[quote=bearishgurl][quote=zk]…I’d be interested to hear other opinions on current market prices vs. peak prices.[/quote]
I agree with SDR that whatever “peak prices” were (during the millenium boom) has no bearing on prices today. The two periods of time are not related. And if they were related, “peak pricing” would be irrelevant as “peak pricing” was only obtained through the copious issuance of NINA mortgages to unqualified buyers.
Even though some homeowners made a (ill-gotten-but-perfectly-legal) killing off the sale of their properties between 2004 and 2006 (to the detriment of their buyers), the sold comps in this period of time should never be “studied” or used again for comparison purposes as they were all derived from “funny money.”
Peak pricing certainly happened but it wasn’t based on reality in any way, shape or form.
If you want to use past sold comps for comparison values, go back to 2002/2003 (depending on area). Homebuyers still had to traditionally qualify for their mortgages up until late 2003/early 2004.[/quote]
Whether peak pricing was based on reality or not isn’t relevant. What’s relevant, in my opinion, is the restriction on inventory due to underwater potential sellers. And if prices are back at their peak (I’m not saying they are; I’m asking if they are) then there would be very few underwater sellers. Regardless of what peak prices were “based on.” This would remove the restriction (if there is one. I think there is, but I could be wrong) on inventory caused by potential sellers who don’t want to sell if they’re underwater.
Edit: I guess they’d need what they paid (possibly peak) plus 5% or more for real estate commissions.
