Or so Zillow forecasts for next year, national appreciation rate.
Kind of makes you wonder if they should have held on.
Headlines get attention about “which city has the highest appreciation”.
At this point, a healthy 5% or match inflation may be the better long term setup.
Still no idea what might trip up the market or the economy mid/longer term:
I guess if inflation really gets out of control. Then perhaps the government would need to reign in spending/borrowing some?
But is there really any pressure to do so? with the 10 year at 1.47% more or less.
It’s like we at least temporarily have negative rates.
So everyone wants to pile into real assets, thus the 11%.
I do wonder if anyone has quantified the impact of lack of buyers vs lack of sellers.
I think most analysts focus on demand side (sales volume etc).
But in some ways, it is just as important to understand wasn’t isn’t sold and what perhaps never will be (or at least in our relatively short) lifespans.
If 50% of the property in San Diego won’t hit the market in the next 20 years, what would be the implications?
Maybe the Zillow forecast people only believed “it was transitory”.
[quote=Escoguy]Or so Zillow forecasts for next year, national appreciation rate.
Kind of makes you wonder if they should have held on.
[/quote]
It does make one wonder if Zillow knows anything at all. They have access to mountains of data, but can they draw any better conclusions than the rest of us? If they were predicting 11% higher prices, then why did they bail on so many homes this year as you allude to?
Remember a few years back when the press was telling us the younger generations were perfectly happy with downtown condos and therefore suburbia was going to deteriorate? I didn’t believe it then and it sure appears that as I thought – as soon as they start having kids, they want their nest with a yard. And that’s exactly what I’m seeing happen all over California. At least in the families I have insight into.
.
