• Trouble logging in? Send us a message with your username and/or email address for help.
New posts
Vacant Land for Home Trade

I am a builder for my profession and when we have a home nearing completion we always offer the home for sale and will take a vacant lot in the same neighborhood as part of the payment. There are times when someone finds themself owning a lot that is now worth 500 when they paid 800 a couple years back and it just makes sense to both parties to perform this type of transaction. So long as the current true value of our home is higher than our mortgage we can fix their equity deficiency.

It doesn't make any financial sense to us to hold out for a high price on our home when we are just going to buy another lot in the same neighborhood anyway. This is the only way I can think of to help some who have found themself upside down in their lot. I'd rather move sideways for a couple years and be able to employ my people than hold out for big profit.

We do this in Watercolor, Watersound, Cypress Breeze and look at other JOE communities as well. I can't speak for what JOE does with their trades as their business model is very different than ours, but if it helps clean up the foreclosures and short sales I'm happy.
 

full time

Beach Fanatic
Oct 25, 2006
726
90
"The Walton County website lists 5 closings in Watersound in August and Sept of 2007 and 23 closings in Aug and Sept of 2005. Looks like they are stretching the truth just a tad don't you think."

Fisher:

I agree with your comment above. The sales folks are doing their best to stress positives, while ignoring the overwhelming evidence that many owners in WS are nearing their pain threshold.

For example; some of these owners who purchased lots with 3 yr. interest only loans with balloon payments will have the loans come up for review by the banks. Banks will reappraise the properties and in some cases the appraised values will decline. Once this happens, owners will be forced to raise additional collateral to support the new loans. I perceive this will cause additional problems for cash strapped owners. (Obviously, not all lot owners are in this position, but my gut tells me there will be some.)

Additionally, I spoke with one owner who paid less that $500K for his lot near the beach. The vacant lot beside his has been flipped several times with the last owner paying roughly $1.5MM. Personally, I cannot see that owner making a profit anytime soon. I can only assume that either he paid cash and can wait it out for years to come, or the interest will be killing him in short order.

The sales rep I spoke with explained to me that the owners in WS are all wealthy; therefore, I will not see any distress sales. Oh really? If that is the Joe perspective, they are deluded.

I believe WS is the most beautiful development along 30-A and would like to become an owner when prices come back down to earth. When, and if I buy, I would be an end user, not an investor. End users are what Joe needs in this development. IMO, they should not have extended the buildouts as the market corrects all excesses. The extensions simply prolong the pain and prohibit the market from returning to normality.

Of course, this is all just my opinion, and is subject to revision from time to time. In the meantime, I'll be watching prices.

Little Fish

What do you consider "back down to earth"? IMO, you don't understand anything about the build-outs. If you force people to build who don't really care about the neighborhood, they will build absolute ****. Then, the most "beautiful development" on 30-A becomes a ****hole. But then I suppose you'll be able to afford it. Who's deluded?
 

Matt J

SWGB
May 9, 2007
24,670
9,510
I just saw this, JOE extended the build outs to protect their own butts. They didn't want to purchase back the lots is the main reason. It really didn't have anything to do with "helping" out owners. It just got spun that way.
 

ER

Beach Comber
Jul 19, 2007
24
0
What do you consider "back down to earth"? IMO, you don't understand anything about the build-outs. If you force people to build who don't really care about the neighborhood, they will build absolute ****. Then, the most "beautiful development" on 30-A becomes a ****hole. But then I suppose you'll be able to afford it. Who's deluded?

Now that is a pretty narrow minded view. Let's take your argument and flip it. Why even have build out requirements in the first place? They serve as nothing more than smoke & mirrors as they become meaningless with extension upon extension. By extending them continuously, the flipper mania of a few years ago is only perpetuated.

Also, I don't think it's fair to owners who bought and who actually at some point plan to build (and have the means to do so) to have these extended. Especially since many of the sales people, and developers, used the build out times as an important tool when selling the lots/homes in the first place. These extensions only serve to promote empty subdivisions.

I suspect that when all this shakes out the majority of buyers facing problems are the ones who got left holding the bag and who had no intention of ever going vertical in the first place. Should these speculators be protected? I would say not, as they gambled on an investment and lost. Not much different than the stock market. I would much rather see the foreclosures occur in a shorter, more condensed timeframe and then for the the real buyers (i.e. people who will build) come in to start actually building these neighborhoods.
 
Last edited:

full time

Beach Fanatic
Oct 25, 2006
726
90
Now that is a pretty narrow minded view. Let's take your argument and flip it. Why even have build out requirements in the first place? They serve as nothing more than smoke & mirrors as they become meaningless with extension upon extension. By extending them continuously, the flipper mania of a few years ago is only perpetuated.

Also, I don't think it's fair to owners who bought and who actually at some point plan to build (and have the means to do so) to have these extended. Especially since many of the sales people, and developers, used the build out times as an important tool when selling the lots/homes in the first place. These extensions only serve to promote empty subdivisions.

I suspect that when all this shakes out the majority of buyers facing problems are the ones who got left holding the bag and who had no intention of ever going vertical in the first place. Should these speculators be protected? I would say not, as they gambled on an investment and lost. Not much different than the stock market. I would much rather see the foreclosures occur in a shorter, more condensed timeframe and then for the the real buyers (i.e. people who will build) come in to start actually building these neighborhoods.

Your assumption being that those forced to build will simply throw up their hands and walk away for the buyer who wishes to build the beautiful dream home. Go to the corner of Western Lake and Pine Needle to see if the assumption holds true. I'll take the peace and privacy of trees and bushes any day over a forced poorly built house, or worse, one that starts and takes forever to finish, if ever (See Prominence). The fairness argument is the same one children make when they have no argument. The only issue is whether the build-outs make sense here and now in the current climate, and the answer is clearly no - and for selfish reasons I could view it differently, but don't.
 

scooterbug44

SoWal Expert
May 8, 2007
16,732
3,330
Sowal
The construction of a home in neighborhoods like Watercolor, Rivercamps, Watersound etc. is subject to building codes, approved materials, architectural design and size guidelines, and house by house approval on everything down to the paint colors and exterior light fixtures, so the argument that they should extend build-outs to control "quality" is hooey.
 

full time

Beach Fanatic
Oct 25, 2006
726
90
The construction of a home in neighborhoods like Watercolor, Rivercamps, Watersound etc. is subject to building codes, approved materials, architectural design and size guidelines, and house by house approval on everything down to the paint colors and exterior light fixtures, so the argument that they should extend build-outs to control "quality" is hooey.

What kind of quality control in Watercolor lets you stop construction for 2 years after completion of the footers? Have you really looked at some of the construction? When you can see the ty vec wrap after daytime heating, it ain't good. Get real!
 

scooterbug44

SoWal Expert
May 8, 2007
16,732
3,330
Sowal
That would be the build-out EXTENSIONS responsible for that!

Realistically you would lose much more $ by going through the process and building an inferior house than by selling the lot or having St. Joe/the bank take it back.
 
Last edited:

full time

Beach Fanatic
Oct 25, 2006
726
90
That would be the build-out EXTENSIONS responsible for that!

Realistically you would lose much more $ by going through the process and building an inferior house than by selling the lot or having St. Joe/the bank take it back.

Since we're talking reality, Joe ain't buyin back lots in this market so they ain't no build-outs no mo, period.
 
New posts


Sign Up for SoWal Newsletter