Home › Forums › Housing › 2 questions, Are short sale prices just fantasy? and Where are the fence sitters?
- This topic has 140 replies, 12 voices, and was last updated 15 years, 1 month ago by
SD Realtor.
-
AuthorPosts
-
-
February 22, 2008 at 9:19 PM #11897
-
February 22, 2008 at 9:38 PM #158009
jimmyle
ParticipantHere is a 43% loss in Mira Mesa. So 46% might not be a fantasy.
Date Price Held Return Annual
02/14/2008 $206,000 2y 7m -43% -19%
06/30/2005 $360,000 n/a – –http://www.sdlookup.com/Property-088A520F-10248_Maya_Linda_Rd_35_San_Diego_CA_92126
-
February 22, 2008 at 10:24 PM #158029
NotCranky
ParticipantThe pitfalls of short sales are many. The price is a wishing price, more dependent on how established the mechanisms for actually selling that property short . Have your agent quiz the listing agent on the topic. Ask if they can verify that the short sale has reasonable possibilities of success before spending too much time and energy on it. Has the lender approved the short sale? The price? Is there evidence of this? Are they making progress towards these goals? If not tell them express your interest but with strong language of it being non-binding, if written, and move on. Check back in a month or so. Don’t go getting pre-approval letters every month for a hopeless properties, that can hurt your credit.
Short sales can be fairly cut and dry but it is taking a while for the parties to get up to speed on them in some instances.
SDR has posted some threads on this topic, You can find them in the archives.
Here is a thread I was just looking at that discusses some important issues on the topic.
-
February 22, 2008 at 10:34 PM #158038
SD Realtor
ParticipantCouldn’t agree more Rustico. Alot of times though it sucks because the listing agent doesn’t have a clue of whether the lender will approve the short sale. In alot of cases as well, the peskiness of the listing agent will make a big difference. I have been nagging and nagging and nagging the asset manager for a short I have listed for months on in quite often. I am always nice and kiss his ass. It does indeed look like the approval will happen. However I think in alot of cases listing agents give up on the listing even when an offer is in… and they just don’t do squat.
Anyways you covered it well. For buyers I am working with on shorts, I just tell em, submit the offer, then basically put in a mental closet. Move on to other properties. Then if it happens all the better. Make enough offers and one will come through. Also not to worry about being obligated to oblige if the offer is accepted months later. You can always get out of it via any of the contingencies.
SD Realtor
-
February 22, 2008 at 10:34 PM #158330
SD Realtor
ParticipantCouldn’t agree more Rustico. Alot of times though it sucks because the listing agent doesn’t have a clue of whether the lender will approve the short sale. In alot of cases as well, the peskiness of the listing agent will make a big difference. I have been nagging and nagging and nagging the asset manager for a short I have listed for months on in quite often. I am always nice and kiss his ass. It does indeed look like the approval will happen. However I think in alot of cases listing agents give up on the listing even when an offer is in… and they just don’t do squat.
Anyways you covered it well. For buyers I am working with on shorts, I just tell em, submit the offer, then basically put in a mental closet. Move on to other properties. Then if it happens all the better. Make enough offers and one will come through. Also not to worry about being obligated to oblige if the offer is accepted months later. You can always get out of it via any of the contingencies.
SD Realtor
-
February 22, 2008 at 10:34 PM #158339
SD Realtor
ParticipantCouldn’t agree more Rustico. Alot of times though it sucks because the listing agent doesn’t have a clue of whether the lender will approve the short sale. In alot of cases as well, the peskiness of the listing agent will make a big difference. I have been nagging and nagging and nagging the asset manager for a short I have listed for months on in quite often. I am always nice and kiss his ass. It does indeed look like the approval will happen. However I think in alot of cases listing agents give up on the listing even when an offer is in… and they just don’t do squat.
Anyways you covered it well. For buyers I am working with on shorts, I just tell em, submit the offer, then basically put in a mental closet. Move on to other properties. Then if it happens all the better. Make enough offers and one will come through. Also not to worry about being obligated to oblige if the offer is accepted months later. You can always get out of it via any of the contingencies.
SD Realtor
-
February 22, 2008 at 10:34 PM #158348
SD Realtor
ParticipantCouldn’t agree more Rustico. Alot of times though it sucks because the listing agent doesn’t have a clue of whether the lender will approve the short sale. In alot of cases as well, the peskiness of the listing agent will make a big difference. I have been nagging and nagging and nagging the asset manager for a short I have listed for months on in quite often. I am always nice and kiss his ass. It does indeed look like the approval will happen. However I think in alot of cases listing agents give up on the listing even when an offer is in… and they just don’t do squat.
Anyways you covered it well. For buyers I am working with on shorts, I just tell em, submit the offer, then basically put in a mental closet. Move on to other properties. Then if it happens all the better. Make enough offers and one will come through. Also not to worry about being obligated to oblige if the offer is accepted months later. You can always get out of it via any of the contingencies.
SD Realtor
-
February 22, 2008 at 10:34 PM #158420
SD Realtor
ParticipantCouldn’t agree more Rustico. Alot of times though it sucks because the listing agent doesn’t have a clue of whether the lender will approve the short sale. In alot of cases as well, the peskiness of the listing agent will make a big difference. I have been nagging and nagging and nagging the asset manager for a short I have listed for months on in quite often. I am always nice and kiss his ass. It does indeed look like the approval will happen. However I think in alot of cases listing agents give up on the listing even when an offer is in… and they just don’t do squat.
Anyways you covered it well. For buyers I am working with on shorts, I just tell em, submit the offer, then basically put in a mental closet. Move on to other properties. Then if it happens all the better. Make enough offers and one will come through. Also not to worry about being obligated to oblige if the offer is accepted months later. You can always get out of it via any of the contingencies.
SD Realtor
-
February 22, 2008 at 10:35 PM #158044
Portlock
ParticipantI’m not a fence sitter, I’m totally on the sidelines. I’ll tell you why I’m not moving yet, although I am a bit more intrigued lately.
Bugs’ post applies to yours (Ground floor? think again). The lower priced segmented market may still depreciate into 2009, but the figures are much smaller – how badly burned could one get if you purchase at under 150k? Probably not much.
Right now I could feasibly purchase a 1 bed / 1 bath property and my total monthly PITI-HOA would equal my current rent cost. I believe this will be a buyers market for at least another 12 months conservatively, so I envision that I can purchase more square footage the longer I wait. And my supply of choices is increasing every day. And they’re upgrades over last month’s choices, in quality and location. I see no reason to pull the trigger now, comfortable and happy as a renter.
-
February 22, 2008 at 10:35 PM #158336
Portlock
ParticipantI’m not a fence sitter, I’m totally on the sidelines. I’ll tell you why I’m not moving yet, although I am a bit more intrigued lately.
Bugs’ post applies to yours (Ground floor? think again). The lower priced segmented market may still depreciate into 2009, but the figures are much smaller – how badly burned could one get if you purchase at under 150k? Probably not much.
Right now I could feasibly purchase a 1 bed / 1 bath property and my total monthly PITI-HOA would equal my current rent cost. I believe this will be a buyers market for at least another 12 months conservatively, so I envision that I can purchase more square footage the longer I wait. And my supply of choices is increasing every day. And they’re upgrades over last month’s choices, in quality and location. I see no reason to pull the trigger now, comfortable and happy as a renter.
-
February 22, 2008 at 10:35 PM #158344
Portlock
ParticipantI’m not a fence sitter, I’m totally on the sidelines. I’ll tell you why I’m not moving yet, although I am a bit more intrigued lately.
Bugs’ post applies to yours (Ground floor? think again). The lower priced segmented market may still depreciate into 2009, but the figures are much smaller – how badly burned could one get if you purchase at under 150k? Probably not much.
Right now I could feasibly purchase a 1 bed / 1 bath property and my total monthly PITI-HOA would equal my current rent cost. I believe this will be a buyers market for at least another 12 months conservatively, so I envision that I can purchase more square footage the longer I wait. And my supply of choices is increasing every day. And they’re upgrades over last month’s choices, in quality and location. I see no reason to pull the trigger now, comfortable and happy as a renter.
-
February 22, 2008 at 10:35 PM #158353
Portlock
ParticipantI’m not a fence sitter, I’m totally on the sidelines. I’ll tell you why I’m not moving yet, although I am a bit more intrigued lately.
Bugs’ post applies to yours (Ground floor? think again). The lower priced segmented market may still depreciate into 2009, but the figures are much smaller – how badly burned could one get if you purchase at under 150k? Probably not much.
Right now I could feasibly purchase a 1 bed / 1 bath property and my total monthly PITI-HOA would equal my current rent cost. I believe this will be a buyers market for at least another 12 months conservatively, so I envision that I can purchase more square footage the longer I wait. And my supply of choices is increasing every day. And they’re upgrades over last month’s choices, in quality and location. I see no reason to pull the trigger now, comfortable and happy as a renter.
-
February 22, 2008 at 10:35 PM #158425
Portlock
ParticipantI’m not a fence sitter, I’m totally on the sidelines. I’ll tell you why I’m not moving yet, although I am a bit more intrigued lately.
Bugs’ post applies to yours (Ground floor? think again). The lower priced segmented market may still depreciate into 2009, but the figures are much smaller – how badly burned could one get if you purchase at under 150k? Probably not much.
Right now I could feasibly purchase a 1 bed / 1 bath property and my total monthly PITI-HOA would equal my current rent cost. I believe this will be a buyers market for at least another 12 months conservatively, so I envision that I can purchase more square footage the longer I wait. And my supply of choices is increasing every day. And they’re upgrades over last month’s choices, in quality and location. I see no reason to pull the trigger now, comfortable and happy as a renter.
-
February 24, 2008 at 5:52 PM #159144
Anonymous
GuestForgive me if these are stupid questions but….. dont the majority of these short sales involve mortgages that had compulsory mortgage insurance? If so then isnt the bank going to foreclose and collect for $ mortage – sales price? from the insurance co? If that is so why would the bank ever accept a short sale. Is the bank just stringing the seller along to keep collecting payments? and is just going to foreclose eventually when the payments stop? or does mortgage insurance cover difference between short sale $ and full loan $ ? If the homeowner can beg-borrow-raise from family a few more payments is this just money in the bank ?
-
February 24, 2008 at 7:23 PM #159174
SD Realtor
ParticipantJosh yeah it will take awhile… just gotta sit tight… we will see what happens…
edmundwest – A vast majority of mortgages did not require mortgage insurance as they were piggybacks. That is people got a first for the first 80% of the value and a second for whatever they were short on for cash. Thus no pmi needed.
SD Realtor
-
February 24, 2008 at 7:23 PM #159467
SD Realtor
ParticipantJosh yeah it will take awhile… just gotta sit tight… we will see what happens…
edmundwest – A vast majority of mortgages did not require mortgage insurance as they were piggybacks. That is people got a first for the first 80% of the value and a second for whatever they were short on for cash. Thus no pmi needed.
SD Realtor
-
February 24, 2008 at 7:23 PM #159483
SD Realtor
ParticipantJosh yeah it will take awhile… just gotta sit tight… we will see what happens…
edmundwest – A vast majority of mortgages did not require mortgage insurance as they were piggybacks. That is people got a first for the first 80% of the value and a second for whatever they were short on for cash. Thus no pmi needed.
SD Realtor
-
February 24, 2008 at 7:23 PM #159488
SD Realtor
ParticipantJosh yeah it will take awhile… just gotta sit tight… we will see what happens…
edmundwest – A vast majority of mortgages did not require mortgage insurance as they were piggybacks. That is people got a first for the first 80% of the value and a second for whatever they were short on for cash. Thus no pmi needed.
SD Realtor
-
February 24, 2008 at 7:23 PM #159564
SD Realtor
ParticipantJosh yeah it will take awhile… just gotta sit tight… we will see what happens…
edmundwest – A vast majority of mortgages did not require mortgage insurance as they were piggybacks. That is people got a first for the first 80% of the value and a second for whatever they were short on for cash. Thus no pmi needed.
SD Realtor
-
February 24, 2008 at 5:52 PM #159440
Anonymous
GuestForgive me if these are stupid questions but….. dont the majority of these short sales involve mortgages that had compulsory mortgage insurance? If so then isnt the bank going to foreclose and collect for $ mortage – sales price? from the insurance co? If that is so why would the bank ever accept a short sale. Is the bank just stringing the seller along to keep collecting payments? and is just going to foreclose eventually when the payments stop? or does mortgage insurance cover difference between short sale $ and full loan $ ? If the homeowner can beg-borrow-raise from family a few more payments is this just money in the bank ?
-
February 24, 2008 at 5:52 PM #159455
Anonymous
GuestForgive me if these are stupid questions but….. dont the majority of these short sales involve mortgages that had compulsory mortgage insurance? If so then isnt the bank going to foreclose and collect for $ mortage – sales price? from the insurance co? If that is so why would the bank ever accept a short sale. Is the bank just stringing the seller along to keep collecting payments? and is just going to foreclose eventually when the payments stop? or does mortgage insurance cover difference between short sale $ and full loan $ ? If the homeowner can beg-borrow-raise from family a few more payments is this just money in the bank ?
-
February 24, 2008 at 5:52 PM #159459
Anonymous
GuestForgive me if these are stupid questions but….. dont the majority of these short sales involve mortgages that had compulsory mortgage insurance? If so then isnt the bank going to foreclose and collect for $ mortage – sales price? from the insurance co? If that is so why would the bank ever accept a short sale. Is the bank just stringing the seller along to keep collecting payments? and is just going to foreclose eventually when the payments stop? or does mortgage insurance cover difference between short sale $ and full loan $ ? If the homeowner can beg-borrow-raise from family a few more payments is this just money in the bank ?
-
February 24, 2008 at 5:52 PM #159531
Anonymous
GuestForgive me if these are stupid questions but….. dont the majority of these short sales involve mortgages that had compulsory mortgage insurance? If so then isnt the bank going to foreclose and collect for $ mortage – sales price? from the insurance co? If that is so why would the bank ever accept a short sale. Is the bank just stringing the seller along to keep collecting payments? and is just going to foreclose eventually when the payments stop? or does mortgage insurance cover difference between short sale $ and full loan $ ? If the homeowner can beg-borrow-raise from family a few more payments is this just money in the bank ?
-
-
February 22, 2008 at 10:24 PM #158320
NotCranky
ParticipantThe pitfalls of short sales are many. The price is a wishing price, more dependent on how established the mechanisms for actually selling that property short . Have your agent quiz the listing agent on the topic. Ask if they can verify that the short sale has reasonable possibilities of success before spending too much time and energy on it. Has the lender approved the short sale? The price? Is there evidence of this? Are they making progress towards these goals? If not tell them express your interest but with strong language of it being non-binding, if written, and move on. Check back in a month or so. Don’t go getting pre-approval letters every month for a hopeless properties, that can hurt your credit.
Short sales can be fairly cut and dry but it is taking a while for the parties to get up to speed on them in some instances.
SDR has posted some threads on this topic, You can find them in the archives.
Here is a thread I was just looking at that discusses some important issues on the topic.
-
February 22, 2008 at 10:24 PM #158329
NotCranky
ParticipantThe pitfalls of short sales are many. The price is a wishing price, more dependent on how established the mechanisms for actually selling that property short . Have your agent quiz the listing agent on the topic. Ask if they can verify that the short sale has reasonable possibilities of success before spending too much time and energy on it. Has the lender approved the short sale? The price? Is there evidence of this? Are they making progress towards these goals? If not tell them express your interest but with strong language of it being non-binding, if written, and move on. Check back in a month or so. Don’t go getting pre-approval letters every month for a hopeless properties, that can hurt your credit.
Short sales can be fairly cut and dry but it is taking a while for the parties to get up to speed on them in some instances.
SDR has posted some threads on this topic, You can find them in the archives.
Here is a thread I was just looking at that discusses some important issues on the topic.
-
February 22, 2008 at 10:24 PM #158338
NotCranky
ParticipantThe pitfalls of short sales are many. The price is a wishing price, more dependent on how established the mechanisms for actually selling that property short . Have your agent quiz the listing agent on the topic. Ask if they can verify that the short sale has reasonable possibilities of success before spending too much time and energy on it. Has the lender approved the short sale? The price? Is there evidence of this? Are they making progress towards these goals? If not tell them express your interest but with strong language of it being non-binding, if written, and move on. Check back in a month or so. Don’t go getting pre-approval letters every month for a hopeless properties, that can hurt your credit.
Short sales can be fairly cut and dry but it is taking a while for the parties to get up to speed on them in some instances.
SDR has posted some threads on this topic, You can find them in the archives.
Here is a thread I was just looking at that discusses some important issues on the topic.
-
February 22, 2008 at 10:24 PM #158410
NotCranky
ParticipantThe pitfalls of short sales are many. The price is a wishing price, more dependent on how established the mechanisms for actually selling that property short . Have your agent quiz the listing agent on the topic. Ask if they can verify that the short sale has reasonable possibilities of success before spending too much time and energy on it. Has the lender approved the short sale? The price? Is there evidence of this? Are they making progress towards these goals? If not tell them express your interest but with strong language of it being non-binding, if written, and move on. Check back in a month or so. Don’t go getting pre-approval letters every month for a hopeless properties, that can hurt your credit.
Short sales can be fairly cut and dry but it is taking a while for the parties to get up to speed on them in some instances.
SDR has posted some threads on this topic, You can find them in the archives.
Here is a thread I was just looking at that discusses some important issues on the topic.
-
-
February 22, 2008 at 9:38 PM #158299
jimmyle
ParticipantHere is a 43% loss in Mira Mesa. So 46% might not be a fantasy.
Date Price Held Return Annual
02/14/2008 $206,000 2y 7m -43% -19%
06/30/2005 $360,000 n/a – –http://www.sdlookup.com/Property-088A520F-10248_Maya_Linda_Rd_35_San_Diego_CA_92126
-
February 22, 2008 at 9:38 PM #158309
jimmyle
ParticipantHere is a 43% loss in Mira Mesa. So 46% might not be a fantasy.
Date Price Held Return Annual
02/14/2008 $206,000 2y 7m -43% -19%
06/30/2005 $360,000 n/a – –http://www.sdlookup.com/Property-088A520F-10248_Maya_Linda_Rd_35_San_Diego_CA_92126
-
February 22, 2008 at 9:38 PM #158319
jimmyle
ParticipantHere is a 43% loss in Mira Mesa. So 46% might not be a fantasy.
Date Price Held Return Annual
02/14/2008 $206,000 2y 7m -43% -19%
06/30/2005 $360,000 n/a – –http://www.sdlookup.com/Property-088A520F-10248_Maya_Linda_Rd_35_San_Diego_CA_92126
-
February 22, 2008 at 9:38 PM #158389
jimmyle
ParticipantHere is a 43% loss in Mira Mesa. So 46% might not be a fantasy.
Date Price Held Return Annual
02/14/2008 $206,000 2y 7m -43% -19%
06/30/2005 $360,000 n/a – –http://www.sdlookup.com/Property-088A520F-10248_Maya_Linda_Rd_35_San_Diego_CA_92126
-
February 22, 2008 at 10:34 PM #158014
SD Realtor
Participantcitydweller the listings are real and not a mirage. Amy Green at Prudential has alot of foreclosure listings and they are all on the MLS. Here office uses the price in the basement mentality to get alot of offers and eventually they all get bid up. I would very much imagine this is the case for the Rancho Mission listing. At 119k this is home absolutely pencils out. So my read is that this is getting bid up as we type. The Friars Rd listing as you pointed out is a short sale and it will take much longer to process. It may indeed also have offers on it already.
SD Realtor
ps – where you been rus?
-
February 22, 2008 at 10:41 PM #158048
citydweller
ParticipantThe Friars Rd listing has been listed for 30 days at $175K and just today was reduced to $149,900. Would that imply that they did not receive any offers at the $175K price?
As enticing as I find these prices, I can’t help but believe that these are just the tip of the iceberg, and that soon I will be able to pick from dozens within this price range.
-
February 23, 2008 at 12:57 AM #158080
NotCranky
Participant“The Friars Rd listing has been listed for 30 days at $175K and just today was reduced to $149,900. Would that imply that they did not receive any offers at the $175K price?”
As a short sale this is probably the real deal. The property has the NOD, which I understand is frequently a requirement for lender motivation. I think it is really anyones guess where the support takes effect for this stuff that has been pretty hard hit already. I know that many properties in the 90’s, that were bargains early on, never went below what they were purchased for including one I bought 1992. Obviously there is no sense of urgency here. If the deals don’t get better,which they might, they are not going away anytime soon either.
Hi Adam,
I have been reading… just not posting.I took the time to get some momentum on a few things.
It seems like you are having a good go of things and as usual putting out the good stuff. -
February 23, 2008 at 12:57 AM #158371
NotCranky
Participant“The Friars Rd listing has been listed for 30 days at $175K and just today was reduced to $149,900. Would that imply that they did not receive any offers at the $175K price?”
As a short sale this is probably the real deal. The property has the NOD, which I understand is frequently a requirement for lender motivation. I think it is really anyones guess where the support takes effect for this stuff that has been pretty hard hit already. I know that many properties in the 90’s, that were bargains early on, never went below what they were purchased for including one I bought 1992. Obviously there is no sense of urgency here. If the deals don’t get better,which they might, they are not going away anytime soon either.
Hi Adam,
I have been reading… just not posting.I took the time to get some momentum on a few things.
It seems like you are having a good go of things and as usual putting out the good stuff. -
February 23, 2008 at 12:57 AM #158379
NotCranky
Participant“The Friars Rd listing has been listed for 30 days at $175K and just today was reduced to $149,900. Would that imply that they did not receive any offers at the $175K price?”
As a short sale this is probably the real deal. The property has the NOD, which I understand is frequently a requirement for lender motivation. I think it is really anyones guess where the support takes effect for this stuff that has been pretty hard hit already. I know that many properties in the 90’s, that were bargains early on, never went below what they were purchased for including one I bought 1992. Obviously there is no sense of urgency here. If the deals don’t get better,which they might, they are not going away anytime soon either.
Hi Adam,
I have been reading… just not posting.I took the time to get some momentum on a few things.
It seems like you are having a good go of things and as usual putting out the good stuff. -
February 23, 2008 at 12:57 AM #158388
NotCranky
Participant“The Friars Rd listing has been listed for 30 days at $175K and just today was reduced to $149,900. Would that imply that they did not receive any offers at the $175K price?”
As a short sale this is probably the real deal. The property has the NOD, which I understand is frequently a requirement for lender motivation. I think it is really anyones guess where the support takes effect for this stuff that has been pretty hard hit already. I know that many properties in the 90’s, that were bargains early on, never went below what they were purchased for including one I bought 1992. Obviously there is no sense of urgency here. If the deals don’t get better,which they might, they are not going away anytime soon either.
Hi Adam,
I have been reading… just not posting.I took the time to get some momentum on a few things.
It seems like you are having a good go of things and as usual putting out the good stuff. -
February 23, 2008 at 12:57 AM #158460
NotCranky
Participant“The Friars Rd listing has been listed for 30 days at $175K and just today was reduced to $149,900. Would that imply that they did not receive any offers at the $175K price?”
As a short sale this is probably the real deal. The property has the NOD, which I understand is frequently a requirement for lender motivation. I think it is really anyones guess where the support takes effect for this stuff that has been pretty hard hit already. I know that many properties in the 90’s, that were bargains early on, never went below what they were purchased for including one I bought 1992. Obviously there is no sense of urgency here. If the deals don’t get better,which they might, they are not going away anytime soon either.
Hi Adam,
I have been reading… just not posting.I took the time to get some momentum on a few things.
It seems like you are having a good go of things and as usual putting out the good stuff.
-
-
February 22, 2008 at 10:41 PM #158341
citydweller
ParticipantThe Friars Rd listing has been listed for 30 days at $175K and just today was reduced to $149,900. Would that imply that they did not receive any offers at the $175K price?
As enticing as I find these prices, I can’t help but believe that these are just the tip of the iceberg, and that soon I will be able to pick from dozens within this price range.
-
February 22, 2008 at 10:41 PM #158349
citydweller
ParticipantThe Friars Rd listing has been listed for 30 days at $175K and just today was reduced to $149,900. Would that imply that they did not receive any offers at the $175K price?
As enticing as I find these prices, I can’t help but believe that these are just the tip of the iceberg, and that soon I will be able to pick from dozens within this price range.
-
February 22, 2008 at 10:41 PM #158358
citydweller
ParticipantThe Friars Rd listing has been listed for 30 days at $175K and just today was reduced to $149,900. Would that imply that they did not receive any offers at the $175K price?
As enticing as I find these prices, I can’t help but believe that these are just the tip of the iceberg, and that soon I will be able to pick from dozens within this price range.
-
February 22, 2008 at 10:41 PM #158430
citydweller
ParticipantThe Friars Rd listing has been listed for 30 days at $175K and just today was reduced to $149,900. Would that imply that they did not receive any offers at the $175K price?
As enticing as I find these prices, I can’t help but believe that these are just the tip of the iceberg, and that soon I will be able to pick from dozens within this price range.
-
-
February 22, 2008 at 10:34 PM #158303
SD Realtor
Participantcitydweller the listings are real and not a mirage. Amy Green at Prudential has alot of foreclosure listings and they are all on the MLS. Here office uses the price in the basement mentality to get alot of offers and eventually they all get bid up. I would very much imagine this is the case for the Rancho Mission listing. At 119k this is home absolutely pencils out. So my read is that this is getting bid up as we type. The Friars Rd listing as you pointed out is a short sale and it will take much longer to process. It may indeed also have offers on it already.
SD Realtor
ps – where you been rus?
-
February 22, 2008 at 10:34 PM #158313
SD Realtor
Participantcitydweller the listings are real and not a mirage. Amy Green at Prudential has alot of foreclosure listings and they are all on the MLS. Here office uses the price in the basement mentality to get alot of offers and eventually they all get bid up. I would very much imagine this is the case for the Rancho Mission listing. At 119k this is home absolutely pencils out. So my read is that this is getting bid up as we type. The Friars Rd listing as you pointed out is a short sale and it will take much longer to process. It may indeed also have offers on it already.
SD Realtor
ps – where you been rus?
-
February 22, 2008 at 10:34 PM #158324
SD Realtor
Participantcitydweller the listings are real and not a mirage. Amy Green at Prudential has alot of foreclosure listings and they are all on the MLS. Here office uses the price in the basement mentality to get alot of offers and eventually they all get bid up. I would very much imagine this is the case for the Rancho Mission listing. At 119k this is home absolutely pencils out. So my read is that this is getting bid up as we type. The Friars Rd listing as you pointed out is a short sale and it will take much longer to process. It may indeed also have offers on it already.
SD Realtor
ps – where you been rus?
-
February 22, 2008 at 10:34 PM #158395
SD Realtor
Participantcitydweller the listings are real and not a mirage. Amy Green at Prudential has alot of foreclosure listings and they are all on the MLS. Here office uses the price in the basement mentality to get alot of offers and eventually they all get bid up. I would very much imagine this is the case for the Rancho Mission listing. At 119k this is home absolutely pencils out. So my read is that this is getting bid up as we type. The Friars Rd listing as you pointed out is a short sale and it will take much longer to process. It may indeed also have offers on it already.
SD Realtor
ps – where you been rus?
-
February 23, 2008 at 7:21 AM #158116
CAwireman
Participant“At these prices, where are all the fence sitters, waiting to jump into the market?”
CityD,
Some thoughts that come to mind.
1) Our saturation of people who wanted to own (buy a
home on credit) rose to something like 75%. Please validate my estimate. So one point is that all the people who wanted homes, bought homes.(purchase a home on credit)2) Fence sitting, is not an easy thing to accomplish. When you want an iPod in the US, you go buy one. Flat panel TV, same. Home, same. It takes discipline to fence sit, and that is not a characteristic commonly found in the US. So,
my WAG is that as a percentage, there aren’t that many fence sitters out there. And, the ones that exist, aren’t going to jump in too early.3) There are now more people who a) can’t affort a home to begin with due to the astronomically high asking prices compared to salary. b) More people are now walking around with bad credit scores, loads of debt or even a foreclosure or bankruptcy. Banks are paying attention to this now (what a concept)and not freely giving loans out to anyone who walks through the door.
4) As a fence sitter, I can tell you it can be brutal. Especially if you and your spouse don’t see eye to eye on it. (If we don’t by now honey, my friend says that we’ll never be able to buy…..). This is a tough one to negotiate, and there is also peer pressure from friends, relatives, and coworkers. We should all have enough self confidence to chart our own course, but most often, we go along with the pack.
It would be interesting to see the total US and San Diego percentages of home ownership (Owned, or purchasing on credit) for each year for the last 20 years. I believe the percentage exploded in the 2000 and an on years, largely due to loose credit rampant RE speculation. With a saturated “owner” sector, there aren’t as many people buying – they have already purchased, and are either happy or just plain stuck. Those who have purchased (loved) and lost (foreclose, short sell, etc) have a bad taste and aren’t likely to purchase again, even if they could. Bubble sitting is a difficult posture to maintain, and few can endure it, they are few and far between.
Thanks for the post CityD
HiggyBaby
-
February 23, 2008 at 9:04 AM #158158
Bugs
ParticipantI think the main thing that has caught me by surprise has been the relative ease with which these lenders have given up over the last few months. I fully expected them to put up more of a fight.
It’s clear that these portions of the market are being dominated and driven by expectations of the lenders. In addition to pricing the REOs, which set the pace for the decline, they also control the pricing on the short sales. A short sale can’t go any lower than it’s lender will allow it to go.
Right now, the REOs and shorts comprise fully 70% of a few of these markets, and I expect that trend to spread. They’re completely in the driver’s seat and everyone else is just along for the ride.
-
February 23, 2008 at 9:37 AM #158178
SD Realtor
ParticipantRus it is good to see you back. Citydweller I would agree with the others that as enticing as some of these deals seem now, patience will be rewarded. Also using the rental rate of today as a metric for your cash flow analysis may lead to problems because the rental rates may well decline as affordability increases for landlords to buy at a cheaper rate and the recession kicks in more.
SD Realtor
-
February 23, 2008 at 9:37 AM #158471
SD Realtor
ParticipantRus it is good to see you back. Citydweller I would agree with the others that as enticing as some of these deals seem now, patience will be rewarded. Also using the rental rate of today as a metric for your cash flow analysis may lead to problems because the rental rates may well decline as affordability increases for landlords to buy at a cheaper rate and the recession kicks in more.
SD Realtor
-
February 23, 2008 at 9:37 AM #158480
SD Realtor
ParticipantRus it is good to see you back. Citydweller I would agree with the others that as enticing as some of these deals seem now, patience will be rewarded. Also using the rental rate of today as a metric for your cash flow analysis may lead to problems because the rental rates may well decline as affordability increases for landlords to buy at a cheaper rate and the recession kicks in more.
SD Realtor
-
February 23, 2008 at 9:37 AM #158490
SD Realtor
ParticipantRus it is good to see you back. Citydweller I would agree with the others that as enticing as some of these deals seem now, patience will be rewarded. Also using the rental rate of today as a metric for your cash flow analysis may lead to problems because the rental rates may well decline as affordability increases for landlords to buy at a cheaper rate and the recession kicks in more.
SD Realtor
-
February 23, 2008 at 9:37 AM #158561
SD Realtor
ParticipantRus it is good to see you back. Citydweller I would agree with the others that as enticing as some of these deals seem now, patience will be rewarded. Also using the rental rate of today as a metric for your cash flow analysis may lead to problems because the rental rates may well decline as affordability increases for landlords to buy at a cheaper rate and the recession kicks in more.
SD Realtor
-
February 23, 2008 at 10:20 AM #158207
barnaby33
ParticipantWhat market is 70% REO and short sales? If its truly that bad already, dear lard, I will get my beach front condo in Del Mar in the high 300’s.
Seriously 70%? El Cajon, Ramona, Santee? Where are these totally illiquid locked up markets? Name some names Bugs.
Josh
-
February 23, 2008 at 10:31 AM #158222
SD Realtor
ParticipantJosh don’t mistake distress with affordability.
SD Realtor
-
February 23, 2008 at 11:01 AM #158237
Bugs
ParticipantThe 70% figure I used includes pendings and closed sales, but doesn’t include the probate, divorce and relocation sellers who are also compelled to sell regardless of price.
Another thing to note is that not all of the REOs and short sales are being openly marketed as such in the MLS – the only way you’d find some of them is to check their current ownership, which is very time consuming.
That’s why I haven’t surveyed that many zips, just a couple that I knew would be likely candidates. Oceanside’s 92056 and 92057 zips were at the top of my list. Some of the S/E San Diego zips, like 92139 and the southern half of 92102 were also no-brainers. I’m sure there are more, like the east side of Chula Vista and parts of Escondido and El Cajon.
-
February 23, 2008 at 11:01 AM #158530
Bugs
ParticipantThe 70% figure I used includes pendings and closed sales, but doesn’t include the probate, divorce and relocation sellers who are also compelled to sell regardless of price.
Another thing to note is that not all of the REOs and short sales are being openly marketed as such in the MLS – the only way you’d find some of them is to check their current ownership, which is very time consuming.
That’s why I haven’t surveyed that many zips, just a couple that I knew would be likely candidates. Oceanside’s 92056 and 92057 zips were at the top of my list. Some of the S/E San Diego zips, like 92139 and the southern half of 92102 were also no-brainers. I’m sure there are more, like the east side of Chula Vista and parts of Escondido and El Cajon.
-
February 23, 2008 at 11:01 AM #158539
Bugs
ParticipantThe 70% figure I used includes pendings and closed sales, but doesn’t include the probate, divorce and relocation sellers who are also compelled to sell regardless of price.
Another thing to note is that not all of the REOs and short sales are being openly marketed as such in the MLS – the only way you’d find some of them is to check their current ownership, which is very time consuming.
That’s why I haven’t surveyed that many zips, just a couple that I knew would be likely candidates. Oceanside’s 92056 and 92057 zips were at the top of my list. Some of the S/E San Diego zips, like 92139 and the southern half of 92102 were also no-brainers. I’m sure there are more, like the east side of Chula Vista and parts of Escondido and El Cajon.
-
February 23, 2008 at 11:01 AM #158547
Bugs
ParticipantThe 70% figure I used includes pendings and closed sales, but doesn’t include the probate, divorce and relocation sellers who are also compelled to sell regardless of price.
Another thing to note is that not all of the REOs and short sales are being openly marketed as such in the MLS – the only way you’d find some of them is to check their current ownership, which is very time consuming.
That’s why I haven’t surveyed that many zips, just a couple that I knew would be likely candidates. Oceanside’s 92056 and 92057 zips were at the top of my list. Some of the S/E San Diego zips, like 92139 and the southern half of 92102 were also no-brainers. I’m sure there are more, like the east side of Chula Vista and parts of Escondido and El Cajon.
-
February 23, 2008 at 11:01 AM #158620
Bugs
ParticipantThe 70% figure I used includes pendings and closed sales, but doesn’t include the probate, divorce and relocation sellers who are also compelled to sell regardless of price.
Another thing to note is that not all of the REOs and short sales are being openly marketed as such in the MLS – the only way you’d find some of them is to check their current ownership, which is very time consuming.
That’s why I haven’t surveyed that many zips, just a couple that I knew would be likely candidates. Oceanside’s 92056 and 92057 zips were at the top of my list. Some of the S/E San Diego zips, like 92139 and the southern half of 92102 were also no-brainers. I’m sure there are more, like the east side of Chula Vista and parts of Escondido and El Cajon.
-
February 23, 2008 at 11:29 AM #158247
barnaby33
ParticipantSD Realtor there is distress because of a lack of afford-ability. Ergo, distress leads to afford-ability over the long run. Ah, the circle of life.
That 70% number just seems to high even in the worst hit zip codes, for how early we are in the foreclosure cycle. I’ve never known Bugs to post anything mildly inflammatory, so taking the source into account alongside the number is alarming.
Josh
-
February 23, 2008 at 1:40 PM #158332
SD Realtor
ParticipantNot agreeing with you at all Josh. REO homes in CV on Caminito Stella and on Mesa Norte were priced over 1.4 and 1.8M respectively. The home on Mesa Norte stood firm on offers and received several offers and did not take any of them until they got one at 1.8M.
What Bugs posted most likely rings true for some areas yet you don’t really care about those areas because you would never buy there would you? Read my CV/4S monitor. My last posted showed over 40% of the 4S listings are either shorts or REO. Yet would you call those affordable? I would not yet but yeah in about 2-3 years it very well could be.
Yes distress does lead to affordability but it is all relative to the region, the demand for that region and how long that region has showed distress.
SD Realtor
-
February 23, 2008 at 2:04 PM #158352
barnaby33
ParticipantSo you cherry pick one area (one of the more desirable) to make your point, but then back track and agree me in the end, whats a boy to do?
First off San Diego will not be saved by CV and its environs. You’ll note in my original post, I asked bugs to name names on areas where this 70% figure is true. Finally distress DOES breed afford-ability; they are two sides of the same coin. If prices were lower there wouldn’t be REO’s.
I think we can all pretty safely agree that SD is not Detroit. This means that there is always a price greater than zero at which ANY property here can be sold. Now given that as my axiom, I posit the corollary if an REO exists, it does so only to the extent that it was not affordable. Thats why it became an REO. The distress happened prior to the foreclosure. Foreclosure is just a way for the bank to dictate the terms. Are you telling me that the bank kept the price the same as the seller who lost it?
All of which is really tangential since the whole point I made was that on a macro level distress breeds lower prices as lenders don’t want to hold houses and will in most cases keep cutting the price till it sells.
Rot always starts at the outside and works in. Temecula is North county later this year and central SD next year.
Josh
-
February 23, 2008 at 5:34 PM #158533
SD Realtor
ParticipantJosh I can pick plenty of REO properties that are unaffordable.
Yes distress does lead to affordability. That is not what I was disagreeing with. Yet if you think you will get your home in Del Mar at what you may deem affordable, you are mistaken. That is the point I was trying to make.
Point number 2, distress also happens when people bought homes who should not have bought homes. What is affordable to some is not affordable to others. People are defaulting on 200k condos just as well as 2M dollar homes. Distress happens moreso because of that then anything else. Now a phenomenah of people handing in their keys because the asset has depreciated so much is a different issue altogether.
My disagreement with you is not that distress doesn’t bredd lower pricing because it does as long AS THERE IS LACK OF DEMAND. However my point of disagreement is you will not find your home in Del Mar because even with distress in Del Mar and depreciation in Del Mar (which will happen by the way), unless you want to live on Mango or on Del Mar Heights, pricing will always be unrealistic based on other areas. Will it go down? Yes. Will it be affordable? Perhaps if you make a couple hundred large a year and have a nice fat down payment ready.
Sadly there are just some places in San Diego that will be unattainable for people even after the depreciation cycle. That is the point I was making.
SD Realtor
-
February 23, 2008 at 6:05 PM #158573
jpinpb
ParticipantSD Realtor – Don’t you think that many of these homes in foreclosure WERE affordable by many w/the teaser rate? It became unaffordable when the rates set. Also, we cannot dimiss entirely the rate of appreciation in a very short time was caused by so many factors. Hence, don’t you think the unjustified price increase will decrease. If you factor everything that caused the bubble, don’t you think we can expect homes to decrease and become affordable.
I think we have to speak in relative terms, of course. Will someone earning a median income be able to afford a home in RSF. Probably not. Certainly they can easily afford City Heights, but probably prefer not to. But, if their expectations are adjusted along w/the price of homes, they may be happy and be able to afford a home in a median priced neighborhood, maybe w/a little effort, an upper/median neighborhood.
-
February 23, 2008 at 6:33 PM #158578
SD Realtor
ParticipantThe homes were never affordable. Temporary affordability does not make a home affordable, it just is like putting honey on tar paper. People bought homes they could not afford thinking that they would eventually afford them because of appreciation.
I think many are missing my point. That happens to me alot because I don’t make them well.
Of course prices will go down. That goes without saying and if you ever find a post I have made out of the thousands of posts I have where I said otherwise then dinner is on me JP. Nor did I say that homes will not be affordable. However affordability for me is different then affordability for say Raptorduck who is currently looking at million dollar homes.
AFFORDABILITY IS RELATIVE.
Try as I may to buy a home in Fairbanks Ranch, I will never be able to afford it. Nor would I be stupid enough to if some pinhead broker waived a teaser rate at me. I am not that dumb. Nor will I make myself a home on the beach in Del Mar unless I win the lottery. This is true no matter how “affordable” these homes will become.
JP here is what I was arguing about…Look at what Josh wrote….
Essentially it was,
“if it is that bad, when will I get my beach condo in Del Mar.”
My answer to that is unless you make a very good living, or have a very rich uncle, the answer is never. The same is true for me.
The argument is not that higher end places will not depreciate. They will. Everything will. Please try to understand the point. Affordability varies for each region and it certainly varies for each buyer. I don’t measure affordability by anything EXCEPT WHAT I CAN AFFORD. I am a realist and know that no matter what, there are places that just will be and will always be out of my reach.
SD Realtor
-
February 24, 2008 at 8:44 AM #158837
Casca
ParticipantSD, you make your points very well, and you’re one of the reasons why this is such a great blog.
-
February 24, 2008 at 9:38 AM #158877
jpinpb
ParticipantI understand your point SD Realtor. I think I may have misunderstood and I was actually have the same thoughts, that affordability is relative.
-
February 24, 2008 at 9:38 AM #159170
jpinpb
ParticipantI understand your point SD Realtor. I think I may have misunderstood and I was actually have the same thoughts, that affordability is relative.
-
February 24, 2008 at 9:38 AM #159181
jpinpb
ParticipantI understand your point SD Realtor. I think I may have misunderstood and I was actually have the same thoughts, that affordability is relative.
-
February 24, 2008 at 9:38 AM #159187
jpinpb
ParticipantI understand your point SD Realtor. I think I may have misunderstood and I was actually have the same thoughts, that affordability is relative.
-
February 24, 2008 at 9:38 AM #159264
jpinpb
ParticipantI understand your point SD Realtor. I think I may have misunderstood and I was actually have the same thoughts, that affordability is relative.
-
February 24, 2008 at 8:44 AM #159128
Casca
ParticipantSD, you make your points very well, and you’re one of the reasons why this is such a great blog.
-
February 24, 2008 at 8:44 AM #159141
Casca
ParticipantSD, you make your points very well, and you’re one of the reasons why this is such a great blog.
-
February 24, 2008 at 8:44 AM #159147
Casca
ParticipantSD, you make your points very well, and you’re one of the reasons why this is such a great blog.
-
February 24, 2008 at 8:44 AM #159224
Casca
ParticipantSD, you make your points very well, and you’re one of the reasons why this is such a great blog.
-
February 23, 2008 at 6:33 PM #158868
SD Realtor
ParticipantThe homes were never affordable. Temporary affordability does not make a home affordable, it just is like putting honey on tar paper. People bought homes they could not afford thinking that they would eventually afford them because of appreciation.
I think many are missing my point. That happens to me alot because I don’t make them well.
Of course prices will go down. That goes without saying and if you ever find a post I have made out of the thousands of posts I have where I said otherwise then dinner is on me JP. Nor did I say that homes will not be affordable. However affordability for me is different then affordability for say Raptorduck who is currently looking at million dollar homes.
AFFORDABILITY IS RELATIVE.
Try as I may to buy a home in Fairbanks Ranch, I will never be able to afford it. Nor would I be stupid enough to if some pinhead broker waived a teaser rate at me. I am not that dumb. Nor will I make myself a home on the beach in Del Mar unless I win the lottery. This is true no matter how “affordable” these homes will become.
JP here is what I was arguing about…Look at what Josh wrote….
Essentially it was,
“if it is that bad, when will I get my beach condo in Del Mar.”
My answer to that is unless you make a very good living, or have a very rich uncle, the answer is never. The same is true for me.
The argument is not that higher end places will not depreciate. They will. Everything will. Please try to understand the point. Affordability varies for each region and it certainly varies for each buyer. I don’t measure affordability by anything EXCEPT WHAT I CAN AFFORD. I am a realist and know that no matter what, there are places that just will be and will always be out of my reach.
SD Realtor
-
February 23, 2008 at 6:33 PM #158880
SD Realtor
ParticipantThe homes were never affordable. Temporary affordability does not make a home affordable, it just is like putting honey on tar paper. People bought homes they could not afford thinking that they would eventually afford them because of appreciation.
I think many are missing my point. That happens to me alot because I don’t make them well.
Of course prices will go down. That goes without saying and if you ever find a post I have made out of the thousands of posts I have where I said otherwise then dinner is on me JP. Nor did I say that homes will not be affordable. However affordability for me is different then affordability for say Raptorduck who is currently looking at million dollar homes.
AFFORDABILITY IS RELATIVE.
Try as I may to buy a home in Fairbanks Ranch, I will never be able to afford it. Nor would I be stupid enough to if some pinhead broker waived a teaser rate at me. I am not that dumb. Nor will I make myself a home on the beach in Del Mar unless I win the lottery. This is true no matter how “affordable” these homes will become.
JP here is what I was arguing about…Look at what Josh wrote….
Essentially it was,
“if it is that bad, when will I get my beach condo in Del Mar.”
My answer to that is unless you make a very good living, or have a very rich uncle, the answer is never. The same is true for me.
The argument is not that higher end places will not depreciate. They will. Everything will. Please try to understand the point. Affordability varies for each region and it certainly varies for each buyer. I don’t measure affordability by anything EXCEPT WHAT I CAN AFFORD. I am a realist and know that no matter what, there are places that just will be and will always be out of my reach.
SD Realtor
-
February 23, 2008 at 6:33 PM #158889
SD Realtor
ParticipantThe homes were never affordable. Temporary affordability does not make a home affordable, it just is like putting honey on tar paper. People bought homes they could not afford thinking that they would eventually afford them because of appreciation.
I think many are missing my point. That happens to me alot because I don’t make them well.
Of course prices will go down. That goes without saying and if you ever find a post I have made out of the thousands of posts I have where I said otherwise then dinner is on me JP. Nor did I say that homes will not be affordable. However affordability for me is different then affordability for say Raptorduck who is currently looking at million dollar homes.
AFFORDABILITY IS RELATIVE.
Try as I may to buy a home in Fairbanks Ranch, I will never be able to afford it. Nor would I be stupid enough to if some pinhead broker waived a teaser rate at me. I am not that dumb. Nor will I make myself a home on the beach in Del Mar unless I win the lottery. This is true no matter how “affordable” these homes will become.
JP here is what I was arguing about…Look at what Josh wrote….
Essentially it was,
“if it is that bad, when will I get my beach condo in Del Mar.”
My answer to that is unless you make a very good living, or have a very rich uncle, the answer is never. The same is true for me.
The argument is not that higher end places will not depreciate. They will. Everything will. Please try to understand the point. Affordability varies for each region and it certainly varies for each buyer. I don’t measure affordability by anything EXCEPT WHAT I CAN AFFORD. I am a realist and know that no matter what, there are places that just will be and will always be out of my reach.
SD Realtor
-
February 23, 2008 at 6:33 PM #158962
SD Realtor
ParticipantThe homes were never affordable. Temporary affordability does not make a home affordable, it just is like putting honey on tar paper. People bought homes they could not afford thinking that they would eventually afford them because of appreciation.
I think many are missing my point. That happens to me alot because I don’t make them well.
Of course prices will go down. That goes without saying and if you ever find a post I have made out of the thousands of posts I have where I said otherwise then dinner is on me JP. Nor did I say that homes will not be affordable. However affordability for me is different then affordability for say Raptorduck who is currently looking at million dollar homes.
AFFORDABILITY IS RELATIVE.
Try as I may to buy a home in Fairbanks Ranch, I will never be able to afford it. Nor would I be stupid enough to if some pinhead broker waived a teaser rate at me. I am not that dumb. Nor will I make myself a home on the beach in Del Mar unless I win the lottery. This is true no matter how “affordable” these homes will become.
JP here is what I was arguing about…Look at what Josh wrote….
Essentially it was,
“if it is that bad, when will I get my beach condo in Del Mar.”
My answer to that is unless you make a very good living, or have a very rich uncle, the answer is never. The same is true for me.
The argument is not that higher end places will not depreciate. They will. Everything will. Please try to understand the point. Affordability varies for each region and it certainly varies for each buyer. I don’t measure affordability by anything EXCEPT WHAT I CAN AFFORD. I am a realist and know that no matter what, there are places that just will be and will always be out of my reach.
SD Realtor
-
February 23, 2008 at 6:05 PM #158863
jpinpb
ParticipantSD Realtor – Don’t you think that many of these homes in foreclosure WERE affordable by many w/the teaser rate? It became unaffordable when the rates set. Also, we cannot dimiss entirely the rate of appreciation in a very short time was caused by so many factors. Hence, don’t you think the unjustified price increase will decrease. If you factor everything that caused the bubble, don’t you think we can expect homes to decrease and become affordable.
I think we have to speak in relative terms, of course. Will someone earning a median income be able to afford a home in RSF. Probably not. Certainly they can easily afford City Heights, but probably prefer not to. But, if their expectations are adjusted along w/the price of homes, they may be happy and be able to afford a home in a median priced neighborhood, maybe w/a little effort, an upper/median neighborhood.
-
February 23, 2008 at 6:05 PM #158874
jpinpb
ParticipantSD Realtor – Don’t you think that many of these homes in foreclosure WERE affordable by many w/the teaser rate? It became unaffordable when the rates set. Also, we cannot dimiss entirely the rate of appreciation in a very short time was caused by so many factors. Hence, don’t you think the unjustified price increase will decrease. If you factor everything that caused the bubble, don’t you think we can expect homes to decrease and become affordable.
I think we have to speak in relative terms, of course. Will someone earning a median income be able to afford a home in RSF. Probably not. Certainly they can easily afford City Heights, but probably prefer not to. But, if their expectations are adjusted along w/the price of homes, they may be happy and be able to afford a home in a median priced neighborhood, maybe w/a little effort, an upper/median neighborhood.
-
February 23, 2008 at 6:05 PM #158884
jpinpb
ParticipantSD Realtor – Don’t you think that many of these homes in foreclosure WERE affordable by many w/the teaser rate? It became unaffordable when the rates set. Also, we cannot dimiss entirely the rate of appreciation in a very short time was caused by so many factors. Hence, don’t you think the unjustified price increase will decrease. If you factor everything that caused the bubble, don’t you think we can expect homes to decrease and become affordable.
I think we have to speak in relative terms, of course. Will someone earning a median income be able to afford a home in RSF. Probably not. Certainly they can easily afford City Heights, but probably prefer not to. But, if their expectations are adjusted along w/the price of homes, they may be happy and be able to afford a home in a median priced neighborhood, maybe w/a little effort, an upper/median neighborhood.
-
February 23, 2008 at 6:05 PM #158957
jpinpb
ParticipantSD Realtor – Don’t you think that many of these homes in foreclosure WERE affordable by many w/the teaser rate? It became unaffordable when the rates set. Also, we cannot dimiss entirely the rate of appreciation in a very short time was caused by so many factors. Hence, don’t you think the unjustified price increase will decrease. If you factor everything that caused the bubble, don’t you think we can expect homes to decrease and become affordable.
I think we have to speak in relative terms, of course. Will someone earning a median income be able to afford a home in RSF. Probably not. Certainly they can easily afford City Heights, but probably prefer not to. But, if their expectations are adjusted along w/the price of homes, they may be happy and be able to afford a home in a median priced neighborhood, maybe w/a little effort, an upper/median neighborhood.
-
February 24, 2008 at 9:56 AM #158892
barnaby33
ParticipantI’m willing to bet the guy who bought my future home in 1990 didn’t imagine he’d be selling it for LESS money 8 years later. I mean, it is in Del Mar. Some places will never be affordable.
Just so you know, it seems so patently obvious that afford-ability is relative, that I didn’t think I had to mention it. For someone with a good income, zero debt and an 80k down payment, I figure a unit in this development in the low 400’s is not unreasonable when things get bad. I could be wrong, time will tell.
Josh
-
February 24, 2008 at 9:56 AM #159184
barnaby33
ParticipantI’m willing to bet the guy who bought my future home in 1990 didn’t imagine he’d be selling it for LESS money 8 years later. I mean, it is in Del Mar. Some places will never be affordable.
Just so you know, it seems so patently obvious that afford-ability is relative, that I didn’t think I had to mention it. For someone with a good income, zero debt and an 80k down payment, I figure a unit in this development in the low 400’s is not unreasonable when things get bad. I could be wrong, time will tell.
Josh
-
February 24, 2008 at 9:56 AM #159196
barnaby33
ParticipantI’m willing to bet the guy who bought my future home in 1990 didn’t imagine he’d be selling it for LESS money 8 years later. I mean, it is in Del Mar. Some places will never be affordable.
Just so you know, it seems so patently obvious that afford-ability is relative, that I didn’t think I had to mention it. For someone with a good income, zero debt and an 80k down payment, I figure a unit in this development in the low 400’s is not unreasonable when things get bad. I could be wrong, time will tell.
Josh
-
February 24, 2008 at 9:56 AM #159202
barnaby33
ParticipantI’m willing to bet the guy who bought my future home in 1990 didn’t imagine he’d be selling it for LESS money 8 years later. I mean, it is in Del Mar. Some places will never be affordable.
Just so you know, it seems so patently obvious that afford-ability is relative, that I didn’t think I had to mention it. For someone with a good income, zero debt and an 80k down payment, I figure a unit in this development in the low 400’s is not unreasonable when things get bad. I could be wrong, time will tell.
Josh
-
February 24, 2008 at 9:56 AM #159279
barnaby33
ParticipantI’m willing to bet the guy who bought my future home in 1990 didn’t imagine he’d be selling it for LESS money 8 years later. I mean, it is in Del Mar. Some places will never be affordable.
Just so you know, it seems so patently obvious that afford-ability is relative, that I didn’t think I had to mention it. For someone with a good income, zero debt and an 80k down payment, I figure a unit in this development in the low 400’s is not unreasonable when things get bad. I could be wrong, time will tell.
Josh
-
February 23, 2008 at 5:34 PM #158823
SD Realtor
ParticipantJosh I can pick plenty of REO properties that are unaffordable.
Yes distress does lead to affordability. That is not what I was disagreeing with. Yet if you think you will get your home in Del Mar at what you may deem affordable, you are mistaken. That is the point I was trying to make.
Point number 2, distress also happens when people bought homes who should not have bought homes. What is affordable to some is not affordable to others. People are defaulting on 200k condos just as well as 2M dollar homes. Distress happens moreso because of that then anything else. Now a phenomenah of people handing in their keys because the asset has depreciated so much is a different issue altogether.
My disagreement with you is not that distress doesn’t bredd lower pricing because it does as long AS THERE IS LACK OF DEMAND. However my point of disagreement is you will not find your home in Del Mar because even with distress in Del Mar and depreciation in Del Mar (which will happen by the way), unless you want to live on Mango or on Del Mar Heights, pricing will always be unrealistic based on other areas. Will it go down? Yes. Will it be affordable? Perhaps if you make a couple hundred large a year and have a nice fat down payment ready.
Sadly there are just some places in San Diego that will be unattainable for people even after the depreciation cycle. That is the point I was making.
SD Realtor
-
February 23, 2008 at 5:34 PM #158834
SD Realtor
ParticipantJosh I can pick plenty of REO properties that are unaffordable.
Yes distress does lead to affordability. That is not what I was disagreeing with. Yet if you think you will get your home in Del Mar at what you may deem affordable, you are mistaken. That is the point I was trying to make.
Point number 2, distress also happens when people bought homes who should not have bought homes. What is affordable to some is not affordable to others. People are defaulting on 200k condos just as well as 2M dollar homes. Distress happens moreso because of that then anything else. Now a phenomenah of people handing in their keys because the asset has depreciated so much is a different issue altogether.
My disagreement with you is not that distress doesn’t bredd lower pricing because it does as long AS THERE IS LACK OF DEMAND. However my point of disagreement is you will not find your home in Del Mar because even with distress in Del Mar and depreciation in Del Mar (which will happen by the way), unless you want to live on Mango or on Del Mar Heights, pricing will always be unrealistic based on other areas. Will it go down? Yes. Will it be affordable? Perhaps if you make a couple hundred large a year and have a nice fat down payment ready.
Sadly there are just some places in San Diego that will be unattainable for people even after the depreciation cycle. That is the point I was making.
SD Realtor
-
February 23, 2008 at 5:34 PM #158844
SD Realtor
ParticipantJosh I can pick plenty of REO properties that are unaffordable.
Yes distress does lead to affordability. That is not what I was disagreeing with. Yet if you think you will get your home in Del Mar at what you may deem affordable, you are mistaken. That is the point I was trying to make.
Point number 2, distress also happens when people bought homes who should not have bought homes. What is affordable to some is not affordable to others. People are defaulting on 200k condos just as well as 2M dollar homes. Distress happens moreso because of that then anything else. Now a phenomenah of people handing in their keys because the asset has depreciated so much is a different issue altogether.
My disagreement with you is not that distress doesn’t bredd lower pricing because it does as long AS THERE IS LACK OF DEMAND. However my point of disagreement is you will not find your home in Del Mar because even with distress in Del Mar and depreciation in Del Mar (which will happen by the way), unless you want to live on Mango or on Del Mar Heights, pricing will always be unrealistic based on other areas. Will it go down? Yes. Will it be affordable? Perhaps if you make a couple hundred large a year and have a nice fat down payment ready.
Sadly there are just some places in San Diego that will be unattainable for people even after the depreciation cycle. That is the point I was making.
SD Realtor
-
February 23, 2008 at 5:34 PM #158916
SD Realtor
ParticipantJosh I can pick plenty of REO properties that are unaffordable.
Yes distress does lead to affordability. That is not what I was disagreeing with. Yet if you think you will get your home in Del Mar at what you may deem affordable, you are mistaken. That is the point I was trying to make.
Point number 2, distress also happens when people bought homes who should not have bought homes. What is affordable to some is not affordable to others. People are defaulting on 200k condos just as well as 2M dollar homes. Distress happens moreso because of that then anything else. Now a phenomenah of people handing in their keys because the asset has depreciated so much is a different issue altogether.
My disagreement with you is not that distress doesn’t bredd lower pricing because it does as long AS THERE IS LACK OF DEMAND. However my point of disagreement is you will not find your home in Del Mar because even with distress in Del Mar and depreciation in Del Mar (which will happen by the way), unless you want to live on Mango or on Del Mar Heights, pricing will always be unrealistic based on other areas. Will it go down? Yes. Will it be affordable? Perhaps if you make a couple hundred large a year and have a nice fat down payment ready.
Sadly there are just some places in San Diego that will be unattainable for people even after the depreciation cycle. That is the point I was making.
SD Realtor
-
February 23, 2008 at 2:04 PM #158645
barnaby33
ParticipantSo you cherry pick one area (one of the more desirable) to make your point, but then back track and agree me in the end, whats a boy to do?
First off San Diego will not be saved by CV and its environs. You’ll note in my original post, I asked bugs to name names on areas where this 70% figure is true. Finally distress DOES breed afford-ability; they are two sides of the same coin. If prices were lower there wouldn’t be REO’s.
I think we can all pretty safely agree that SD is not Detroit. This means that there is always a price greater than zero at which ANY property here can be sold. Now given that as my axiom, I posit the corollary if an REO exists, it does so only to the extent that it was not affordable. Thats why it became an REO. The distress happened prior to the foreclosure. Foreclosure is just a way for the bank to dictate the terms. Are you telling me that the bank kept the price the same as the seller who lost it?
All of which is really tangential since the whole point I made was that on a macro level distress breeds lower prices as lenders don’t want to hold houses and will in most cases keep cutting the price till it sells.
Rot always starts at the outside and works in. Temecula is North county later this year and central SD next year.
Josh
-
February 23, 2008 at 2:04 PM #158654
barnaby33
ParticipantSo you cherry pick one area (one of the more desirable) to make your point, but then back track and agree me in the end, whats a boy to do?
First off San Diego will not be saved by CV and its environs. You’ll note in my original post, I asked bugs to name names on areas where this 70% figure is true. Finally distress DOES breed afford-ability; they are two sides of the same coin. If prices were lower there wouldn’t be REO’s.
I think we can all pretty safely agree that SD is not Detroit. This means that there is always a price greater than zero at which ANY property here can be sold. Now given that as my axiom, I posit the corollary if an REO exists, it does so only to the extent that it was not affordable. Thats why it became an REO. The distress happened prior to the foreclosure. Foreclosure is just a way for the bank to dictate the terms. Are you telling me that the bank kept the price the same as the seller who lost it?
All of which is really tangential since the whole point I made was that on a macro level distress breeds lower prices as lenders don’t want to hold houses and will in most cases keep cutting the price till it sells.
Rot always starts at the outside and works in. Temecula is North county later this year and central SD next year.
Josh
-
February 23, 2008 at 2:04 PM #158662
barnaby33
ParticipantSo you cherry pick one area (one of the more desirable) to make your point, but then back track and agree me in the end, whats a boy to do?
First off San Diego will not be saved by CV and its environs. You’ll note in my original post, I asked bugs to name names on areas where this 70% figure is true. Finally distress DOES breed afford-ability; they are two sides of the same coin. If prices were lower there wouldn’t be REO’s.
I think we can all pretty safely agree that SD is not Detroit. This means that there is always a price greater than zero at which ANY property here can be sold. Now given that as my axiom, I posit the corollary if an REO exists, it does so only to the extent that it was not affordable. Thats why it became an REO. The distress happened prior to the foreclosure. Foreclosure is just a way for the bank to dictate the terms. Are you telling me that the bank kept the price the same as the seller who lost it?
All of which is really tangential since the whole point I made was that on a macro level distress breeds lower prices as lenders don’t want to hold houses and will in most cases keep cutting the price till it sells.
Rot always starts at the outside and works in. Temecula is North county later this year and central SD next year.
Josh
-
February 23, 2008 at 2:04 PM #158736
barnaby33
ParticipantSo you cherry pick one area (one of the more desirable) to make your point, but then back track and agree me in the end, whats a boy to do?
First off San Diego will not be saved by CV and its environs. You’ll note in my original post, I asked bugs to name names on areas where this 70% figure is true. Finally distress DOES breed afford-ability; they are two sides of the same coin. If prices were lower there wouldn’t be REO’s.
I think we can all pretty safely agree that SD is not Detroit. This means that there is always a price greater than zero at which ANY property here can be sold. Now given that as my axiom, I posit the corollary if an REO exists, it does so only to the extent that it was not affordable. Thats why it became an REO. The distress happened prior to the foreclosure. Foreclosure is just a way for the bank to dictate the terms. Are you telling me that the bank kept the price the same as the seller who lost it?
All of which is really tangential since the whole point I made was that on a macro level distress breeds lower prices as lenders don’t want to hold houses and will in most cases keep cutting the price till it sells.
Rot always starts at the outside and works in. Temecula is North county later this year and central SD next year.
Josh
-
February 23, 2008 at 1:40 PM #158625
SD Realtor
ParticipantNot agreeing with you at all Josh. REO homes in CV on Caminito Stella and on Mesa Norte were priced over 1.4 and 1.8M respectively. The home on Mesa Norte stood firm on offers and received several offers and did not take any of them until they got one at 1.8M.
What Bugs posted most likely rings true for some areas yet you don’t really care about those areas because you would never buy there would you? Read my CV/4S monitor. My last posted showed over 40% of the 4S listings are either shorts or REO. Yet would you call those affordable? I would not yet but yeah in about 2-3 years it very well could be.
Yes distress does lead to affordability but it is all relative to the region, the demand for that region and how long that region has showed distress.
SD Realtor
-
February 23, 2008 at 1:40 PM #158634
SD Realtor
ParticipantNot agreeing with you at all Josh. REO homes in CV on Caminito Stella and on Mesa Norte were priced over 1.4 and 1.8M respectively. The home on Mesa Norte stood firm on offers and received several offers and did not take any of them until they got one at 1.8M.
What Bugs posted most likely rings true for some areas yet you don’t really care about those areas because you would never buy there would you? Read my CV/4S monitor. My last posted showed over 40% of the 4S listings are either shorts or REO. Yet would you call those affordable? I would not yet but yeah in about 2-3 years it very well could be.
Yes distress does lead to affordability but it is all relative to the region, the demand for that region and how long that region has showed distress.
SD Realtor
-
February 23, 2008 at 1:40 PM #158642
SD Realtor
ParticipantNot agreeing with you at all Josh. REO homes in CV on Caminito Stella and on Mesa Norte were priced over 1.4 and 1.8M respectively. The home on Mesa Norte stood firm on offers and received several offers and did not take any of them until they got one at 1.8M.
What Bugs posted most likely rings true for some areas yet you don’t really care about those areas because you would never buy there would you? Read my CV/4S monitor. My last posted showed over 40% of the 4S listings are either shorts or REO. Yet would you call those affordable? I would not yet but yeah in about 2-3 years it very well could be.
Yes distress does lead to affordability but it is all relative to the region, the demand for that region and how long that region has showed distress.
SD Realtor
-
February 23, 2008 at 1:40 PM #158716
SD Realtor
ParticipantNot agreeing with you at all Josh. REO homes in CV on Caminito Stella and on Mesa Norte were priced over 1.4 and 1.8M respectively. The home on Mesa Norte stood firm on offers and received several offers and did not take any of them until they got one at 1.8M.
What Bugs posted most likely rings true for some areas yet you don’t really care about those areas because you would never buy there would you? Read my CV/4S monitor. My last posted showed over 40% of the 4S listings are either shorts or REO. Yet would you call those affordable? I would not yet but yeah in about 2-3 years it very well could be.
Yes distress does lead to affordability but it is all relative to the region, the demand for that region and how long that region has showed distress.
SD Realtor
-
February 23, 2008 at 11:29 AM #158540
barnaby33
ParticipantSD Realtor there is distress because of a lack of afford-ability. Ergo, distress leads to afford-ability over the long run. Ah, the circle of life.
That 70% number just seems to high even in the worst hit zip codes, for how early we are in the foreclosure cycle. I’ve never known Bugs to post anything mildly inflammatory, so taking the source into account alongside the number is alarming.
Josh
-
February 23, 2008 at 11:29 AM #158549
barnaby33
ParticipantSD Realtor there is distress because of a lack of afford-ability. Ergo, distress leads to afford-ability over the long run. Ah, the circle of life.
That 70% number just seems to high even in the worst hit zip codes, for how early we are in the foreclosure cycle. I’ve never known Bugs to post anything mildly inflammatory, so taking the source into account alongside the number is alarming.
Josh
-
February 23, 2008 at 11:29 AM #158557
barnaby33
ParticipantSD Realtor there is distress because of a lack of afford-ability. Ergo, distress leads to afford-ability over the long run. Ah, the circle of life.
That 70% number just seems to high even in the worst hit zip codes, for how early we are in the foreclosure cycle. I’ve never known Bugs to post anything mildly inflammatory, so taking the source into account alongside the number is alarming.
Josh
-
February 23, 2008 at 11:29 AM #158630
barnaby33
ParticipantSD Realtor there is distress because of a lack of afford-ability. Ergo, distress leads to afford-ability over the long run. Ah, the circle of life.
That 70% number just seems to high even in the worst hit zip codes, for how early we are in the foreclosure cycle. I’ve never known Bugs to post anything mildly inflammatory, so taking the source into account alongside the number is alarming.
Josh
-
February 23, 2008 at 10:31 AM #158515
SD Realtor
ParticipantJosh don’t mistake distress with affordability.
SD Realtor
-
February 23, 2008 at 10:31 AM #158524
SD Realtor
ParticipantJosh don’t mistake distress with affordability.
SD Realtor
-
February 23, 2008 at 10:31 AM #158532
SD Realtor
ParticipantJosh don’t mistake distress with affordability.
SD Realtor
-
February 23, 2008 at 10:31 AM #158605
SD Realtor
ParticipantJosh don’t mistake distress with affordability.
SD Realtor
-
February 23, 2008 at 10:20 AM #158500
barnaby33
ParticipantWhat market is 70% REO and short sales? If its truly that bad already, dear lard, I will get my beach front condo in Del Mar in the high 300’s.
Seriously 70%? El Cajon, Ramona, Santee? Where are these totally illiquid locked up markets? Name some names Bugs.
Josh
-
February 23, 2008 at 10:20 AM #158509
barnaby33
ParticipantWhat market is 70% REO and short sales? If its truly that bad already, dear lard, I will get my beach front condo in Del Mar in the high 300’s.
Seriously 70%? El Cajon, Ramona, Santee? Where are these totally illiquid locked up markets? Name some names Bugs.
Josh
-
February 23, 2008 at 10:20 AM #158518
barnaby33
ParticipantWhat market is 70% REO and short sales? If its truly that bad already, dear lard, I will get my beach front condo in Del Mar in the high 300’s.
Seriously 70%? El Cajon, Ramona, Santee? Where are these totally illiquid locked up markets? Name some names Bugs.
Josh
-
February 23, 2008 at 10:20 AM #158591
barnaby33
ParticipantWhat market is 70% REO and short sales? If its truly that bad already, dear lard, I will get my beach front condo in Del Mar in the high 300’s.
Seriously 70%? El Cajon, Ramona, Santee? Where are these totally illiquid locked up markets? Name some names Bugs.
Josh
-
-
February 23, 2008 at 9:04 AM #158451
Bugs
ParticipantI think the main thing that has caught me by surprise has been the relative ease with which these lenders have given up over the last few months. I fully expected them to put up more of a fight.
It’s clear that these portions of the market are being dominated and driven by expectations of the lenders. In addition to pricing the REOs, which set the pace for the decline, they also control the pricing on the short sales. A short sale can’t go any lower than it’s lender will allow it to go.
Right now, the REOs and shorts comprise fully 70% of a few of these markets, and I expect that trend to spread. They’re completely in the driver’s seat and everyone else is just along for the ride.
-
February 23, 2008 at 9:04 AM #158459
Bugs
ParticipantI think the main thing that has caught me by surprise has been the relative ease with which these lenders have given up over the last few months. I fully expected them to put up more of a fight.
It’s clear that these portions of the market are being dominated and driven by expectations of the lenders. In addition to pricing the REOs, which set the pace for the decline, they also control the pricing on the short sales. A short sale can’t go any lower than it’s lender will allow it to go.
Right now, the REOs and shorts comprise fully 70% of a few of these markets, and I expect that trend to spread. They’re completely in the driver’s seat and everyone else is just along for the ride.
-
February 23, 2008 at 9:04 AM #158468
Bugs
ParticipantI think the main thing that has caught me by surprise has been the relative ease with which these lenders have given up over the last few months. I fully expected them to put up more of a fight.
It’s clear that these portions of the market are being dominated and driven by expectations of the lenders. In addition to pricing the REOs, which set the pace for the decline, they also control the pricing on the short sales. A short sale can’t go any lower than it’s lender will allow it to go.
Right now, the REOs and shorts comprise fully 70% of a few of these markets, and I expect that trend to spread. They’re completely in the driver’s seat and everyone else is just along for the ride.
-
February 23, 2008 at 9:04 AM #158541
Bugs
ParticipantI think the main thing that has caught me by surprise has been the relative ease with which these lenders have given up over the last few months. I fully expected them to put up more of a fight.
It’s clear that these portions of the market are being dominated and driven by expectations of the lenders. In addition to pricing the REOs, which set the pace for the decline, they also control the pricing on the short sales. A short sale can’t go any lower than it’s lender will allow it to go.
Right now, the REOs and shorts comprise fully 70% of a few of these markets, and I expect that trend to spread. They’re completely in the driver’s seat and everyone else is just along for the ride.
-
-
February 23, 2008 at 7:21 AM #158406
CAwireman
Participant“At these prices, where are all the fence sitters, waiting to jump into the market?”
CityD,
Some thoughts that come to mind.
1) Our saturation of people who wanted to own (buy a
home on credit) rose to something like 75%. Please validate my estimate. So one point is that all the people who wanted homes, bought homes.(purchase a home on credit)2) Fence sitting, is not an easy thing to accomplish. When you want an iPod in the US, you go buy one. Flat panel TV, same. Home, same. It takes discipline to fence sit, and that is not a characteristic commonly found in the US. So,
my WAG is that as a percentage, there aren’t that many fence sitters out there. And, the ones that exist, aren’t going to jump in too early.3) There are now more people who a) can’t affort a home to begin with due to the astronomically high asking prices compared to salary. b) More people are now walking around with bad credit scores, loads of debt or even a foreclosure or bankruptcy. Banks are paying attention to this now (what a concept)and not freely giving loans out to anyone who walks through the door.
4) As a fence sitter, I can tell you it can be brutal. Especially if you and your spouse don’t see eye to eye on it. (If we don’t by now honey, my friend says that we’ll never be able to buy…..). This is a tough one to negotiate, and there is also peer pressure from friends, relatives, and coworkers. We should all have enough self confidence to chart our own course, but most often, we go along with the pack.
It would be interesting to see the total US and San Diego percentages of home ownership (Owned, or purchasing on credit) for each year for the last 20 years. I believe the percentage exploded in the 2000 and an on years, largely due to loose credit rampant RE speculation. With a saturated “owner” sector, there aren’t as many people buying – they have already purchased, and are either happy or just plain stuck. Those who have purchased (loved) and lost (foreclose, short sell, etc) have a bad taste and aren’t likely to purchase again, even if they could. Bubble sitting is a difficult posture to maintain, and few can endure it, they are few and far between.
Thanks for the post CityD
HiggyBaby
-
February 23, 2008 at 7:21 AM #158414
CAwireman
Participant“At these prices, where are all the fence sitters, waiting to jump into the market?”
CityD,
Some thoughts that come to mind.
1) Our saturation of people who wanted to own (buy a
home on credit) rose to something like 75%. Please validate my estimate. So one point is that all the people who wanted homes, bought homes.(purchase a home on credit)2) Fence sitting, is not an easy thing to accomplish. When you want an iPod in the US, you go buy one. Flat panel TV, same. Home, same. It takes discipline to fence sit, and that is not a characteristic commonly found in the US. So,
my WAG is that as a percentage, there aren’t that many fence sitters out there. And, the ones that exist, aren’t going to jump in too early.3) There are now more people who a) can’t affort a home to begin with due to the astronomically high asking prices compared to salary. b) More people are now walking around with bad credit scores, loads of debt or even a foreclosure or bankruptcy. Banks are paying attention to this now (what a concept)and not freely giving loans out to anyone who walks through the door.
4) As a fence sitter, I can tell you it can be brutal. Especially if you and your spouse don’t see eye to eye on it. (If we don’t by now honey, my friend says that we’ll never be able to buy…..). This is a tough one to negotiate, and there is also peer pressure from friends, relatives, and coworkers. We should all have enough self confidence to chart our own course, but most often, we go along with the pack.
It would be interesting to see the total US and San Diego percentages of home ownership (Owned, or purchasing on credit) for each year for the last 20 years. I believe the percentage exploded in the 2000 and an on years, largely due to loose credit rampant RE speculation. With a saturated “owner” sector, there aren’t as many people buying – they have already purchased, and are either happy or just plain stuck. Those who have purchased (loved) and lost (foreclose, short sell, etc) have a bad taste and aren’t likely to purchase again, even if they could. Bubble sitting is a difficult posture to maintain, and few can endure it, they are few and far between.
Thanks for the post CityD
HiggyBaby
-
February 23, 2008 at 7:21 AM #158423
CAwireman
Participant“At these prices, where are all the fence sitters, waiting to jump into the market?”
CityD,
Some thoughts that come to mind.
1) Our saturation of people who wanted to own (buy a
home on credit) rose to something like 75%. Please validate my estimate. So one point is that all the people who wanted homes, bought homes.(purchase a home on credit)2) Fence sitting, is not an easy thing to accomplish. When you want an iPod in the US, you go buy one. Flat panel TV, same. Home, same. It takes discipline to fence sit, and that is not a characteristic commonly found in the US. So,
my WAG is that as a percentage, there aren’t that many fence sitters out there. And, the ones that exist, aren’t going to jump in too early.3) There are now more people who a) can’t affort a home to begin with due to the astronomically high asking prices compared to salary. b) More people are now walking around with bad credit scores, loads of debt or even a foreclosure or bankruptcy. Banks are paying attention to this now (what a concept)and not freely giving loans out to anyone who walks through the door.
4) As a fence sitter, I can tell you it can be brutal. Especially if you and your spouse don’t see eye to eye on it. (If we don’t by now honey, my friend says that we’ll never be able to buy…..). This is a tough one to negotiate, and there is also peer pressure from friends, relatives, and coworkers. We should all have enough self confidence to chart our own course, but most often, we go along with the pack.
It would be interesting to see the total US and San Diego percentages of home ownership (Owned, or purchasing on credit) for each year for the last 20 years. I believe the percentage exploded in the 2000 and an on years, largely due to loose credit rampant RE speculation. With a saturated “owner” sector, there aren’t as many people buying – they have already purchased, and are either happy or just plain stuck. Those who have purchased (loved) and lost (foreclose, short sell, etc) have a bad taste and aren’t likely to purchase again, even if they could. Bubble sitting is a difficult posture to maintain, and few can endure it, they are few and far between.
Thanks for the post CityD
HiggyBaby
-
February 23, 2008 at 7:21 AM #158496
CAwireman
Participant“At these prices, where are all the fence sitters, waiting to jump into the market?”
CityD,
Some thoughts that come to mind.
1) Our saturation of people who wanted to own (buy a
home on credit) rose to something like 75%. Please validate my estimate. So one point is that all the people who wanted homes, bought homes.(purchase a home on credit)2) Fence sitting, is not an easy thing to accomplish. When you want an iPod in the US, you go buy one. Flat panel TV, same. Home, same. It takes discipline to fence sit, and that is not a characteristic commonly found in the US. So,
my WAG is that as a percentage, there aren’t that many fence sitters out there. And, the ones that exist, aren’t going to jump in too early.3) There are now more people who a) can’t affort a home to begin with due to the astronomically high asking prices compared to salary. b) More people are now walking around with bad credit scores, loads of debt or even a foreclosure or bankruptcy. Banks are paying attention to this now (what a concept)and not freely giving loans out to anyone who walks through the door.
4) As a fence sitter, I can tell you it can be brutal. Especially if you and your spouse don’t see eye to eye on it. (If we don’t by now honey, my friend says that we’ll never be able to buy…..). This is a tough one to negotiate, and there is also peer pressure from friends, relatives, and coworkers. We should all have enough self confidence to chart our own course, but most often, we go along with the pack.
It would be interesting to see the total US and San Diego percentages of home ownership (Owned, or purchasing on credit) for each year for the last 20 years. I believe the percentage exploded in the 2000 and an on years, largely due to loose credit rampant RE speculation. With a saturated “owner” sector, there aren’t as many people buying – they have already purchased, and are either happy or just plain stuck. Those who have purchased (loved) and lost (foreclose, short sell, etc) have a bad taste and aren’t likely to purchase again, even if they could. Bubble sitting is a difficult posture to maintain, and few can endure it, they are few and far between.
Thanks for the post CityD
HiggyBaby
-
February 23, 2008 at 5:11 PM #158512
jpinpb
ParticipantI’m a fence sitter. We have good credit and some $$$. We don’t want to go in over our heads and be mortgage slaves, but we have certain criteria that would push us over our comfort level, so we’re waiting so as to not have to compromise too much. I’m being thanked now for not buying 2 to 3 years ago, but that was a problem, pressured to buy. Not so easy to wait for the right one, but I’m sure it will be worth it.
-
February 23, 2008 at 5:11 PM #158803
jpinpb
ParticipantI’m a fence sitter. We have good credit and some $$$. We don’t want to go in over our heads and be mortgage slaves, but we have certain criteria that would push us over our comfort level, so we’re waiting so as to not have to compromise too much. I’m being thanked now for not buying 2 to 3 years ago, but that was a problem, pressured to buy. Not so easy to wait for the right one, but I’m sure it will be worth it.
-
February 23, 2008 at 5:11 PM #158815
jpinpb
ParticipantI’m a fence sitter. We have good credit and some $$$. We don’t want to go in over our heads and be mortgage slaves, but we have certain criteria that would push us over our comfort level, so we’re waiting so as to not have to compromise too much. I’m being thanked now for not buying 2 to 3 years ago, but that was a problem, pressured to buy. Not so easy to wait for the right one, but I’m sure it will be worth it.
-
February 23, 2008 at 5:11 PM #158825
jpinpb
ParticipantI’m a fence sitter. We have good credit and some $$$. We don’t want to go in over our heads and be mortgage slaves, but we have certain criteria that would push us over our comfort level, so we’re waiting so as to not have to compromise too much. I’m being thanked now for not buying 2 to 3 years ago, but that was a problem, pressured to buy. Not so easy to wait for the right one, but I’m sure it will be worth it.
-
February 23, 2008 at 5:11 PM #158896
jpinpb
ParticipantI’m a fence sitter. We have good credit and some $$$. We don’t want to go in over our heads and be mortgage slaves, but we have certain criteria that would push us over our comfort level, so we’re waiting so as to not have to compromise too much. I’m being thanked now for not buying 2 to 3 years ago, but that was a problem, pressured to buy. Not so easy to wait for the right one, but I’m sure it will be worth it.
-
February 24, 2008 at 10:14 AM #158912
rbeast
ParticipantSD Realtor – you & some others on this board are the cool voices of reason that keep me coming back for more – thanks!
-
February 24, 2008 at 10:37 AM #158941
SD Realtor
ParticipantJosh as you can see I took your post quite literally. The property you mentioned is not beachfront. I consider beachfront to be you open your sliding glass door and walk out onto your yard and there is nothing between you and the beach… Perhaps a rock breakwater wall.
Yes this property “MAY” indeed fall all the way to the sales price of the 332k that it sold for in 1998. I bet it does not but I guess we will see. However it is not a beachfront condo.
SD Realtor
-
February 24, 2008 at 11:11 AM #158956
barnaby33
ParticipantBeach front it is not, at least by your definition. It is a 5 minute walk to the beach. I don’t anticipate it falling back to its 98 purchase price, but back to its assessed value seems pretty in the ballpark, on a similar unit.
The whole point of this exercise was to state that, dear lard, if there are zip codes that are already 70% REO and short sales, even the lilly white parts of town are going to take a severe beat down. Its just going to take longer.
If I’m wrong, well then I still have my dream. If I’m right then all my years of living in sub-standard areas (Northpark currently) will have been repaid.
Josh
-
February 24, 2008 at 11:11 AM #159249
barnaby33
ParticipantBeach front it is not, at least by your definition. It is a 5 minute walk to the beach. I don’t anticipate it falling back to its 98 purchase price, but back to its assessed value seems pretty in the ballpark, on a similar unit.
The whole point of this exercise was to state that, dear lard, if there are zip codes that are already 70% REO and short sales, even the lilly white parts of town are going to take a severe beat down. Its just going to take longer.
If I’m wrong, well then I still have my dream. If I’m right then all my years of living in sub-standard areas (Northpark currently) will have been repaid.
Josh
-
February 24, 2008 at 11:11 AM #159261
barnaby33
ParticipantBeach front it is not, at least by your definition. It is a 5 minute walk to the beach. I don’t anticipate it falling back to its 98 purchase price, but back to its assessed value seems pretty in the ballpark, on a similar unit.
The whole point of this exercise was to state that, dear lard, if there are zip codes that are already 70% REO and short sales, even the lilly white parts of town are going to take a severe beat down. Its just going to take longer.
If I’m wrong, well then I still have my dream. If I’m right then all my years of living in sub-standard areas (Northpark currently) will have been repaid.
Josh
-
February 24, 2008 at 11:11 AM #159267
barnaby33
ParticipantBeach front it is not, at least by your definition. It is a 5 minute walk to the beach. I don’t anticipate it falling back to its 98 purchase price, but back to its assessed value seems pretty in the ballpark, on a similar unit.
The whole point of this exercise was to state that, dear lard, if there are zip codes that are already 70% REO and short sales, even the lilly white parts of town are going to take a severe beat down. Its just going to take longer.
If I’m wrong, well then I still have my dream. If I’m right then all my years of living in sub-standard areas (Northpark currently) will have been repaid.
Josh
-
February 24, 2008 at 11:11 AM #159344
barnaby33
ParticipantBeach front it is not, at least by your definition. It is a 5 minute walk to the beach. I don’t anticipate it falling back to its 98 purchase price, but back to its assessed value seems pretty in the ballpark, on a similar unit.
The whole point of this exercise was to state that, dear lard, if there are zip codes that are already 70% REO and short sales, even the lilly white parts of town are going to take a severe beat down. Its just going to take longer.
If I’m wrong, well then I still have my dream. If I’m right then all my years of living in sub-standard areas (Northpark currently) will have been repaid.
Josh
-
-
February 24, 2008 at 10:37 AM #159235
SD Realtor
ParticipantJosh as you can see I took your post quite literally. The property you mentioned is not beachfront. I consider beachfront to be you open your sliding glass door and walk out onto your yard and there is nothing between you and the beach… Perhaps a rock breakwater wall.
Yes this property “MAY” indeed fall all the way to the sales price of the 332k that it sold for in 1998. I bet it does not but I guess we will see. However it is not a beachfront condo.
SD Realtor
-
February 24, 2008 at 10:37 AM #159246
SD Realtor
ParticipantJosh as you can see I took your post quite literally. The property you mentioned is not beachfront. I consider beachfront to be you open your sliding glass door and walk out onto your yard and there is nothing between you and the beach… Perhaps a rock breakwater wall.
Yes this property “MAY” indeed fall all the way to the sales price of the 332k that it sold for in 1998. I bet it does not but I guess we will see. However it is not a beachfront condo.
SD Realtor
-
February 24, 2008 at 10:37 AM #159252
SD Realtor
ParticipantJosh as you can see I took your post quite literally. The property you mentioned is not beachfront. I consider beachfront to be you open your sliding glass door and walk out onto your yard and there is nothing between you and the beach… Perhaps a rock breakwater wall.
Yes this property “MAY” indeed fall all the way to the sales price of the 332k that it sold for in 1998. I bet it does not but I guess we will see. However it is not a beachfront condo.
SD Realtor
-
February 24, 2008 at 10:37 AM #159329
SD Realtor
ParticipantJosh as you can see I took your post quite literally. The property you mentioned is not beachfront. I consider beachfront to be you open your sliding glass door and walk out onto your yard and there is nothing between you and the beach… Perhaps a rock breakwater wall.
Yes this property “MAY” indeed fall all the way to the sales price of the 332k that it sold for in 1998. I bet it does not but I guess we will see. However it is not a beachfront condo.
SD Realtor
-
-
February 24, 2008 at 10:14 AM #159204
rbeast
ParticipantSD Realtor – you & some others on this board are the cool voices of reason that keep me coming back for more – thanks!
-
February 24, 2008 at 10:14 AM #159216
rbeast
ParticipantSD Realtor – you & some others on this board are the cool voices of reason that keep me coming back for more – thanks!
-
February 24, 2008 at 10:14 AM #159222
rbeast
ParticipantSD Realtor – you & some others on this board are the cool voices of reason that keep me coming back for more – thanks!
-
February 24, 2008 at 10:14 AM #159299
rbeast
ParticipantSD Realtor – you & some others on this board are the cool voices of reason that keep me coming back for more – thanks!
-
-
AuthorPosts
- You must be logged in to reply to this topic.