale... Holy $#!&

[Grizmayor]

http://www.saturdaydownsouth.com/2012/bobby-petrinos-house-for-sale/" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

Nice digs... just for kicks and giggles, take the panoramic tour, too.

 

[ilovethecats]

cool place. less than 2 mill seems real cheap to me. guess i've been living in montana too long. i have seen smaller houses than that, and not nearly as nice right up the road in bridger canyon go for more than 2 million.

 

[getgrizzy]

http://www.trulia.com/home_prices/" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

yes, montana is one of the most expensive places to buy a home, whereas arkansas is one of the lowest. of course, p.r. will probably explain how that's not true in missoula. :lol:

 

[Grizmayor]

I think it says in the story the going price is $2.5m. I'll have to go check. Putting green, batting cage, basketball court, 7.5 bathrooms. If it had a distillery, Alpha would be making an offer.

 

[ilovethecats]

I think it says in the story the going price is $2.5m. I'll have to go check. Putting green, batting cage, basketball court, 7.5 bathrooms. If it had a distillery, Alpha would be making an offer.

confusing. it does say 2.5 in the description. then when you take the virtual tour it says 1,995,000? :?

 

[grizcountry420]

cool place. less than 2 mill seems real cheap to me. guess i've been living in montana too long. i have seen smaller houses than that, and not nearly as nice right up the road in bridger canyon go for more than 2 million.

Housing down south is relatively cheap.. A person can buy a 3 bedroom house down there in Arkansas on a lake for 80k.

 

[Griz Growler]

cool place. less than 2 mill seems real cheap to me. guess i've been living in montana too long. i have seen smaller houses than that, and not nearly as nice right up the road in bridger canyon go for more than 2 million.

That's because nobody WANTS to live in Arkansas.

 

[GrizLA]

cool place. less than 2 mill seems real cheap to me. guess i've been living in montana too long. i have seen smaller houses than that, and not nearly as nice right up the road in bridger canyon go for more than 2 million.

That's because nobody WANTS to live in Arkansas.

In Pasadena, that would be over $5M...@$7.5 in Beverly Hills, $10M in Bel Aire, $4.5 in Encino...people will pay to live where they like it best....it is all paper money, anyway...

 

[fanofzoo]

WTF the fifth bedroom only has a pullout (couch) and a old crt tv ! CHEAP

 

[Potomac Griz]

cool place. less than 2 mill seems real cheap to me. guess i've been living in montana too long. i have seen smaller houses than that, and not nearly as nice right up the road in bridger canyon go for more than 2 million.

That's because nobody WANTS to live in Arkansas.

^^ This... Personally I'd rather live in Detroit than Arkansas...

Housing is cheap in other areas though. Missoula is very pricey for the wages paid out here compared to many other nice places. Even a few decent places in California are way cheaper than Missoula now (Sacramento for example).

 

[mtgrizrule]

cool place. less than 2 mill seems real cheap to me. guess i've been living in montana too long. i have seen smaller houses than that, and not nearly as nice right up the road in bridger canyon go for more than 2 million.

That's because nobody WANTS to live in Arkansas.

^^ This... Personally I'd rather live in Detroit than Arkansas...

Housing is cheap in other areas though. Missoula is very pricey for the wages paid out here compared to many other nice places. Even a few decent places in California are way cheaper than Missoula now (Sacramento for example).

My home in Colorado is less than the same home in Missoula, and I make 1/2 as much in Missoula, doing the same job. Exactly why, many Montanans don't stay put, and takes much too long to get back, in a good situation.

 

[BWahlberg]

http://www.trulia.com/home_prices/

yes, montana is one of the most expensive places to buy a home, whereas arkansas is one of the lowest. of course, p.r. will probably explain how that's not true in missoula. :lol:

FWIW data aggregate sites like trulia and zillow feed off public records to bolster their stats. Montana is a big time privacy state and does not publicly disclose sales prices so sites like Trulia guess average sales prices based upon what is currently listed for sale but not sold. Montana, Idaho, Texas, wyoming, and a few other eastern states make up the 10 or so states that do not disclose sales prices of homes in pubic record. So while Montana is still hugh compared to its median earned incomes, I'd bet it's not as high priced as trulia here suggest.

 

[grizcountry420]

http://www.trulia.com/home_prices/

yes, montana is one of the most expensive places to buy a home, whereas arkansas is one of the lowest. of course, p.r. will probably explain how that's not true in missoula. :lol:

FWIW data aggregate sites like trulia and zillow feed off public records to bolster their stats. Montana is a big time privacy state and does not publicly disclose sales prices so sites like Trulia guess average sales prices based upon what is currently listed for sale but not sold. Montana, Idaho, Texas, wyoming, and a few other eastern states make up the 10 or so states that do not disclose sales prices of homes in pubic record. So while Montana is still hugh compared to its median earned incomes, I'd bet it's not as high priced as trulia here suggest.

What do you know about the housing market? :lol: :lol:

 

[GrizLA]

http://www.trulia.com/home_prices/

yes, montana is one of the most expensive places to buy a home, whereas arkansas is one of the lowest. of course, p.r. will probably explain how that's not true in missoula. :lol:

FWIW data aggregate sites like trulia and zillow feed off public records to bolster their stats. Montana is a big time privacy state and does not publicly disclose sales prices so sites like Trulia guess average sales prices based upon what is currently listed for sale but not sold. Montana, Idaho, Texas, wyoming, and a few other eastern states make up the 10 or so states that do not disclose sales prices of homes in pubic record. So while Montana is still hugh compared to its median earned incomes, I'd bet it's not as high priced as trulia here suggest.

What do you know about the housing market? :lol: :lol:

Real estate taxes are not public record? valuation of property is not public? Sounds like a third world dictatorship situation...lots of room for corruption...

 

[BWahlberg]

http://www.trulia.com/home_prices/

yes, montana is one of the most expensive places to buy a home, whereas arkansas is one of the lowest. of course, p.r. will probably explain how that's not true in missoula. :lol:

FWIW data aggregate sites like trulia and zillow feed off public records to bolster their stats. Montana is a big time privacy state and does not publicly disclose sales prices so sites like Trulia guess average sales prices based upon what is currently listed for sale but not sold. Montana, Idaho, Texas, wyoming, and a few other eastern states make up the 10 or so states that do not disclose sales prices of homes in pubic record. So while Montana is still hugh compared to its median earned incomes, I'd bet it's not as high priced as trulia here suggest.

What do you know about the housing market? :lol: :lol:

Real estate taxes are not public record? valuation of property is not public? Sounds like a third world dictatorship situation...lots of room for corruption...

Taxes are public as are tax appraisals but since the county/state does not have public records of sales reports the taxes are usually based upon a rough appraisal that the counties use. The "tax appraisals" for newer construction and lower priced homes are fairly accurate (+/- 10%) but when you go into the higher realms and older home neighborhoods then it gets all out of whack, sometimes way under, other times WAY over.

 

[GrizLA]

FWIW data aggregate sites like trulia and zillow feed off public records to bolster their stats. Montana is a big time privacy state and does not publicly disclose sales prices so sites like Trulia guess average sales prices based upon what is currently listed for sale but not sold. Montana, Idaho, Texas, wyoming, and a few other eastern states make up the 10 or so states that do not disclose sales prices of homes in pubic record. So while Montana is still hugh compared to its median earned incomes, I'd bet it's not as high priced as trulia here suggest.

What do you know about the housing market? :lol: :lol:

Real estate taxes are not public record? valuation of property is not public? Sounds like a third world dictatorship situation...lots of room for corruption...

Taxes are public as are tax appraisals but since the county/state does not have public records of sales reports the taxes are usually based upon a rough appraisal that the counties use. The "tax appraisals" for newer construction and lower priced homes are fairly accurate (+/- 10%) but when you go into the higher realms and older home neighborhoods then it gets all out of whack, sometimes way under, other times WAY over.

sounds like a recipe for corruption on a grand scale. Even with Prop 13 in Cali where taxes are based upon sales price, there is grand corruption in spite of close scrutiny and public records but generally caught sooner or later. But, the system you describe seems to protect the shifty and tax dodger element...there has to be more to it than that. I sold my property in the Swan Valley years ago and it was a very public sale. Has something changed? Also sold property I had in Butte.

 

[BWahlberg]

sounds like a recipe for corruption on a grand scale. Even with Prop 13 in Cali where taxes are based upon sales price, there is grand corruption in spite of close scrutiny and public records but generally caught sooner or later. But, the system you describe seems to protect the shifty and tax dodger element...there has to be more to it than that. I sold my property in the Swan Valley years ago and it was a very public sale. Has something changed? Also sold property I had in Butte.

A very public sale possibly but the only directly known access to the sales price would be those in the MLS that it was listed in, if it was listed in an MLS. Also depending on when you sold it you may have had to file a transaction data form with the state that does hold those sales records, however they're not made public.

An older blog on it from zillow: http://www.zillow.com/blog/2006-05-11/chronicles-of-data-collection-ii-non-disclosure-states/" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

The big, big picture is that in a non-disclosure state, transaction sale prices are not available to the public.

There are two main causes for states being considered non-disclosure:

- The first cause is that in most non-disclosure states or counties, when a real estate transaction occurs, the sale price is not required to be submitted to the county office (this is the case in Texas and North Dakota among others).

- The second cause is that even though records are kept by a governing body, the records can not be distributed to the public. Such is the case in New Mexico, which "is a strict nondisclosure state, information about property can only be given to the registered owner of the property."

Public records of sales prices, to the best of my knowledge, have never been available in Montana. Our state is very much concerned about privacy and thus there is no public access to all of the sales records.

However a few things to point out:

1. Any property sold through a Realtor would be recorded in their MLS, so anyone with legal access to sold data in a regional MLS (agents and appraisers who subscribe to it) can quite easily log into the system and pull those records. That's not a public source, but in the cases of appraisals and CMAs that are provided to clients for information puposes the individual sales prices are shown. Depsite this database though, the state/county/cities do not have access to it for use of property tax appraisals.

2. Public records DO contain the county appraised value (not based on MLS/actual sales records though) which you can easily pull up. Additionally public records contain all of the basic stuff, building size, lot size, etc. It also contains your warranty deed in the event of a mortgage on the property, that warranty deed up until about 10 years ago would always state that the loan amount is $10,000 regardless of what it actually was/is. Now when you pull up a property in public records it will show the actual loan balance - which can reflect well of many sales (especially those that are FHA) within 5% or better of the actual sales price. While I have no direct knowledge of if it's used I would presume that data is part of the equasion.

 

[GrizLA]

sounds like a recipe for corruption on a grand scale. Even with Prop 13 in Cali where taxes are based upon sales price, there is grand corruption in spite of close scrutiny and public records but generally caught sooner or later. But, the system you describe seems to protect the shifty and tax dodger element...there has to be more to it than that. I sold my property in the Swan Valley years ago and it was a very public sale. Has something changed? Also sold property I had in Butte.

A very public sale possibly but the only directly known access to the sales price would be those in the MLS that it was listed in, if it was listed in an MLS. Also depending on when you sold it you may have had to file a transaction data form with the state that does hold those sales records, however they're not made public.

An older blog on it from zillow: http://www.zillow.com/blog/2006-05-11/chronicles-of-data-collection-ii-non-disclosure-states/" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

The big, big picture is that in a non-disclosure state, transaction sale prices are not available to the public.

There are two main causes for states being considered non-disclosure:

- The first cause is that in most non-disclosure states or counties, when a real estate transaction occurs, the sale price is not required to be submitted to the county office (this is the case in Texas and North Dakota among others).

- The second cause is that even though records are kept by a governing body, the records can not be distributed to the public. Such is the case in New Mexico, which "is a strict nondisclosure state, information about property can only be given to the registered owner of the property."

Public records of sales prices, to the best of my knowledge, have never been available in Montana. Our state is very much concerned about privacy and thus there is no public access to all of the sales records.

However a few things to point out:

1. Any property sold through a Realtor would be recorded in their MLS, so anyone with legal access to sold data in a regional MLS (agents and appraisers who subscribe to it) can quite easily log into the system and pull those records. That's not a public source, but in the cases of appraisals and CMAs that are provided to clients for information puposes the individual sales prices are shown. Depsite this database though, the state/county/cities do not have access to it for use of property tax appraisals.

2. Public records DO contain the county appraised value (not based on MLS/actual sales records though) which you can easily pull up. Additionally public records contain all of the basic stuff, building size, lot size, etc. It also contains your warranty deed in the event of a mortgage on the property, that warranty deed up until about 10 years ago would always state that the loan amount is $10,000 regardless of what it actually was/is. Now when you pull up a property in public records it will show the actual loan balance - which can reflect well of many sales (especially those that are FHA) within 5% or better of the actual sales price. While I have no direct knowledge of if it's used I would presume that data is part of the equasion.

thanks..very interesting. I used a broker/agent. I cannot imagine anyone not doing so. Worth every dime and then some.