An occasional commenter here on ThePaepae.com, known as ‘Xav’ here and at PropertyTalk, did some homework on ‘bargain’ US properties being assiduously hawked by property spruiker Dean Letfus to his database and via the internet …
From Dean Letfus’s list of Atlanta properties:
Address . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .Price. . . . . Rent. . . . Yield (after costs)
4881 Amsler Rd, Ellenwood . . $85,000 . $1,100 . . 10.01%
From Google:
Thanks for the opportunity Dean, but I don’t think so .
If this is taken at face value: a USD$60,000 margin between what the property is selling for on Realtor.com (two listings at USD$25,000) versus Dean Letfus’s ‘hot off the press’ ‘Atlanta list’ @ USD $85,000 — it surely demolishes Dean Letfus’s supposed status as a ‘bargain property’ finder … that’s an amazing markup.
Do you think that $60,000 margin would go towards the ‘oh-no-that’s-not-a sales-commission-they’re-just-proprietary-fees‘ we discussed earlier?
[Looks like you can take the boy out of Richmastery but you can’t take Richmastery out of the boy. Jeez.]
I was struck by this tweet in my timeline tonight….
Brian Alvey sardonically explains that more made-up stuff is expressed on spreadsheets than novels ...
I download Dean Letfus’s ‘Atlanta list’ from his sales site to look for myself. In one case, as Xav highlighted, it apparently offers a house at USD $85,000 — USD $60,000 more than the USD$25,000 asking price for the same property elsewhere — but he describes the list like this:
“This is hot off the press so apologies for the formatting, but the numbers are all correct.”
What a coincidence. Dean Letfus supplied his 'Atlanta list' as an Excel document.
Oops, it’s an Excel document … Fiction?
If there’s been a misunderstanding or misinterpretation of the details of this property, let me know please. Otherwise, 340% seems like a HUGE mark-up, don’t you think?
– P
If this claim is true and can be verified, it is simply unacceptable conduct.
The responsible thing to do is to report the alleged spruiker to the Commerce Commission?
Rgds,
*p*
Well, superficially it looks true.
Below is an extract of the ‘Atlanta List 10 June’ that Dean Letfus has been promoting through various avenues but recently consolidated to a Facebook page…
On that new Facebook page*, he promoted the ‘latest Atlanta list’ …
Top of the list (an Excel spreadsheet) is a property 4881 Amsler Rd, GA, 30294: (click to enlarge)
“Sales price 85,000”
But, as Xav pointed out, a property at 4881 Amsler Rd, Ellenwood, GA 30294 is currently listed at Realtor.com
http://www.realtor.com/realestateandhomes-detail/4881-Amsler-Rd_Ellenwood_GA_30294_M50253-30667?ex=ASGA_3080462&source=web
… for $25,000. (As I write this, it’s been listed for 8 days.)
Perhaps an earlier listing at $85,000 failed to sell and the (desperate?) vendors decided to discount the asking price? That’s a possibility. But to discount it by $60,000? Wow, that seems a lot.
Or there could be another explanation … which I think seems more in keeping with the ‘Don’t invest in the US as a bunny’ warnings of people like Neil Jenman and Olly Newland and discussed in Greener grass in yonder paddock …
* Does running a Facebook page, website and email marketing operation promoting property deals constitute ‘selling real estate’? Or promoting it for (presumably) financial reward? D’ya think? That’s a licensed activity where I live …
As for “And if you want to know how to take 25 to 50K and build a retirement income from it in under ten years just holler…:” well, that seems a lot like the activities of a Financial Advisor … and they’re licensed/registered/approved in NZ now … hmmm.
It just occurred to me that another possible reason for the discrepancy between the Realtor.com multi listing price of $25,000 and the $85,000 ‘Sales price’ of Dean Letfus’s “Atlanta List” is a simple typo.
That would explain it. – P
Not really.
Per PT:
So all the calculations were based on a sale price of $85,000 – not $25,000. Instead of a net yield of 10%, he would have calculated a net yield of over 30% if he had intended to list the property at $25,000.
What a shyster.
Rgds,
*p*
Not a good look, I agree. Trying to see if there’s an alternative explanation …
That does not look good. It annoys me when a Trader because thats indirectly what he is here. Selling it as a Fantastic Deal. And he knows its not. If he discloses his position then fine.
Also a Brick bat for you Peter.
You reference a Random Twitter claiming Excel is Fiction over Word. So Dean using excel suggests its Fiction. Peter Tut tut.
Hi Craig. Thanks for sharing your view.
I wonder if we’re missing something. That gap is SOO big. Enormous …
re the Excel/fiction tweet — I think that’s a hilarious observation. [And he’s got a point.]
A brickbat? For me? Juxtaposition is a fine thing. – P
Sorry I Don’t follow, I am missing something now.
Juxtaposition = someone who is attempting to defend/argue a point by using 2 completely irrelevant details.
Also known as a logical Fallacy or a Non-Sequitur.
Craig,
There may be a little more subtlety in Peter’s comments than you have appreciated?
If in the interests of balance Peter is desperately trying to find some innocent explanation for the pricing, and the best and only defence Peter can think of to try to defend Mr Letfus is a complete and utter absurdity, what does it all mean?
Rgds,
*p*
@Craig, re the meaning of Juxtaposition, I prefer this definition to your unsourced one (did you make it up?):
http://grammar.about.com/od/il/g/Juxtaposition-term.htm
Juxtaposition is a noble form of literary communication with a fine pedigree, and I like to use it, my dear chap. (I’m sure you understand.)
—
@Poormastery, re looking for ‘balance’ …. yeah, well, it’s such a striking difference as I noted.
So I wrote to Dean Letfus, asking: “Is there any light you can shed on this apparent discrepancy?”
He replied:
Over a series of emails I tried to get clear on the possible additional costs on the Amsler Road property highlighted at the top of Dean Letfus’s ‘Atlanta List’ … asking what the back taxes or tax liens etc (if any) were on the property [to justify the $60,000 gap] … and while he didn’t specify, he did offer a ‘formula’ of sorts:
Dean Letfus also seemed adamant that he doesn’t “sell properties to anybody” … I told him I think such a statement is sophistry*, and that he’s clearly marketing property for reward.
Nevertheless, he indicated he feels unexposed to NZ law regarding real estate sales … saying:
Anyway, good on him for replying to my emails, although when I asked him again for specifics about that Amsler Road property:
He replied:
So, the question is still open.
As already noted, I appreciate him engaging in the conversation as he did.
– Peter
* fallacious argument with the intention of deceiving
His answers make a little sense. But only a little.
Firstly, it is not a foreclosure sale. If it were a foreclosure sale then it would be sold on the courtroom steps. Dean even writes about this on his blog but seemingly he has a short memory.
It could be a Short Sale by either the owner or its financier, but there is an issue with this as well, since the company Dean is working with must own it since Dean is offering it for sale on their behalf. He even says “No it is not my company that bought it and it is none of my business”, the clear implication being that someone has bought it but it isn’t him.
As an aside, the last half of that quote should be very disturbing for anyone thinking of buying one of these places on the basis of Dean’s recommendation.
I don’t pretend to be an expert on the US system but it seems to me there are only a couple of options:
1. There is a premium of $60,000 or thereabouts; or
2. The company that Dean is dealing with is in serious financial trouble.
Xav, thanks for your comments.
From observation, there’s often an unfortunate aspect of Dean Letfus’s communication style which sees him apparently rely on implication and a read-between-the-lines style — rather than straight answers to straight questions.
One could call it ‘Clinton-esque’ … hard to pin down … and the interchange can quickly slide to “As I already said…” or the conversation becomes about the conversation rather than the topic.
So I wasn’t surprised his replies left us to typically fill in the gaps and speculate. Still, as I said, good on him for ‘engagjng’.
P
Peter,
You know I like your interests are they are common with mine, and I enjoy reading (from time to time) but recently you have seemed to just find angles which are completey Non-Sequitur
Do you want me to go and find the sourced meaning to keep you happy? Well no I won’t, because I know what it means. I don’t need to prove that I can use Google and cut and paste. Oh he has a link wow this must be true. But the link is a opinion piece of from Wikipedia or about.com. It does not matter it must be true I red it therefore it is.
By the way I know what Juxtaposition means and just because you link to it does not make you superior or correct even though it makes you feel better, infact it reeks of BS when people link to anything and everything. (there a blogging tip for you) Do you want me to link to Reek?
Juxtaposition is a noble form of literary communication with a fine pedigree, and I like to use it, my dear chap.
Peter you truly are a Prat.
Heres a link for you.
Defintion: Prat.
Quote Basically someone whos a major idiot, or is delusional and dumb. Acts against logic and thinks hes self-righteous. AKA: Major dumbass. End Quote.
I like the self righteous part.
I cannot believe you stand by the Excel comment. What you did there was poor and your reaction abhorrent ( go on Peter Google it abhorrent )
So this will be the last post from me here.(maybe one more….) Now your thinking Oh I’m so hurt. That’s the reaction I would expect from you Peter. Fine.
But by judging from reading for the last year or so. I would say there is maybe 4 or 5 people who comment consistently (i’m sure you will have some link or table to dispute this – irony there for ) so for one person too leave and drop your activity by about 20% you truly have a really made an impact as you like to call yourself as some sort of whistle blower. ha Was this a Personal gab well I guess it is. live and die by the sword.
I know I know what you are thinking, what I am doing to make a difference huh?
Answer not being a Prat.
Thanks for the feedback. Yes, I agree it can be seen as unforgivably rude of me to challenge your slanted definition of juxtaposition in that way. I’m sorry to have apparently provoked you to ill-temper or exasperation.
I still find the Excel-used-for-fiction quote/insight hilarious and I do not resile from that ironic linkage to Dean’s Atlanta list. (Not sure why that offends YOU so much?)
Cheers, P
Mr Leftus and the other spruikers are evil geniuses.
The idea that people would actually pay sometimes thousands of dollars to be pitched real estate deals is something that would never have even occured to me. Real estate agents charge you nothing for looking. Even dodgy timeshare salesmen didn’t charge you for the privilege of being harrassed and pitched “deals”.
Now, it seems that the price of these sales sessions has come down to zero cost, but the infomercials will continue, because suckers will presumably attend and buy.
Of course, Letfus went one better. He went to the PT boards, established himself as a so-called “guru”, and took a sizeable piece of PT’s client base back to his own paying forum!
The owners of PT appeared to be suffering from Stockholm Syndrome at the time, so instead of chastising Leftus for his questionable conduct and use of their forum, they responded by censoring anyone who dared to criticise Leftus! You couldn’t make it up!
Judging by the price and the number of people Leftus claimed to have got to his paying forum, he had succeeded in creating over $100k of passive revenue. Not only that, he now had a substantial mailing list to pitch his “deals” to. Various dodgy products rolled off the shelf.
Some say that the victims deserve it, but I do not agree. Leftus et al develop very believable personas, with the Christianity pitch facilitating this.
Allegedly marking up the sales price of a property from $25k to $85k is not exactly in line with Jesus’ principles, as I remember Christianity.
It appears as if the banks have stopped Letfus buying, but who is going to stop him selling?
The regulator needs to step up.
Rgds,
*p*
Thanks for reminding me. Yes, I regard PropertyTalk’s complicity in effectively and even overtly ENDORSING Dean Letfus as breathtaking. Like you, I copped a fair bit of inconsistent ‘moderation’ and censorship at their hands — but, hey, their sand pit, their ‘rules’ (cough).
The Christianity persona was a factor, so were his copious declarations of his own integrity — using the word ‘integrity’… and if you ever met Dean, as I have a few times, you would say, as I did, that he seems like a good man, very personable, good communications skills, and intelligent… as I discussed here: http://www.thepaepae.com/prick-us-do-we-not-bleed/13976/
But it seemed clear to me from his marketing materials, his activities and his alliances that he operated as a hyperbolic salesman and exaggerating spruiker. (These are my observations based on his behaviour, not his character.)
Whether it’s Stockholm Syndrome or Schizophrenia, some of the governing elite at PropertyTalk now seem openly hostile and disbelieving of Dean Letfus … the man they once regarded (and described) in these terms: “Dean has given a lot of value and help to the PT community… ”
That they now appear SO derisive and challenging of him in his latest sales/not sales endeavour indicates perhaps they’ve come to share your view of the reasons behind his ‘contribution’.
– P
One more thing: It is just as striking for me today to watch PropertyTalk owner Donna vouching for ex Richmastery spruikers Sean Wood and Steve Goodey in their new hyperbolic chip-off-the-old-block, endeavour … while having a go at previous ‘contributor’ Dean Letfus:
http://www.propertytalk.com/forum/showthread.php?29034-About-Property-tutors-(tutoring-program)&p=253577#post253577
I personally doubt Donna’s assessment of Sean Wood and Steve Goodey quoted above — mainly because of my plotting of what I call ‘the leopard spot delta coefficient’ — and I have laid out a bit of their history of questionable behaviour and past possible conflicts-of-interest as I perceive them here on ThePaepae.com:
http://www.thepaepae.com/tag/sean-wood/ | http://www.thepaepae.com/tag/steve-goodey/
I was right about Phil Jones, I was right about Dean Letfus and Shaun Stenning, and I reckon I’m right about these two spruikers too. But watching PropertyTalk’s Marc and Donna sticking up for them and, indeed, acting as part of their promotional machine even today is sobering.
Interesting choices.
– P
The “15 million dollar* man” Sean Wood (*apparently this refers to his debt load) and Steve Goodey (Goody Yum Yum) appear to be the biggest advertisers on the PT site.
I am sure this financial conflict of interest has nothing to do with the owners endorsement of these spruikers (cough).
Of course, Mr Goodey didn’t post on PT for more than a year awhile back, because he was aggrieved by the humble poormastery’s questions! Whatever next?
No wonder they threw me out of the forum!
Rgds,
*p*
I see your point.
I put the endorsement and new ‘respect’ these wide boys apparently attract on PropertyTalk free and independent down to an unholy cocktail of ‘Frequency of interaction’, with a dash of Stockholm Syndrome and a sprinkle of ‘Don’t bite the hand that feeds you (especially in a recession)’.
I understand that these two spruikers were part of the ‘bring PropertyTalk to its knees’ collective (United Federation of Property Spruikers). That spittle-flecked mob last year put the wind up the owners and managers of PT emasculating them with threats of legal threats, menacing declarations of ‘deep pockets’ and a determination to ‘clean up’ the discussion forum or crush it and its owners into the dust.
They spun a line about there being a pot of cash to pay lawyers aimed at PT (which promoted Andrew King to take pledges from a bunch of us to set up a legal fighting fund).
The result was a disheartening cave-in (no surprise) by PT — mass deletions (sorry, threads ‘removed for review’) and ‘certain posters’ gagged (put on the watch-list) with certain topics effectively BANNED.
All this compromise just to create a safe and unquestioning environment for those apparently incapable of standing up for themselves and mounting an argument about their business practices in the actual discussion forum.
So, as I noted earlier, it’s remarkable to see their newfound boldness in what looks like an openly derisive attitude towards Dean Letfus (I’m not defending him, just saying) … while at the same time offering a cosy and soothing protection to Sean Wood and Steve Goodey’s enterprises … with comments like this from Donna, aggrieved that someone should start a thread even questioning her main advertisers:
“About Property Tutors (tutoring program)” …
Oh dear. So questions about the Richmastery alumni Wood & Goodey’s activities are a ‘diversion of attention’ and ‘misguided’, according to Donna, while the ‘big evil’ is something else … anything else?
I’m sure Patty Hearst would completely understand.
– P
Ouch. That is embarrassing. Free and independent? Really?
I didn’t realise that PT.com had now turned of Letfus, and embraced Wood / Goodey. Thanks for the update on the machinations of the owners. The underdog supporter in me cannot help but feel some sense of sympathy towards Letfus, who doesn’t seem any worse than the other two aforementioned spruikers.
To be honest, although I occasionally log on to PT.com to see what is going on, I invariably log off again after 60 seconds or so. I look at the thread topics, and it all seems like a monumental bore.
I used to enjoy reading the views of Xris, David Hunter, Olly Newland et al, but now all the interesting posters with opinions seem to have gone gently into the good night. Most of the posters who have remained or joined seem to me to be a little vapid and vacuous.
PT.com would, I think, be a good case study for MBA students on how not to run a business. For awhile, the owners had something, and then they threw it all away as they were overcome by the dark side of the force. It is a tale of missed opportunity after missed opportunity, caused by a fundamental lack of bottle.
The irony of setting up PropertyTalk “for people to share their experiences and knowledge [to keep] businesses ‘honest’”, and then ending up promoting RM acolytes Wood / Goodey could be amusing were it not so sad.
Rgds,
*p*
I have a bit of a schizophrenic attitude towards PropertyTalk myself.
I like the people involved, and the idea, as promoted, is such a worthwhile vision. The mechanics are close to right … but the determination — the will — to hold fast to the ‘free and independent’ values of the masthead are sadly (not amusingly) lacking.
It takes resolve to stand up to the bully boys, to maintain a true division between the commercial and the ‘editorial’ line (staying true to the declared purpose of the site). It sometimes feels like a superhuman task, and certainly, as you have said elsewhere, requires some financial ballast or heft to resist the toxic overtures and threats that free comment attracts.
I highlighted before how anonymous poster MUFFIT (Sean Wood’s alter ego) seemed to threaten to withdraw his advertising patronage of PropertyTalk because all/certain of his critics weren’t (at the time – Feb 2010) BANNED from posting in the discussion forums …
http://www.thepaepae.com/propertytalk-public-criticism-and-the-public-good/15170/
And yet, today, as you say, the “$15 million dollar man” is both PropertyTalk’s largest advertiser … and benefiting from repeated endorsements from the owner of the site. Free and independent is, it seems, a relative thing.
I feel a certain sense of fraternity for PropertyTalk and an affinity with the stated goals. I continue to contribute a bit where I can, while I still can, but these things bother me.
– P
Actually, speaking of overdoses of financial hyperbole, do you remember Mr Fong’s now legendary “Boom of all Booms” thread.
I believe that the legendary boom of all booms was predicted for the period 2010 – 2012. I suppose we are currently in the middle of it. I wonder how the “boom of all booms” is going for Mr Fong? He doesn’t appear to post to PT any more?
I think at around the end of 2007 PT had a thread on what would happen to property prices in 2008. From memory, I predicted that they would fall a couple of percent in real terms. I was the only one who seemed to think real prices would fall. Everybody else seemed to be preaching about property prices doubling every seven years!
The PT forum often was a good example of group thinking…
Enuff,
*p*
Well, far be it from me to criticise a property market prophet whose predictions are taking a bit longer to eventuate than he first anticipated.
One of fellow publisher Andrew Waite’s best jokes was a comment he made in 2006 when I mentioned in conversation that we were releasing an updated version of Olly Newland’s book The Day the Bubble Bursts … the bubble having not quite burst by then, although the first mentions of a ‘sub-prime crisis’ were starting to be whispered.
Andrew said:
‘If it was prophetic then, it’s prophetic now!’
… so I feel I should cut Ron Hoy Fong the same slack. We’ll see whether his (derivative) theory of a baby-boomer asset sell-down sparking another massive boom holds any water in the fullness of time.
– P
“Stopped clock” style predictions aren’t much use to anyone either.
After all:
“Markets can remain irrational longer than you can remain solvent.” [Attributed to Lord Keynes]
Rgds,
*p*
Yes, well said. Olly’s Bubble book was really saying: Hey, the party can’t run forever, these are some of the warning signs, these are some of the things you should start doing (and STOP doing) … and judging by previous cycles this could be the timing … or not. It was a warning bell. Some people who entered the market after 2000 seemed to have no idea it could ‘turn’ and, for instance, that lenders’ behaviour could be so changeable.
Some benefitted from Olly’s warnings, others didn’t.
—
I like a lot of what Keynes had to say, not least this about writing…
Really, this quote from Keynes is more relevant:
… it’s about anticipation.
And one could say the platoons of spruikers hawking defunct US properties (sorry, ‘opportunities’) are anticipating people’s needs, in a way…
– P