May 05, 2008

Ten years from now, you bubble sitters, bitter renters, fringe nuts and HP looosers will still be watching this with a big ol' smile on your face

53 comments:

Jax said...

That commercial has always Made my skin crawl.

Check this video out. Realtor in the street, holding sign like a homeless.
http://tinyurl.com/6htxgc

Anonymous said...

Ten years?

No, right now.

fatty's garage said...

Fat man's tee shirt makes him look like a little boy. This marketing masterpiece keeps on giving.

Anonymous said...

"Yes wifey. I'm such a gelded, effeminate, bloated, pussy-assed post-modern slave of a male that I'm going to do whatever financially destructive thing you tell me to do. Even if I know we're going to lose $500,000 by buying this shitshack for over a million with 100% financing and you end up divorcing me when I'm bankrupt and in foreclosure. Call Suzanne and tell her we're on. I've got to start looking for a second and third job."

Anonymous said...

I have a big smile on my face right now. I can't decide on buying a new Corvette with the cash I've saved or leaving it in CDs returning 3%.

We are passed the panic stage of this bubble, now in the capitulation stage. The depression stage has not been approached yet and will last a long time as the Alt-A and Option Arm Tsunamis continue to roll in.

Anonymous said...

Looosers? I think you meant "losers" unless you were refering to British slang for toilet sitters (but then it would be "looers").

Roccman said...

.
.
.
.
.
10 years from now most of you are gonna be dead.

VP from LI said...

I want to say it again, it gives me so much pleasure:

This advertisement represents everything that's wrong with the sheeple:

1. The wife is psychotic, isn't she? She's probably on Prozac or something similar. And she's also a manipulative whiny bitch. Long Island is full of the likes of her!

2. It's obvious that the soft, unassertive and rather chubby guy lives on fastfood. And he needs a big garage for his truck or SUV too!

3. Suzanne on the phone, called by the wife to eavesdrop on the conversation: "You guys can do it!"
YES YOU CAN WITH A SUBPRIME MORTGAGE!


Farewell irrevocably corrupted America and all you represent: tract houses, SUVs, suburbs, strip malls, fast food, antidepressants, Wall St, private health insurance, hedge fund managers, MTV, ... ! The hideous and never meant to be monstrosity of an empire called the USA is shaking at its foundations! Let's hope the real America that the founding fathers envisioned emerges out of the ruins.

Ford said...

Well they have two kids they can eat when starvation hits. Fat boy can last on water only for 2-3 months. Wifey's kinda ugly but with some work she could turn $10 tricks.

Anonymous said...

Suzanne would be required to bring "knee pads" to the closing. She would owe me big time.

LauraVella said...

Realtor says over the phone: Great! Let me get to work!

To herself: First off, let me figure out my commision on this transaction, and if its good enough, I'll push them into a negative am loan...

Anonymous said...

i have known men who get pressured by their wives to buy a certain house and they finally agree, with some trepidation, but with one caveat....

it will be in her name and her's alone...ha ha ha...

Out at the peak said...

I've caved in on many things before, but I'd rather have a divorce/break up before caving on real estate.

I'm glad my girlfriend listens to me regarding housing. I think she took it to the extreme, "we're going to rent forever." I told her to calm down and said there will be a time when it is beneficial to purchase again.

ForWhomTheTollBuilds said...

On Swann's blog they are supporting government bailouts for failed flippers.

It would be good for society you see, and the only people against it are the "scary" bubble bloggers.

Those who follow Swann will know that if there is one thing he is more in love with himself for than being a Realtor, its for being a laissez-faire capitalist.

*ssholes....

Anonymous said...

Don't you just hate these vultures preying on the whims of naive couples with kids. Again buy it now, because you will be on the road to perfect harmony and you will be the perfect parent.. Don't consider that Johnny may be an ignoramus and needs special remediation across town. That the neighborhood you are moving to is loaded with fat, coach potatoe kiddies ready to turn to cocaine and booze in junior high. My "kids" are 30 and grandkids are 10 and I have discovered as a boomer that life cannot be predicted like in Dr
Spock and today one should stay flexible. Today's picture perfect community could be tomw's drug haven. Stability is waning as our state and local gov'ts abandon their constituents ( I live in Florida and the budget cuts are really going to bring out the guns)

Anonymous said...

"Our work is over" as a long time member recently stated. I disagree, there is plenty more great entertainment to come.

The salesmanshit will keep going on as long as there are uneducated families ripe for picking. And the ones that will listen need our advice.

Even with some of the nitwit comments made here and there, I believe we actually help open peoples eyes as to what really could be happening out there.

And as for a recovery in the housing market, that will be many, many, years down the road.

Posted by a long time anon.

laymesuzzane said...

I've got my BIC lighter lit up since watching that flick is like watching the rocky horror picture show!

tater said...

Oh its the impotent Pillsbury doughboy actor back with his actress b*tch of a wife. Suzanne returns!!! (GAG)

Anonymous said...

I still laugh at this horrible ad. Whoever wrote should be horse whipped. I wonder what happened to that lovely couple and their ARM loan? Most of all where is Suzanne now?

Reality said...

Bernanke is talking about new actions needed to stop foreclosure again tonight:

http://money.cnn.com/2008/05/05/real_estate/Bernanke_home_prices_and_foreclosures/index.htm?postversion=2008050520

Preventing further price decline and foreclosure is in the interest of everyone? Really? What about the responsible people who saved and waiting to buy at a lower price? How about the this idea:

FED provide matching funds for buyers's down payment, dollar for dollar for transaction price totalling no more than existing 2007 or 2008 tax assessed value. Has to be the buyer's cash contribution minus all of the buyer's outstanding secured and unsecured debt, no matching on borrowed money allowed so as to prevent another sudden borrowing binge leaving the FED on the hook for more money in the future.

That way, housing prices drop can be stopped, and the new owner will have much much ower debt load. The transation price cap is in place to prevent new scams/bubbles and speculations, so that money is directed towards loans that will most likely default (as in house price in decline) Existing home owners will have to find an honest home buyer with cash as the metric disqualifies self-dealing and second-home buying from speculators through cash minus indebtedness matric.

The advantages:

1. Housing price will be stabilized by a flood of purchases with substantial cash downpayments;

2. The sanctity of existing mortgage contracts will be preserved. You never really want a society of gleeful deadbeats as any other bailout plan would inevitably entail; in fact, in order to qualify for matching funds, many may work hard to pay off other forms of indebtedness like creditcards as any existing debts will cut into the matching; buyers can't cheat by coming up with cash by borrowing.

3. There will be a flood of dollar repatriation as any individual or insitution that has money overseas will try to put down downpayments to get the matching FED money. Dollar decline and inflation that would result from any bailout plan will be tempered by this flood of dollar repatriation in this case;

4. Yes, the FED will be on the hook for up to one half of 2007-2008 tax assessed value, in case the buyer puts down the maximum capped amount (also why transaction price can be no higher than 2007-2008 tax assessed value). However, the FED will be on the hook for that much sooner or later, if not more, as a 30-50% decline from peak 2006 is very much in the cards. With this massive cash-down payment incentive, the new buyer will be very very reluctant to walk away from the new substantially lower loan in the future . . . unlike any of the Fannie, Freddie and especially FHA loans that still entail way too little borrower's skin in the game.

Anonymous said...

Just mail everyone a $20,000 check and get it over with. Why only reward the idiot flippers?

Lady Di said...

Suzanne for president!

"HP Looosers" Ha!

Frank@Scottsdale-Sucks.com said...

Good God, why on earth are American women so damn obsessed with home "ownership"?

I bet if you ran a poll and got honest answers you'd find out that 9 out of 10 married couples who got into a foreclosure or upside-down mortgage mess did it at the wife's demands.

You'd think they'd be happy with the SUV, designer shoes and bags, expensive watches, etc., but NOOOOOO, greedy American women will never be satisfied until they can stick their noses up and say "I own." At any cost.

Two thoughts:

1. Read nomarriage.com
2. Read through women's personal ads and look at how many say "you must be a homeowner"

Out at the peak said...

Reality: What would prevent someone from purchasing a house for $200K with $100K cash and then flipping it for $200K (doubling their money)? Would the Feds permanently have a $100K 0% lien on the house? Would this only be allowed for owner occupied only?

In that case, you better find the house of your dreams because you could find yourself really stuck in it (avoiding realization of loss) if house prices decline any further.

Famous Housing Porn Director said...

Do we all have enough to chip in and hire the two actors and the voice of Susanne to shoot the sequel?

I've got a film company and would be willing to do the production for free provided we can get the actors and some of us can write the script!

I'M dead serious here. This would be a great ad to run on national TV or on the intertubes!

Let's hear from all parties interested.

We can do this! ;-)

Anonymous said...

if a guy is willing to get hen-pecked into submission like that then he deserves his sorry fate.
in the case of Chubby McSupersize over here that fate is foreclosure, bankruptcy, divorce and moving back in with his parents at age 40.

Anonymous said...

"Do we all have enough to chip in and hire the two actors and the voice of Susanne to shoot the sequel?

I've got a film company and would be willing to do the production for free provided we can get the actors and some of us can write the script!

I'M dead serious here. This would be a great ad to run on national TV or on the intertubes!

Let's hear from all parties interested.

We can do this! ;-)"


I am in! Post an email address. I turning and burning the script now. THIS will be a classic and get HP on the map nationally.

Beignet

Anonymous said...

If we all chipped in $10.00

We Could Do This!

Beignet

Its a Good Thing... said...

You just know that now-divorced, foreclosed, bankrupt and destitute jobless ex-husband is opening up a little splt of Ripple Red wine for breakfast and tweaking the last of his meth to start his day.

Zipping up his sh*t crusted pants and Peering into the stainless steel metal mirror in the gas station lit by pale sickly yellow flourescent lites pondering how all this happened so fast, he was seen to mutter over and over again:

F*cking Realtors alway lie
Houses never go down, only UP
Suzanne is now living with my wife?

There is a good thing though, he doesn't have to listen to that whiny bitch beat him down any more.

She may have taken his money, but he kept his balls...

Jerkstore said...

Let's totally do the follow up ad!

Anonymous said...

Suzanne researched this and she says we can totally do it for $10 each

(Suzanne's commission will be $2000)

Jonathan said...

@Roccman,

You are wrong. We will come up with a much better energy method before things get to hairy. And ten years from now? Care to get a little melodramatic?

Anonymous said...

This little gem is the gift that truly keeps on giving. It also contains in my humble opinion one of the most brilliant small moments ever in a TV commercial. The humiliating and castrating look and head shake she gives Joe Henpecked as he fights his losing battle to inject reason into the conversation is CLASSIC! "What?" indeed. As a married man that look never fails to send a shiver up my spine.

Frank@Scottsdale-Sucks.com said...

Do we all have enough to chip in and hire the two actors and the voice of Susanne to shoot the sequel?

I'm in!! I'll grab my HVX and drive all over inland Orange County getting tons of "motivated seller" and "bank repo" signs :)

Hell I wish I would've brought the camera to Scottsdale last week, there were 10x as many there!!!

Anonymous said...

"I have a big smile on my face right now. I can't decide on buying a new Corvette with the cash I've saved or leaving it in CDs returning 3%."

Wow, and you renters think homeowners are materialistic...can one of you college boys with all the untested theories explain what the difference is between buying a Corvette for cash vs. putting it down on a house?

Personally, I always thought a nice car in front of an apartment building or rented house showed irresponsibility and skewed priorities. As could be expected, I have never met a renter who has agreed with me. But then again, any girl who would be impressed with a nice car in front of some dumpy rental deserves what she gets.

Anonymous said...

Wow, and you renters think homeowners are materialistic...can one of you college boys with all the untested theories explain what the difference is between buying a Corvette for cash vs. putting it down on a house?

Yeah, it's pretty f*cking simple actually. A 2008 Corvette goes for about $55,000. It will probably bring you lots of hot sex action and is a joy to drive. Over a year it might lose $15,000 in value max.

Compare that to a $1 million four bedroom home that is depreciating rapidly and has probably lost at least $200,000 in equity over the last year alone.

Do the math dummy. What's the better deal?

Anonymous said...

I would buy from Suzanne if we drew up the offer at the motel...

Frank@Scottsdale-Sucks.com said...

Yeah, it's pretty f*cking simple actually. A 2008 Corvette goes for about $55,000. It will probably bring you lots of hot sex action and is a joy to drive. Over a year it might lose $15,000 in value max.

Compare that to a $1 million four bedroom home that is depreciating rapidly and has probably lost at least $200,000 in equity over the last year alone.

Do the math dummy. What's the better deal?


He's right..... add in that my luxury car is owned by my corporation (read: tax deduction) and it really begins to make sense :)

Oh yeah and half my rent for home office.......

Reality said...

"Personally, I always thought a nice car in front of an apartment building or rented house showed irresponsibility and skewed priorities."

Okay, here's a real life story: I went to an open house over the weekend. It's a four-bedroom with close to 4000sq.ft, sitting on over 4 acres; The homedebtor is asking 1.2mil, having bought the place for 950k in 2005 . . . let me guess, it was a negative-arm, and the seller is asking buyers to pay for his 911Turbo in the garage and the 6 percenter's fee. You know what's really hilarious: the owner is living in the Au-Pair suite of the house because he has rented the main part of the house to two renters. Let me guess, the two roommates are paying $1000 each, tops (over that amount, few would be putting up with roommates). So for 2000 measly dollars a month, the loser is packing himself into a the tiny au-pair bedroom. What kind of million-dollar home owner rent out the master bedroom suite and all the big bedrooms, while living out of the au-pair suite? I joked to another couple who were also looking at the place (they happened to have been outbid by the current homedebtor three years ago), "smells like a flip gone bad!" and they knowingly laughed. On a cash flow basis, based on the way the current homedebtor is running it, the house is not worth more than $400k. I went there only to see the place in detail before having to make a bid at bank REO auction some time in the next 12 months, when scheduling a house showing might be difficult.

All the old stereotypes about renters became much more apt at describing the reckless homedebtors of the past few years.

Reality said...

Out at the Peak,

"What would prevent someone from purchasing a house for $200K with $100K cash and then flipping it for $200K (doubling their money)?"

For the reason that you mentioned later in the email, the house' real free market value may not be worth $200k, so the speculator may not be able to flip it at all. I do see your point. For another consideration in another thread(prevention of fraudulent piggyback loan to get the "cash down payment"), I have refined the fed contribution to tax credit instead of cash payout; a tax credit that the buyer can carry to the subsequent years if not used up in one year. To further reduce the incentive for flipping, perhaps the tax credit can only be carried so long as the person still lives in that house. More suggestions/bug-testing are heartily welcome :-)

Anonymous said...

I had a pretty good time in my 1970 Dodge Challenger back in the day. Would I trade those memories for a million dollar home?
That is a very tough question. Can't really answer though, as I have both.

I think it's really a question of balancing your priorities, and most importantly not going too the extremes either way. Yes I " wasted" a few years of earning money while having fun but you only live once as they say.

Anonymous said...

"Yeah, it's pretty f*cking simple actually. A 2008 Corvette goes for about $55,000. It will probably bring you lots of hot sex action and is a joy to drive. Over a year it might lose $15,000 in value max."

"About"..."probably"..."might lose". Any more untested theories you'd like to spew?

Here's a fact: Your car is parked in front of a rental. Enjoy your trailer hos.
Here's another fact: Chicks don't like making much noise screwing in an apartment. Unless they're trailer hos. Enjoy them.
Fact 3: Plenty of guys have expensive cars. How do you plan to stand out with nothing but a car?

You can't afford a million-dollar house, so what do you really stand to lose on that $150K townhome you can get at 40% of your income? The same 15 grand you'd "probably" lose on the car?

Now get busy and go look up some facts on Corvettes. Your price guess wasn't bad, but it was obviously a guess. And your depreciation dart throw is WAY off. And please, PLEASE, stop talking about how to get laid. Your inexperience being revealed is like watching a car wreck in slow motion.

Anonymous said...

"Personally, I always thought a nice car in front of an apartment building or rented house showed irresponsibility and skewed priorities."

What stupidity! It is exactly that mentality that will have to change.

1. Apartment buildings/condos are NOT inferior to stand alone houses. They actually are a sustainable alternative to suburban sprawl.

2. Rented apartments/houses are not inferior to owned condos/houses. If you don't like a shabby rental, you can always terminate and find a better one.

3. Homeownership is incompatible with the lifestyle of some people. Not everyone wants a heterosexual marriage at 25-30 with children.

I've lived in apartments all my life. My mom drives an Audi (company car), dad drives his own Volvo.

mairca izda debol said...


To further reduce the incentive for flipping, perhaps the tax credit can only be carried so long as the person still lives in that house. More suggestions/bug-testing are heartily welcome :-)


A $5,000 tax rebate per year for the next 5 years for taxpayers. Instead of throwing money away to save the bankers, throw it away on the taxpayers. At least everyone can have a little fun before the system implodes.

Frank@Scottsdale-Sucks.com said...

"All the old stereotypes about renters became much more apt at describing the reckless homedebtors of the past few years."

You're not kidding ... in my old neighborhood we had absolutely wonderful neighbors across the street who were renting. They were classy, high-income, and extremely kind people. They kept the place immaculate, the wife planted and maintained a beautiful flower garden, etc. They kept everything spotless.

When they moved out, the owners moved back into the house. Now the yard is overrun with weeds, there's trash all over the place, they're constantly blocking everyone's driveways the way they park their Lexus SUVs, their dipsh*t kids run amock all over the street and won't even get out of the way for cars, they leave their bins out days after trash pickup, etc.... basically the way you'd describe trailer trash.

So much for "homeowners" being higher class than renters.

It blows my mind how, after years of reckless lending, the 'trailer trash' description now fits "owners" more often than it does renters.

Reality said...

Non-targetted tax rebate (like the current $600 - $2400 per tax filer thing) is a little like dropping money from the helicopter. It only results in inflation, which in turn will discourage savings because the real interest rate will drop. Because housing is the latest busted bubble, new money created without string attached will not be directed towards housing; new money chases after new bubbles first, as Greenspan's 2001-2004 effort to reflate stock market resulted in a gigantic real estate bubble instead.

If the goal is to save the banks and prevent an implotion (assuming rapid switching over to sound money and repeal the Federal Feserve Act is not a politically feasible option), the incentives have to be targetted directly on housing, and it has to be done in a way that will encourage homeowners to keep making payments on their debts. IMHO, the matching down-payment through tax credit is the best way of going about it; it doesn't even require new money printing up front.

Reality said...

"You can't afford a million-dollar house, so what do you really stand to lose on that $150K townhome you can get at 40% of your income? "

Around here, $150k wouldn't get anything that doesn't have wheels attached :-) Why would you want to spend $350k to live in a townhouse/condo, when for the same monthly payment, you can live in a million-dollar single family home sitting on an acre, by renting . . . regardless whether you are dating a screamer or not.

Anonymous said...

Anon May 07, 2008 5:09 AM:

1) 8-10% of the land in this country is developed. Your socialist friends might drool over "sustainability", but you're not fooling anyone who knows there is no danger of running out of the land that "isn't being made anymore".
2) So move as much as you need to. Some people like having a say in whether a place gets shabby in the first place or not. You are instead at the whim of someone else's pride and motivation.
3) I won't knock your homosexuality, but I have to confess I don't understand looking for love in a man's hairy ass.

"What stupidity! It is exactly that mentality that will have to change."

Why? Because you want it to? Good luck with that one.

"My mom drives an Audi (company car)"
Who gives a shit? It's not hers. It's not like she was successful enough to get one on her own.

Anonymous said...

reality:
"Around here, $150k wouldn't get anything that doesn't have wheels attached"

So you live in a high-priced area. Impressive. Ever thought about moving to a place you can afford?

"Why would you want to spend $350k to live in a townhouse/condo, when for the same monthly payment, you can live in a million-dollar single family home sitting on an acre, by renting"

Because in 30 years you don't have a rent payment anymore? Because the million dollar home isn't really yours? Because ranting shows you thought to the point of a monthly payment, but owning shows you have thought about the rest of your life?

Frank@Scottsdale-Sucks.com said...

Why would you want to spend $350k to live in a townhouse/condo, when for the same monthly payment, you can live in a million-dollar single family home sitting on an acre, by renting . . . regardless whether you are dating a screamer or not.

Because he's insecure and is small in the pants and needs to cry "I own! I own! I'm better than you!" to compensate for his lack of manhood.

Oh and he's stupid too and doesn't understand the importance of cash flow. He also foolishly believes that a house is an asset.

Reality said...

Anon 5:55:

"So you live in a high-priced area. Impressive. Ever thought about moving to a place you can afford?"

Why? My current rent accounts for less than 10% of my income. If I moved to a less expensive area, I'd spend much more time driving, and wouldn't have the clientelle that I have right now. I used to live in a less expensive area hours of drive away. Rent was 1/4 of what I have right now, but my income was also less than 1/2 of what I have now. You do the math, I'd rather increase the rent per centage of my income from 4% to 9%, when I can more than double my income, and have higher quality of life (not to mention less gas bill).

"Because in 30 years you don't have a rent payment anymore? Because the million dollar home isn't really yours? Because ranting shows you thought to the point of a monthly payment, but owning shows you have thought about the rest of your life?"

No, I'm not planning on renting for 30 years, if that's what you were thinking. However, just like it made sense to short the NASDAQ at 5000 in year 2000, even if 30 years from now, chances are that NASDAQ will be over 6000. The index is now at 2500 some 8 years later. The "long term" argument is still not winning. It's the same deal with buying vs. renting house in the last few years; renting a house is essentially shorting real estate, just like if you short a stock you'd have to pay the stock owner dividends.

What do you mean by "really yours?" I have a renwable long-term rent contract, and I'm entitled to enjoy the house. The difference between rent vs. a mortgage on the same house if I bought it plus tax would be over $3500 a month ($3200 vs $6500+$1000tax+ 1% maintenance = $8500;), that's enough to redo the landscaping every single month if I were so inclined. A brand new kitchen or bathroom can be thrown away every single year! or even a brand new in-ground pool for that matter. Or a brand new jacuzzi every single month! A new roof or new sceptic tank would be on the landlord :-)

Of course, I'm not wasting money on a new kitchen every year. I'm investing the difference in asset classes that give me double-digit returns. Any idea what a 15+% annual return over 30 years is like?

BTW, it's not possible to truely "own" a piece of real estate anymore in this day and age, even after mortgage is fully paid. The title is not Allodial (full ownership, free and clear). What title "homeowners" get nowdays is called "Fee-Simple" in real estate law . . . as the name implies, the title paper entitles the holder to enjoyment of the property contingent on fee payment and overlord regulations etc. In other words, just another form of rent, whether it's called tax or HOA fee or eminent domain. The real difference between "renting" vs. "owning" really comes down to the present discount value of a stream of future cash flow; the future cash flow being the difference between the two rent payments. The last few years have really gone out of wack on that score. Unless one bought a house in order to use it as an ATM machine, eventually walk away from it (including finding a greater fool) . . . in other words scamming the system . . . it really made absolutely no sense to pay a premium whatsoever.

I have no need to show anyone anything. I have a very good plan for my life, and concrete steps to achieve it: trade cash for house when cash is king not when cash is trash (cash is trash when no downpayment is required). Somehow, I think it's a better plan than scamming banks or counting on greater fools to come to the rescue when financially strapped.

Reality said...

"2) So move as much as you need to. Some people like having a say in whether a place gets shabby in the first place or not. You are instead at the whim of someone else's pride and motivation."

I actually don't like moving very much; however, if the financial numbers makes sense, I don't mind moving . . . and have been moving every few years, in pursuit of higher and higher income. As for rennovations, well, I wouldn't rent a place if it's not nice and newly rennovated; for $2-3000 a month, you can get what you want. After seeing a few houses asking in the $6-700k range, I relized that nothing asking less than $1mil can even compare to what I'm renting right now. For the $3500 a month that I'm saving by renting right now, there's plenty rennovation I can do if I wish . . . and frankly I'd demand the landlord to pitch in half the cost if I wanted something. If the demand were not met, I'd go move to a difference house. There are plenty very nices houses for rent at $3k a month.

Frank@Scottsdale-Sucks.com said...

Why? My current rent accounts for less than 10% of my income. If I moved to a less expensive area, I'd spend much more time driving, and wouldn't have the clientelle that I have right now. I used to live in a less expensive area hours of drive away. Rent was 1/4 of what I have right now, but my income was also less than 1/2 of what I have now. You do the math, I'd rather increase the rent per centage of my income from 4% to 9%, when I can more than double my income, and have higher quality of life (not to mention less gas bill).

Reality, this is *exactly* what guys like him will *never* understand. They have no concept of quality of life. I have relatives like this - they scrimp and save, life in the "affordable" exurbs, drive ratty old cars, etc., with nary a thought that they could be happy and comfortable and still stay within their income.

I agree with those who say that living poor so you can die rich isn't smart. It's INSANITY.