List Source - help with my criteria

11 Replies

Good afternoon,

I am trying to build my first Absentee owner list through listsource. The following criteria is what I have gathered through the forums as being the most recommended. However, the last bullet point is giving me some trouble “Last Market Sale Date”.

  • Equity: 40%-100%
  • Minimum Equity 30k
  • Property Type: SFR
  • Bedrooms: 3 - 5
  • Absentee Owner (In and Out of State)
  • Mailing Address and Property Address Complete
  • Exclude Corporate
  • Exclude Trustee
  • Last Market Sale Date: 01/01/1900 to 01/01/2008

Before I add the above "Last Market Sale Date" I have a list of 967. After I add that filter I have a list of 119.

But, if I run the same report but change the "Last Market Sale Date" to 01/02/2008 to 01/02/2015 I get 311.

If you add 311 + 119 it does not equal 967. So I guess my question is what is the best way to filter and find homes that have been owned for more than 7 years? "Last Market Sale Date" seems to be incorrect in its results. 

Yep, I too have found that will filter out many records that appear without a value in that column.  What I like to do is to leave it blank and include it in the data you append to your records (you do this in "purchase your list"). 

Yes, you will pay per lead for this information, and you should try to cross-reference this to determine the actual sale date if you can, but at least you aren't leaving out 537 potential leads.

What geographic filer are you using?

Originally posted by @Jeremy T. :

Yep, I too have found that will filter out many records that appear without a value in that column.  What I like to do is to leave it blank and include it in the data you append to your records (you do this in "purchase your list"). 

Yes, you will pay per lead for this information, and you should try to cross-reference this to determine the actual sale date if you can, but at least you aren't leaving out 537 potential leads.

What geographic filer are you using?

I am using my zip code + 10 miles. So your saying purchase the entire list and then try and filter by last sale date? 

Originally posted by @Richard Adjou :

@Erik Chipchase just out of curiosity, why are you looking for homes owned more than 7 years?

 I was thinking those sellers may be more motivated as they have had the house for longer. I am also trying to eliminate the people who potentially purchased a house recently with a large down payment 40% or more. 

@Account Closed That makes sense. I feel like I'm always over thinking the bit about equity. Like if they get a conventional loan for 80% LTV, don't they automatically start off with 20% equity on the property? That leave me having to figure out just how much equity they would be willing to forgo to make the seller motivated enough. But 40% or more is a solid number in IMO

Richard Adjou, Real Estate Agent in DC (#SP98378648)
Originally posted by @Erik Chipchase:
Originally posted by @Jeremy T.:

Yep, I too have found that will filter out many records that appear without a value in that column.  What I like to do is to leave it blank and include it in the data you append to your records (you do this in "purchase your list"). 

Yes, you will pay per lead for this information, and you should try to cross-reference this to determine the actual sale date if you can, but at least you aren't leaving out 537 potential leads.

What geographic filer are you using?

I am using my zip code + 10 miles. So your saying purchase the entire list and then try and filter by last sale date? 

 Yes, but you need to make sure to include that information in your records in the "Add Additional Fields" of the Append Output Fields tab when you go to purchase your list.  It costs 0.01/lead (full price), and, IMO, is well worth the 10 bucks it will cost you to double your potential leads.

@Account Closed  ,

I think the reason your data source is dropping so many names is because not all properties transfer from market sales. All cash sales of distressed properties for example, which were never listed, they would be eliminated with a filter like that. Only homes sold from a retail listing will show up with that criteria.

If you're set on using that as part of your criteria, try using "length of residence". Although they do not actually reside there, it should calculate the amount of time the owner has been in title.

Most people compiling equity lists skip anyone who has been in title less than seven years or so. I used to do that also,

But then realized I was missing 2 key groups that I've done alot of deals with; Inheritors and the growing ranks of newbie Landlords who have already figured out they're in over their heads ( I call them really really bad Landlords, or RRBL's). That second group is growing larger every day. What I have found is that there has been tons of cash flying around the market for the last two years. Many, disgusted with there 401k or other investment strategies have decided to throw their money into Real Estate without even knowing what they're doing.

They're going out, making bad deals, and very quickly coming to the realization that they just weren't cut out to be landlords! They just want out! And I'm happy to oblige! The RRBL's usually have about an 18 month turn around, so if I filtered for length of residence, I'd lose them.

Many of the "niche" lists (Inherited, Probate, Code Violation, Eviction....even Divorce) spend time on the Absentee list, you just don't know they're there until after the seller calls and explains their situation. Almost every property that goes through probate will be on an Absentee list also. If you filtered even 2 years time in title, you'd lose them. So even though they're unidentified, you're reaching them if you leave off the last sale date, which means you're mailing to a list that others spend hundreds of dollars to attain.

That's my reasoning. Times are changing and methods must too. I do understand that it also produces some unproductive calls, but keep in mind that the entire process is similar to looking for needles in a haystack. Ask yourself if the handful of unproductive calls is worth the exponentially higher odds of landing a deal. For me it's a definite yes.

(P.S. Another tweak, go ahead and include the trusts, definitely worth mailing to.)

@Jerry Puckett  Thank you for the explanation of why the results may be dropping, it definitely makes sense now.  Your detailed explanation has convinced me to keep "Last Market Sale" off my criteria. I certainly do not want to lose out on those potential leads in order to avoid a few more tire kickers. 

@Jerry Puckett  Great advice.

@Account Closed  If you are going to buy the list Jerry outlined. I would buy it in two batches. 

first batch is using the last sale filter to 01/01/2015

second batch don't use the filter. 

Suppress the second list against the first list so you don't buy duplicates. 

Doing so will give you a data set that may be valuable to you.

@Michael Quarles  I think your mind works differently than most, and it obviously is working for you. From your BP podcasts, I gather your business is booming!

 I would so very much appreciate a more detailed explanation of the "last sale date" filter set to 01/01/2015. 

I did a test of this on a data set (from what I could see, you have to select a range for "Last Market Sale Date" so I set the TO and FROM fields to the same day) and it came back with 0 count. Incidentally, I also ran it with today's date (2/20/15), with the same result.

Thanks!

@Jerry Puckett

Jerry thank you very much for posting this, I know it was 2 years ago but do you have any recommendations on what filters to use now. I found a software based in TX (real acquisitions) that has pretty good filters for finding distressed homes, with specific criteria like.. Divorces, (Absantee + tax problems) or (over 65 + tax problems).

I wanted to know if you have heard of this software, and if you think the records they pull are accurate?

Also, is there a way to use the filters list source provides, to find these types of distressed properties?

Thanks again!

Join the Largest Real Estate Investing Community

Basic membership is free, forever.