The information presented below is complied from data sourced via the Gillespie County Multiple Listing Service. The tracking historical sales data is grouped into categories that include:  ”Residential”, “Rural Subdivision Lots/Tracts”, Acreage, Farm/Ranch” and “City Lots”.  These categories are further defined by “area” (e.g. in town, out-of-town/county).

While it can be difficult to portrait a true “apples to apples” picture of current real estate sales, the numbers speak for themselves as categorized.  A lot can be read “between the lines” when discussing these figures, if you would like more detailed information on these summary comparisons, feel free to contact me at your convenience.

3rd Quarter-2009

Residential-City (Fredericksburg, TX) - The total number of homes sold within the 3rd quarter of 2009 actually increased by 18.1% from sales reported within the 3rd quarter of 2008 (33 in ‘08 and 39 in ‘09). The average price of a sold property declined by 5.85% ($213,695 in ‘08 vs. $201,176 in ‘09) and the average number of days-on-market (DOM) has increased an average of 10.5% (152 by end of 3^rd, 2008 vs. the current 168 days). The total dollar volume of homes sold actually increased by 11.25%. Notably, the average list price to sale price ratio (LP/SP) has remained statistically unchanged from 95% in 2008 to the current 94%.

Overall number of units sold decreased from the 2^nd quarter of this year to the 3rd quarter of 2009 by 23.5% (51 units were sold in 2^nd qtr. ’09 vs. 39 sold in the 3^rd qtr. of 2009).

Year-to-date (vs. YTD, 2008), total units sold have decreased by 3.5%, the average price of sold units has decreased by 9.12%, the average DOM has increased by 27%, the total dollar volume sold has decreased by 12.28% and the average LP/SP ratio has remain statistically unchanged (94% in ’08 to 93% currently).

Residential-County (Gillespie County Only) - The total number of homes (w/acreage) sold within the 3rd quarter of 2009 increased by 63% from the sales reported within the 3rd quarter of 2008 (19 in ‘08 vs. 31 in ‘09).  The average price of a sold property declined 28% ($512,100 in ‘08 vs. $368,610 in ‘09) and the average number of DOM has increased 25.27% (186 in ‘08 to 233 in ‘09).  The total dollar volume of homes sold has increased 17.44%. Notably, the average list price to sale price ratio (LP/SP) has decreased from 93% in 2008 to the current 91%.

Year-to-date (vs. YTD, 2008), total units sold have decreased by 25.4%, the average price of sold units has decreased by 23.2%, the average DOM has held steady at an average of 208 days, the total dollar volume sold has decreased by 43% and the average LP/SP ratio has dropped from an average of 93% to the current 91%.

Lots-City (Fredericksburg, TX) - The total number of lots sold within the 3^rd quarter of 2009 increased by 66.7% from the sales reported within the 3rd quarter of 2008 (6 in ‘08 vs. 10 in ‘09).  The average price of a sold lot declined 15.75% ($70,042 in ‘08 vs. $59,009 in ‘09) and the average DOM has increased 35% (511 in ‘08 vs. 690 in ‘09).  The total dollar volume of lots sold has increased by 40.14%.

Year-to-date (vs. YTD, 2008), total units sold have decreased by 44.4%, the average price of sold units has decreased by 17.7%, the average DOM has increased by 92%, the total dollar volume sold has decreased by over 54% from YTD ’08 to YTD ’09.

Rural Subdivision Lots/Tracts - The total number of acreage lots sold within the 3rd quarter of 2009 declined 33% (9 in ‘08 vs. 6 in ‘09).  The average price of a sold acreage lot increased by 59% ($105,077 in ‘08 vs. $167,168 in ‘09) and the average DOM decreased by almost 20%.  The total dollar volume of acreage lots sold marginally increased by 6%.  

Year-to-date (vs. YTD, 2008), total units sold have decreased by 46.5%, the average price of sold units has decreased by 19%, the average DOM has increased by 6.6%, the total dollar volume sold has decreased by 57%.

Acreage, Farm/Ranch (All MLS Counties) - The total number of properties categorized as Farm/Ranch sold within the 3rd quarter of 2009 declined 24% (29 in ‘08 vs. 22 in ‘09).  Average prices and DOM tend to be less significant in this category as the properties offered and sold vary tremendously. Most notably, total sales volume has decreased by 30.3% from within the 3rd quarter 2008 vs. 3rd quarter 2009.

Year-to-date (vs. YTD, 2008) the total number of units sold has decreased by 37% and the total volume sold has decreased by 47%

A relatively recent government edict known as the Home Valuation Code of Conduct (HVCC) has the potential to have a major impact on Fredericksburg, TX real estate. Anecdotal evidence suggests these effects are already being felt as deals are coming apart based on appraisals from “professionals” not familiar with our local market conditions.

The rules, which went into effect May 1 for all conventional, single-family loans destined for sale to Fannie Mae or Freddie Mac, prohibit mortgage brokers and real estate brokers from ordering appraisals and require that lenders erect a firewall between loan production staff and the appraiser. Sounds reasonable.

Problems have arisen, however, as the code is vague and confusing. In fact, the six-page HVCC is so difficult to interpret that Fannie Mae has produced an eight-page document of frequently asked questions. Freddie Mac has published guidance, too—and still many questions remain unanswered.

A very informative analysis of the HVCC has been published in REALTOR Magazine and can be found on line at: http://www.realtor.org/rmonews_and_commentary/Articles/2009/0909_HVCC

The debate concerning affordable housing in Fredericksburg, TX arose again at last night’s city council meeting. Up for presentation was Johnnie Long’s Fredericks Place. Mr. Long (a well-known and reputable Hill Country builder) is in the planning stages of a 19 acre development that will ultimately provide up to 114 homes that are both “affordable” and “green”. (This project is vastly different than the ill-fated project on Highway Street that kicked off this whole debate.)

His goal is to build the development out over a 6-year timeline and to keep the prices of the four models currently envisioned to under $200,000 each. Lot set-backs will be staggered and streets will be “curvy” to provide the over-all feeling of a “non-cookie-cutter” infill development. Mr. Long is committed to “green features” such as added insulation, radiant roof barriers and high-efficiency HVAC systems (among other features).

While this presentation was not a proposal requesting/requiring council action, it was a very insightful peek into how a developer should properly prepare public and private interests for what will soon be submitted for consideration.

Mr. Long wisely provided a study evidencing the positive economic impact his development would have on Fredericksburg, TX. By setting the stage to contrast the positive impact of a long-term real estate development against what he is surely to ask for as concession from the public sector, Mr. Long begins to chip away at the base-less assertions that “give-aways” to developers serve no one but the developer.

This sly shot across the bow of the NIMBY crowd was further reinforced by handing the city a solution on how to accomplish such a feat on a proverbial silver platter. His suggestion that they consider a Neighborhood Empowerment Zone is classic “Negotiations 101” (define the problem them hand them a solution). NEZ’s are authorized under the Texas Local Government Code, Chapter 378.

While Mr. Long has quite a difficult road ahead, he has clearly demonstrated that he’s well-versed in the game. Opponents intending to make the argument that market forces have provided plenty of current housing stock priced under $200K should recall that this wasn’t nearly the case just one year ago. As our market corrects (as they always do), folks should be cognizant of how long it actually takes to put a project on the ground. We’re not arguing over conditions today or even next month. We’re talking about projecting into Fredericksburg’s future and assuming, like most things in life, housing will not be getting any cheaper.

The information presented below is complied from data sourced via the Gillespie County Multiple Listing Service.  The tracking historical sales data is grouped into categories that include:  ”Residential”, “Rural Subdivision Lots/Tracts”, Acreage, Farm/Ranch” and “City Lots”.  These categories are further defined by “area” (e.g. in town, out-of-town/county).



While it can be difficult to portrait a true “apples to apples” picture of current real estate sales, the numbers speak for themselves as categorized.  A lot can be read “between the lines” when discussing these figures, if you would like more detailed information on these summary comparisons, feel free to contact me at your convenience.

2^nd Quarter-2009

Residential-City (Fredericksburg, TX) -  The total number of homes sold in the 2nd quarter of 2009 declined 18.3% from sales reported in the 2nd quarter of 2008 (93 in ‘08 and 76 in ‘09). The average price of a sold property declined 25.4% ($280,518 in ‘08 vs. $209,263 in ‘09) and the average number of days-on-market (DOM) has increased an average of 24% (166 in 2nd qtr. 2008 vs. the current 206 days). The total dollar volume of homes sold declined 39.04%. Notably, the average list price to sale price ratio (LP/SP) has decreased from 94.09% in 2008 to the current 93.02%.

Year-to-date (vs. YTD, 2008), total units sold have decreased by 15.82%, the average price of sold units has decreased by 25%, the average DOM has increased by 12.43%, the total dollar volume sold has decreased by 43.1% and the average LP/SP ratio has remain statistically unchanged.

The number of units sold registered in the 1^st quarter of 2009 has increased noticeably in the 2nd quarter (44 sold in the 1^st qtr. And 76 sold in the 2^nd).

Residential-County (Gillespie) - The total number of homes (w/acreage) sold in the 2nd quarter of 2009 declined 18.27% from the sales reported in the 2nd quarter of 2008 (93 in ‘08 vs. 76 in ‘09).  The average price of a sold property declined 25.41% ($280,518 in ‘08 vs. $209,236 in ‘09) and the average number of DOM has increased 24.1% (166 in ‘08 to 206 in ‘09).  The total dollar volume of homes sold has declined 39%. Notably, the average list price to sale price ratio (LP/SP) has decreased from 94.09% in 2008 to the current 93.02%.

Year-to-date (vs. YTD, 2008), total units sold have decreased by 24.5%, the average price of sold units has decreased by 25%, the average DOM has increased by 12.4%, the total dollar volume sold has decreased by 43% and the average LP/SP ratio has remain statistically unchanged.

The number of units sold registered in the 1^st quarter of 2009 has increased noticeably in the 2nd quarter (44 sold in the 1^st qtr. And 76 sold in the 2^nd).

Lots-City (Fredericksburg, TX) - The total number of lots sold in the 2^nd quarter of 2009 declined 47% from the sales reported in the 2nd quarter of 2008 (17 in ‘08 vs. 9 in ‘09).  The average price of a sold lot declined 7.82% ($62,682 in ‘08 vs. $55,778 in ‘09) and the average DOM has increased 92.94% (241 in ‘08 vs. 465 in ‘09).  The total dollar volume of lots sold has decreased 51.2%. Notably, the average LP/SP ratio has decreased by 7.57%.

Year-to-date (vs. YTD, 2008), total units sold have decreased by 64.7%, the average price of sold units has decreased by 34.71%, the average DOM has increased by 48%, the total dollar volume sold has decreased  to the current 91.5%.

The number of units sold registered in the 1^st quarter of 2009 has increased noticeably in the 2nd quarter (3 sold in the 1^st qtr. And 9 sold in the 2^nd).

Rural Subdivision Lots/Tracts - The total number of acreage lots sold in the 2nd quarter of 2009 declined 39.1% (23 in ‘08 vs. 14 in ‘09).  The average price of a sold acreage lot declined 35.3% ($129,405 in ‘08 vs. $83,761 in ‘09) and the average DOM increased by 50%.  The total dollar volume of acreage lots sold decreased 60.60%.  Notably, the average LP/SP ratio has decreased by 3.05%.

Year-to-date (vs. YTD, 2008), total units sold have decreased by 56.86%, the average price of sold units has decreased by 34.83%, the average DOM has increased by 29%, the total dollar volume sold has decreased  by 71.89.

Acreage, Farm/Ranch (All MLS Counties) - The total number of properties categorized as Farm/Ranch sold in the 2nd quarter of 2009 declined 30.95% (42 in ‘08 vs. 29 in ‘09).  Average prices and DOM tend to be less significant in this category as the properties offered and sold vary tremendously. Most notably, total sales volume has decreased by 45.6% from 2nd quarter 2008 vs. 2nd quarter 2009.

Year-to-date (vs. YTD, 2008) the total number of units sold has decreased by 65.9% and the total volume sold has decreased by 62.76%

Offers of “seller financing” (a/k/a owner financing) have been popping up more and more in ads listing Fredericksburg, TX real estate for sale.  What can this mean for a  buyer or seller?

For a seller, it is a way to differentiate your offering to the buying public.  While it can often be interpreted as a “hint” that you are “motivated” (not always a good card to play), in today’s challenging market, who cares!  If you weren’t “motivated” your property wouldn’t be on the market in the first place.

Savvy seller’s have learned that an offer to finance a buyer’s purchase of your property can be a nice way to bank some cash (down payment), receive a pretty good return on your investment (the interest rate charged) and retain the possibility of regaining ownership of that property in the event a buyer defaults on the note.  The keys, of course are the creditworthiness of the buyer and the negotiated down payment (generally 20% or more) and the interest rate (typically, slightly higher than published mortgage rates).

Of course, a creditworthy buyer will compare your terms to that they might receive from a financial institution.  It is likely that (all things being equal) they will opt for bank financing.  In the current lending environment, however, potential buyers with available cash and “decent” credit (i.e. not “sterling credit”) may not have the option of shopping around for financing.

The questions a seller must ask when considering this are:  Do I need 100% of my cash now?  What will I do with that cash if I get it all now?  Do I have a mortgage to pay off?  Will a buyer’s down-payment pay off my current mortgage? What kinds of competing returns can I receive on my funds?

The bottom line for seller’s is that the option to provide financing to a potential buyer sets you apart from the competition, expands your pool of potential buyers and allows you options on handling your sales proceeds.

 A buyer considering negotiating for seller financing faces many questions.  First and foremost is whether or not the financing offered is competitive with other, more traditional, lenders.  Be sure to factor in fees, points and all the other miscellaneous fees lenders charge when comparing the bottom line. ( e.g. a seller typically won’t charge an “origination fee” so common to “traditional” lenders).  The savings can be significant.

As noted, a buyer today with less than perfect credit often will not qualify for the low rates advertised (without paying substantial “buy-down” points, etc.) and seller financing may be a very legitimate (or only) option.

Flexibility and creativity are keys in selling (and buying) real estate in our current market.  Fredericksburg, TX is no different.  Be sure you work with an agent that is familiar with the ins and outs of all aspects of these important transactions.

The information presented below is complied from data sourced via the Gillespie County Multiple Listing Service.  The tracking historical sales data is grouped into categories that include:  ”Residential”, “Rural Subdivision Lots/Tracts”, Acreage, Farm/Ranch” and “City Lots”.  These categories are further defined by “area” (e.g. in town, out-of-town/county).



While it can be difficult to portrait a true “apples to apples” picture of current real estate sales, the numbers speak for themselves as categorized.  A lot can be read “between the lines” when discussing these figures, if you would like more detailed information on these summary comparisons, feel free to contact me at your convenience.

1st Quarter-2009

·      Residential-City (Fredericksburg, TX) -  The total number of homes sold in the 1st quarter of 2009 declined 32.3% from sales reported in the 1st quarter of 2008 (31 in ‘08 and 21 in ‘09). The average price of a sold property declined 22.26% ($254,144 in ‘08 vs. $197,562 in ‘09) and the average number of days-on-market (DOM) has increased an average of 16% (174 in 1st qtr. 2008 vs. the current 202 days). The total dollar volume of homes sold declined 47.34%. Notably, the average list price to sale price ratio (LP/SP) has remained statistically unchanged.

·      Residential-County (Gillespie) - The total number of homes (w/acreage) sold in the 1st quarter of 2009 declined 68.75% from the sales reported in the 1st quarter of 2008 (16 in ‘08 vs. 5 in ‘09).  The average price of a sold property declined 28.15% ($301,031 in ‘08 vs. $216,300 in ‘09) and the average number of DOM has increased 25.3% (229 in ‘08 to 287 in ‘09).  The total dollar volume of homes sold has declined 77.55%. Notably, the average LP/SP ratio has remained statistically unchanged (93% vs. 93%).

·      Lots-City (Fredericksburg, TX) - The total number of lots sold in the 1st quarter of 2009 declined 82.35% from the sales reported in the 1st quarter of 2008 (17 in ‘08 vs. 3 in ‘09).  The average price of a sold lot declined 69.22% ($91,679 in ‘08 vs. $28,217 in ‘09) and the average DOM has decreased 70.6% (255 in ‘08 vs. 75 in ‘09).  The total dollar volume of lots sold has decreased 94.6%. Notably, the average LP/SP ratio has decreased  by 4.3%.


Note: these figures can be slightly misleading as the volume sold so far in 2009 is statistically insignificant and not readily comparable to 2008 volume. 

·      Rural Subdivision Lots/Tracts - The total number of acreage lots sold in the 1st quarter of 2009 declined 71.4% (28 in ‘08 vs. 8 in ‘09).  The average price of a sold acreage lot declined 26% ($171,702 in ‘08 vs. $126,925 in ‘09) and the average DOM was statistically unchanged.  The total dollar volume of acreage lots sold declined 78.87%.  Notably, the average LP/SP ratio has decreased by 3.37%.

·      Acreage, Farm/Ranch (All MLS Counties) - The total number of properties categorized as Farm/Ranch sold in the 1st quarter of 2009 declined 58.82% (34 in ‘08 vs. 14 in ‘09).  Average prices and DOM tend to be less significant in this category as the properties offered and sold vary tremendously. Most notably, total sales volume has decreased by 61.41% from 1st quarter 2008 vs. 1st quarter 2009.

Amid the primarily bleak news continuing to pour forth about the state of our economy, we are beginning to see glimpses of ‘good” news that could herald the stirrings of a recovery.  Oops, hold on.  Scratch that.

News reports today are that the recession is catching up with Texas and that more “pain” is forecast.  Economists are predicting that unemployment could rise to as high as 8% statewide.  Gillespie County is reporting record high unemployment (a relatively respectable 4.3%) and all sales indicators for Fredericksburg TX real estate continue to give heartburn to people like me.

Of course, these are the same economists that utterly failed to “predict” the current mess we find ourselves in so I tend to take all their current predictions with a grain of salt.  These folks are about as reliable as weather forecasters in my opinion.  I have learned to go with what I see first-hand.

I’ll spare you the frightful statistics on sales, price reductions, etc. and simply say that it is a terrible time to be a seller of real estate but a pretty good time to be a buyer.  Financing is available, tax incentives are huge (for 1^st time buyers, anyway), sellers are “motivated” and inventory is plentiful.

Be forewarned; however, that agents all over town are psyching their sellers up for the “selling season”, that “traditional” time it is believed that the market is strongest (March to mid-summer).  I predict that the pace of price reductions will slow noticeably as false hopes are re-infused into the Fredericksburg market and sellers are encouraged to “hold tight”.

Being the contrarian, I would opine that now is the best time to put your best price forward, to jump ahead of all the other competing properties.  Arguably, “the season” does bring out more buyers and today’s buyers are incentivized in ways they haven’t been before (e.g. low interest rates, fear of other investment vehicles, tax credits, etc.) so why not take advantage of that as a seller?

Buyers in this market are all about “deals”, perceived or otherwise.  If you truly want to sell, you have to stand out.  Standing out today is all about price, price and price. The buyers are there, you just have to get them off the fence.

Buyers, you will be lured off that fence in various ways so be patient, but be ready.

Real estate has always been a great hedge against inflation and other economic woes.  While real estate may have led us into the current mess, it is also what will lead us out of it.  Values in Gillespie County/Fredericksburg, TX/the Hill Country have held up very well (thank you very much) and should be seen as a sign of the inherent and unchanging desirability of our little corner of the world.

With year-to-date Fredericksburg, TX real estate sales falling so far below the same figures from this time last year, it is interesting to note the “buzz” being proclaimed about the number and pace of price reductions on listed properties.

I continually hear from clients, etc. that prices must finally be falling as so many listings are being touted as “REDUCED”.  Is a price reduction truly relevant if the property was, a) overpriced to begin with, and b) still over-priced?

While many agents were quick to begin suggesting more realistic pricing for their clients, a lot of sellers have resisted the advice and insisted on prices that do not accurately account for current market conditions.

Less informed (or less scrupulous) agents will happily accept a listing at an unrealistic price just to “have the business”.  Hidden is their assumption (hope) that they can subsequently have the seller lower the price over the term of the listing.

When an agent suggesting realistic prices competes for a listing with an agent suggesting less realistic pricing the “realistic agent” must fight the urge to “get the business” and tell a client what they want to hear to do so.  If, against their better judgment, they give-in and secure an unrealistically priced listing, everyone loses.

The agents lose because they then face the cost of advertising a property that won’t sell (as priced) and the sellers..well, you know.  Taking it further, an agent will logically focus their best efforts on listing that will actually sell and the natural tendency is to “forget about” the overpriced one. The disservice this provides a seller is truly unethical.

So, back to the price reductions.  We’ve seen over 200 so far this year (compared to about 35 or so this time last year).  Does a drop in “price” equate to a drop in “value”?  Remember folks, it’s all relative.

Let’s say, for example that I feel my home is worth $1,000,000 and I list it at that price.  The property tax folks may have it valued at $600,000 and my neighbor just sold a house very comparable to mine for $700,000. If I “REDUCE” my price to $950,000 is that really relevant to “market value”?  Hardly.

While a $50,000 price reduction may sound awfully good, if the home was over-priced to begin with, it’s really not that big of a deal.  Always remember, “market value” is defined as:

“The most probable price which a property should bring a competitive and open market under all conditions requisite to a fair sale, the buyer and seller, each acting prudently, knowledgeably and assuming the price is not affected by undue stimulus.  Implicit in this definition is the consummation of a sale as of a specified date and the passing of title from seller to buyer under conditions whereby: (1) buyer and seller are typically motivated: (2) both parties are well informed advised, and each acting in what he considers his own best interest: (3) a reasonable time is allowed for exposure in the open market: (4) payment is made in terms of cash in U. S. dollars or in terms of financial arrangements comparable thereto; and (5) the price represents the normal consideration for the property unaffected by special or creative financing or sales concessions* by anyone associated with the sale.”-National Residential Appraisal Institute

In other words, a property is worth what some is willing to pay for it AND what someone is willing to sell it for. 

I’ve posted before on pricing in a down market (e.g get ahead of falling prices and you’ll be noticed first by the most buyers) and, let’s face it, the Fredericksburg, TX real estate market, while (relatively) healthy is in a “correction”.  Sellers shouldn’t be fooled in to pricing that ignores that reality.

Here are six things that buyers of Fredericksburg TX real estate need to know about the freshly enacted $8,000 first-time home-buyer tax credit that is a part of the $787 billion stimulus bill that President Obama signed into law Tuesday, 2/17/09:

1. Eight grand, new buyers: The tax credit included in the economic stimulus legislation is much narrower than the $15,000 credit previously proposed.  The approved credit is equivalent to 10 percent of the purchase price of the home–although it’s capped at $8,000–and applies only to first-time homebuyers and principal residences. But unlike an earlier $7,500 homebuyer tax credit, this one does not have to be repaid.

2. First time buyers defined: For the purpose of this legislation, a “first-time home buyer” is someone who hasn’t owned a principal residence for three years before buying a house. (The date of purchase is considered the day that the title is transferred.) That means if you’ve owned a vacation home–but not a principal residence–within the past three years, you would still qualify for the credit.

3. 2009 buyers only: Only those who purchase a home on or after January 1 and before December 1, 2009 are eligible for the credit. Anyone who bought a home last year won’t be able to take advantage of it.

4. Income limits: The tax credit is subject to income limitations. Single buyers need a modified adjusted gross income of $75,000 or less to qualify for the full credit, that’s $150,000 for married couples. Those earning more than these thresholds may be eligible for reduced credits.

5. Refundable: Because the tax credit is “refundable,” qualified buyers can take advantage of it even if they don’t have much tax liability.

6. Recapture: Buyers have to own the home for at least three years in order to capitalize on the credit. If they sell the home before then, they will have to return the credit to the government. (Exceptions will be made in certain cases, such as death or divorce.)

More “stimulus” for the real estate market is being outlined daily.  Apparently, on March 4, we will have more details on what types of mortgage, bankruptcy and foreclosure relief is planned with the goal of jump-starting the economy.

After just over a year of finally arriving into the 1980’s and instituting a key lockbox system for use by Fredericksburg, TX realtors, this grand experiment appears on the verge of failure. Readers may be surprise, shocked, humored or indifferent to learn that real estate practitioners in our fine community stubbornly adhere to an antiquated, inefficient and (borderline) reckless method of storing and distributing the keys necessary to facilitate the showing of real property listed for sale in Fredericksburg, TX.

To avoid the potential liability of revealing too much on how keys of listed property are stored, logged, tagged, distributed and/or collected, suffice to say that the stubborn reluctance to recognize the liability inherent with the various haphazard systems of key management employed by local offices would send any risk manager worth his salt into a major tailspin.

Having failed to make any progress with the “liability argument” much has been debated about the “efficiency argument” that holds in wonder a group of professionals who fail to place a value on the time it takes them to wander from office to office picking up and dropping off keys (not to mention the cost of the gas to do so), looking for keys that someone failed to turn in, etc.  Isn’t your time, effort and frustration worth anything to you? What is this saying to your clients?

Failure on the liability and efficiency fronts turns us to the “leadership argument”.  Agents dropping the system cite spotty usage as one reason they are opting out of efficiency (in favor, as it were, of liability and inefficiency).  Our Board of Directors and Officers have within their power the ability to mandate usage of this system. They apparently prefer to build “consensus” and play politics rather than actually lead and make decisions that will protect the entire membership (despite themselves).

The failure to recognize liability, efficiency and/or leadership leaves us nothing left to play except, perhaps, for the “cost argument”.  Agents opting out of the system cite “cost” as a concern (along with the aforementioned lack of universal implementation).  We’re talking about $180/year per agent.  That works out to about $0.50 per day per agent.  Are they really saying they can’t see the wisdom in spending $0.50 per day to make themselves more efficient and to protect themselves and their loved ones from unspeakable liability?  Really?

When times are tough, people have a tendency to cut back on what they may deem to be “luxuries”.  Is a system that boosts efficiency and reduces liability a luxury?  Hardly.  Is $180/year going to break your bank?  Do the math folks.  Add up your time and the cost of your gas and multiply it by the number of times you show property in Fredericksburg, TX.  $0.50 per day…really??!!