The need for sellers to accept contingency offers is quickly becoming a frustrating issue in the Triangle. Because sellers usually need to find a home to buy, and because of the growing shortage of houses for them TO buy, we’re facing a new, huge challenge. Buyers know how hard it is to find a home to buy in general, but SELLERS cannot compete with buyers who do not have a contingency, once their home is under contract. But think about this: If sellers know they have a double challenge (selling their home and finding one to move to) AND they know agents will not advocate for them in presenting (and getting accepted) contingency offers, then we can expect a big drop in listings. There you have it: My prediction. With the existing shortage of housing, if people stop listing, we’re in for a terrible situation. Agents need to become familiar with contingency offers and stop viewing them as bad. If a seller needs to make a contingency offer in order to have a shot at a place to move TO when they sell, then this puts the owner of the DESIRED home in an even stronger selling position. They can ask for full list price, high due diligence, and pretty much anything else they want, just for accepting a contingency offer. They might have to make one more house payment than planned, but they can also get that payment in due diligence if they play their cards right. Contingency offers are not the devil and they are growing…GROWING…in popularity and need. But both agents need to be able to have a frank discussion about the likelihood of two successful transactions and work towards facilitating a win-win situation. I remember writing blog entries, appealing to buyers to be sensible about their position of power during the market crash. So many buyers lost perspective and put sellers in heart wrenching positions because they had the upper hand. I hope our sellers now, when it’s their turn to hold all the cards, will keep their perspective as well. And agents, think about these contingency offers. They may work to your sellers’ advantage, if you negotiate well.
I watched a recently added documentary about the Trade Center and of, obviously, 9/11. I’ve watched many documentaries and news stories, of course, through the years, and every single time, I cry, even after all this time. This documentary was called 9/11 Explosive Evidence-Experts Speak Out. If you haven’t seen it, watch it. It’s on Amazon. I was enthralled, because these were educated, experienced scientists from specific backgrounds, people with centuries of experience, collectively. These were people you want to listen to.
I am a scientist at heart: That’s how my brain is wired, that’s part of my education, and where I spent the lion’s share of my corporate life. Science. In general, I like to know why. Why anything, why everything. I am naturally curious and I just like to know why things happen the way they do. This is the one and only reason I’d like to live another century: To learn more stuff. In the case of our national tragedy, I allowed emotion to overtake my logical side, and I just believed what I was told. That was a mistake.
After having watched many documentaries, I have finally had to face cold, hard facts of science, which clearly indicate that jets did not bring down THREE world trade center buildings: Explosives did. Now wait. Stay with me here. I am not a wacko conspiracy theorist and I do not believe our government is responsible for the deaths of thousands of American civilians. But I do believe, because the science cannot be denied, that explosives were involved in the collapse of the North and South towers, and building 7. You don’t have to believe me; look at the electron microscope images and x-ray spectra! I worked with SEM and x-ray micro-analysis for years. I know what I’m looking at. Then watch building 7 fall. Watch the penthouse go over and down first, INTO the building, and then watch the building collapse into free fall (impossible if it was due to a fire related collapse) onto its own footprint. NIST said the collapse started on the lower left front of the building. If that was true, the building would have fallen forward and to the left. No. That building fell due to CONTROLLED DEMOLITION. That, in and of itself, is the “smoking gun” as one interviewee said. I agreed, and nearly shouted with shock.
Many of the speakers in this documentary were engineers and architects, civil engineers, physicists, chemists, materials specialists, explosives experts, and my favorites, electron microscope analysts. Clearly, there is a mountain of evidence that there were explosives (Thermite) involved, to the extent that pretty much any sample of dust or paint you can find, has microscopic bits of evidence pointing to thermite. But beyond that, fundamental physical FACTS, if presented in a logical way, certainly show that the planes were “red herrings”. They were there to create a huge distraction from the truth, which was that these buildings were demolished, in a controlled and well thought out manner. They fell because a team of people, over some period of time, planted explosives in those buildings (and maybe others) and detonated them when the planes hit the buildings…except building 7, which “collapsed” later. If you watch this documentary, you will see these buildings’ collapses in a way you haven’t seen before, think about it in a way you haven’t thought about it before. And as for building 7, well there’s a reason we didn’t see much about THAT in the news: There was no red herring, no jet flying into the building. There was just a blatant planned demolition! NIST actually stated that building 7 collapsed because of burning office furniture and interior structures. ARE YOU KIDDING ME? Last time I checked, a fire like that doesn’t burn at 2700 degrees. And if it DID, no way the steel would melt, all of it, at exactly the same rate, allowing the building to free fall into its own footprint. Not possible. Work with me now: The parts of the building farthest away from the fires would fall intact, last. Didn’t happen.
What disturbs me most about this path to the truth for me is this: Most of the PhDs insinuate that there are TWO stories: 1) that we have been fed a line by our government that is NOT the truth; so therefore 2) the government must be the ones who did the deed. That’s hogwash. Wouldn’t you want to believe that these talking heads would at least entertain the POSSIBILITY that we WERE lied to, and that there is a DIFFERENT possibility? This is called “groupthink” folks, when one “good” idea is put forth and everyone jumps on that bandwagon, at the expense of the “best” idea, which is left unfound and unexamined. Happens all the time. And you can bet your booty that the government spin doctors know people have narrow lenses. They know people won’t THINK. Let this be a lesson to you: PhD’s don’t alway know everything. While you’re at it, remember this lesson: Don’t stop at the first idea. Keep digging. The best idea probably hasn’t been found yet.
Consider this: I believe that the government DID feed us a line of untruths, aided by NIST (National Institute of Standards and Technology) and others, BECAUSE they knew we couldn’t handle the real truth. In my opinion, that’s why the powers that be were so quick to remove evidence before it could be thoroughly examined. Listen, there HAD to be HUNDREDS of experts who knew, beyond a SHADOW of a doubt, that those buildings were BLOWN UP. People HEARD the explosions. I can imagine some of the demolition experts hearing those sounds and RUNNING to phones. Running.
We can debate about what happened afterward all decade and never figure that out, but I believe that the ‘government’ decided Americans couldn’t handle the truth: That there are explosives experts who can come into downtown Manhattan and bring down your safe building in seconds, without you even knowing they were there. Then they can leave, and plan their next ‘event’. Wouldn’t that shake our world more than air travel? We think we’re safe because of all of these new procedures at airports. Yes, they are needed. But what about your workplace?
Perhaps the government used this story, the one about the planes dropping the buildings, as a reason for us to jump on board with war. Either way, countries that seek to destroy our nation, to kill us, need to be stopped. Do we fight back because of planes, or do we fight back because of explosive experts? War is war. Doesn’t matter. What does matter is that Americans now feel we have some level of control of our destiny, some amount of “safety” because we get patted down before we fly. Well, nobody’s patting down anybody in high rise buildings. And there goes, my friends, our safety. And maybe that is why (idea THREE) 1) the government lied to us; and 2) they were NOT involved.
Imagine that: Another possibility.
Remember that in 1993, there was an attempt to bring down the world trade center with explosives. Remember that? I called that “practice” when it happened. And I said, “You watch. They will get it right”. And they did. When nobody was looking, they did. I don’t have a PhD and I could see that coming. I said, “Give them 10 more years”. It took them 11. Again, no PhD.
We have been told that 19 Fundamentalist Muslims brought down the twin towers and building 7. I’m here to say that those 19 men were the red herrings, the ones sent to distract attention from the REAL terrorist teams, who got into three of the largest buildings in our country, planted explosives, and demolished those buildings in controlled explosions, dropping them in seconds, killing thousands, and terrorizing a nation. Imagine if you dare, how frightening THAT scenario is. And, if I’m right, they GOT AWAY WITH IT. Or did they?
In this documentary, there are lots of government experts, talking (on video in the aftermath of the event). Now, you get to listen to their line, compared to the science that has been done in the last 16 years, and compare them. I felt like I’d been punched in the gut. And I cried. The “official” story about how materials behave in certain conditions was an outright fairy tale. You can’t change the laws of physics. And for the first time, these laws, and analyst experts about them, present their results. Irrefutable. AND they state the laws about which they pontificate. Just in case you were wondering. Great stuff.
I believe there actually was a “true” investigation. I believe our government knows the absolute truth about 9/11 and I think they knew it FAST. And when the PhDs say that Americans need to know the truth? I’m not so sure. Think about how frightening the truth is if I’m right…and I’d bet a big chunk of money that I am.
The majority of Americans don’t fly every day, but a majority DO go into big buildings every day, and imagine if any/every one of those buildings could drop within its footprint in less than 10 seconds. If you think about that, you will know why we don’t want our kids and grandkids thinking about that scenario. What we were given to think about, was enough.
I guess the gist of this blog is this: I make it my JOB to try to examine multiple facets. So I watch for groupthink. And I am furious when top of the tree experts get so narrowly focused that they miss the forest for the trees. Watch the documentary and don’t believe people when they say there are two stories. There are ALWAYS more. And not that it matters to anybody but me, but it took a LONG time for me to really look at the elephant in the room and THINK about it, with the aid of some fine experts and a great documentary.