[quote=nhamlin]I am a real estate investor in San Diego and have given a great deal of thought to buying a place in the mountains.
If you calculate the annual cost of maintaining a nice home and divide by the number of days of use, you will often find it more expensive than the staying at the Waldorf with hot and coldf running blodes. Ever wonder why resort areas have more real estate offices than service stations?
You can reduce the costs by renting it out but when you go there, you are now staying in a rental.
My attitudes were formed when 40 year old beat up 2 BR 2 BA condos at Mammoth were selling for well over $300K. Things would look a lot better with current pricing. Things would also look better for someone who plans to eventually retire there.
It sounds like you can well afford to take the plunge. I think you might have regrets if you don’t. As for the bad financial new; the time to buy is when blood is running in the streets. I doubt that there is a lot more bad news coming down the road for Mammoth.[/quote]
Sadly, I think you may be right, nhamlin. For those that want to retire into a part-time “ski-bum,” such as myself, the time to act is when hardly anyone is interested in buying.
The TOT tax is currently 13% at Mammoth Lakes and that is 69% of their general fund revenue. All they would have to do is raise their TOT tax to 15% and they could potentially crawl out of this judgment hole in a VERY few years, IMHO.
The masses wouldn’t care. What’s 2% more?? It is a destination ski resort due to its remote location and there is only ONE Mammoth Mtn.
Unlike Colo ski resorts, it is in the VERY high desert with a straight, fun nearly treeless face and there is nowhere else like it in the country and probably the world. It is what it is.
Even though I thought I would prefer Lake Tahoe, I REALLY like skiing at Mammoth Mtn and will investigate Mammoth Lakes RE further. My time frame for “retirement” is 17-23 months. I could potentially substantially improve a property AFTER I decided to occupy it myself.
