But the situation has more to do with chronology than geography. 2003 should have been the peak of the last cycle had it not been extended through creative financing.

I have someone very close to me who bought in Pt. Loma at the same time you did and paid almost the exact same amount. They have also made every payment and have nothing to show for it at the moment, like you. They are actually in a worse off situation as the going rent is about 1100 to 1200 with 300 in hoa fees. Like many folks they have a relatively high interest rate and cannot refi because of the negative equity, and have an I/O that will be resetting. You are in a fixed loan, have stable employment, the lack of appreciation is all you have to contend with. So is it the location, or the timing? Granted it’s a 1 br condo, but it is what 270ish bought you in 2003 in pt. loma. Their ony hope is to refi to current rates and convert to a fixed. They never intended on making a profit. Of course in 2008 they could have bought two townhomes in temecula for that price and rented one for 1500 and lived in the other. So was it 2008 vs 2003 or san diego vs temecula. They will keep it, if their housing needs change, they can afford to keep it as a rental and just ride it out, most people are like that, their net worth on paper doesn’t bend them out of shape, my explanation did, but there’s more to life than savvy investments. Enjoy San Diego paramount, I’m not being sarcastic when I say that, this is a good place for those of us who enjoy it, it didn’t work out for you, I hope your next stop does work for you, wherever it may be. But remember, the person that said location is everything in real estate was incorrect, timing is everything. The same holds true for sex and slot machines, timing is the most important factor.