“43% Overpriced”

[NotCranky]

“Incidentally, the $80,000 household income, as would be represented at the 75th percentile in our region, could swing a mortgage of $310,000, leading to the $345,000 median housing price. That is, of course, assuming no move-up equity and the aforementioned 6% mortgage interest rate.

In this scenario I don’t understand the “no move up equity provision.” The 75% percentile household income earners I have known through life and currently had and have money and equity.Many people in the lower percentiles do also.I would think it fair to expect a good portion of those households bring move up money and could push the median.

In the scenario where the median house has an after tax expense of $1666 dollars a month and is a 3/2 townhome in a decent neigborhood rents start to put a floor if nothing else does.

In any case I agree that incomes do not set housing prices in the long run, competition for them to the extent that an economy and the previously aquired wealth of the populace will allow for does. We have to see where that is at when the funny money effect plays out. This bubble sure did make real estate hard to talk about.

[sdrealtor]

Rus
you missed a great bottle of wine tonite;)
sdr

[sdrealtor]

Rus
you missed a great bottle of wine tonite;)
sdr

[sdrealtor]

Rus
you missed a great bottle of wine tonite;)
sdr

[sdrealtor]

Rus
you missed a great bottle of wine tonite;)
sdr

[sdrealtor]

Rus
you missed a great bottle of wine tonite;)
sdr

[NotCranky]

Cheers all the same. I was reading an article on the possibility that boutique vineyards with bed and breakfast may soon be allowed for certain back country properties. I can see that just driving the value of mine sky high. I am sure we are 43% underpriced as it is.

[NotCranky]

Cheers all the same. I was reading an article on the possibility that boutique vineyards with bed and breakfast may soon be allowed for certain back country properties. I can see that just driving the value of mine sky high. I am sure we are 43% underpriced as it is.

[NotCranky]

Cheers all the same. I was reading an article on the possibility that boutique vineyards with bed and breakfast may soon be allowed for certain back country properties. I can see that just driving the value of mine sky high. I am sure we are 43% underpriced as it is.

[NotCranky]

Cheers all the same. I was reading an article on the possibility that boutique vineyards with bed and breakfast may soon be allowed for certain back country properties. I can see that just driving the value of mine sky high. I am sure we are 43% underpriced as it is.

[NotCranky]

Cheers all the same. I was reading an article on the possibility that boutique vineyards with bed and breakfast may soon be allowed for certain back country properties. I can see that just driving the value of mine sky high. I am sure we are 43% underpriced as it is.

[Anonymous]

FWIW: here are the 2007 census numbers (in percentages) for ownership nationwide. Reading from left to right across the row, we have the total, then the five quintiles based on HH income from lowest to highest. There’s a big skew to the high side, for sure, but also a surprisingly high proportion of owners on the lower end too. My sense (though I don’t have data) is that SD would skew even more to the high side given the comparatively high prices and low wages here. Still, its hard to see how the 75th pcntl is any more than a theoretical upper bound, since it assumes 100% ownership for those above the median and 0% ownership for those below. Of course the 50th pcntl is wrong too. The numbers below suggest the ownership percentile is about the 68th (plus the SD skew, minus the equity).

Owner occupied: 68.3, 45.6, 59.2, 68.2, 79.7, 88.9
Renter occupied: 30.3, 51.4, 39.0, 30.6, 19.6, 10.8

[Anonymous]

FWIW: here are the 2007 census numbers (in percentages) for ownership nationwide. Reading from left to right across the row, we have the total, then the five quintiles based on HH income from lowest to highest. There’s a big skew to the high side, for sure, but also a surprisingly high proportion of owners on the lower end too. My sense (though I don’t have data) is that SD would skew even more to the high side given the comparatively high prices and low wages here. Still, its hard to see how the 75th pcntl is any more than a theoretical upper bound, since it assumes 100% ownership for those above the median and 0% ownership for those below. Of course the 50th pcntl is wrong too. The numbers below suggest the ownership percentile is about the 68th (plus the SD skew, minus the equity).

Owner occupied: 68.3, 45.6, 59.2, 68.2, 79.7, 88.9
Renter occupied: 30.3, 51.4, 39.0, 30.6, 19.6, 10.8

[Anonymous]

FWIW: here are the 2007 census numbers (in percentages) for ownership nationwide. Reading from left to right across the row, we have the total, then the five quintiles based on HH income from lowest to highest. There’s a big skew to the high side, for sure, but also a surprisingly high proportion of owners on the lower end too. My sense (though I don’t have data) is that SD would skew even more to the high side given the comparatively high prices and low wages here. Still, its hard to see how the 75th pcntl is any more than a theoretical upper bound, since it assumes 100% ownership for those above the median and 0% ownership for those below. Of course the 50th pcntl is wrong too. The numbers below suggest the ownership percentile is about the 68th (plus the SD skew, minus the equity).

Owner occupied: 68.3, 45.6, 59.2, 68.2, 79.7, 88.9
Renter occupied: 30.3, 51.4, 39.0, 30.6, 19.6, 10.8

[Anonymous]

FWIW: here are the 2007 census numbers (in percentages) for ownership nationwide. Reading from left to right across the row, we have the total, then the five quintiles based on HH income from lowest to highest. There’s a big skew to the high side, for sure, but also a surprisingly high proportion of owners on the lower end too. My sense (though I don’t have data) is that SD would skew even more to the high side given the comparatively high prices and low wages here. Still, its hard to see how the 75th pcntl is any more than a theoretical upper bound, since it assumes 100% ownership for those above the median and 0% ownership for those below. Of course the 50th pcntl is wrong too. The numbers below suggest the ownership percentile is about the 68th (plus the SD skew, minus the equity).

Owner occupied: 68.3, 45.6, 59.2, 68.2, 79.7, 88.9
Renter occupied: 30.3, 51.4, 39.0, 30.6, 19.6, 10.8

[Author]

Posts