|
Top
Keller Williams Ranks Highest in Customer Satisfaction
Builder Breaks Ground for Lakewood Ranch Central Park
Housing Bill OK’d with Relief on Mortgages
The Housing Crisis Is Over
How Buyers, Sellers are Closing Deals in Today’s Market
December 2007 Sales Rebound by 22.7 Percent from November
A Reality Check for Home Sellers
J.D. Power and Associates Reports:
Among Home Buyers, Keller Williams Ranks Highest in Customer Satisfaction
With Real Estate Companies
Despite Popularity of Online Home Buying and Selling Tools,
Real Estate Agents are Key to Customer Satisfaction
WESTLAKE VILLAGE, Calif.: 23 July 2008 — Keller Williams ranks highest among real estate companies in satisfying home buyers, while Prudential ranks highest in satisfying home sellers, according to the J.D. Power and Associates 2008 Home Buyer/Seller StudySM released today.
The inaugural study measures customer satisfaction of home buyers and sellers with the largest national real estate firms. Overall satisfaction is determined by examining three factors for the home-buying experience: agent (65%); office (21%); and services (13%). Four factors are examined for the home-selling experience: agent (43%); marketing (38%); office (12%); and services (7%).
In the home-buyer segment, Keller Williams achieves a score of 831 on a 1,000-point scale, and receives highest ratings from customers in all three factors. Following in the rankings are Prudential (820) and Coldwell Banker (816). Prudential performs well in the agent and office factors, while Coldwell Banker performs particularly well in the services factor.
Among home sellers, Prudential ranks highest with a score of 793 and performs particularly well in the marketing and office factors. Coldwell Banker and RE/MAX follow Prudential in the segment rankings, in a tie. Coldwell Banker performs particularly well in the marketing factor, while RE/MAX performs particularly well in the agent factor.
“When buying a home, customers particularly appreciate agent professionalism, responsiveness to calls and e-mails and the agent’s skill in locating and showing properties in the appropriate price range—all areas in which Keller Williams excels,” said Jim Howland, senior director of the real estate and construction practice at J.D. Power and Associates. “When it comes to selling a home, marketing of the home is particularly critical, although professionalism and responsiveness of the agent are still important. Both Prudential and Coldwell Banker demonstrate considerable strengths in the area of marketing.”
The study finds that despite the popularity of home-buying and -selling resources on the Internet, real estate agents are key to customer satisfaction with real estate companies. A large proportion of both home buyers and sellers rely on the Internet to facilitate the buying or selling process, with 68 percent of buyers saying that they used Internet tools to help them in the purchase process and 61 percent of sellers reporting that they used a Web site listing to market their home. In addition, among home sellers, online methods are the most important aspect of marketing. However, the agent factor carries the greatest importance among the factors that comprise overall satisfaction among both home buyers and sellers.
“Although the Internet provides home buyers and sellers with the ability to perform some essential tasks—such as listing a home for sale or researching a neighborhood in which to purchase a home—it still does not replace the importance of a good real estate agent,” said Howland. “Particularly in an uncertain real estate market, professional advice from agents can be especially valuable to buyers and sellers. The knowledge and expertise provided by experienced agents is an important benefit of using a full-service real estate company.”
The study also finds that the average time a home for sale remained on the market was slightly more than six months, although home sellers represented by the top-ranking real estate companies report that their homes were on the market for slightly less time—approximately five and a half months, on average.
“Satisfaction averages 794 among those customers whose homes sold within 5 months or less, but declines considerably to an average of 730 among customers whose homes took 7 months or longer to sell,” said Howland. “A real estate company that provides agents who are skilled at determining the appropriate market value and listing price for homes, and who can effectively market properties, can help minimize the time that clients’ homes remain on the market—which can not only save the seller money, but also diminish inconvenience and anxiety.”
Additional noteworthy study findings include the following:
- Nearly one-half of respondents (46%) report using recommendations from family or friends to find their real estate agent. Approximately 28 percent used the Internet, while 23 percent used an agent they had used previously and 11 percent used a printed real estate guide.
- On average, home buyers were shown approximately 13 homes before making a purchase.
- Home sellers report that, on average, their home was shown approximately 11 times and approximately five open houses were conducted before the sale occurred.
The 2008 Home Buyer/Seller Study includes 3,670 evaluations from 3,205 respondents who bought or sold a home between April 2007 and June 2008.
RETURN TO TOP
Builder Breaks Ground for Lakewood Ranch Central Park
By Renn Nichols
August 11, 2008
If you’ve ever been to Central Park in New York, you are sure to notice the similarity in Lakewood Ranch’s Central Park. Planned, developed, and (to be) built by Neil Communities and Lakewood Ranch Communities, Lakewood Ranch’s newest infrastructure got underway in a ground-breaking ceremony last Thursday.
The 372-acre Central Park, which is expected to take seven years to complete, would be the first Lakewood Ranch community North of State Road 70. The site plan includes 787 home sites for single-family residences and 150,000 square feet of commercial land use.
Lakewood Ranch Central Park will consist of 5 neighborhoods: Great Lawn, East Meadow, Cedar Hill, East Garden, and Conservatory Garden, all of which were inspired by areas located within New York’s Central Park. All new homes will meet Florida Green Building Standards.
Homes will vary in price, but Neal has stated, “I think they will be higher than the $144,000 homes we are currently selling, but our goal is to make them affordable for two Manatee County school teachers.” There will be 29 floor plans available, ranging up to 3,500 square feet.
The heart of Lakewood Ranch Central Park will include shaded picnic areas, a covered pavilion, a sports field for baseball and soccer, and a gazebo. The community will also be connected via a bikeway or sidewalk to Lakewood Centre, which is Schroeder-Manatee Ranch’s recently approved “town center” project, which is less than a mile south of Central Park.
Commercial space for shopping and offices will be available at the northeast and northwest corners.
RETURN TO TOP
Housing bill OK’d with relief on mortgages
Measure helps people refinance home loans
By Julie Hirschfeld Davis - ASSOCIATED PRESS
Updated: 07/27/08 7:04 AM
WASHINGTON — Congress approved mortgage relief for 400,000 struggling homeowners Saturday as part of an election-year housing plan that also aims to calm jittery financial markets and bolster the sagging economy. President Bush said he would sign it promptly, despite reservations.
The measure, regarded as the most significant housing legislation in decades, lets homeowners who cannot afford their mortgage payments refinance into more affordable government-backed loans rather than losing their homes.
It offers a temporary financial lifeline to troubled mortgage companies Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac — pillars of the home loan market whose losses have sparked investor fears — and tightens controls over the two government-sponsored businesses.
What began as a showdown between the White House and the Democratic-led Congress over how far the government should go in rescuing homeowners evolved into a bipartisan effort.
In a rare Saturday session, the Senate voted, 72-13, to send the bill to the president; the House passed it Wednesday.
New York’s Democratic senators, Charles E. Schumer and Hillary Rodham Clinton, voted for the bill.
Bush had withdrawn his veto threat earlier in the week over $3.9 billion in neighborhood grants to buy and fix foreclosed homes. He contended the money would benefit lenders who helped cause the mortgage meltdown, encouraging them to foreclose rather than work with borrowers.
“Because of the Democratic Congress’ delays and the need for action now, President Bush will sign this bill when he receives it, despite our concerns with some provisions, including nearly $4 billion to help lenders, not the homeowners this legislation is intended to serve,” said Tony Fratto, deputy White House press secretary.
Many Republicans, particularly those from areas hit hardest by housing woes, were eager to get behind a housing rescue as they looked ahead to tough re-election contests.
Treasury Secretary Henry M. Paulson’s request for the emergency power to rescue Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac also helped push through the measure. So did the creation of a regulator with stronger reins on the government-sponsored companies, as Republicans long have sought.
Democrats won cherished priorities in the bargain: the aid for homeowners, a permanent affordable housing fund financed by Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac, and the neighborhood grants.
“This is far more than sending a bill to the president’s desk for his signature. It’s sending a message to the American people that the Congress of the United States — despite an alternative reputation — can actually get things done and can work together to achieve a good result,” said Sen. Christopher J. Dodd, D-Conn., chairman of the Senate Banking, Housing and Urban Affairs Committee.
Still, Republicans weren’t eager to celebrate. Bush was not expected to hold a White House signing ceremony, and Senate GOP leaders didn’t mention it at a news conference following the vote. In the House, more than three-quarters of Republicans voted against the bill.
The legislation takes several approaches to curing the ailing housing market.
It aims to spare an estimated 400,000 debt-strapped homeowners, many of whom owe more than their houses are worth, from foreclosure by allowing them to get more affordable mortgages backed by the Federal Housing Administration.
The FHA could insure $300 billion in such mortgages, which would be available to homeowners who showed they could afford a new loan. Banks would first have to agree to take a large loss on the existing loans in exchange for avoiding an often- costly foreclosure.
To free up safer and more affordable mortgage credit, the bill permanently would increase to $625,000 the size of home loans that Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac can buy and the FHA can insure. They also could buy and back mortgages 15 percent higher than the median home price in certain areas.
The measure tries to prevent blight in areas hardest hit by the housing crisis, where waves of foreclosures have left properties sitting abandoned, dragging down values and ruining neighborhoods. It sends $3.9 billion to such neighborhoods to buy and fix up foreclosed properties.
The Treasury Department gains unlimited power, until the end of 2009, to lend money to Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac or buy their stock should they need it. The Federal Reserve takes on a new “consultative” role overseeing the companies.
RETURN TO TOP
The Housing Crisis Is Over
By CYRIL MOULLE-BERTEAUX
May 6, 2008
The dire headlines coming fast and furious in the financial and popular press suggest that the housing crisis is intensifying. Yet it is very likely that April 2008 will mark the bottom of the U.S. housing market. Yes, the housing market is bottoming right now.
How can this be? For starters, a bottom does not mean that prices are about to return to the heady days of 2005. That probably won't happen for another 15 years. It just means that the trend is no longer getting worse, which is the critical factor.
Most people forget that the current housing bust is nearly three years old. Home sales peaked in July 2005. New home sales are down a staggering 63% from peak levels of 1.4 million. Housing starts have fallen more than 50% and, adjusted for population growth, are back to the trough levels of 1982.
Furthermore, residential construction is close to 15-year lows at 3.8% of GDP; by the fourth quarter of this year, it will probably hit the lowest level ever. So what's going to stop the housing decline? Very simply, the same thing that caused the bust: affordability.
The boom made housing unaffordable for many American families, especially first-time home buyers. During the 1990s and early 2000s, it took 19% of average monthly income to service a conforming mortgage on the average home purchased. By 2005 and 2006, it was absorbing 25% of monthly income. For first time buyers, it went from 29% of income to 37%. That just proved to be too much.
Prices got so high that people who intended to actually live in the houses they purchased (as opposed to speculators) stopped buying. This caused the bubble to burst.
Since then, house prices have fallen 10%-15%, while incomes have kept growing (albeit more slowly recently) and mortgage rates have come down 70 basis points from their highs. As a result, it now takes 19% of monthly income for the average home buyer, and 31% of monthly income for the first-time home buyer, to purchase a house. In other words, homes on average are back to being as affordable as during the best of times in the 1990s. Numerous households that had been priced out of the market can now afford to get in.
The next question is: Even if home sales pick up, how can home prices stop falling with so many houses vacant and unsold? The flip but true answer: because they always do.
In the past five major housing market corrections (and there were some big ones, such as in the early 1980s when home sales also fell by 50%-60% and prices fell 12%-15% in real terms), every time home sales bottomed, the pace of house-price declines halved within one or two months.
The explanation is that by the time home sales stop declining, inventories of unsold homes have usually already started falling in absolute terms and begin to peak out in "months of supply" terms. That's the case right now: New home inventories peaked at 598,000 homes in July 2006, and stand at 482,000 homes as of the end of March. This inventory is equivalent to 11 months of supply, a 25-year high – but it is similar to 1974, 1982 and 1991 levels, which saw a subsequent slowing in home-price declines within the next six months.
Inventories are declining because construction activity has been falling for such a long time that home completions are now just about undershooting new home sales. In a few months, completions of new homes for sale could be undershooting new home sales by 50,000-100,000 annually.
Inventories will drop even faster to 400,000 – or seven months of supply – by the end of 2008. This shift in inventories will have a significant impact on prices, although house prices won't stop falling entirely until inventories reach five months of supply sometime in 2009. A five-month supply has historically signaled tightness in the housing market.
Many pundits claim that house prices need to fall another 30% to bring them back in line with where they've been historically. This is usually based on an analysis of house prices adjusted for inflation: Real house prices are 30% above their 40-year, inflation-adjusted average, so they must fall 30%. This simplistic analysis is appealing on the surface, but is flawed for a variety of reasons.
Most importantly, it neglects the fact that a great majority of Americans buy their houses with mortgages. And if one buys a house with a mortgage, the most important factor in deciding what to pay for the house is how much of one's income is required to be able to make the mortgage payments on the house. Today the rate on a 30-year, fixed-rate mortgage is 5.7%. Back in 1981, the rate hit 18.5%. Comparing today's house prices to the 1970s or 1980s, when mortgage rates were stratospheric, is misguided and misleading.
This is all good news for the broader economy. The housing bust has been subtracting a full percentage point from GDP for almost two years now, which is very large for a sector that represents less than 5% of economic activity.
When the rate of house-price declines halves, there will be a wholesale shift in markets' perceptions. All of a sudden, the expected value of the collateral (i.e. houses) for much of the lending that went on for the past decade will change. Right now, when valuing the collateral, market participants including banks are extrapolating the current pace of house price declines for another two to three years; this has a significant impact on the amount of delinquencies, foreclosures and credit losses that lenders are expected to face.
More home sales and smaller price declines means fewer homeowners will be underwater on their mortgages. They will thus have less incentive to walk away and opt for foreclosure.
A milder house-price decline scenario could lead to increases in the market value of a lot of the securitized mortgages that have been responsible for $300 billion of write-downs in the past year. Even if write-backs do not occur, stabilizing collateral values will have a huge impact on the markets' perception of risk related to housing, the financial system, and the economy.
We are of course experiencing a serious housing bust, with serious economic consequences that are still unfolding. The odds are that the reverberations will lead to subtrend growth for a couple of years. Nonetheless, housing led us into this credit crisis and this recession. It is likely to lead us out. And that process is underway, right now.
Mr. Moulle-Berteaux is managing partner of Traxis Partners LP, a hedge fund firm based in New York.
RETURN TO TOP
How Buyers, Sellers are Closing Deals in Today's Market
Being flexible is the name of the game
April 07, 2008 09:25 AM
By Dian Hymer
Inman News
Negotiation is back in style, and is likely to remain a necessary part of buying or selling a home in today's beleaguered residential housing market. Other key elements to a satisfactory closing are flexibility, perseverance, creativity and diligence.
Needless to say, you need to work with the best real estate professionals you can find in your area. In most cases, it takes a team effort to put a home-sale transaction together and see it through to fruition.
HOUSE HUNTING TIP: Successful negotiations usually require give and take by both parties. It has been said that the sign of a successful negotiation is one where both parties walk away feeling they have won. It has also been said that the key to a mutually acceptable agreement is that both sides feel a little wounded.
A must in this market is a commitment to exhaust all possible ways to put and keep a deal together before calling it quits. Recently, it looked like a purchase contract was about to fall apart. The buyers had originally offered a price that seemed insultingly low to the seller.
The seller set his personal feelings about the price aside and countered the buyers' offer at a price he felt was reasonable. The buyers accepted. As it turned out, the price was one that was halfway between the seller's list price and the price the buyers offered. Splitting the difference is often a winning strategy.
The house in question had been well inspected before the buyers entered into contract to buy it. However, when it came time for the buyers to remove their inspection contingency, they requested a large monetary credit from the seller. Not only did the buyers discover a few health and safety issues that weren't covered in the previous reports, they also developed a serious case of cold feet.
These buyers were able to find jumbo financing at a good interest rate. However, to obtain this financing, they had to make a larger cash down payment than anticipated. This left them feeling cash-strapped.
The seller refused to credit the buyers the amount of money they requested. However, he was willing to credit some money. Or, he would carry a second mortgage for the buyers so that they didn't have to put so much cash down.
Flexibility gives the parties to a negotiation a way to explore options for making a deal or for keeping one moving forward. In order for the buyers in this case to feel comfortable closing the sale, they needed a concession from the seller in order to ease their financial strain. By offering to carry a second mortgage against the property, the seller found a way to free up more cash for the buyer.
As it turned out, the buyers elected not to take the seller-financing offer and accepted a monetary credit at closing.
Credits at closing require approval by the buyers' lender. Most lenders have limits on how much money a seller can credit a buyer at closing. It is often equal to 3 percent of the purchase price, but cannot exceed the actual amount of the buyers' nonrecurring closing costs. These are costs paid for the buyers on a one-time-only basis at closing, such as title insurance or a transfer tax.
A seller carry-back would also need lender approval. The lender in first position would want to ensure that the terms of the second mortgage were reasonable and would not be likely to put the buyers in financial jeopardy.
THE CLOSING: Sellers should carefully consider whether it makes good financial sense to carry financing for a buyer who is making a relatively small cash down payment.
Dian Hymer is author of "House Hunting, The Take-Along Workbook for Home Buyers" and "Starting Out, The Complete Home Buyer's Guide," Chronicle Books.
RETURN TO TOP
December 2007 Sales Rebound By 22.7 Percent From November
Total unit sales in the local real estate market for December 2007 were up considerably over November 2007 as the buyer's market began to gain strength with the arrival of the seasonal population. Sales figures for December 2007 also mirrored December 2006 totals.
The dramatic improvement came in total sales comparing November 2007 to December 2007, which saw a 22.7 percent improvement (347 up to 426). There were 426 closed transactions recorded in the Sarasota MLS in December 2007 - 280 single family homes; and 146 condominiums. This compares to 440 sales in December 2006 (294 homes, and 146 condos).
In addition, the overall 2007 unit sales (combined single family homes and condominiums) were down only 5.8 percent from 2006 totals, compared to an overall state sales drop off of almost 30 percent. There were 6,113 sales of homes and condominiums recorded in 2007 by local agents, compared to 6,491 sales in 2006. The condominium market actually fared better in 2007 than in 2006, with sales up 4.6 percent
(2,166 compared to 2,070). Single family home sales slipped from 4,421 down to 3,947.
Historically, even with the real estate downturn, this places 2007 unit sales as the seventh highest on record based upon tabulations from the Sarasota MLS system. Sales didn't climb above the 6,000 level until the year 2000, and this decade saw an historic sales boom from 2003-05.
The overall sales volume in 2007 stood at $2.94 billion, compared to $3.19 billion in 2006. Even considering the extraordinary boom years of 2003-05, and the recent drop in sales prices, the overall property sales volume in 2007 still ranks as the fifth highest year on record for the Sarasota market.
For the year 2007, the median condominium sales price actually went up by 7 percent, from $314,000 in 2006 to $336,250 in 2007. The 2007 figure represents the highest median condominium sales price for a full year on record for the Sarasota MLS. Condominium sales were also up for the full year (2,166 in 2007, compared to 2,070 in 2006).
For the full year, the median price for single family homes dropped from $341,000 to $303,000 (11 percent), and sales fell from 4,421 in 2006 to 3,947 in 2007 (10.7 percent). This reflects the overall weakness in the single family home market across the state and nation, and tended to pull down the overall local market. But once again, the drop has not been nearly as much as the drop seen statewide during 2007, when sales declined more than 20 percent for several months in succession.
"December's sales figures were definitely encouraging as we enter our busiest sales season," said Helen Sosso, 2008 SAR President. "There was even more dramatic news at the beginning of 2008, when the average 30-year fixed interest rate dropped to a three-year low, and the Federal Reserve lowered the key interest rate by .75 percent, to 3.5 percent. This bodes well for the first quarter in terms of the buyers' ability to get a good, low interest home loan. And it makes our current buyer's market even more enticing."
Corrected prices in every segment of the market add up to incredible buying opportunities in 2008, Helen noted. Well-priced homes in resort-style destinations are always in demand, and there are many other factors that continue to make Sarasota a great choice for potential home buyers - the affordable cost of living, tremendous natural beauty, great education system, fabulous restaurants, recreational and cultural opportunities, safe and clean environment, and world-class health care.
The National Association of Realtors® news release on Jan. 24 acknowledged the positive sales figures in the Sarasota market.
"Many local areas continue to have healthy or improving local housing markets," noted NAR President Richard Gaylord. "For example, we saw higher home sales last month in diverse areas such as San Antonio; Syracuse; Springfield, Ill.; and Sarasota, Fla. If you're thinking about getting into the market as a buyer or a seller, consult a Realtor® to learn about conditions in your area - they may be considerably different from the composite national picture."
Sarasota Association of REALTORS® RETURN TO TOP
September 23, 2007
Economic View
A Reality Check for Home Sellers
By AUSTAN GOOLSBEE
ECONOMISTS and other humans don’t always see eye to eye. “Economists tend to think people are crazy because they won’t sell their houses for less than they paid for them — and people think economists are crazy for thinking things exactly like that,” said Professor Christopher Mayer, director of the Paul Milstein Center for Real Estate at Columbia Business School and an authority on real estate economics.
With house prices falling in many markets around the nation, this particular quirk of the human psyche might end up costing the economy a great deal, Professor Mayer says.
Classical economics can’t explain this behavior. That’s because people who refuse to sell their houses for less than they paid for them are violating a cardinal rule of the market: stuff is worth what it’s worth. It doesn’t matter what you paid for it. But when Professor Mayer and his co-author, David Genesove, a professor of economics at the Hebrew University in Jerusalem, studied the Boston condominium market in the 1990s — scene of one of the biggest real estate busts in recent American memory — the actual patterns of human behavior did not seem to follow the standard rules at all.
From 1989 to 1992, prices in Boston fell sharply, with condominium prices dropping as much as 40 percent. For a great many of those who bought condominiums during that period, selling could be done only at a significant loss. And, basically, many people refused to sell.
Their study, “Loss Aversion and Seller Behavior: Evidence From the Housing Market,” appeared in The Quarterly Journal of Economics in November 2001. The professors gathered data on almost 6,000 Boston condominium listings from 1991 to 1997 and showed that for essentially identical condominiums, people who had bought at the peak and were facing a loss generally listed their properties for significantly more than those who had bought at a time when prices were lower.
Properties listed above the market price just sat there. In the Boston market over all, sellers listed their properties for an average of 35 percent above the expected sale price, and less than 30 percent of the properties sold in fewer than 180 days. In other words, much of the market went into a deep freeze as many people held out for market prices that no one would reasonably pay.
In classical economics, that’s not supposed to happen, but the episode did comport with the behavioral economics theory of loss aversion: people have a visceral — some might say “irrational” — hatred of losing money. They try to avoid doing so, even when it goes against their own best interests.
Move ahead to September 2007. Many regions may be starting down a path like that of Boston’s market freeze of the 1990s. Wherever prices decline, look for lots of sellers holding out for unrealistic prices in a vain attempt to recoup their losses. It’s a hang-up that people have, and it can cause big problems. A number of houses with high prices just sit on the market while everyone waits.
One source of difficulty arises from a basic fact of real estate economics: about half of home purchases are by people moving within a metropolitan area. If sellers can’t sell their houses because they want too much for them, they also can’t become buyers of new homes.
“The buyers and the sellers are the same people in this market,” Professor Mayer said. “So if the sellers price so high that they, effectively, put themselves out of the market, it shows up on the buying side, too.”
He notes that economists at the Federal Reserve and elsewhere keep close tabs on this kind of behavior because the purchases of durable goods like furniture, appliances and televisions tend to run hand in hand with home purchases — and durables have a disproportionate influence on the business cycle. Further, because the freezing of the housing market makes it harder for people to move, it reduces the likelihood that they can quickly relocate for higher-paying jobs. Dysfunction in the housing market can spill over into the job market, too.
So by being hung up about whether your condominium will sell for what you paid for it, you aren’t just driving yourself crazy trying to get a buyer. You may be threatening the very performance of the economy and driving up the unemployment rate — provided that many others behave in a similar way.
What is to be done? Well, if you are holding out for an above-market price to recoup your losses, perhaps you would do well to hear the advice that Professor Mayer gives his own family members.
“If you want to sell your house then you list it at the market price and you sell it,” he said. “If you don’t really want to sell then don’t put it on the market. But don’t say you want to sell and then set the price so high that you spend the year cleaning up every morning, having people walk through your living room and look in your medicine cabinets and reject you. That’s just painful — and expensive.”
His research offers a simple lesson for everyone out there waiting for a high price to push them back into the black: Get real.
Austan Goolsbee is a professor of economics at the University of Chicago Graduate School of Business and a research fellow at the American Bar Foundation. He is advising the campaign of Senator Barack Obama' of Illinois for the Democratic presidential nomination. E-mail: goolsbee@nytimes.com.
RETURN TO TOP
|
